Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
07/18/2017 (2)
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS INDIAN RIVER COUNTY FLORIDA COMMISSION AGENDA TUESDAY, JULY 18, 2017 - 9:00 AM Commission Chambers Indian River County Administration Complex 180127th Street, Building A Vero Beach, Florida, 32960-3388 www.ircgov.com COUNTY COMMISSIONERS Joseph E. Flescher, Chairman, District 2 Jason E. Brown, County Administrator Peter D. O'Bryan, Vice Chairman, District 4 Dylan Reingold, County Attorney Susan Adams, District 1 Jeffrey R Smith, Clerk of the Circuit Court and Comptroller Bob Solari, District 5 Tim Zorc, District 3 1. CALL TO ORDER 2.A. A MOMENT OF SILENT REFLECTION FOR FIRST RESPONDERS 2.11. INVOCATION Stan Boling, Community Development Director 3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Commissioner Peter D. O'Bryan, Vice Chairman 4. ADDITIONS/DELETIONS TO THE AGENDA I EMERGENCY ITEMS 5. PROCLAMATIONS and PRESENTATIONS 5.A. Presentation of Proclamation Designating the Week of July 24, 2017, as Treasure Coast Waterway Cleanup Week in Indian River County Attachments: Proclamation 5.B. Presentation of Update on Indian River Lagoon Pilot Project by Adam Taylor, President/CEO, Greenfield Resources 6. APPROVAL OF MINUTES 6.A. Regular Meeting of June 13, 2017 7. INFORMATION ITEMS FROM STAFF OR COMMISSIONERS NOT REQUIRING BOARD ACTION July 18, 2017 Page I of 8 State of Florida Pudic ,Service Commission CAP] -1-Al.. CIRCLE OFFICE CENTER * 2540 SnuAIARD OAK B( ut,EVARI) TALLAIIASSFF, FLORIDA 32399-0850 -M-E-M-0-R-A-N-D-U-M- DATE: July 6, 2017 TO: Filers with the PSC FROM: Carlotta S. Stauffer, Commission Clerk, Office of Commission Clerk RE: Case Management_ System Upgrade ne Florida Public Service Commission has upgraded its internal Case Management System. The main change you will notice is the year reference is now 4 digits, rather than 2. The following is a FAQ page designed to answer the most common questions about the upgrade and what it 'means to you as a filer. We hope this will. be a smooth transition for everyone, and please do not hesitate to contact the Clerk's Office if we may be of assistance to you. We may be reached at 850.413.6770 or clerk@ pse.state.fl.us. Jess Attachment CASE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM UPGRADED Effective July 2017, our internal Case Management System (CMS) has been upgraded. Below are some FAQs concerning the upgrade. Are there e -filing changes? No, the e -filing process is the same. However, CMS now uses a 4 -digit year instead of a 2 -digit year. If you do not type in the 4 -digit year, the system will automatically populate the 4 -digit year for you. You will also notice a dropdown menu of docket numbers for your convenience. How does the CMS upgrade affect me as a user? All entries requiring the year will now use 4 digits instead of 2, for example: * Docket No. 20170001 * Document No. 00012-2017 * Order No. PSC -1017 -0250 -CFO -EI Does this change the Commission's historical documents, especially orders? No, historical documents will keep their original Docket No., Document No., or Order No. in the body of the document (e.g., the DN ''stamp" will not change from what was used on the document at the time it was originally filed). However, the search to locate the documents will need to be entered in the new 4 -digit year format. How do I reference a historical order? Reference the order in the same manner as always. Use the order number as it was originally entered; this is the information that will show on the online document when you view it. No changes. What if I need help filing or finding a document? For help filing a document, contact Dorothy Menasco in the Clerk's Office at 850-413-6243 or dmenascoftsc.stateftu . For assistance finding a document, call the Clerk's main line at 850-413-6770 or email clerk@ gsc. state.fi. us. 7.A. Florida Public Service Commission- Memorandum Re: the Commission advising its internal Case Management System had been upgraded; year reference is now four (4) digits, rather than two (2) digits, is available for review in the office of the Clerk to the Board. 7.13. Proclamation and Retirement Award Honoring Jerome K. Driskell on His Retirement From Indian River County Board of County Commissioners Department of Public Works/Fleet Management Division with Seventeen Years of Service Attachments: Proclamation Service Award 7.C. Proclamation and Retirement Award Honoring Cathy Lynn Bell on Her Retirement From Indian River County Board of County Commissioners Office of Veteran Services with Thirty Years of Service Attachments: Proclamation Service Award 7.D. Former Gifford Road Landfill Site Redevelopment Plan Public Workshop Attachments: Former Gifford Road Landfill Site Public Workshop 7.E. Conservation Lands Program Update Attachments: Staff Report 8. CONSENT AGENDA 8.A. Checks and Electronic Payments June 30, 2017 to July 6, 2017 Attachments: Finance Department Staff Report 8.13. List of Errors, Insolvencies, Double Assessments and Discounts for the 2016 Tax Roll Attachments: Memorandum Errors and Insolvencies Report 8.C. Out of County Travel to Attend White House Office of Intergovernmental Affairs Florida County Commissioners' Conference Attachments: Commissioner Memorandum Florida County Commissioners' White House Conference Invitation 1 8.13. Recommendation of Award of Construction Contract for Osprey Acres Floway and Nature Preserve (Bid #2017051) Attachments: Staff Report Osprey Acres - Sample Agreement July 18, 2017 Page 2 of 8 B.E. Michael Cooper's Request for Release of an Easement at 100 38th Court (Hidden Oaks Subdivision) Attachments: Staff report Maps Proposed resolution 8.F. Miscellaneous Budget Amendment 20 Attachments: Staff Report Letter from Sheriff Loar 2016 2017 Resolution Exhibit "A" 8.G. Amendment No. 8 to the Civil Engineering and Land Surveying Agreement for Intersection Improvements at SR -60 and 43rd Avenue and the Widening of 43rd Avenue from l 8th Street to 26th Street with Arcadis US, Inc. Attachments: Staff Report Amendment No. 8 with Arcadis US, Inc 8.H. Approval of Blue Medicare Advantage Renewal Attachments: Blue Medicare Advantage Renewal 2017 Medicare Advantage Renewal Evaluation 8.I. GHO Segovia Lakes Corp's Request to Replat the Segovia Lakes Planned Development (PD) to be known as Segovia Lakes PD Replat [PD -16-10-06/ 2003090165-78588] Attachments: Staff Report Application Location Map Plat Layout 8.J. GHO Serenoa Corp's Request for Final Plat Approval for a Subdivision to be Known as Serenoa Phase 4 [98110046-77525/ SD -13-11-04] Attachments: Staff Report Application Location Map Plat Layout 8.K Phase 1 of Willows Development Escrow Agreement Attachments: Staff Report Escrow Agreement 9. CONSTITUTIONAL OFFICERS and GOVERNMENTAL AGENCIES July 18, 2017 Page 3 of 8 9.A. Indian River County Sheriff Deryl Loar Request for transfer of $10,706.40 from Florida Contraband Forfeiture Act proceeds to the Indian River County Sheriff for the Substance Awareness Center in compliance with F.S. 932.7055 Attachments: Sheriff Deryl Loar Letter Dated July 12, 2017 9.11. Indian River County Sheriff Deryl Loar Notification of Application for a 2017-2020 Department of Homeland Security Operation Stonegarden Grant Attachments: Sheriff Deryl Loar Letter Dated July 11, 2017 2017-2020 Operation Stonegarden Grant Application Grant Application Justification Letter Indian River County Grant Application Form 9.C. Indian River County Sheriff Deryl Loar Notification of Application for a 2017 Office of Justice Programs, Bulletproof Vest Partnership Grant Attachments: Sheriff Deryl Loar Letter Dated July 11, 2017 2017 Bulletproof Vest Partnership Grant Application Indian River County Grant Application Form 10. PUBLIC ITEMS A. PUBLIC HEARINGS 10.A.1. North Sebastian Septic to Sewer (S2S) Phase 1, Public Hearing and the Adoption of Resolution No. III (Legislative) Attachments: Staff Report Confirming Resolution (Resolution No. III) Assessment Roll Capital Cost Breakdown Map B. PUBLIC DISCUSSION ITEMS 10.11.1. Request to Speak from Kate Wesner, Ygrene Energy Fund, Regarding Property Assessed Clean Energy Program (PACE) Attachments: Request to Speak Form 10.B.2. Request to Speak from Arda Rigby and Bill Rigby Regarding Drainage and Sewer Services in the Wabasso Community Attachments: Request to Speak Form C. PUBLIC NOTICE ITEMS 10.C.1. Public Notice of Public Hearing Scheduled for August 15, 2017 to Consider Amending Chapters 306 and 315 of the Code of Indian River County with regard to Medical Marijuana Attachments: Staff Report July 18, 2017 Page 4 of 8 11. COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR MATTERS 11.A. Florida Institute of Technology (FIT) Request for Proposals for qualified buyers to bid for the purchase of the Vero Beach Marine Laboratory Property Attachments: Staff Report Request for Proposals 12. DEPARTMENTAL MATTERS A. Community Development 12.A.1. Condemnation, Demolition and Removal of Unsafe Structures Located at 6345 85th Street, 4305 26th Avenue and 4345, 4355 & 4365 28th Avenue Attachments: Staff Report Resolution Condemnation List Pictures of Unsafe Structures Minutes from November 15, 2016 BCC Meeting B. Emergency Services C. General Services 1. Human Services 2. Sandridge Golf Club 3. Recreation D. Human Resources E. Office of Management and Budget F. Public Works 12.F.1. Designation of Duperon Corporation as Sole Source Provider for Self -Cleaning Bar Screens Used in Stormwater Division Regional Stormwater Treatment Facilities Attachments: Staff Report Duperon Sole Source Letter 12.F.2. Designation of Xylem Water Solutions USA as Sole Source Provider for Pumping Systems Used in Stormwater Division Regional Stormwater Treatment Facilities Attachments: Staff Report Xylem Corp Sole Source Letter July 18, 2017 Page 5 of 8 12.F.3 Relocation of Indian River North County Offices - Purchase of Sebastian Corners Retail Center, LLC 1919-1931 US Highway 1 Sebastian, FL 32958 Attachments: Staff Report Purchase and Sell Agreement G. Utilities Services 12.G.1. Request for Sole Source for Equipment, Repair and/or Replacement for Data Flow System Products Attachments: Staff Report Letter from Data Flow Systems regarding TAC II SCADA System 12.G.2. Request for Sole Source for Warranty Repair and/or Replacement for Master. Meter Products Attachments: Staff Report Letter from Master Meter 12.G.3. Countywide Septic to Sewer Conversion Evaluation/Ranking Report - Results Attachments: Staff Report Countywide Septic to Sewer Ranking Report by Schulke, Bittle & Stoddard, LLC 12.G.4. Request to Waive Bid Requirement for a Comprehensive Water, Wastewater, and Reclaimed (Reuse) Water Rate Study, and Water and Sewer Impact Fee Study Attachments: Staff Report Professional Services Agreement for a Comprehensive Water Wastewater and Reclaimed Rate Study Professional Services Agreement for a Water and Wastewater Impact Fee Study Statement of Qualifications Municipal Advisor Disclosure Acknowledgement Letter 13. COUNTY ATTORNEY MATTERS 14. COMMISSIONERS MATTERS A. Commissioner Joseph E. Flescher. Chairman B. Commissioner Peter D. O'Brvan, Vice Chairman C. Commissioner Susan Adams D. Commissioner Bob Solari E. Commissioner Tim Zorc 15. SPECIAL DISTRICTS AND BOARDS A. Emergency Services District July 18, 2017 Page 6 of 8 B. Solid Waste Disposal District 15.13.1. Approval of Engineering Consulting Services Agreement to CDM Smith for IRC Landfill Attachments: Staff Report Agreement for Engineering Consulting Services with CDM Smith Inc. 15.B.2. IRC Landfill Work Order No. 1 to CDM Smith, Inc. Attachments: Staff Report IRC Landfill Work Order No. 1 15.13.3. Amendment To Option Agreement with Alliance Bioenergy +, Inc. Attachments: Staff Report Amendment to Option Agreement with Alliance Bioenergy + Option Agreement for Processed Vegetative Waste with Alliance Bioenergy + 15.B.4. Termination of Feedstock Supply Agreement and Landfill Gas Agreement with INEOS New Planet BioEnergy LLC Attachments: Staff Report Termination of the Feedstock Supply Agreement and Landfill Gas Interconnect Agreement with INEOS July 12 2017 Letter from Arbor One Certificate of Insurance and Associated Invoice 15.13.5. Quarterly Recycling Update - Second and Third Quarter FY2016/17 Attachments: Staff Report 15.B.6. Traditional Recycling Opportunities and Options Attachments: Staff Report Technical Memorandum - Kessler Consulting Inc C. Environmental Control Board 16. ADJOURNMENT July 18, 2017 Page 7 of 8 Except for those matters specifically exempted under the State Statute and Local Ordinance, the Board shall provide an opportunity for public comment prior to the undertaking by the Board of any action on the agenda, including those matters on the Consent Agenda. Public comment shall also be heard on any proposition which the Board is to take action which was either not on the Board agenda or distributed to the public prior to the commencement of the meeting. Anyone who may wish to appeal any decision which may be made at this meeting will need to ensure that a verbatim record of the proceedings is made which includes the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal will be based. Anyone who needs a special accommodation for this meeting may contact the County's Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) Coordinator at (772) 226-1223 at least 48 hours in advance of meeting. Anyone who needs special accommodation with a hearing aid for this meeting may contact the Board of County Commission Office at 772-226-1490 at least 20 hours in advance of the meeting. The full agenda is available on line at the Indian River County Website at www.ircgov.com The full agenda is also available for review in the Board of County Commission Office, the Indian River County Main Library, and the North County Library. Commission Meetings are broadcast live on Comcast Cable Channel 27 Rebroadcasts continuously with the following proposed schedule: Tuesday at 6:00 p.m. until Wednesday at 6:00 a.m., Wednesday at 9:00 a.m. until 5. 00p.m., Thursday at 1:00 p.m. through Friday Morning, and Saturday at 12:00 Noon to 5:00 p.m. July 18, 2017 Page 8 of 8 PROCLAMATION DESIGNATING THE WEEK OF JULY 24, 2017, AS TREASURE COAST WATERWAY CLEANUP WEEK IN INDIAN RIVER COUNTY WHEREAS, on Saturday, July 29, 2017, the Marine Industries Association of the Treasure Coast in conjunction with the Florida Inland Navigation District will conduct the 10TH Annual Treasure Coast Waterway Cleanup; and WHEREAS,,this event will attract approximately 950 volunteers who will participate in cleaning up the waterways of Indian River, Martin and St. Lucie Counties; and WHEREAS, twenty designated sites throughout the three counties will serve as registration and disposal sites for the volunteers to work out of; and WHEREAS, numerous waterfront homeowners' associations have been recruited to clean up their own waterfronts; and WHEREAS, in 2016, over 7 tons of trash was collected from approximately 125 miles of waterways with an expectation of a significantly larger amount to be collected this year with an increased volunteer effort. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT PROCLAIMED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, that the week of July 24, 2017, through July 30, 2017, be designated as TREASURE COAST WATERWAY CLEANUP WEEK in Indian River County, and all citizens are encouraged to use this occasion to foster appreciation for the Treasure Coast Waterways and assist in the cleanup efforts. Adopted this 18th day of July, 2017. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA Joseph E. Flescher, Chairman Peter D. O'Bryan, Vice Chairman Susan Adams Bob Solari Tim Zorc P1 PROCLAMATION HONORING JEROME K. DRISKELL ON HIS RETIREMENT FROM INDIAN RIVER COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS/FLEET MANAGEMENT DIVISION WHEREAS, Jerome L Driskell retired from Indian River County Fleet Management Division, effective June 30, 2017, and WHEREAS, Jerome K. Driskell began his career with Indian River County on August 12, 1999, as a Foreman for the Solid Waste Disposal District. On January 2, 2004, he was promoted to Manager with Road & Bridge Division and on September 28, 2012, Jerome K Driskell transferred to Fleet Management as Manager and continued in that capacity until his retirement; and WHEREAS, Jerome K. Driskell has served this County and the Public with distinction and selflessness. During his seventeen years of service, he was dedicated, and his work was greatly appreciated by the employer, citizens, and co-workers alike; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT PROCLAIMED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, that tl:e Board applauds Jerome K. Driskell's efforts on behalf of the County, and the Board wishes to express their appreciation for the dedicated service he has given to Indian River County for the last seventeen years; and BE IT FURTHER PROCLAIMED that the Board of County Commissioners and staff extend hearfelt wishes for success in his future endeavors! Adopted this 18th day of July 2017. _BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS 1v �Cr INDIANRIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA Jo ph E. Flescher, Chairman P2 gh s is to certify that ,femme X �Dris%lT is heredy presented this !Retirement Award for outstanding performance and fiaithfufseMce to Indian fiver County Board of County Commissioners Tor seventeen years of service On this 30th day of June 2017 t chard la. Szpy4 7ardof osE�Directcrr of 4qu6Cu'iNorkc OBoounty Commissioner, Ciiairnian P3 PROCLAMATION HONORING CA THY L YNN BELL ON HER RETIREMENT FROM INDIAN RIVER COUNTY BOARD OF CO UNTY COMMISSIONERS OFFICES OF VETERANS SERVICES WHEREAS, Cathy Lynn Bell retired from Indian River County Offices of Veterans Services, effective July 31, 2017, and WHEREAS, Cathy Lynn Bell began her career with Indian River County on May 18, 1987, as a Clerk Typist. On September 30, 1988, she was promoted to Secretary I and on March 30, 2001, her position was reclassified to Staff Assistant L Cathy Lynn Bell continued in that capacity until her retirement; and WHEREAS, Cathy Lynn Bell has served this County and the Public with distinction and selflessness. During her thirty years of service, she was dedicated, and her work was greatly appreciated by the employer, co-workers, veterans and their families alike; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT PROCLAIMED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, that the Board applauds Cathy Lynn Bell's efforts on behalf of the County, and the Board wishes to express their appreciation for the dedicated service she Inas given to Indian River County for the last thirty years; and BE IT FURTHER PROCLAIMED that the Board of County Commissioners and staff extend heartfelt wishes for success in her future endeavors! Adopted this 18th day of July 2017. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA Joseph E. Flescher, Chairman 7(- PROCLAMATION ( P4 This is to certify that Cathy Lynn Belt' is here6y presented this l tirement Award for outstan&zng perfnrniance and faitfifuf service to Indian Vver County hoard of County Commi srioners For thirty years of service On this 31st Day oflucy 201 7 WichaetZito Assistant CountyAdministrator Joseph E. Tfacher Board of County Commissioner, Chairman P5 M nday, July 24, 2017 6: pm at the Gifford Community Center 4855 430 Avenue Vero Beach, Florida 3l) At this meeting there will be an up- date to the community about the re- sults of planning activities since the public workshop in December 2016. We will also be seeking additional public input to refine and to develop a final redevelopment plan for this site. 'Tou Ave Dflv'063d 7D Participate On R, Work -In -Progress Meeting Provide Input Share Ideas Collaborate With Neighbors Help Shape the Future of Our Community DO UL A ,+ F For More Information, Please Contact: Himanshu Mehta, Indian River County (772) 770-5112, hmehta@ircgov.com or Stephanie Heidt, Treasure Coast RPC (772) 221-4060, sheidt@tcrpc.org Public Participation is solicited without regard to race, color, national origin, sex, religion, disability or family status. Persons who require special accommodations under the Americans with Disabilities Act or persons who require transla- tion services should contact Mr. Mehta at least seven (7) days prior to the workshop. Fx VE IM% Lai air {t ' Geosyntec I'consuhams Your Voice is Vital to the Success of This Effort This project is a collaboration among Indian River County, Geosyntec Consultants, and the Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council. Funding for this effort is provided through a U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Brownfields Coalition Assessment Grant. P6 INFORMATIONAL ITEM 7-R� INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA AGENDA ITEM Assistant County Administrator / Department of General Services Date: July 6, 2017 To: The Honorable Board of County Commissioners Thru: Jason E. Brown, County Administrator Thru: Michael C. Zito, Assistant County Administrator From: Beth Powell, Conservation Lands Manager Subject: Conservation Lands Program Update This informational item has been prepared to provide the Commission and the general public with an overview of the current and projected activities for the Conservation Lands Program. It is our goal to improve communication of upcoming work efforts by updating the progress of various projects. Conservation Lands/Parks staff in cooperation with the Environmental Planning Division of the Community Development Department continues to develop a strategic approach to advancing public access improvements and land management projects within each of the conservation areas. This approach places special emphasis on conservation area management plans that have a commitment to Florida Communities Trust (FCT) to fulfill specific obligations. Below is a summary of current work efforts. Staff has also provided summaries of encumbered funds, grant application efforts, and long-range projections for anticipated allocations for various conservation areas. Highlights of Conservation Lands Work Efforts/Proiects Ansin Riverfront CA: ➢ In order to complete the public access trail network for the site, the management plan required installation of at least one crossing of the tributary to the St. Sebastian River. Permitting of the boardwalk included the following in-house services: delineation of jurisdictional wetlands (by Conservation and GIS staff); site review and approval of wetland boundaries with the St. John's River Water Management District (SJRWMD) & U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) staff (completed by Conservation staff); preparation of permit application and follow up response to data requests (by Conservation and GIS staff). The cost for completing this work using outside consulting services would range between $3,500 to $5,000. ➢ The BOCC has been briefed (via an informational item) on the background, purpose, and funding of the boardwalk, and staff is proceeding with developing a RFP for construction. Completion of this project by November of 2017 would comply with the county's annual FCT Conservation Lands Program Update — Informational Item July 2017 P7 reporting obligations. The anticipated cost of the project is approximately $15,000, which will be funded through the CIE Conservation Lands allocation. Captain Forster Hammock Preserve (CFHP): ➢ FWC approved funding for treating exotics on the Conservation Area in the next treatment cycle. Staff has requested $50,000 (no County match) and a pre-bid meeting was conducted on June 28, 2017, by FWC to receive bids. The project will be awarded to the lowest bidder and treatment is expected to begin Fall/Winter 2017. ➢ Part of the DHR Grant mentioned under the Jones' Pier Conservation Area includes additional educational signage proposed for CFHP. ➢ Staff has completed extensive removal of debris and exotic species from the northern boundary of the site, and along the beach (with the assistance of the FEMA crews). The final clean-up will be completed this month. Hallstrom Farmstead: ➢ Work Order #5 for engineering services for MBV was approved. The work order will provide for the development of site plans for Hallstrom Farmstead, Jones' Pier and the Kroegel Homestead. Staff is coordinating with MBV in the development of this plan. Survey work is underway. ➢ Completed extensive debris clean-up around the buildings east of Old Dixie Highway in preparation for submitting grant applications to restore these buildings. ➢ Staff is monitoring a Division of Historical Resources Special Categories grant opportunity projected for June 2018 to provide funding for restoring the buildings east of Old Dixie Highway. Staff met on-site with County Building department staff to solicit their input on potential work needed and projected costs, and will be using this information to develop the grant application. This grant application would be submitted in June 2018 following Board approval and provided the state funding cycle is similar to 2017. ➢ A Work Order was issued to install the fence abutting the Hallstrom House. The fenceline needs to be cleared prior to installation, and we are coordinating with a contractor to complete this work. PO was issued for the fence and will be installed as soon as the fenceline has been cleared. Harmony Oaks Conservation Area: ➢ In order to complete the public access facilities and trail network for this site in a manner consistent with the approved management plan, there are four elements proposed to be constructed: (1) creation of parking facilities at the trailhead; (2) a boardwalk traversing wetlands to complete the public access trail from the proposed parking area to the Lagoon, and (3) construction of two overlooks for public viewing of wetlands and the Lagoon. Upon completion of this project, permitting of these facilities will have included the following in-house services: delineation of jurisdictional wetlands (by Conservation and GIS staff); site review and approval of wetland boundaries with the St. John's River Water Management District (SJRWMD) & U.S. Conservation Lands Program Update — Informational Item July 2017 P8 Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) staff (completed by Conservation staff); preparation of permit application and follow up response to data requests (by Conservation and GIS staff). As these facilities will traverse existing wetlands, there will be additional coordination with permitting agencies to address specific criteria. Therefore, the cost for completing this work using outside consulting services would range between $5,500 to $8,000. ➢ Staff is working with GIS to produce the maps necessary to make application to SJRWMD. Indian River Lagoon Greenway ➢ Staff has applied for FWC funding ($10,000 has been allocated by FWC— no County match) to treat exotics on this conservation area. Staff received notification that this funding will be provided, and a pre-bid meeting was held on June 28, 2017 by FWC (bids are all processed through FWC). Once the purchase order has been issued, the FWC selected contractor will begin work which is expected to begin Fall/Winter 2017. Jones 'Pier Conservation Area: ➢ Work Order #5 for engineering services for MBV was approved. The work order will provide for the development of site plans for Hallstrom Farmstead, Jones' Pier and the Kroegel Homestead. Staff is coordinating with MBV in the development of this plan. Survey work is underway. ➢ Staff completed the wetland delineation for the site, and received approval of this delineation from the Water Management District (WMD). Staff is working with GIS to provide the coordinates for the wetland boundaries as part of the site planning process ➢ With Commissioner Solari's input, staff has created a walking trail that is now part of the rotation for mowing and maintenance. ➢ Staff has installed water level monitoring wells to evaluate the groundwater conditions as part of the site planning process. This data is collected monthly. ➢ Staff applied for a Department of Historical Resources (DI -IR) Small Matching Grant to restore the Fruit Stand along Jungle Trail, and to create educational signage for conservation areas and other strategic locations to promote the County's conservation efforts. The grant was submitted on April 28th and the amount requested for the grant was $55,100 (the County's portion included $17,050 in cash & $10,050 in in-kind services). This project works to meet the objectives outlined in the Board Approved Management Plan and requirements under the Florida Committees Trust grant agreement. ➢ Staff submitted an IRLNEP grant application to receive funds to assist in development of a restoration plan for wetlands on-site. As part of the Master Plan, there will be impacts to jurisdictional wetlands that will have to be off -set, therefore, the grant will be used to help partially fund the design of a wetland restoration plan for the site that will be required by the WMD. (Project ranked 12/17 — not funded per 6/13/17 email.) Commissioner Adams (the designated liaison for IRLNEP) was briefed on the application prior to the presentation to the IRLNEP selection committee. Conservation Lands Program Update — Informational Item July 2017 P9 Kroegel Homestead: ➢ Work Order #5 for engineering services for MBV was approved. The work order will provide for the development of site plans for Hallstrom Farmstead, Jones' Pier and the.Kroegel Homestead. Staff is coordinating with MBV in the development of this plan. Survey has been completed. ➢ Site visit with the Traffic Engineering Department (Kim Graham) and Attorney's Office (Bill Debraal) was conducted to determine issues related to public access and easement issues. ➢ DHR Large Categories grant application being submitted June 15, 2017, to provide funding for restoring the buildings east of AIA. The maximum amount funded through these grants is $500,000. Proposed project cost is $141,000 with a County cash match of $52,000 and in-kind match of $18,500. Staff met on-site with County Building department staff to solicit their input on potential work needed and projected costs. This project works to meet the objectives outlined in the Board Approved Management Plan and requirements under the Florida Committees Trust grant agreement. North Sebastian Conservation Area: ➢ Staff has applied for FWC funding ($75,000 has been allocated by FWC— no County match) to treat exotics on this conservation area. Staff received notification that this funding will be provided, and a pre-bid meeting was held on June 28, 2017, (bids are all processed through FWC). Once the purchase order has been issued, the FWC selected contractor will begin work which is expected to begin FalMinter 2017. ➢ Staff continues to work with the Florida Forest Service to provide habitat management and wildfire reduction measures throughout the site. Currently, staff is coordinating with Forestry on 4 units that will be prescribed burned. In addition, fire breaks will be refreshed and mowed as needed. Budgeted other contractual funds may be utilized to accomplish these tasks. Some firelines also serve as trails and work doubles as trail maintenance. Oslo Riveriront Conservation Area: ➢ Staff prepared an HMGP Grant Application for creation of a large firebreak along the northern boundary of the conservation area. This grant application was submitted on June 9, 2017. Approval for grant application approved on consent agenda June 6, 2017. Oyster Bar Marsh )0, On April 4, 2017, the Board of County Commissioners approved a partnership agreement with the Indian River Land Trust (IRLT) to develop public access improvements at the Oyster Bar Marsh Conservation Area and on adjacent IRLT-owned land on the south barrier island. ➢ As authorized by the Board on May 16, 2017, county staff has submitted a Waterways Assistance Program (WAP) grant application to FIND for cost -share funding for the project for FY 2017-18. The FIND grant application is for 50% ($140,850) of the total estimated construction costs ($281,700). The County's match is to come from Optional Sales Tax and Land Acquisition Bond proceeds. The IRLT has committed to contributing up to $100,000 for project design and permitting. Conservation Lands Program Update — Informational Item July 2017 P10 Round Island South Conservation Area: ➢ To be consistent with the management plan for the site and facilitate public access, staff is proposing to install a boardwalk at the southern end of the existing trail to provide access for wetland and wildlife viewing. Additionally, staff is proposing installation of an additional floating kayak launch to alleviate congestion at the existing launch to the north. A site review with the SJRWMD identified that only the boardwalk will likely require issuance of a construction permit. Upon completion of the project, permitting of this boardwalk will have included the following in- house services: delineation of jurisdictional wetlands (by Conservation and GIS staff); site review and approval of wetland boundaries with the St. John's River Water Management District (SJRWMD) & U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) staff (completed by Conservation staff); preparation of permit application and follow up response to data requests (by Conservation and GIS staff). As this boardwalk will traverse existing wetlands, there will be additional coordination with permitting agencies to address specific criteria. Therefore, the cost for completing this work using outside consulting services would range between $4,000 to $6,000. ➢ Staff is working with GIS to produce the maps necessary to make application to SJRWMD. Sebastian Scrub Conservation Area: ➢ Contractor will be hired to refresh trails under other contractual services. South Oslo Riverfront Conservation Area: ➢ In order to complete the public access trail network for this site in a manner consistent with the approved management plan, there are two small crossings that have been proposed. A site review with the SJRWMD identified that only one of the crossings will require a permit for construction. Upon completion of the project, permitting of this boardwalk will have included the following in- house services: delineation of jurisdictional wetlands (by Conservation and GIS staff); site review and approval of wetland boundaries with the St. John's River Water Management District (SJRWMD) & U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) staff (completed by Conservation staff); preparation of permit application and follow up response to data requests (by Conservation and GIS staff). As this boardwalk will traverse existing wetlands, there will be additional coordination with permitting agencies to address specific criteria. Therefore, the cost for completing this work using outside consulting services would range between $4,500 to $6,500. ➢ Staff is working with GIS to produce the maps necessary to make application to SJRWMD. Wabasso Scrub Conservation Area: ➢ Staff has been coordinating with FDOT & their contractors to assist in permitting issues associated with the CR 510 widening project. The widening also affects the South Prong Slough Conservation Area and staff is working to coordinate with FCT on their approval. ➢ Staff continues to work with the Florida Forest Service to provide habitat management and wildfire reduction measures throughout the site. Currently, staff is coordinating with Forestry on 2 units that will be prescribed burned. In addition, fire breaks will be refreshed and mowed as needed. Budgeted other contractual funds may be utilized to accomplish these tasks. Firelines also serve as trails and work doubles as trail maintenance. Conservation Lands Program Update — Informational Item July 2017 Pii In addition to the efforts from the Conservation Lands Program, Environmental Planning has been working on funding and improvements to the Archie Smith Fish House which is included for reference in this informational item. Archie Smith Fish House ➢ The County has received a 50% cost -share grant from the Florida Inland Navigation District (FIND) for phased dock and ice house restoration at the Archie Smith Fish House. As approved by the County Commission in December 2015, the FIND grant award is $100,000, with a County match of $100,000 using Florida Boating Improvement Funds. The restoration work has been designed and construction bid documents have been advertised, with a bid opening on June 30, 2017. One bid was received and is currently under review. Community Development Department is coordinating the efforts on this project. In addition to the above described information, there are three tables for quick reference: Table 1. Summary of Conservation Lands Program Projects with Encumbered Funds Table 2. Summary of Conservation Lands Program Projected Allocations Table 3. Summary of Conservation Lands Program Grant Applications Conservation Lands Program Update — Informational Item July 2017 P12 Table 1. Summary of Conservation Lands Program Projects with Encumbered Funds Project Task Encumbered Funds County Reference Funding Source Ansin Riverfront CA Permit application fee $250.00 Check 14514639-066390 Hallstrom Farmstead Install perimeter fence $8,215.00 PO #7686500 14514639-066390 Hallstrom Farmstead Complete site plan $14,800.00 WO #5 31521072-066390 Hallstrom Farmstead Fenceline clearing $2,000.00 PO #77675-00 00421072-033490 Jones' Pier CA Complete site plan $28,250.00 WO #5 31521072-066390 Kroegel Homestead Complete site plan $22,800.00 WO #5 31521072-066390 NSCA Addition Trail establishment $3,000.00 PO #77330-00 12721037-033490 Mowing at NSCA (in conjunction $7,300.00 NSCA with FWC Grant) —John Brown & (reimbursement by FWC PO #77329-03 00421072-003490 Sons — project complete has been received) Silt fence installation at NSCA (in $4,552.80 conjunction with FWC Grant) — (3,500.00 NSCA C&C Silt Fence Co. — project reimbursement by FWC has PO #774017-00 00421072-003490 complete been received—balance not utilized) Sebastian Harbor Firebreak/trail mowing $1,000.00 PO #77675-00 1 00421072-033490 Summary of Conservation Lands Program Work Efforts & Funding Information June 2017 1 W Table 2. Summary of Conservation Lands Program Projected Allocations Summary of Conservation Lands Program Work Efforts & Funding Information June 2017 Possible County Current Status Projected Project Work Item Estimated Cost Matching Funding Timeframe Funding Source Ansin Riverfront CA Boardwalk construction $25,000.00 None CIE Con Lands Working on November RFP/Purchasing 2017 Captain Forster Cottage restoration $25,000.00 DHR CIE Con Lands Staffseeking 2019 Hammock Preserve opportunities for funding. Hallstrom Farmstead Construction of parking and public access $150,000.00 None CIE Con Lands Regular meetings with 2018 facilities MBV to discuss progress. Hallstrom Farmstead Renovation of buildings $100,000.00 DHR CIE Con Lands 2019-2020 GIS working on site Harmony Oaks CA Boardwalk construction $35,000.00 None CIE Con Lands drawings necessary for 2018 in-house permitting. Jones' Pier CA Construction of pond & wetland IRLNEP/ Meeting with SJRWMD enhancements $75,000.00 SJRWMD CIE Con Lands for permitting and 2019 funding guidance. Jones' Pier CA Construction of parking and public access $150,000 FRDAP CIE Con Lands Regular meetings with 2019 facilities MBV to discuss progress. Kroegel Homestead Construction of parking and public access $100,000.00 None CIE Con lands Regular meetings With 2018 facilities MBV to discuss progress. Kroegel Homestead Renovation of buildings $150,000.00 DHR CIE Con Lands Grant submitted to DHR 2019-2020 — notice by June 2018. GIS working on site SORCA Boardwalk construction $20,000.00 None CIE Con Lands drawings necessary for 2018 in-house permitting. Round Island South GIS working on site CA Boardwalk construction $25,000.00 None CIE Con Lands drawings necessary for 2018 in-house permitting. Summary of Conservation Lands Program Work Efforts & Funding Information June 2017 Table 3. Summary of Conservation Lands Program Grant Applications Project Grantor Description Board Approval — Permission to Total County County Administrator Application of Grant Project Apply /Board Project Grant Match % Funding Status Letter of Date Approval Amount Funding Match Source Approval (*budgeted) Necessary Provide for habitat improvement for Ansin Tract FWC° Gopher Tortoises through prescribed Submitted/ Conservation September burning, roller -chopping and exotics Upcoming $15,000 $15,000 $0 0% N/A Not Funded — No Area 2016 treatment and installation of silt fence Informational Item will resubmit to become a waif recipient site. 9/2017 Archie Smith FIND April p Phased restoration of dock and ice Consent Item — Boating Submitted/ Fish House 2015 house. Agreement $200,000 $100,000 $100,000 50% Improvement Funded No December 2015 Fund Captain Forster FWC' Provide for the treatment of invasive Upcoming Submitted/ Hammock May 2017 exotics. Informational Item $50,000 $50,000 $0 0% N/A Funded No Preserve Countywide Provide wildfire protection in the $20,000 TBD Wildfire HMGP form of mechanical treatment, Consent Item June $150,000 $l 12,500 cash 25% No— Submitted/ Yes Mitigation June 2017 installation of firebreaks and fire 6, 2017 Approved $17,500 Hurricane In Review Received management plans. in-kind Recovery' Rehabilitation and repurposing of DHR historical bams/structures for the Hallstrom Large purposes of historic preservation, Upcoming CIE Con Yes Farmstead Category public access and environmental Informational Item TBD TBD TBD TBD Lands* Not Submitted June 2018 education. An FCT requirement in the approved management plan 8/2002. Indian River Lagoon FWC3 Provide for the treatment of invasive U comin p g $10,000 $10,000 $0 0% N/A Submitted/ No Greenway May 2017 exotics. Informational item Funded DHR Provide for the re -building of the $18,500 Jones' Pier CA Small Historic Jones Fruit Stand and Informational Item $55,500 $28,000 cash CIE Con Submitted/ Yes Matching educational signage along Jungle April 19, 2017 $9,500 50% Lands* In Review Received April 2017 Trail. I in-kind Summary of Conservation Lands Program Work Efforts & Funding Information June 2017 Summary of Conservation Lands Program Work Efforts & Funding Information June 2017 Grantor Board Approval — Total County Administrator Project Application Description Permission to Project Grant County % Funding Status Letter of Date of Grant Project Apply /Board Amount Funding Match Match Source Approval Approval (* budgeted) Necessary Provide design services for a $5,750 Jones' Pier CA IRLC stormwater treatment area/wetland Upcoming cash CIE Con Submitted/ Yes June 2017 restoration and enhancement as part Informational Item $24,400 $11,750 $6,900 52% Lands* Not Funded Received of the overall site plan for public 6/2017 in-kind access improvements. Jones' Pier CA HMGP Elevate main house above base flood Informational Item $69,356 $52,017 $17,339 25% LAAC Bond Submitted/ Yes June 2017 elevation. June 20, 2017 In Review Received Rehabilitation and repurposing of Kroegel DHR historical bams/structures for the $52,000 Large purposes of historic preservation, Upcoming Cash CIE Con Submitted/ Yes Homestead Category public access and environmental Informational Item $141,000 $70,600 $18,500 o 50% Lands* in Review Received June 2017 education. An FCf requirement in the in-kind approved management plan 10/2004. FWC' Provide for the treatment of invasive Upcoming $75,000 $75,000 $0 ° 0% N/A Submitted/ No May 2017 exotics. Informational Item Funded North Provide for habitat improvement for Sebastian Gopher Tortoises through prescribed Conservation FWC burning, roller -chopping and exotics $14,000 $14,000 Submitted/ Area September treatment to become an Incidental Consent Item ($11,880 ($11,880 $0 0% N/A Funded/ No 2016 Take Recipient Site. Also provided November 16, 2016 actual) actual) Reimbursement for installation of silt fence for Received relocation enclosure. FWC' (Project Provide for the treatment of invasive Upcoming Submitted/ Oslo complete exotics. Informational Item $67,000 $67,000 $0 ° 0% N/A Completed NO Riverfront Conservation 2017) Area Provide for wildfire protection to TBD HMGP adjacent neighbors (Forest Park6, Consent Item June $65,000 $48,750 $16,250 25% No— Submitted/ Yes May 2017 Subdivision). 2017 Approved Hurricane In Review Received Recovery' Summary of Conservation Lands Program Work Efforts & Funding Information June 2017 'Funding may be provided through Upland Mitigation Account. 'Funding may be provided through a combination of Florida Forest Service services and Upland Mitigation Account. 'Funding is provided through a purchase order from FWC. No cash transaction between County/FWC. 'Funding is provided through a purchase order from FWC to Indian River County. v Summary of Conservation Lands Program Work Efforts R. Funding Information June 2017 Grantor Board Approval — Total County Administrator Project Application Description Permission to Project Grant County % Funding Status Letter of Date of Grant Project Apply /Board Amount Funding Match Match Source Approval Approval (* budgeted) Necessary Oyster Bar FIND/IRLT Provide for public access $100,000 Optional Sales Marsh April 2017 - improvements to the conservation Consent Item —May $381,700 (IRLT) $140,850 37% Tax and Submitted/ No IRLT area. 16, 2017 (1410,85 LAAC Bond In Review WabassoProvide FWC^ for habitat improvement for p Submitted/ Scrub Gopher Tortoises through prescribed Upcoming Not Funded — Conservation September burning, roller -chopping and exotics Informational Item $15,000 $15,000 $0 u 0% N/A will resubmit No Area 2016 treatment. 9/2017 $370,689 TOTAL Cash APPLIED: $1,332,956 $910,467 $52,400 In-kind TOTAL RECEIVED: $313,880 $0 'Funding may be provided through Upland Mitigation Account. 'Funding may be provided through a combination of Florida Forest Service services and Upland Mitigation Account. 'Funding is provided through a purchase order from FWC. No cash transaction between County/FWC. 'Funding is provided through a purchase order from FWC to Indian River County. v Summary of Conservation Lands Program Work Efforts R. Funding Information June 2017 i JEFFREY R. SMITH, CPA, CGFO, CGMA CSN' ' Clerk of Circuit Court & Comptroller Finance Department 1801 271' Street Vero Beach, FL 32960.�n TO:. HONORABLE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS I. FROM: DIANE BERNARDO, FINANCE DIRECTOR THRU: JEFFREY R. SMITH, COMPTROLLER I DATE: July 0, 2017 SUBJECT: APPROVAL OF CHECKS AND ELECTRONIC PAYMENTS June 30, 2017 to July 6, 2017 In compliance with Chapter 136.06, Florida Statutes, all checks. and electronic payments issued by the Board of County Commissioners are to be recorded in the Board minutes.. . Approval is requested for the attached lists of checks and electronic payments,, issued by the Comptroller's office, for the timeperiod of June 30, 2017 to July 6, 2017. Attachment: _----.P18 CHECKS WRITTEN TRANS NHR DATE VENDOR AMOUNT 355314 06/30/2017 NIGP 270.00 355315 07/03/2017 1135 RENTALS LLC 580.00 355316 07/03/2017 ORANGE COUNTY HOUSING & C D 629.73 355317 07/03/2017 ALL FLORIDA REALTY SERVICES INC 3,919.00 355318 07/03/2017 VERO BEACH EDGEWOOD PLACE LP 931.00 355319 07/03/2017 GRACES LANDING LTD 9,467.00 355320 07/03/2017 LINDSEY GARDENS LTD 6,257.00 355321 07/03/2017 BRYAN D BLAIS 356.00 355322 07/03/2017 WILLIE C REAGAN 449.00 355323 07/03/2017 RIVER PARK ASSOCIATES LIMITED 14,615.00 355324 07/03/2017 RICHARD C THERIEN 444.00 355325 07/03/2017 CREATIVE CHOICE HOMES XVI LTD 10,522.00 355326 07/03/2017 DAVID YORK 502.00 355327 07/03/2017 ST FRANCIS MANOR OF VERO BEACH 274.00 355328 07/03/2017 TREASURE COAST HOMELESS SERVICES 945.00 355329 07/03/2017 VENETIAN APARTMENTS OF VERO BEACH 390.00 355330 07/03/2417 PINNACLE GROVE LTD 9,062.00 355331 07/03/2017 VERO CLUB PARTNERS LTD 7,541.00 355332 07/03/2017 DAVID SPARKS 383.00 355333 07/03/2017 INDIAN RIVER COUNTY HOUSING AUTHORITY 533.00 355334 07/03/2017 INDIAN RIVER COUNTY HOUSING AUTHORITY 534.00 355335 07/03/2017 CRAIG MERRILL 1,209.00 355336 07/03/2017 CHRISTINE SALTER 483.00 355337 07/03/2017 HAGGERTY FAMILY LTD 373.00 355338 07/03/2017 SUNQUEST INC 4,469.00 355339 07/03/2017 THE PALMS AT VERO BEACH 11,730.00 355340 07/03/2017 FELLSMERE COMM ENRICHMENT PROGRAM INC 88.00 355341 07/03/2017 DAVID CONDON 632.00 355342 07/03/2017 HILARY MCIVOR 418.00 355343 07/03/2017 PAULA LANE 451.00 355344 07/03/2017 PELICAN ISLES LP 7,693.00 355345 07/03/2017 KATE TYSON LYONS 334.00 355346 07/03/2017 SUNCOAST REALTY & RENTAL MGMT LLC 4,539.00 355347 07/03/2017 OAK RIVER PROPERTIES INC 348.00 355348 07/03/2017 SOLARISE VILLAS LTD 2,504.00 355349 07/03/2017 ADINA GOLDMAN 545.00 355350 07/03/2017 INDIAN RIVER RDA LP 5,373.00 355351 07/03/2017 MAURICE W BROWN 497.00 355352 07/03/2017 RICHARD LDAVENPORT 495.00 355353 07/03/2017 GEORGE THUYNS 683.00 355354 07/03/2017 LAZY J LLC 1,740.00 355355 07/03/2017 SYLVIAMCNEILL 719.00 355356 07/03/2017 SKOKJE HOLDINGS INC 750.00 355357 07/03/2017 ROGER WINSLOW 478.00 355358 07/03/2017 VINCENT PILEGGI 200.00 355359 07/03/2017 OSLO VALLEY PROPERTIES INC 319.00 355360 07/03/2017 SAID S MOOBARK 1,302.00 355361 07/03/2017 OSCEOLA COUNTY SECTION 8 622.73 355362 07/03/2017 LINDSEY GARDENS Il LTD 4,645.00 355363 07/03/2017 ANTHONY ARROYO 654.00 355364 07/03/2017 AHS HOLDINGS GROUP LLC 3,485.00 355365 07/03/2017 DANIEL CORY MARTIN 742.00 355366 07/03/2017 YVONNE KOUTSOFIOS 370.00 355367 07/03/2017 ALAN R TOKAR 650.00 355368 07/03/2017 VERO BEACH VILLAS I LLC 463.00 355369 07/03/2017 BRIAN E GALLAGHER 524.00 355370 07/03/2017 HOUSING AUTHORITY 766.73 355371 07/03/2017 STEPHANIE WATCHEK FOUNTAIN TRUST 243.00 P19 TRANS NBR DATE VENDOR AMOUNT 355372 07/03/2017 SCOT WILKE 503.00 355373 07/03/2017 J & K PALMER ENTERPRISES LLC 199.00 355374 07/03/2017 THEODORE BARTOSIEWICZ 508.00 355375 07/03/2017 FOUNDATION FOR AFFORDABLE RENTAL 21,604.00 355376 07/03/2017 RICHARD KUSSEROW 573.00 355377 07/03/2017 ARE JAY INVESTMENTS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY IT 514.00 355378 07/03/2017 SONRISE VILLAS H LLC 591.00 355379 07/03/2017 JOHN T STANLEY 785.00 355380 07/03/2017 CSMA SFR HOLDINGS H -LLC 503.00 355381 07/03/2017 YELLOW KID INC 550.00 355382 07/03/2017 WEDGEWOOD RENTALS LLC 1,607.00 355383 07/03/2017 ALMA LUCKETT 854.00 355384 07/03/2017 LIVE OAKS REALTY INC 614.00 355385 07/03/2017 IBIS GARDENS APTS LLC 476.00 355386 07/03/2017 MCLAUGHLIN PROPERTIES LLC 1,196.00 355387 07/03/2017 JOYCE BODANZA 552.00 355388 07/03/2017 MYRIAM MELENDEZ 438.00 355389 07/06/2017 JORDAN MOWER INC 362.21 355390 07/06/2017 COMMUNICATIONS INTERNATIONAL 128.80 355391 07/06/2017 COMMUNICATIONS INTERNATIONAL 3,431.23 355392 07/06/2017 TEN -8 FIRE EQUIPMENT INC 7,020.41 355393 07/06/2017 RANGER CONSTRUCTION IND INC 765.68 355394 07/06/2017 VERO CHEMICAL DISTRIBUTORS INC 105.20 355395 07/06/2017 RICOH USA INC 40.00 355396 07/06/2017 SAFETY PRODUCTS INC 61.20 355397 07/06/2017 PARALEE COMPANY INC 500.00 355398 07/06/2017 E -Z BREW COFFEE & BOTTLE WATER SVC 21.46 355399 07/06/2017 KELLY TRACTOR CO 368.23 355400 07/06/2017 GRAYBAR ELECTRIC 247.36 355401 07/06/2017 AMERIGAS EAGLE PROPANE LP 708.31 355402 07/06/2017 AMERIGAS EAGLE PROPANE LP 932.91 355403 07/06/2017 AMERIGAS EAGLE PROPANE LP 1,355.09 355404 07/06/2017 HACH CO 901.37 355405 07/06/2017 LFI FORT PIERCE INC 1,894.73 355406 07/06/2017 LFI FORT PIERCE INC 1,249.88 355407 07/06/2017 PHYSIO CONTROL INC 2,004.39 355408 07/06/2017 PETES CONCRETE 850.00 355409 07/06/2017 VERO INDUSTRIAL SUPPLY INC 174.68 355410 07/06/2017 DIVE RESCUE INTERNATIONAL INC 1,820.00 355411 07/06/2017 CHILDCARE RESOURCES OF IRC INC 18,948.88 355412 07/06/2017 THE GOODYEAR TIRE & RUBBER COMPANY 1,284.20 355413 07/06/2017 THE GOODYEAR TIRE & RUBBER COMPANY 100.00 355414 07/06/2017 BLAKESLEE SERVICES INC 710.00 355415 07/06/2017 BAKER & TAYLOR INC 3,822.39 355416 07/06/2017 MIDWEST TAPE LLC 3,108.90 355417 07/06/2017 NORTHERN SAFETY CO INC 110.37 355418 07/06/2017 HUDSON PUMP & EQUIPMENT 2,987.00 355419 07/06/2017 MICROMARKETING LLC 191.68 355420 07/06/2017 BAKER DIS'T'RIBUTING CO LLC 109.94 355421 07/06/2017 PALM TRUCK CENTERS INC 753.33 355422 07/06/2017 PENWORTHY COMPANY 1,003.51 355423 07/06/2017 COMMUNITY ASPHALT CORP 216,350.62 355424 07/06/2017 CITY OF VERO BEACH 8,444.89 355425 07/06/2017 COMPBENEFITS COMPANY 80.16 355426 07/06/2017 INDIAN RIVER ALL FAB INC 710.00 355427 07/06/2017 UNITED PARCEL SERVICE INC 76.79 355428 07/06/2037 FERGUSON ENTERPRISES INC 1,638.35 355429 07/06/2017 FLORIDA GOVERNMENT FINANCE 18.00 355430 07/06/2017 LIVINGSTON PAGE 90.00 355431 07/06/2017 JANITORIAL DEPOT OF AMERICA INC 503.62 P20 TRANS NBR DATE VENDOR AMOUNT 355432 07/06/2017 PUBLIX SUPERMARKETS 18.00 355433 07/06/2017 PUBLIX SUPERMARKETS 14.95 355434 07/06/2017 PUBLIX SUPERMARKETS 15.52 355435 07/06/2017 DEANGELO BROTHERS INC 232.00 355436 07/06/2017 GEOSYNTEC CONSULTANTS INC 1,483.29 355437 07/06/2017 FEDERAL EXPRESS CORP 16.55 355438 07/06/2017 FEDERAL EXPRESS CORP 21.57 355439 07/06/2017 FEDERAL EXPRESS CORP 36.06 355440 07/06/2017 TIMOTHY ROSE CONTRACTING INC 73,700.00 355441 07/06/2017 FLORIDA RECREATION & PARK ASSOC INC 275,00 355442 07/06/2017 FLORIDA POWER AND LIGHT 2,953.93 355443 07/06/2017 FLORIDA POWER AND LIGHT 19,863.31 355444 07/06/2017 FLORIDA POWER AND LIGHT 5,047.05 355445 07/06/2017 BRE-CLEARWATER OWNER LLC 387.00 355446 07/06/2017 BRE-CLEARWATER OWNER LLC 387.00 355447 07/06/2017 BRE-CLEARWATER OWNER LLC 913.70 355448 07/06/2017 SUNSHINE STATE ONE CALL OF FL INC 1,067.30 355449 07/06/2017 SASAN ROHAM 375.00 355450 07/06/2017 MYLES BROWN 108.00 355451 07/06/2017 TRANSPORTATION CONTROL SYSTEMS 39,280.00 355452 07/06/2017 GIFFORD COMMUNITY CENTER 5,435.64 355453 07/06/2017 HENRY SMITH 162.00 355454 07/06/2017 PITNEY BOWES INC 20.1,00 355455 07/06/2017 ALAN C KAUFFMANN 240.00 355456 07/06/2017 FLORIDA DEPT OF FINANCIAL SERVICES 15,992.17 355457 07/06/2017 NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF LEGAL ASSISTANTS INC 140.00 355458 07/06/2017 SCHOOL DISTRICT OF I R COUNTY 23,325.00 355459 07/06/2017 ST LUCIE COUNTY BOCC 27,938.00 355460 07/06/2017 ST LUCIE COUNTY BOCC 118,849.00 355461 07/06/2017 RUSSELL PAYNE INC 479.22 355462 07/06/2017 TRANS US INC 13,727.00 355463 07/06/2017 VAN WAL INC 20.00 355464 07/06/2017 NATIONAL NOTARY ASSOCIATION 130.00 355465 07/06/2017 JOHNS EASTERN COMPANY INC 50,000.00 355466 07/06/2017 SANIBEL HARBOUR MARRIOTT RESORT & SPA 312.00 355467 07/06/2017 MBV ENGINEERING INC 322.50 355468 07/06/2017 RICHARD PEEPLES 350.00 355469 07/06/2017 MASTELLER & MOLER INC 676.00 355470 07/06/2017 STAPLES CONTRACT & COMMERCIAL INC 765.75 355471 07/06/2017 GARY L EMBREY 184.00 355472 07/06/2017 C W NIELSEN MFG CORP 2,370.00 355473 07/06/2017 LARRY STEPHENS 198.00 355474 07/06/2017 CAROLE J MADIGAN 1,605.00 355475 07/06/2017 KC ENTERPRISES OF VERO BEACH INC 4,520.00 355476 07/06/2017 AMERICAN DRILLING SERVICES INC 535.00 355477 07/0612017 TOTAL TEMPERATURE INSTRUMENTATION INC 911.10 355478 07/06/2017 JOHNNY B SMITH 76.00 355479 07/06/2017 MUNICIPAL WATER WORKS INC 15,548.50 355480 07/06/2017 MOORE MEDICAL LLC 2,638.97 355481 07/06/2017 GLOBALSTAR USA 146.81 355482 07/06/2017 CHARLES A WALKER 100.00 355483 07/06/2017 DYNAMIC AIR QUALITY & COOLING INC 5,936.68 355484 07/06/2017 SOUTHEAST SECURE SHREDDING 400.12 355485 07/06/2017 KATHLEEN P DOUGHERTY 210.00 355486 07/06/2017 RENAE CHANDLER 20.00 355487 07/06/2017 TREASURE COAST SPRINKLERS INC 5,000.00 355488 07/06/2017 KRISTIN DANIELS 207.48 355489 07/06/2017 FLORIDA EAST COAST INDUSTRIES INC 12,737.01 355490 07/06/2017 K'S COMMERCIAL CLEANING 16.954.08 355491 07/06/2017 NANCY H MOSSALI 199.00 TRANS NBR DATE VENDOR AMOUNT 355492 07/06/2017 VERA SN41TB 108.00 355493 07/06/2017 GARRETT SMITH 162.00 355494 07/06/2017 KNAPHEIDE TRUCK EQUIPMENT SOUTHEAST 400.44 355495 07/06/2017 BRENNTAG MID -SOUTH INC 12,497.97 355496 07/06/2017 HEATHER HATTON 20.00 355497 07/06/2017 MOORE MOTORS INC 79.10 355498 07/06/2017 TIM ZORC 264.43 355499 07/06/2017 LOWES HOME CENTERS INC 627.88 355500 07/06/2017 MUNICIPAL EMERGENCY SERVICES INC 61,700.00 355501 07/06/2017 BURNETT LIME CO INC 3,232.60 355502 .07/06/2017 SOUT14WIDE INDUSTRIES INC 14,400.60 355503 07/06/2017 AMERICAN MINORITY BUSINESS FORMS 651.82 355504 07/06/2017 TREASURE COAST TURF INC 1,950.00 355505 07/06/2017 PENGUIN RANDOM HOUSE LLC 463.95 355506 07/06/2017 NICOLE GRAPPO 68.00 355507 07/06/2017 ROBERT DOERR UPHOLSTERY 100.00 355508 07/06/2017 SOUTHERN MANAGEMENT LLC 222.50 355509 07/06/2017 DEBORAH CUEVAS 108.00 355510 07/06/2017 CHEMTRADE CHEMICALS CORPORTATION 5,593.01 355511 07/06/2017 DYLAN REINGOLD 100.13 355512 07/06/2017 KATE P COTNER 80.13 355513 07/06/2017 WADE WILSON 60.00 355514 07/06/2017 MONA MOSHKI FEDERICI 270.00 355515 07/06/2017 AMERITAS 27,292.74 355516 07/06/2017 RONALD NICHELSON 40.00 355517 07/06/2017 MICHAEL EDWARD HAMIILTON 300.00 355518 07/06/2017 HAWKINS INC 1,558.75 355519 07/06/2017 ENCORE ONE LLC 2,271.86 355520 07/06/2017 JOSEPH DIZONNO 140.00 355521 07/06/2017 KARYN BRYANT 13.35 355522 07/06/2017 JAMES BROXTON 250.00 355523 07/06/2017 INNOVATIVE INTERFACES INC 44,557.78 355524 07/06/2017 UNIFIRST CORPORATION 879.50 355525 07/06/2017 CDA SOLUTIONS INC 5,413.85 355526 07/06/2017 SCHUMACHER AUTOMOTIVE DELRAY LLC 183.09 355527 07/06/2017 SITEONE LANDSCAPE SUPPLY LLC 28.32 355528 07/06/2017 GOTTA GO GREEN ENTERPI SES INC 56.49 355529 07/06/2017 ADVANCE STORES COMPANY INCORPORATED 141.37 355530 07/06/2017 GUARDIAN ALARM OF FLORIDA LLC 198.00 355531 07/06/2017 RUSSELL L OWEN III 40.00 355532 07/06/2017 DOUG FLOOD 107.00 355533 07/06/2017 EASTERN PIPELINE CONSTRUCTION INC 3,900.00 355534 07/06/2017 DOCKSIDE BUILDERS OF SEBASTIAN INC 10,810.00 355535 07/06/2017 EDWARD ILLIDGE 120.00 355536 07/06/2017 OKLAHOMA SIMMS 90.00 355537 07/06/2017 MATHESON TRI -GAS INC 3,935.10 355538 07/06/2017 PEOPLE READY INC 3,884.80 355539 07/06/2017 KEITH ADAMS 60.00 355540 07/06/2017 ROBERT O RICHARDSON 111 40.00 355541 07/06/2017 EMILY GOUGE 120.00 355542 07/06/2017 RAUL E VIVANCO 192.00 355543 07/06/2017 COLE AUTO SUPPLY INC 565.23 355544 07/06/2017 GEOTECH ENVIRONMENTAL EQUIPMENT INC 542.73 355545 07/06/2017 MARISAALEXANDER 28.00 355546 07/06/2017 CANON FINANCIAL SERVICES INC 253.19 355547 07/06/2017 RICHARD B VOTAPKA 2,768.00 355548 07/06/2017 CAP WORLD INC 4,653.00 355549 07/06/20.17 KONICA MINOLTA BUSINESS SOLUTIONS 73.05 355550 07/06/2017 BETH NOLAN 60.00 355551 07/06/2017 THOMAS R PILIERO 44.00 4 P22 5 - -- - TRANS NBR DATE VENDOR AMOUNT 355552 07/06/2017 ALEXANDRA APOSTOLIDES 16.00 355.553 07/06/2017 ERIC GAYETSKY 140.00 355554 07/06/2017 SARAH KELLY 80.00 . 355555 006/2017 SHAWN PETERMAN 107.00 355556 07/06/2017 ROCKY MOUNTAIN HOLDINGS LLC 157000:00 355557 07/06/2017 PADDLES BY THE SEA 200.00 355558 07/06/20.17 WHITT CHENOWITH 54.00 355559 07/06/2017 PAUL CARONE 1,535:00 355560 07/06/2017. THE PALMS AT VERO BEACH 627.00 355561 07/06/2017 MISS INC OF THE TREASURE COAST 630,00 355562 07/06/2017 REID REALTY 506.00 355563 . 07/06/2017.. H&H SHADOWBROOK LLC 568.00 355564 07/06/2017 VERO BEACH PLACE LLC 404.00 355565 07/06/2017 COALITION FOR ATTAINABLE HOMES INC 551.00 355566 07/06/2017 HELPING HANDS REAL ESTATE & INVESTMENT CO 750.00 355567 07/06/2017 JOHN K GERRATO.: 355568 07/06/2017 IBIS GARDENS APTS LLC 1,936.00 Grand Total: I k i I 1,166,338.98 5 - -- - 23 ELECTRONIC PAYMENT - VISA CARD TRANS.N'BR DATE VENDOR AMOUNT 1011638 06/30/2017 EVERGLADES FARM EQUIPMENT CO INC 3,495.58 1011639 06/30/2017 ROBINSON EQUIPMENT COMPANY INC 1,135.00 1011640 06/30/2017 INDIAN RIVER BATTERY 1,129.00 1011641 06/30/2017 MIKES GARAGE & WRECKER SERVICE INC 185.00 1011642 06/30/2017 MIKES GARAGE & WRECKER SERVICE INC 65.00 1011643 06/30/2017 APPLE INDUSTRIAL SUPPLY CO 635.83 1011644 06/30/2017 MEEKS PLUMBING INC 407.69 1011645 06/30/2017 ABCO GARAGE DOOR CO INC 256.00 1011646 06/30/2017 APPLE MACHINE & SUPPLY CO 274.06 1011647 06/30/2017 COMMERCIAL ENERGY SPECIALISTS 236.58 1011648 06/30/2017 HD SUPPLY FACILITIES 'MAINTENANCE LTD 457.03 1011649 06/30/2017 COMPLETE ELECTRIC INC 142.50 1011650 06/30/2017 BARKER ELECTRIC, AIR CONDITIONING 125.00 1011651 06/30/2017 ESRI INC 1,695.00 1011652 06/30/2017 MIDWEST MOTOR SUPPLY CO 382.14 1011653 06/30/2017 SOUTHERN JANITOR SUPPLY INC 2,314.11 1011654 06/30/2017 CONSOLIDATED ELECTRICAL DISTRIBUTORS INC 1,682.18 1011655 06/30/2017 BENNETT AUTO SUPPLY INC 293.24 1011656 06/30/2017 AUTO PARTNERS LLC 772.96 1011657 06/30/2017 L&L DISTRIBUTORS 199.60 1011658 06/30/2017 STAT MEDICAL DISPOSAL, INC 330.00 1011659 06/30/2017 HYDRA SERVICE (S) INC 13,031.45 1011660 06/30/2017 HORIZON DISTRIBUTORS INC 270.66 1011661 06/30/2017 NEXAIR LLC 237.36 1011662 07/06/2017 AT&T 15,921.18 1011663 07/06/2017 OFFICE DEPOT BSD CUSTOMER SVC 1,130.24 1011664 07/06/2017 COMCAST 264.55 1011665 07/06/2017 EVERGLADES FARM EQUIPMENT CO INC 2,177.49 1011666 07/06/2017 COLKITT SHEET METAL & A/C INC 174.00 1011667 07/06/2017 COLD AIR DISTRIBUTORS WAREHOUSE 175.78 1011668 07/06/2017 APPLE INDUSTRIAL SUPPLY CO 128.52 1011669 07/06/2017 GALLS LLC 464.50 1011670 07/06/2017 ALLIED UNIVERSAL CORP 7,752.00 1011671 07/06/2017 DEERE & COMPANY 309.26 1011672 07/06/2017 APPLE MACHINE & SUPPLY CO 321.04 1011673 07/06/2017 TOTAL TRUCK PARTS INC 70.66 1011674 07/06/2017 COMO OIL COMPANY OF FLORIDA 196.13 1011675 07/06/2017 ESRI INC 29,850.00 1011676 07/06/2017 SHRIEVE CHEMICAL CO 2,307.06 1011677 07/06/2017 RECHTIEN INTERNATIONAL TRUCKS 611.91 101.1678 07/06/2017 FLAGLER CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT LLC 701.09 1011679 07/06%2017 SYNAGRO-WWT INC 52,021.20 1011680 07/06/2017 SOUTHERN JANITOR SUPPLY INC 949:11 1011681 07/06/2017 HARCROS CHEMICALS, INC. 13,725.83 1011682 07/06/2017 WACO FILTERS CORPORATION 7,323.00 1011683 07/06/2017 SIMS CRANE & EQUIPMENT CO 535.00 1011684 07/06/2017 CUMMINS POWER SOUTH LLC 2,820.30 1011685 07/06/2017 HYDRA SERVICE (S) INC 2,831.38 1011686 07/06/2017 HORIZON DISTRIBUTORS INC 109.75 1011687 07/06/2017 PACE ANALYTICAL SERVICES INC 10,812.00 1011688 07/06/2017 XYLEM WATER SOLUTION USA INC 9,175.10 1011689 07/06/2017 MET -PRO TECHNOLOGIES LLC 15,015.00 1011690 07/06/2017 ALLIED DIVERSIFIED OF VERO BEACH LLC 100.00 1011691 07/06/2017 NEXAIR LLC 74.27 Grand Total: 207,800.32 ELECTRONIC PAYMENTS - WIRE & ACH TRANS NBR DATE VENDOR AMOUNT 5236 06/30/2017 ICMA RETIREMENT CORPORATION 13,048.04 5237 06/30/2017 FLORIDA LEAGUE OF CITIES, INC 4,032.04 5238 06/30/2017 NACO/SOUTHEAST 1,512.55 5239 06/30/2017 BENEFITS WORKSHOP 9,121.44 5240 06/30/2017 KIMLEY HORN & ASSOC INC 13,837.50 5241 06/30/2017 ICMA RETIREMENT CORPORATION 2,410.00 5242 06/30/2017 IRC FIRE FIGHTERS ASSOC 6,780.00 5243. 06/30/2017 NACO/SOUTHEAST 42,056.14 5244 06/30/2017 INTEGRITY LAWNS LLC 1,750.00 5245 06/30/2017 RUSSELL PAYNE INC 94,398.88 5246 06/30/2017 CDM SMITH INC 8,940.56 5247 07/03/2017 FL SDU 5,247.14 5248 07/03/2017 LRS -PAYROLL TAXES 446,785.84 5249 07/03/2017 AGENCY FOR HEALTH CARE ADMIN 13,173.89 5250 07/03/2017 INDIAN RIVER COUNTY PROPERTY APPRAISER 756,577.02 5251 07/03/2017 INDIAN RIVER COUNTY SUPERVISOR OF ELECTIONS 86,512.37 5252 07/03/2017 INDIAN RIVER COUNTY SHERIFF 3,600,453.65 5253 07/03/2017 CLERK OF CIRCUIT COURT 80,959.25 5254 07/0,,3/2017 ST LUCIE BATTERY & TIRE CO 1,000.00 5255 07/05/2017 BLUE CROSS & BLUE SHIELD OF FLORIDA INC 35,5.14.45 5256 07/05/2017 BLUE CROSS & BLUE SHIELD OF FLORIDA INC 18,173.16 5257 07/05/2017 HEALTH ADVOCATE 11173.15 5258 07/05/2017 CHARD SNYDER & ASSOCIATES INC 284.40 5259 07/05/2017 MUTUAL, OF OMAHA 16,491.95 13 -CARD 07/06/2017 TD BANK. N.A. 937.20 5260 07/06/2017 FL RETIREMENT SYSTEM 870,997.79 5261 07/06/2017 REGIONS BANK 4,216.559.82 Grand Total: 10,348,728.23 P25 P Carole jean Jordan, CFC '0 P Tax Collector "How MAY WE HELP You?" INTER -OFFICE MEMO: To: Jason Brown, County Administrator Date: Friday, July 07, 2017 Subject: Consent Agenda Item From: Carole Jean Jordan, Tax Collector Please place the following on the Consent Agenda for the Board of County Commissioners meeting on Tuesday July 18, 2017. Pursuant to Chapter 197.492 of the Florida Statutes, enclosed is a report of the List of Errors, Insolvencies, Double Assessments and Discounts for the 2016 tax roll. This list was completed as of June 30, 2017 and is attached for your review. If you need any further information or assistance, please feel free to contact me. Thank you for your consideration in this matter. 1800 27th Street, Bldg. B, Vero Beach, FL 32960-0310 E-mail: HowMayWeHelpYouO1RCTax.com + Website., www.IRC-rax.com Phone: (772) 226-1338 # Fax (772) 770-5009 P26 n July 7, 2017 Board of County Commissioners Attention: Joseph E Flescher, Chairman 1801 27`" Street, Bldg A Vero Beach, FL 32960 Carole Jean Jordan, CFC Tax Collector °HOW MAY WE HELP YOU?" Re: Errors and Insolvencies Report for the 2016 Tax Roll Dear Chairman Flescher: Pursuant to Chapter 197.492 of the Florida Statutes, please find enclosed the Recapitulation of the 2016 Tax Roll. It includes a copy of the Errors and Insolvencies Report which shows the errors, double assessments, and insolvencies allowed. If I may be of further assistance, please do not hesitate to contact me. Thank you. Sincerely, Carole Jean Jordan Indian River County Tax Collector CJJ:ekp Attachments 1800 27th Street, Bldg. B, Vero Beach, FL 32960-0310 E-mail: HowMayWeHelpYouO1RCTax.com + Website: www.IRCTax.com Phone: (772)226-1338 # Fax (772) 770-5009 P27 INSTRUCTIONS To Tax Collectors: 505 R. 05/17 1. Use this for the last sheet on your report of discounts, errors, double assessments, and insolvencies. 2. Do not list any item without showing the reason for reduction in the right-hand column. 3. As much as possible, group together all items coming under one heading. For instance, place all errors under one heading, all double assessments under another, exemptions under another, etc. 4. For exemptions, specify whether widow, veteran, homestead, disability, etc. Tax Collector Recapitulation I, Carole Jean Jordan , Tax Collector of Indian River County, Florida, certify this is a report of all discounts, errors, double assessments, insolvencies, and federal bankruptcies on the assessment roll for 2016 ; that the discounts were actually earned for the month as shown; that the attached list shows all errors and double assessments as the property appraiser certified; that I have allowed no exemptions, other than those the attached list shows as certified by the property appraiser; that each item marked insolvent on the attached list is in fact insolvent and, although I have made a diligent search, I have been unable to find the tangible personal property to levy on to enforce the payment of the tax; and that I have not collected any of the items on the attached list. I am entitled to credit against the 2016 assessment roll on the following amounts: 4S&gnaturiftax Collector Discounts 9,448,350.49 Errors -480,666.60 Double Assessments 0.00 Insolvencies 22,446.01 Federal Bankruptcies 0.00 Other: (specify) Under minimum 5,048.40 Total 8,995,178.30 Indian River 07/07/2017 County Date P28 REPORT OF DISCOUNTS, ERRORS, DOUBLE ASSESMENTS, AND INSOLVENCIES Section 197.492, Florida Statutes Certified to the Board of County Commissioners by Carole Jean Jordan. Tax Collector for Indian River County, Florida. Discounts, errors, double assessments, Insolvencies, and exemptions are the only reasons for not collecting personal property taxes. Do not list any personal property tax item unless it is uncollectible. Do not take credit for items which are expected to be collected and remitted later. Before submitting this list to the board of county commissioners, the tax collector must fill out and sign the certificate at the end of this form as the last page of the report and recapitulate the amount of all taxes that will be credited. Desch tion of land -or ersonal property: Person the tax Is assessed against In the roll . Pro a ID # 1, Total taxes, deleted: I Reason for reduction DOROTHY CHARLES T JOANNE M 30-38-21-00005-0070-OOOOS/0 459.32 Errors MILLER DAVID M SAUNDRA 30-38-28-00006-0000-00284/0 -214.72 Errors PANGBURN TIMOTHY T (TRS) 31-37-00-00001-1227-00001/0 -80.00 Errors FELLSM ERE JOINT VENTURE 31-37-00-00001-2122-00001/0 10,123.34 Errors HOLLER WILLIAM CHARLES 31-38-01-00002-0020-00019/0 3,397.89 Errors CHERRY DAVID E 31-38-01-00003-0510-00006/0 491.27 Errors HAMMOND SUSAN RON ERIC 31-38-01-00003-0700.00004/0 90.21 Errors GRABENBAUER ELOISE HOOK & • C/O JAMES YELTON 31-38-01-00003-1000-00014/0 1,019.22 Errors YEATTS AMY M & 31-38-11-00003-0040-00008/0 38.90 Errors VON STEGERT EVELYN & 31-38-12-00005-5030-00008/0 331.91 Errors BANKS BRIAN' LINDA 31-38-13-00001-1820.00001/0 323.57 Errors MEADORS OTHUR E II JOAN COX 31-38-22-00002-0000-00116/0 346.55 Errors BEALS PATRICIA B (TR)(TOK) 31-38-23-00008-0000-00035/0 0.00 Errors MAGEE CATHERINE 8 31-38-24-00001-2600-00026/0 1,648.92 Errors HELMER PATRICK R & 31-38-25-00001-2960-00013/0 624.38 Errors COOTS RICHARD' LORETTAA 31-38-25.00001-2990-00090/1 -60.00 Errors WALLACE CALVIN 31-38-25-00001-3970-OOD02/0 33.95 Errors LEFEBURE JUSTIN 1 SHARON M 31-38-26-00001-3180-00022/0 1,281.50 Errors CAPUTO LAURENCE (TR) FBO MARTEL FAMILY IRR TRUST 31-38-33-00005-0020.00004/0 1,415.03 Errors REICHER CRAIG ERIN 31.39-15-00019-0440-00001/0 258.39 Errors JACINTO EZPELETA MARIA ZITA BERNARDINA (TR) 31-39-15-00024-0000-00013/0 11,561.52 Errors JACINTO EZPELETA MARIA ZITA BERNARDINA (TR) 31-39-15-00024.0000-00016/0 4,078.78 Errors SIMONE JUSTINE M 31-39-17-00004-0030-00110/0 268.34 Errors WEST ROBERT 31-39-19-00001-4510-00006/0 1,250.26 Errors RICHARDSON DANIEL J 31-39-19-00001-6030-00019/0 1,510.33 Errors STRANSKY RONNIE & 31-39-23-00001-0010-00004/0 334.88 Errors KIRBY MARY R 31-39-23-00005-0010-00000/8 486.00 Errors BEEH NANCY T 31-39-23-00005-0010.00001/0 486.15 Errors JEFFERSON BRADFORD L' HELENE L 31-39-27-00005-0000-00006/0 7,453.20 Errors CROSS CREEK LAKE ESTATES INC 31-39-30-00007-0070-00003/0 -40.20 Errors CROSS CREEK LAKE ESTATES INC 31-39-30-00007-0070-00004/0 -40.20 Errors GHO CROSS CREEK LAKE CORP 31-39-30-00007-0070-00005/0 -40.20 Errors JACKOWSKI EDWARD M LORRAINE B 31-39-30-00007-0070-00006/0 -40.20 Errors BAUER KARL W JANICE E 31-39-30-00007-0070-00007/0 -40.20 Errors LP RINA PROPERTIES 31-39-33-00000-1000-00008/0 1,137.60 Errors AC VERO BEACH LLC 31-39-34.00000-0040-00001/0 1,342.21 Errors ANDERSON DORIS 31-39-34-00003-0000-00028/0 501.32 Errors MORRISON HARRY 0 BONITA 31-39-36-00022-0000-00037/0 1,217.94 Errors AC VERO BEACH LLC 32-39.03-00000-0010-00001/0 149.31 Errors AC VERO BEACH LLC 32-39-03-00000-3000-00001/1 493.53 Errors RSG OF VERO BEACH, LLC • 32-39-03-00000-3000-00014/0 183.54 Errors OAKWOOD PARTNERS LLP 32-39-07-00001-0050.00002/0 214.80 Errors GILBERT MATTHEW W ' MIA M 32-39-07-00001-0110-00001/0 5,005.54 Errors OAKWOOD PARTNERS LLP 32-39-07400001-0120-00003/0 121.00 Errors OAKWOOD PARTNERS LLP 32-39-07-00001-0120-00004/0 84.32 Errors YOUNG CHRISTOPHER 8 & 32-39-07-00001-0150-00003/0 733.60 Errors BRUCKNER STEVEN L (H) SANDRA S 32-39-13-00015-0000-00201/0 2,915.13 Errors WHITEMAN RITA P (TR)(1/2) & 32-39-13-00015-0000-00202/0 4,102.15 Errors PASSARETTI BERNICE (TR)(TOK)' 32-39-13-D0015-0000-00203/0 2,959.12 Errors BARTON MICHAEL J (TRS) 32-39.13-00015-0000-00301/0 3,508.40 Errors MELNICK NICHOLAS ELIZABETH R 32-39-13-00015.0000-00302/0 3,653.79 Errors REDMOND DAVID A' 32-39.13-00015-0000-00303/0 3,614.59 Errors MENDELL JOHN R' LINDA D' 32-39-13-00015-0000-00401/0 3,216.47 Errors LINDSAY HORACE A DONNA V 32-39-13-00015.0000-00402/0 3,911.29 Errors Page 1 of 9 P29 Descri"'tion of land or personal properfy Person the taxis assessed against in the roll. Property 10 # Total taxes'd'eleted+ Reason for reduction PORTER CHERYL J 32-39-13-00015-0000-00403/0 3,396.47 Errors BARNEY KENNETH CJEANNE L 32-39.14-00001-0000.00051/0 510.39 Errors LANDRY MARK P & 32-39-16.00006-0000-00172/0 281.14 Errors TIERNEY DAVID T ALICIA 32-39-16-D0010-0000-00017/0 -3,253.19 Errors JACOBSON JOEL JACOBSON THOMAS WHITE ANDRE 32-39-20-00004-0000-00038/0 1,670.39 Errors RAHAL MARIA C 32-39-20-00004-0000-00061/0 396.89 Errors MURRAY JAMES A 32-39-21.00003.0120.00012/0 311.88 Errors THOMAS MARY' 32-39.22-00002-0060-00011/0 554.48 Errors RIVERFRONT PACKING CO LLC 32-39-23-00000-5000-00002/0 9,503.79. Errors SMILEY LLOYD G (TR)(TOK)' MARGARET C (TR)(TOK) 32-39-23-00012-0000-00030/0 70.48 Errors HAYNES ROBERT ALAN JULIET MORGAN 32-39.25.00008.0000-00127/0 813.92 Errors DARRISAW CARL L' HANNAH L 32.39-26-00001-0030.00004/0 314.74 Errors INDIAN RIVER COUNTY 32-39-26-00008-0000-00033/0 102.61 Errors WEBB MARGARET LEE' C/O ERNESTINE WEBB WILLIAMS 32-39-27-00007-0000-00026/0 102.61 Errors AFFORDABLE HOMES OF GIFFORD • C/O CLIFF CHERRY 32-39.27-00008-0000-00003/0 83.48 Errors WILKEY JOANNE K (TR)(TOK) 32-39.32-00019-0000.00004/3 208.29 Errors INDIAN RIVER COUNTY 32-39-33-00004-0000-00000/1 102.61 Errors NOLAN KEVIN M SR TERRY E 32-40-18-00001-0000-00079/0 5,084.76 Errors GRINSTEAD DALE' JANET C/O BARRY SEGAL 32-40.19-00039-0000-00001/0 2,954.51 Errors SURPRENANT JEFFREY A (TRS)(TOK) & 32-40-30-00008-0000-00011/0 891.35 Errors MARR JOHN S 32-40-32-00005-0170.00003/0 656.46 Errors VIGNEAULT MARK J GLORIA STELLA '32-40.32-00013-0001-00003/0 2,974.65 Errors GIACCIO JOHN J (LE) LENA (LE) 32-40.32-00022-0000-00406/0 404.39 Errors MILLER CARLETON W DIANE T 32.40.32-00022-0000-00504/0 680.79 Errors ADULT COMM TOTAL SERVICES INC D/B/A [NO RIV ESTATES 33-38-01-00001-0010.00001/0 -244,816.59 Errors UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE 33-38-02-00001-0070-00001/1 102.61 Errors BERGAMINO STEVEN 33.38-11-00001-0090-00001/0 771.54 Errors INEOS NEW PLANET BIOENERGY LLC 33-38-25.00001-0010-00001/0 4,884.92 Errors INEOS NEW PLANET BIOENERGY LLC 33-38-25-00001-0010-00002/0 -9,304.80 Errors ALGAE TO OMEGA LLC 33-38-36-00001-0010-00001/1 12,943.04 Errors TILLE RY USA M (TR) 33-39-01-00005-0100-00008/0 -680.82 Errors FLETCHER CHRISTINE C 33.39-01-00005-0130-00024/0 433.02 Errors THISTLE GEORGE G (TRS)(TOK) 33-39.01-00005-0230-00014/0 570.72 Errors HESS ERIC W ' LINDA C 33-39-01-00027-0020-00006/6 5.03 Errors PETTERSON ROBERT E CAROL R 33-39-02-00001-0210-00012/0 667.02 Errors FORBES OLSKE V 33-39-02400004.0210-00001/0 674.32 Errors ZERVOS ANNA T (LE) 33-39-02-00007-0040-00001/0 1,225.20 Errors OSTROM SUMMER L (50%) & 33-39-03-00010-0100-00002/0 433.03 Errors MOORE LINDA 33-39-03-00022-0040-00006/0 1,560.75 Errors CHAMBERLAIN YTSJELISCK 33-39-03-00025-0040-00009/0 790.36 Errors YOUNG CHRISTOPHER B 33-39-03.00039-0000-00004/0 -1,481.25 Errors PROFORMANCE CONSTRUCTION LLC 33.39-04-00036-0001-00006/0 1,827.75 Errors WARD DAVID W & 33.39-06-00007-0350.00203/0 114.19 Errors POINTE WEST MASTER PROPERTY OWNERS ASSOCIATION INC 33-39-07-00004-0000-00000/2 126.00 Errors SCHACHT & COMPANY INC 33-39-08-00001-0060-00001/0 102.61 Errors BELLO JUAN A (LE) MARY K (LE) 33-39-08-00001-0140-00001/1 1,232.39 Errors LAZIMAN WILLIAM J & 33-39.10-00002-0020-00009/0 1,246.08 Errors SHULMANJOHN P 33.39-11-00006-0140-00013/1 1,149.82 Errors AZIZ KHURRAM SARAH 1 33-39.11-00014-0050.00003/0 245.11 Errors BLEDSOE DEBBIE &' 33-39-12-00000-5000-00016/0 617.39 Errors ESPOSITO EVAN G 33.39.15-00001-0080-00024/0 608.51 Errors BROWN KAREN FAYE 33-39-15-00001-0120-00004/0 234.84 Errors CLEMANN AVENUE ACQUISITION GROUP LLC 33-39-15-00001-0120-00006/0 1,118.63 Errors CLEMANN AVENUE ACQUISITION GROUP LLC 33-39-15-00001.0120.00006/1 1,227.71 Errors CUBBAGE JEFFREY 33-39.15-00009-0008-00022/0 134.78 Errors THOMPSON PATRICIAA' 33-39-16.00012-0000-00033/0 1,265.87 Errors ARENA T L (TRS)(TOK)(1/2) & • FBO T L ARENA REALTY TRUST 33.39-21-00015-0000-00041/0 388.80 Errors DAMSGAARD JAMES E CORRINE M 33-39-21-00018-0000-00103/0 2,741.98 Errors INDIAN RIVER COUNTY 33-39-24-00000-5000-00024/0 101.88 Errors JENKINS JAMES DAVID JR ' LORINE 33-39-24-00000-5000-00025/0 25.47 Errors JENKINS JOHNNIE B' 33-39-24-00000-5000-00036/0 203.76 Errors MANCHECJOHN (50%) & 33-39-25-00000.1000-00010/3 101.88 Errors PARCHAMI AZAR & 33-39-25-00000-1000-00010/4 152.82 Errors HAMILTON NICOLE L (HUMMEL) 33-39-25.00000-1000.00010/5 101.88 Errors STEVENS CHARLES RICHARD BETTY J' 33-39.25-00000.1000-00025/0 76.41 Errors LINSKY ADAM MICHAEL KRISTEN SHALAYN 33-39-2S-00000-1000-00025/1 25.47 Errors Page 2 of 9 P30 Desai tion of land of 'ersonal propert . I. Person the tax Is assessed against in the roll. Property ID #. I Total taxes deleted Reason for reduction BEAM GERALD F 33-39-25-00000-1000-00026/0 25.47 Errors HOLLINGSWORTH LLOYD DEBORAH 33-39-25-00000-1000-00026/1 50.94 Errors RYAN LINDA L (TR)(TOK)• & FBO BARRY M & LINDA L RYAN TR 33-39-25-DODOO-1000-00026/3 25.47 Errors SELECTIVE PROPERTIES LLC 33-39-25-00000.1000-00027/0 229.23 Errors BUCKINGHAM JOYCE R (TRS) 33-39-25-00000-1000-00028/0 127.35 Errors HAYNES WALLACE B 33-39-25-00000-3000-00005/0 76.41 Errors SMITH JEROLYN 33-39-25-00000-3000-00018/0 50.94 Errors MANNING AUTHOR SR 33-39-25-00000-3000-00024/0 25.47 Errors BETHLEHEM TEMPLE INC C/O ARTHOR MANNING 33-39-25-00000-3000-00025/0 50.94 Errors WINDSOR RIDGE LLC 33-39-25-00000-30OD-00027/0 101.88 Errors WINDSOR RIDGE LLC C/O JESSE GADDIS 33-39-25-00000-3000-00028/0 101.88 Errors OSLO PROPERTIES LLC 33-39-25-00000-3000-00029/0 229.23 Errors BROWN ETHEL' C/O MAE E JOHNSON 33-39-25400000-3000.00031/0 50.94 Errors SELECTIVE PROPERTIES LLC 33-39-25-00000-3000.00047/0 101.88 Errors CASTER MARK JAMES PATRICIA ANN 33-39-25-00000-3000.00048/0 50.94 Errors KRAMER KEVIN F 33-39.25-00000-3000-00049/0 50.94 Errors WILLIAMS ROBERT 33.39-25-00001-0001-00001/0 25.47 Errors WILLIAMS ROBERT D GLADYS 1 33-39-25-00001-0020.00003/0 25.47 Errors WILLIAMS ROBERT D GLADYS J 33-39-25-00001-0020-ODO10/O 25.47 Errors WHITEHOUSE DAVID D (COTRS) DEBORAH K (COTRS) 33-39-25-00006-0040-00001/0 101.88 Errors WYATT EDDIE JAMES • C/O REGINA BARTEE 33-39-25-00006-0040.00002/0 25.47 Errors TARPON IV LLC 33.39.25-00006-0040-00022/0 25.47 Errors MCKENZIE GLORIA & 33-39-25-00006-0040-00023/0 76.41 Errors LAMB ELDER GLADYS 33.39-25-00006-0040.00024/0 76.41 Errors HUDSON EDDIE MARTHA N 33-39-26-00002-0008-00009/0 25.47 Errors BLACKMON ANNIE • 33-39-26-00002-0022-00002/0 711.97 Errors DEAN MARY ELIZABETH 33-39-26.00016-0000-00012/0 279.26 Errors HUDSON ANDREA 33-39-26-00017-0000-00011/0 793.76 Errors REECE DEBORAH 33-39-28-00011-0000.00020/0 634.02 Errors MCLAUGHLIN ELISA ILGAN (TR)(TOK) 33-39-33-00002-0150-00001/1 396.86 Errors BURKHARD CARL P VIOLA J 33-39-36.00006-0010-00009/0 506.27 Errors JODKA, ERIC A (LE) & SUSAN E (LE) 33-39.36-00009.0060.00006/0 1,180.65 Errors HIGH HAWK OF VERO PHASE 1 POA 33-39-36-00013.0000.00000/2 216.00 Errors AMATO CLARE (LE) 33-40-05-00012-0070-00007/0 -173.54 Errors MADELINE STEPHEN E (TR) 33-40-05-DO025-1616-00403/0 1,591.57 Errors BRADLEY CAROL M & 33.40-16-00020-0000-00056/0 1,765.96 Errors BIEGLER ANA 33-40-18-00002-0460-00107/0 7.95 Errors ELLIOTT CHARLES W . GLORIA 1 & 33-40-19-00002-0120-00103/0 7.89 Errors PORPOISE POINT HOA 33-40-21-00003-0000-00008/1 11.00 Errors MOORINGS DEVELOPMENT CO 33.40-21-00008-0000-00000/1 10.00 Errors MOORINGS DEVELOPMENT CO 33-40-21-00008-0000-00000/2 10.00 Errors MOORINGS DEVELOPMENT CO 33-40-21-00008-0000-00000/3 30.00 Errors FLORALTON BEACH POA 33-40-22-00001-0010.00000/1 100.00 Errors MOORINGS OF VERO PROP OWNERS ASSOC • C/O VISTA PROP MGMT INC 33.40-27-00001-0000-00050/0 40.00 Errors SOUTHWINDS AT THE MOORINGS ASSOC INC C/O VISTA PROPERTIES MGT 33-40-27-00001-0000-00055/0 40.00 Errors SOUTHWINDS & THE MOORINGS ASSN 33-40-27.00001-0000-00055/2 10.00 Errors SOUTHWINDS & THE MOORINGS ASSN 33-40-27-00001-0000.00055/3 10.00 Errors SOUTHWINDS AT MOORINGS ASSOC C/W VISTA PROP MGMT INC 33-40-27-00001-0000-00055/4 10.00 Errors POINTES AT MOORINGS ASSOC INC C/O ELLIOTT MGMT 33-40.27-00006-0000-00119/0 10.00 Errors SEA MIST COURT OWNERS ASSOCIATION INC 33-40.27-00042-0000-00000/2 20.00 Errors VAN EMBURGH DONALD M ILENE (1/2) & 33-40-30-00008-0002-50010/9 176.16 Errors SHIEDER LINDA A 33-40.30-00008-0020.00151/0 547.07 Errors RANKEL GERTRUDE (TRS) 33-40.31-00005-0030.00014/0 559.30 Errors INDIAN RIVER CLUB COMM ASSOC 33-40.31-00010-0000-00000/2 216.00 Errors INDIAN RIVER CLUB COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION INC 33-40.31-00013-0000-00000/3 72.00 Errors SZENTIRMAI OSZKAR & 33-40-34-00001-0000-00025/1 2,940.85 Errors WARD-MATTHEWS DOE LLC 33-40-34-00004-0000-00009/0 400.41 Errors BELLACE E PENELOPE M 33-40-34-00005-0000-00003/0 426.24 Errors PITNEY BOWES INC 00166330000 18.35 Errors PB EQUIPMENT MANAGEMENT INC 0019917 ODOO 1,290.84 Errors PITNEY BOWES INC 0019920 0000 11.74 Errors PB EQUIPMENT MANAGEMENT INC 00613400000 243.86 Errors NEIGHBORHOOD VARIETY STORE LLC CRAFTS NSTUFF 01481250000 541.29 Errors PB EQUIPMENT MANAGEMENT INC 01540400000 122.54 Errors PITNEY BOWES INC 01540500000 115.52 Errors PB EQUIPMENT MANAGEMENT INC 0191045 0000 24.99 Errors Page 3 of 9 P31 Description of, land or, personal property Person the tax is assessed against in the roll I Propirty 11 8 I . Total taxes deleted Reason for reduction VERO MACHINE INDUSTRIES INC ATTN: ROBERT H BEAUCHER 0195364 0000 PITNEY BOWES INC 0197923 ODOO FRED MEYER JEWELERS INC THE KROGER CO LITTMAN JEWELERS 0203413 D000 WINN DIXIE STORE INC ATTN: SE GROCERS ACCOUNT MGR WINN DIXIE STC 0204505 0000 PB EQUIPMENT MANAGEMENT INC 0206595 0000 PITNEY BOWES INC 02067160000 WINN DIXIE STORES INC WINN DIXIE STORE #2366 ASSESSMENT TECHNOLC 02072930000 KURTELL MEDICAL CENTER 0217672 0000 CHARTER REALTY & INVESTMENT CO INC 0220756 0000 INEOS NEW PLANET BIOENERGY LLC 0221787 0000 CROSS -CORE TECHNOLOGY LLC 0221879 0000 XEROX FINANCIAL SERVICES LLC 0222102 0000 ROBERTS BRANDYE CARMELA'S ITALIAN BAKERY 02221400000 WINN DIXIE STORES INC LIQUOR 2394 ASSESSMENT TECHNOLOGIES LTD 0222222 0000 THE BOTTLE SHOP LLC THE BOTTLE SHOP 0222625 0000 Grand Total- Errors INDIAN RIVER COUNTY DODSON CAROLYN A & GIESSERT MICHAEL J LISA B STALLER MICHAEL VENTURES TRUST 2013 -1 -H -R BY MCM CAPITAL PARTNERS LLC INDIAN RIVER COUNTY ROBBINS CYNTHIA 1 & • INDIAN RIVER COUNTY DENTON ROBERT JR • JEANETTE M ROSELAND UNITED METHODIST CHURCH ROSELAND UNITED METHODIST CHURCH INC LAPORTA GRACE ROSELAND UNITED METHODIST CHURCH INC SLADE JON JEFFREY BONNIE S HUMANA INC KARR EDWARD T (TR) KESSINGER MARY L CALVERT DANIEL C/O FEY HAROLD GROVER ALBERT D & DYNASTY PROPERTIES OF SOUTH FLORIDA LLC BENJAMIN LYNDA L D'AMICO GUY LISA DAVIES JEFFREY NEIL JENNIFER ANNE ROTCHFORD GEORGE 0 MARILYN I & DESTINATION SEBASTIAN LLC GAMUT PROPERTIES LLC CT CORPORATION SYSTEM GAMUT PROPERTIES LLC CT CORPORATION SYSTEM CORONER HAROLD LIANNE CORONER HAROLD J LIANNE K UNITED REAL ESTATE VENTURES INC SMITH ROGER W 1R TRIPLE S HOLDINGS LTD C/O KNIGHT MANAGEMENT INC LISLE DORIS M (TR)(TOK) • TRIPLE S HOLDINGS LTD C/O KNIGHT MANAGEMENT INC LISLE DORIS M (TR)(TOK) MILLS KATHRYN (TR) MILLS KATHRYN (TR) FL ATL CITRUS PROP OWNRS ASSOC FL ATL CITRUS PROP OWNRS ASSOC FLORIDA ATLANTIC CITRUS PROPERTY OWNERS INC FL ATL CITRUS PROP OWNRS ASSOC FL ATL CITRUS PROP OWNRS ASSOC FL ATL CITRUS PROP OWNRS ASSOC FL ATL CITRUS PROP OWNRS ASSOC FL ATL CITRUS PROP OWNRS ASSOC FL ATL CITRUS PROP OWNRS ASSOC FL ATL CITRUS PROP OWNRS ASSOC FL ATL CITRUS PROP OWNRS ASSOC 31-39-20-00000-7000-00007/3 31-39-20-00002-0003-00018/0 32-39.33-00001-0140.00001/5 32-39-33-00003-0003-00001/0 33-39-09-00001-0080-ODD01/0 33-39-24-00000-5000-00001/0 33-39-24-00000-5000.00020/0 33-39-24-00000-5000-00024/0 Grand Total - Insolvencies 30-38-21-00001-0000-00009/0 30.38-21-00005-0090-00004/0 30-38-21-OD005-0100-00006/0 3038-21-00005-0110-00006/1 30-38-21-00005-0120-00001/O 30.38-22-00002-0006-00000/0 30-38-25-00000-0010-00017/0 30-38-25-00007-0000-00001/1 30.38-30.00006-0000-00003/2 30-39-33.00000-1000-OODDS/0 30-39-33-00000-1000-00006/0 30-39-33-00000-1000-00D09/0 30.39-3 3-0D000.10DO-00009/1 30.39.33-00000-1000-00010/0 30-39-33-00000-7000.0005/0 30-39.33.00000.7000-00007/0 30-39-33-00000-7000.00009/0 30.39-33-00000-7000-00010/O 3D-39-33-00000-7000-00012/0 30.39-33-00000-7000-00013/0 30.39-33-00000-7000-00015/0 30-3 9-3 3-00000 -700 D-00016/0 31-35-03-00000.1000-00005/0 31.35-03-00000-3000-00002/0 31-35-03-00000-5000-00003/0 31.35-04-00000-5000-00004/0 31-35-06-00000-5000-00001/1 31-35-18-00000-3000-ODDO3/O 31-37-00-00001-0322-00001/0 31-37-00.00001-0324-00002/0 31-37-00-00001-0359-00001/1 31-37-00.00001-0364-00001/0 31-3 7-00-00001-0366.00001 /0 31.37-00-00001-0431-00001/O 31-37-00400001-0431-00002/0 31-37-00-00001-0475-00001/0 31 -37 -OD -00001-0517.00001/0 31 -37 -OD -00001-0568-00001/0 31.37-00-00001-0619-00001/0 Page 4 of 9 4,151.07 70.58 101.29 3,802.15 22.98 5.93 2,761.28 935.88 1,798.44 (403,311.19) 570.94 130.38 238.12 208.25 259.81 (480,666.60) 1,072.29 0.44 605.73 114.73 1,230.60 18,000.52 284.36 1,137.34 22,446.01 25.52 1.00 1.00 28.15 1.00 16.28 2.71 27.15 16.45 3.19 3.19 2.87 2.87 3.37 3.19 3.19 3.19 2.58 5.11 5.27 1.20 6.23 2.04 22.33 3.94 12.59 22.76 23.81 21.13 20.96 23.60 20.80 10.49 20.61 20.96 20.80 20.80 10.49 20.80 Errors Errors Errors Errors Errors Errors Errors Errors Errors Errors Errors Errors Errors Errors Errors Insolvencies Insolvencies Insolvencies Insolvencies Insolvencles Insolvencies Insolvencies Insolvencies Under Minimum Under Minimum Under Minimum Under Minimum Under Minimum Under Minimum Under Minimum Under Minimum Under Minimum Under Minimum Under Minimum Under Minimum Under Minimum Under Minimum Under Minimum Under Minimum Under Minimum Under Minimum Under Minimum Under Minimum Under Minimum Under Minimum Under Minimum Under Minimum Under Minimum Under Minimum Under Minimum Under Minimum Under Minimum Under Minimum Under Minimum Under Minimum Under Minimum Under Minimum Under Minimum Under Minimum Under Minimum Under Minimum Under Minimum P32 Person the tax is assessed against in the roll Description of land or.persohal prope Total taxes deleted Reason for reduction Property ID k FIL ATL CITRUS PROP OWNRS ASSOC 31-37-00-00001-0625-00001/0 10.61 Under Minimum FL ATL CITRUS PROP OWNRS ASSOC 31-37-00-00001-0625-00002/0 20.80 Under Minimum FL ATL CITRUS PROP OWNRS ASSOC 31-37-00-00001-0677-00001/0 10.49 Under Minimum FL ATL CITRUS PR OWNRS ASS INC 31.37.00-00001-0768-00001/0 20.61 Under Minimum PARENTELA VINCENT DIANE 31-37-0040001-0870-00001/0 23.60 Under Minimum REVELATION TRUTH CHURCH INT'L 31-37-00-00001-1548-00002/0 20.00 Under Minimum REVELATION TRUTH CHURCH INTERNATIONAL INC 31-37-00-00001-1548-00003/0 20.00 Under Minimum REVELATION TRUTH CHURCH INTERNATIONAL INC 31-37-00-00001-1548.00004/0 20.00 Under Minimum REVELATION TRUTH CHURCH INTERNATIONAL INC 31-37-00-00001.1548-00006/0 20.00 Under Minimum COX BETTY A (TR) 31-37-00-00001-2446-00002/2 22.79 Under Minimum NEW BETHELAME CHURCH 31-37-00-00004-0020-00061/0 10.00 Under Minimum MT OLIVE MISSIONARY BAPTIST CHURCH 31-37-00-00004-0030-00073/0 10.00 Under Minimum MT OLIVE MISSIONARY BAPTIST CHURCH 31-37-00-00004-0030.00074/0 10.00 Under Minimum CARNELL RICHARD M JR WENDY W 31-37-00-00009-0420.00024/0 23.49 Under Minimum MONROE MICHAEL M' CHERYL S 31-37-00-00009-0420.00024/1 23.49 Under Minimum FELLSMERE CHURCH OF GOD (TRS) 31.37-00-00009-0820-00001/0 10.00 Under Minimum REDLANDS CHRISTIAN MIGRANT ASSOC INC 31-37-00-00009-0830-00016/0 10.00 Under Minimum JOURNIGAN HORACE (TRS) & FIRST BAPTIST CH OF FELLSMERE 31.37-00-00009-1160-00012/0 10.00 Under Minimum FEY HAROLD 31-38.11-00003-0090-00019/0 4.00 Under Minimum INDIAN RIVER COUNTY C/O BILL DEBRAAL CTY ATTY 31-38-21-00000-0020-00005/0 10.85 Under Minimum UNITED REAL ESTATE VENTURES IN 31-39-04-00000-0030.00004/0 14.05 Under Minimum GOLDING JEFFREY . MARY BETH • 31-39-04-00000.0030.00004/1 2.71 Under Minimum SEBASTIAN METHODIST CHURCH INC 31-39-06-00000-0040-00025/0 19.43 Under Minimum CITY OF SEBASTIAN 31-39-06-00003-0010-00001/2 7.08 Under Minimum SEBASTIAN METHODIST CHURCH INC 31-39-06-00005.0010.00004/0 25.12 Under Minimum SEBASTIAN METHODIST CHURCH INC 31-39-06-00005-0010-00005/0 23.55 Under Minimum SEBASTIAN UNITED METHODIST CHURCH • 31-39.06-00005-0030-00001/0 21.31 Under Minimum SEBASTIAN UNITED METHODIST CHURCH' 31-39-06.00005-0030.00002/0 21.55 Under Minimum SEBASTIAN UNITED METHODIST CHURCH • 31-39-06-00005-0030-00003/0 21.16 Under Minimum SEBASTIAN UMC 31-39-06-00010-0000-00008/0 24.44 Under Minimum SEBASTIAN UNITED METHODIST CHURCH • 31-39.06.000104000-00012/0 26.69 Under Minimum INDIAN RIVER COUNTY 31-39-06-00017-0010.00013/1 3.15 Under Minimum MOTIVA ENTERPRISES LLC 31.39-06-00020.0060-00001/1 0.18 Under Minimum WINDSOR PROPERTIES 31.39.15-00001-0012-00000/1 13.60 Under Minimum CONDE CLARENCE P' 31-39.17-00000.0020.00029/2 8.17 Under Minimum HIERS PROPERTIES LLC 31-39-17-00000-0020-00029/3 13.60 Under Minimum FISCHER HENRY A 31-39-20-00000-1000-00022/2 13.60 Under Minimum 6005 -GMC SEBASTIAN LLCC/O 8005 DEV GROUP INC 31-39-20-00007.0000.00000/2 8.93 Under Minimum SCHWERIN 510 LLC 31-39-28.00006.0090.00001/0 5.43 Under Minimum DAWSEY WOODROW 31-39.29-00000-3000-0011/0 21.72 Under Minimum DAWSEY WOODROW 31-39-29-00000-3000-00012/0 21.72 Under Minimum ABT MICHAEL C TAFFI ' 31-39-30-00001-0000-00001/0 18.03 Under Minimum ABT MICHAEL C TAFFI • 31-39-30.00001-0000-00002/0 18.03 Under Minimum INDIAN RIVER COUNTY 31.39-30.00002-0000.00000/3 4.60 Under Minimum VAN ANTWERP FREDERICK W (COTR) FLORENCE B (COTR) 3139-32-00000-5000-00004/0 28.88 Under Minimum GRAINGER KEITH A & 31.39-33-00000-1000-00038/0 16.28 Under Minimum TR OF HEAVENLY CHURCH OF FIRST BORN 31-39-33-00000-3000.00008/0 13.60 Under Minimum SEACREST ESTATES INC • C/O LUCIANO CORTESE 31-39-34.00000.0060-00001/0 8.63 Under Minimum CROOKED TREE LAND AND CATTLE COMPANY 32-35-14.00000-7000.00003/0 6.29 Under Minimum RBCR LLC (5496)& 32-35-18-00000-3000-00001/0 12.27 Under Minimum LOR INC (46%) & 32-35-19-00000-1000-00002/0 3.94 Under Minimum MCINTURF ENTERPRISES INC' 32-35-20-00000-1000-00002/0 5.34 Under Minimum LGR RANCH CATTLE COMPANY LLC 32-35-22-00000.3000-00001/0 9.28 Under Minimum LATT MAXCY CORP 32.35-22-00000-5000.00001/1 1.43 Under Minimum GRANTHAM SUZANNE TINOELL (TR) . FBO SUZANNE T GRANTHAM 32.35.23-00000-1000-00002/1 19.18 Under Minimum CROOKED TREE LAND AND CATTLE COMPANY 32-35-23-00000.1000-00004/0 17.12 Under Minimum KAHLE FAMILY INVESTMENTS III LLC 32-35-26-00000-5000-00001/0 14.31 Under Minimum HULLFISH CLARENCE E 32-35-31-00000-3000-00001/6 21.23 Under Minimum GARITSON CAMERON & 32-35-31-00000-5000-00011/0 21.85 Under Minimum SILVERS RICHARD WARREN CATHERINE ANNE 32-35-31-00000-7000-00001/0 19.18 Under Minimum PRESSLEY RANCH INC 32-35-36-00000-0010-00002/0 9.44 Under Minimum PRESSLEY RANCH INC 32-36-00-00000-0000-00002/0 5.66 Under Minimum HOLMAN B L (LESS) 32-36-00-00000-0000-00007/0 5.19 Under Minimum RO-ED CORP 32-38-08-00000.1000-00001/1 6.32 Under Minimum LATOUR JORGE A CONSUELO P 32-38-13-00000-5000.00001/0 18.18 Under Minimum HUGH CORRIGAN III FAMILY LIMITED PARTNERSHIP (1/2) & 32.38-29-00000-5000-00001/0 5.96 Under Minimum Page 5 of 9 P33 Person the tax is assessed against in.the roll Description of land or personal property Property ID If Total taxes deleted Reason for reduction INDIAN RIVER PROPERTY LP C/O WALTER L METCALF 1R 32-38-30.00000-5000-00001/0 17.39 Under Minimum HUGH CORRIGAN III FAMILY LIMITED PARTNERSHIP (1/21 & 32-38-32-00000-3000-00001/0 21.87 Under Minimum O'HAIRE MICHAEL 32.39-01-00001-0190-00001/0 7.11 Under Minimum KEAN JOHN (TRS) & C/O ENJAY REALTY, LLC 32-39-01-00001-0260-00001/0 5.54 Under Minimum CHARLESTON ESTATES VERO LLC 32-39-03-00001-1110-00001/0 7.68 Under Minimum LOST TREE VILLAGE CORP 32.39-01-00001-1120-00001/0 27.34 Under Minimum LOST TREE VILLAGE CORP 32-39-01-00001-1140-00001/0 16.08 Under Minimum WINKLER ANDREW J (TR) & 32-39-03-00000-5000-00001/2 13.51 Under Minimum KLETTY RICHARD F MONICA EVE 32-39-10-00000-3000-00004/0 13.96 Under Minimum FLORIDA EAST COAST RAILWAY LLC 32-39-10-00DO0-3000-00018/0 6.81 Under Minimum CLARK EDWARD LOUISE 32-39-10-00003-0020-00017/1 24.28 Under Minimum JOHNS ISLAND CLUB INC 32-39-12-00000-0010-00002/0 1.99 Under Minimum JETSON EXECUTIVE MINI -STORAGE LLC 32-39.15-00000-1000-00010/1 20.46 Under Minimum GRAND HARBOR NORTH LAND LLC C/O GRAND HARBOR MGMT LLC 32-39-15-00000-1000-00025/0 1.35 Under Minimum BENT PINE GOLF CLUB INC 32-39-15-00000-3000-00011/2 27.04 Under Minimum BENT PINE GOLF CLUB INC 32-39-16-00000-1000-00015/1 27.04 Under Minimum BENT PINE GOLF CLUB INC 32-39-16-00000-1000-00015/2 27.04 Under Minimum PROVIDENCE POINTE VERO BEACH LLC 32-39-20-00001-0030-00003/0 21.02 Under Minimum CAC VERO I LLC 32-39-22-00000-1000.00003/2 26.98 Under Minimum LF2/MCP HARBOR POINT LP 3239-23-00029-0000.00000/2 8.10 Under Minimum ESTUARY DEVELOPMENT LTD • 32-39-24-00002-0000-00000/1 0.30 Under Minimum TRS OF ST PETERS MISSIONARY BAPTIST CHURCH 32-39-26-OOD00-3000-00048/0 25.00 Under Minimum SEGMENT MARKETS 85 INC 32-39-26-00000-7000-00002/0 16.50 Under Minimum RUSSELL VIRGINIA W FAMILY LTD PTNR 32-39-26-00000-7000-00006/0 21.43 Under Minimum APOSTOLIC FAITH REVIVAL CENTER 32-39-26-00002-0130-00003/0 25.00 Under Minimum APOSTOLIC FAITH REVIVAL CENTER 32-39-26-00004-0200-00001/O 25.00 Under Minimum APOSTOLIC FAITH REVIVAL CENTER 32-39-26.00004-0200-00002/0 25.00 Under Minimum RIVERFRONT GROVES INC 32-39-26-00006-0000-00025/0 27.38 Under Minimum BEASLEY LEONA MC DOUGALO C/O MCDOUGALD 32-39-26-00010-0070-00103/0 13.51 Under Minimum SUN AVIATION INC (LESS)- 32-39-26-00011-0060-00001/1 18.00 Under Minimum OSV INVESTMENTS LLC 32-39-32-00002-0000-00004/0 18.00 Under Minimum HARMONY RESERVE LLC 32-39-32-00022-0000-00000/3 18.00 Under Minimum KINGDOM HARVEST INC 32-39-35-00007-0030-00006/0 18.00 Under Minimum VISTA HARBOR 32-39-36-00011-0130-00000/5 18.00 Under Minimum VISTA HARBOR 32-39-36-00011-0140-00000/5 18.00 Under Minimum VISTA HARBOR 32-39-36-00011-0150-00000/5 18.00 Under Minimum VISTA HARBOR 32-39-36-00011-0160-00000/5 18.00 Under Minimum VISTA HARBOR 32-39-36-00011-0170-00000/5 18.00 Under Minimum VISTA HAR80R 32-39-36-00011-0180-00000/5 18.00 Under Minimum VISTA HARBOR 32-39-36-00011-0190-00000/5 18.00 Under Minimum VISTA HARBOR 32-39-36-00011-0200.00000/5 18.00 Under Minimum JOHNS ISLAND INC 32-40-07-00000-0040-00001/0 24.17 Under Minimum THE ESTUARY DEVELOPMENT LTO 32-40-19-00000-0020-00004/0 17.64 Under Minimum VISTA HARBOR 32-40-31-00010-0010-OODDO/5 18.00 Under Minimum VISTA HARBOR 32-40-31-00010-0020-00000/5 18.00 Under Minimum VISTA HARBOR 32-40-31-00010-0030-00000/5 18.00 Under Minimum VISTA HARBOR 32-40-31-00010-0040-00000/5 18.00 Under Minimum VISTA HARBOR 32-40-31-00010-0050-00000/5 18.00 Under Minimum VISTA HARBOR 32-40-31-00010-0060-00000/5 18.00 Under Minimum VISTA HARBOR 32-40-31-00010-0070-00000/5 18.00 Under Minimum VISTA HARBOR APT BLDG 32-40-31-00010-0080-00000/5 18.00 Under Minimum VISTA HARBOR APT BLDG 32-40-31-00010-0090-00000/5 18.00 Under Minimum VISTA HARBOR APT BLDG 32-40-31-00010-OSOD-00000/5 18.00 Under Minimum VISTA HARBOR 3240-31-00010-0110-00000/5 18.00 Under Minimum VISTA HARBOR 32-40-31-00010-0120-00000/5 18.00 Under Minimum VISTA HARBOR 32-40-31-00010-0210-00000/S 18.00 Under Minimum R & H DEVELOPMENT CORP C/O ROBERT E GRIFFIN 32-40-31-00014-0000-00000/1 18.00 Under Minimum CAIN & BRANIGAN 32-40-31-00016.0000-00000/1 18.00 Under Minimum ROYAL PALM POINTE OF VERO BEACH CONDO ASSOC INC 32.40-31-00017-0000.00000/3 18.00 Under Minimum SELBY JANICE JOY &' 32-40-32-00014-0000-00000/1 29.44 Under Minimum ESCO LYNN (TRS) & FBO MARGARET BELCHER TRUST 33-37-14-00000-3000-00002/0 24.44 Under Minimum BELCHER E N 1R (ETAL) C/O JEWEL BELCHER 33-37-23-00000-7000-00002/0 15.08 Under Minimum FOUNTAIN JOHN N JR C/O TELETHIA D SZUBA (PL GRDN) 33-38-03-00002-0010-00009/0 24.03 Under Minimum PRIMA VISTA CORP 33-38-03-00002-0030-00008/0 25.94 Under Minimum GILMORE JOSEPH A • STEPHANIE 33.38-03-00002-0030-00009/0 2.06 Under Minimum PRIMA VISTA CORPORATION • 33-38-03-00002-0030-00019/0 18.79 Under Minimum Page 6 of 9 P34 Person the tax is assessed against in the roll Description of land or personal property I Property ID N Total taxes deleted Reason for reduction PARADISE CENTRAL CORP 33-38-03-00002-0170-00013/1 27.04 Under Minimum SOUTHERN CLASSIC HOMES LLC C/O BURGOON BERGER/ACCTING DEP 33 -38 -12 -00002 -GOOD -00045/1 24.81 Under Minimum VERO BEACH COUNTRY CLUB INC 33-39-01-OD000-3000-00008/0 19.59 Under Minimum FLA EAST COAST RAILWAY 33-39-01-00000-5000-00020/0 7.43 Under Minimum FIRST PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH OF VERO BEACH FL INC 33-39-01-00005-0310.00011/0 18.00 Under Minimum FEC RAILWAY CO 33-39-01-00046-0000.00000/2 22.17 Under Minimum MASCHMEYER PROPERTIES 1400 LLC 33-39-01.00047-0040-0002011 25.43 Under Minimum FELIX POPPELL POSTN39 DEPT OF FL AMERICAN LEGION INC 33-39-01-00047-0200-00009/0 18.00 Under Minimum ROYAL PARK CONDO ASSN BLDG E 33-39-01-00052-0050-00000/5 18.00 Under Minimum ROYAL PARK CONDO ASSN BLDG W 33-39-01-00052-0100-00000/5 18.00 Under Minimum ST VINCENT DE PAUL SOC IRC INC 33.39-02-00000-7000-OD005/0 18.00 Under Minimum ST VINCENT D£ PAUL SOC IRC INC 33-39-02-00000.7000-00006/0 18.00 Under Minimum COMMUNITY CHURCH OF VERO BEACH INC 33-39-02-00001-0240-00003/0 18.00 Under Minimum THE COMMUNITY CHURCH OF VERO BEACH FLORIDA INC 33-39-02-00001-0240-00004/0 18.00 Under Minimum FIRST BAPTIST CHURCH OF VERO BEACH INC 33-39-02-00001-0280-00004/0 18.00 Under Minimum FIRST BAPTIST CHURCH OF VERO BEACH INC 33-39-02-00001-0300-00014/0 18.00 Under Minimum COMMUNITY CHURCH OF VERO BEACH 33-39-02-00001-0390-00001/0 18.00 Under Minimum COMMUNITY CHURCH OF VERO BEACH 33-39-02-00001-0390-00003/0 18.00 Under Minimum FIRST UNITED METHODIST CHURCH OF VERO BEACH INC 33-39-02-00001-0390-00008/0 18.00 Under Minimum FIRST UNITED METHODIST CHURCH OF VERO BEACH INC 33-39-02-00001-0390-00010/0 18.00 Under Minimum FIRST METHODIST CHURCH OF VERO BEACH INC33-39-02-00001-0420.00003/0 18.00 Under Minimum FIRST UNITED METHODIST CHURCH 33-39-02-00001-0420-00004/0 18.00 Under Minimum FIRST UNITED METHODIST CHURCH 33-39-02-00001-0420-00006/0 18.00 Under Minimum FIRST UNITED METHODIST CHURCH OF VERO BEACH INC 33-39-02-00001-0420-00010/0 18.00 Under Minimum FIRST METHODIST CHURCH OF VERO BEACH INC * 33-39-02-00001-0430-00003/0 18.00 Under Minimum FIRST METHODIST CHURCH OF VERO BEACH INC * 33-39-02-00001-0430-00004/0 18.00 Under Minimum FIRST METHODIST CHURCH OF VERO BEACH INC * 33-39-02-00001-0430.00007/0 18.00 Under Minimum CITY OF VERO BEACH ALLEY 33-39-02-00001-0470-00006/1 18.00 Under Minimum VERO BEACH THEATRE GUILD INC 33-39-02-00005-0350-00003/0 18.00 Under Minimum ST FRANCIS MANOR INC 33-39-02-00008-0040-00007/0 18.00 Under Minimum ST FRANCIS MANOR INC 33-39-02-00008-0040-00008/0 18.00 Under Minimum EVANGELICAL COVENANT CHURCH OF VERO BEACH FL INC 33-39-02-00016-0010-00001/1 18.00 Under Minimum EVANGELICAL COVENANT CHURCH OF VERO BEACH FL INC 33-39-02-00016-0010-00001/2 18.00 Under Minimum EVANGELICAL COVENANT CHURCH OF VERO BEACH FL INC 33-39-02-00016-0010-00011/0 18.00 Under Minimum VERO BEACH CHURCH OF CHRIST INC 33-39-03-00010-0030-00007/0 18.00 Under Minimum VERO BEACH CHURCH OF CHRIST INC 33-39-03-00010-0030-00009/0 18.00 Under Minimum VERO BEACH CHURCH OF CHRIST INC 33-39-03-00010-0030-00010/0 18.00 Under Minimum VERO BEACH CHURCH OF CHRIST INC 33-39-03-00010-0030-00012/0 18.00 Under Minimum VERO BEACH CHURCH OF CHRIST INC 33-39-03-00010-0030-00016/0 18.00 Under Minimum VERO BEACH CHURCH OF CHRIST INC 33-39-03-00010-0030-00017/0 18.00 Under Minimum VERO BEACH CHURCH OF CHRIST INC 33-39-03-00010-0030-00019/0 18.00 Under Minimum VERO BEACH CHURCH OF CHRIST INC 33-39-03-00010-0030-00021/0 18.00 Under Minimum VERO BEACH CHURCH OF CHRIST INC 33-39-03-00010-0040-00006/0 18.00 Under Minimum VERO BEACH CHURCH OF CHRIST INC 33-39-03-00030-0040-00008/0 18.00 Under Minimum VERO BEACH CHURCH OF CHRIST INC 33-39-03-00010-0040-00011/0 18.00 Under Minimum VERO BEACH CHURCH OF CHRIST INC 33-39-03-00010-0040-00016/0 18.00 Under Minimum VERO BEACH CHURCH OF CHRIST INC 33-39-03-00010-0040-00020/0 18.00 Under Minimum DIAZ MARIO * RAQU£L 33-39-10-00001-0070-00004/0 28.15 Under Minimum JOHNSON WALTER 0 JOANNE L 33-39-10-00001-0070-00006/0 28.15 Under Minimum DIMINO NICK • 33-39-10-00001-0070-00009/1 28.15 Under Minimum SOWELL BROADUS F PATRICIA B 33-39-10-OD001-0070-00009/2 28.15 Under Minimum UNITARIAN UNIVERSALIST FELLOWSHIP OF VERO BEACH INC 33-39-10-00003-0010.00003/0 18.00 Under Minimum SANDALWOOD OF VERO HOA INC C/O J MCHUGH 33-39-10-00030-0080-00001/0 18.00 Under Minimum FIRST CHURCH OF THE NAZARENE INC 33-39-11-00014-0020-00004/0 18.00 Under Minimum FIRST CHURCH OF THE NAZARENE INC 33-39-11-00014-0020-00018/0 18.00 Under Minimum SENIOR RESOURCE ASSOCIATION INC 33-39-12-00000-1000-00017/0 18.00 Under Minimum LEWIS JESSIE G * & 33-39-12-00000-3000-00042/0 14.93 Under Minimum BARATTINI P 33-39-12-00000-1000-00042/1 20.32 Under Minimum STEWART JAMES H (TR) 33-39-12-000DD-3000-00039/0 26.98 Under Minimum GRIMM MANAGEMENT LTO PTNR 33-39-12-00000-3000-00039/1 3.35 Under Minimum VILLAGE WALK INC * 33-39-12-00043-0000-00001/0 13.51 Under Minimum HEALTH CARE REIT INC * C/O RE MCELROY LLC 33-39-13-00000-1000-00014/0 8.10 Under Minimum SCHUTT MARGUERITE M (1/2) & 33-39-13-00000-7000-00002/1 6.81 Under Minimum PIONEER BAPTIST CHURCH INC 33-39-13-00022-0000-00001/0 18.00 Under Minimum PIONEER BAPTIST CHURCH INC 33-39-13-00022-0000-00002/0 18.00 Under Minimum CARINI EUGENE * OLIVE B 33-39-15-00001-0080-00019/0 23.40 Under Minimum Page 7 of 9 I P35 Person the tax is assessed against in the roll Description of land or personal ropert Total taxes deleted Reason for reductlori Property ID # TEMPLE BETH SHALOM OF VERO BEACH INC 33-39-16-00001-0090-00010/1 18.00 Under Minimum ENRIQUEZ PEDRO TERESA 33-39-18-00001-0050-00004/0 20.69 Under Minimum WOLFF GORDON R 1R 33-39-24-00014-0000-00000/1 13.51 Under Minimum TREASURE COAST COMMUNITY HEALTH INC 33-39-26-00001-0010-00002/1 18.00 Under Minimum PRICE WILLIAM ROBERT JR CAROL L 33-40-05-00008-0002.00000/1 29.44 Under Minimum TREASURE COVE RE HOLDINGS LLC 33-40-16-00004-0000-00021/1 2.69 Under Minimum VISTA II INC ° 33-40-19-00001-0010.00002/1 12.21 Under Minimum SOUTH PASSAGE ASSN INC C/O VISTA PROPERTY'S MGMT 33-40.28-00000-0030-00001/0 12.85 Under Minimum SOUTH PASSAGE ASSN INC C/O THE CONTINENTAL GROUP INC 33-40-28-00000-0030-00004/0 23.19 Under Minimum ROE FAMILY BEACH PARTNERSHIP 33.40-28-00000-0030.00005/0 22.87 Under Minimum ATLANTIS PROPERTIES OF VERO BEACH LLC (2/3) & 33-40-28-00000-0030-00007/0 27.14 Under Minimum BAUR SHAUNA 33-40-28.00000-0040-00005/0 5.24 Under Minimum INDIAN RIVER LAND TRUST INC (1/2) & 33-40.31-00005-0010-00001/0 24.00 Under Minimum FISCHER HENRY ANTHONY 0005700 ODDO 5.41 Under Minimum TITUS CHARLES DAVID PALMETTO TRACTOR SERVICES 00219000000 2.29 Under Minimum TLC PRESCHOOL OF SEBASTIAN INC 01876180000 19.07 Under Minimum KNOWLES NORMAN DMD PA ART OF SMILES 0188872 0000 20.07 Under Minimum HALLMARK MARKETING CORPORATION -011 0189173 0000 28.24 Under Minimum HALLMARK MARKETING CORPORATION -011 0191166 0000 11.65 Under Minimum JBT CORPORATION 0191673 0000 26.13 Under Minimum CPV OFFICE BUILDING LLC 0196216 0000 16.49 Under Minimum O'HAIRE,QUINN & CANDLER CHTRD 0199510 0000 10.49 Under Minimum SAS SHOES #127 SAS FACTORY SHOE STORE #127 C/O SAN ANTONIO SHOE 0200836 0000 2.68 Under Minimum REDDY ICE CORPORATION 0203488 0000 3.98 Under Minimum PAYLESS SHOESOURCE INC #5459 0203553 0000 8.15 Under Minimum ST LUCIE BATTERY & TIRE OF INDIAN RIVER CTY, INC. 0204965 OD00 23.20 Under Minimum LEONARD ENTERPRISES LLC VERO BEACH BOOK CENTER 02051640000 26.82 Under Minimum BECKER HOLDING CORP 02055510000 2.58 Under Minimum ADVANCE AMERICA CAC OF FL INC ADVANCE AMERICA #5647 ATT TAX DEP 0206025 0000 28.42 Under Minimum PITNEY BOWES INC 0206716 0000 21.01 Under Minimum REDDY ICE CORPORATION 0206796 0000 2.10 Under Minimum FOCUS FOUR LLC FOCUS FOUR LLC 0206904 0000 26.64 Under Minimum FOCUS FOUR LLC FOCUS FOUR LLC 0206905 0000 19.04 Under Minimum I R SPORTSMAN INDOOR TARGET RANGE INC 0209196 0000 2.79 Under Minimum HP FINANCIAL SERVICES ATTN: PROPERTY TAX 0209945 0000 3.69 Under Minimum SCAMPI SEAFOOD GRILL INC 02101010000 3.16 Under Minimum MARSH LANDING INC ATTN: FRAN B ADAMS 0212363 0000 9.74 Under Minimum INDIAN RIVER MEMORIAL HOSPITAL INC UROLOGY ASSOCIATES OF VERO 610213861 0000 2.40 Under Minimum PUBLIC STORAGE INC #28087 PUBLIC STORAGE 0215421 D000 21.67 Under Minimum ACTION MOBILE INDUSTRIES LLC ACTON MOBILE INDUSTRIES C/O ADVANT• 0216318 0000 6.03 Under Minimum SAVVIS-COMMUNICATION CORP CENTURYLINK TECHNOLOGY SOLUTIONS ( 02176610000 2.59 Under Minimum KING PUTT ENTERTAINMENT INC SAFARI MINI GOLF & GAMES 0218262 0000 7.37 Under Minimum CARDTRONICS USA INC C/O HARDING & CARBONE INC 0218709 0000 29.73 Under Minimum STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTO INS CO C/O CORP TAX D3 - CPTR 0218786 0000 7.12 Under Minimum HARRIS CORP-EXELIS ADSB HARRIS CORP-GCSD 0218791 0000 28.30 Under Minimum MEDTRONIC USA INC 0219486 0000 27.77 Under Minimum HARRIS CORP-EXELIS AOSS HARRIS CORP- MISSION SUPPORT 0219521 0000 7.47 Under Minimum VERO BEACH WINNELSON COMPANY INC 0219707 0000 19.93 Under Minimum T -MOBILE SOUTH LLL T -MOBILE PROPERTY TAX DEPARTMENT 0220402 0000 4.53 Under Minimum UNIVEST CAPITAL INC 0220493 0000 15.58 Under Minimum COMCAST IP PHONE II LLC ATTN: PROPERTY TAX DEPT 02208110000 19.51 Under Minimum SPRINT SPECTRUM LP LOC M113XCO49 0221001 0000 9.04 Under Minimum SHORE THING VERO INC FISHACK C/O ETHAN H WEISSY 0221070 0000 4.96 Under Minimum D R HORTON INC 0221465 0000 17.28 Under Minimum ARIZONA SOUTHEAST DISTRIBUTORS LLC 0221844 0000 24.08 Under Minimum AT&T SERVICES INC TIC 02218700000 4.62 Under Minimum AT&T SERVICES INC TC/8 0221872 0000 27.82 Under Minimum CROWN CASTLE TOWERS 06-02LLC 0222018 0000 28.08 Under Minimum HAUTE DRY LLC 0222165 0000 20.67 Under Minimum WILD THYME CATERING LLC CHIVE 0222179 0000 20.27 Under Minimum HEAVENLY WINGS & RIB HOUSE 0222392 0000 9.19 Under Minimum PAYNE SAM 0222608 0000 3.20 Under Minimum BIDWELL NYRY G SR HELEN E FAIRLANE HARBOR 81200900000 6.39 Under Minimum ANDERSONS, THE C/O INDURANTE & ASSOCIATES INC 7100006 12.84 Under Minimum 8 A S F CORPORATION C/O INDURANTE & ASSOCIATES INC 7100007 17.73 Under Minimum FORMOSA TRANSRAIL CORPORATION ATTN: SU CHANG 7100137 16.25 Under Minimum Page 8 of 9 A P36 Description of land or persdinal property Person the tax is assessed a ainst,in the roll Property ID k 1. Total taxes deleted I Reason for reduction EXXON MOBIL CORP C/0 INDURANTE & ASSOCIATES INC KOCH RAIL LLC C/O INDURANTE & ASSOC ANDERSONS, THE C/O INDURANTE & ASSOCIATES INC 8 A S F CORPORATION C/O INDURANTE & ASSOCIATES INC FORMOSA TRANSRAIL CORPORATION ATTN: SU CHANG EXXON MOBIL CORP C/O INDURANTE & ASSOCIATES INC DAVID J JOSEPH CO C/O INDURANTE & ASSOCIATES INC PROGRESS RAIL SERVICES CORP C/O INDURANTE & ASSOCIATES INC KOCH RAIL LLC C/O INDURANTE & ASSOC TITAN FLORIDA LLC ATTN: ERICA WALKER ANDERSONS, THE C/O INDURANTE & ASSOCIATES INC FORMOSA TRANSRAIL CORPORATION ATTN: SU CHANG ANDERSONS, THE C/O INDURANTE & ASSOCIATES INC B A S F CORPORATION C/O INDURANTE & ASSOCIATES INC FORMOSA TRANSRAIL CORPORATION ATTN: SU CHANG EXXON MOBIL CORP C/O INDURANTE & ASSOCIATES INC DAVID J JOSEPH CO C/O INDURANTE & ASSOCIATES INC KOCH RAIL LLC C/O INDURANTE & ASSOC 7100177 19.31 Under Minimum 7100322 23.79 Under Minimum 7200006 4.28 Under Minimum 7200007 5.93 Under Minimum 7200137 5.41 Under Minimum 7200177 6.44 Under Minimum 7200215 10.91 Under Minimum 7200231 26.77 Under Minimum 7200322 7.95 Under Minimum 7200330 17.41 Under Minimum 7300006 22.35 Under Minimum 7300137 28.30 Under Minimum 7400006 8.79 Under Minimum 7400007 12.15 Under Minimum 7400137 11.13 Under Minimum 7400177 13.20 Under Minimum 7400215 22.37 Under Minimum 7400322 16.29 Under Minimum Grand Total - Under Minimum 5,048.40 Grant Total - Discounts 9,448,350.49 Discounts Grand Total - Errors, Insolvencies, Under Minimum & Discounts Page 9 of 9 8,995,178.30 P37 CONSENT AGENDA June 6, 2017 0� INDIAN RIVER COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS INTER -OFFICE MEMORANDUM TO: Members of the Board of County Commissioners DATE: July 18, 2017 SUBJECT: Out of County. Travel to Attend White House Office of Intergovernmental Affairs Florida County Commissioners' White - House Conference — July 27, 2017 FROM: Lisa Hill Commissioner's Assistant Out of county travel is requested for commissioners and staff to attend.the White House Office of Intergovernmental Affairs Florida County Commissioners' Conference at the Eisenhower Executive Office Building in Washington, DC on Thursday, July 27, 2017. Additional information is attached. Cary a%re e0, a,/# 1,zirrte� Oy?,�# 27 2,017 20, 2017 -a— a��?�Qc����tit peeevw 41~w ""4" P39 Florida County Commissioners, My name is Jack Sewell, and I work for Billy Kirkland who is the Deputy Director of Intergovernmental Affairs at the White House. Our office serves as the liaison between the White House and the State and Local governments. Our office would like to extend an invitation for you to participate in the Florida County Commissioners' White House Conference on July 27. The purpose of this event is to develop a working relationship between the White House/Federal Agencies and the County Commissioners of Florida. We hope you or a designated staffer will consider attending this event. Florida State County Commissioners' White House Conference Event Details: Event Date: July 27, 2017 Location: The White House Complex Building: The Eisenhower Executive Office Building Room: South Court Auditorium We will distribute a schedule and additional information (such as arrival logistics) next week, but we anticipate that the event will begin promptly at 12:00 PM. Administration Participation: The Intergovernmental Affairs team is coordinating the event schedule with the Federal Agencies. We anticipate representatives from each Federal Agency to participate in this event. The representatives of the agencies will be senior -level agency officials (including the potential for Cabinet Secretary participation). Senior -level White House staff will also lead and participate in portions of the event throughout the day. Our team will provide an updated schedule with participants. One of the primary goals of this conference is to ensure that you are introduced to and put in contact with appropriate officials at each agency to ensure efficient coordination between the Federal Agencies and the Florida Counties. This conference will be an opportunity for the Administration to strengthen our relationship with local entities of government. External Invitations: Our team is extending invitations for this event to all County Commissioners in the state of Florida. P40 RSVP Instruction: Please work with me, Jack Sewell (contact information listed below), in order to RSVP by July 20th at 5:00 PM and receive the logistics for the meeting. RSVP Point of Contact: Jack Sewell John.B.Sewell@who.eop.eov (Please send all RSVP information via email) If you plan to attend this event, please submit your personal information to Secret Service using the link below. Please note that it is essential for all information to be submitted accurately, and that there are no discrepancies between what is submitted and what is listed on the ID presented to Secret Service upon arrival. It is also important to note that your city and state of residence must exactly match what is listed on your ID. Personal Information Submission Link: https://events.whitehouse.gov/form?rid=JH4WCBP8XV Please do not hesitate to reach out to Billy or me at any time if we can be of any assistance. Billy Kirkland Special Assistant to the President & Deputy Director White House Intergovernmental Affairs D - 202-456-8491 E - William.H.Kirkland@who.eop.gov All the best, Jack Sewell White House Office of Intergovernmental Affairs O: 202.456.4754 1 C: 202.881.8435 1 E: John.B.Sewell@who.eop.gov P41 ro INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA MEMORANDUM TO: Jason E. Brown, County Administrator THROUGH: Richard B. Szpyrka P.E., Public Works Director FROM: Keith McCully, P.E., Stormwater Engineer 90� SUBJECT: Recommendation of Award of Construction Contract for Osprey Acres Floway and Nature Preserve (Bid #2017051) DATE: July 10, 2017 DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS On April 5, 2016, the Board of County Commissioners directed Public Works Stormwater Division to begin grant applications and project design tasks for Osprey Acres Floway and Nature Preserve, located on approximately 83.14 acres of County property. Design and permitting is complete and three construction grants were obtained. The project was bid for construction on May 5, 2017 and bids were received on June 23, 2017. Four potential bidders attended a non -mandatory pre-bid meeting and Demandstar listed over twenty-two potential contractors as plan holders. However, only two bids were submitted. This low response is most likely attributable to the abundance of construction activity available for potential bidders our area. Similar low bid responses have been experienced on recent County Utility Department projects. Bidder . Amount of Base Bid West Construction, Inc. $7,443,433.35* Timothy Rose Construction $8,678,257.93* There were math errors in each base bid. The amounts shown above are the corrected bid amounts. The West Construction base bid is approximately 35% higher than staff's May 4, 2017 project construction cost estimate of $5,515,576. This estimate was obtained using the latest similar construction costs available to staff at the time, but the information obviously did not accurately reflect the area's current very active construction market, which tends to inflate normally expected bid prices. Numerous recent projects by the County Utility Department and FDOT have recently returned bids exceeding initial construction cost estimates by 30% to 100%. The Bid Form had several alternate bid items. West Construction, Inc.'s (West) prices for each are: 1. Alternate "A" — Asphalt Entrance Road and Parking Area in place of cemented coquina shell surface = $36,612.24. 2. Millings Turnaround at Site Entrance in place of cemented coquina surface = $0.00. C:\Users\GRANIC—I\AppData\Local\Temp\BCL Technologies\easyPDF 7\@BCL@28057B23\@BCL@28057B23.doe P42 Recommendation of Award of Construction Contract for Osprey Acres Floway and Nature Preserve (Bid #2017051) BCC Meeting — July 18, 2017 July 10, 2017 3. Construct Timber Bridge in place of culverted earth crossing at Floway Crossing No. 2 = ($6,512.00) deduct. FUNDING The following construction grants have been secured for this project: 1. $1,200,250 SJRWMD Cost -Share Grant (Contract #28730); 2. $1,200,000 FDEP TMDL Grant (FDEP is preparing the grant contract); and 3. $1,234,286 Florida House Appropriations Grant (the Florida House is preparing the grant contract). The total of all grants is $3,634,536. The remaining funds ($3,808,898) are budgeted and available from Optional Sales Tax/Stormwater/Osprey Acres (account number 31524338-066510-16022) Funding of this project will be provided by a budget amendment from Optional Sales Tax/Cash Forward to Optional Sales Tax/Public Works/Osprey Acres Stormwater — Account # 31524338-066510-16022 RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends the Board: 1. Approve award to the lowest apparent responsive and responsible bidder, West Construction, Inc. for the base bid of $7,443,433.35 plus Alternate "B" (millings entrance turnaround at no additional cost) and Alternate "C" (timber bridge at a $6,512.00 deduct) for a total contract amount of $7,436,921.35; 2. Authorize the Chairman to execute the agreement upon review and approval of both the agreement and required public construction bond by the County Attorney as to form and legal sufficiency, and the receipt and approval of required insurance by the Risk Manager. ATTACHMENTS Sample Agreement DISTRIBUTION Jennifer Hyde, Purchasing Division Michael Smykowski, Budget Division William K. DeBraal, Deputy County Attorney APPROVED AGENDA ITEM FOR JULY 18, 2017 C:\Users\GRANIC—I\AppData\Local\Temp\BCL Technologies\easyPDF 7\@BCL@28057B23\@BCL@28057B23.doc P43 SECTION 00520 - AGREEMENT ADDENDUM NO. 1 THIS AGREEMENT is by and between INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, a Political Subdivision of the State of Florida organized and existing under the Laws of the State of Florida, (hereinafter called OWNER) and (hereinafter called CONTRACTOR). OWNER and CONTRACTOR, in consideration of the mutual covenants hereinafter set forth, agree as follows: ARTICLE 1 -WORK 1.01 CONTRACTOR shall complete all Work as specified or indicated in the Contract Documents. The Work is generally described as follows: Construction of a pollution removal facility that will receive flows from an adjacent existing County pollution removal facility (Osprey Marsh Algal Turf Scrubber) and the Indian River Farms Water Control District's South Relief Canal. The remainder of the property is a nature preserve with constructed hiking trails. ARTICLE 2 - THE PROJECT 2.01 The Project for which the Work under the Contract Documents may be the whole or only a part is generally described as follows: Project Name: OSPREY ACRES FLOWAY AND NATURE PRESERVE Bid Number: 2017051 Project Address: 925 5th Street SE, Vero Beach, FL 32962. ARTICLE 3 — ENGINEER 3.01 The Stormwater Division of the Indian River County Public Works Department is hereinafter called the ENGINEER and will act as OWNER's representative, assume all duties and responsibilities, and have the rights and authority assigned to ENGINEER in the Contract Documents in connection with the completion of the Work in accordance with the Contract Documents. ARTICLE 4 - CONTRACT TIMES 4.01 Time of the Essence A. All time limits for Milestones, if any, Final Completion, and completion and readiness for final payment as stated in the Contract Documents are of the essence to the Contract. 4.02 Days to Achieve Final Completion and Final Payment A. The Work will be fully completed (Final Completion) and ready for final payment in accordance with paragraph 14.07 of the General Conditions on or before the 300th day @BCL@A8058894 00520-1 C:\Users\GRANIC-1\AppData\Local\Temp\BCL Technologies\easyPDF T@BCL@A8058894\@BCL@A8058894.doc Rev. 05/01 P44 from the date the Contract Time commences as set forth in the Notice -to -Proceed (Section 00550). 4.03 Liquidated Damages A. CONTRACTOR and OWNER recognize that time is of the essence for this Agreement and that OWNER will suffer financial loss if the Work is not completed on or before the date specified in paragraph 4.02 above, plus any extensions thereof allowed in accordance with Article 12 of the General Conditions. The parties also recognize the delays, expense, and difficulties involved in proving in a legal proceeding the actual loss suffered by OWNER if the Work is not completed on time. Accordingly, instead of requiring any such proof, OWNER and CONTRACTOR agree that as liquidated damages for delay (but not as a penalty), CONTRACTOR shall pay OWNER $2,811.00' for each calendar day that expires after the date specified in paragraph 4.02 for Final Completion, until the Work is finally complete and ready for final payment. ARTICLE 5 - CONTRACT PRICE 5.01 OWNER shall pay CONTRACTOR for completion of the Work in accordance with the Contract Documents, an amount in current funds equal to the sum of the amounts determined pursuant to paragraph 5.01.A and summarized in paragraph 5.01.6, below: A. For all Work, at the prices stated in CONTRACTOR's Bid, attached hereto as an exhibit. B. THE CONTRACT SUM subject to additions and deductions provided in the Contract: Numerical Amount: $ Written Amount: ARTICLE 6 - PAYMENT PROCEDURES 6.01 Submittal and Processing of Payments A. CONTRACTOR shall submit Applications for Payment in accordance with Article 14 of the General Conditions. Applications for Payment will be processed by ENGINEER as provided in the General Conditions. 6.02 Progress Payments, Retainage A. OWNER shall make progress payments on account of the Contract Price on the basis of CONTRACTOR's Applications for Payment at intervals not less than once each month during performance of the Work as provided in paragraph 6.02.A.1 below. All such payments will be measured by the schedule of values established in paragraph 2.07.A of the General Conditions (and in the case of Unit Price Work based on the number of units 1 Reference for liquidated damages amount: "Standard Specifications for Road and Bridge Construction", Florida Department of Transportation, July 2017, Section 8-10.2, page 93, for projects of $2,500,000 but less than $5,000,000. The actual liquidated damages amount will be based on the actual contract award amount and determined using the referenced Florida Department of Transportation criteria @BCL@A8058894 00520-2 C:\Users\GRANIC-1WppData\Local\Temp\BCL Technologies\easyPDF 7\@BCL@A8058894\@BCL@A8058894.doc Rev. 05/01 P45 completed) or, in the event there is no schedule of values, as provided in the General Requirements: 1. Progress payments will be made in an amount equal to the percentage indicated below, less the aggregate of payments previously made and less such amounts as ENGINEER may determine or OWNER may withhold, in accordance with paragraph 14.02 of the General Conditions: a. Ninety percent (90%) of Work completed (with the balance being retainage). There will be no payment for the cost of materials and equipment not incorporated in the Work but stored on the Project site. 6.03 Final Payment A. Upon final completion and acceptance of the Work in accordance with paragraph 14.07 of the General Conditions, OWNER shall pay the remainder of the Contract Price as recommended by ENGINEER as provided in said paragraph 14.07. ARTICLE 7 - INDEMNIFICATION 7.01 CONTRACTOR shall indemnify OWNER, ENGINEER, and others in accordance with paragraph 6.20 (Indemnification) of the General Conditions to the Construction Contract. ARTICLE 8 - CONTRACTOR'S REPRESENTATIONS 8.01 In order to induce OWNER to enter into this Agreement CONTRACTOR makes the following representations: A. CONTRACTOR has examined and carefully studied the Contract Documents and the other related data identified in the Bidding Documents. B. CONTRACTOR has visited the Site and become familiar with and is satisfied as to the general, local, and Site. conditions that may affect cost, progress, and performance of the Work. C. CONTRACTOR is familiar with and is satisfied as to all federal, state, and local Laws and Regulations that may affect cost, progress, and performance of the Work. D. CONTRACTOR has carefully studied all: (1) reports of explorations and tests of subsurface conditions at or contiguous to the Site and all drawings of physical conditions in or relating to existing surface or subsurface structures at or contiguous to the Site (except Underground Facilities) which have been identified as provided in paragraph 4.02 of the General Conditions and (2) reports and drawings of a Hazardous Environmental Condition, if any, at the Site which have been identified as provided in paragraph 4.06 of the General Conditions. E. CONTRACTOR has obtained and carefully studied (or assumes responsibility for having done so) all examinations, investigations, explorations, tests, studies, and data concerning conditions (surface, subsurface, and Underground Facilities) at or contiguous to the Site which may affect cost, progress, or performance of the Work or which relate to any aspect of the means, methods, techniques, sequences, and procedures of construction to be employed by CONTRACTOR, including applying the specific means,, methods, techniques, sequences, and procedures of construction, if any, expressly required by the @BCL@A8058894 00520-3 C:\Users\GRANIC-1\AppData\Local\Temp\BCL Technologies\easyPDF 7\@BCL@A8058894\@BCL(f8058894.doc Rev. 05/01 P46 Contract Documents to be employed by CONTRACTOR, and safety precautions and programs incident thereto F. CONTRACTOR does not consider that any further examinations, investigations, explorations, tests, studies, or data are necessary for the performance of the Work at the Contract Price, within the Contract Times, and in accordance with the other terms and conditions of the Contract Documents. G. CONTRACTOR is aware of the general nature of work to be performed by OWNER and others at the Site that relates to the Work as indicated in the Contract Documents. H. CONTRACTOR has correlated the information known to CONTRACTOR, information and observations obtained from visits to the Site, reports and drawings identified in the Contract Documents, and all additional examinations, investigations, explorations, tests, studies, and data with the Contract Documents. I. CONTRACTOR has given ENGINEER written notice of all conflicts, errors, ambiguities, or discrepancies that CONTRACTOR has discovered in the Contract Documents, and the written resolution thereof by ENGINEER is acceptable to CONTRACTOR. J. The Contract Documents are generally sufficient to indicate and convey understanding of all terms and conditions for performance and furnishing of the Work. ARTICLE 9 - CONTRACT DOCUMENTS 9.01 Contents A. The Contract Documents consist of the following: 1. This Agreement (pages 00520-1 to 00520-8, inclusive); 2. Section 00605 — Public Construction Bond (pages 00605-1 to 00605-3, inclusive); 3. Section 00700 - General Conditions (pages 00700-1 to 00700-51, inclusive); 5. Specifications as listed in the Table of Contents of the Project Manual; 6. Drawings as listed in the Cover Sheet of the CONSTRUCTION DRAWINGS FOR OSPREY ACRES FLOWAY AND NATURE PRESERVE; 7. Addenda (numbers to , inclusive); 8. Exhibits to this Agreement (enumerated as follows): a. Section 00310— Bid Form (CONTRACTOR's Bid) (pages 00310-1 to 00310-5 and pages 1 of 7 through 7 of 7, inclusive); b. Section 00450 — Qualifications Questionnaire (page 00450-1 to 00450-7, inclusive including _ attached pages); c. Section 00452 - Sworn Statement Under Section 105.08, Indian River County Code, on Disclosure of Relationships (pages 00452-1 to 00452-2, inclusive); @BCL@A8058894 00520-4 C:\Users\GRANIC-1\AppData\Local\Temp\BCL Technologies\easyPDF 7\@BCL@A8058894\@BCL@A8058894.doc Rev. 05/01 P47 d. Section 00454 — Sworn Statement Under the Florida Trench Safety Act (pages 00454-1 to 00454-2, inclusive); e. Section 00458 — List of Subcontractors (page 00458-1); f. Section 00459 — Drug -Free Workplace Certification (page 00459-1) g. Section 00622 — Contractor's Application for Payment (pages 00622-1 to 00622-5, inclusive); h. Section 00632 — Contractor's Final Certification of the Work (pages 00632-1 to 00632-2, inclusive); i. Documentation submitted by CONTRACTOR prior to Notice of Award (pages to , inclusive); j. Certificates of Insurance as required by the General Conditions. 9. The following which may be delivered or issued on or after the Effective Date of the Agreement and are not attached hereto: a. Written Amendments; b. Work Change Directives; c. Change Order(s). B. The documents listed in paragraph 9.01.A are attached to this Agreement (except as expressly noted otherwise above). C. There are no Contract Documents other than those listed above in this Article 9. D. The Contract Documents may only be amended, modified, or supplemented as provided in paragraph 3.04 of the General Conditions. ARTICLE 10 - MISCELLANEOUS 10.01 Terms A. Terms used in this Agreement will have the meanings indicated in the General Conditions. 10.02 Assignment of Contract A. No assignment by a party hereto of any rights under or interests in the Contract will be binding on another party hereto without the written consent of the party sought to be bound; and, specifically but without limitation, moneys that may become due and moneys that are due may not be assigned without such consent (except to the extent that the effect of this restriction may be limited by law), and unless specifically stated to the contrary in any written consent to an assignment, no assignment will release or discharge the assignor from any duty or responsibility under the Contract Documents. 10.03 Successors and Assigns @BCL@A8058894 00520-5 C:\Users\GRANIC-1\AppData\Local\Temp\BCL Technologies\easyPDF 7\@BCL@_A8058894\@BCL@A8058894.doc Rev. 05/01 P48 A. OWNER and CONTRACTOR each binds itself, its partners, successors, assigns, and legal representatives to the other party hereto, its partners, successors, assigns, and legal representatives in respect to all covenants, agreements, and obligations contained in the Contract Documents. 10.04 Severability A. Any provision or part of the Contract Documents held to be void or unenforceable under any Law or Regulation shall be deemed stricken, and all remaining provisions shall continue to be valid and binding upon OWNER and CONTRACTOR, who agree that the Contract Documents shall be reformed to replace such stricken provision or part thereof with a valid and enforceable provision that comes as close as possible to expressing the intention of the stricken provision. 10.05 Venue A. This Contract shall be governed by the laws of the State of Florida. Venue for any lawsuit brought by either party against the other party or otherwise arising out of this Contract shall be in Indian River County, Florida, or, in the event of a federal jurisdiction, in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida. 10.06 Affirmative Steps With Respect to Minority and Women's Businesses A. CONTRACTOR shall take the following affirmative steps to ensure minority business, women's business enterprises and labor surplus area firms are used when possible: 1. Placing qualified small and minority businesses and women's business enterprises on solicitation lists. 2. Ensuring that small and minority businesses, and women's business enterprises are solicited whenever they are potential sources. 3. Dividing total requirements, when economically feasible, into smaller tasks or quantities to permit maximum participation by small and minority businesses, and women's business enterprises. 4. Establishing delivery schedules, where the requirement permits, which encourage participation by small and minority. businesses, and women's business enterprises. 5. Using the services and assistance of the Small Business Administration and the Minority Business Development Agency of the Department of Commerce. 10.07 Public Records A. Indian River County is a public agency subject to Chapter 119, Florida Statutes. The Contractor shall comply with Florida's Public Records Law. Specifically, the Contractor shall: 1. Keep and maintain public records required by the County to perform the service. 2. Upon request from the County's Custodian of Public Records, provide the County with a copy of the requested records or allow the records to be inspected or copied within a reasonable time at a cost that does not exceed the cost provided in Chapter 119 or as otherwise provided by law. 3. Ensure that public records that are exempt or confidential and exempt from public records disclosure requirements are not disclosed except as authorized by law for @BCL@A8058894 00520-6 C:\Users\GRANIC-1\AppData\Local\Temp\BCL Technologies\easyPDF T@BCL@ A8058894\@BCL@48058894.doc Rev. 05/01 P49 the duration of the contract term and following completion of the contract if the contractor does not transfer the records to the County. 4. Upon completion of the contract, transfer, at no cost, to the County all public records in possession of the Contractor or keep and maintain public records required by the County to perform the service. If the Contractor transfers all public records to the County upon completion of the contract, the Contractor shall destroy any duplicate public records that are exempt or confidential and exempt from public records disclosure requirements. If the contractor keeps and maintains public records upon completion of the contract, the Contractor shall meet all applicable requirements for retaining public records. All records stored electronically must be provided to the County, upon request from the Custodian of Public Records, in a format that is compatible with the information technology systems of the County. B. IF THE CONTRACTOR HAS QUESTIONS REGARDING THE APPLICATION OF CHAPTER 119, FLORIDA STATUTES, TO THE CONTRACTOR'S DUTY TO PROVIDE PUBLIC RECORDS RELATING TO THIS CONTRACT, CONTACT THE CUSTODIAN OF PUBLIC RECORDS AT: (772) 226-1424 publicrecords(c-ircaov.com Indian River County Office of the County Attorney 1801 27t" Street Vero Beach, FL 32960 C. Failure of the Contractor to comply with these requirements shall be a material breach of this Agreement. [The remainder of this page was left blank intentionally] @BCL@A8058894 00520-7 C:\Users\GRANIC-1\HppData\Local\Temp\BCL Technologies\easyPDF 7\@BCL@48058894\@BCL@A8058894.doc Rev. 05/01 P50 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, OWNER and CONTRACTOR have signed this Agreement in duplicate. One counterpart each has been delivered to OWNER and CONTRACTOR. All portions of the Contract Documents have been signed or identified by OWNER and CONTRACTOR or on their behalf. This Agreement will be effective on , 20_ (the date the Contract is approved by the Indian River County Board of County Commissioners, which is the Effective Date of the Agreement). OWNER: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA By: Joseph E. Flescher, Chairman Approved by BCC Jason Brown, County Administrator APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGAL SUFFICIENCY: By: William K. DeBraal, Deputy County Attorney ATTEST: Jeffrey R. Smith, Clerk of Court and Comptroller Deputy Clerk CONTRACTOR: By: (Printed name and title) Witnessed by: (Printed name) * * END OF SECTION * * @BCL@A8058894 00520-8 C:\Users\GRANIC-1\AppData\Local\Temp\BCL Technologies\easyPDF 7\@BCL@A8058894\@BCL@48058894.doc Rev. 05/01 P51 INDIAN RIVER COUNTY MEMORANDUM TO: Jason E. Brown County Administrator DEPARTMENT HEAD CONCURRENCE: Stan Boling, AICP Community Development Director THROUGH: Roland M. DeBlois, AICP Chief, Environmental Planning & Code Enforcement FROM: Kelly Buck Code Enforcement Officer DATE: 7/11/2017 RE: Michael Cooper's Request for Release of an Easement at 100 38th Court (Hidden Oaks Subdivision) It is requested that the Board of County Commissioners formally consider the following information at its regular meeting of July 18, 2017. DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS The County has been petitioned by Michael Cooper, owner of a lot at 100 38th Court in Hidden Oaks Subdivision, for release of a 40' x 8' drainage access easement. The purpose of the easement release request is to allow for extension of an existing pool deck on the lot (see attached maps). ANALYSIS The request has been reviewed by AT&T; Florida Power & Light Corporation; Comcast Cable Services; the Indian River County Utilities Department; the County Road & Bridge and Engineering Divisions; and the County Surveyor. None of the utility providers or reviewing agencies expressed an objection to the requested release of easement. Therefore, it is staff's position that the requested easement release would have no adverse impact to drainage or to utilities being supplied to the subject property or to other properties. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Board, through adoption of the attached resolution, approve release of the 40'x 8' drainage access easement described in the resolution. P52 MICHAEL GRANT COOPER Release of Easement Page 2 ATTACHMENTS 1. Map(s) depicting easement proposed for release. 2. Proposed County Resolution Releasing Easement. ease.bccmemo proj./appl. no. 2004060285/79379 P53 (I bEC�15-.�isv II ITP. LOT I RI ILRL�,,apElr N 05`2] � SE SN169' 5 ti lR N Meet T'In 2—. AS B 2 3 ' i A S I-2IT DRAINAGE I ANT. — LAST J, LERT"m OF INDICATION STATE OF RDIOA COUNTY or — RIVER CUiVE HIDDEN OAKS CELTA AND CICRD A WIDIVISION Of'LANO IN SECTION 15, TONISHIP33 SOUTH, RANGE 39 EAST, INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA C. DESCNPTOM LETiwD: A PARCH OF LAND BEING THE REST 10 ACRES' OF TRACT 14 AND THE EAST 1.95 FEET OT TRACT 13 AS DESIGNATED •-ACA ON THE LAST GENERAL PLAT OF LANDS OF THE INDIAN RIVER FRANS COMPANY, FILED IN THE OFFICE OF TIKE CLERK O -PRN OF THE CIRCUIT COURT OF g LUCIE COUNTY. FLORIDA, IN KAT BOON 2, PAGE 25; $AID LAND NOW SINATE N It INDIAN RIVER COUNTY. FLORIDA. SA.96' TO 6A' LESS AND EXCEPT THE SOUTH AFEET TNER1TP FOR ROAD RIGHT-OF-WAY. CA G5 —L". 6 ONa—K t— KAMM MAHODLANDS IUB. M 4 � LFIDER2E�DP�WL NECDCORDED OW IA, 211 ZA.E ONED AS a M OD• OD' OCE ¢t4GP � L� TRACT L C6 IIOCO'36'SY LXAMPIED ANO aP WFO pat SAO" T� AN.m'2o'W DT DB C4AT 6112' IO' 822'./ 183' N69.24'G3'W X"-atGT'R BLOCK A 20' TANAGER E -T. RlFO FOR RE"'D DT yi LLY AID RECOMED PLAT BOOKIE, PASEUI !!:.i. 'C- ! ✓�/ ( WiTNFSXD Bf ,iI,�L,b (A^'�" 696 er e � i:�•ti :�' � r' �F a�C+.cX I� [TERN OF ORCUIT COURT `(£FF.PEY K• BARTOiV�� • - C3� VnT+1¢Szfn CAROL LOBAS9O 2 J 0 ITATE OF FLORIDA TEES IFOTRWtIT PRfPMfD AY AOM R MOROW. 11 ➢RMNACC E NT. REV6/D. 19.89 vEAO "AOL. CODA 32960 Meet T'In 2—. AS B 2 3 ' i A S I-2IT DRAINAGE I ANT. — LAST J, LERT"m OF INDICATION STATE OF RDIOA COUNTY or — RIVER CUiVE RADIUS CELTA AND CICRD DH. BEAR IND C. II ow warm, 3c 9Y 53.89' M 9T' AEW C C2 C5' 25004VW So00'-9Y It SB.T' 7e.AR' SA.96' TO 6A' N9!•3Y10'W wRN*MIT . CA G5 80.00.55'12' HO.Od•IS'o" 07 roAN P1 12154 """ I13.0Y E62T Xas•SB ad* TV w 12• lo' 2!' N C6 IIOCO'36'SY LXAMPIED ANO aP WFO pat SAO" N,N]' AN.m'2o'W DT DB IIOo0'•SYJI' 110.0 D' C4AT 6112' IO' 822'./ 183' N69.24'G3'W X"-atGT'R (60 AM DRAINAGE EIMT.y F B T b B 9 i I 10 a I XNOv1 ALL MEN BV THESE RESENTS, THAT JAM P. YODIeI AS TRUSTEE. K[ SNPU -14A OF THE LAND DESODSED AND RATTED MEAEN, BEIxe N —4 RIVER COUNTY, NAS CAUSED SAD LAN" TD AE SURVIS"A AND PLATTE* AS I— HEREON AND DOES MEPWV DEDICATE " FOLLOWS, NOTES' SHRUS9 WILL BE ,LACED .IN L STREETS AND IISHTS-OF-RAT, EAS'M!Ny "MN:T' COVEY A IN U9FN_NI9 IWTNOVI COUNTY AP{MpA1L- E.NOTICE' THERE MAY BE ADDITIONAL RESTRICTOta THAT IRE ALL STRIt s ANO TIGRIS -d -WAY fNOWN ON INNS MAY apE HEREBY DEDICATED N PERPETUITY TO INDIAN RIVER COIN RDIDA FOR THE RISE AND, AFN[FR d TRE PUBLIC FOR CERTXICATE d TITLE NOS ACCORDED ON YIDS Rai THAT MAY B[ ROlCO N THE !ROPER "�' 1 PUBLIC RECONOS OF THIS COUNTY, STATE OF FLORIDAN 2. VTQJTT EASEMENTS: - E UM TL11N" EASEMENTS AS SHOW ARE 06MATOD RERFETXf1' COUNTY OF INDIAN RIVER FOR TFC COWINUCTION AND MAINTEMAMIE d UTILITIES BY ART UTILITY AlIUV w:ic(..w ,.. ♦� , CnMNMAY d THE Adb � RUOXDER AND FOR THE CONSTRUCTION, NSNJ.LATIO6, MAINTENANCE. 1, BYRD T. COONSCS', MAY LICCFCSFD IN THE STATE OF ANDOPERATION OF CABLE .TELEVISION SERWES IN COMPLIANCE WITH FLOR)DA, Do HERE" CERTIFY THAT I HAVE EXAMINED THE TITLE ArTHE HI EON DESCRHIM PROPERTY, THAT 1 PIND THE TITLE TO IKE PRdERTT M VESTED IN JA3Ef P. YOm. AS TRUSTEE. SUCH ORONRANCE9 ANDRE6nLATOES A!'MAT ADOPTED FROM TME TO TWE.BT THE BOARD d C0.wrY CdINS4DNER$ W INDIAN RIVER CAAITY. FLOAIML IRA THAT ALL TAXES HAVE BEEN, WIN DN SAN PROPIRTY AS IPCDT'BIT SC� , �BE Rm .0 OADIES, ENCUL6! Q5.CR LEMS 3. ORAINACE AMD 210*10 .ITER MAWGtMENF EASEMENTS: 3. OR EASEMENTS AS THE DRAINAGE ESNOIF4 ARE DEDRATEANWIFY! AND TDMIN PEk3TOTYTEN S FOR COl- s"EL IJIU BE AIAITENA CE OBBLIGR m WMAN BRWECOR 07 roAN P1 THE PERFElu I NOURITY, e x c— WE ATTOAWI O LAM ♦WITCO ACCESS EA52YENT91 rte_ L G TNt LIMITED AcdSS [ASNEIAT] AS SHORN ARE DEORATED 14 PDXENITV TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY CONMSSIOERS OF BANAN LXAMPIED ANO aP WFO pat MKH COUNTY. /LORAN. FOR M WRPOSE9 OF CANT— AND JUMSDICTION OVER ACCESS RIOHTS CCRTIt-Tt d MEN. IN HITFE95 WHfNEOP, 1 HAVE ANAEUMTO SET MY NYD WD STATE d fVOIANA SEAL THIS �C' DINT COUNTY d INODR ArvCR /1 I, CLERK OF NOAIR RIVER COUNT, T1:DDOA.Dp FERtAY CflTFT NAT R NAVE EXANIYm TNtl KR d •NIDOEN —81 r BY!�R•-'>♦ •'• A eUDOIVXIAH, AND TIMI 1T -NGF WITH ALL THE R XRC- MENTS OF CNAPTERvT OF THE l/M��0{ PLOOW. TMtl RJ1T Y_. PFN JAMES P. c. AS TOOTEC RlFO FOR RE"'D DT yi LLY AID RECOMED PLAT BOOKIE, PASEUI !!:.i. 'C- ! ✓�/ N TIE OFF.IF DR, MINE CLERK OF CNCWT COFAT OF INDIAN f,��•.(� D WiTNFSXD Bf ,iI,�L,b (A^'�" 696 er e � i:�•ti :�' � r' �F a�C+.cX I� [TERN OF ORCUIT COURT `(£FF.PEY K• BARTOiV�� • - C3� VnT+1¢Szfn CAROL LOBAS9O Lomnox MAr NTS CONRETONXFAT .46 IENSRE LAND Use: U-2 R.Dv D9m 89A0 NDC' I I 9R.ON 91se' BL CK B TRACT IS TRACT E O' W tD. PR KM MSS TRACT NI TRACT A b a 16 03 H NOWRAOYL� h� UFft TIED 13 zoMe n AF 6 Iz In L CEANNWTE of APPDVAL 6Y BOARD OF Co.— Do—SIGNERS ODYERANT9. RESTXCTXNO, OR RESERVATIONS AFFECTING TIC ONNEROM OR USE OF THE Txtl IS TO C[RTRT THAT ON THUS DAB d RT*PERTY 9NRR IN MIS PUT ARE FILED M OFFICIAL RECORD AGN NO10 PAGE1EILi. VFA X69, TE FOREGOING PUT WIN APPROM BY THE BOARD m COUNTY INDIAN RPIER COUNTY, FLDIDII THAT TIME H B AND IT THAT TIME THE ADHD ALSO ACCFPTEO THE DEDICM TON((9// iHOMw D LO RAT. AlIUV w:ic(..w ,.. ♦� , CnMNMAY d THE Adb � AT119T- �ca� !r I ttr✓. �_ -. ,tum• d: eyu�gg..; ). �...., 3 ADRNONetoeENbrt APFAOVEU A3 TO I. �II^1 p �..PD.... T d RONOA L[eF EMLY: W.r IM . IL 1NND COU Ntt Ai10NEY GRIT DAINTY I4D1NR TY d pV[R Ntl lb COTR1 T ,yN TNS OF APPINT,,TOR OAT aF, SBC, eFTOM YE, LT PPEYED IF, 001:ATE Ar COUNTY AOMIfIAA10 P. .0. M , A3 "MIT" rte_ L G TO M ERS* NOMI TO N PERSONALLY * RNOWN ToD K THE DICATON ANO- EXFOITED 1S FORE- LXAMPIED ANO aP WFO pat 401110 NIDI •GOIONLED EXECUTION AS EYFCIITION TNEREGR 10 d AS ETEC ATHECT CT AND AEON N X. 1 HEREUNTO ICT CERTTCAIL d fURVEYO AN SEM. . LT HAND AND SEM. dR THE ABOv[ GATE E 48 RDW ALL NEN AY THESE IMINTS, THAT THE UNDER- /1 BIOMED VINO A LICfMEO.AID REOtlTEMD LPIRp. SURVEY0IL t UAI ar0 l: DOST HEREBt CGTXY DRAT D '/f!L_ Ff69. HE COMPLETED THE SUW." OF THE UNIX iNOAX IN INK NDTM[ RFALIC STATE OF MG.FGA R -LARGE "OOn10 PLATT THAT SAA PLAT S A CORRECT PRMENTITION OF THE LANDS TNEACN DESCAIAEO AND FLATTED Be SUBDIVIDE*: A T FERYY[MT R¢[R[NtE MONUMENTA HAVE RECO FLACFD ASSHORN THEREON AA REWIRED BY CHAPTEH.TT. FLORIDA MY DOMMISSION� n"Fes. dllj/Q/ STANTE9, AND THE NDMN RIVER COUNTY AUBDIVXXN AND KATTUO OOREANLE: AND THAT SAID LAND IS LOCATE*' IN RDRAM RIVER COLm FLORIDA. aA I�1! r- Iw �m H,HrI JOIN 40R6AM n DATE ITATE OF FLORIDA TEES IFOTRWtIT PRfPMfD AY AOM R MOROW. 11 A,R6 EO TAI STREET REV6/D. 19.89 vEAO "AOL. CODA 32960 i I cr 0 I? F— Lu rn w I? cr- z cn of u Lu (n L o w z J Z H O N I i i i I 94.00' V) o ;r e wI r - m o I I+) 2 Z f- 0 C ti M fl 40' x 8' ACC SS' ESMT, FOR DRAINA E ESMT. (TYP) SET M. P.R,M. UNPLATTED ZONED RS 6 94.00' N 009 .01' 522"" W I( 94.00' 94.00' i in 1 34 5 I ( rn �20' DRAINAGE f SMT, S 000 00' 00" W CURVE RADIUS .93' rNn CH. BEARING C I to 25..00' 3 N 05°23'5F - N 470 42'39" E C2 82.71' 88°42`46" 0 Q N 45' 3 7'10" W C 3 50.00' 89°53' 12 " 78.44' 70.64' d 80.58' nn nn' Qa*r.-S' 19" C2 0"6' 7.. W 3 w a 9.6 5' NSI°16'06° W bD w 24.56' 94.00' V) o ;r e wI r - m o I I+) 2 Z f- 0 C ti M fl 40' x 8' ACC SS' ESMT, FOR DRAINA E ESMT. (TYP) SET M. P.R,M. UNPLATTED ZONED RS 6 94.00' N 009 .01' 522"" W I( 94.00' 94.00' i in 1 34 5 I ( rn �20' DRAINAGE f SMT, S 000 00' 00" W CURVE RADIUS DELTA ARC CHORD CH. BEARING C 1 25..00' 84036'58" 36.92' 33.66' N 470 42'39" E C2 25.00' 88°42`46" 38.71' 34.96' N 45' 3 7'10" W C 3 50.00' 89°53' 12 " 78.44' 70.64' N 44058'26" W f.A nn nn' Qa*r.-S' 19" 19R r'n' Im n9' AI AAO `o' 1 n° %M C£RTMC9 STATE 0 COUNTY 4 HIDDEN =_QAi <,S 'SuBD-zJVl5..1.0N BLi . LOT 2'. j l Fli'v,FLR.-2z..72' r .FINS 'S/r t4p.of - I'�j .}'f//^^ xoxr- - - . '�8a`59'1�•,a� :�;�{y�. ,��4;$G� •�1�i i / JL%�+f���>����a i;T� ii•'7�'% ��t� �5�� Sj iL•.�J two le IP_ �..Ll oit8- BUILDING SETBACK 0141 Y _ �OtI I EJB ..- 2.0' ty _ 3_t '' i EJB I i A1fAfi LE SEPMbC-'ANIS y' AREA 1650 CL .18.71'LL �, �•' �.. ' .-_..�'i �_ ' F c:':3F1: r. � `� i _.� ; � ; .,.. ice. co c.� 1 'LJ IN 01 LOT !: 20.lD3F BuiLD"NIG, is "BACK C V-4;, tom°. .'i.Uj.1 ��� ., `i�'til��, lYy!'1 Wrr Y `''•._ •�� ......�Y. �h�fRf�Iy'✓�taf!K•�,-�rI f'•`•�!•r i'1�''-' A�.. v+•rr.+��(� , 111.......» •': `, ': • •�1 •�-.-...._..-•.•'+r'. ,� �5,: e t ;J6Li 3ktii HGiI: J'y P56 RESOLUTION NO. 2017 - A RESOLUTION OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, RELEASING AN EASEMENT ON LOT 1, BLOCK B, HIDDEN OAKS SUBDIVISION WHEREAS, Indian River County has an interest in an access easement for drainage easement on Lot 1, Block B, of Hidden Oaks Subdivision; and WHEREAS, retention of the easement, as described below, serves no public purpose; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida that: INDIAN RIVER COUNTY DOES HEREBY RELEASE and abandon all right, title, and interest that it may have in the following described easement: the 40'x 8' access easement for drainage easement, less and except any portion of the south five (5) foot limited access easement, of Lot 1, Block B, Hidden Oaks Subdivision, according to the plat thereof recorded in Plat Book 12, Page 95 of the Public Records of Indian River County, Florida. This release of easement is executed by Indian River County, a political subdivision of the State of Florida, whose mailing address is 1801 27th Street, Vero Beach, Florida 32960. THIS RESOLUTION was moved for adoption by Commissioner , seconded by Commissioner , and adopted on the day of 2017, by the following vote: Chairman Joseph E. Flescher Vice -Chairman Peter D. O'Bryan Commissioner Susan Adams Commissioner Bob Solari Commissioner Tim Zorc The Chairman declared the resolution duly passed and adopted this 52017, BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA Joseph E. Flescher, Chairman day of ATTEST: Jeffrey R. Smith, Clerk of Court and Comptroller Deputy Clerk P57 RESOLUTION .NO.2017 - APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM: County Attorney ease.bccdoc proj/apl. no. 2004060285/79379 Cc: Applicant: COOPER, MICHAEL GRANT 100 38TH CT VERO BEACH, FL 32968 P58 Consent Agenda Indian River County Interoffice Memorandum Office of Management & Budget To: Members of the Board of County Commissioners From: Michael Smykowski Director, Office of Management & Budget Date: July 10, 2017 Subject: Miscellaneous Budget Amendment 020 Description and Conditions On November 4, 2016 payment from the State Criminal Alien Assistance Program (SCAAP) in the amount of $48,984.00 was received by the County. The program provides funding to participating jurisdictions for the partial reimbursement of costs incurred by incarcerating undocumented criminal aliens in their corrections facilities. The following letter from Sheriff Deryl Loar requests the funds to be used for the Corrections operating expenses. Exhibit "A" appropriates the $48,984.00. 2. The restroom located near the entrance of the "Dick Bird" South County Regional Park is in need of repair. Exhibit "A" appropriates $12,000 from General Fund/Reserve for Contingency. 3. On March 7, 2017, the Board of County Commissioners voted to approve the Second Amended and Restated Indian River Lagoon National Estuary Program Interlocal Agreement (IRLNEP ILA). On June 16, 2017, the Second Amended and Restated IRLNEP ILA was recorded in Indian River County. Exhibit "A" appropriates $14,584 from General Fund/Reserve for Contingency which represents the pro -rated membership fee of $50,000 for the June 16, 2017 through September 30, 2017 time period. P59 November 10, 2016 erfflDeryl Loar Indian River Cotmty Sheriff's Office The Honorable Bob Solari, Chairman Indian River Board of County Commissioners 1801 27th Street Vero Beach, FL 32960-3388 Dear Chairman Solari: The State Criminal Alien Assistance Program (SCARP) is a payment program that is administered by the Department of Justice's Bureau of Justice Assistance (BJA). This program provides funding to participating jurisdictions for the partial reimbursement of costs incurred by incarcerating undocumented criminal aliens in their correctional facilities. I am pleased to inform you that through the efforts of my staff and the use of the consulting firm of Justice Benefits, Inc, (JBI) - that does the research, inputs the data in the proper format and submits the records - the Bureau of Justice Assistance has wire transferred $48,984.00 into the board's bank account. The invoice from the consulting firm for $8,817.12 will need to be paid from the proceeds which leaves a net of $40,166.88 from the FY 2016 SCAAP award. Beginning with FY 2007 SCAAP awards, SCAAP funds must be used for correctional purposes only. Consequently, 1 am requesting a check in the amount of $48,984.00, with the appropriate budget amendment into Corrections Operating Expenses, to pay the consulting firm and to augment finds needed for inmate care. If you have any questions or require additional information, please contact Kelly Goodwin at 978-6146. Sincerely, Deryl Loar, Sheriff cc: Kelly Goodwin, Comptroller Mike Smykowski, OMB Director Diane Bernardo, Finance Director 4055 41st Avenue o Vero Beach, FL 32960 + (772) 569-6700 . www.iresheriff.org ^QW P60 RESOLUTION NO. 2017- A RESOLUTION OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, AMENDING THE FISCAL YEAR 2016-2017 BUDGET. WHEREAS, certain appropriation and expenditure amendments to the adopted Fiscal Year 2016-2017 Budget are to be made by resolution pursuant to section 129.06(2), Florida Statutes; and WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County desires to amend the fiscal year 2016-2017 budget, as more specifically set forth in Exhibit "A" attached hereto and by this reference made a part hereof, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, that the Fiscal Year 2016-2017 Budget be and hereby is amended as set forth in Exhibit "A" upon adoption of this Resolution. This Resolution was moved for adoption by Commissioner , and the motion was seconded by Commissioner , and, upon being put to a vote, the vote was as follows: Chairman, Joseph E. Flescher Vice Chairman, Peter D. O'Bryan Commissioner, Susan Adams Commissioner, Bob Solari Commissioner, Tim Zorc The Chairman thereupon declared this Resolution duly passed and adopted this day of 12017. Attest: Jeffrey R. Smith Clerk of Court and Comptroller Deputy Clerk INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA Board of County Commissioners In Joseph E. Flescher, Chairman 'i1 APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGAL SUFFICIENCY COUNTY ATTORNEY P61 Resolution No. 2017 - Budget Office Approval: Exhibit "A" Michael Smykowski, Budget Director Budget Amendment: 020 Entry Number Fund/ Department/Account Name Account Number Increase Decrease 1. Revenue General Fund/Intergovernmental/DOJ SCAAP Grant 001033-331207 $48,984 $0 Expense General Fund/Sheriff/Sheriff-Detention Center 00160086-099140 $48,984 $0 2. Expense General Fund/Parks/Maintenance Buildings 00121072-034610 $12,000 $0 General Fund/Reserves/Reserve for Contingency 00119981-099910 $0 $12,000 3. Expense General Fund/Agencies/IRLNEP 00111015-088151 $14,584 $0 F- General Fund/Reserves/Reserve for Contingency 00119981-099910 $0 $14,584 1 of 1 P62 INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA MEMORANDUM TO: Jason E. Brown, County Administrator THROUGH: Richard B. Szpyrka, P.E., Public Works Directo James W. Ennis, P.E., PMP, County Enginee FROM: William Johnson, P.E., Roadway Production Engineea- SUBJECT: Amendment No. 8 to the Civil Engineering and Land Surveying Agreement for Intersection Improvements at SR -60 and 43rd Avenue and the Widening of 43rd Avenue from 18th Street to 26th Street with Arcadis US, Inc. DATE: July 10, 2017 DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS Arcadis US, Inc. (fka Arcadis, G&M) is under original contact/Agreement signed May 17, 2005 with Indian River County to provide Civil Engineering and Land Surveying Services for improvements to the SR -60/431d Avenue Intersection and the widening of 43rd Avenue from 18th Street to 26th Street. Final Design process commencing September 19, 2006. The purpose of Amendment No. 8 is to update design plans to current (2017) standards and provide right-of-way support services to complete construction documents. The project construction is scheduled to commence spring/summer 2018. The total negotiated lump sum for Amendment No. 8 is $30,813.20. FUNDING Funding is available from Optional Sales Tax/43rd Avenue & SR -60 — 18th Street to 26th Street - Account No. 31521441-066510-06041 in the amount of $30,813.20. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends the Board of County Commissioners approve Amendment No. 8 for a lump sum fee of $30,813.20 and requests the Board of County Commissioners authorize the Chairman to execute Amendment No. 8 on their behalf. ATTACHMENTS 1. Amendment No. 8 with Arcadis US, Inc. — Hank Deibel, P.E. APPROVED AGENDA ITEM FOR JULY 18, 2017 fI I R\Public Works\ENGINEERING DIVISION PROJECTS\0853-43rd AVE 18th ST to 26th ST (Arcadis)\Admim\agenda items\Arcadis Proposal 07102017URC- 0853 BCC Agenda Memo for Arcadis Amendment k8.docx I' P63 IMPROVEMENT OF THE INTERSECTION OF SR 60 & 43RD AVENUE PROFESSIONAL CI M ENGINEERING & STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING SERVICES AMENDMENT NO. 8 TO THE PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERING/LAND SURVEYING SERVICES AGREEMENT BETWEEN ARCADIS US, Inc. (tks ARCADIS G&M, Inc.), Inc. AND INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA. This is an amendment to the existing Engineering Services Agreement (AGREEMENT) dated September 6, 2005 between ARCADIS US, Inc. (ENGINEER) and Indian River County (COUNTY). This amendment addresses changes in "Section I — Project Limits and Description", "Section III - Scope of Services", and "Section V - Compensation". Amendment Description This Amendment includes the following: "SECTION I - PROJECT LI IITS AND DESCRIPTION" is being modified to incorporate the following: Consultant services are required for the preparation of road design plans; bridge plans; permit applications and utility relocations associated with the construction of SR 60 / 43yd Avenue Intersection Improvements. ARCADIS US, Inc., was contracted to design the widening of 43rd Avenue from 26'h Street to 18* Street. The Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) is acquiring the right of way parcels and license agreements required for the construction of the project. As a result of the right of way acquisition negotiations with the property owners, FDOT has requested plan revisions to address property owner's comments and desires. ARCADIS will revise the plans to address the FDOT's requests. The plan revisions are summarized as follows: • Add ditch bottom inlets, handrails, and a license agreement along the frontage of parcels 113 and 114 at station 2568+70 +/-. • Revise the driveway and grading at the TD Bank parcel to eliminate the requirement for license agreement. • Revise the driveway layout and grading for the driveway for the Nino's parcel on 431 Avenue to eliminate the requirement for the license agreement and to eliminate the "Do Not Enter" signage. • Revise the driveways for the Mobil gas station to provide for 24' wide driveways. • Coordinate with FDOT for possible driveway revisions at the shopping center on SR 60 at station 2645+00 +/-. • Obtain survey information for the stormwater drainage system on 43rd Avenue along the frontage of the Pat O'Connell Plaza site and revise the plans to address impacts to the drainage system. Page 1 of 6 G:\LNR Support\Proposa1s\WPB\2017\SR 60 Bt 43rd Avenue\SR60 -43RD AVE AIvXENDMENT 8 7-8-17.doc P64 • Revise the plans to add a gravity wall and handrail or fencing at the Pinewoods Animal Hospital site. • Revise the plans to add a handrail along the sidewalk at the Cumberland farms site. • Revise the drainage inlets and driveways at the Szechuan Palace site to provide for an additional driveway. • Eliminate the license agreement and driveway layout and grading at the 7-11 site. • Increase the width of the license agreement along the Dodgertown site between station 136+50 and 141+50 +/-. • Show all license agreements on the cross sections. Arcadis has provided utility coordination services for the project to show existing utility facilities on the plans and to coordinate with the utility companies for the relocation of their facilities and to address potential utility conflicts. Additional utility coordination will be provided as requested by the County to show existing and proposed underground utilities on the cross sections sheets. The location of the underground facilities will be based on information provided by the utility companies. In addition, the culvert at the MFWCD canal on the south side of 26a` Street will be extended to provide for 40 feet of clearance between the face of curb and the end of the pipe. The following plan sheets will be modified: • Cover Sheet • Quantities and General Notes • Construction Plans • Cross Sections • Signing and Pavement Marking Plans The work included in Amendment No. 8 is in accordance with the existing AGREEMENT dated November 6, 2005 between ARCADIS US, Inc. (ENGINEER) and Indian River County (COUNTY). "SECTION III — SCOPE OF SERVICES" is being modified to incorporate the fdllowing: 30% and 60%, and 90% plans have been submitted to the County. Engineer will prepare revised 90%, and 100% plans. The plan modifications will consist of the following: The Roadway set of plans shall consist of the following: Page 2 of 6 G:\LNR Support\Proposa1s\WPB\2017\SR 60 & 43rd Avenue\SR60 - 43RD AVE AMENDMENT 8 7-8-17.doe P65 30% 60% 90% 100% Cover Sheet X Typical Sections X Summary of Quantities and General Notes X Page 2 of 6 G:\LNR Support\Proposa1s\WPB\2017\SR 60 & 43rd Avenue\SR60 - 43RD AVE AMENDMENT 8 7-8-17.doe P65 Details X Plan and Profile Sheets (40 scale) X Cross Sections at 100 ft interval X Signage & Pavement Marking Plans (40 scale) X Intersection Plan & Details X Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plans (SWPPP) X Computation Book X Construction Cost Estimate and Quantities X "SECTION IV - TIME FOR COMPLETION" is being modified to incorporate the following: 1. Project shall be completed as follows: a. The time for completion of the 100% design drawings for the plan revisions requested by FDOT shall be one (1) month from the date of execution of this ADDENDUM. Utility coordination work will be as requested by the county and will be completed within six (6) months from the date of execution of this ADDENDUM. 2. Deliverables -The ENGINEER shall provide the COUNTY: a. Three (3) 11" x 17" paper signed and sealed of the 100% plans. Also, a pdf format set of the plans on a cd. b. FINAL five (5) 24" x 36" paper signed and sealed "hardcopy", AutoCad drawing file and PDF formats on CD. c. Work Product shall be prepared and supplied in State Plane geometry (NAD83 2007 adjustment if applicable); digital versions are to be prepared and submitted so that the COUNTY or other consultants can readily use it for the design and analysis of the area, as defined. It shall contain all information necessary for third party surveyor to independently recreate and/or utilize the survey work. It is acknowledged all final products become property of Indian River COUNTY and will be available for use by the public at large. "SECTION V — COMPENSATION" is being modified to incorporate the following: The COUNTY agrees to pay and the ENGINEER or agrees to accept for services rendered pursuant to this Agreement fees in accordance with the following: A. Professional Services Fee 1. The basic compensation mutually agreed upon by the ENGINEER and the COUNTY follows: Page 3 of 6 Q:\LNR Support\Proposa1s\WPB\2017\SR 60 & 43rd Avenue\SR60 - 43RD AVE AMENDMENT 8 7-8-17.doc P66 The following is a summary of costs. Charge Associated with New Total This Amendment Compensation Roadway Design Geotechnical Services (Tierra)...NNN.....N.N....1..... ........ .......... .... $0.00 $35,487.50 Engineering NNNN.......N........... ........ ..... N N ...... .....N ....... ....... $29,500.00 $342,297.03 (ARCADIS) Signal PlansN......NNN...........N...NN........NN....................o................. $0.00 $31,48&41 (SIMMONS & WHITE Inc.) Stormwater Pollution Prevention plans ....... ........ .... N . ................. $0.00 $9,02292 (ARCADIS) (/j� Perms{iing.N....N.NNNNN.N.N...N.NN.N..............NN....NNN.N.N.NN......N. $w00 $33,090 .00 (ARCADIS) surveying Design Survey..N..NNN...NN......N.N........... ...... ..... ....... ....... NN $1,313.20 $65,003-60 (ARCADIS) Right of Way Survey and Map ......................................................... $0.00 $20,38640 (ARCADIS) Structural Design Structural Design for SR 60 over Main Relief Canal bridge ............................... ...................N............. $0.00 $76,060.00 (Bridge Design Associates, Inc.) Structural Design for 431 Avenue over Main Relief Canal bridge.NN......N..N.N.N....................................... $0.00 $67,604.00 (Bridge Design Associates, Ina) Page 4 of 6 GALNR SupportiProposa1s\WPB124171SR 60 & 43rd AvenuelSR60 - 43RD AVE AMENDMENT 8 7-8-17.doc 1 P67 Landscape & Lighting Plans Landscape Architectural Services.................................................$0.00 $31,486.00 (Roy Fisher Associates, Inc.) LightingPlans................................................................................$0.00 $39,835.00 (Techno Engineering) Public Involvement Public Workshop Meeting.............................................................$0.00 $6,180.00 Contamination Screening Evaluation Report..........................................$0.00 $9, 750.00 Conceptual Commercial Area Improvement Plan .................................. $0.00 $11,700.00 TOTAL LUMP SUMFEE................................................................$30,813.20 $779,390.86 ALLOWANCES Sketch and Legal Descriptions......................................»..............$0.00 $50,000.00 (ARCADIS) Soft Digfor Utility Locations ........................................................$0.00 $20,000.00 Appraisal........................................................................................$0.00 $121,500.00 (Callaway & Price) (For 27parcels) LandPlanner.................................................................................$0.00 $20,000.00 (Moyle, Flanigan, Katz, Raymond & Sheehan) (Hourly not to exceed at $175.001hour) Market Analysis .............................................................................$0.00 $20,000.00 (Realmark Research) (Hourly not to exceed at $110.001hour) Eminent Domain Business Damage Assessment .........................$0.00 $40,000.00 (Gerson, Preston,Robinson & Company)(Hourly not to exceed at $165. 001hourfor Principa4 $125. 001hourfor Manager, and $90. 001hourfor Staff Cure Plans...................................................................................... $0.00 $56,000.00 (ARCADIS) (Allowance for 14 parcels at $4,000.00 per parcel Page 5 of 6 G:VM SupportTroposa1s\WPB\2017\SR 60 & 43rd Avenue\SR60 - 43RD AVE AMENDMENT 8 7-8-17.doc P68 Landscape plans for Cure Plans...................................................$0.00 $16,800.00 (Roy -Fisher) (Allowance for 14 parcels @ $1,200.00 per parcel) BoundarySurveying......................................................................$0.00 $10,000.00 TOTAL ALLOWANCES (Hourly Not To Exceed) ..................................... $0.00 $354,300.00 The AGREEMENT is hereby amended as specifically set forth here in. All other sections of the AGREEMENT shall remain in full force and effect and are incorporated herein. This Amendment No. 8 to the AGREEMENT regardless of where executed, shall be governed by and constructed by the laws of the State of Florida. In witness whereof the parties have executed this Amendment this day of 2017. ARCADIS INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA 1500 Gate a e ard, Suite 200 Boynton ach, FL. 41 By: By: P.E. WITNESSED BY: County Attorney Approved as to Form and Legal Sufficiency ja..son E, &10,wq County Administrator Board of County Commissioners Approved by BCC Attest: Jeffrey R. Smith, Clerk of Circuit Court Deputy Clerk Page 6 of 6 G:\LNR Support\Proposa1s\VWPB\2017\SR 60 & 43rd Avenue\SR60 - 43RD AVE AMENDMENT 8 7-7-17.doc P69 SR 60E43RDAVE Amwdmwd87.8-17 As O ESTIMATE OF WORK EFFORT FOR ENGINEERING SR -60 & 43RD AVENUE Amendment 8 Tw l r.-" SURVEY 3 MAN RELD CREW MAN HOURLY -HOURS I HATE PROF. SURVEYOR MAN ItW SURVEY CAD TECH MAN HOURLY HOURS I___XATff_ ACTIVITY TOTAL MAN HOURS SURVEY 10.01s 112.00 I.Ols 75.60 2.0 58.80 13.0 PROJECT MANAGER MAN HOURLY HOURS RATE PROJECT ENGINEER MAN HOURLY HOURS RATE SR. CADD OPERATOR MAN HOURLY HOURS RATE ACTIVITY TOTAL MAN HOURS ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS $ 140.00 115.00 75.00 75.00 18,520.00 DRAINAGE DESIGN 8 ANALYSIS 30 320 4,040.00 101.00 MENT MARKING PLANS 1.0 75DO ROADWAY PLANS 94.0 S 140.00 45.0 S 115.00 94.0 75.00 233.0 SIGNALI7ATION PLANS 140.00 115.00 75.00 PERMITTING 16.0 1 S 140.00 - 115.00 24.0 75.00 40.0 MARKING PLANS - 140.00 115.00 1.0 75.00 1.0 TOTALS 120A I 1 121.0 287.0 Tw l r.-" SURVEY $ 1,120.00 75.60 117.60 - - 1,313.20 ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS - $ $ $ ROADWAY PLANS 13160.00 5175.00 111 7,050.00 25 386.00 SIGNALVATION PLANS #DIWOI ROADWAY PLANS PERMITTING 2240.00 1 800.00 4,040.00 MARKING P 75.00 75.00 TOTALSLANS 18,520.00 6260.60 8,042.60 30 320 Ampmgo pw hooi BY ACTIVITY COSTFOR ACTIVITY HOURLY RATE SURVEY 13.0 $ 131320 101.02 DRAINAGE ANALYSIS $ #DIWOI ROADWAY PLANS 233.0 $ 25 385.00 108.95 UTILITIES $ #DIVIOI PERMITTING 40.0,-$ 4,040.00 101.00 MENT MARKING PLANS 1.0 75DO 7&00 TOTALS 287.0 $ 30.81320 $10.7-M Ampmgo pw hooi SR 60143rd Avenue Amendment a HIGHWAY TASK LIST ACTIVITY: A. ROADWAY PLANS PACKAGE SUBAC71VITY: I - SURVEY HIGHWAY PAGE l OF TASK BASIS OF ESTIMATE NO. OF UNITS HOURS/UNIT NO. OF SHEETS TOTAL HOURS FIELD CREW PROJECT SURVEYOR SFLCADDI REMARKS 1. Survey Control HR 1 2 2 2.0 2. Location Survey HR 1 9 9 8.0 1.0 Pat orAnnell Plaza and canal 3. Elevation Survey HR 1 0 4. Drawings HR 1 2 2 2.0 5. (WOC HR 1 0 6. Final HR 1 0 7. 0 8. 0 9. 0 10. 0 SUBTOTAL THIS SHEET =13 10 1 2 SR 60 & 43RD AVE Amendment 8 7-8-17 As SR 60/43rd Avenue Amendment 8 HIGHWAY TASK LIST ACTIVITY: A. ROADWAY PLANS PACKAGE HIGHWAY PAGE 2 OF A SUBACTIVITY: I- ROADWAY PLANS TASK BASIS OF ESTIMATE NO. OF UNITS HOURS/UNIT NO. OF SHEETS TOTAL HOURS PROJECT MANAGER PROJECT ENGINEER SR. CADD REMARKS 1. Key Map Sheet 0 2. Typical Section & Notes Sheet 0 3, Summary of Quantities Each 1 8 1 8 2.0 2.0 4.0 4. Plan Sheets Sheet 15 6 15 90 21.0 24.0 45.0 5. Intetsecdon Plateau Details Each 0 6. Storrs Water Pollution Prevention Plans Sheet 0 7. Profile Sheets Sheet 0 8. Drainage Revisions Sheet 4 4 16 4.0 4.0 8.0 9. QA/QC LS 1 9.5 9.5 9.5 10. Cross -Sections EA 78 0.75 21 58.5 14.5 16.0 29.0 11. Drainage Maps Ea. 3 2 8 1.0 5.0 12. Summary of Drainage Structures Sheet 6 1 5 5 2.0 3.0 13 FOOT Coordination LS 1 40 40 40.0 SUBTOTAL THIS SHEET 1 1 233 94.0 45.0 94.0 SR 60 8 43RD AVE Amendment 8 7-8-17 .)ds 4 N SR 60/43rd Avenue Amendment 8 HIGHWAY TASK LIST ACTIVITY. A. ROADWAY PLANS PACKAGE HIGHWAY PAGE 3 OF 4 SUBACTPAW: 5 - ENV. SERVICES I PERMITS TASK BASIS OF ESTIMATE NO. OF UNITS HOURS/UNIT NO. OF SHEETS TOTAL HOURS PROJECT MANAGER PROJECT ENGINEER SR. CADD REMARKS 1. Preliminary Field Review L.S. 0 2. Agency Coordination Pre App Me L.S. 0 3. Establish Wetland Jurisdictional Unas LS. 0 4. Agency Field Review L.S. 0 Prepare Welland Resouce ! Dredge & Fill Permit 5. licatlon LS. 0 6. Modify SJRWMD Permit LS. 0 7. Address FDOT ERC Comments LS. 0 8. FDOT coordination LS. 0 9. Utilitycoordination L.S. 1 40 40 16.0 24.0 10. Health Department L.S. 0 11 Mitigation Coordination and Mee s L.S. 0 SUBTOTAL. THIS SHEET 40 16 0 24 SR 60 8 43RD AVE Amendment 87-8-17 ift .D V- — — -- ---- ----- - -- _..... - - -- -- — - - - -- - — -- -- -- — SR 60 43rd Avenue Amendment 7 HIGHWAY TASK LIST ACTIVITY: B. SIGNING & PAVEMENT MARKINGS SUBACTMTY: NONE HIGHWAY PAGE 4 OF 4 TASK BASIS OF ESTIMATE NO. OF UNITS HOURSAJNIT NO. OF SHEETS TOTAL HOURS PROJECT MANAGER PROJECT ENGINEER SR CADD REMARKS 1. Key Sheet Sheet 0 2. General Notes Sheet 0 3. Tabulation of Quanbtles Sheet 1 1 0 4. Plan Sheets Sheet 1 1 1 8. Guide Sign Worksheet EA 0 6. Cross -Sections & Layout EA 0 7. S cial Marking Detalls EA p 8. Sign Details Sheet 0 8. Metal / Concrete Pole Details EA 0 10. Service Point Details EA 0 11. C.E.S. / Summary of Pay Items L.S. 0 12. Special Provisions L.S. p SUBTOTAL 1 O 0 1 SR 60 & 43RD AVE Amendment 8 741-17 As -D V A CONSENT INDIAN RIVER COUNTY MEMORANDUM TO: Jason Brown County Administrator FROM: Suzanne Boyll Human Resources Director DATE: July 12, 2017 SUBJECT: Approval of Blue Medicare Advantage Renewal N BACKGROUND: Under Florida Statute, retirees of the County are eligible to continue health insurance under the County's self-insured Group Medical Insurance Program. Beginning in 2008, retirees who attain age 65 are provided the option to enroll in the Blue Medicare Advantage Plan. The Board of County Commissioners approved the current Blue Medicare Group PPO 2 RX 1 plan at its August 16, 2016 meeting at a monthly premium of $365.54. This plan provided the lowest monthly premiums and increased out-of-pocket maximums (from $1,000/$2,000 to $2,000/$4,000) and increased copays (currently ranging from $10 to $150 increasing to $20 to $250). Three retirees are insured under this plan. The County provides a health insurance subsidy of 54% for one retiree and 60% for two retirees totaling $7,632.48 per year. Staff received a renewal evaluation for the plan year beginning October 1, 2017, reflecting a slight decrease of 0.4% in the monthly premium from $365.54 to $363.97. Staff was also provided two additional renewal alternatives for consideration. See attached Alternative #1 and Alternative #2. Alternative #1 is a 10.6% decrease in premiums and includes a prescription deductible of $75 for brand drugs as well as increases pharmacy copays (from $10/$40/$70 to $15/$45/$85). Alternative #2 is an increase of 8.7%. This the plan that was in place prior to the current plan. This alternative has reduced out-of-pocket maximums (from $2,000 to $1,000) and reduced copays (currently ranging from $20 to $250 and reducing to $10 to $150). FINANCIAL IMPACT: A breakdown of the change in the annual subsidv for each renewal DroDosal is listed below: Option Monthly Premium Annual IRC Subsidy Increased Subsidy Amount Percent Current PPO 2 RX 1 $365.54 $7,632.48 n/a n/a Renewal PPO 2 RX 1 $363.97 $7,599.69 ($32.78) -0.4% Alternative 1 PPO 2 RX 2 $326.64 $6,826.51 ($805.97) -10.6% Alternative 2 PPO 1 RX 1 $397.46 $8,298.96 $666.49 8.7% P75 Although Alternative 1 is a reduction of 10.6% in premiums/subsidy, it would negatively impact retirees by increasing pharmacy costs substantially. Alternative 2 provides for increasing benefits to the level provided in 2014/2015; however, it also results in increased premiums/subsidy for both the retiree and the County. The renewal option for the current Blue Medicare PPO 2 RX 1 plan, maintains benefit levels and reduces premiums/subsidy slightly for both the retirees and the County. Therefore, staff recommends approval of the renewal of the current plan Blue Medicare PPO 2 RX 1 at a monthly premium of $363.97. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Board approve the renewal for the current Blue Medicare PPO 2 RX 1_ plan effective October 1, 2017 throujzh September 30, 2018 and authorize the Chair to P76 Indian River County Retiree Medicare Advantage Renewal Evaluation Effective Date: October 1, 2017 GEHMNG AGROUP INSURANCE S ROK ERS, - a CONSULTANTS Summary of Benefits CURRENT RENEWAL Plan Structure Florida Blue Medicare Advantage Florida Blue Medicare Advantage Blue Medicare Group PPO 2 RX 1 Blue Medicare Group PPO 2 RX 1 Network Name PPO 1 Out of Network PPO 1 Out of Network Lifetime Maximum Unlimited Unlimited Calendar Year Deductible (CYD) Individual No deductible $2,000 No deductible ! $2,000 Family N/A N/A N/A I N/A Annual Out -of -Pocket Maximum Individual $2,000 $4,000 $2,000 1 $4,000 Family N/A N/A N/A N/A Physician Services Primary Care Office Visit $35 / visit 40% after CYD $35 / visit i 40% after CYD Specialist Office Visit $50 / visit 40% after CYD $50 / visit 40% after CYD Chiropractic Services $20 / visit 40% after CYD $20 / visit { 40% after CYD Preventive Services No charge 40% Coinsurance No charge 40% Coinsurance Lab &Radiology Services _ Diagnostic Tests & X -Rays (I ETF) $100 / visit 4090 after CYD $100 /visit 40% after CYD Advanced Imaging (IDTF) $175 / visit 40% after CYD $175 / visit 40% after CYD Lab Services (Independent) No charge i 40% after CYD No charge 40% after CYD Laboratory Provider Quest Diagnostics N/A Quest Diagnostics N/A Hospital Services $250/day to max of j $250/day to max of Inpatient 40% after CYD $1,750/admit $1,750/admit 40% after CYD Outpatient $250/visit 40% after CYD $250/visit 40% after CYD Physician Services at Facility No charge i No charge No charge f No charge Outpatient Advanced Imaging $250 / visit { 40% after CYD $250 / visit 40% after CYD Emergency Room $75 / visit j $75 / visit $75 / visit $75 /visit Urgent Care $50 / visit i $50 / visit $50 / visit $50 / visit Ambulance $150 / occurrence i $150 / occurrence $150 / occurrence j $150 / occurrence Outpatient Rehabilitation Facility Charge $40 40% after CYD $40 i 40% after CYD Annual Maximum Visits $1,940 Max - P,S / $1,940 Max - 0 $1,980 Max - P,S / $1,980 Max - 0 Services Included(') C, P, S, 0 C, P, S, 0 Durable Medical Equipment $0-20%/item 40% after CYD $0-20%/item { 40% after CYD Prescription Drugs Prescription ONLY Deductible No Deductible Not Covered No Deductible i Not Covered $0 to Catastrophic Preferred Generics $10 ($0 through Not covered $10 ($0 through i _ Not covered mail order) mail order) i Non -Preferred Generics $10 ($0 through Not covered $10 ($0 through Not covered mail order) mail order) Preferred Brand $40 Not covered $40 { Not covered Non -Preferred Brand $70 Not covered i $70 ! Not covered Specialty Drugs 25% Not covered 25% i Not covered Mail Order (90 day supply) 2x �T Not covered 2x Not covered Catastrophic 2016> = $4,85012017>=$4,950 2017> _ $4,950/2018>= $5,000 Generic Greater of 5% or Not covered Greater of 5% or Not covered $2.95 / $3.30 (Z) $3.30 / $3.35 Preferred Brand Greater of 5% or j Not covered Greater of 5% or i Not covered $7.40 / $8.25 $8.25 / $8.35(2) Non -Preferred Brand Greater of 5% or ( Not covered Greater of 5% or i Not covered $740 / $8.25 (z) $8.25 / $8.35 � Specialty Drugs Greater of 5% or Not coveredI Greater of 5% or { Not covered $7.40/ $8.25 $8.25 / $8.35(zi Monthly Premium Current Renewal Single $365.54 $363.97 Family N/A N/A % Change N/A -0.4% (1) C=Cardiac; P=Physical; S=Speech; O=Occupational (2) Minimum Cost sharing for 2018 displayed. P77 Indian River County Retiree Medicare Advantage Renewal Evaluation Effective Date: October 1, 2017 GEHRING -AGROUP INSURANCE E (1) C=Cardiac; P=Physical; S=Speech; O=Occupational (2) Minimum Cost sharing for 2018 displayed. P78 Summary of Benefits CURRENT ALTERNATIVE # 1 Plan Structure Florida Blue Medicare Advantage Florida Blue Medicare Advantage Blue Medicare Group PPO 2 RX 1 Blue Medicare Group PPO 2 RX 2 Network Name PPO I Out of Network PPO Out of Network Lifetime Maximum Unlimited Unlimited Calendar Year Deductible (CYD) Individual No deductible I $2,000 No deductible ! $2,000 Family N/A N/A N/A N/A Annual Out -of -Pocket Maximum Individual $2,000 $4,000 $2,000 $4,000 Family N/A N/A N/A N/A Physician Services Primary Care Office Visit $35 / visit 40% after CYD $35 / visit 40% after CYD Specialist Office Visit $50 / visit 40% after CYD $50 / visit 1 40% after CYD Chiropractic Services p $20 /visit 40% after CYD $20 /visit ? 40% after CYD Preventive Services No charge 40% Coinsurance No charge 40% Coinsurance Lab & Radiology Services Diagnostic Tests & X -Rays (IDTF) $100 / visit 40% after CYD $100/visit 40% after CYD Advanced Imaging (IDTF) $175 / visit 40% after CYD $175 / visit 40% after CYD Lab Services (Independent) No charge 40% after CYD No charge 40% after CYD Laboratory Provider Quest Diagnostics N/A Quest Diagnostics I N/A Hospital Services $250/day to max of40% j! $250/day to max of Inpatient $1,750/admit after CYD i $1,750/admit 40% after CYD Outpatient $250/visit II 40% after CYD $250/visit j 40% after CYD Physician Services at Facility No charge No charge No charge jl No charge Outpatient Advanced Imaging $250 / visit ! 40% after CYD $250 / visit ! 40% after CYD Emergency Room $75 / visit j $75 / visit $75 / visit $75 / visit Urgent Care $50 / visit ii $50 / visit $50 / visit $50 / visit Ambulance $150 / occurrence $150 / occurrence $150 / occurrence $150 / occurrence Outpatient Rehabilitation Facility Charge $40 40% after CYD _ $40 4090 after CYD Annual Maximum Visits $1,940 Max - P,S / $1,940 Max - 0 $1,980 Max - P,S / $1,980 Max - O Services Included(') C, P, S, 0 C, P, S, 0 Durable Medical Equipment $0-20%/item ! 40% after CYD $0-20%/item 40% after CYD Prescription Drugs Prescription ONLY Deductible No Deductible Not Covered $75 (Brand Drugs Only) Not Covered $0 to Catastrophic �T!� _ Preferred Generics $10 ($0 through ! ! Not covered $15 ($8 through Not covered mail order) mail order) ! Non -Preferred Generics $10 ($0 through i Not covered $1S ($8 through ; Not covered mail order) j mail order) I Preferred Brand $40 Not covered $45 ! Not covered Non -Preferred Brand $70 Not covered $85 Not covered Specialty Drugs 25% Not covered 25% Not covered Mail Order (90 day supply) 2x _ _ Not covered 3x ! Not covered Catastrophic 2016> =$4,85012017>=A950 2017> = $4,95012018>= $5,000 Greater of 5% or Greater of 5% or ! Generic $2.95 / $3.30 Not covered $3.30/$3.3 5(z) Not covered Preferred Brand Greater of 5% or Not covered Greater of 5% or i Not covered $7.40 / $8.25 $8.25/$8.3 5 (Z) Non -Preferred Brand Greater of 5% or Not covered Greater of 5% or ! Not covered $7.40/ $8.25 $8.25 / $8.35(z) Specialty Drugs Greater of 5% or Not covered Greater of 5% or ! Not covered $7.40 / $8.25 $8.25 / $8.35 t2) Monthly Premium Current Alternative #1 Single $365.54 $326.64 Family N/A N/A 9'o Change N/A -10.6% (1) C=Cardiac; P=Physical; S=Speech; O=Occupational (2) Minimum Cost sharing for 2018 displayed. P78 Indian River County Retiree Medicare Advantage Renewal Evaluation Effective Date: October 1, 2017 GEHRING AGROUP INS A AN CE R'RO RERSI❑ i CONSULTANTS (1) C=Cardiac; P=Physical; S=Speech; O=Occupational (2) Minimum Cost sharing for 2018 displayed. P79 Summary of Benefits CURRENT ALTERNATIVE # 2 Plan Structure Florida Blue Medicare Advantage Florida Blue Medicare Advantage Blue Medicare Group PPO 2 RX 1 Blue Medicare Group PPO 1 RX 1 Network Name PPO Out of Network PPO I Out of Network Lifetime Maximum Unlimited Unlimited Calendar Year Deductible (CYD) Individual No deductible $2,000 No deductible ) $1,000 Family N/A N/A N/A N/A Annual Out -of -Pocket Maximum Individual $2,000 $4,000$11 000 $3,000 Family N/A I N/A N/A N/A Physician Services Primary Care Office Visit $35 / visit 40% after CYD $10 / visit 20% after CYD Specialist Office Visit $50 / visit 40% after CYD $30 / visit 20% after CYD Chiropractic Services $20 / visit i 40% after CYD $20 / visit 20% after CYD Preventive Services No charge 40% Coinsurance_ No charge 20% Coinsurance Lab & Radiology Services Diagnostic Tests & X -Rays (IDTF) $100 / visit 40% after CYD $50 / visit 20% after CYD Advanced Imaging (IDTF) $175 / visit i 401Y. after CYD $125 / visit { 20% after CYD Lab Services (Independent) No charge 40% after CYD No charge i 20%after CYD Laboratory Provider Quest Diagnostics N/A Quest Diagnostics i N/A Hospital Services 4' $250/day to max of i $150/day to max of y Inpatient $1,750/admit 40% after CYD $1,050/admit 20% after CYD` Outpatient $250/visit 40% after CYD $150/visit 2095 after CYD Physician Services at Facility No charge j No charge No charge No charge Outpatient Advanced Imaging $250 / visit I 40% after CYD $150 / visit 20% after CYD Emergency Room $75 / visit $75 / visit $75 / visit $75 /visit Urgent Care $50 / visit $50 / visit $30 / visit $30 / visit Ambulance $150/occurrence i $150/occurrence $150/occurrence $150/occurrence Outpatient Rehabilitation Facility Charge _ $40 �! 40% after CYD $30 20% after CYD Annual Maximum Visits $1,940 Max - P,S / $1,940 Max - O $1,980 Max - P,S / $1,980 Max - 0 Services Included(') C, P, S, 0 C, P, S, 0 Durable Medical Equipment $0-20%/item i 40% after CYD $0-20%/item i 2091a after CYD Prescription Drugs Prescription ONLY.Deductible No Deductible Not Covered Deductible Not Covered l� $0 to Catastrophic T �No Preferred Generics $10 ($0 through Not covered $10 ($0 through � Not covered mail order) mail order) Non -Preferred Generics $30 ($0 through Not covered $10 ($0 through Not covered mail order) mail order) Preferred Brand $40 Not covered $40 Not covered Non -Preferred Brand $70 Not covered $70 Not covered Specialty Drugs 25% Not covered 25% Not covered Mail Order (90 day supply) 2x Not covered _ 2x 2017>=$4,950/2018>= Not covered $5,000 Catastrophic —h 2016>= $4,850/2017>=$4,950 Generic Greater of 5% or I j Not covered Greater of 5% or Not covered $2.95 / $3.30 $3.30 / $3.35(2) ! Preferred Brand Greater of 5% or Not covered Greater of 5% or ! ' Not covered $7.40 / $8.25 I (2) $8.25 / $8.35 ; Non -Preferred Brand Greater of 5% or Not covered Greater of 5% or Not covered $7.40/ $8.25 $8.25 / $8.35 (2) Specialty Drugs Greater of 5% or i Not covered Greater of 5% or Not covered $7.40 / $8.25 � $8.25 /$8.35(2) Monthly Premium Current Alternative #2 Single $365.54 $397.46 Family N/A N/A % Change N/A 8,7% (1) C=Cardiac; P=Physical; S=Speech; O=Occupational (2) Minimum Cost sharing for 2018 displayed. P79 n INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA MEMORANDUM TO: Jason E. Brown; County Administrator THROUGH: Stan Boling, AICP; Community Development Director FROM: Ryan Sweeney; Senior Planner, Current Development DATE: July 10, 2017 SUBJECT: GHO Segovia Lakes Corp's Request to Replat the Segovia Lakes Planned Development (PD) to be known as Segovia Lakes PD Replat [PD -16-10-06 / 2003090165-78588] It is requested that the data herein presented be given formal consideration by the Board of County Commissioners at its regular meeting of July 18, 2017. DESCRIPTION & CONDITIONS: The Segovia Lakes PD Replat is an overall replat of the existing 82 -lot single-family planned development located at the southwest corner of 58th Avenue and the Main Relief Canal (see attachment 2). The subject site is zoned PD, Planned Development and has a T, Transitional Residential (up to 3 units/acre for Planned Development Projects) land use designation. The overall density for the subject project is 2.66 units per acre. The Segovia Lakes PD project obtained PD rezoning and concurrent conceptual/preliminary PD plan/plat approval by the Board of County Commissioners (BCC) on April 20, 2004. Subsequently, all project infrastructure improvements (i.e. roads, utilities, drainage systems) were constructed, the project obtained a Certificate of Completion on September 9, 2010, and final plat approval was granted on August 16, 2011. No homes have been constructed within the limits of the project, and all 82 lots are currently vacant. On October 13, 2016 the current owner/developer obtained approval of a PD modification to reduce the front and rear setbacks for all interior lots (Lots 31-52 and 63-82), to reduce the right-of-way (ROW) diameter for an internal cul-de-sac, and to make minor lot line adjustments on 16 lots. The subject replat will finalize and record the reduction in ROW diameter for the internal cul- de-sac and the minor lot line adjustments to 16 lots; all other lots will remain in their previously platted configurations. The applicant has submitted a final plat (replat) in conformance with the approved (modified) preliminary PD plan/plat and now requests that the BCC grant final plat approval for the Segovia Lakes PD Replat. The Board is now to consider granting final plat approval for the Segovia Lakes PD Replat. ANALYSIS: All of the required site improvements for the existing Segovia Lakes PD project were completed and inspected, and a Certificate of Completion for the overall subdivision improvements was issued on C:\Users\GRANIC-1\AppData\Local\Temp\BCL Technologies\easyPDF 7\@BCL@AC056B5D\@BCL@AC056B5D.docx P80 September 9, 2010. The project received final plat approval on August 16, 2011. This replat required the minor relocation of several utility service connections, and those service relocations have been completed in the field. However, as of the date of this report, the utility relocations have not been certified by the project engineer of record, and the project has not obtained final approval from the County Department of Utility Services. It is anticipated that the project engineer of record will certify the utility relocations and obtain final approval from the County Department of Utility Services between the date of this report and the July 18, 2017 BCC meeting. However, if those items are not completed before the July 18, 2017 BCC meeting, then this item will be pulled from the BCC agenda. All reviewing departments, including the County Attorney's Office, have signed -off on the replat. RECOMMENDATION: Based on the above analysis, staff recommends that the Board of County Commissioners grant final plat approval for Segovia Lakes PD Replat. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Application 2. Location Map 3. Plat Layout C:\Users\GRANIC-1 WppData\Local\Temp\BCL Technologies\easyPDF 7\@BCL@AC056B5D\@BCL@AC056B5D.docx P81 INDIAN RIVER COUNTY PLANNED DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION ��@� p.=. �s• -' Please indicate the type of application being submitted: Conceptual PD Special Exception: Concurrent Conceptual PD Special Exception & Preliminary PD: Biu Preliminary Planned Development: Final Planned Development: Note: For a PD rezoning also include the appropriate rezoning application. PROJECT NAME: Segovia Lakes PD Plan Number: PD- 16-10-06 Project #: 2003090165 PROPERTY OWNER: (PLEASE PRINT) GHO Segovia Lakes Corp NAME 590 NW Mercantile Place ADDRESS Port St. Lucie, FL 34986 CITY, STATE, ZIP (561)688-2020 PHONE NUMBER billh@ghohomes.com EMAIL ADDRESS William N. Handler, President CONTACT PERSON PROJECT ENGINEER: (PLEASE PRINT) Schulke, Bittle & Stoddard, LLC NAME 1717 Indian River Blvd, Suite 201 ADDRESS Vero Beach, FL 32960 CITY, STATE, ZIP 772-770-9622 PHONE NUMBER jschulke@sbsengineers.com EMAIL ADDRESS oseph W. Schulke, P.E. CONTACT PERSON FACoavnunity APPLICANT (PLEASE PRINT) Same as Property Owner NAME ADDRESS CITY, STATE, ZIP P14ONE NUMBER EMAIL ADDRESS CONTACTPERSON AGENT (PLEASE PRINT) Same as Project Engineer NAME ADDRESS CITY, STATE, ZIP PHONE NUMBER EMAIL, ADDRESS PERSON r "Z-1� //,/ SIGNA ,?jF OWNER OR AGENT Revised�A riril 2016 Page 1 of 3 Attachmemt 1 P82 TAX PARCEL ID 4(s) OF SUBJECT PROPERTY: 33-39-05-00015-000.0-00000.2 1(as 5 5"6 -ON /iv,2 PROPERTY CLASSIFICATION(S): Land Use Desiguation Zoning District Acreaee T PD 30.8 30.8 TOTAL PROJECT ACREAGE: EXISTING SITE USE(S): Residential Planned Development PROPOSED SITE USE(S) AND INTENSITY (e.g. # of units, square feet by use): 82 lots, 2.66 units/acre This is a replat. The number.of lots has not changed, only minor changes to several lot lines- ** PLEASE COMPLETE THE SUBMITTAL CHECKLIST ** The following items must be attached to the application: NIA If the applicant is other than the owner(s), a sworn statement of authorization from the owner; Two deeds and a verified statement naming every individual having legal or equitable ownership in the property; if owned by a corporation, provide the names and address of each stockholder owning more than 10% of the value of outstanding corporation shares; V Two copies of the owner's recorded warranty deed; A check, money order or cash made payable to "Indian River County": Planned Development Request - Conceptual PD Special Exception less than 20 acres $ 2075.00 20-40 acres 2475.00 over 40 acres 2575.00 + 100.00 for each additional 25 acres over 40 acres Preliminary PD Plan less than 20 acres $ 1150.00 20-40 acres 1250.00 over 40 acres 1300.00 + 50.00 for each additional 25 acres over 40 acres Final PD Plans 1400.0 For concurrent applications: combine the appropriate fees and subtract $400.00. JTen sets of complete Conceptual, Preliminary or Final PD (final plat plans must be signed and sealed by surveyor). Plans as per Chapter 915, pursuant to the type of approval being requested. Any requirements of the zoning or subdivision ordinance which the applicant is requesting to be waived (such as minimum lot width and size, street frontage requirements, setbacks, etc.), .shall be .clearly indicated by section and paragraph numbers, together with the rationale for the waiver request(s), on an attached sheet. P:\Community DcvelopmcnAAPPL1CATI0NS\CurDev applications\PDAPP,doc Revised April 2016 Page 2 of 3 Attachmemt 1 P83 Y 2 Aerials for conceptual or preliminary PDs N/A Itemized response to pre -application for conceptual or concurrent applications V! 2 sealed surveys N/A 3 sets of floor plans and elevation for commercial or multi -family buildings ~ Written Statement and Photograph of Posted Sign For Final Plat's only V_ Letter from developer providing timeline for achieving the 75% completion threshold for the See cover letter overall subdivision improvement ONE OF THE FOLLOWING SETS OF REQUIRED IMPROVEMENT DOCUMENTS: CONSTRUCTION COMPLETE - BUILT OUT: 11 Certificate of Completion from Public Works or copy of letter to Public Works and Utilities On file requiring inspection of improvements. IF IMPROVEMENTS ARE DEDICATED TO THE PUBLIC: Original Engineer's Certified Cost Estimate for Improvements (signed and sealed) Failure to provide information on which option is being selected may result in a delay in processing the application. =ORS -- CONSTRUCTION INCOMPLETE - BOND OUT: Original Engineer's Certified Cost Estimate for Improvements (signed and sealed; note items to be completed or percent completed at 75% threshold for overall subdivision). Statement that improvements are nearing completion and a certificate of completion will be See cover letter obtain prior to final plat approval Copies of Documents to be recorded with the final plat: a. Covenants, Deed Restrictions, Bylaws, etc, or Statement On file There Are None b. Property Owner's Association Articles of Incorporation or On file statement indicating why recording of POA is NOT required. FACommunity Development\APPLICATIONS\CurDev applications\PDAPP.doc Revised April 2016 Page 3 of 3 Attachmemt 1 P84 A-1 00 RM -6 :00ocoa[ 90 001.0 333940033 10 0000002 7-COLLEGECN- UAXSERG20J PD CG CG G RM -6 c;l G RS -2 JS RS -2 Q A-1 W-laoLl—vo I CC A-1 jilrTACHMENT ABBREVIATIONS: ABBREVIATIONS, CONTINUED: A - CENTRAL AN OF CURVE UE - UT UTY EASEMENT R. - RADIUS OF CURVE DE - DRA9AGE EASEMENT L - LENGTH OF CURVE CH. - CHORD OF CURVE, DIRECTOR AND LENGTH MONUMENT LEGEND R/W - RIGHT -Ci -WAY MONUMENTS ARE WHAT ARE DESCRIBED BELOW CL - CENTERUNE UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED SEC- SECTION P.B. - PLAT BOOK OSET PERMANENT REFERENCE MONUMENT (PRN) 4'X4' CONCRETE MONUMENT WITH BRASS DISK OA. -OVERALL STAMPED 'PRM IB#69O5' PRM - PERMANENT REFERENCE MONUMENT IDFOUND PERMANENT REFERENCE MONUMENT (PRN) PCP -PERMANENT CONTROL POINT P.R.I.R.C.F. - PUBLIC RECORDS INDIAN RIVER 1'%4' CONCRETE MONUMENT WITH BRASS DISK STAMPED 'PRM WBZ-LB#6&0' I R F.W.C.D. - INDIAN RIVER FARMS WATER ° PERMANENT CONTROL PONT (PCP) CDNTROL DISTRICT PA NAIL d DISK STAMPED 'PRN-WWZ-LB#6B40' (R) - RADIAL O EXSRNG PARCEL CORNER (NR) - NOT RAMAL 5/8' IRON ROD d CAP - 'WBZ-18#6640' (M) - MEASURED LPI - PLATTED *PROPOSED PARCEL CORNER MARKER 5/8' IRON ROD d CAP - 'LB#6905' SEGOVIA LAKES P.D. REPLAT ES P D. RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 28, PAGE 18, PUBLIC RECORDS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, AST 1/4 OF SECTION 5, TOWNSHIP 33 SOUTH, RANGE 39 EAST, LYING SOUTH OF THE MAIN CANAL P[AT BOOK EAST 1/4 OF SECTION 8, TOWNSHIP 33 SOUTH, RANGE 39 EAST, INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA SHEET INDEX NOT TO SCALE PAGE / DOCKET NO. SHEET 2 (THIS SHEET) MATCH HE I j P1.00Ol A Il �lOAF' / FD 5/8' IRC •PLSi3435- t FE \- SHEET 3 /X71531 iI FD A. HAIL i"IADARK STAMPED - - 'PRM' ELEV-2166' NAVD 1908 eaF``N vj 0.t G ad" / s. j -is� _=z SNYPA7Y AI 55019- N i - LB IS.T7 �r9.I 25 00 N R g a U B.15Ltl " fMM lOWE� � 1.50 59 � a.7s1BY0' NJDY72t I>W $ I � � S ,P1712 .r L=//.Gi e3 O LINE TABLE N5971'JS GN7NG)j7 �`i1� y^� IS d.67/Y ' /14�g 0 a 7-Aa2 "^I,til wsw 8 W W 8 8E K69T - 159. d.13�L'/ IF II I V u $ LLIE LENGTH BEARING / S L=/73B 1 JY LI3429, 118954'31"E� ONE NE'1F �00% / B-l7RLW 51. N6g f./1 p g I a 3 L2 J1.s5 14756 $ a{JT / d=s3J2Sj y /17300 8 I I zW 8 L3 16.7 568'1851 W ® ® 17, Fl COLE A / �j�" `,`� d.2ptfSl• L4 71.7 N21-47 59 W riortn flf/� 1�11-�. / L=AEd /51 TRACT'D' R v BI 2 ISI a S I R GRAPHIC SCALE / d /'NR.ImMlY/ 15, MANAGEMENT .... ZIw I I ik I I I U SA91 A• A, 5'Low fAvmwf 5' d 55 Rw7dwdNBV136' O�1�j57. • p1fF JmRVI74 1730' SAT' N60j5K�pE / 85 / ,P+173 "� dYM' B0 M' /0 B=JJRLtl JB' lON �/ 53 L.9JI d=1!787^ / pSERALL _ fE0'JJ E x se 150 U lb 1 pLn JI _ /I-17NLtl I 34 g_ / 9 1.58 �� / M1� M Q. "" I NR Itl' I� /J Y B=ABOtl /6g. JY [ L' 655 _ E, 5' $ 30 d=/17Y.Ri' 2JR9' d=7#639' 9'Y1 � 8. Y5135r -�� W! 150' ,� S2/D777Y AEA" I I rn w n •. A'31710JTP iNdi D BI.Cd 0.1 C75 8- Tq'`E _ /Re755�j�• !• 1701' 'CAS /pj ,� 031 -77j m ISBN' rc J o x IO'UI@/ry I I ta� 79n J i 8. Cn / 9 5a1'y69 1.50 g �i1D00 I 87 � 78 7 09 z 20'0'RIWFER az LLo Li 65 . YB1/ 115 8P 51 OBB _ fAJZA4N! e=JCJI'tjt"7.50 L S 559 K661 SI 8T o M U • $ 2g $ /3'NAMIfNAN[t { 5°l y 15 0 p9 `ft°Y IJ 1 N#6 TRACT'A' a=/71ov 36'LY R/IFPCF OR p �Y j N R,- Rr 78/'...1 CA.S'LfN7 56659; 7o L°7 6659 '' 23. 51.65 fJ RECREATION I BLIYY IJJS PG Jlll U i r L9 0 I I I I. p•Y yjJ R•Y J{ 4p 8' -ALK d01 ➢o ww jAa Q Q ¢ m 5t $ $ TRACT 19 I°T 1000 9 I°% / 2i EASEHE F f7L lfM7B_&fO i 70'lP. 46 CASYLJfN7, a l0'Ura/n ,� R N V 66 L° 65� oR. eaW JOGS rc aF p H III STORMWATER 01/°Y5 1d 71 g{6,3^ 1- \ L /LIRE IB,i VC .[Y7J IL IN, EA,YYEN! 11 MANAGEMENT 1 R 10 0 R° 1- L=A710 �� Itl ri FJ 8 28 6I w 51M1'9 / 5°r 10 D 5g A• Tb9 a p,SE 554 g R=7IIA39 L vA FD P/K NAIL d DISK W -M- - ti L° 56 C6 p R IR > 15 72 Y �� LAB 7 57 e2 �L` b y(�- A 4 / /2 RLDIAN RIVER C0.7 W ^ $ U r O rc @ FQ n�R�. I o f`L=/701 55 - 9'i� ' �cE 6° 1.y5 5L o 50.00' WEST OF SECTION CORNE9 ¢ E'd$ g U Un I �1� 50 `R^, $ R=1IB01 L°5065y9 W t61 -I bi6?9. NlS:7lt 1A7J' & :' CCR�44I69 ' I N Ips $ d•!11'JY 1{i`7� L"1{Y SS �L� Y / (NOTE: NEW CCRO5707 FILED I = NMSAJ/t JAAS.'b3' ULL 1 / n .(R/° 1'IQ R• 39 - at V - 10/5/DS) ©$ C67 4'i� / Lit %5$9 e•I iRl SEGOVIA VARIES) A $ 27 r8-s-� . , 5JJ73T7'M 'R3. /q41 .Ij Bo2 ( , /o o w9'\�F' Sdf / R Dsl 41 '1 5�0j,05 � 0 #65 559 5 g 74 1�Y550 7B ($1 - [3q rE'y�. •�Sl��� TRACTIE O _. I O RECREATION CERRRED R F W.C.O CER 41 CORNER g I rK R+SLM 'C !• 1071' Tg1E _ ��,\� 'V,L, �A,1 I CORNER 085707 B -1-E CANAL W 9p044167 ' d=,5Jpyq,S• u I 78 1l 0A ,,, h (RJ N 1199153.132 It 28 i$I N 7676' L=7A/B .f�� \ ` • \ _ • 37� o N 119 161.90IT tv/A E 829950.90) R R SI.00' R=3lM / 10{.1 8 0 UR/7Y fASf9fN! - _ _ _ E 835325.0119 OO=yfp I ealm29' JY E T= uxstzza I aom PRM I uA\v\ sm�1a $ W (RJ I l0'BBJry NIP .0 SW CORNER OFSE de 8 & /�?4' fp 00 8 31 R81 1 fA.SEKN! 1 8 I 4'%4' CONCRETE MONUMENT WITH I1/4 OF SE 1/4 R �a %�M1/ tp��� - `g 41 z_a< ,. \ R 6 TRACT'm 41' I 5'(as7m AGt755 MACNAIL d BRASS DISK a m� ^�F=Si Ai •L h STORMWATER \' I Gq EASf4fN! STAMPED 'PRM -W92 -LB 6540' y W LL 25 '6N i m ,� R.31.00 MANAGEMENT 1Q70J_, 001 W. LINE OF NE 1/4 R IRI I v : �Po ,. \69� �' MA OF NE 1/4 SECTION 8 ^, _ ^=Bl•ldli ` VW M1 HOUSTON, SCHULKE, BOTTLE, 8 STODDARD, INC. IS. SHEE] _ Ig 4 �."J,'s'� J Iw Ff 47 \ \ le /e' Et ``I sal je MERIDIAN [•[•''��// ATC - $ ET 3 I ry +G \ \ \ L./3A.05 / / / PREPARED BV 11 1 /I\ 1717 UNDD AF'NN RIVER B9 LLVD. SOW. 201 / ORB A=/I6.Ol �PLt CHARLES H. L ND SU R., P. BY .Ul. "� G1 VERO PEACH, FL. 32W LB#6905 /�j, B / 'M� DATE OFRPRIEPARAT ON. JANUARY 2017 _ PHOMAIL: LB59D50177 BELLSO RI NETW6 0ft Attachment 3 OD rn SEGOVIA LAKES P.D. REPLAY PREPARE.-. CHARLES H.BUNCHARD, PSMa5]55 MERIDIAN LAND SURVEYORS IDK 5 A REPLAT OF SEGOVIA LAKES P D RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 26. PAGE 18, PUBLIC RECORDS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, DATE OF PREPARATION JANUARY 2017 PLAT BOOK FLORIDA, LYING IN THE SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF SECTION 5, TOWNSHIP 33 SOUTH, RANGE 39 EAST, LYING SOUTH OF THE MAIN CANAL AND ALSO LYING IN THE NORTHEAST 1/4 OF SECTION B, TOWNSHIP 33 SOUTH, RANGE 39 EAST, INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA. PAGE cl2aaelc scnLLL DOCKET NO. 31 MATCH NE - SEE SHEET 2 OF 3 _ JWOL Nom' 3 lTaW I I — MATCHLINE - SEE SHEET 2 OF 3- �° SEE 5H 3z RI I 2 ! i 17-1 1 1 I I I � 24 NMS IRI lD uan7 W I� EA¢Ww7 I� \ S'YAYUGMT R 3 KD I i TRACT' T 6( wLw O F: 2J �R "N 3 (-laW MANAGEMENT!M916.112 $-167 K I Q p N 1196&79.112 I FLODDZONE X ' L=176 M6 $$ /s'AL e aaESW E $ ONE AE -21' I I E 835218.376 I� w y e w g D d=mA7' 8- _-6•aTsrar /eW' c I �,wl < %7 d=N67f1• rA K r 5' LMILD ALYISS I I O > U I 5 181 �- l=Z/dO �1 Ier EUS 032v NE W Q F a -_ w e 22 w [=ul< tb�7 Mi G �a9an� 7r=.ia2W I a-.aW 1 /a'uE 'I� s^ I I i 3 I I N S CL M [=6lJ l(=.MSW 7//I' ROODZONE X 1a a=JNW d=1P1R1" d -N5/76• 1�/(/, \ r- = I (7 a f Pb N "�. L I /� $ r hnW S/ O Fw .^a ... 20• d=J75YA• !R/r � _ _ ROOD ONE AE -21' �"" L=.lSS d�67YJ/• >7 5a7' 36 \L5 35 \ cAF �i I I Q = I I Y U d=6' J/• 44 C.b— — 1.16- a=.TMW d=/1W Ni• m A39U5J6 /IaN c eb9• [-lr� /aW' ,[P`_-zmm \ \ 5 'o N 579xiI rc o' a o-nA9 7�. ]9 (=61.10 d=I e-11Y7as• \ rale• I I p �� a=R1W L• rc - d-/97a7s• d�$D� U o F �' d=x XW _.V.�� J 15 aE -"� a-/6aW 5 slb' 1893)A%TZ7. OHA G/ L .4=)7LW �p ';I I I I I e �C� �' 2L [.dA d J[B79• c59 SEGOVN CIR E(4O. AF'"R \ d-xDlia• •� z m Y ary / prSOJe R ,v !W W a (-57gp0 i *E 1a4 (!6 J 2737 •n7. A[[J \ 6 [=Jan oo Y d=zm5s' a•I6T ALL ('5811 W �fI _rsf = ' ' 2 \ saPrs7J7 d=1F 11 L -AIX _ 1 I (-Jvn a NvmW \ •@ az � a-nmW a ? d=11Wdi5' �, W76 UI 1919 d=/57671• a=laW d=111779• \ I ry 6 20 d-75711" `V' Ea lb R-tw1v WOE r C26 d=526'26• IT xIYYd• 7 I I /'6FdJ L_6 y9 [-l7Ta L-11. 10 8� �= 6 5� I I � m Rfiow L=27.57 d-J57LW" d•r6 d39� I L-JUV Id s' 121=la67 d -//P1:6 I 7.S0' lam' SW �� I LANDSCAPE BUFFER r dNp15' R --WW 17 7Sa' R°IAW [-Lr7 13 RdAW 75a (5� �h\'\� @RECREATION g a d-2vwl 5• L=z/.95 d-/ Y9• .R LZVX L- _ d=1WIWI6Id 71x7 7SLtl' 11.A' WEB, \� I lI7.SY N69 " I G _ ?(� 56S'5 !Rs W=NOW 18 � 1•� d�87r ,4=.NaW 7 — — — — O IGN,I L=2261 ; �I d=rI156' [=/2.97 I4 d=55YH• ,. 5 .UR ELOOOZORLL— I I 3 I n N-6aW 747 ♦. 4y .fL a4aW 6 I nt, atL i�D7M1� — H 1, d=x3YA' q A' -✓1p d na'J9• [=e91 0 474sxwtv[uRY FLODDZONE AE -2r Sm'� •G I I T/ w � O £A9tN971S771 ;ry�ao I a=JdDDYRAa•c ON /E XG-7.51— L71 J=ISD L29 LANDSCAPE BUFFER 6 RECREATION SW. COR,'FN. (01W.W(f UFFFER&W� �R �'V\ \ I I da W' I Fn NE 1/4 OF I1/2 OF UNDSCAPEBURECREATION /1 OF HE 1/4 OF SESECBON 6 AB95YAY l90!' TH 1H 1 N 1 t N CT B FLOODZONE AE -21' n S.W. COR. TRACT 1 (CALCULATED) r ABBREVIATIONS: ABBREVIATIONS, CONTINUED: A - CENTRAL AMBLE DF CARVE UE - UTMY EASEMENT R. - RADIUS OF CARVE BE - ORANAGE EASEMENT L - LENGTH OF CURVE CK - DOM O CURVE, DRCCTION AND LENGTH MONUMENT LEGEND R/W - RIGHT-OF-WAY MONUMENTS ARE WHAT ARE DESCRIBED BELOW CL - CEN"W" UNLESS OTHERWSE NOTED SEC - SEC110N BESET PERMANENT REFERENCE MONUMENT (PRY) P.B. - PUT BOOK 4•X4• CONCRETE MONUMENT WITH BRASS DISK O.A. - OVERALL STAMPED "PRM 1015905• PRIM- PERMANENT REFERENCE MONUMENT EBFOOND PERMANENT REFERENCE MONUMENT(PRM) PCP - PERMANENT CONTROL POINT M'XC CONCRETE MONUMENT WITH BRASS DISK P R.LR C F. - PUBLIC RECORDS OF MAN RIVER CWNTY FLORIDA STAMPED -PRM W7Z-LB16W I.R. F.W. C. D. - RATAN OVEN FARMS WATER ° PERMANENT CONTROL POINT (PCP) CONTROL NSTRICT P/K NAIL R DISK STAMPED "PRM-WBZ-LB#6810" (R) - RADIAL -EMSTNG PARCEL CORNER (NR) - NOT RADIAL NOT 5/8" NON ROD 6 CAP - •118Z-IB�6810• (M) - !PROPOSED PARCEL CORNER MARKER (P) - PLATTED 5/8" IRON ROD 6 WP - iB1690V v CD V 5�5 J4 !!TEES �58�1b'1 /SEW _ _ I r y Iwoo SE CORNER OF N 1 2 § o m OF NE 1/6 OF NE 1 4 FLOOOZONE AE -21' SECTII 6 -FLOODZONE X TRACT 1, INDIAN RIVER FARMS COMPANY SID .�S�IIII i PLAT BOOK 2, PG. 25, ST. LUCIE COUNTY PUBLIC RECORDS IS SE COR. TRACT 1 LAND SURVEYORS SU 1711 TNOIAN RIVER BL\D, SUITE 201 r ct' VERO BEACH, FL 12950 LBM WS Ql PHONE. 772.7941213, FAX' 772-]90.1096 En 13 EMAIL LRO050BELISOLHH.NET Attachment 3 � INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA MEMORANDUM TO: Jason E. Brown; County Administrator THROUGH: Stan Boling, AICP; Community Development Director FROM: John W. McCoy, AICP; Chief, Current Development DATE: July 12, 2017 SUBJECT: GHO Serenoa Corp's Request for Final Plat Approval for a Subdivision to be Known as Serenoa Phase 4 [98110046-77525/ SD -13-11-04]. It is requested that the data herein presented be given formal consideration by the Board of County Commissioners at its regular meeting of July 18, 2017. DESCRIPTION & CONDITIONS: The Serenoa Phase 4 subdivision represents the fourth of five phases of the Serenoa Subdivision. Phase 4 consists of 32 lots on 17.59 acres resulting in a density of 1.82 units/acre for Phase 4. Located on the north side of 5th Street SW, the overall Serenoa project is proposed to be developed in 5 phases and is zoned RS -6 (Residential Single -Family, up to 6 units / acre), and has an L-2 (Low Density 2, up to 6 units / acre) land use designation. The overall density for the Serenoa project is 2.27 units per acre. On December 12, 2013, the PZC (Planning & Zoning Commission) granted preliminary plat approval for the Serenoa Subdivision Phases 2 through 5. The applicant subsequently obtained a land development permit, commenced construction on the Phase 4 improvements, and obtained a certificate of completion for those improvements. Recently the applicant submitted a Phase 4 final plat in conformance with the approved preliminary plat and now requests that the Board of County Commissioners grant final plat approval for Serenoa Phase 4. The Board is now to consider granting final plat approval for Serenoa Phase 4. ANALYSIS: All of the required improvements for Serenoa Phase 4 have been completed and inspected, and a certificate of completion was issued on July 12, 2017. As part of the certificate of completion process, the developer posted a maintenance bond to guarantee required road and drainage improvements for a period of 1 year. In this case, all subdivision improvements (stormwater tracts, landscape easements, roadways) will be private, with the exception of certain utility facilities, which will be dedicated and guaranteed to Indian River County as required by the Utility Services Department. All requirements of final plat approval for Serenoa Phase 4 have been satisfied. C:\Users\GRANIC—I\AppData\Local\Temp\BCL Technologies\easyPDF 7\@BCL@B405D484\@BCL@B405D484.rtf P88 RECOMMENDATION: Based on the above analysis, staff recommends that the Board of County Commissioners grant final plat approval for Serenoa Phase 4. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Application 2. Location Map 3. Plat Layout C:\Users\GRANIC�I\AppData\Local\Temp\BCL Technologies\easyPDF 7\@BCL@B405D484\@BCL@B405D484.rtf P89 PROJ13Cr NAME P LAT (P IMP^) IV-#-- 71-71ONT Serena Phase 4 ldi A' V 1 -1 THISP gyr.- THIS 1"BE M FL"RbjAj/C 14r,11 AL I-TANI-78 OF UMPM IM (ZUCH AS "WOODY MG IMM 81121DIMOFIC). CORRESPONDING FMaMARY PLAT PR?,' CT NA EB AMD PLAN NUMBER P.WPEOLTYMM (.0UV PP -MI) GHO Serena Corp. 590 NW Mercantile Place ADDRESS Pon St. Lucie, Fl. 34986 &ff. SIAM 21P 561-868-2020 earl, 117 PRONE NUMBER bIIIhQghohoffw.corn ADDRESS 13 . 11 04 AGMUL Schulko, Me & Stoddard, LLC "Aa 1717 Indian River Blvd, Suite 201 ZD-RESS Vero Beach, FL 32960 cHy. STATE, 23P 772-770-9622 PMNENUMM jachulke@sbsenglnears.com ffwL4M ADD RESIS William N. Handier, President Joseph W. Schulke, P.E. CONTACT PERSON CONTACT PERSON OWNER ORAGENT p.,tciaCr IK-40MM, (PLEASE MVM Same as Agent NAME F5 a) 07) -74:77%0 PHONENUMMO) CONTACTFERSON 180127* Stzee% Vow Beach PL 52%0 HinesDW&*wd%0MXATKMTndXY M01wr MURYOM. (PLUSE W -JIM Meridian Land Surveyors, Inc, 1717 Indian River Blvd, Suite 201 ADDRESS Vero Beach, Fl. 32960 Cr1Y. STATE, ZIP 772-794-1213 PRONE NUM M(s) ria57556bellsouth.not -- EMAM ADDRESS , RwWd Arft 2016 of 3 ATT ACHally P90 Srrj9 PARCEL T.AA MR- 33392400000300000001.1 COUNTY IA14D DEVELOMMT PERM (LDP) #.._!8110046-72870 (Modfflcatk)n #2) DA6M LDP 1Ej"*UW: 8/8/16 (Modffmhon #2) . RS -6 L-2 TOTAL (CIOSS)ACM 17-59 TOTAL NIT&O MI, 01-17 LC,'Jo, - 32 17.59 A,F-RA OF D i3NEWP b-IINT 01 MI) Am' -21 WE LOLS: DENSI—ff (CT IPM -FER ACM.- 1.79 ICUR T -Z SUMAM'".810117 0WICILISr" ATOTI'!f: "141A" ifwuld Le matkod in'-!= "'M" colum ff"WcA Appilforible- MATERIAL j, Foo -$Ii,,,"iOO.00(c�j,-=.L-spayable tolud;.au Riva C* u-ty) V1 C 2. Com*W F Pm Appliceirm VI Form v, if -01 4. LAW of Audmbmtkm (if applicmd !o not ov=) 5, L4 0 W 2 OM &MIX 4XA' Xpy&i DA #X A&�-i 75% brediw!d fm f1m mmH mib&vision hopuvw=1 —', r -SOW -M t S. OMS CF MUIMED LAM MMY-N-1 DOCUMM; compuirm- mmur coxyr: (a) cordfiem of cotapieton fto Public V orb or owy of letter to Public Works and offi . MtL A-VID t' M*TQVT KID TO W.8 F M LTC. orww &,enoeea Cmtfied Cost Est1wato for hqrovements (Sip-ce AM= to proAde Infimunfim cwi which opOm is Wn selected may result in a delay w pvc,escing the Etplicadoz —OR --- 1,0012716 gave% Vero B" FL 32050 F,1()V113r4I8* -- U&a Apt 2016 2 of3 P91 Mr,"vc ..110111) cour: (a) OA&a! Engineer's Carew Cost R911mate fbr Impmvdnents (sipad and swl--,sato 1twu to be oompicted or Moot cmPided at 7S% fteshold for overall mMtvbiu- ). are gnd a (b) Stdmncmt did 11WOM8 , W4ntw�mgccm,plefloa wtfficate of omplelian wit ba abilk p.im W final Phd aPPmval Copies Of Do=nenft to IUD recorim Vft the final plet z. Covenants, I-)ccd Reattictiom Bylatirs, ate, or jSuwnLw. -Ihgn Aze Non* b. Pwpartir Owner's Amoclatimtides of Imorporation or stWzmat indicatingwhy irwrdiag, of PCA is NOT required. 13-312r Shut, Vac Becah FL 32960 F,.VAmLmfty DvvdqpmcvAAPPLWAT10N3kCuMw aMfiwdonA?hwMakwAudkmAw RMU April 2OL6 On File On File 3 *f3 AVACHNINT P92 9 JAMMUM 040=099099pow"m 4W.IrA" L T.Awft j; I DID&OMMM qKqAQAp : 9100000MIONOMM co CD CL ti6d "D CO C3" I /. SI RW PHASE 4 A RE -RAT K A "KIRIN K SEEM 24. WNOW D 1XIM WINE 39 CAST ACLDERR TO THE RAT K 9W RAE) FA6M (APANT 91101091011 AS RUED N MT e0R 1 PACE m PIAL RECORDS OF ST. 111Q"E O RreD MERIT, TUNICA NOT A PART OF THIS PLAT OmTWf o...m FUTURE PHASE 5 I - mrA weaw,N t.y leMOIM aura a wu.nll I PQ1NtiI OF TF.ACT7 : A 0, >4rN :ECT161 24-33-391NOIAN R'-tR FARMS CVVANY i zNar teaa .v x rayrla nrt'n'Nv >fGe PL'.T WX :, PA'E 25, PUFUC REWDS ST. LUGS I •rn ��..f rax •.. c•a• a�•rra�• ..: es rx +r aG arti a:. COUNTY, NOW INDIAN RUER COUNTY, FLOACA. P,:u t -r n•fa o-rn rffr� nr en It>re Rrnx r.lnx! wrr i rr. ar INS OD r_•,: nnrnw c•x m :ra la�w.;J Au• ax rtNx :^. •l Pim' N1:iS •JP mfiR - n< ss fvyr L'yINE MM Cb hf! EKE= Y'Qi.! as Cfr NO nf,s flltf• fN.11 •'J Nx WTIY AI%T191� a � GN N:T is is fr..'1r Cllmb! nr ea tyf M91fa :xT il.�p. uia 1DtxN fNINNe LTi% � I I Gtr :' •�' TW �®,I• tl :IIS fix _ Nx yr'�115N f�:=r-. �fc,. ti�,.sn..�.arac:aa-la*tay.sro�s.aaar:;rF'�±J->ma WWI llALO I MATCHJNE-B I in tO' LSKE MAMNE-B i f0':•':rn II i 4F W $ i MANTENANCE M= I i ! Iawr HAa'•I I 1 •.,•'I.'JrY I tNLt9 Lmww rmvmgaw i ' I_u.�r•[OIAE Iti &XIArMeu ARMsr.rESAW IRI /Foam � / IN zinww-MV �~ w� i I Ir I, ✓✓/ atJwxP.ern L•, a.�r fieeP+J rrA- LDT p I "`-Yot eNE,weDAe'1r 4ARCIJ _-_`___-�-_ alB19INa9bAe9 A.AWRI L01o" ��. I pL LOl ru [-EeR [OT 9! S LOIN LCV,. /7AW6 QEL6./Z•'H' •^ ''ti Leser o IX e1R.sfiY,Dt �4 L07dF �3}g z CR 1OA96E1EM 4/817 Ww" Yv urn y 1 .t±L.Q2 JesUyot, W, V9� 37.e•M'E.lN 8l:8M A Krt9 JID tA1AtEr SR lk No Dr— Nwlh GRAPENC SCALE 1 knh 11L � tSO 8 !: .ry.•Te7s• X71 3a L - RAM OFMIME �7Atl?r 14 ,.,� ��ffY AAf. RIO 1 I .. LOf.D LOVA LW .II LSA iy�e< CL - CERIUM SEC - 38mm P.M. -PIAT DOME 10719 .pRy 381 T WAM rsseo9 Ore/3 A.9rom 4eese SII 1 I LOTS CH -MAC Cr OINK, EBR111 'r`JeeACJ ea8eB,1g [ ?"' f LOT. PAIRGr - MIC mm 0 PJMAM Mom ODDITY IRMA ®ayfa PAlUF. - PUBUC ADMIN OF ST. I1DE rEpp 40 CM CHIN X rAN ll'r.ACp _ eUMR CV01 rAR6 N81lA CARNAL CairDISTINCT SEiQIDA PHASE 1 i 1 AAT WOK 2L PAPE IS T^-- ( �e, N ` • �n b i (MOT A PIPIT Q llq PLAT) Din - NOR RACIAL y 915; + 1 CM - CMIMt[IE IOIIIENR ( itg$A eA; `E~.LOT2tT PAROL ONGR MARKER SET 5AVEBM1 ARC CAP 1B-45ROS y PUBUMM CW= PONT SET PARKER KN Mf RAL ■ DISK V y RAT eaol (RED A PART OF ROS RAT) 1 I MOWN A• y<y cram i pE E } SS I I I 1 RR p RAF— 70 A>IR e ARTA PAU ffife Auq Nwlh GRAPENC SCALE 1 knh 11L Anwww 3 SHEET LAYOUT KEY MAPS ABORAAL/L ARCE OF MCK L - RAM OFMIME L - Umm OF MIRK _ - MITA Q MIA[ CN BRQ - OICID OF CUM MIEOTOII Riff - RAiT-UF-YM7 CL - CERIUM SEC - 38mm P.M. -PIAT DOME C.A. - 0191811 PRY -PERMANENT WORE N4 %WNW PCP - PERMANENT CONTROL PNMT CH -MAC Cr OINK, EBR111 o19LEL PAIRGr - MIC mm 0 PJMAM Mom ODDITY IRMA ®ayfa PAlUF. - PUBUC ADMIN OF ST. I1DE CHIN X rAN ll'r.ACp _ eUMR CV01 rAR6 N81lA CARNAL CairDISTINCT A • r4 M - RAMAL •!; Din - NOR RACIAL I'DCM - 1ON0 ' CM - CMIMt[IE IOIIIENR !W YDNUYENT LEGEND IP ET PERMANENT REFERENCE MUMMERY (PRM) PAROL ONGR MARKER SET 5AVEBM1 ARC CAP 1B-45ROS y PUBUMM CW= PONT SET PARKER KN Mf RAL ■ DISK V 015 LAW RAe1EBIANLE EASEMENT COINER NO CORER WL FOR REFERENCE LPLY Anwww 3 I as ARL.aEFANAIvr a aAsaA,ecPa RA MR-571VV077ON to"'Was \ SE91Mwr AAF(JM-, SET 414 ON 'Am IelSPw Wl-A PART OF THIS PLAT FUTURE PHASE 5 FWMDN LF TRACTS 3 A A. SECTKNJ .3-53-7.1 RAI..N RT ER FARMS COMPANY PIAT D(% Z, PACE 25, PUBLIC RE^•ORDS ST. LUCE COUNTY, NOV INDIAN RI'.ER CO'NTY. IICTIDA• j a ! ! I ftLor LOT rRwff -'r 02 N MRW EAM LOl iP I RAW 10 � I MA 11114E -B 11ws'+'�WT;eNoa�, N yyy� j I IFj SERENOA PHASE 4 A AE -PIAT W A FMCM OF SECTION 2% TOMW 37 SMIRL RAMS ]i DIF MCORONG TO INE MT pF MAN RMI FAM CWPAW 6RSSMMI AS FRED N NAT IMIK e, PARE Zf TANUC RDDORDS OF RE IUDE OIDR INMAN NIMO CCURr, RATIN NOT : PART OF THIS PL.;T FUTURE PHASE 5 PDRTRIN OF T-11%; ; A a, oECTICFI 28-e3-39 INDt N m.7i MMCDNAPANr MUT 8" :, P'SE 25, ruBUC RECORD • rT. LUCIE COUNTY, .4110 UJ FIT[ACOUTTT. rLCF7DA yY 'LA TC i NOT .=. PART OF THIS PLAT �A4.t FUTURE PHASE 5 jaw m � 11 air L2�I , _ , PDRnaI Or 7RACT5 3 F .,11:1W AAMA) . o-17%DAfRsji4 i T, SECTION .4-33-?' INMAu RI,2R FARM- COMPANY '' ��2p5pl�pf E REObF1'.,bP eN•p,T.T1p p� RAT B! -0I( 2. PACE 25. PURUC RECORDS ST. LUCE D Epp N.rT Ap IXIX LAMP �y I mo'•• CC(MTY. NNK Np`N Ar.£R C)LMTY. FLORID^. m"ff v SDIMIFIMP UMANE MrT jwlr u (a At At) , 1 n1 1 ( 11� 1 , 1 , 1 1 1, 1 11 SHEET LAYOUT KEY MAPS ABBWMA7M G - CEMMAL ANEL OF CURVE R - RAMMR W CURVE L - ILTOM OF QNK - I.TA W CURVE CH CUR - MImD W CURVE, NRWMN "- RMT -W- CL - OMTRRLI E sm - smMN P8 - TUT OM OA- OVERML Rel -PM-RENT RSEREN(X NDNMIMrr POP - FmNw CONTROL FV>♦l1 OL - aorto W MMvr. amm D,mML PAUCF. - PINUO REM PS W ENWI RIVER COUNTY FLMDA PACI.LF. - PURE IECUIOS W SE LUCE LRF.MLM - MAN WER FARMS W TER CM11R1 00 - BAWL (NO - Nu RAMAL FD - ROM CM - CDNMETE MONUMENT MONUIEW LEGM eSET FEb1UE]IT RMMhTICE MNot"m (p" PRIM CORDER MMIMR SET AMMAR AND CAP %W -OW • PERMANENT MRROL POINT SET PARR KMW NAL A NSII 'PC IUL -$W OTS'LAIE NNNE]IA}CE EASOITIT [AREA ND CMINE R SET. FOR Rl1aM CE OLT AnwilwaEitT 3 CD �,✓ AWImw AQq.071W N-aTOIYY Mme' a IIRa-mmurYGITAPTIIC OK LOM s".7 FLT as ON IX r6 CRA SCALE 1KN INAI tsar >».a:rFW AR IMM047 ` 1 OL NCJIkglF f RA Peet 1 INad 4 n FET CUR ON N L-eNra yY 'LA TC i NOT .=. PART OF THIS PLAT �A4.t FUTURE PHASE 5 jaw m � 11 air L2�I , _ , PDRnaI Or 7RACT5 3 F .,11:1W AAMA) . o-17%DAfRsji4 i T, SECTION .4-33-?' INMAu RI,2R FARM- COMPANY '' ��2p5pl�pf E REObF1'.,bP eN•p,T.T1p p� RAT B! -0I( 2. PACE 25. PURUC RECORDS ST. LUCE D Epp N.rT Ap IXIX LAMP �y I mo'•• CC(MTY. NNK Np`N Ar.£R C)LMTY. FLORID^. m"ff v SDIMIFIMP UMANE MrT jwlr u (a At At) , 1 n1 1 ( 11� 1 , 1 , 1 1 1, 1 11 SHEET LAYOUT KEY MAPS ABBWMA7M G - CEMMAL ANEL OF CURVE R - RAMMR W CURVE L - ILTOM OF QNK - I.TA W CURVE CH CUR - MImD W CURVE, NRWMN "- RMT -W- CL - OMTRRLI E sm - smMN P8 - TUT OM OA- OVERML Rel -PM-RENT RSEREN(X NDNMIMrr POP - FmNw CONTROL FV>♦l1 OL - aorto W MMvr. amm D,mML PAUCF. - PINUO REM PS W ENWI RIVER COUNTY FLMDA PACI.LF. - PURE IECUIOS W SE LUCE LRF.MLM - MAN WER FARMS W TER CM11R1 00 - BAWL (NO - Nu RAMAL FD - ROM CM - CDNMETE MONUMENT MONUIEW LEGM eSET FEb1UE]IT RMMhTICE MNot"m (p" PRIM CORDER MMIMR SET AMMAR AND CAP %W -OW • PERMANENT MRROL POINT SET PARR KMW NAL A NSII 'PC IUL -$W OTS'LAIE NNNE]IA}CE EASOITIT [AREA ND CMINE R SET. FOR Rl1aM CE OLT AnwilwaEitT 3 CD Dylan Reingold, County Attorney William K. DeBraal, Deputy County Attorney Kate Pingolt.Cotner, Assistant Count), Attorney Consent Agenda - B. CC 7.18.17 Of ce of A INDIAN RIVER COUNTY MEMORANDUM TO: Board of County Commissioners FROM: Dylan Reingold, County Attorney DATE: July 12, 2017 SUBJECT: Phase I of Willows Development Escrow Agreement BACKGROUND. ATTORNEY Oculina Bank has issued a guaranty Irrevocable Letter of Credit No. 30 ("GLOC"), dated September 14, 2016, in the amount $321,500.44, related to the guaranty of Phase 1 construction of required improvements for the Willows Development, LLC ("Phase I"). This GLOC expires on December 13, 2017. The construction of Phase 1 is now substantially complete. Under section 913.10(4) of the Indian River County Code of Ordinances, and the Contract for Construction of Required Improvements for Phase 1, warranty of required improvements, for utility facilities and for road and drainage (the "Warranty LOCs"), are required to be posted before the GLOC can be released. In order to post the Warranty LOCs, Oculina Bank has requested that Indian River County enter into the attached escrow agreement in which Indian River County will agree to release the GLOC within 30 days of the posting of the Warranty LOCs. The Indian River County Community Development Department and Public Works Department staff has confirmed that all work that could be callable under the GLOC has been satisfied. Thus, staff has no objection to the proposed escrow agreement. FUNDING. There is no funding associated with the execution of the, escrow agreement RECOMMENDATION. The County Attorney's Office recommends that the Indian River County Board of County Commissioners vote to approve and authorize the County Administrator to sign the escrow agreement. ATTACHMENT(S). Escrow Agreement FA4-.1-7kU.d.%GE.VERAUR C CWg—&.M 11V111—Ero Aammrm&a P97 The Willows—Phase 1 ESCROW AGREEMENT THIS ESCROW AGREEMENT is entered into this day of July, 2017 by and between INDIAN RIVER COUNTY ("IRC") and OCULINA BANK ("Oculina"). WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, Oculina issued a guaranty Irrevocable Letter of Credit No. 30 ("GLOC") dated September 14, 2016 in the amount of THREE HUNDRED TWENTY ONE THOUSAND FIVE HUNDRED AND 44/100 DOLLARS ($321,500.44) in favor of IRC. This GLOC related to the guaranty of Phase I construction of required improvements for the Willows Development, LLC ("Willows"). This GLOC expires on December 13, 2017. The Willows construction on Phase 1 is now substantially complete; and WHEREAS, under section 913.10(4) IRC Code and the Contract for Construction of Required Improvements No. SD -15-09-08 (2006010188-77191), warranty of required improvements is required to be posted and a certificate of completion issued before the GLOC can be released, as outlined below: A. A warranty letter of credit ("WLOC-utilities") in the amount of ONE HUNDRED TWENTY FOUR THOUSAND THREE HUNDRED THIRTY THREE AND 89/100 ($124,333.89) as warranty under the Bill of Sale of Utilities Facilities for Willows Phase 1 project. This WLOC-utilities is to expire on October 18, 2018. B. A warranty letter of credit for road and drainage ("WLOC-road") in the amount of NINETY TWO THOUSAND FOUR HUNDRED THIRTY TWO AND 30/100 DOLLARS ($92,432.30) as the warranty of road and drainage improvements under the Warranty and Guaranty Agreement relating to Willows Phase 1. This WLOC-road is to expire on October 18, 2018. The WLOC-utilities and WLOC-road respectively listed in paragraphs A and B above will be referred to as "Warranty LOCs". WHEREAS, it is anticipated that the Warranty LOCs will be issued approximately thirty (30) days before the GLOC for THREE HUNDRED TWENTY ONE THOUSAND FIVE HUNDRED AND 44/100 DOLLARS ($321,500.44) is released by IRC due to the fact that the GLOC cannot be released until the applicable acceptable one (1) year warranty postings and appropriate Warranty Agreement and Bill of Sale of Utility Facilities are in place and a certificate of completion issued. With the acceptable Warranty LOCs in place, IRC will be able to issue a Certificate of Completion on Phase 1 of The Willows project. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants and conditions contained herein and other good and valuable consideration, the parties agree as follows. 1. The above "Whereas" clauses are incorporated into this Agreement. 7/13/17 P98 The Willows — Phase 1 2. IRC, upon receipt of the acceptable Warranty LOCs, shall hold the THREE HUNDRED TWENTY ONE THOUSAND FIVE HUNDRED AND 44/100 DOLLARS ($321,500.44) GLOC in escrow for a period of time not to exceed thirty (30) days from the receipt of the acceptable Warranty LOCs, thereupon permitting IRC to issue a certificate of completion, upon which issuance IRC shall release and return the GLOC to Oculina within the 30 days set forth above. 3. IRC, by acting as a party to this agreement as well as the Escrow Agent, shall incur no liability as Escrow Agent except for misfeasance or malfeasance. IRC shall hold the GLOC in escrow during the term of this agreement. The term of this agreement runs from the date of execution of this agreement until 30 days after receipt of the acceptable Warranty LOCs. In the event there are conflicting demands for the return of the GLOC during the term of this agreement or IRC as Escrow Agent has a good faith as to the entitlement of the GLOC, IRC as Escrow Agent may either deposit said GLOC into the Registry of the Court or may continue to hold said GLOC as Escrow Agent until the parties are in agreement or until a Final Judgment from a court of competent jurisdiction shall determine the rights of the parties. 4. In any proceeding between the parties or Escrow Agent, each party shall bear their own attorneys' fees and costs. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this agreement the day and year first above written. Witnesses: printed name: printed name: approved as to form and legal sufficiency: By: Dylan Reingold County Attorney printed name: printed name: 2 INDIAN RIVER COUNTY M. Jason E. Brown County Administrator BCC approved: OCULINA BANK LIM Christopher J. Russell, President 7/13/17 P99 ra Indian River County Sheriff's Office July 12, 2017 Mr. Joseph E. Flescher, Chairman Indian River Board of County Commissioners 1801 271' Street Vero Beach, FL 32960 Re: P.G.I. Request — County Fund 126 Dear Chairman Flescher: According to the Florida Contraband Forfeiture Act (FCFA) any local law enforcement agency that acquires at least $15,000 in forfeiture proceeds of real or personal property pursuant to the Act within a fiscal year shall expend or donate no less than 15 percent of such proceeds for the support or operation of any drug treatment, drug abuse education, drug prevention, crime prevention, safe neighborhood or school resource officer program. (F.S. 932.7055) Please consider this letter as a request for transfer of $10,706.40 to the Indian River County Sheriff's Office, which reflects at least 15 percent of the proceeds acquired pursuant to the FCFA in the last fiscal year. These funds will go to the Substance Awareness Center to satisfy the requirements under Florida State Statute 932.7055. Please place this item under Constitutional Officers for the July 18, 2017 board agenda. If you have any questions or require additional information, please contact me at 978-6404. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, 1 Deryl Loar, Sheriff DL:nmj cc: Jason E. Brown, County Administrator Mike Smykowski, OMB Director Kelly Goodwin, Comptroller 4055 41st Avenue • Vero Bead -t, FL 32960 • (772) 569-6700 • www.iresheriff.org GE)ZE P100 Indian River County Sheriff's Office July 11, 2017 Chairman Joseph E. Flescher Indian River County Board of County Commissioners 1801 271h Street Veto Beach, Florida 32960 RE: Notice of request for placement on the July 18 2017 Board of County Commission Agenda Dear Chairman Flescher: Please allow this letter to serve as a request to be added to the Constitutional Officers and Governmental Agencies portion of the July 18, 2017 Board of County Commission agenda. Indian River County Sheriff's Office (IRCSO), would like to notify Indian Rivet County (IRC) that itis applying for a 2017-2020 Department of Homeland Security Operation Stonegarden Grant. This grant, if approved, will provide funding to reimburse overtime salaries for pre -approved inter -coastal extra duty details. Pre -approved details are scheduled based on intelligence data received and coordinated through Customs and Border Patrol. This is a continuation grant which has been utilized by IRCSO since 2014. In addition, we have requested the purchase of an off -shore vessel to perform duties in line with the Department of Homeland Security mission. The total dollar amount requested .of the 2017-2020 grant is $380,000. These funds are set to reimburse $90,000 in overtime and $290,000 toward the purchase of the off -shore vessel. No funding match is required. The completed application, required justification letter for the vessel, along with the Indian River County Finance Office Grant Form, is included with this request. Should you have any questions, please contact Planner, Annette M. Russell, at 772-978-6214. Thank you for your assistance. Sincerely, Deryl Loar, Sheriff DL:amr cc: Jason Brown, County Administrator Mike Smykowski, Budget Director IRC Board of County Commissioners Dori Roy Enclosures 4055 41st Avenue • Vero Beach, FL 32960 • (772) 569-6700 • Nvww.iresheriff.org ^ L P101 DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Federal Emergency Management Agency OPERATION STONEGARDEN (OPSG) OMB Control Number: 1660-0125 L•�;t_���_vL•�Y!�:t•�a:i_t.t•�.ir�•����Ea�,l��r_>t_�� PAPERWORK BURDEN DISCLOSURE NOTICE Public reporting burden for this data collection is estimated to average 571 hours per response. The burden estimate includes the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and submitting this form. This collection of information is required to obtain or retain benefits. You are not required to respond to this collection of information unless a valid OMB control number is displayed on this form. Send comments regarding the accuracy of the burden estimate and any suggestions for reducing the burden to: Information Collections Management, Department of Homeland Security, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street, SW., Washington, DC 20472-3100, Paperwork Reduction Project (1660-0125) NOTE: Do not send your completed form to this address. Operation Order Name: OPSG FY 17 Florida, Indian River County Sheriff's Office Operation Order Number: Fiscal Year: 2017 Operations Dates: From: 9/1/2017 To: 8/31/2020 Report Date: ration Stonegarden (OPSG) is funded by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and led by Customs and Border Protection 3) which supports a joint mission to secure the Unites States' borders along routes of ingress, to include travel corridors with national waters, in an effort to achieve the goal of a secure and resilient Nation. Costs can include, but are not limited to, equipment personnel overtime to perform allowable planning, intelligence, and operations activities that meet the intent of the program. an River County Sheriffs Office (IRCSO) shall lead operations with the ability to utilize resources from other local agencies including, not limited to, Vero Beach Police Department (VBPD), Sebastian Police Department (SPD), and Indian River Shores Public Safety ►artment (iRSPSD), as the coastal/local law enforcement agency for Indian River County, Florida. Operations and intelligence activities enhance the capability to detect, prevent, and deter terrorist activity, weapons of mass effect, smuggling of contraband, and human icking. These efforts will reduce crime in Indian River County and ultimately secure the safety of the Nation by limiting threats that otherwise enter through our air and waterways. f+cers performing duties under this operation plan will act on intelligence led investigations and approved operations pians to enhance rder security, support the DHS Mission and the National Border Patrol Strategy. Additionally, creation of specific operations following a alifying incident or shared intelligence brief, will increase our capability to augment operational elements of state law enforcement ecialized/technical teams. Lastly, we intend to leverage intelligence analysis in order to enhance our ability in identification and analysis trends, linkages, and targeting to support a full range of enforcement including interdiction, investigation, and adjudication. Our goal is to tain necessary equipment, provide man power, and intelligence in a joint effort to secure a resilient Nation by preventing threats and zards that pose a risk. 1. SITUATION Indian River County's northern border is along the Sebastian Inlet. Our locally known inlet and miles of undeveloped beach front have been utilized for illicit smuggling operations since prohibition. Sebastian Inlet is remotely located between the Ports of Fort Pierce and Cape Canaveral, thus patrolled less frequently by federal agencies. As security efforts at official ports of entry become more sophisticated and stringent, it is known that criminal organizations have utilized areas between ports of entry to enter the country. Historical maritime security efforts within Indian River County have focused primarily on traditional maritime safety and basic law enforcement concerns. Small vessels (under 300 gross tons) traveling adjacent to and through Indian River County can operate (often routinely and with ease) in close proximity to critical infrastructure and key resources in nearby Florida ports, which would qualify as potential high-profile targets. Indian River County also encompasses two local airports, which additionally allow for air movement in and out of the country. All of the information listed poses a moderate level of risk due to gaps in situation awareness. Our local agencies ability to perform operations alongside and share intelligence with Border Patrol in an effort to expand capabilities will mitigate those threats. Indian River County encompasses twenty two and a half miles of relatively unincorporated Florida coastline, an additional twenty two miles of Indian River Lagoon, two small airports, multiple airfields, and is positioned a mere 70 miles from the Bahamian coastline, a country without stringent security measures and a documented history of drug activity. These factors provide virtually unlimited opportunity for those who wish to utilize maritime and/or aviation conveyances to those who intend to breach our borders, smuggle humans, drugs, weapons, or other types of contraband. Another notable fact is the Gulf Stream that flows between Florida and the Bahamas is one of the most powerful ocean surface currents in the world. Mariners are able to take FEMA Form 089-16 (11/16) Page 1 of 8 OPERATION STONEGARDEN (OPSG) OPERATIONS ORDER AND BUDGET TEMPLATE (Continued) tull advantage o ese currents and prevailing easterly or southerly winds when departing the Bahamas to arrive on the Indian River County shoreline. C. Criminal Element: The United States Department of Justice National Drug Intelligence Center (NDIC) has designated South Florida as a high intensity drug trafficking area. Due to our country diligently protecting inland borders in recent years, criminal organizations are returning to the air and sea as a means to smuggle humans and contraband. Indian River County's economic climate, largely dependent on agriculture and tourism, the rich demographic composition of Florida, ranked third for the number of immigrants living within its borders, provides a steady supply of vulnerable victims for traffickers to prey on. Prostitution, indentured servitude and migrant farm work are just a few examples of how Florida's unique demographic renders it an ideal location for human trafficking. Miami and the Florida Keys still remain popular destinations for human and drug smuggling, although heavy enforcement and prosecution in those areas push criminals to trend north. Currently, the U.S. Government has an incomplete knowledge of the international recreational boating public, their travel patterns, and limited information available regarding fishing fleets and the multitude of small commercial vessels and/or aircraft operating in or near Indian River County Florida. Not only can these resources be exploited by a criminal element, small vessels and aircraft found in Indian River County are vulnerable to potential exploitation by terrorists to deliver weapons of mass destruction or improvised explosive devices as well. The ability to gather, track and share intelligence between law enforcement agencies has become increasingly difficult and the criminal element has become more sophisticated with increased counter -intelligence capabilities. This vulnerability is compounded by a very limited advance notice of arrival requirements for most recreational small vessels arriving from abroad and the inability to screen them for illegal activity. D. Friend) Forces: Federal: Customs Border Protection (CBP) Border Patrol (BP), Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), United States Coast Guard (USCG), Federal Bureau of Investigations (FBI), Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA). State: Florida Department of Law Enforcement (FDLE), Central Florida Regional Domestic Security Task Force (CFRDSTF), Central Florida Information Exchange (CFIX), Florida Highway Patrol (FHP), Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC). Local: Indian River County Sheriffs Office (IRCSO), Vero Beach Police Department (VBPD), Sebastian Police Department (SPD), Indian River Shores Public Safety Department (IRSPSD), Fellsmere Police Department (FPD). It. MISSION Operation Stonegarden is designed to coordinate surge efforts between federal, State and local law enforcement agencies to protect and secure our Nation's borders from terrorist activity, weapons of mass effect, contraband smuggling and human trafficking. Increased law enforcement presence along the border will result in the reduction of crimes, improvement of the quality of life for the citizens of Indian River County, and enhance the security of the Nation. Local agency leader Indian River County Sheriffs Office(IRCSO), with VBPD, SPD, and IRSPSD available as additional manpower if needed, will combine efforts with the Miami Sector Border Patrol to predict and prevent criminal activity. Officers assigned to Operation Stonegarden will enforce applicable state and local laws and regulations within the scope of their authority granted by the State of Florida. Approved intelligence activities will be conducted and the information shared between the partners to enhance operations. These agencies will also share equipment and resources as they coordinate with Border Patrol for grant activity, and to help locate wanted subjects, smuggled currency, and smuggled weapons. Ili. EXECUTION A. Mana ement/Su ervisor Intent: IRCSO will increase border security through coordination, collaboration, and cooperation with U.S. Border Patrol Miami Sector under the provisions of Operation Stonegarden to establish a common operational picture (COP). The focus of this operations plan is aggressive enforcement of Florida law and denial of opportunity to criminal organizations in smuggling efforts, potential terrorist activity, ingress and egress to transportation hubs in Indian River County. B. General Concept: The IRCSO, utilizing VBPD, SPD & IRSPSD if additional manpower is needed, will conduct "Surge" border security through direct coordination with US Border Patrol Miami Sector. It is anticipated that the increase in law enforcement presence will significantly impact the perceived ability of criminal organizations to operate in the Miami Sector AOR (Area of Responsibility) in Florida. Intelligence information assessments are critical to this operation. IRCSO will leverage available technology, operations personnel, analyst personnel, and specific monthly performance reporting to supply information to federal agencies which will enhance their ability to identify and analyze trends, linkages, and targeting in order to support a full range of enforcement including, but not limited to, interdiction, investigation and adjudication. FEMA Form 089-16 (11/16) Page 2 of 8 om C. Specific Responsibilities: Z. OPERATION STONEGARDEN (OPSG) OPERATIONS ORDER AND BUDGET TEMPLATE (Continued) Share information collected by operations and reviewed by analysts between U.S. Customs and Border Patrol and local law enforcement agencies relevant to Indian River County. Perform intelligence led operations to include, but not limited to interdiction, investigation, adjudication, and local `surge" activities coordinated by U.S. Border Patrol in conjunction with local law enforcement. Report all pertinent operations, intelligence, milestone, and financial data in a clear and concise format to the required agency. D. Coordinating Instructions: ncies, assets, and related operations will coordinate activities through the border patrol station responsible for AOR's where specified rations will be conducted. Agencies will work together to stage and/or support operations, establish traffic patterns, and maintain a strong enforcement presence by land, air, and water in Indian River County to deter criminal and/or terrorist activity. Agencies will submit )rts using prescribed procedures dictated in the award documentation. The Miami Border Patrol Sector will determine specific operational is. Agencies will coordinate with the BP to ensure the ability to redirect resources to areas deemed the greatest risk to national security 3d on the most current intelligence and illegal border related activity trends. FEMA Form 089-16 (11/16) Page 3 of 8 P104 OPERATION STONEGARDEN (OPSG) OPERATIONS ORDER AND BUDGET TEMPLATE (Continued) IV. ADMINISTRATION/LOGISTICS/BUDGET REQUEST The Current Fiscal Year Operations order budget spending pian worksheet will begin at Section IV Administration/Logistics/ Budget. The Worksheet will need to contain itemized listing of overtime, fringe, equipment, fuel, maintenance, mileage, travel and M&A. Budget spending plan should be planned in one or 2 year increments. Grantees may not begin operations, obligate, or expend any funds until the final Operation Order and embedded budget has been approved by FEMA GPD and CBPIUSBP Headquarters and any existing special conditions and/or restrictions are removed. The sample table provided should be utilized as the standard official format to be utilized In the execution of operations orders. A detail itemization and justification section is to be documented In the same format as the example demonstrated on the following page. Each State, Local, or Tribal entity will need to be separated and categorized In the same order each category has been listed, on the A.1 Example. The preparer should first enter all the information below in the justification section of the budget and use the tables to fill In the chart above. Cost Estimates/Funding/issues I Chart A.1 Cost Estimates/Funding Issues/Budget Chart (Year t) County Name Indian Rivcr County Law Enforcement Operational Overtime Operational and Intelligence OT 77,079 *Over 50% in OT funding needs a Personnel Cap Waiver request letter. Fringe Benefits for Law Enforcement Allowable Fringe for OT 12,921 Overtime and Fringe Total 90,000 General Equipment NIA N/A ` Justification Letter needed for $100K or more purchases 0 'if more space is needed show total equipment cost and list all equipment in justification section of budget. Special Equipment NIA N/A 0 " Needs Justification Letter Vehicles, Watercraft, other type of Offshore Boat vehicles 17WC-00-BOAT-Watercraft (including trailer and accessories) 290,000 Needs Justification Letter Regional Capability Building Equipment NIA N/A 0 ' Needs Justification Letter Equipment Total 290,000 Vehicles Fuel Cost List Counties with Fuel Totals 0 Maintenance Cost List Counties w/ Maintenance Totals 0 Mileage Cost List Counties with Mileage Totals 0 For Deployed LE and/or Travel, Lodging, and Per diem Federally sponsored (DHS/ FEMA) border security task force List Counties with Travel Totals 0 meetings County M&A Sub -Recipient County Only 0 Total Funding Cost 380,000 FEMA Form 089-16 (11/16) Page 4 of 8 P105 OPERATION STONEGARDEN (OPSG) OPERATIONS ORDER AND BUDGET TEMPLATE (Continued) Overtime OVERTIME IS ESTIMATED BASED ON PREVIOUS YEARS USAGE AND AVERAGED COSTS. Maritime Patrols: $33,783.00 Averaged OT rate x 2 personnel x 8 hours x 4 details x 12 months per year x 3 years Aviation Patrols: $15,148.00 Averaged OT rate x 2 personnel x 4 hours x 4 $77,079.00 details x 4 quarters per year x 3 years Highway Interdiction: $15,148.00 Averaged 'OT rate x 9 perSonnei (one supervisory) x 3 hours x I details x 4 quarters per year x 3 years Intelligence Analysis: $13,000.00 Averaged OT rate x 1 personnel x 3 hours x 36 details x 3 years Fringe (FICA 7.65%) (Retirement 7.26%) + (WC .17%) $12,921 00 PERCENTAGES WILL VARY/ESTIMATED Equipment Item I - Offshore Boat (including trailer and accessories) $290,000 Justification Letter attached Sample quotes attached Item 2 - 0 N/A Fuel N/A IRCSO Will cover fuel cost of all equipment 0 used (boats, vehicles, aircraft) Maintenance N/A IRCSO will cover maintenance cost of all 0 equipment used (boats, vehicles, aircraft) Mileage N/A IRCSO will not request mileage 0 reimbursement Travel N/A 0 M&A ,(Only the Sub -recipient County can claim M&A) 10 A.1 tnis table is tor earn inaiviouat participant Tor ineir prupubau vAIR-lultufuzo Willy indian River County Sub -Recipient Cost Summary Cost Categories Overtime Fringe Equipment Fuel Maintenance Mileage. Travel M&A Total Indian River County Sheriffs 0, 77,079 12,921 290,000 0 0 0 0 0 380,000 FEMA Form 089-16 (11/16) rage out 0 121011 OPERATION STONEGARDEN (OPSG) OPERATIONS ORDER AND BUDGET TEMPLATE (Continued) )r all participating Partners Operation Order Total Budget Summary Overview Equlpme,nt Fuel Maintenance Mileage Travel. M&A Total Operation Order Total Budget Summary Overview Equipment Fuel MaintenanceMileage T�aYet M&A Total Page 6 of 8 P107 OPERATION STONEGARDEN (OPSG) OPERATIONS ORDER AND BUDGET TEMPLATE (Continued) B. Travel: N/A C. Lodging: N/A 0. Reception of Detailed Personnel: N/A E. Uniform and Equipment: NIA F. Special E ui ment: N/A G. Alien Processin : Apprehensions and seizures will be processed by Miami Sector Border Patrol Station per current SOP. H. Medical: Indian River County Medical Center 1000 36th Street, Vero Beach, Fl- 32960 772-567-4311 1. Detention/Transportation: Suspects that are apprehended will be transported by agent or contract personnel to Indian River County Jail for further processing. J. Vehicles: Utilize our Hawk, boats, and multiple patrol vehicles as needed for approved operations. V. COMMAND/ CONTROL-! COMMUNICATION A. Chain of Command: Each law enforcement agency will follow its own chain of command concept. B. Unit Command: The Indian River County Sheriffs Office designated program manager shall designate an appropriate supervisor during detail operations. C. Communications Detail: IRCSO will coordinate with other units/agencies to patch common frequencies. Communications between IRCSO and federal agencies will take place through the utilization of telephone, email correspondence and other agreed upon electronic means until other technology becomes available. D. Map Coordinates: Notes: N/A FEMA Form 089-16 (11/16) aye , — - P108 Longitude: 27.6386 N Degrees: Decimal: Location Zone: Miami Selo A. Administration Annex: B. Execution Annex: C. Command Annex: D. Media Action Plan: OPERATION STONEGARDEN (OPSG) OPERATIONS ORDER AND BUDGET TEMPLATE (Continued) Latitude: 80.3973 W Minutes: Seconds: Indian River County Sheriffs Office will administer the operations and take fiscal and programmatic reporting responsibilities for this grant. The IRCSO Special Operations Section Lieutenant, under the direction of Indian River County Sheriff, Deryl Loar, will serve as Program Manager for Operation Stonegarden, Indian River County. Operation Stonegarden will be executed by a joint effort to Include: Chief Patrol Agent —CBP Miami Sector Headquarters, (TBD) (305) 810-5120 Indian River County Sheriffs Office — Sheriff Daryl Loar, (772) 978-6404 Vero Beach Police Department — Chief David Curry (772) 978-4610 Sebastian Police Department — Chief Michelle Morris (772) 589-5233 Indian River Shores Public Safety - Chief Michael Jacobs (Acting) (772) 231-1771 Indian River County Sheriff's Office Chain of Command: Sheriff Deryl Loar 4055 41 st Ave, Vero Beach, FI 32960, (772) 978-6404 Chief James Harpring 4055 41 st Ave, Vero Beach, F132960, (772) 978-6414 Major John Burdock 4055 41 st Avenue Vero Beach, FL 32960, (772) 978-6125 Captain Anthony Consalo 4055 41st Ave, Vero Beach, FI 32960, (772) 978-6160 Lieutenant James Hyde (Program Manager) 4055 41 st Ave, Vero Beach, FI 329601 (772) 978-6329 Vero Beach Police Department: Chief David Curry 1055 20th Street, Vero Beach, FL 32960, (772) 978-4610 Sebastian Police Department: Chief Michelle Morris 1201 Main Street, Sebastian FL, 32958, (772) 589-5233 Indian River Shores Public Safety Department: Chief Richard Rossell 6001 N. Al A, Indian River Shores, FL, 32963 (772) 231-1771 [Agency Public Information Officers will coordinate the release of information to the public. Legal Review: As required by each participating agency. Risk: Refer to Section I -A -General Situation and I -C -Criminal Element sections. FEMA Form 089-16 (11/16) raqu V V. . P109 June 15, 2017 Grants program Directorate heriff D Indian River County Sheriff's Office RE: Justification Letter, uipment Purchase. Opera 'on S%neg;4 en FY 2017 Please accept this letter of justification for equipment requested in our Fiscal Year 2017 Operation Stonegarden application. The following is a request for one offshore boat, outfitted with standard law enforcement equipment, including a trailer, under AEL #17WC400-BOAT-Watercraft, per the Authorized Equipment List (AEL) to be used by Indian River County Sheriff's Office. (1) Offshore vessel with appropriate specialized equipment, designed to perform prevention and response missions within waterways of Indian River County. $290,000.00 a. Offshore Vessel with equipment $270,505.00 b. Trailer to transport Vessel $19,495 Specifications: (1) 2017 or 2018 model year offshore capable 29'or 30' vessel with center console and collar system, or equivalent. The vehicle will be marked with graphics bearing "Indian River County Sheriffs Office" as well as "Purchased with DHS funds for Operation Stonegarden Use" per the NOFO instructions. Vessel will be equipped with all standard law enforcement patrol equipment and communication equipment consistent with current fleet requirements. Standard fleet requirements including, but not limited to, radio, GPS capabilities, high visibility LED light bar, high output public address system, console, seating, secure weapons boxes, canvas enclosure for center console, monitors, coatings, motors, flood lights, batteries, trailer, and shipping. Other items and supplies above grant funding will be purchased separately by the Indian River County Sheriffs Office. justification: Indian River County encompasses twenty-two and a half (221/2) miles of relatively unincorporated Florida coastline with an inlet at its North end. The closest Ports patrolled by federal forces are Cape Canaveral to the North and Fort Pierce to the south, leaving Indian River County susceptible to illegal entry along its waterways. Indian River County Sheriff's Office has been partnering with Border Patrol through Operation Stonegarden since 2014, requesting strictly overtime reimbursement. We have utilized our boat and aircraft at no cost to the grant for joint effort Stonegarden operations. Our current vessel is fifteen years old and a 23' fishing style boat. The new vessel, by style and size, would extend the life of our current fleet, allow for offshore patrols, present a boat that is easily recognizable as law enforcement, offer a high/soft side design allowing for tie -off onto another vessel without causing damage to either vessel, offer a collar flotation design that allows for on/off- loading people and/or contraband without fear of taking on water or injury to personnel, and is large enough to deploy to additional Homeland Security and/or Border Patrol efforts. Maintenance and Fuel Costs: All maintenance and fuel costs associated with the vessel will be paid for from Indian River County Sheriff's Office general operating funds. Respectfully, Deryl Loar, Sheriff DL:amr 4055 41st Avenue • Vero Beach, FL 32960 6 (772)569-6700 * www.iresheriff.org 'QOV GRANT NAME: Operation Stonegarden GRANT # AMOUNT OF GRANT: $380,000 DEPARTMENT RECEIVING GRANT: Indian River County Sheriff's Office CONTACT PERSON: Annette M. Russell. Planner TELEPHONE: 772-978-6214 I . How long is the grant for? Three i3) Years 2. Does the grant require you to fund this function after the grant is over? 3. Does the grant require a match? If yes, does the grant allow the match to be In -Kind services? 4. Percentage of match to grant 5. Grant match amount required. Starting Date: October 1, 2017 Yes X No Yes ___X__No Yes No 6. Where are the matching funds coming from (i.e. In -Kind Services; Reserve for Contingency)? 7. Does the grant cover capital costs .or start-up costs? Yes No If no, how much do you think will be needed in capital costs or start-up costs: $ (Attach a detail listing of costs) S. Are you adding any additional positions utilizing the grant funds? Yes X No If yes, please list. (If additional space is needed, please attach a schedule.) Acct. Description Position Position Position Position Position 011.12 Regular Salaries 011.13 Other Salaries & Wages (PT) 012.11 Social Security 012.12 Retirement — Contributions 012.13 Insurance — Life & Health 012.14 Worker's Compensation 012.17 S/Sec. Medicare Matching $ 30,000.00 TOTAL 9. What is the total cost of each position including benefits, capital, start-up, auto expense, travel and operating? Salary and Benefits Operating Costs Capital Total Costs 10. What is the estimated cost of the grant to the county over five years? $ 0 Signature of Preparer: tai 1--m . �1� 0 Date: July l2, 2017 Grant Amount Other Match Costs Not Covered Match Total First Year $ 310,000.00 $ $0 $ NO MATCH Second Year $ 30,000.00 $ $0 $ NO MATCH Third Year $ 30,000.00 $ $0 $ NO MATCH Fourth Year $ $ $ $ Fifth Year $ $ $ $ Signature of Preparer: tai 1--m . �1� 0 Date: July l2, 2017 Indian River County Sheriff's Office July 11, 2017 Chairman Joseph E. Flescher Indian River County Board of County Commissioners 180127th Street Vero Beach, Florida 32960 RE: Notice of request for placement on the July 18,20L7 Board of County Commission Agenda Dear Chairman Flescher: Please allow this letter to serve as a request to be added to the Constitutional Officers and Governmental Agencies portion of the July 18, 2017 Board of County Commission agenda. Indian River County Sheriff's Office (IRCSO), would like to notify Indian River County (IRC) that it is applying for a 2017 Office of Justice Programs, Bulletproof Vest Partnership grant. This grant, if approved, will provide funding to reimburse 50% of the cost of officer safety vests purchased over the next two years. This is a continuation grant which has been utilized by iRCSO prior to this application. The total dollar amount requested of the 2017 grant is $23,587.00. The estimated cost of vest replacement during the life of -the grant is $47,175.00 based on current schedules, but varies. Grant requires 50% match. The completed application, along with the Indian River County Finance Office Grant Form, is included with this request. Should you have any questions, please contact Planner, Annette M. Russell, at 772-978-6214.1"hank you for your assistance. Sincerely, Deryl Loar, Sheriff DL:amr cc: Jason Brown, County Administrator Mike Smykowski, Budget Director IRC Board of County Commissioners Dori Roy Enclosures 405541st Avenue • Vero Beach, FL 32960 • (772) 569-6700 • www.iresheriff.org 2100Z P112 Jurisdiction's Handbook https://grants.ojp.usdoj.gov/bvp/vests/roles/apps/submit_app_to_bvp ad... 1. Agency Profile i ' 2. Application 2.5 Submit Application } 3. Payment 4. Status i 5. Personal j information t Help JUR: INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FL LOGOUT OMB #1121-0235 (Expires: 10/31/2016) SU BM IT APPLICI-A I OMMMMOMMMMOMMMO Application Profile Application NIJ Approvad Vests Submit Application PLEASE NOTE: Applications for funding may be submitted for the purchase of any armor that meets the established NI3 ballistic or stab standards ordered on or after April 1, 2017. Once the open application period closes, funding levels will be established and all applicants will be notified. Participant Fiscal Year Number of Agencies Applied Total Number of Officers for Application Number of Officers on Approved Applications INDIAN RIVER COUNTY 2017 1 317 317 I of 3 6/21/17, 3:15 PM P113 Jurisdiction's }landbook Fiscal Year 2017 Vest Replacement Cycle 0 Number of Officers 317 2 of 3 https:/Igrants.ojp.usdoi.gov/bvp/vests/roles/apps/s ubmit_app_tq_bvp„_ad... 6/21/17, 3.15.PM P114 Number of Stolen or 0 Number of Damaged Emergency Replacement Number of Needs Officer 0 Turnover - 2 of 3 https:/Igrants.ojp.usdoi.gov/bvp/vests/roles/apps/s ubmit_app_tq_bvp„_ad... 6/21/17, 3.15.PM P114 Jurisdiction's Handbook https://grants.ojp. usdoj.gov/bvp/vests/roles/apps/submit_app_to_bvp_ad.., Name INDIAN RIVER Extended xtended Cost COUNTY 75 $47,175.00 rand Totals _ 75 $47,175.00 Requested SVP Portion of Total Cost, up to: Tax, S&H* Total Cost $0.00 $47,175.00 .$0.00 $47,175.00 $23,587.50 * Total Taxes; Shipping and Handling Cost for each Application SUBMIT APPLICATION FOR BVP APPROVAL Paperwork Reduction Act Notice Under the Paperwork Reduction Act, a person is not required to respond to a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number. We try to create forms and instructions that 'are accurate, can be easily understood, and which impose the least possible burden on you to provide us with information. The estimated average time for all components of a jurisdiction_ to complete and file this Application for Funding form is two hours. If you have comments regarding the accuracy of this estimate, or suggestions for making this form simpler, you may use the Suggestions e-mail option on this BVP web site, or you may write to the BVP, P/o Bureau of Justice Assistance, 810 Seventh Street NW, Washington, DC, 20531. 3 of 3 6/21/.17, 3:15 PM 15 GRANT NAME: Bulletproof Vest Partnership Grant GRANT # AMOUNT OF GRANT: $23,587.50 DEPARTMENT RECEIVING GRANT: Indian River County Sheriffs office CONTACT PERSON: Anne"tie M. Russell. Planner TELEPHONE: 7D-978-6214 1. How long is the grant for? Two (2) Years 2. Does the grant require you to fimd this function after the grant is over? 3. Does the grant require a match? If yes, does the grant allow the match to be In -Kind services? 4. Percentage of match to grant 50% 5. Grant match amount required $13587 nn Starting Date: April 1, 2017 Yes --X—No Yes ------No Yes X No 6. Where are the matching fiords coming from (i.e. In -Kind Services; Reserve for Contingency)? Vests are reimbursed at a rate of 501Y* for scheduled purchases that are included in the buffet already. 7. Does,the gram cover capital costs or start-up costs? Yes —_,No If no, how much do you think will be needed in capital costs or start-up costs: $ (Attach a detail listing of costs) 8. Are you adding any additional positions utilizing the grant funds? Yes X No If yes, please list. (if additional space is needed, please attach a schedule.) Acct. Description Position Position Position Position Position 011.12 Regular Salaries 011.13 Other Salaries & Wages (PT) 012.11 Social Security 012.12 Retirement - Contributions 012.13 Insurance - Life & Health 012.14 Worker's Compensation 012.17 S/Sec..Medicare Matching $ TOTAL 9. What is the total cost of each position including benefits, capital, start-up, auto expense, travel and operating? Salary and Benefits Operating Costs Capital Total Costs 10. What is the estimated cost of the grant to the county over five years? Signature of Preparers _ ~ �.'�} , Date: July 12, 2017 7 ME Grant Amount Other Match Costs Not Covered Match Total First Year $23,587.50 $ $ 23 87.50 $ 47,175.00 Second Year $ $ $ $ Third Year $ $ $ $ Fourth Year $ $ $ $ Fifth Year $ $ $ $ Signature of Preparers _ ~ �.'�} , Date: July 12, 2017 7 ME INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF UTILITY SERVICES Date: July 7, 2017 To: Jason E. Brown, County Administrator From: Vincent Burke, P.E., Director of Utility Services Prepared By: Arjuna Weragoda, P.E., Capital Projects Manager Subject: North Sebastian Septic to Sewer (S2S) Phase 1, Public Hearing and the Adoption of Resolution No. III BACKGROUND On June 20, 2017, the Indian River County Board of County Commissioners (BCC) approved the adoption of Resolution 1 (2017-063) and Resolution II (2017-064) for the benefitting property owners in the North Sebastian Septic to Sewer Phase 1 sewer project in Sebastian. Since the adoption of Resolution I and II, staff mailed out letters to the one hundred and twelve (112) benefitting parcels/units notifying them of the preliminary assessment roll and the subject public hearing. Included in the letter was an invitation to an informal meeting held on July 11, 2017, at the City of Sebastian City Hall, where project details and financing options were discussed. ANALYSIS The North Sebastian Septic to Sewer (S2S) Phase 1 area has 61 "parent" parcels (Map ID No's) benefitting from the sewer main. Please note that Map ID No's 45, 48, 53, 58 and 60 are office condominiums and, as such, contain sub parcels with multiple owners (or 115 parcels/units). The parcels vary in size from the largest parcel at approximately 17 -acres to the smallest parcel at 0.13 acres. See Attachment 4 for an area map. Out of the 61 parent parcels, three (3) parcels were left out of the preliminary assessment roll (or 112 parcels/units) and also were excluded (not benefitting) from previous sewer assessment calculations for the following reasons: Map ID No. Parcel ID. Reason 39 30383000009000000000.1 City of Sebastian Cemetery 40 30393100001000000002.9 City of Sebastian Cemetery (TIITF/STATE OF FLORIDA) 41 30393100001000000002.3 Vacant Land, can connect to centralized sewer on Indian River Drive The BCC, in its capacity to oversee the assessment process, shall meet as the equalizing board to hear and consider any and all support for, or complaints against, the proposed special assessments, and it shall adjust and equalize the special assessments on the basis of justice and right according to Indian River County Ordinance Chapter 206 (Special Assessments). The City of Sebastian City Council has been informed of the assessment process. On Wednesday, May 24, 2017, staff provided an update to the City Council of the BCC approval from May 2nd C:\Users\GRAN IC"1\AppData\Local\Temp\BCL Tech no logies\ea syPD F 7\@BCL@D005AFiF\@BCL@D005AF1F.docx P117 The project will consist of the construction of a new gravity sanitary sewer system. The system will serve commercial areas along US Highway 1 in parts of the un -incorporated county and within the City of Sebastian. The project will generally include approximately 2,700 LF of 8" sewer, 6,500 LF of 10" sewer, 37 manholes, 143 LF of 8" sewer jack and bore, 137 LF of 10" sewer jack and bore, 50 service laterals, county -specified lift station, 850 LF of 4" force main, and all related and necessary appurtenances. The total construction cost is estimated at $2,977,931.58 based on competitive bids. Based on Option 11 of the funding allocations approved by BCC and utilizing the HFS/ERU Allocation method, the capital cost ranges between $4,989.12 and $374,183.86 per "parent" parcel based on a single or a multiple ERU allocation. On December 20, 2016 the BCC also approved the sliding scale impact free cost subsidy to help entice. property owners to connect sooner in the unincorporated Indian River County for existing structures as shown below. Year Subsidized Impact fee paid by IRC Cost Impact fee/Property Owner Responsibility 1 100% $2,796.00 $ 0.00 2 80% $2,236.80 $ 559.20 3 60% $1,677.60 $1,118.40 4 40% $1,118.40 $1,677.60 5 20% $ 559.20 $2,236.80 6 0% $ 0.00 $2,796.00 Furthermore, the BCC authorized staff toformalize a connection policy for existing structures within the North County Phase 1 S2S area, with a 5 -year timeline for mandatory hook-up. The Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) permit, City of Sebastian right-of-way permit, Indian River County right-of-way permit and Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) utility construction permit have all been secured. If the BCC authorizes staff to move forward with the project after the Public Hearing, then staff anticipates the following schedule (please note that these dates are estimations and could be subject to change): ➢ Pre -construction Meeting -July, 2017 ➢ Notice to Proceed (NTP) — August, 2017 ➢ Substantial Completion —June 2018, or 270 calendar days from Notice to Proceed (NTP) ➢ Final Completion — August, 2018, or 330 calendar days from NTP ➢ Final As -Built Resolution (Resolution IV) to BCC—September, 2018 FUNDING: As approved on May 16, 2017, the funds for this project are to be derived as follows: Description Account Number Amount SJRWMD Cost Share Grant (21.80%) N/A $ 649,240 Utility Assessment Fund Reserves (473) (20.00%) 473-169000-15501 $ 595,586 Optional Sales Tax Contribution (20.00%) 31526836-066510-15501 $ 595,586 Property Owner Assessment (38.20%) 473-169000-15501 $1,137,519 Construction Cost Total $2,977,931 C:\Users\GRAN IC^1\AppData\Local\Temp\BCL Tech nologies\easyPDF 7\@BCL@D005AF1F\@BCL@D005AF1F.docx P118 RECOMMENDATION Open the public hearing and after receiving input, consider adopting Resolution No. III with any revisions based on that public input. Staff recommends that the BCC consider the following options: 1) Adopt Resolution No. III with the following items: a. Cost per parcel/unit to be based on Attachment 3. b. One hundred and twelve (112) benefitting parcels/units as part of the special assessment lien. C. For benefitting parcels above in point b, allow property owners to finance the capital cost up to 10 years, payable in ten equal yearly installments at an annual interest rate of 2.00% as approved by BCC. LIST OF ATTACHMENTS: 1. Confirming Resolution (Resolution No. III) 2. Assessment Roll 3. Capital Cost Breakdown 4. Map C:\Users\GRANIC-1\AppData\Local\Temp\BCL Tech no logies\easyP D F 7\@BCL@DOOSAFiF\@BCL@D005AFSF.docx P119 Public Hearing (Third Reso.) RESOLUTION NO. 2017- A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, CONFIRMING THE SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS IN CONNECTION WITH A SEWER MAIN EXTENSION TO SERVE CERTAIN PROPERTIES LOCATED ALONG THE EAST SIDE OF U.S. HIGHWAY 1 BETWEEN 13230 AND 14410 U.S. HIGHWAY 1, AND INCLUDING 12920 AND 12950 U.S. HIGHWAY 1 WITHIN THE UNINCORPORATED BOUNDARY OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY; AND CERTAIN PROPERTIES ALONG THE EAST SIDE OF U.S. HIGHWAY 1 WITHIN THE MUNICIPAL BOUNDARY OF THE CITY OF SEBASTIAN BETWEEN 13100 AND 1614 U.S. HIGHWAY 1, INCLUDING CERTAIN PROPERTIES ALONG JACKSON STREET, MADISON STREET, DAVIS STREET, N. CENTRAL AVENUE (SOUTH OF JACKSON STREET) AND INCLUDING 1637 AND 1727 N. INDIAN RIVER DRIVE (NORTH SEBASTIAN SEPTIC TO SEWER ]S2S] PHASE 1 PROJECT); AND PROVIDING FOR SPECIAL ASSESSMENT LIENS TO BE MADE OF RECORD. WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County ("Board") has, by Resolution No. 2017-063 adopted on June 20, 2017, determined to make special assessments against certain properties to be specially benefited and serviced by a sewer main extension ("Assessment Project') servicing certain properties located along the east side of U.S. Highway 1 between 13230 and 14410 U.S. Highway 1, and including 12920 and 12950 U.S. Highway 1 within the unincorporated boundary of Indian River County; and certain properties along the east side of U.S. Highway 1 within the municipal boundary of the City of Sebastian between 13100 and 1614 U.S. Highway 1, including certain properties along Jackson Street, Madison Street, Davis Street, N. Central Avenue (south of Jackson Street) and including 1637 and 1727 N. Indian River Drive ("the Assessment Area"); and WHEREAS, Resolution No. 2017-063 described the method of assessing the cost of the Assessment Project against the specially benefited properties in the Assessment Area and how the special assessments imposed on the specially benefited properties in the Assessment Area are to be paid; and WHEREAS, Resolution No. 2017-063 was published in the Indian River Press Journal on June 30, 2017, as required by Section 206.04, Indian River County Code; and s WHEREAS, Resolution No. 2017-064, adopted by the Board on June 20, 2017, set a time and place for a public hearing at which the owners of the specially benefited properties in the Assessment Area to be assessed for the Assessment Project and other interested persons would _- have -the -chance -to -be heard- as -to Ahe propriety -and -advisability -of making-the-improvements;-if- not aking-the-improvements; if -not already made, the cost thereof, the manner of payment therefor and the amount to be assessed against each property, and for the Board to act as required by Section 206.07, Indian River County Code; and P120 RESOLUTION NO. 2017 - WHEREAS, notice of the time and place of the public hearing was published in the Indian River Press Journal on July 4, 2017 and on July 11, 2017 (at least twice, one week apart; the last being at least one week prior to the hearing), as required by Section 206.06, Indian River County Code; and WHEREAS, the land owners of record were mailed notices on June 26, 2017 (at least ten days prior to the hearing), as required by Section 206.06, Indian River County Code; and WHEREAS, the Board, on Tuesday, July 18, 2017, at 9:05 a.m. (or as soon thereafter as the public hearing was heard) conducted the public hearing with regard to the special assessments; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, as follows: 1. The foregoing recitals are affirmed and ratified in their entirety. 2. The special assessments imposed for the Assessment Project against the specially benefited properties in the Assessment Area shown on the assessment roll attached hereto as Exhibit "A" and incorporated herein by this reference are hereby confirmed and approved, and shall remain legal, valid, and binding first liens upon and against the specially benefited properties shown on attached Exhibit "A" until paid in full. The special assessments for the Assessment Project shall constitute a lien against the specially assessed property in the Assessment Area equal in rank and dignity with the liens of all state, county, district or municipal taxes, and other non -ad valorem assessments. Except as otherwise provided by law, such special assessment lien shall be superior in dignity to all other liens, titles and claims, until paid. The special assessment lien shall be deemed perfected upon adoption by the Board of this Resolution and recordation of this Resolution in the Official Records of the County maintained by the Clerk of Indian River County. Such recordation shall constitute prima facie evidence of the validity of the special assessments imposed for the Assessment Project in the Assessment Area. 3. The special assessment imposed shall be $4,989.12 per each Equivalent Residential Unit (ERU) or a percentage of same in the case of condominiums where units share ERUs, and shall be due and payable and may be paid in full without interest within 90 days after.the date of the passage of the as -built resolution by the Board. The as -built resolution occurs after completion of the improvements. If not paid in full within the 90 -day period from the passage of the as -built resolution, then the special assessment may be paid in ten equal yearly installments of principal plus two percent (2%) interest per annum. _ _._.w _ _.. _ _ 4. _ _The_Board_hereby finds_ and determines. that .the -special assessments-imposed_in,accordance— -.^_ . _ . with this Resolution and Resolution Nos. 2017-063 and 2017-064 are based on the number of existing ERUs for developed property; and for vacant property, the number of ERUs conservatively calculated based on existing land use designation, zoning and size. The Board hereby finds and determines that the properties assessed by this Resolution will receive special 2 P121 RESOLUTION NO. 2017 - benefits greater than the cost of the special assessment as the special assessment is 38.20% of the cost of the Assessment Project. The resolution was moved for adoption by Commissioner and the motion was seconded by Commissioner and, upon being put to a vote, the vote was as follows: Chairman Joseph E. Flescher Vice Chairman Peter D. O'Bryan Commissioner Susan Adams Commissioner Tim Zore Commissioner Bob Solari The Chairman thereupon declared the resolution duly passed and adopted this _ day of July, 2017. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA Attest: Jeffrey R. Smith, Clerk of Court and Comptroller By: By Deputy Clerk Approved as to form and leg#l-sufficiency: By Dyl;in Reingold, County Attorney Joseph E. Flescher, Chairman Attachment: Exhibit "X- Assessment Roll (to be recorded on Public Records) 9 P122 IIVUTAIV KIVtK LUUIV I T— UtYAK I IVItIV I Uh U I ILI I T btKVILtb NORTH COUNTY SEPTIC TO SEWER PROPOSED SEWER ASSESSMENT PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT ROLL – RESOLUTION 3 Parcel # 30382100001999900029.0 Assessment= $9,978.24 Owner RIVERWALK VILLAGE INC Secondary Owners ; iicC: !0 Secondary Owners Mailing Address 1616 N US HIGHWAY 1 Number E ?U's. 2 SEBASTIAN FL 32958 Legal TOWN OF WAUREGAN , PBB 1-178 COM AT THE INT OF THE E R/W LI - NE OF NEW US HWY 1 AND THE S R/W UNE OF 9TH ST; RUN SLY ALONG THE E R/W LINE OF, NEW US HWY 1 A DIST OF 1185.13 FT TO PO - B: FROM SAID POB RUN ELY ON A LINE P ARA WITH THE S BDY OF 9TH ST A Revision Date Site Address 1614 US HIGHWAY 1 7/6/2017 a - - Parcel # 30383000002001000004.1 Assessment= $4,989.12 Owner VARI, ATTILA T AND HEATHER E Secondary Owners Map ID: 2 Secondary Owners Mailing Address 285 RAVENNA DR Number ERU's: 1 LONG BEACH CA 90803 Legal INDIAN RIVER HILLS SUB PBI 4-51 THE SLY 25.0 FT OF LOT 4 BEING - A STRIP 25.0 WIDE LYING NLY OF AND IMME DIATELY ADIACENTTO SIDE LINE BETWEEN LO, TS4&5 NLY 50.0 FT OFLOT 5 BEING A - STRIP 50 FT WIDE LYING S OF & 1M Revision Date Site Address 1620 N CENTRAL AV 7/6/2017 Parcel # 30382100001999900028.0 Assessment= $4,989.12 Owner RIVERWALK VILLAGE INC Secondary Owners Map ID: 3 Secondary Owners Mailing Address 1616 N US HIGHWAY 1 Number ERU's: 1 SEBASTIAN FL 32958 Legal TOWN OF WAUREGAN , PBB 1-179 THAT PART OF WAUREGAN LYING E - OF RY; S OF 9 TH ST & BETWEEN NEW US HWY 1 & N CENTRAL AVE DESC AS FOLL; COM AT , SE COR OF INTERSECTION OF NEW US HWY 1 & - 9TH ST RUN S 9 DEG 57 MIN 30 SEC E AL 0 GN E R/W LINE OF NEW US HWY '— Revision Date Site Address US HIGHWAY 1 7/6/2017 11 Page F:\Utilities\UTIUTr • Engineerin;\Projects •Assessment Projects\OOOAssessments_2017_Proposed\06_NortltCountySeptic_to SewerAssessmen',Project_61 Parcels\bVordDocuments\Resolution_3\01_PrelinlAsslRoil_RESO_3_NortliCountySeptic_ SewerAsses.doix Thursday, July 06, 2017 P123 IIVUTAIV KIVtK LVU1V I T— ULFAK I IVIM 1 Ut U I ILI IT -NtKVK.tb NORTH COUNTY SEPTIC TO SEWER PROPOSED SEWER ASSESSMENT PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT ROLL —RESOLUTION 3 �Z Ly,, Parcel # 30383000002001000004.0 Assessment= $4,989.12 Owner JMH VENTURES CORPORATION Secondary Owners Secondary Owners Mailing Address PO BOX 1014 `lumber E ?U's. j. ROSELAND FL 32957 Legal INDIAN RIVER HILLS SUB PBI 4-51 NLY 75 FT OF LOT 4 SLY & IMMED - IATELY ADJ TO SIDE LOT LINE BETWEEN LOTS 3 & 4 AS R BK 279 PP 420 BLK 1 Revision Date: Site Address 1624 N CENTRAL AV 7/6/2017 Parcel # 30382100001999900027.0 Assessment= $4,989.12 Owner FISH, GLENN Secondary Owners Map ID: 5 Secondary Owners Mailing Address 6007 INNES TRACE RD Number ERU's: 1 LOUISVILLE KY 40222-6004 Legal TOWN OF WAUREGAN , PBB 1-178 POR OF PART OF WAUREGAN BETWEE - N RY & S OF 9TH ST, BEING A LOT LOCATED BETWEEN N CENTRAL AVE & NEW US HWY 1 AS , R BK 51 PP 257 Revision Date Site Address US HIGHWAY 1 7/6/2017 Parcel # 30383000002001000002.0 Assessment= $4,989.12 Owner STRUNK, GLENN A AND DOROTHY Secondary Owners Map ID: 6 Secondary Owners Mailing Address 2 SEA GULL AVE Number ERU's: 1 VERO BEACH FL 32960-5213 Legal INDIAN RIVER HILLS SUB PBI 4-51 LOT 2 & SWLY 80 FT OF LOT 12 AS-RBK64 PP 289 BLK 1 Revision Date Site Address 1632 N CENTRAL AV 7/6/2017 4,_ •. • t+ t'k4'A,i � V RYi'"�,-iP �yyi�Sttey�., .fib +��?..,� �, r,al'-Y^ Y '" `' aI? 'M"f' �rR'�l.•:.w ���'�1:1. llt'age F\Utilities,UTi LITY - Engineering\Projects - Assessment Projects\ODOAssessmen ts_201 7 _Propose d\0o NorthCountySeptic_to SewerAssessmen,Project 61_Parcels\Word Doc uments\Resolution_3\Ol_PrelimAsstRol l_RESO_3_NorthCountySeptic _ SewerA.sses .docx Thursday, July 06, 2017 P124 INUTAN KIVtK I.UUN IT — UtFAK I WIM I Ut U I ILI IT btKV ILtb NORTH COUNTY SEPTIC TO SEWER PROPOSED SEWER ASSESSMENT PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT ROLL — RESOLUTION 3 Parcel # 30382100001999900026.0 Assessment= $9,978.24 Owner STRUNK, GLENN AND DOROTHY Secondary Owners i i?.-,;, !D : 7 Secondary Owners Mailing Address 91617TH ST Nurnber ERU's: 2 VERO BEACH FL 32960 Legal TOWN OF WAUREGAN , PBB 1-178 POR OF PART OF WAUREGAN BETWEE - N RY & S OF 9TH ST; BEING A LOT LOCATED BETWEEN N CENTRAL AVE & NEW US HWY 1 AS , R BK 51 PP 249 Revision Date Site Address 1640 US HIGHWAY 1 7/6/2017 Parcel # 30383000002001000011.0 Assessment= $4,989.12 Owner MC CANN, SANDRA CALVIN Secondary Owners Map ID: 8 Secondary Owners Mailing Address 1637 INDIAN RIVER DR Number ERU's: 1 SEBASTIAN FL 32958-3854 Legal INDIAN RIVER HILLS SUB PBI 4-51 LOT 11 BLK 1 LOT 1 BLK 2 & ALS - 0 INCL THAT POR OF ARAN R/W IND RIV DR P ER THE CITY OF SEB RES #R-01-52 AS DESC IN OR BK 1417 PG 2405; ALSO INCL LOT 1 B - LK 1 Revision Date Site Address 1637 INDIAN RIVER DR 7/6/2017 Parcel # 30382100001999900025.0 Assessment= $4,989.12 Owner STRUNK, GLENN A AND DOROTHY Secondary Owners Map ID: 9 Secondary Owners Mailing Address 2 SEAGULL AVE Number ERU's: 1 VERO BEACH FL 32963 Legal TOWN OF WAUREGAN , PBB 1-178 FROM THE SE COR OF US #1 & 9TH - ST; RUN S.9 DEG 57 MIN 30 SEC E 835.15 FT ALONG E R/W OF US #1 TO POB; TH S 9 D, EG 57 MIN 30 SEC E 50 FT ALONG R/W TH S - 88 DEG 06 MIN E 124.79 FT TO W R/W N CE NTRAL AVE TH N ALONG SAID Revision Date Site Address US HIGHWAY 1 7/6/2017 a I r a g e F:\Ufilities\UTtL!TY - Engineering\Projects-.Absessment P+ojects\OOOAssessments_2017_Pr000sed\06_NorthCountySeptic_to_SewerlssessmentProject 61_Pnrcels\WotdDocumencs\Resolution_3\01_Pre!imAsstRo!I_RESO_3_NorthCountYSeptiC_ Se+nerAssei.docx Thursday, July 06, 2017 P125 IIVUTAN KI V CK LUV IV 1 T — UCYHK I IVICIY 1 Ur U I ILI IT JCKV ILC-. NORTH COUNTY SEPTIC TO SEWER PROPOSED SEWER ASSESSMENT PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT ROLL — RESOLUTION 3 Parcel # 30382100001999900024.0 Assessment= $4,989.12 Owner STRUNK, GLENN A AND DOROTHY Secondary Owners Secondary Owners Mailing Address 2 SEAGULL AVE Number Ei;U's: 1 VE'RO BEACH FL 32963 Legal TOWN OF WAUREGAN , PBB 1-178 FROM THE SE COR OF US NO1&9-THST RUNS 9DEG 06MIN W 142.09 FT TO POB AS IN R BK 312 PP 456. Revision Date: Site Address US HIGHWAY 1 7/6/2017 Parcel # 30382100001999900014.0 Assessment= $29,934.72 Owner KELLY, RICHARD ARTHUR & Secondary Owners KELLY, BARBARA JEAN Map ID: 11 Secondary Owners Mailing Address 1644 N CENTRAL AVE Number ERU's: 6 SEBASTIAN FL 32958 Legal TOWN OF WAUREGAN , PBB 1-179 PART OF SEC 30; FLEMING GRANT - AS OR BK 41 P P 292 & PART E OF RY AS IN D BK 46 PP 110 AND ALSO INCL PART OF LO, T 6 MO RE PART DESC AS FOLL FR INT OF N - LINE OF IR HILLS & FLEMING GRANT LINE F OR POB RUN N 45 DEG 09 MIN 00 Revision Date Site Address 1644 N CENTRAL AV 7/6/2017 Parcel # 30382100001999900022.0 Assessment= $4,989.12 Owner STRUNK, GLENN A AND DOROTHY H Secondary Owners Map I D: 12 Secondary Owners Mailing Address 2 SEAGULL AVE Number ERU's: 1 VERO BEACH FL 32960-5213 Legal TOWN OF WAUREGAN , PBB 1-178 COM AT SE COR OF US #1 & 9TH S - T; CITY OF S EBASTIAN; RUN S 9 DEG 57 MIN 30 SEC E ALONG E R/W SAID US#1; DIST OF, 300 FT TO POB TH CONT ALONG SAID E R/W - 485.18 FT TH RUNS88DEG6 MIN ED N A LINE PARALELLTO 9TH ST 14 T Revision Date: Site Address 1623 N CENTRAL AV 7/6/2017 4 i v a g e r:\Utilities\UTILITY - Engineering\Proiects - Assessment Piojects\D00Assessment> 2017_Proposed\06_NorthCounty5epuc_to_SewerAssessmentFroiect_61_Parce1s\'%AfordDocuments\Resolution_3\0'1_PrelimAsstRoll_RESO 3_N orthCounty5eptic _ SewerAssesdyer. Thursday, JUly 06, 2017 P126 INUTAN KIVLK LUU1Y I Y— UtNAK I MUM 1 UP U I ILI I T btK V IL.t3 NORTH COUNTY SEPTIC TO SEWER PROPOSED SEWER ASSESSMENT PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT ROLL— RESOLUTION 3 Parcel # 30382100001999900013.0 Assessment= $4,989.12 Owner SWANIK, JAMES Secondary Owners Secondary Owners Mailing Address 1945 5TH CT t,Ilmber cRu's: 1 VERO BEACH FL 32960 Legal TOWN OF WAUREGAN , PBB 1-179 PART OF SEC 30 FLEMING DR ASD - BK 12 PP 62 &DBK25;PP571&DBK30PP131&DBK31PP91,LESS BERG BOM A, S R B K41PP292 LESS LOT 100 X 150 FT - AS DESC IN OR BK 366 PP 455 & LESS TO B ERGBOM AS IN OR BK 41 PP 292 Revision Date: Site Address 1654 N CENTRAL AV 7/6/2017 Parcel # 30382100001999900012.0 Assessment= $4,989.12 Owner HALL, HAROLD AND CHRISTINE L Secondary Owners Map ID: 14 Secondary Owners Mailing Address 8925 107TH AVE Number ERU's: 1 VERO BEACH FL 32967 Legal TOWN OF WAUREGAN , PBB 1-179 PART OF SEC 30; FLEMING GRANT; - BEING LOT 10 0 FT X 150 FT AS DESC IN OR BK 366 PP 455 Revision Date Site Address 1662 N CENTRAL AV 7/6/2017 Parcel # 30382100001999900021.0 Assessment= $4,989.12 Owner 1676 DUCKS LLC Secondary Owners Map ID: 15 Secondary Owners Mailing Address 3155 62ND AVE Number ERU's: 1 VERO BEACH FL 32966 Legal TOWN OF WAUREGAN , PBB 1-178 NLY 300 FT, MEASURED ALONG E R -/W LINE OF N EW US HWY l OF THAT PART OF WAUREGAN LYING E OF RY & S OF 9TH ST; LY, ING BETWEEN NEW US HWY 1 & N CENTRAL AVE - LESS ELY 100 FT THEREOF AS R BK 36 PP 316, ALSO DESC AS FOLL; BE Revision Date: Site Address 1676 US HIGHWAY 1 7/6/2017 51Page F:\Utilities\UTILITY • Engineering\Projects - Assessment Projects\=Assessments_2017_Propose d\06_Nort hCountvSeptic_to_SewerAssessmentProject 61 Parcels\VdordDocuments\Resolution 3\01 PreliniAsstRoll_RE50_3_NorthCountySeptic_ SewerAsses .docx Thursday, July 06, 2017 P127 INDIAN RIVER COUNTY— DEPARTMENT OF UTILITY SERVICES NORTH COUNTY SEPTIC TO SEWER PROPOSED SEWER ASSESSMENT PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT ROLL—RESOLUTION 3 Parcel # 30382100001999900020.0 Assessment= $4,989.12 Owner SYPHER, RONALD Secondary Owners __ ID: 1_: Secondary Owners Mailing Address 1683 N CENTRAL AVE Nunn'ber ERU'S: 1 SEBASTIAN .FL 32958-3807 Legal TOWN OF WAUREGAN , PBB 1-179 BEG AT INTERSECTION OF E R/W L - INE OF NEW U S HWY 1 & S R/W LINE OF 9TH ST; TH RUN ELY ALONG S R/W LINE OF 9TH S, T 29 3.59 FT TO THE INTERSECTION OF 9TH S - T & N CENTRAL AVE TH RUN SLY ALONG W LI NE OF N CENTRAL AVE 153.5 Revision Date Site Address 1683 N CENTRAL AV 7/6/2017 Parcel # 30382100001999900011.1 Assessment= $19,956.48 Owner INDIAN RIVER RV INC Secondary Owners Map I D: 17 Secondary Owners Mailing Address 1698 N CENTRAL AVE Number EP,U's: 4 SEBASTIAN FL 32958 Legal TOWN OF WAUREGAN , PBB3-179 THAT PART OF WAUREGAN LYING E 0 - F N CENTRAL AVE & S OF 9TH ST DESC AS FO LL; BEG AT INT OF S R/W OF 9TH ST & WLY , LIN E OF AUGUST PARK SUB (SAME BEING FLEM - ING GRANT LINE) AS IN PBS 1-19 TH RUN S WLY ALONG S R/W OF 9TH S Revision Date: Site Address N CENTRAL AV 7/6/2017 Parcel # 30382100001999900018.0 Assessment= $4,989.12 Owner VICTORIA -WILLIAM COMPANY Secondary Owners Map ID: 13 Secondary Owners Mailing Address 6945 49TH ST Number ERU's: 1 VERO BEACH FL 32967 Legal TOWN OF WAUREGAN , PBB 1-179 BEG AT THE INT OF THE E R/W LI - NE OF NEW US HIGHWAY NO 1 & THE S R/W OF NINTH ST; TH RUN ELY ALONG THE S R/W LI, NE O F NINTH ST A DIST OF 293.59 FTTO TH - E INT OF NINTH ST & _N_CENTRAL.AVE_FO RPOB TH RUN SLY ALONG THE W Revision Date Site Address 1697 N CENTRAL AV 7/6/2017 6 1 P a g e F:\Utilities\UTILITY - Engineering\Project - Assessment Projects\OOOAssessments_2017_Proposed\06._,NlortliCounty5eptic_to SewerAssessmentProject_61_Parceis\WordDocurnents\Resolution_',\01 PrelilnA;stRoll_RESO 3_DlorthCot+nty5eptic_ SewerAsses .docx Thursday, July 06, 2017 P128 INDIAN RIVER COUNTY — DEPARTMENT OF UTILITY SERVICES NORTH COUNTY SEPTIC TO SEWER PROPOSED SEWER ASSESSMENT PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT ROLL — RESOLUTION 3 Parcel # 30382100001999900011.0 Assessment= $9,978.24 Owner INDIAN RIVER RV INC Secondary Owners - Secondary Owners Mailing Address 1698 N CENTRAL AVE Nurnbcr E.',lPs: 2 SEBASTIAN FL 32958 Legal TOWN OF WAUREGAN , PBB 1-179 & PBI 1-19; COM INT OF S R/WO- FDAVIS ST& WLY LINE OF AUGUST PARK SUB (SAME BEING FLEMING GRANT LINE); TH S 5, 6 DE G 03 MIN 35 SEC W ALONG S R/W LINE 0 - F DAVIS ST A DIST OF 16.30 FT TO POB TH CONT S 56 DEG 03 MIN 35 S Revision Date Site Address 1698 N CENTRAL AV 7/6/2017 Parcel # 30383000001004000011.0 Assessment= $9,978.24 Owner SMITH, DALE S AND CYNTHIA A Secondary Owners Map ID: 20 Secondary Owners Mailing Address 197 FULLERTON RD Number ERU's: 2 DERRICK CITY PA 16727-1213 Legal OCEAN BREEZE HEIGHTS SUB PBI 2-7 LOT 11 LESS HWY R/W & LOTS 12 & -13 BL K4 Revision Date Site Address DAVIS ST 7/6/2017 Parcel # 30383000001004000014.0 Assessment= $4,989.12 Owner SMITH, DALE S AND CYNTHIA A Secondary Owners Map ID: 21 Secondary Owners Mailing Address 197 FULLERTON RD Number ERU's: 1 DERRICK CITY PA 16727-1213 Legal OCEAN BREEZE HEIGHTS SUB PBI 2-7 LOT 14 BLK 4 TOGETHER WITH WLY 1-/2 OF ADJ ABND ALLEY PER CITY OF SEBASTI AN ORD # 0-83-16 'Revisjun Date Site Address DAVIS ST 7/6/2017 7 1 P a g e F:\1-11i1ities\UT1UTY - Engineering\Project; - Assessment Projects\OOOAssessments_2017 _Pro posed\06 PlorthCountySeptic_to Set:-erAssessmentProject 61 Parcels\WordDocuntents\Resolution_3\01_PrelimnstRoll RESD 3_NorthCountySep:ic_ SewerAsses .docg Thursday, July 06, 2017 P129 INDIAN RIVER COUNTY — DEPARTMENT OF UTILITY SERVICES NORTH COUNTY SEPTIC TO SEWER PROPOSED SEWER ASSESSMENT PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT ROLL — RESOLUTION'3 Parcel # 30383000001003000001.0 Assessment= $4,989.12 Owner SEBASTIAN MASONIC LODGE NO 232 Secondary Owners ;; D . 2 Secondary Owners Mailing Address PO BOX 780193 SEBASTIAN FL 32978-0193 Legal OCEAN BREEZE HEIGHTS SUB PBI 2-7 LOTS 1 TO 10 INC BLK 3 TOGETHER - WITH E LY 1/2 OF ADJ ABND ALLEY PER CITY OF SEBASTIAN ORDINANCE # 0-83-16 Revision Date Site Address 1715 N CENTRAL AV 7/6/2017 Parcel # 30382100001999900010.0 Assessment= $4,989.12 Owner MCBRIDE, HAROLD R JR (LE) Secondary Owners DELVIN, LINDA (1/4) GIBLIN, LAURA (1/4) Map ID: 23 Secondary Owners MOBLEY, CRAIG (1/4)• MOBLEY, ERIC (1/4) Mailing Address 616 DAVIS ST Number ERU's: 1 SEBASTIAN FL 32958 Legal TOWN OF WAUREGAN , PBB 1-179 COM AT A PT WHERE THE FLEMING - GRANT LINE IN TERSECTS CENTRAL AVE OR THE OLD DIXIE HWY; IN THE TOWN OF SEBASTIAN , ; TH GO S 338 FT MORE OR LESS TO AN IRO - N POST WHERE CENTRAL AVE IS INTERSECT ED BY 9TH ST FOR THE POB TH G Revision Date Site Address 616 DAVIS ST 7/6/2017 Parcel # 30393100001000000005.4 Assessment= $4,989.12 Owner FAIRCHILD, BRIAN J Secondary Owners Map ID: 24 Secondary Owners Mailing Address 86A CAMPVILLE RD Number ERU's: 1 NORTHFIELD CT 6778 Legal AUGUST PARK SUB ESTATE OF PBS 1-19 PART OF LOT 5 AS D BK 26 PG 85 Revision Date Site Address 612 DAVIS ST 7/6/2017 �• i 8 1 P a g e F:\Utilities\UTILITY - Engineering\Project: • Assessment Projects\OGOAssessments_2017 Proposed\06_Nor-thCountySeptic_to SewerAssessmentProject 61 Parcels\WordOocunients\Resolution 3\01_PrelhnAsstRoll RE503 NorthCountySeptic_ SevrerAsses . docx Thursday, July 06, 2017 P130 INDIAN RIVER COUNTY — DEPARTMENT OF UTILITY SERVICES NORTH COUNTY SEPTIC TO SEWER PROPOSED SEWER ASSESSMENT PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT ROLL — RESOLUTION 3 Parcel # 30393100001000000004.2 Assessment= $9,978.24 Owner NILSSON, ROBERT AND TERESA Secondary Owners :' ;f'.D :t5 Secondary Owners Mailing Address 608 DAVIS ST -"umc9r ER'.rs: 2 SEBASTIAN FL 32958 Legal AUGUST PARK SUB ESTATE OF PBS 1-19 A POR OF LOTS 4 & 5 BEING MORE - PART DESC AS FOLL COM AT INT OF WLY R/ W LINE OF OLD DIXIE HWY & NLY R/W LINE 0, F 9TH ST; TH RUN N 26 DEG 44 MIN 00 SEC - W ALONG SAID WLY R/W LINE 141 .21 FT Revision Date: Site Address 1727 N INDIAN RIVER DR 7/6/2017 Parcel # 30383000001004000002.0 Assessment= $4,989.12 Owner KRASCO, LESLIE Secondary Owners Map ID: 26 Secondary Owners Mailing Address 5240 93RD LN Number ERU's: 1 SEBASTIAN FL 32958 Legal OCEAN BREEZE HEIGHTS SUB PBI 2-7 LOTS 2,3 & LOT 4; LESS HWY R/W & - LOT 5 LESS HWY R/W BLK 4 Revision Date: Site Address 1716 US HIGHWAY 1 7/6/2017 k Parcel # 30383000001004000001.0 Assessment= $4,989.12 Owner KRASCO, LESLIE Secondary Owners Map ID: 27 Secondary Owners Mailing Address 5240 93RD LN Number ERU's: 1 SEBASTIAN FL 32958 Legal OCEAN BREEZE HEIGHTS SUB PBI 2-7 LOT 1 BLK 4 TOGETHER WITH WLY 1/-2OF ADJ ABND ALLEY PER CITY OF SEBASTIA N ORDINANCE # 0-83- 16 Revision Date Site Address MADISON ST 7/6/2017 9 1 P a g e F:\Utibties\UTILITY - Engineering\Projects • Assessment Projects1000Assessments_2017 Prouosed\06_NortltCoanty5eptic_to_SewerAssessmentProject 61_Parcels\Word Documents\Resolution_3\01_PreiiiiiAsstRolt RESO_3_NortliCountySeptic_ SewerAsses.docx Thursday, July 06, 2017 P131 INDIAN RIVER COUNTY— DEPARTMENT OF UTILITY SERVICES NORTH COUNTY SEPTIC TO SEWER PROPOSED SEWER ASSESSMENT PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT ROLL — RESOLUTION 3 Parcel # 30382100001999900009.0 Assessment= $4,989.12 Owner NILSSON, ROBERT AND TERESA Secondary Owners Secondary Owners Mailing Address 608 DAVIS ST SEBASTIAN FL 32958 Legal TOWN OF WAUREGAN , PBB 1-179 A POR OF FLEMING GRANT SEC 30 - MORE PART DES C AS FOLL; BEG AT A PT WHER E FLEMING GRANT LINE INTERSECTS N CENTRA, LAV E TH S 22 DEG 16 MIN 05 SEC E ALONG - E R/W OF N CENT AVE TO A PT WHICH IS 13 8 FT N OF INTERSECTION OF Revision Date Site Address 608 DAVIS ST 7/6/2017 Parcel # 30383000001005000011.0 Assessment= $4,989.12 Owner NEVAREZ, PEDRO & Secondary Owners HUITRON, GLORIA Map ID: 29 Secondary Owners Mailing Address 7340 57TH ST Number ERU's: 1 VERO BEACH FL 32967 Legal OCEAN BREEZE HEIGHTS SUB - BLK'5 LOT it PBI 2-7 Revision Date Site Address 704 MADISON ST 7/6/2077 Parcel # 30383000001005000012.0 Assessment $9,978.24 Owner CITY OF SEBASTIAN Secondary Owners Map ID: 30 Secondary Owners Mailing Address 1225 MAIN ST Number ERU's: 2 SEBASTIAN FL 32958-4165 Legal OCEAN BREEZE HEIGHTS SUB PBI 2-7 LOTS 12 & 13 BLK 5 & INCA PORT - OF ABN D ALLEY ABUTTING LOT 13 PER CITY O F SEBASTIAN ORD #0- 092-10 Revision Date Site Address MADISON ST 7/6/2017 20IPa.-e F:\Utilities\UTILITY - Engine eting\Projects - Assessment Projects\OQOAssessments_2017 Proposed\06_tJonhCOuntySeptic_to 5ewerAsses,menWroject_61 Parcels\WOrdDownients\Resolution_3\01_PrelinlAstRoll_RESO_3_\orthCotintySeptic_ SewerAsses .docx Thursday, July 06, 2017 P132 INDIAN RIVER COUNTY— DEPARTMENT OF UTILITY SERVICES NORTH COUNTY SEPTIC TO SEWER PROPOSED SEWER ASSESSMENT PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT ROLL — RESOLUTION 3 Parcel # 30383000001002000009.0 Assessment= $4,989.12 Owner CITY OF SEBASTIAN Secondary Owners Secondary Owners Mailing Address 1225 MAIN ST Number ERUr . l SEBASTIAN FL 32958-4165 Legal OCEAN BREEZE HEIGHTS SUB PBI 2-7 LOTS 9 & 30, BLK 2 & INC A PORT - OF ABN D ALLEY ABUTTING SAID LOTS PER CIT Y OF SEBASTIAN ORD #0-92-10 Revision Date Site Address MADISON ST 7/6/2017 Parcel # 30383000001005000003.0 Assessment= $4,989.12 Owner NEVAREZ, PEDRO & Secondary Owners HUITRON, GLORIA Map ID: 32 Secondary Owners Mailing Address 7340 57TH ST Number ERU's: 1 VERO BEACH FL 32967 Legal OCEAN BREEZE HEIGHTS SUB - BLK 5 LOTS 3 & 4 PBI 2-7 Revision Date Site Address 711 JACKSON ST 7/6/2017 - r r Parcel # 30383000001005000001.0 Assessment= $4,989.12 Owner MARSHALL, HARRY J AND SARA Secondary Owners Map ID: 33 Secondary Owners Mailing Address 707 JACKSON ST Number ERU's: 1 SEBASTIAN FL 32958 Legal OCEAN BREEZE HEIGHTS SUB PBI 2-7 LOTS 1 & 2 BLK 5 & INC A PORT OF - ABND ALLEY ABUTTING LOT 1 PER CITY OF S EBASTIAN ORD #0-92-10 _ Revision Date: Site Address 707 JACKSON ST 7/6/2017 111 Page F:\Utilities\UTILITY - Engineering\Projects - Assessment Projects\OOOAssessments_2017_Proposed\06_NotthCountySeptic_to_Se;ve.4ssessmen;Project_61_Parcels;b\lordDocuments\Resolution_3\01PrelimAsstRoll RESO 3_NorthCounty5epk_ Sewe.'A;;Ps.docr. Thursday, July 06, 2017 P133 INDIAN RIVER COUNTY— DEPARTMENT OF UTILITY SERVICES NORTH COUNTY SEPTIC TO SEWER PROPOSED SEWER ASSESSMENT PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT ROLL — RESOLUTION 3 Parcel # 30383000001002000001.0 Assessment= $4,989.12 Owner CITY OF SEBASTIAN Secondary Owners Map:D : 3.,. Secondary Owners Mailing Address 1225 MAIN ST 'rlurnher ERU's: 1 SEBASTIAN FL 32958-4165 Legal OCEAN BREEZE HEIGHTS SUB PBI 2-7 LOTS 1 TO 8 INC & INC A PORT OF - ABND A LLEY ABUTTING SAID LOTS PER CITY 0 F SEBASTIAN ORD #0- 92-30 Revision Date Site Address 1805 CENTRAL AV 7/6/2017 Parcel # 30393100001000000003.5 Assessment= $4,989.12 Owner HOCH REBECCA S (LE) Secondary Owners HOSH RACHEL S Map ID: 35 Secondary Owners Mailing Address 99 CARMEN ST Number ERU's: 1 MELBOURNE FL 32951-3836 Legal AUGUST PARK SUB ESTATE OF PBS 1-19 BEG AT CONCRETE MARKER ON N LINE OF LOT 3 291.5 FT W OF NE COR OF LOT 3 TH RUN S ON W BDY OF PROPERTY DESC IN D BK 88 PG 88 A DIST 139.82 FT TO AN IRON PIPE FOR POB Revision Date ; Site Address 1724 N CENTRAL AV 7/6/2017 Parcel # 30383000001006000000.2 Assessment= $4,989.12 Owner HART, MARIA Secondary Owners Map ID: 36 Secondary Owners Mailing Address 1546 N US HIGHWAY 1 Number ERU's: 1 SEBASTIAN FL 32958 Legal OCEAN BREEZE HEIGHTS SUB PBI 2-7 PART OF TRACT AAS FOLL: BEG AT - NW COR OF LOT 5 BLK 6 RUN N 93.20 FT TO NW COR OF TRACT A TH SELY ALONG N BDY 0 -- ---� ,FTRACT ATOPTDUE NOFNECDR OFLOT 5-;TH5TO NE -COR-OF-L•OT 5;-W - 50 FT TO PO B Revision Date Site Address 710 JACKSON ST 7/6/2017 121Page F:\Utili ieAUTILITY - Engineering\Projects - Assessment Projects\OOOAssessments_2017 Proposed\06_NorthCounty5eptic_to_SewerAssessmentProject 61 Parcels\Wold Documents\Resolution_3\01_PrelimA;stRoll_RESO_3_NorthCounzySeptic_ SewerAsses docx Thursday, luly 06, 2017 P134 INDIAN RIVER COUNTY - DEPARTMENT OF UTILITY SERVICES NORTH COUNTY SEPTIC TO SEWER PROPOSED SEWER ASSESSMENT PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT ROLL - RESOLUTION 3 Parcel # 30383000001006000000.1 Assessment= $9,978.24 Owner HART, MARIA Secondary Owners ,v;r,p i r) 37 Secondary Owners Mailing Address 1546 N US HIGHWAY 1 du mbe r ERU's: 2 SEBASTIAN FL 32958 Legal OCEAN BREEZE HEIGHTS SUB PBI 2-7 BLK 6 LOTS 1, 2, 3, 4 & TRACT A LESS THAT DESC POR CONVEYED IN D BK 72 PG 351 BLK 6 & INC A POR OF LOT 1TOWN OF WAUR EGAN IN PBS 6-32 BEING MORE PART DESC AS COM AT CAPPED 4 INCH IRON PIPE LA BELED AS PRM ON SAID PLAT OF 0 Revision Date: Site Address 708 JACKSON ST 7/6/2017 Parcel # 30383000001001000001.0 Assessment= $4,989.12 Owner HALL, JERRY S AND MARSHA G Secondary Owners Map ID: 38 Secondary Owners Mailing Address 7711 ROSELAND RD Number ERU's: 1 SEBASTIAN FL 32958 Legal OCEAN BREEZE HEIGHTS SUB PBI 2-7 LOTS 1-2 & 3 BLK 1 AS PREV CONV - EYED I N R BK 227 PP 440; TOG W TOWN OF WAUREGAN PBS 1-179 PART OF GRANT SEC 30 , AS IN R BK 227 PP 41 & ALSO INC ALL OF A - BND ALLEY PER CITY OF SEB RES # R-01-51 D ESC IN OR BK 1417 PP Revision Date Site Address 698 JACKSON ST 7/6/2017 Parcel # 30382100001000000025.1 Assessment= $9,978.24 Owner CITY OF SEBASTIAN Secondary Owners Map ID: 42 Secondary Owners Mailing Address 1225 MAIN ST Number ERU's: 2 SEBASTIAN FL 32958 Legal TOWN OF WAUREGAN , PBB 1-178-179 PART OF LOT 25; LYING E OF - US NO 1 DESC AS FOLL; BEG ON NELY FLEMI NG GRANT LINE IN SEC 30 AT A CONCRETE MO, NUME NT MARKING BDRY BETWEEN LOTS 25 & 26 - " " `TN-SWLY ALONG-SAID-BDRY-SETWEEN-SA----'— ---- - - - — -- - - - ID L OTS 322.38 FT TO ELY R/W Revision Date Site Address 12900 US HIGHWAY 1 7/6/2017 131Page F:\Utilities\UTILITY - Engineerino\Projects - Assessment Projects\OOOAssessments_201% Proposed\06_N ort hCountySeptic_tu SewerAssessmentProject_6!_Parcels\WordDocuments\Resolution_3\01_PrelimAsstRoll_RE50_3—NorthCountySeotic_ SewerAsses docx Thursday, July 06, 2017 P135 INDIAN RIVER COUNTY— DEPARTMENT OF UTILITY SERVICES NORTH COUNTY SEPTIC TO SEWER PROPOSED SEWER ASSESSMENT PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT ROLL — RESOLUTION 3 Parcel # 30382100001000000025.0 Assessment= $9,978.24 Owner FOUNTAIN TOWERS LLC Secondary Owners z Secondary Owners Mailing Address 12920 US HIGHWAY 1 1Iur,ber Fates: 2 SEBASTIAN FL 32958 Legal TOWN OF WAUREGAN , PBB 1-178&179 THE NWLY 116.97 FT OF LOT - 25 LYING NELY OF US HW 1(OR BK 457 PP 186) Revision Date Site Address 12920 US HIGHWAY 1 7/6/2017 Parcel # 30382100001000000024.0 Assessment= $14,967.36 Owner RIZWI LLC Secondary Owners Map ID: 44 Secondary Owners Mailing Address 8540 SEACREST DR Number ERU's: 3 VERO BEACH FL 32963 Legal TOWN OF WAUREGAN , PBB 1-178 PART OF LOT 24 LYING E OF US N - O 1 DESC AS FOLL: FR A PT ON THE NELY FG LINE IN SEC 30 AT A CONCRETE MON MARKIN , G BD RY BETWEEN LOT 25 & 26 TH SELY ALON - G SAID BDRY 322.38 FT TO ELY R/W OF USN01 TH NWLY ALONG R/W OF Revision Date: Site Address 12950 US HIGHWAY 1 7/6/2017 Parcel # 30382100001000000023.0 Assessment= $29,934.72 Owner FAMILY CAR WASH CO INC Secondary Owners Map ID: 46 Secondary Owners Mailing Address 101 INNER HARBOUR WAY Number ERU's: 6 JUPITER FL 33477 Legal TOWN OF WAUREGAN , PBB 1-75 AND RE -FILED IN PBS 1-178 THE P - OB BEING THE PT OF INT FORMED BY THE ELY R/W OF US HIGHWAY #1 WITH THE NLY BDY L, INE OF LOT 23 FROM SAID POB PROCEED NELY - ALONG THE NLY BDY OF LOT 23 A DIST 0 F 2 07.03 FT TO THE INTERSECTI Revision Date: Site Address 13020 US HIGHWAY 1 7/6/2017 141Page F.\Utilities"UTILITY - Engineering\Proles:, - Assessment P role c is\OOOAss essrn e nt s_2017_Propos ed\06_N ort iiCou in ySeptic_to_SewerAs s es sme nt P reiect_61_Pai cels\boor d Documen is\Resolut ien_3\01_P relim As st P,o II_R ESO_3_N orth Cou n:yS eptic_ Sev,erAsses.docx Thursday, July 06, 2017 P136 INDIAN RIVER COUNTY— DEPARTMENT OF UTILITY SERVICES NORTH COUNTY SEPTIC TO SEWER PROPOSED SEWER ASSESSMENT PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT ROLL — RESOLUTION 3 Parcel # 30382100001000000022.0 Assessment= $9,978.24 Owner PTS OF BREVARD COUNTY INC Secondary Owners :,A7.r i -D : 17 Secondary Owners Mailing Address PO BOX 4060 Number ERU's: 2 DANVILLE IL 61834-4060 Legal TOWN OF WAUREGAN , PBB 1-178 & 179 ALL OF LOT 22 LYING EOFUSHWYI&WO F FLEMING GRANT LINE AS I N OR BK 555 PG 1886 LESS PORT DESC AS F OLL: COM AT INTERSECTION WITH SLY LINE LOT 22 & ELY R/W US HWY #1 & RUN N 36 DEG 38 MIN 55 SEC W 166.59 FT FTTO Revision Date Site Address 13050 US HIGHWAY 1 7/6/2017 Parcel # 30382100001000000021.1 Assessment= $141967.36 Owner SEBASTIAN PARTNERS LLC Secondary Owners Map ID: 49 Secondary Owners Mailing -Address 2503 NW HOLLYBERRY LN Number ERU's: 3 PALM CITY FL 34990 Legal TOWN OF WAUREGAN , PBB 1-178 & 179 THAT PART OF LOT 21 LYIN - G E OF PRESE NT HIGHWAY #1 Revision Date Site Address 13070 US HIGHWAY 1 7/6/2017 Parcel # 30382100001000000020.2 Assessment= $9,978.24 Owner ZAIDI, SYED IRFAN H (COTRS) AND MUNAWAR SULTANA (COTRS) Secondary Owners Map ID: 50 Secondary Owners Mailing Address 209 AREGA ST Number ERU's: 2 SEBASTIAN FL 32958 Legal TOWN OF WAUREGAN , PBB 1-178 & 179 THAT PART OF LOT 20; E 0 - F PRESENT US HW #1 Revision Date: Site Address 13090 US HIGHWAY 1 7/6/2017 15IPa.ge R\Utilities\UTILITY - Engineenng\Projects - Assessment Projects\000A.ssessments_2017_Proposed\06_tlorthtounty5eptic_to SewerassessmentProject_61_Parcels`J,Void0octunents\Resolution_3\0l_PrclirtlAsstRoll_RE50_3_NorthCounty5eptic_ 5ewerAsses.docx, Thursday, July 06, 2017 P137 INUTAN KIVtK LULIN I Y— UtYAK I MtN 1 Ut U I ILI I Y btKVILtb NORTH COUNTY SEPTIC TO SEWER PROPOSED SEWER ASSESSMENT PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT ROLL — RESOLUTION 3 Parcel # 30382100001000000019.0 Assessment= $14,967.36 Owner SHALHOUB, HALA Secondary Owners Secondary Owners Mailing Address 1302 RIVER REACH DR Number ERU's. 3 VERO BEACH FL 32967 Legal TOWN OF WAUREGAN , PBB 1-178 & 179 THAT PART OF LOT 19 LYIN - G E OF PRESE NT US HWY #1 & ALSO INC LOT 18 OF INDIAN RIVER TWIN ESTATES ;JEANS U, NIT PBI 8-31 Revision Date Site Address 13100 US HIGHWAY 1 7/6/2017 Parcel # 30383600004001000001.0 Assessment= $4,989.12 Owner GERISEB PL Secondary Owners Map ID: 52 Secondary Owners Mailing Address 1515 US HIGHWAY 1 STE 204 Number ERU's: 1 SEBASTIAN FL 32958 Legal INDIAN RIVER TWIN ESTATES SUB PBI 8-31 LOT 1 JEANS UNIT & TOWN OF WAUR - EGAN PBS 1-178 & 179 LOT 18 LYING W OF F LEMING GRANT LINE & E OF US HWY #1 Revision Date Site Address 13230 US HIGHWAY 1 7/6/2017 Parcel # 30382500000004100002.0 Assessment= $374,184.00 Owner ROYAL PALM CORPORATE CENTER AS SOCIATES LTD Secondary Owners Map ID: 54 Secondary Owners Mailing Address 101 PINEAPPLE GROVE WAY Number ERU's: 75 DELRAY BEACH FL 33444 Legal ALL THAT PART OF FOLL DESC LAND LYING E - OF US HWY 1 BEG AT SE COR OF INL ET VIE SUB AS PER PLATTHEREOF; THENCE RUNS 74, DEG 07 MIN W ALONG SOUTH _ERN BDRY OF SAI - SUB & ACROSS R/W OF OLD D/H A DIST OF - - 656.34 FT MORE OR LESS; TO W R/W LINE , OF OLD Revision Date Site Address 13350 US HIGHWAY 1 7/6/2017 77 lbI v oe F:\Utilities\U T ILI'rY - Engineering\Projects - Assessment Projects\0004ssessments_2017_Proposed\OG_NortliCoun,ySeptic to SewerAssessmentProject_61 Parcei;\Word Documents\Resoiution_3\0l Prelin,Ass:Roll_RESO_3 NortliCounty5e'ndc_ SewerAsses .docx Thursday, July 06, 2017 P138 NORTH COUNTY SEPTIC TO SEWER PROPOSED SEWER ASSESSMENT PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT ROLL — RESOLUTION 3 Parcel # 30382500000005000005.0 Assessment= $99,782.40 Owner SWEET FEELINGS LLC Secondary Owners i 1a !D: 55 Secondary Owners Mailing Address 1840 BAYVIEW CT ',lurnbr-r ERU's: 20 VERO BEACH FL 32963 Legal BEG AT THE INTERSECTION OF THE S BDRY LI - NE OF VAN BERGEN & HENDRYS ADD T 0 ROSELA ND; ACCORDING TO PLAT THEREOF IN PBI 3-3, 9, WITH THE E BDRY LINE OF STRD5 SEC - 8801/207 110 ACCORDING TO SURVEY THEREO F RECORDED IN PL AT BK4PP63;THRUN N,41 Revision Date Site Address 13480 US HIGHWAY 1 7/6/2017 Parcel # 30382500000002000003.3 Assessment= $109,760.64 Owner JUNO ROAD REALTY LLC Secondary Owners Map ID: 56 Secondary Owners Mailing Address 910 GILPIN AVE Number ERU's: 22 WILMINGTON DE 19806 Legal FOR A PT OF COMMENCE BEGIN AT INTERSECTI - ON OF THE SLY R/W LINE OF BAY ST (A/K/A 110TH ST) & TH ELY R/W LINE OF US, 1(ST RD #5); TH RUN S 15 DEG 1 5 MIN 59 - SEC E ALONG SAID R/W LINE OF US #1 A DIST OF 965.66 FT TO THE PO B; THENCE RUN, N 43 DEG 36 MI Revision Date Site Address 13700 US HIGHWAY 1 7/6/2017 Parcel # 30382500000002000003.2 Assessment= $9,978.24 Owner NATIONAL RETAIL PROPERTIES LP Secondary Owners Map ID: 57 Secondary Owners Mailing Address 450 S ORANGE AVE STE 900 Number ERU's: 2 ORLANDO FL 32801 Legal A POR OF LAND LYING IN SEC 25 TWP 30 S R - GE 38 E BEING MORE PART DESC AS FOLL; FO R A PT OF COM BEGIN AT THE INT OF THE SL, Y R/W LINE OF BAY ST (A /K/A 110TH ST) & -THE ELY R/W LINE OF US HWY NO ONE (SR TH RUN S 15 DEG 15 MIN 59 SEC E ALO, NG Revision Date Site Address 13800 US HIGHWAY 1 7/6/2017 271P a g F:\Utilities\UTILITY - Engineering\Projects - Assessment Projecs\OOOAssessments_2017 _Pro pose d\06_NorthCoumySeotic to_SewerAssessmentProject-61_Parcels\Wordoocuments\ResoluUon_3\01 PrelimAsstRcll_RESO_3_NorthCounty5eptic_ SevrerAsses .docx Thursday, July 06, 2017 P139 INDIAN RIVER COUNTY — DEPARTMENT OF UTILITY SERVICES NORTH COUNTY SEPTIC TO SEWER PROPOSED SEWER ASSESSMENT PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT ROLL—RESOLUTION 3 Parcel # 30382500000002000003.1 Assessment= $19,956.48 Owner BAY STREET SEBASTIAN LLC Secondary Owners :iso IU Secondary Owners Mailing Address 1579 ESTUARY TRAIL F.urnber ERU,'s. 4 DELRAY BEACH FL 33483 Legal ALL THAT PART OF LOTS 2-3 & 4 LYING ELY - OF US HWY 1 MORE PART DESC AS FOL L; COM ATAPTONWBDYOFGOV LOT 2&617.80,FTNOF SW COR THEREOF; TH N 35 DEG 10 - MIN 00 SEC E 778.47 FT TH S 34 DEG 23 MIN 42 SEC E 37.35 FT TO POB; TH CONT , S 34 DEG 2 Revision Date Site Address 14000 US HIGHWAY 1 7/6/2017 Parcel # 30382500000002000002.1 Assessment= $19,956.48 Owner CLARITY MEDICAL PROPERTIES LLC Secondary Owners Map ID: 61 Secondary Owners Mailing Address 14410 US HIGHWAY 1 Number ERU's: 4 SEBASTIAN FL 32958 Legal COM AT SE COR OF GOV LOT 1 SEC 25-30-38 - TH N ALONG E LINE OF GOV LOT 1 617.80 FT, TH N 35 DEG 10 MIN 00 SEC E 678.12 , FT TO INTER PT OF ELY R/W LINE OF US 1 & - NLY R/W LINE OF OLD ROSELAND RD, A/K/A BAY ST; TH N.15 DEG 21 MIN 20 SEC W 445 , FT TO Revision Date Site Address 14410 US HIGHWAY 1 7/6/2017 181Page r:\Utilities\UTILITY - Engineering\Projects Assessment Projects\DDOAssessments_2017_Proposed\06_NortiiCountySeptic_lo Sewer:• ssessmentProject_61_Parcels\Word Document S\Resolution_3\OI_PrelimAsstRoll_RESO_3_NorthCountgSeptic_ SewerASSes .CIOcx Thursday, July 06, 2017 P140 NORTH COUNTY SEPTIC TO SEWER PROPOSED SEWER ASSESSMENT PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT ROLL — RESOLUTION'3 Parcel # 30382500012000000001.0 Assessment= $1,663.04 Owner PETERSON, MARK A and MARY LOU Secondary Owners ?:qa,, I'D : E0 Secondary Owners Mailing Address 4280 BERRY RD i o, I E'U's: 4 GRANT FL 32949 Legal BAY STREET CENTER PHASE I UNIT 1 OR BK 685 PP 566 Revision Date: Site Address 7740 BAY ST 7/6/2017 Parcel .# 30382500012000000002.0 Assessment= $1,663.04 Owner BAY STREET PHARMACY INC Secondary Owners Map ID: 60 Secondary Owners Mailing Address PO BOX 368 Number ERU's: 4 ROSELAND FL 32957 Legal BAY STREET CENTER PHASE I UNITS 2 & 3 OR BK 685 PP 566 Revision Date Site Address 7744 BAY ST 7/6/2017 Parcel # 30382500012000000004.0 Assessment= $1,663.04 Owner BAY STREET PHARMACY INC Secondary Owners Iv1ap ID: 60 Secondary Owners Mailing Address PO BOX 368 Number ERU's: 4 ROSELAND FL 32957 Legal BAY STREET CENTER PHASE I UNIT 4 OR BK 685 PP 566 Revision Date: Site Address 7746 BAY ST 7/6/2017 ivIrage F:",Utilities\U i ILITY - Engineerin,\Proj2ci; - A;sessrnent Projects\OOOAss essments_2017_Propose d\06_NorthCountySeptc_to_SewerAs9zssmentPrejec:_61_Parcels\+.�trord0ocurnents\Resolution_3\01_P:elimAsstRol l_RESO NorthCnuntySeptic 5 ewerAsstProjectvluIti.docx Thursday, July 06, 2017 P141 NORTH COUNTY SEPTIC TO SEWER PROPOSED SEWER ASSESSMENT PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT ROLL—RESOLUTION 3 Parcel # 30382500012000000005.0 Assessment= $1,663.04 Owner KHAWAJA, FARHAT 1 and MUSSARRAT J Secondary Owners Secondary Owners Mailing Address 1860 BAYVIEW CT=='• =' VERO BEACH FL 32963 Legal BAY STREET CENTER PHASE I UNIT 5 OR BK 685 PP 566 Revision Dare: Site Address 7750 BAY ST 7/6/2017 Parcel # 30382500012000000006.0 Assessment= $1,663.04 Owner KHAWAJA, FARHAN J and SABEEN J Secondary Owners Map ID: 60 Secondary Owners Mailing Address 1860 BAYVIEW CT Number ERU's: 4 VERO BEACH FL 32963 Legal BAY STREET CENTER PHASE I UNIT 6 OR BK 685 PP 566 Revision Date Site Address 7752 BAY ST 7/6/2017 Parcel # 30382500012000000007.0 Assessment= $1,663.04 Owner KHAWAJA, SOBIA (1/3) & "Secondary Owners KHAWAJA, FARHAN (1/3) Map ID: 60 'Secondary Owners KHAWAJA, SABEEN (1/3) Mailing Address 1860 BAYVIEW CT Number ERU's: 4 VERO BEACH FL 32963 Legal BAY STREET CENTER PHASE I UNIT 7 OR BK 685 PP 566 Revision Date: Site Address 7754 BAY ST 7/6/2017 zoI Page F:\Utilities\UTWTY - Engineering\Projects - Assessment Projects\000As'sessntents_2017_Proposed\o6_NorthCOunty5eptiC_to_Sen,erAssessmentProjec _61_Parcels\bvtrrciDocunmants\Resoluiion_3\O1_PrelimAsstRell_RESO_ NortbCot:nty5eptic_5 eaa=r:\rtProjectht ulti.dov: Thursday, JUIV 06, 21017 P142 NORTH COUNTY SEPTIC TO SEWER PROPOSED SEWER ASSESSMENT PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT ROLL — RESOLUTION 3 Parcel # 30382500012000000008.0 Assessment= .$1,663.04 Owner BAY STREET PHARMACY INC Secondary Owners . Secondary Owners Mailing Address 7746 BAY ST UNIT 4 -ai =RV, : 4 SEBASTIAN FL 32958 Legal BAY STREET CENTER PHASE I UNIT 8 OR BK 685 PP 566 Revision Date Site Address 7760 BAY ST 7/6/2017 Parcel # 30382500012000000009.0 Assessment= $1,663.04 Owner THEIS, ALFRED J Secondary Owners .Map ID: 60 Secondary Owners Mailing Address PO BOX 2550 Number ERU's: 4 MELBOURNE FL 32902 Legal BAY STREET CENTER PHASE I UNIT 9 OR BK 685 PP 566 Revision Date: Site Address 7762 BAY ST 7/6/2017 -- i 3N U^4Y!'.�.,.�:�i Parcel # 30382500012000000010.0 Assessment= $1,663.04 Owner KHAWAJA, MUSSARRATJ (1/2) and MAHMUDA (1/2) Secondary Owners Map ID: 60 Secondary Owners Mailing Address 1860 BAYVIEW CT Number ERU's: 4 VERO BEACH FL 32963 Legal BAY STREET CENTER PHASE I UNIT 10 OR BK 685 PP 566 Revision Date: Site Address 7764 BAY ST 7/6/2017 211 P a g e E:\Utilities\UTILIM - Engineering\Protests - Assessment •Projects\OOOA.ssessments__2017 Propo5ed\05 0100hCountyseptic_to_Se`.veiAssessmentProject_61__Parcels\`-VordDocuments\Resolution_3\01_PrelinlAsstRoll_RESO_j'qorthCountySep0c 5 ewer.Asst Project R•. ult i. docx Thursday. July 06, 2017 P143 NORTH COUNTY SEPTIC TO SEWER PROPOSED SEWER ASSESSMENT PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT ROLL - RESOLUTION 3 Parcel # 30382500012000000011.0 Assessment= $1,663.04 Owner BROOKS, HAROLD L JR & BARBARA R Secondary Owners via,;: 'G : 5G Secondary Owners Mailing Address 6855 1ST ST SW i Dta1 Rt.J' VERO BEACH FL 32968 Legal BAY STREET CENTER PHASE I UNIT it OR BK 685 PP 566 Revision Date: Site Address 7766 BAY ST 7/6/2017 Parcel # 30382500012000000012.0 Assessment= $1,663.04 Owner ALI, SABIR MD and ATTIYA Secondary Owners Map ID: 60 Secondary Owners Mailing Address 809 CHAMPION DR NE dumber ERU's: 4 PALM BAY FL 32905 Legal BAY STREET CENTER PHASE I UNIT 12 OR BK 685 PP 566 Revision Date Site Address 7768 BAY ST 7/6/2017 Parcel # 30382500012000000013.0 Assessment= $1,663.04 Owner KHAWAJA, MOHAMMAD NAIM and SHAHIDA NAIM (1/2) Secondary Owners KHAWA]A, FARHAT J & MUSSARRAT J (1/2) Map ID: 60 Secondary Owners Mailing Address 7754 BAY ST Number ERU's: 4 SEBASTIAN FL 32958 Legal BAY STREET CENTER PHASE I UNIT 13 OR BK 685 PP 566 Revision Date: -Site-Address-- -1-7-7-70-13 zzIPage F:\Utilities\UTILnY - Engineering\Projects • Assessment Pi ojects\000As sessmen ts_2017_Proposed\06_Nort h Coun tyS eptic_tct_SewerAsse ssm ent P roi ect_6 i_Parc els\ijVo rd Docum e tit s\Resoiution_3\01 Prel imAss t R oll_R ESO_N o rt hCountySep t ic_S evrerAsstProjectiM ulti.doC.x Thursday, July 06, 2017 P144 11ML01MIv t\tVLt\ %.w LPi%l t — tJLf M1\a1Y1LIe a — V r—e a --,— NORTH COUNTY SEPTIC TO SEWER PROPOSED SEWER ASSESSMENT PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT ROLL — RESOLUTION 3 Parcel # 30382500017000000001.0 Assessment= $1,663.04 Owner BRADY, VALERIE Secondary Owners Secondary Owners Mailing,Address 13830 N US HWY 1 #1 SEBASTIAN FL 32958 Legal ZALES PLAZA UNIT 1 OR BK 927 PP 419 Revision Date Site Address 13830 US HIGHWAY 1 7/6/2017 Parcel # 30382500017000000002.0 Assessment= $1,663.04 Owner PELICAN NEST LLC Secondary Owners Map ID: 58 Secondary Owners Mailing Address 13832 US HWY 1 Number ERU's: 4 SEBASTIAN FL 32958 Legal ZALES PLAZA UNIT 2 OR BK 927 PP 419 Revision Date Site Address 13832 US HIGHWAY 1 7/6/2017 Parcel # 30382500017000000003.0 Assessment= $1,663.04 Owner SPOTO, JAMES (TRS) & Secondary Owners SPOTO, CATHY Nlap ID: 58 Secondary Owners Mailing Address 7 ORION Number ERU's: 4 IRVINE CA 92612 Legal ZALES PLAZA UNIT 3ORBK927PP419 Revision Date: Site Address 13834 US HIGHWAY 1 7/6/2017 231 Page f:\Utilities\UTIUTI' • Engineering\Projects - Assessment Projects\OOOAssessments_2017_Prnoosed\06_NorthCountySeptic_to_Ses•:erAssessntentProject_61_Parc els\WordCocumens\Resolution_3\Ot_Preltnt;;sstRol]_ RESO_NorthCountySeptic S ewerAsstProjectMuI0. docz Thursday, July 06, '4017 P145 NORTH COUNTY SEPTIC TO SEWER PROPOSED SEWER ASSESSMENT PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT ROLL — RESOLUTION 3 Parcel # 30382500017000000004.0 Assessment= $1,663.04 Owner SPOTO, JAMES (TRS) & Secondary Owners SPOTO, CATHY ! .: Secondary Owners Mailing Address 7 ORION IRVINE CA 92612 Legal ZALES PLAZA UNIT 4 OR BK 927 PP 419 Revision Date Site Address 13836 US HIGHWAY 1 7/6/2017 Parcel # 30382500017000000005.0 Assessment= $1,663.04 Owner SPOTO, JAMES (TRS) & Secondary Owners SPOTO, CATHY Map ID: 58 Secondary Owners Mailing Address 7 ORION Number ERU's: 4 IRVINE CA 92612 Legal ZALES PLAZA UNIT 5 OR BK 927 PP 419 Revision Date: Site Address 13838 US HIGHWAY 1 7/6/2017 Parcel # 30382500017000000006.0 Assessment= $1,663.04 Owner SPOTO, JAMES (TRS) & Secondary Owners SPOTO, CATHY Map ID: 58 Secondary Owners Mailing Address 7 ORION Number ERU's: 4 IRVINE CA 92612 Legal ZALES PLAZA UNIT 6 OR BK 927 PP 419 Revision Date: Site Address 13840 US HIGHWAY 1 7/6/2017 241Page F:\Utilities\UTILITY - Engineering\Projects - Asses3ment Projects',000Assessments_2017_Proposed\O6_Nom ti'CountySeptic_to_SewerAssessmen,,Project_61_Pa, cels\4JorcIDocurnents\Resolution_3\01_PrelimAsstRoll_Rc50_i�JorthCountyseotic_S ewerAsslProlecnt9uld do" Thursday, July 06, 2011 P146 INDIAN RIVER COON I Y— UWAK 1 MtN I Uh U I ILI I r JtKVK.tD NORTH COUNTY SEPTIC TO SEWER PROPOSED SEWER ASSESSMENT PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT ROLL—RESOLUTION 3 :: Parcel # 30382500017000000007.0 Assessment= $1,663.04 Owner SPOTO, JAMES (TRS) & Secondary Owners SPOTO, CATHY =,ic::,D. Secondary Owners Mailing Address 7ORION IRVINE CA 92612 Legal ZALES PLAZA UNIT 7 OR BK 927 PP 419 Revision Date: Site Address 13842 US HIGHWAY 1 7/6/2017 Parcel # 30382500017000000008.0 Assessment= $1,663.04 Owner SPOTO, JAMES (TRS) & Secondary Owners SPOTO, CATHY Map ID: 58 Secondary Owners Mailing Address 7 ORION Number ERU's: 4 IRVINE CA 92612 Legal ZALES PLAZA UNIT 8 OR BK 927 PP 419 Revision Date: Site Address 13844 US HIGHWAY 1 7/6/2017 Parcel # 30382500017000000009.0 Assessment= $1,663.04 Owner SPOTO, JAMES (TRS) & Secondary Owners SPOTO, CATHY Map ID: 58 Secondary Owners Mailing Address 7 ORION Number ERU's: 4 IRVINE CA 92612 Legal ZALES PLAZA UNIT 9 OR BK 927 PP 419 Revision Date: Site Address 13846 US HIGHWAY 1 7/6/2017 25IPage F•\Utilities\UTILITf - Engineermg\Projects - Assessment Projects\OOOAssessments_7.017_Fronosed\OG_itor,L•Count,rSeptic_ to_Seo:er4ssessmentProle r. _61_.Parcels\�-VordDocumtnts\Resolution_3\01_PrelintAsstRoll_RESO ilortitCountySeptic S e•.verAsstProjecUNI ultI e0cx Thursday, July 06, 2017 P147 mwipAiv nsv cn -.vvry t r — vcrmn t wrcry a yr U s ru r r VLn V naso NORTH COUNTY SEPTIC TO SEWER PROPOSED SEWER ASSESSMENT PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT ROLL — RESOLUTION 3 Parcel # 30382500017000000010.0 Assessment= $1,663.04 Owner SPOTO, JAMES (TRS) & Secondary Owners SPOTO, CATHY ::•;a : ''D Secondary Owners Mailing Address 7 ORION Tot.;::RU's. 4 IRVINE CA 92612 Legal ZALES PLAZA UNIT 10 OR BK 927 PP 419 Revision, Date: Site Address 13848 US HIGHWAY 1 7/6/2017 Parcel # 30382500017000000011.0 Assessment= $1,663.04 Owner DONOVAN, RICHARD J and PATRICIA W Secondary Owners Map ID: 58 Secondary Owners Mailing Address 1831 CAYMAN RD E Number ERU's: 4 VERO BEACH FL 32963 Legal ZALES PLAZA UNIT 11 OR BK 927 PP 419 Revision Date Site Address 13850 US HIGHWAY 1 7/6/2017 Parcel # 30382500017000000012.0 Assessment= $1,663.04 Owner DONOVAN, RICHARD J and PATRICIA W Secondary Owners Map ID: 58 Secondary Owners Mailing Address 1831 CAYMAN RD E Number ERU's: 4 VERO BEACH FL 32963 Legal ZALES PLAZA UNIT 12 OR BK 927 PP 419 Revision Date Site Address 13852 US HIGHWAY 1 7/6/2017 AbIFage F:\Utilities\UTILITY - Engineering\Projects - Assessment Projects\000Asse ssments_2017_Ptoposecl\06_1IorthCoLin ty5eptic_to_Se:•rerAssessmon' Project_G1_Parcels\%Vord0ocumen is\Resolution_3\0I PrelimAsstRo!I_RESO_iNorthCounty5eptic_S ev:erd, tProject M ul ti.docx Thursday, July 06, 2017 P148 NORTH COUNTY SEPTIC TO SEWER PROPOSED SEWER ASSESSMENT PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT ROLL — RESOLUTION 3 Parcel # 30383000010000000001.0 Assessment= $1,187.89 Owner SEA CREST OF SEBASTIAN LLC Secondary Owners Va o : D : 4 Secondary Owners Mailing Address 3717 10TH CT VERO BEACH FL 32960 Legal SEA CREST PROFESSIONAL BUILDING CONDO UNIT 1 OR BK 1597 PP 2809 Revision Date Site Address 13000 US HIGHWAY 1 7/6/2017 Parcel # 30383000010000000002.0 Assessment= $1,187.89 Owner SEA CREST OF SEBASTIAN LLC Secondary Owners Map ID: 45 Secondary Owners Mailing Address 3717 10TH CT Number ERU's: 5 VERO BEACH FL 32960 Legal SEA CREST PROFESSIONAL BUILDING CONDO UNIT 2 OR BK 1597 PP 2809 Revision Date Site Address 13000 US HIGHWAY 1 7/6/2017 Parcel # 30383000010000000003.0 Assessment= $1,187.89 Owner SEA CREST OF SEBASTIAN LLC Secondary Owners Map ID: 45 Secondary Owners Mailing Address 3717 10TH CT Number ERU's: 5 VERO BEACH FL 32960 Legal SEA CREST PROFESSIONAL BUILDING CONDO UNIT 3 OR BK 1597 PP 2809 Revision Date: Site Address 13000 US HIGHWAY 1 7/6/2017 ci1rage F:\Utilities\UI ILI TY - Engineering\Proiects -Ass es5ment Projects\000Assessment,_2017_Proposed\06_NoithCountySeptic_to_Se,verAssessmentProject_61_Parcel5\`:VordDocuments\Resolution_3\01_PrelimAsstRoll_RES0_ilonhCountySeptir S e,.. erAsstP rot ectJA tit d. docx Thursday, July 06, 20!7 P149 /IVY/AIV/\IV LI•VV VIV// Yr1 n1•IIVILI\1 VI VI/LI/I.+r/•�.\.\.✓ NORTH COUNTY SEPTIC TO SEWER PROPOSED SEWER ASSESSMENT PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT ROLL — RESOLUTION 3 + �Y Parcel # 30383000010000000004.0 Assessment= $1,187.89 Owner SEA CREST OF SEBASTIAN LLC Secondary Owners r ir:p Ir} :15 Secondary Owners Mailing Address 3717 10TH CT To al Ru VERO BEACH FL 32960 Legal SEA CREST PROFESSIONAL BUILDING CONDO UNIT 4 OR BK 1597 PP 2809 Revision Date: Site Address 13000 US HIGHWAY 1 7/6/2017 Parcel # 30383000010000000005.0 Assessment= $1,187.89 Owner SEA CREST OF SEBASTIAN LLC Secondary Owners Map ID: 45 Secondary Owners Mailing Address 3717 10TH CT Number ERU'5: 5 VERO BEACH FL 32960 Legal SEA CREST PROFESSIONAL BUILDING CONDO UNIT 5 OR BK 1597 PP 2809 Revision Date Site Address 13000 US HIGHWAY 1 7/6/2017 Parcel # 30383000010000000006.0 Assessment= $1,187.89 Owner SEA CREST OF SEBASTIAN LLC Secondary Owners Map ID: 45 Secondary,Owners Mailing Address 371710TH CT Number ERU's: 5 VERO BEACH FL 32960 Legal SEA CREST PROFESSIONAL BUILDING CONDO UNIT 6 OR BK 1597 PP 2809 Revision Date: Site Address 13000 US HIGHWAY 1 7/6/2017 --R 281Page F:\Utilitiei\IJTILITY - Engineering ,Project: - Assessment Projects\000Aeses5ments_2017_Proposecl\06_Nort hCounty5eptic_to_Se:veiAsses smentProject 61 Parcels\trv01d0ocuments\R2solution_3\0l_Prelim::,5tR0II_P.ESO_Northr0untySeptic_S e:ee-;,;tProlechN"uIti. docx Thursday, July 06, 2017 P150 nvurnty mvLn uwwtvr r —u�r nn acro•r yr vu�rr r su.r re.w NORTH COUNTY SEPTIC TO SEWER PROPOSED SEWER ASSESSMENT PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT ROLL — RESOLUTION 3 Parcel # 30383000010000000007.0 Assessment= $1,187.89 Owner PRIMARY CARE OF SEBASTIAN LLC Secondary Owners Secondary Owners Mailing Address 13000 US HIGHWAY 1 STE 4 TOTad ERU's: S SEBASTIAN FL 32958 Legal SEA CREST PROFESSIONAL BUILDING CONDO UNIT 7 OR BK 1597 PP 2809 Revision Date Site Address 13000 US HIGHWAY 1 7/6/2017 c m$1,187.89 Parcel # 30383000010000000008.0 Assessment= Owner PRIMARY CARE OF SEBASTIAN LLC Secondary Owners Map ID: 45 Secondary Owners Mailing Address 13000 US HIGHWAY 1 STE 4 Number ERU's: 5 SEBASTIAN FL 32958 Legal SEA CREST PROFESSIONAL BUILDING CONDO UNIT 8 OR BK 1597 PP 2809 Revision Date: Site Address 13000 US HIGHWAY 1 7/6/2017 Parcel # 30383000010000000009.0 Assessment= $1,187.89 Owner PRIMARY CARE OF SEBASTIAN LLC Secondary Owners Map ID: 45 Secondary Owners Mailing Address 13000 US HIGHWAY 1 STE 4 Number ERU's: 5 SEBASTIAN FL 32958 Legal SEA CREST PROFESSIONAL BUILDING CONDO UNIT 9 OR BK 1597 PP 2809 Revision Date Site Address 13000 US HIGHWAY 1 7/6/2017 29IPa g r:\U6hties\UT1t.ITY - Enginee ring\Projects - Assessment Projects\OOOAssessments_2017_Pt oposed\06_NorthCoun ty5eotic_lo_Sewe(Assess mentProiect_61_Parcels\WordDocutnents\Resolution 3\01_PreiimAsstRo11_REO NorthCountySeptic 5 awerAsstProjectrot utti.docx Thursday, July 06, 2017 P151 I IV✓IHIv rtivcn 6V✓lvl t —✓cr Mnllvl Glv, yr uiI-I. a,nvs�uj NORTH COUNTY SEPTIC TO SEWER PROPOSED SEWER ASSESSMENT PRELIMINARYASSESSMENT ROLL — RESOLUTION 3 Parcel # 30383000010000000010.0 Assessment= $1,187.89 Owner PRIMARY CARE OF SEBASTIAN LLC Secondary Owners : ,i ::: • . 45 Secondary Owners Mailing Address 13000 US HIGHWAY 1 STE 4 Total FR l's: 5 SEBASTIAN FL 32958 Legal SEA CREST PROFESSIONAL BUILDING CONDO UNIT 10 OR BK 1597 PP 2809 Revision Date Site Address 13000 US HIGHWAY 1 7/6/2017 Parcel # 30383000010000000011.0 Assessment= $1,187.89 Owner PRIMARY CARE OF SEBASTIAN LLC Secondary Owners Map ID: 45 Secondary Owners Mailing Address 13000 US HIGHWAY 1 STE 4 Number ERU's: 5 SEBASTIAN FL 32958 Legal SEA CREST PROFESSIONAL BUILDING CONDO UNIT 11 OR BK 1597 PP 2809 Revision Date: Site Address 13000 US HIGHWAY 1 7/6/2017 Parcel # 30383000010000000012.0 Assessment= $1,187.89 Owner PRIMARY CARE OF SEBASTIAN LLC Secondary Owners Map ID: 45 Secondary Owners Mailing Address 13000 US HIGHWAY 1 STE 4 Number ERU's: 5 SEBASTIAN FL 32958 Legal SEA CREST PROFESSIONAL BUILDING CONDO UNIT 12 OR BK 1597 PP 2809 Revision Date: Site Address 13000 US HIGHWAY 1 7/6/2017 301Page F:\Utilities\UT'ILITY Engineering\Prolects - Assessment Projects\OOOAssesstit ents._2017 Proposed\06_NortliCounty5eptic_to See1e6ASsessmCntPreject_GI_Patcels\WordUt:aimen.ts\Resolution_3\Ol_PrelimAsstRoll_RES0_NortliCountySeotic_S ewer.Asst Project Mtil ll. docx Thursday, July 06, 2017 P152 IIr VIMW n1VL'n �.V Vlvl I -utr nn Irl Vlrl v1 vnul JLnv�.LJ NORTH COUNTY SEPTIC TO SEWER PROPOSED SEWER ASSESSMENT PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT ROLL — RESOLUTION 3 Parcel # 30383000010000000013.0 Assessment= $1,187.89 Owner KP MAES PROPERTIES LLC Secondary Owners Secondary Owners Mailing Address 1351 INDIAN MOUND TRAIL T EK! ,-: VERO BEACH FL 32963 Legal SEA CREST PROFESSIONAL BUILDING CONDO UNIT 13 OR BK 1597 PP 2809 Revision Date: Site Address 13000 US HIGHWAY 1 7/6/2017 Parcel # 30383000010000000014.0 Assessment= $1,187.89 Owner KP MAES PROPERTIES LLC Secondary Owners Map ID: 45 Secondary Owners Mailing Address 1351 INDIAN MOUND TRAIL Number ERU's: 5 VERO BEACH FL 32963 Legal SEA CREST PROFESSIONAL BUILDING CONDO UNIT 14 OR BK 1597 PP 2809 Revision Date Site Address 13000 US HIGHWAY 1 7/6/2017 Parcel # 30383000010000000015.0 Assessment= $1,187.89 Owner KP MAES PROPERTIES LLC Secondary Owners Map ID: 45 Secondary Owners Mailing Address 1351 INDIAN MOUND TRAIL Number ERU's: 5 VERO BEACH FL 32963 Legal SEA CREST PROFESSIONAL BUILDING CONDO UNIT 15 OR BK 1597 PP 2809 Revision Date: Site Address 13000 US HIGHWAY 1 7/6/2017 311Page F:\Utilities\UTiLI i ! - Engineering\Projects • AS;e;smen; Projects\000Assessments_20'_7_Proposed\06_Mor;hCounty5eptic_to SevierAssessnientProject_61_Parcels'%WordDoctinients\Resolution_3\01_P,elirnAsstRofl_P,ESO_IjorthCountySep;ic_S ev. etAs5tProjectM ts1d.docz Thursday, July 06, 2017 P153 NORTH COUNTY SEPTIC TO SEWER PROPOSED SEWER ASSESSMENT PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT ROLL—RESOLUTION 3 Parcel # 30383000010000000016.0 Assessment= $1,187.89 Owner KP MAES PROPERTIES LLC Secondary Owners Secondary Owners Mailing Address 1351 INDIAN MOUND TRAIL VERO BEACH FL 32963 Legal SEA CREST PROFESSIONAL BUILDING CONDO UNIT 16 OR BK 1597 PP 2809 Revision Daze: Site Address 13000 US HIGHWAY 1 7/6/2017 Parcel # 30383000010000000017.0 Assessment= $1,187.89 Owner KP MAES PROPERTIES LLC Secondary Owners Map ID: 45 Secondary Owners Mailing Address 1351 INDIAN MOUND TRAIL Number ERU's: 5 VERO BEACH FL 32963 Legal SEA CREST PROFESSIONAL BUILDING CONDO UNIT 17 OR BK 1597 PP 2809 Revision Date: Site Address 13000 US HIGHWAY 1 7/6/2017 Parcel # 30383000010000000018.0 Assessment= $1,187.89 Owner KP MAES PROPERTIES LLC Secondary Owners Map ID: 45 Secondary Owners Mailing Address 1351 INDIAN MOUND TRAIL Number ERU's: 5 VERO BEACH FL 32963 Legal SEA CREST PROFESSIONAL BUILDING CONDO UNIT 18 OR BK 1597 PP 2809 Revision Date Site Address 13000 US HIGHWAY 1 7/6/2017 3zIPage f:\Utilities\UTILITY - Engineering\Project, - Assessment Projects\000Aseessment;_2017_Proposed\06_JlorthCounty5 eptic_to_5ewerAss ?ssnientProjea_61_Parcels\YVo i CDocuments\Resolution_ 3\01_PrelintAsstRoll_RE50_1`1ort hrountySeptic _5 ewerAsstProjectmuId, (IOcx Thursday, July 06, 2017 P154 NORTH COUNTY SEPTIC TO SEWER PROPOSED SEWER ASSESSMENT PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT ROLL— RESOLUTION 3 Parcel # 30383000010000000019.0 Assessment= $1,187.89 Owner KP MAES PROPERTIES LLC Secondary Owners Secondary Owners Mailing Address 1351 INDIAN MOUND TRAIL ro,ai R.Li's: VERO BEACH FL 32963 Legal SEA CREST PROFESSIONAL BUILDING CONDO UNIT 19 OR BK 1597 PP 2809 Revision Date: Site Address 13000 US HIGHWAY 1 7/6/2017 Parcel # 30383000010000000020.0 Assessment= $1,187.89 Owner KP MAES PROPERTIES LLC Secondary Owners Map ID: 45 Secondary Owners Mailing Address 1351 INDIAN MOUND TRAIL Number EP,U's: 5 VERO BEACH FL 32963 Legal SEA CREST PROFESSIONAL BUILDING CONDO UNIT 20 OR BK 1597 PP 2809 Revision Date: Site Address 13000 US HIGHWAY 1 7/6/2017 Parcel # 30383000010000000021.0 Assessment= $1,187.89 Owner KP MAES PROPERTIES LLC Secondary Owners IM a p ID: 45 Secondary Owners Mailing Address 1351 INDIAN MOUND TRAIL Number ERU's: 5 VERO BEACH FL 32963 Legal SEA CREST PROFESSIONAL BUILDING CONDO UNIT 21 OR BK 1597 PP 2809 Revision Date Site Address 13000 US HIGHWAY 1 7/6/2017 77. 331Page F:\UtihtEes\UTILITY - Engineering\Projects -Assessment Projects\000AssessmCnts_2017_Proposed\06_PlorthCounty5eptic_to_Se%verAssessntentPr oject_61_Parcels\tAloi d0ocuments\Resolution_ 3\0 t_PreiinnAsstRoll_RESO_Not thCounlySeptic_S ev. erAsstProject N1 u It;. docx Thursday, July 06, 2017 P155 NORTH COUNTY SEPTIC TO SEWER PROPOSED SEWER ASSESSMENT PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT ROLL — RESOLUTION 3 Parcel # 30383000011000000001.0 Assessment= $4,989.12 Owner OONWALA, ABID H (TRS) Secondary Owners A Secondary Owners Mailing Address 4854 S HARBOR DR #301 VERO BEACH FL 32967 Legal MERCHANT-RIZWI CONDO UNIT A OR BK 1689 PG 1942 Revision Date: Site Address 13060 US HIGHWAY 1 7/6/2017 Parcel # 30383000011000000002.0 Assessment= $4,989.12 Owner RIZWI, M NASIR AND TABASSUM Secondary Owners Map ID: 48 Secondary Owners Mailing Address 8540 SEACREST DR (`lumber ERU's: 2 VERO BEACH FL 32963 Legal MERCHANT-RIZWI CONDO UNIT B OR BK 1689 PG 1942 Revision Date: Site Address 13060 US HIGHWAY 1 7/6/2017 Parcel # 30383600006000000001.0 Assessment= $3,741.84 Owner FIREFOX PROPERTIES LLC Secondary Owners Map ID: 53 Secondary Owners Mailing Address PO BOX 643661 Number ERU's: 9 VERO BEACH FL 32964 Legal SAND RIDGE CENTRE CONDOMINIUM UNIT 1 OR BK 805 PP 1379 Revision Date: Site Address 13262 US HIGHWAY 1 7/6/2017 341Page F-\Utilitie;\UTIUTY - Engineering\Projects - Assessment Projects\OOOAvsessments_2017_Pr000sed\05florthCnuntySeptic_to_SewerAss2:smentProject_61_Parcels\4t'ord0ocuments\Resolution_3\01_J,relim.4sstRoll_RESO BlorthCotmtySeptic_S e\ve,,A5stProjeuY1u16.docx Thursday, July 06, 2017 P156 IIYV1111Y !\IYLI\ VV VIYII VL• n1\11\Ir��. v� �.\r1. • rr..�r�r� NORTH COUNTY SEPTIC TO SEWER PROPOSED SEWER ASSESSMENT PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT ROLL — RESOLUTION 3 Parcel # 30383600006000000002.0 Assessment= $3,741.84 Owner FIREFOX PROPERTIES LLC Secondary Owners Secondary Owners Mailing Address PO BOX 643661 VERO BEACH FL 32964 Legal SAND RIDGE CENTRE CONDOMINIUM UNIT 2 OR BK 805 PP 1379 Revision Date: Site Address 13260 US HIGHWAY 1 7/6/2017 Parcel # 30383600006000000003.0 Assessment= $3,741.84 Owner FIREFOX PROPERTIES LLC Secondary Owners Map'ID: 53 Secondary Owners Mailing Address PO BOX 643661 Number ERU's: 9 VERO BEACH FL 32964 Legal SAND RIDGE CENTRE CONDOMINIUM UNIT 3 OR BK 805 PP 1379 Revision Date Site Address 13258 US HIGHWAY 1 7/6/2017 Parcel # 30383600006000000004.0 Assessment= $3,741.84 Owner FIREFOX PROPERTIES LLC Secondary Owners Map ID: 53 Secondary Owners Mailing Address PO BOX 643661 Number. ERU's: 9 VERO BEACH FL 32964 Legal SAND RIDGE CENTRE CONDOMINIUM UNIT 4 OR BK 805 PP 1379 Revision Date: 'Site Address 13256 US HIGHWAY 1 7/6/2017 351 Page P.^tUti1i0-!s\UT1l1 ry - Engineering\Protects - Asse;srnent Projects\000Fssessments_2017_Proposed\06_PtorthCountySeptic to Se,.verAssessmentProiect_61_Parcels\WordDoctimetit s\Resolution_3\01 PrehmAsstRoll_RESO_NorthCountySeptic S e.verAsst?roie c t N1 ul t i. docx Thursday, July 06, 2017 P157 NORTH COUNTY SEPTIC TO SEWER PROPOSED SEWER ASSESSMENT PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT ROLL— RESOLUTION 3 Parcel # 30383600006000000005.0 Assessment= $3,741.84 Owner FIREFOX PROPERTIES LLC Secondary Owners Secondary Owners Mailing Address PO BOX 643661 VERO BEACH FL 32964 Legal SAND RIDGE CENTRE CONDOMINIUM UNIT 5 OR BK 805 PP 1379 Revision Date . Site Address 13254 US HIGHWAY 1 7/6/2017 Parcel # 30383600006000000006.0 Assessment= $3,741.84 Owner FIREFOX PROPERTIES LLC Secondary Owners Map ID: 53 Secondary Owners Mailing Address PO BOX 643661 Number ERU's: 9 VERO BEACH FL 32964 Legal SAND RIDGE CENTRE CONDOMINIUM UNIT 6 OR BK 805 PP 1379 Revision Date: Site Address 13252 US HIGHWAY 1 7/6/2017 Parcel # 30383600006000000007.0 Assessment= $3,741.84 Owner FIREFOX PROPERTIES LLC Secondary Owners Map ID: 53 Secondary Owners Mailing Address PO BOX 643661 Number ERU'S: 9 VERO BEACH FL 32964 Legal SAND RIDGE CENTRE CONDOMINIUM UNIT 7 OR BK 805 PP 1379 Revision Date Site Address 13250 US HIGHWAY 1 7/6/2017 3b1 11 a g e f.^'Utilities\UTILITY - Engineering 'Projects - Assessment Projects\OOOAssessntents_2017_Proposed\06_i•IorthCountySeptic_to_SewerAressmentProject_61_Parcels\WorciDocuments\Resolution_3\01_PrelimAsstRoll_RESO_NorthCountySelitic S evierAist ProlectNluld.e.ocx Thursday, July 06, 2017 P158 INDIAN RIVER CUUN I Y — UEPAR I IVII:W I U11-4.1 IOU IT btKV N.tJ NORTH COUNTY SEPTIC TO SEWER PROPOSED SEWER ASSESSMENT PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT ROLL — RESOLUTION 3 Parcel # 30383600006000000008.0 Assessment= $3,741.84 Owner FIREFOX PROPERTIES LLC Secondary Owners >'- Secondary Owners Mailing Address PO BOX 643661 VERO BEACH FL 32964 Legal SAND RIDGE CENTRE CONDOMINIUM UNIT 8 OR 8K 805 PP 1379 Revision Date: Site Address 13248 US HIGHWAY 1 7/6/2017 Parcel # 30383600006000000009.0 Assessment= $3,741.84 Owner FIREFOX PROPERTIES LLC Secondary Owners Map ID: 53 Secondary Owners Mailing Address PO BOX 643661 Number ERU's: 9 VERO BEACH FL 32964 Legal SAND RIDGE CENTRE CONDOMINIUM UNIT 9 OR BK 805 PP 1379 Revision Date Site Address 13246 US HIGHWAY 1 7/6/2017 Parcel # 30383600006000000010.0 Assessment= $3,741.84 Owner FIREFOX PROPERTIES LLC Secondary Owners Map ID: 53 Secondary Owners Mailing Address PO BOX 643661 Number ERU's: 9 VERO BEACH FL 32964 Legal SAND RIDGE CENTRE CONDOMINIUM UNIT 10 OR BK 805 PP 1379 Revision Date Site Address 13244 US HIGHWAY 1 7/6/2017 371 Page f:\Utilities\UTILI IY • Engineennffrojects • Assessment Projects\OOOAssessmen,,s_2017 Proposed\06_rtorthcountysepuc to_so.weras;essm.encProject_61_Parcels\WordDocuments\Resolution_3\Ol_Prelim:A.sstPoll_RESO NorthCountySeptic S ewerAsstProject rvlulti.d ocx Thursday, July 06, 2017 P159 NORTH COUNTY SEPTIC TO SEWER PROPOSED SEWER ASSESSMENT PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT ROLL — RESOLUTION 3 Parcel # 30383600006000000011.0 Assessment= $3,741.84 Owner FIREFOX PROPERTIES LLC Secondary Owners Secondary Owners Mailing Address PO BOX 643661 tela! ERU' VERO BEACH FL 32964 Legal SAND RIDGE CENTRE CONDOMINIUM UNIT 11 OR BK 805 PP 1379 Revision Date: Site Address 13242 US HIGHWAY 1 7/6/2017 - M a 1 Parcel # 30383600006000000012.0 Assessment= $3,741.84 Owner FIREFOX PROPERTIES LLC Secondary Owners Map ID: 53 Secondary Owners Mailing Address PO BOX 643661 Number ERU's: 9 VERO BEACH FL 32964 Legal SAND RIDGE CENTRE CONDOMINIUM UNIT 12 OR SK 805 PP 1379 Revision Date Site Address 13240 US HIGHWAY 1 7/6/2017 381Page F:\Utilit1es\Ur1LI TY - Engineering\Projects • Assessment Projects\000Assessments_2017_Proposed\06_NorthCountySeptic to_SewerAssessmentProject 61_ParcelsNWord0ocuments\Resolution_3\01 PrelimAsstRoll RESO_PlorthCounty5eptic_S ewerAwProiectMulti.docx Thursday, July 06, 2017 P160 CAPITAL COST BREAKDOWN -OPTION II Map IDIRC No. Parcel ID SITE ADDR OWNER_NAME Estimated ERU's ERU (HFS) COST DOR DESC is 30382100001999900018.0 1697 N CENTRAL AV VICTORIA -WILLIAM COMPANY 1 $4,989.12 Single Famlly-Improved 1 30382100001999900029.0 1614 US HIGHWAY 1 RIVERWALK VILLAGE INC 2 $9,978.24 Stores (1 Story) 2 30383000002001000004.1 1620 N CENTRAL AV VARI, ATTILA T AND HEATHER E 1 $4,989.12 Multi -Family (2-9 Unit Bu 3 30382100001999900028.0 US HIGHWAY 1 RIVERWALK VILLAGE INC 1 $4,989.12 Vacant Commercial Land 4 30383000002001000004.0 1624 N CENTRAL AV JMH VENTURES CORPORATION 1 $4,989.12 Stores (1 Story) 5 30382100001999900027.0 US HIGHWAY 1 FISH, GLENN 1 $4,989.12 Vacant Commercial Land 6 30383000002001000002.0 1632 N CENTRAL AV STRUNK, GLENN A AND DOROTHY 1 $4,989.12 Vacant Commercial Land 7 30382100001999900026.0 1640 US HIGHWAY 1 STRUNK, GLENN AND DOROTHY 2 $9,978.24 Vacant Commercial Land 8 30383000002001000011.0 1637 INDIAN RIVER OR MC CANN, SANDRA CALVIN 1 $4,989.12 Single Family -Improved 9 30382100001999900025.0 US HIGHWAY 1 STRUNK, GLENN AAND DOROTHY 1 $4,989.12 Vacant Commercial Land 10 30382100001999900024.0 US HIGHWAY 1 STRUNK, GLENN A AND DOROTHY 1 $4,989.12 Vacant Commercial Land 11 30382100001999900014.0 1644 N CENTRAL AV KELLY, RICHARD ARTHUR & 6 $29,934.71 Single Family -Improved 12 30382100001999900022.0 1623 N CENTRAL AV STRUNK, GLENN A AND DOROTHY H 1 $4,989.12 Mortuaries/ Cemeteries / Crematoriums 13 30382100001999900013.0 1654 N CENTRAL AV SWANIK, JAMES 2 $4,989.12 Vacant Commercial Land 14 303821000019999DD012.0 1662 N CENTRAL AV HALL, HAROLD AND CHRISTINE L 1 $4,989.12 Single family -Improved 15 30382100001999900021.0 1676 US HIGHWAY 1 1676 DUCKS LLC 1 $4,989.12 Offices; Non -Professional 16 30382100001999900020.0 1683 N CENTRAL AV SYPHER, RONALD 1 $4,989.12 Single Family -Improved 17 30382100001999900011.1 N CENTRALAV INDIAN RIVER RV INC 4 $19,956.47 Oen Storage, Etc- tc18 is 30382100001999900018.0 1697 N CENTRAL AV VICTORIA -WILLIAM COMPANY 1 $4,989.12 Single Famlly-Improved 19 30382100001999900011.0 1698 N CENTRAL AV INDIAN RIVER RV INC 2 $9,978.24 Auto Sales /Auto Service /Auto 30383000001004000002.0 1716 US HIGHWAY 1 KRASCO LESLIE • 1 $4,989.12 Stores (1 Story) Rental /Car Wash 20 30383000001004000011.0 DAVIS ST SMITH, DALE S AND CYNTHIA A 2 $9,978.24 Vacant Commercial Land 21 30383000001004000014.0 DAVIS ST SMITH, DALES AND CYNTHIA A 1 $4,989.12 Vacant Commercial Land 22 30383000001003000001.0 1715 N CENTRAL AV SEBASTIAN MASONIC LODGE NO 232 1 $4,989.12 Clubs / Lodges / Union Halls 23 30382100001999900010.0 616 DAVIS ST MCBRIDE, HAROLD R JR (LE) 1 $4,989.12 Single Family -Improved 24 30393100001000000005.4 612 DAVIS ST FAIRCHILD BRIAN J 1 $4,989.12 Single Family -Improved 25 30393100001000000004.2 1727 N INDIAN RIVER OR NILSSON ROBERT TERESA 2 $9,978.24 Single Family -Improved 26 30383000001004000002.0 1716 US HIGHWAY 1 KRASCO LESLIE • 1 $4,989.12 Stores (1 Story) 27 30383000001004000001.0 MADISON ST KRASCO LESUE • 1 $4,989.12 Vacant Commercial Land 28 30382100001999900009.0 608 DAVIS ST NILSSON ROBERT TERESA " 1 $4,989.12 Vacant Commercial Land 29 30383000001005000011.0 704 MADISON ST NEVAREZ PEDRO & 1 $4,989.12 Vacant Commercial Land HIGHWAY 1 SEA CREST OF SEBASTIAN LLC 0.24 $1,187.89 30383000010000000004.0 13000 US Municipal, other than Parks, 30 30383000001005000012.0 MADISON ST CITY OF SEBASTIAN 2 $9,978.24 Recreational Area, Colleges, and 0.24 $1,187.89 3n2A7nnnni----,-A aannn ue ulri.1. .1l aeA f-ey ne eenwertwu ur Hospitals Municipal, other than Parks, 31 30383000001002000009.0 MADISON ST CITY OF SEBASTIAN 1 $4,989.12 Recreational Area, Colleges, and Hospitals 32 30383000001005000003.0 711 JACKSON ST NEVAREZ PEDRO & 1 $4,989.12 Single Family -Improved 33 30383000001005000001.0 707 JACKSON ST MARSHALL HARRY J SARA 1 $4,989.12 Mixed Use; Store, Office with Residential Municipal, other than Parks, 34 30383000001002000001.0 1805 CENTRAL AV CITY OF SEBASTIAN 2 $4,989.12 Recreational Area, Colleges, and Hospitals 35 30393100001000000003.5 1724 N CENTRAL" HOCH REBECCA S 1 $4,989.12 Mobile Homes 36 30383000001006000000.2 710 JACKSON ST HART MARIA 1 $4,989.12 Laundries, Various Services, etc. 37 30383000001006000000.1 708 JACKSON ST HART MARIA 2 $9,978.24 Multi -Family (2-9 Unit Buildings) 38 30383000001001000001.0 698 JACKSON ST HALL JERRY S • MARSHA G 1 $4,989.12 Single family -Improved Municipal, other than Parks, 42 30382100001000000025.1 12900 US HIGHWAY 1 CITY OF SEBASTIAN 2 $9,978.24 Recreational Area, Colleges, and Hospitals 45 30383000010000000000.0_ S f ,: _ ._ . _ _ S _ __- �___ � $24,945.59 � _ ..-_..___,,.._._._Tits; ._.,._-__ Office Condominium 30383000010000000001.0 13000 US HIGHWAY 1 ISEA CREST OF SEBASTIAN LLC 0.24 $1,187.89 30383000010000000002.0 13000 US HIGHWAY 1 SEA CREST OF SEBASTIAN LLC 0.24 $1,187.89 30383000010000000003.0 13000 US HIGHWAY 1 SEA CREST OF SEBASTIAN LLC 0.24 $1,187.89 30383000010000000004.0 13000 US HIGHWAY 1 SEA CREST OF SEBASTIAN LLC 0.24 $1,187.89 30383000010000000005.0 13000 US HIGHWAY 1 SEA CREST OF SEBASTIAN LLC 0.24 $1,187.89 3n2A7nnnni----,-A aannn ue ulri.1. .1l aeA f-ey ne eenwertwu ur nee 30383000010000000007.0 13000 US HIGHWAY 1 PRIMARY CARE OF SEBASTIAN LLC 0.24 $1,187.89 303830000100000DD008.0- 13000.US.HIGHWAY_1_ P-RIMARY_CARE-O SEBASTIAN_LLC_ _0.24 _ _$1,187.89_ 30383000010000000009.0 13000 US HIGHWAY 1 PRIMARY CARE OF SEBASTIAN LLC 0.24 $1,187.89 30383000010000000010.0 13000 US HIGHWAY 1 PRIMARY CARE OF SEBASTIAN LLC 0.24 $1,187.89 U3 nlOnwAr 1 US HIGHWAY 1 rK1rAAnr i.ANt UY.)ttl/1.111AF4 LA.l PRIMARY CARE OF SEBASTIAN LLC U.L4 0.24 US HIGHWAY 1 KP MAES PROPERTIES LLC 0.24 US HIGHWAY 1 KP MAES PROPERTIES LLC 0.24 US HIGHWAY 1 KP MASS PROPERTIES LLC 0.24 US HIGHWAY 1 KP MAES PROPERTIES LLC 0.24 US HIGHWAY 1 KP MAES PROPERTIES LLC 0.24 US HIGHWAY 1 KP MAES PROPERTIES LLC 0.24 US HIGHWAY 1 KP MAES PROPERTIES LLC 0.24 F:\Ulaitiet\UnUSY- Fnylneering\ProItas - Utility Construction Permits\IRC- Sewer FeaslbiSty Sludles ULD 14101\9. North Sebastian IM&MI\Desip Phase\Phase HDau\SMPhase witned aid Pricesah t ATTACHMENT 3. P161 CAPITAL COST BREAKDOWN -OPTION II FAusatieAuttuty- EnQineerhVVrojects - utiturconstruchus PermltsURC- sevum reast60Ry studies MPR 41011n, north sebasitan 11018MJ10efto PhaselPhast i•01t3js2s•P M0IA•eased Bid Pkes.abr. ATTACHMENT 3. P162 30383000010000000020.0 13000 US HIGHWAY i KP MASS PROPERTIES LLC 0.24 $1,187.89 30383000010000000021.0 13000 US HIGHWAY 1 KP MAES PROPERTIES LLC 0.24$1,187.89 .46 30382100001000000023.0 13020 US HIGHWAY 1 FAMILY CAR WASH CO INC 6 $29,934.71 Auto Sales / Auto Service / Auto Rental / Car Wash 47 4P 30382100001000000022.0 . 3g383WW11Q0404Ci000.0 _ 3038300gD1100WOODE6 13050 US HIGHWAY 1 - f 13060 US HIGHWAY 1 PTS OF BREVARD COUNTY INC - .'_ _ .._. ARID. H. OONWALA 2 .. ? .. 1 _... $9978.24 _ $9µ97H.24 $4,989.12 Professional Services Office Condominium..__ 30383000011000000002.0 113060 US HIGHWAY 1 M. NASIR & TABASSUM RIZWI 1 $4,989.12 49 30382100001000000021.1 13070 US HIGHWAY i SEBASTIAN PARTNERS LLC 3 $14,967.35 Vacant Commercial Land SO 30382100001000000020.2 23090 US HIGHWAY 1 ZAIDi SYED IRFAN H COTRS) MUNAWA 2 $9,978.24 Professional Services 51 43 30382100001000000019.0 30382100001000=2,5.0 13100 US HIGHWAY 1 12920 US HIGHWAY 1 SHALHOUB HALA FOUNTAIN TOWERS LLC' 3 78.00 2 $14,967.35 $389,151.22 $9,978.24 Professional Services I Professional Services 44 30382100OOS000QO0024.0 12950'US HIGHWAY 1 RIZWI LLC 3 $14,967.35 Vacant Commercial Land S2 1 30383600004001000001.4 13230 US HIGHWAY 1 IGERISEB PL 1 $4,989.12 Professional Services _? 303836=6000000_DOD.O L 303836454060000OOOtJLO 13262 US HIGHWAY 1 _.. _. _ .. FIREFOX PROPERTIES !LC _ 9 0.75 $A�4,902:06 m $3,74184 _ - Offic_e.Condominium __ �...._ 30383600006000000002.0 13260 US HIGHWAY 1 FIREFOX PROPERTIES LLC 0.75 $3,741.84 30383600006000000003.0 132S8 US HIGHWAY 1 FIREFOX PROPERTIES LLC 0.75 $3,741,84 3038360000600000RDD4.0 1.3256 US HIGHWAY 1 FIREFOX PROPERTIES LLC 0.75 $3,741.84 30383600OD6000000005.0 13254 US HIGHWAY 1 FIREFOX PROPERTIES LLC 0.75 $3,741.84 303836000N0000000060 13252 US HIGHWAY i FIREFOX PROPERTIES LLC 0.75 $3,741.84 30383600006000000007.0 13250 US HIGHWAY 1 FIREFOX PROPERTIES LLC 0.75 $3,741.84 303836000060000000DH.0 13248 US HIGHWAY 1 FIREFOX PROPERTIES LLC 0.75 $3,741.84 30383600006000000009.0 13246 US HIGHWAY 1 FIREFOX PROPERTIES LLC 0.75 $3,741.84 303836000D6000000010.D 13244 US HIGHWAY 1 FIREFOX PROPERTIES LLC 0.75 $3,741.84 303836000060000DO011.0 13242 US HIGHWAY 1 FIREFOX PROPERTIES LLC 0.75 $3,741.84 303836ODD06000000012.0 13240 US HIGHWAY 1 FIREFOX PROPERTIES LIC 0.75 $3,741.84 54 303825000000041000024 33350 US HIGHWAY 1 ROYAL PALM CORPORATE CENTER AS SC 75 $374,183.86 Vacant Commercial Land 55 303825OW0000500004S.0 13480 US HIGHWAY 1 QUALITY HEALTH CARE INC OF FLORIDA 20 $99,782.36 Vacant Commercial Land S6 30382500000002000003.3 13700 US HIGHWAY 1 JUNO ROAD REALTY LLC 22 $109,760.60 vacant Commercial land 57 30382500000002000003.2 13800 US HIGHWAY 1 µ NATIONAL RETAIL PROPERTIES LP - '~^+A - 2 -~_ $9,978,24 Banks / Savings and Loan Assoc. / Mortgage Co. / Credit Services C . Z SH 30382500017000000000.0; _-_ _ _ �F- 579,95647 Officefondominium- µ � - 30382SOOM0017 000 0001.0 _ 13830 US HIGHWAY 1 w . BRADY, VALERIE V _ _.. 0.33 $1,663.04 303825000170DO00WO2,0 13832 US HIGHWAY 1 PELICAN NEST LLC 0.33 $1663.04 Z 30382SO0017000000003.0 13834 US HIGHWAY 1 SPOTO, JAMES {TRS) & 0.33 $1,663.04 0 30382500017000000004:0 13836 US HIGHWAY 1 SPOTO, JAMES TRS & 0.33 $1,663.04 r zs 30382S0001700000000S.0 13838 US HIGHWAY i SPOTO, JAMES (TRS) & 0.33 $1,663.04 t} 3038250001700000OW&O 13840 US HIGHWAY 1 SPOTO, JAMES 5) & 0.33 $1,663.04 30382500017000000007.0 13842 US HIGHWAY 1 SPOTO, JAMES (TRS) & 0.33 $1,663.04 O 30382500017000000008.0 13844 US HIGHWAY 1 SPOTO, JAMES (TRS) & 0.33 $1,663.04 n 30382500017000000009,0 13846 US HIGHWAY 1 SPOTO, JAMES ) & 0.33 $1,663.04 O 3038250001700000DO10.0 13848 US HIGHWAY 1 SPOTO, JAMES (TRS) & 0.33 $1,663.04 30382SO0017000000011.0 13850 US HIGHWAY 1 IDONOVAN, RICHARD J and PATRICIA W 0.33 $1,663.04 z 3038250DO17000000012.0 113852 US HIGHWAY 1 DONOVAN, RICHARD J and PATRICIA W 0.33 $1,663.04 59 '60 30382500000042000003.1 353825000120000001100.0 _ 30382500012040000001.0 _ 14000 US HIGHWAY 1 - _� 7740 8AY ST BAY STREET SEBASTIAN LLC _ PETERSON, MARK A and MARY LOU 4 4 0.33 A $19,956.47 $19,956.47 - $1,663.04 Stores (15tory) _ MedicalCo.CondomlMum _ # 303825000120000000024 7744 BAY ST BAY STREET PHARMACY INC 0.33 $1,663.04 30382500012000000004.0 7746 BAY ST BAY STREET PHARMACY INC 0.33 $1,663.04 i 303825ODD1200000000S.0 7750 DAY ST KHAWA)A, FARHATI and MUSSARRATI 0.33 $1,663.04 3038250D0120D0000006,0 7752 BAY ST KHAWAJA, FARHAN J and SA8EEN J 0.33 $1,663.04 30382S0W120DWW0074 7754 SAY ST KHAWAJA, SOBIA (1/3) & 0.33 $1663.04 30382500012000000008.0 7760 SAY ST RAY STREET PHARMACY INC 0.33 $1,663.04 30382SOD012ODD00000%0 7762 BAY ST THEIS, ALFRED J 0:33 $1,663.04 30382500012000000010.0 7764 SAY ST KHAWAJA, MUSSARRATJ (1/2) and MAHMUDA 0.33 $1,663.04 30382500012000000011.0 7766 BAY ST BROOKS, HAROLD LIR & BARBARA R 0.33 $1,663.04 30382500012000000012.0 7768 BAY ST AU, SABIR MD and ATTIYA 0.33 $1,663.04 .., 30382500012000000013.0 7770 BAY ST KHAWAJA. MOHAMMAD•NAIM•and-�-- SHAHIDA MAIM 0.33 $1 .04 61 30382500000002000002.1 14410 US HIGHWAY 1 I CLARITY MEDICAL PROPERTIES LLC j 4 150.00 1 228.00 $19,956,47 $748,367.73 $1137,519 Professional Services FAusatieAuttuty- EnQineerhVVrojects - utiturconstruchus PermltsURC- sevum reast60Ry studies MPR 41011n, north sebasitan 11018MJ10efto PhaselPhast i•01t3js2s•P M0IA•eased Bid Pkes.abr. ATTACHMENT 3. P162 61 � r s S ,PL A 14380 S, ` 1 _142ND ST ST.ST� N, °0 140TH-ET yeti A� S� UNINCORPORATED - IRC S3 \Ty \sem cl, 0 `AlsFe � A TACHMENT 4 NORTH SEBASTIAN SEPTIC TO SEWER N PHASE 1 po \t<`� 38 cf� 36 37 ` MZ .� 3b 32 33 34 25 �L 25 28 OQ�)jT 27 22 �cy zs. T 20 1 �pZ� 1s 18 �c 66 1 G� ��0. 2 12 14: 13 1111 63 1 130TH 126TH CITY OF SEBASTIAN a PL' ,26 ii CITY OF SEBASTIAN I CITY LIMITS °�1 ate: 6/14/2017 P163 Indian River County Utilities North Sebastian Septic to Sewer (S2S)- Phase I Adoption of Resolution III Board of County Commissioners July 18, 2017 7/18/2017 Septic to Sewer (S2S) History i (Date Description 3/9/2017 Advertised for Bids 4/12/2017 Opened Bids 5/16/2017 BCC Approved Option II for the assessment portion 5/24/2017 Staff presented results at City of Sebastian City Council Meeting 6/20/2017 BCC Adopted Resolution I & II 7j1;)d�017 Staff presented project/financing options to benefiting property owners at City of Sebastian City Council Chambers 7/18/2017 10-A.I. 173- 1 7/18/2017 Approved Allocations Based on $2.97M FUNDING ALLOCATIONS APPROVED BASED ON LOWEST RESPONSIVE, RESPOSIBLE BID PRICE OF $2.97 M Funding Allocations Initial estimate was based on $1.97M approved by BCC 12/20/16- Below are % allocation changes due to new cost Cost are Grant Utility Assessment Fund (473) Sales Tax Contribution Assessment (Owner) Portion �' . ■ OWNER PORTION PER ERU �� E 7/18/2017 163" 2 •\ - �� E • • W-10 IRON �� !� � d 111111,E �� • S •i r �9¢f iA �rMA 163" 2 PARCELS/UNIT COST BREAKDOWN 7/18/2017 Tentative Schedule ** The grant agreement terminates on June 30, 2018. There is an option for extension, but such requests must be made on or before April 1, 2018. There is a tight timeline imposed by the SIRWMD to expedite completion of the work. 7/18/2017 7/19/2017 �3 ` 3 Public Hearing, Resolution III confirming the project for mandatory assessment Pre -construction meeting & NTP Finish Project" .Begin to connect property owners once Resolution IV (As - Built) has been adopted by BCC ** The grant agreement terminates on June 30, 2018. There is an option for extension, but such requests must be made on or before April 1, 2018. There is a tight timeline imposed by the SIRWMD to expedite completion of the work. 7/18/2017 7/19/2017 �3 ` 3 7/19/2017 Board Consideration Open the public hearing and after receiving input, consider adopting Resolution No. 111 with any revisions based on that public input. 1. Adopt Resolution No. III with the following items: a. Cost per parcel/unit to be based on Attachment 3. b. One hundred and twelve (112) benefitting parcels/units as part of the special assessment lien. C. For benefitting parcels above in point b, allow property owners to finance the capital cost up to 10 years, payable in ten equal yearly installments at an annual interest rate of 2.00% as approved by BCC. 7/18/2017 IZ3 4 CAPITAL COST BREAKDOWN -OPTION II Map ID No. Parcel ID SITE ADDR - OWNER NAME IRC Estimated ERU's ERU (HFS) COST DOR DESC 1 30382100001999900029.0 1614 US HIGHWAY 1 RIVERWALK VILLAGE INC 2 $9,978.24 Stores (1 Story) 2 30383000002001000004.1 1620 N CENTRAL AV VARI, ATTILA T AND HEATHER E 1 $4,989.12 Multi -Family (2-9 Unit Buildings) 3 30382100001999900028.0 US HIGHWAY 1 RIVERWALK VILLAGE INC 1 $4,989.12 Vacant Commercial Land 4 30383000002001000004.0 1624 N CENTRAL AV JMH VENTURES CORPORATION 1 $4,989.12 Stores (1 Story) 5 30382100001999900027.0 US HIGHWAY 1 FISH, GLENN 1 $4,989.12 Vacant Commercial Land 6 30383000002001000002.0 1632 N CENTRAL AV STRUNK, GLENN A AND DOROTHY 1 $4,989.12 Vacant Commercial Land 7 30382100001999900026.0 1640 US HIGHWAY 1 STRUNK, GLENN AND DOROTHY 2 $9,978.24 Vacant Commercial Land 8 30383000002001000011.0 1637 INDIAN RIVER DR MC CANN, SANDRA CALVIN 1 $4,989.12 Single Family -Improved 9 30382100001999900025.0 US HIGHWAY 1 STRUNK, GLENN A AND DOROTHY 1 $4,989.12 Vacant Commercial Land 10 30382100001999900024.0 US HIGHWAY 1 STRUNK, GLENN AAND DOROTHY 1 $4,989.12 Vacant Commercial Land 11 30382100001999900014.0 1644 N CENTRAL AV KELLY, RICHARD ARTHUR & 6 $29,934.71 Single Family -Improved 12 30382100001999900022.0 1623 N CENTRAL AV STRUNK, GLENN A AND DOROTHY H 1 $4.989.12 / Mortuaries/ CemeteriesCrematoriums 13 30382100001999900013.0 1654 N CENTRAL AV SWANIK, JAMES 1 $4,989.12 Vacant Commercial Land 14 30382100001999900012.0 1662 N CENTRAL AV HALL, HAROLD AND CHRISTINE L 1 $4,989.12 Single Family -Improved 15 30382100001999900021.0 1676 US HIGHWAY 1 1676 DUCKS LLC 1 $4,989.12 Offices; Non -Professional, One Story 16 30382100001999900020.0 1683 N CENTRAL AV SYPHER, RONALD 1 $4,989.12 Single Family -Improved 17 30382100001999900011.1 N CENTRAL AV INDIAN RIVER RV INC 4 $19,956.47 Open Storage, Etc. 18 30382100001999900018.0 1697 N CENTRAL AV VICTORIA -WILLIAM COMPANY 1 $4,989.12 Single Family -Improved 19 30382100001999900011.0 1698 N CENTRAL AV INDIAN RIVER RV INC 2 $9,978.24 Auto Sales / Auto Service / Auto Rental / Car Wash 20 30383000001004000011.0 DAVIS ST SMITH, DALE S AND CYNTHIA A 2 $9,978.24 Vacant Commercial Land 21 30383000001004000014.0 DAVIS ST SMITH, DALE S AND CYNTHIA A 1 $4,989.12 Vacant Commercial Land 22 30383000001003000001.0 1715 N CENTRAL AV SEBASTIAN MASONIC LODGE NO 232 1 $4,989.12 Clubs / Lodges / Union Halls 23 30382100001999900010.0 616 DAVIS ST MCBRIDE, HAROLD RJR (LE) 1 $4,989.12 Single Family -Improved 24 30393100001000000005.4 612 DAVIS ST FAIRCHILD BRIAN 1 1 $4,989.12 Single Family -Improved 25 30393100001000000004.2 1727 N INDIAN RIVER DR NILSSON ROBERT TERESA 2 $9,978.24 Single Family -Improved 26 30383000001004000002.0 1716 US HIGHWAY 1 KRASCO LESLIE' 1 $4,989.12 Stores (1 Story) 27 30383000001004000001.0 MADISON ST KRASCO LESLIE' 1 $4,989.12 Vacant Commercial Land 28 30382100001999900009.0 608 DAVIS ST NILSSON ROBERT TERESA • 1 $4,989.12 Vacant Commercial Land n 29 30383000001005000011.0 704 MADISON ST NEVAREZ PEDRO & 1 $4,989.12 Vacant Commercial Land 30 30383000003005000012.0 MADISON ST CITY OF SEBASTIAN 2 $9,978.24 Municipal, other than Parks, Recreational Area, Colleges, and Hospitals Q T7 31 30383000001002000009.0 MADISON ST CITY OF SEBASTIAN 1 $4,989.12 Municipal, other than Parks, Recreational Area, Colleges, and Hospitals T W 32 30383000001005000003.0 711 JACKSON ST NEVAREZ PEDRO & 1 $4,989.12 Single Family -Improved N 33 30383000001005000001.0 707 JACKSON ST MARSHALL HARRY SARA 1 $4,989.12 Mixed Use; Store, Office with Residential D 34 30383000001002000001.0 1805 CENTRAL AV CITY OF SEBASTIAN 1 $4,989.12 Municipal, other than Parks, Recreational Area, Colleges, and Hospitals z C 35 30393100001000000003.5 1724 N CENTRAL AV HOCH REBECCA S 1 $4,989.12 Mobile Homes 36 30383000001006000000.2 710 JACKSON ST HART MARIA 1 $4,989.12 Laundries, Various Services, etc. 37 30383000001006000000.1 708 JACKSON ST HART MARIA 2 $9,978.24 Multi -Family (2-9 Unit Buildings) 38 30383000001001000001.0 698 JACKSON ST HALL JERRY S . MARSHA G 1 $4,989.12 Single Family -Improved 42 30382100001000000025.1 12900 US HIGHWAY 1 CITY OF SEBASTIAN 2 $9,978.24 Municipal, other than Parks, Recreational Area, Colleges, and Hospitals Q 2 45 30383000010000000000.0 5 $24,945.59 Office Condominium 30383000010000000001.0 13000 US HIGHWAY 1 SEA CREST OF SEBASTIAN LLC 0.24 $1,187.89 30383000010000000002.0 13000 US HIGHWAY 1 SEA CREST OF SEBASTIAN LLC 0.24 $1,187.89 30383000010000000003.0 13000 US HIGHWAY 1 SEA CREST OF SEBASTIAN LLC 0.24 $1,187.89 30383000010000000004.0 13000 US HIGHWAY 1 SEA CREST OF SEBASTIAN LLC 0.24 $1,187.89 30383000010000000005.0 13000 US HIGHWAY 1 SEA CREST OF SEBASTIAN LLC 0.24 $1,187.89 30383000010000000006.0 13000 US HIGHWAY 1 SEA CREST OF SEBASTIAN LLC 0.24 $1,187.89 30383000010000000007.0 13000 US HIGHWAY 1 PRIMARY CARE OF SEBASTIAN LLC 0.24 $1,187.89 30383000010000000008.0 13000 US HIGHWAY 1 PRIMARY CARE OF SEBASTIAN LLC 0.24 $1,187.89 30383000010000000009.0 13000 US HIGHWAY 1 PRIMARY CARE OF SEBASTIAN LLC 0.24 $1,187.89 30383000010000000010.0 13000 US HIGHWAY 1 PRIMARY CARE OF SEBASTIAN LLC 0.24 $1,187.89 30383000010000000011.0 13000 US HIGHWAY 1 PRIMARY CARE OF SEBASTIAN LLC 0.24 $1,187.89 30383000010000000012.0 13000 US HIGHWAY 1 PRIMARY CARE OF SEBASTIAN LLC 0.24 $1,187.89 30383000010000000013.0 13000 US HIGHWAY 1 KP MAES PROPERTIES LLC 0.24 $1,187.89 30383000010000000014.0 13000 US HIGHWAY 1 KP MAES PROPERTIES LLC 0.24 $1,187.89 30383000010000000015.0 13000 US HIGHWAY 1 KP MAES PROPERTIES LLC 0.24 $1,187.89 30383000010000000016.0 13000 US HIGHWAY 1 KP MAES PROPERTIES LLC 0.24 $1,187.89 30383000010000000017.0 13000 US HIGHWAY 1 KP MAES PROPERTIES LLC 0.24 $1,187.89 30383000010000000018.0 13000 US HIGHWAY 1 KP MAES PROPERTIES LLC 0.24 $1,187.89 13000 US HIGHWAY 1 KP MAES PROPERTIES LLC 0.24 $1,187.89 12Z30383000010001000000000019.0 N360202011206002000020.0 13000 US HIGHWAY 1 KP MAES PROPERTIES LLC 0.24 $1,187.89 F.\Utllitles\UTIUTY- Engineering\Projects -Utility Construction Permits\IRC - Sewer Feasibility Studies UCP a 4101\3. North Sebastian (M&M)\Design Phase\Phase l-Data\S2S-Phase IA -Based Bid Price-lu ATTACHMENT 3. CAPITAL COST BREAKDOWN -OPTION II F.\Utllides\UTILITY - Engineering\Projects - UtilityConstruction Permits\IRC - Sewer Feasibility Studies UCP 714101\3. North Sebastian (M&M)\Design Phase\Phase 1-Data\S2S-Phase IA -Based Bid Prlces.xlsx ATTACH M ENT 3. 30383000010000000021.0 13000 US HIGHWAY 1 KP MAES PROPERTIES LLC 0.24 $1,187.89 46 30382100001000000023.0 13020 US HIGHWAY 1 FAMILY CAR WASH CO INC 6 $29,934.71 / Auto Sales / Auto Service Auto Rental / Car Wash 47 30382100001000000022.0 13050 US HIGHWAY 1 I PTS OF BREVARD COUNTY INC 2 $9,978.24 Professional Services 48 30383000011000000000.0 2 $9,978.24 Office Condominium 30383000011000000001.0 113060 US HIGHWAY 1 ABID. H. OONWALA 1 $4,989.12 30383000011000000002.0 13060 US HIGHWAY 1 M. NASIR & TABASSUM RIZWI 1 $4,989.12 49 30382100001000000021.1 13070 US HIGHWAY 1 SEBASTIAN PARTNERS LLC 3 $14,967.35 Vacant Commercial Land 50 30382100001000000020.2 13090 US HIGHWAY 1 ZAIDI SYED IRFAN H (COTRS) MUNAWA 2 1 $9,978.24 Professional Services 51 30382100001000000019.0 13100 US HIGHWAY 1 SHALHOUB HALA • 3 $14,967.35 Professional Services 78.00_ 43 30382100001000000025.0 12920 US HIGHWAY 1 FOUNTAIN TOWERS LLC ` 2 i _$389,151.22_ $9,978.24 ITrofessional Services 44 30382100001000000024.0 12950 US HIGHWAY 1 1 RIZWI LLC 3 $14,967.35 1Vacant Commercial Land 52 30383600004001000001.0 13230 US HIGHWAY 1 IGERISEB PL 1 $4,989.12 jProfessional Services 53 30383600006000000000.0 9 $44,902.06 Office Condominium 30383600006000000001.0 13262 US HIGHWAY 1 FIREFOX PROPERTIES LLC 0.75 $3,741.84 30383600006000000002.0 13260 US HIGHWAY 1 FIREFOX PROPERTIES LLC 0.75 $3,741.84 30383600006000000003.0 13258 US HIGHWAY 1 FIREFOX PROPERTIES LLC 0.75 $3,741.84 30383600006000000004.0 13256 US HIGHWAY 1 FIREFOX PROPERTIES LLC 0.75 $3,741.84 30383600006000000005.0 13254 US HIGHWAY 1 FIREFOX PROPERTIES LLC 0.75 $3,741.84 30383600006000000006.0 13252 US HIGHWAY 1 FIREFOX PROPERTIES LLC 0.75 $3,741.84 30383600006000000007.0 13250 US HIGHWAY 1 FIREFOX PROPERTIES LLC 0.75 $3,741.84 30383600006000000008.0 13248 US HIGHWAY 1 FIREFOX PROPERTIES LLC 0.75 $3,741.84 30383600006000000009.0 13246 US HIGHWAY 1 FIREFOX PROPERTIES LLC 0.75 $3,741.84 30383600006000000010.0 13244 US HIGHWAY 1 FIREFOX PROPERTIES LLC 0.75 $3,741.84 30383600006000000011.0 13242 US HIGHWAY 1 FIREFOX PROPERTIES LLC .0.75 $3,741.84 30383600006000000012.0 13240 US HIGHWAY 1 FIREFOX PROPERTIES LLC 0.75 $3,741.84 54 1 30382500000004100002.0 13350 US HIGHWAY 1 ROYAL PALM CORPORATE CENTER AS 5 75 $374,183.86 Vacant Commercial Land 55 30382500000005000005.0 13480 US HIGHWAY 1 IQUALITY HEALTH CARE INC OF FLORIDA 20 $99,782.36 Vacant Commercial Land 56 30382500000002000003.3 13700 US HIGHWAY 1 JUNO ROAD REALTY LLC 22 $109,760.60 Vacant Commercial Land 57 30382500000002000003.2 13800 US HIGHWAY 1 NATIONAL RETAIL PROPERTIES LPMortgage 2 $9,978.24 Banks / Savings and Loan Assoc. / Co. / Credit Services 58 30382500017000000000.0 4 $19,956.47 Office Condominium 30382500017000000001.0 13830 US HIGHWAY 1 BRADY, VALERIE 0.33 $1,663.04 C Z 30382500017000000002.0 13832 US HIGHWAY 1 PELICAN NEST LLC 0.33 $1,663.04 Z 30382500017000000003.0 13834 US HIGHWAY 1 SPOTO, JAMES (TRS) & 0.33 $1,663.04 n O 30382500017000000004.0 13836 US HIGHWAY 1 SPOTO, JAMES (TRS) & 0.33 $1,663.04 v 3038250001700000000S.0 13838 US HIGHWAY 1 SPOTO, JAMES (TRS) & 0.33 $1,663.04 O 30382500017000000006.0 13840 US HIGHWAY 1 SPOTO, JAMES (TRS) & 0.33 $1,663.04 y, 30382500017000000007.0 13842 US HIGHWAY 1 SPOTO, JAMES (TRS) & 0.33 $1,663.04 M 30382500017000000008.0 13844 US HIGHWAY 1 SPOTO, JAMES (TRS) & 0.33 $1,663.04 0 30382500017000000009.0 13846 US HIGHWAY 1 SPOTO, JAMES (TRS) & 0.33 $1,663.04 O 30382500017000000010.0 13848 US HIGHWAY 1 SPOTO, JAMES (TRS) & 0.33 $1,663.04 C Z 30382500017000000011.0 13850 US HIGHWAY 1 DONOVAN, RICHARD 1 and PATRICIA W 0.33 $1,663.04 30382500017000000012.0 13852 US HIGHWAY 1 DONOVAN, RICHARDJ and PATRICIA W 0.33 $1,663.04 59 30382500000002000003.1 14000 US HIGHWAY 1 BAY STREET SEBASTIAN LLC 4 $19,956.47 IStores (1 Story) 60 30382500012000000000.0 4 $19,956.47 Medical Condominium 30382500012000000001.0 7740 BAY ST PETERSON, MARK A and MARY LOU 0.33 $1,663.04 30382500012000000002.0 7744 BAY ST BAY STREET PHARMACY INC 0.33 $1,663.04 30382500012000000004.0 7746 BAY ST BAY STREET PHARMACY INC 0.33 $1,663.04 30382500012000000005.0 7750 BAY ST j KHAWAJA, FARHAT J and MUSSARRAT 0.33 $1,663.04 30382500012000000006.0 7752 BAY ST KHAWAJA, FARHAN J and SABEEN J 0.33 $1,663.04 30382500012000000007.0 7754 BAY ST KHAWAJA, SOBIA (1/3) & 0.33 $1,663.04 30382500012000000008.0 7760 BAY ST BAY STREET PHARMACY INC 0.33 $1,663.04 30382500012000000009.0 7762 BAY ST THEIS, ALFRED 1 0.33 $1,663.04 30382500012000000010.0 7764 BAY ST KHAWAJA, MUSSARRAT J (1/2) and MAHMUDA 0.33 $1,663.04 30382500012000000011.0 7766 BAY ST BROOKS, HAROLD LJR & BARBARA R 0.33 $1,663.04 30382500012000000012.0 7768 BAY ST ALI, SABIR MD and ATTIYA 0.33 $1,663.04 30382500012000000013.0 7770 BAY ST KHAWAJA, MOHAMMAD NAIM and SHAHIDA NAIM 0.33 $1,663.04 61 30382500000002000002.1 14410 US HIGHWAY 1 CLARITY MEDICAL PROPERTIES LLC 4 $19,956.47 Professional Services 150.00 $748,367.73 228.00 $1137,519 F.\Utllides\UTILITY - Engineering\Projects - UtilityConstruction Permits\IRC - Sewer Feasibility Studies UCP 714101\3. North Sebastian (M&M)\Design Phase\Phase 1-Data\S2S-Phase IA -Based Bid Prlces.xlsx ATTACH M ENT 3. l O•/ \ . r♦ SEBASTIAN PROPERTY OWNERS ASSOCIATION FOUNDED FEBRUARY 2, 1977 Sebastian Property Owners Association P.O. Box 780263 Sebastian, Florida, 32958 Commissioner Tim Zorc 180127' Street Vero Beach, Florida 32960-3388 Dear Tim, Our membership and board are asking, that on Tuesday, July 18, 2017 at the County Board of Commissioners meeting, you and the County Board of Commissioners, will open the public hearing and after receiving input adopt Resolution NO. III concerning North Sebastian Septic to Sewer (S2S) Phase 1. We are well aware of the diligence you and the board have shown since the S2S plan has been presented by Staff. We, as you do, look forward to the day the poisonous algae bloom that turns the Lagoon into toxic soup are a thing of the past and we smile and feel good that we did what we could to make a difference. We thank you for your help and all you do. Bruce Zingman Buzz Hermann Mark Bondy President Past President Secretary INDIAN RIVER COUNTY SEPTIC TO SEWER PROGRAM PROTECTING THE INDIAN RIVER LAGOON Outline ➢Septic Systems: A brief overview ➢Collection systems ➢Countywide S2S Ranking • Methodology • Results • Examples • Nitrogen Loading • Current Projects ➢Moving forward/next steps • County Goals • Next Steps ➢Other programs in the Treasure Coast 7/18/2017 161 1A 1 7/18/2017 , Mataflai' D, do ddon Voktiluafion Y Po Figure 7. Nitrogen sources and pathways to streams, Including direct discharges, runoff, leaching to groundwater, subsurface tile drainage to ditches, and precipitation directly into waters. Nitrogen In Minnesota Surface waters • lune 2013 M,Innesota Pollution Control Agency Even Properly Functioning and Maintained On -Site Sewage Treatment Disposal Systems (OSTDS) produce an Effluent Capable of Causing Groundwater and Surface Water Contamination Daily Contribution of Wastewater to Septic Tank Average 0 50 to 80 Gallons Septic System Fact: per daylper person— Nitrogen compounds cannot be There were four (4) major —"- significantly reduced in the conventional OSTDS and thus nitrogen changes to the criteria for septic Wastewater in levels within ground waters may system placement, requirements an Septic Tanks increase. size of systems: Contain: Four significant periods of septic regulations* o Rules Prior to '72 Total Nitroge�o Change: '72 to '82 SomglL A"10 Contnbuti �n 6 Geo rftdwato Surface, Septic System Waeearbrri'SepCKTanks ;;�:"a' ' o Change: '83 to '97 Total Phosphorus - o Change: '98 to present 10.4mgn *(Chapter 64E -Florida Administrative Total Bacteria 1 ( f Code, Standards for On-site Sewage CFU 100mml — 7A71 4,7bs tVttroge • Treatment and �.o Plume --�'� per_onl iyal Disposal Systems, 3/98) and Anything Else Groundwater Flow Flushed Down the Drains _-0 . 'M Asxst+n"d dt$,ogm Cm�Snn t:an Oo-sBr Wariraa�s Treakroltby�"m+n Bye weiira SCfCyGea d CeiSal Fluida'. Floida Oepnhnntdrka*Ji. ••'OnSte TteaSrndand Depos9 Syer An Ohnier,Wms;/dnorida. IFAS ratxnim 7/10/2017 Locations of Septic Tanks in Indian River County 30,369 septic systems in Indian River County J .�• j" G� ;�� 1 •''c tti , i tom'' -'J `4�J �.Fy\ '1... • A � '.`- _ Y' "' 1�� ti,!{'"a'�tifi��;tyi j.. r• t X - � T f 4 ";•• . [_.. �y 4 40., g. ��+ .� f' -���: •._--''�?�',�, � '.{'{'�'� iii.. - -";-:. ►- �`; .....�• r- ��` vex � t`e�i'!+� -- 143 J-� Jurisdiction Parcel with No Sewer Service Parcel Count City of Fellsmere No Sewer Service, Built 1983 or After 648 4% No Sewer Service, Built Before 1983 464 City of Sebastian No Sewer Service, Built 1983orAfter 6,807 28% No Sewer Service, Built Before 1983 1,577 Cit of Vero Beach No Sewer Service, Built 1983 or After 486 5% No Sewer Service, Built Before 1983 1,000 County No Sewer Service, Built 1983orAfter 11,419 No Sewer Service, Built Before 1983 7,814 63% Town of Indian River Shores No Sewer Se rvice, Built 1983 or After 93 <1% <1% No Sewer Service, Built Before 1983 60 Town of Orchid No Sewer Serv Data Sources Indian River County Utility Dept, 2013 City of Vero Beach Utility Dept, 2013 Indian River County Property Appraiser, 2013 143 J-� ice, Built 1983 or After 1 Total 30,369 3 ➢ Indian River County Utility Department Service Area • Excluding COVB, Fellsmere, Town of IRS ➢ 325 Subdivisions/ Communities ➢ Initial Ranking..."Importance Factor" Weighting ➢ Final Ranking 7/is/2017 Initial Ranking Seven (7) Factors and associated Index Numbers lridek,Numb_er =a'ctor,Nlin. IVlax.: Population Density 4(x1*)= 4 12(x2*)= 24 Proximity to Surface Waters 0.1(x1*)= 0.1 12(x2*)= 24 FEMA Flood Plain 0 12 Depth to Ground Water Table 4 12 Soil Condition 4 12 Age Surface Water Mgmt System 4 12 Age of Existing OSTDS 4 12 20.1 to 108 * 1 is minimum importance factor, and 2 is maximum importance factor 7/18/2017 163A-4 Importance Factor Weighting • Adjacent to Indian River Lagoon (IRL) 2.0 • Adjacent to Sebastian River (SR) 1.85 • Adjacent to and downstream of spillways for IRFWCD Main, North or South relief canals or other streams/channels within 1 mile of IRL 1.85 • Adjacent to and downstream of spillways for IRFWCD Main, North or South relief canals or other streams/channels within 1 mile of SR 1.7 • Adjacent to and within 1 mile upstream of spillways for IRFWCD Main, North or South relief canals or other streams from 1-2 miles of the IRL 1.4 • Adjacent to and within 1 mile upstream of spillways for SRID laterals Ca and L, and City of Sebastian waterways; or other Laterals ("C"), sub -laterals, 1.3 streams / channels from 1-2 miles of the SR • Adjacent to all other upstream surface waters 1.0 'Adjacent to" a surface water shall include any community within 100 ft. of a surface water Population Density <_ 2 units/ac 4 x 1 4 to 8 2 to 4.8 units/ac* 4 to 12* x 1 4 to24 > 4.8 units/ac 12 x 1 12 to 24 *Sliding Scale, Index Number = 2.85d —1.7 D = Density (2-4.8) I = Importance Factor (1.0 to 2.0) 7/18/2017 Flood Zone Designation Outside 100 year Flood Hazard Area (FHA) 0 <= 1/3 community in FHA. 4 1/3 to 2/3 of community in FHA In Flood Zone Depth to Groundwater Table 12 > 48 inches 4 36 to 48 inches 5 24 to 36 inches 6 0 to 23 inches 10 above GWT 12 7/18/2017 7/16/2017 Soil Condition Slight (Slightly limited) .4 Moderate (Moderately limited) 5 Severe (Severely limited) 6 1 * Actual Score = calculate a weighted average number based on percentage of each soil classification within each community F Age of Existing OSTDS (septic system) 'Age of OSTDS/ Septic system 1998 to present 1983 to 1997 1972 to 1982 Before 1972 Example of an Initial Ranking Cal Subdivisions Picked: ✓ Floravon Shores ✓ Sebastian Highlands Unit 05 ✓ River Shores Estates Units 1-4 Index #/ Score d 4 0 10 12 ear nrdR ]6]7 Proximity of el[aM a5TD5 1919 vowurnu+orrlsm Population Map Id. van.ne oenNnon Importance Surface No Subdivision Name Factor Density Water Index 4 % NmM rwir.onea. ole,]aMyeraekpnf wrreisnlma Index # Wn,bvr Orm Index# # 48 Floravon Shores Subdivision 2.00 9.33 18.24 58 Sebastian Higlands Unit 05 1.70 12.30 16.66 12.1. River Shores Estates Units 1- 16S'te 667 lo.reaa han l6S'te LSTlmmunlxe water/stream 0. 5.16 320 4 2.00 14.36 8.56 Index #/ Score d 4 0 10 12 7/18/2017 ic3A-8 ear nrdR ]6]7 el[aM a5TD5 1919 vowurnu+orrlsm van.ne oenNnon are anfA 6rau Maw , 1611 Depth INA L Ictal runts M Acrtle6m<nt wrte6m bt. 4 % NmM rwir.onea. ole,]aMyeraekpnf wrreisnlma ; 1] Wn,bvr Orm Index# er inde erinde .%ee oIINOon '"` aNA La. M.r+ . 1611 I.-A D—Ov q,• 3M 4 0.60 12.1. 7/18/2017 ic3A-8 e 0�.neq o• u] adm• aha 1 , Depth od Plain round Ground- Index# er inde erinde .%ee oIINOon '"` aNA La. M.r+ . 1611 .6ST oarw]a6ST/mm aurhre waM/.vem 4 0.60 16S'te 667 lo.reaa han l6S'te LSTlmmunlxe water/stream 0. 5.16 a]6S' AB.rcwcl6i'fmm wAa[ewart./ab a l0.W 8.00 10.0( cowmo:er o s.e ce�e.w,wvoe. avxrax, L• oa6% 0.1 0.00 10.0( >.•32AI% 3 fNWtNb 1 k. Nvnbn 7/18/2017 ic3A-8 S2S Methodology INITIAL RANKING: Study evaluated 325 platted subdivisions within unincorporated IRC and City of Sebastian for the initial ranking. RESULTS Factors used in the Initial Ranking • Population Density - Importance factor assigned • Proximity to Surface Waters — Importance factor assigned • Flood Plain • Depth to Ground Water Table • Soil Condition • Age of Surface Water Management System • Age of the Existing CISTDS Final Ranking 7/18/2017 Map Id. Subdivision, Name Overall Score Initial Ranking 138 Hobart Landing Unit 2 89.19 i 17 Orchid Island No. 1 85.49 - 2 . 18 Orchid Island No. 2 84.65 3 _ 139 Hobart Landing Unit 3 82.37 4 2 Hallmark Ocean Subdivision 78.45 5 1 Ambersand Beach Sub No 1 & 2 75.73 6 48 Floravon Shores Subdivision 75.57 7 131 Naranja TR Shellmound Bch Replat of POR 74.05 8 52 Sebastian Highlands Unit 02 Collier 73.05 9 320 River Shores Estates Units 1-4 70.92 10 212 Rain Tree Corner Subdivision 69.63 11 58 Sebastian Highlands Unit 05 68.96 12 137 Hobart Landing Unit 1 68.28 13 19 Orchid Isle Estates Subdivision 68.27 14 275 Arpes{A-ef-[}� 67,54 35 213 Kanawah Acres 67.41 16 199 Verona Estates Subdivision 67.38 17 291 Indian River Heights Units 1 -9 66.96 18 273 Diana Park Subdivision 66.85 19 49 Dales Landing Subdivision 66.33 20 278 - Stevens Park Unit 1 & 2 66.17 21 - 272 Pine Tree Park Units 1-4 65.24 22 196 Little Portion Subdivision Replat OF 64.85 23 50 Sebastian Highlands Unit 01 63.99 24 57 Sebastian Highlands Unit 04 63,78 25 143 Winter Grove Subdivision 62.82 26 207 Tropic Colony Subdivision 62.60 27 32 Halleluiah Acres 62.50 28 Re -prioritization of Initial Top 30 Sewer Cost per home — ascending order Nitrogen reduction cost — ascending order Presence of potable water 7/18/2017 FINAL RANKING Initial Rankings were then sorted per the following factorsto obtain the Final Ranking. • Sewer Cost/home site - ranked in ascending ord cost • Nitrogen reduction cost - ranked in ascending order of COSI • Presence of potable water RESULTS Map Id. No Subdivision Name Initial Final Ranking Ranking Ssytem Type Pollutant Reduction Ib/yr Ib/yr/lot 48 Floravon Shores Subdivision 7 1 Gravity 949.44 26.37 52 Sebastian Highlands Unit 02 Collier 9 2 Vacuum 1,027.53 36.70 58 Sebastian Unit 05 12 3 Vacuum 13577.22 29.20 Ming 138 Hobart Landin Unit 2 1 4 Gravity965.00 37.12 ' 18 Orchid Island No. 2 3 5 Low Pressure 737.76 33.53 Sebastian Hi hlands Unit 04 25 5 Vacuum 10018.99 22.87 Orchid Island No.1 2 7 Low Pressure 473.15 33.80 Ambersand Beach Sub No 1 & 2 6 8 Grata 2,902.36 33.36 Sebastian Hi hlands Unit 01 24 8 Vacuum 17256.07 22.89 Sebastian Hi hlands 31 10 Vacuum 1.5&.57 9.41 r5l ch Rep' NaranJa TR SheIIFOORnd Bch Replat of 8 11 Low Pressure 326.94 29.72 Sebastian Hihlands Unit 02 30 11 Vacuum 17845.33 16.96 Orchid Isle Estates Subdivision 14 13 Vacuum 2428.71 36.25 139 HobartLandin Unit3 4 14 Low PressurC 270.20 38.60 53 e6as[ian HighlanZ.Unit02 RepIatP 38 14 Vacuum 1,268.19 19.22 320 1 River Shores Estates Units 14 10 16 Vacuum 1663.11 13.86 272 Pine Tree Park Units 14 22 17 Vacuum 6,221.58 11.85 291 Indian River Heights Units 1-9 18 17 Vacuum 5759.18 7.46 54 Sebastian Highland. Unit02 RepIatP 45 17 Vacuum 3,319.68 25.73 212 Rain Tree Corner Subdivision 11 20 Low Pressure 444.68 27.79 273 Diana Pak Subdivision 19 21 Low Pressure 587.62 27.98 199 Verona Estates Subdivision 17 22 Low Pressure 105.88 9.63 68 Sebastian Highlands Unit 13 29 22 Vacuum 5988.17 9.64 278 Stevens Park Unit I 2- 21 24 Vacuum ,657.82 115.90 5.47 49 Dales Landing n 20 24 Low Pressure 169.33 24.19 24 re 46.71 22 v HallmakO eantSE 6d soon 5 24 Low Pressure 3360 137 Hobart Landing Unit 1 13 24 Gravity 136.40 8.02 143 Winter Grove Subdivision 26 29 Low Pressure 632.10 24.31 213 Kanawah Acres 16 29 Low Pressure 164.70 13.73 rata 1114.80 7.69 207 Tropic Colon Subdivision 27 31 Gravity 32 Hallelulah Acres 28 32 Low Pressure 231.60 38.60 196 Little Portion Subdivision Replat OF 23 33 Low Pressure 201.17 9.58 55 ebastian Highlands Unit 02 RepIatP 69 34 Vacuum 893.06 15.95 erlta e7rece at Hobart• 28 35 Gra' 0 SBS Estimation of Nitrogen Loading Nitrogen (Nitrate) • Soluble in water • Not readily removed • Drainfield • Septic system converts organic nitrogen/ammonia to nitrate • Removes 10% to 40% of nitrate cmuem rimite • Up to 20% additional removal of nitrate through soil • Dilution/dispersion reduces to drinking water standard (< 10 mg/1) given enough travel time and distance • Studies show effluent plumes extend well beyond expectations (N > 10 mg/1) • 426 ft IN > 10 mg/1) • 1338 ft (detectable viruses) MA 10 • From Household 70.0 52.8 0% • After Drainfield 0 to 165 ft 50.97 38.6 27% 165 to 657 ft 12.92 9.78 81% > 657 ft < 10 7.55 > 85% • Study Average/Household 16.20 12.22 N/A Nitrogen (Nitrate) • Soluble in water • Not readily removed • Drainfield • Septic system converts organic nitrogen/ammonia to nitrate • Removes 10% to 40% of nitrate cmuem rimite • Up to 20% additional removal of nitrate through soil • Dilution/dispersion reduces to drinking water standard (< 10 mg/1) given enough travel time and distance • Studies show effluent plumes extend well beyond expectations (N > 10 mg/1) • 426 ft IN > 10 mg/1) • 1338 ft (detectable viruses) MA 10 Treatment via Standard Septic System and Drainfield (N Removed) 70 4 41.5 40.0 75.5 7/10/2017 Sayemuzzaman, 2015 30% USEPA (1992) 10-40% USEPA (2002) [Anderson, 1994] 50% (estimate) USEPA (2002) [Siegrist, 2001] 10-20% 70 4 41.5 40.0 75.5 7/10/2017 7/18/2017 Estimation of Nitrogen Loading into Groundwater from Drainfield • Nitrogen loadings per household (Ib/yr) from septic system drainfield to groundwater. MDO.. Koppelman, 1978 Long Island, NY 16.8 12.7 Gold, et al., 1990 Kingston, RI 23.3 17.6 Weiskel and Howes, 1991 Buzzards Bay, MA 11.7-19.7 9.8-14.9 Maizel, et al. 1997 Chesapeake Bay 17.5-25.6 13.2-19.3 Valiela, et al., 1997 Waquoit Bay, MA 21.2 16.0 Reay, 2004 Coastal Plain, VA 17.5-21.2 13.2-16.0 Roeder, 2008 Wekiva, FL 23.0 17.4 Sayemuzzaman, 2015 St. Lucie Estuary, FL 24.5 18.5 USEPA_(1992) N/A 35.8-65.6 27.0 — 49.5 USEPA (2002) [Anderson, 1994] N/A 21.6 16.3 USEPA (2002) .[Siegrist, 20011 N/A 32.0-90.0 24.2-68.0 Wekiva Study (Ursin & Roeder, 2007) Central Florida N/A 30 ➢ North Sebastian Septic to Sewer - Phase I Construction Phase- Pending approval of assessment ➢ North Sebastian Septic to Sewer - Phase II Design 90% Complete iwwN PJVEB co— OMRWEnTOf LM.-6ERNEE. IfONTM SEBAs—DP.WER PA11GE18 LOCIITOM NAP PHASE II Parcels: 342 Vacant: 48 Moving Forward/Next Steps County Goals ➢ Protecting Our Lagoon Work with the regulatory agencies, residents and other stakeholders to develop and implement the County Wide S2S plan ➢ Provide safe, reliable water and wastewater service ➢ Pursue grant dollars to minimize the overall impact to rate payers and be fair to all County citizens Moving Forward/Next Steps Next Steps ➢ Approve Countywide Septic to Sewer Ranking by adopting the report prepared by Schulke, Bittle & Stoddard, LLC. ➢ Work with Community Development Long Range planning staff to incorporate the findings into the IRC 2030 Comprehensive Plan Chapter 3A, Sanitary Sewer Sub -Element for BCC review and approval at a later date. ➢ Make the report available on-line. Phase II : Proposed changes to the county comprehensive plan Phase III : Financing options and public outreach Phase IV : Encumber funds and implementation of the priority ranking plan 7/10/2017 tii ►J' m - Ei{ ♦ "v I _ H L- a Gi m ». fm®eMsti �m i So SHASUEG&&B116DTAINVWIGS.H. IU OMN T DDN ]6 S 1U <KEY t NAME 18 RTUdUMTi 17 ORCHID ISLAND N1 18 ORCWOISUNO 02 19 HOBARTUNdGUMTS 2 HALLMARKOEANSUBpS101N 1 MERSAND BEACH SU. NO 1 B6 d 2 48 OAVON SHORES 6UMSION 131 xAxATRSH¢LMoCHRT 82 SEBASTIAN WGANUNIT 9C O.O , WF roER 0 RNR SHES ESTATES UNITS 1< 212 RAIN REE CfttER SIRMSK)NR 5�►rr" � G1nl f_:I i :�.iY°f1it- 11 lff#S � — 1I{ �1'�.■iaIt. l��`•—fv�—^rp_p�. —y--�i -ti!ii�iilirY1E�)`__irFllt t-r�(��}tt1.yy�iR—i1}u1��TR'�:]+.ir,�1i3C{�1i— � F�� 'Fl��rkr�yi'�tI�YyA11i�y11�i1LLii1,y.5iilL.x#!Y!.1c�o1l1Frm�F�raF411ler313i : " ��� t ■e���lY I��_ ^..AA�. .Y , r."�_a ' :...M..C �jR�$5�Mc�1:r'"IwAi �::r,jG7±'' ��.i?��i 2 'I'i�IYf;f�.� �©u�YfYY::'a� 'j. iII-�li iI,R�i�i�IIE�f��BH�iri,II�/'•''Nyffi�, tI.f�8k�/{tl.1yII1% 't'lYiirt1iut++lr`�cl.'oa1IFl�ilT2,f —No � f�t16�'1�!�trz1';iS► o �i �i4fI��wf�l#$imiy `m . \7 1 (h 1l.Es 'J1ioti f�f'1�A1y 137 HOBART UNg0 UNIT Kij �11tn 1A ON ORWOISLE ESTATES SUBDSI AS061hBFEY278 213 KANAWAH ACRES 19VERONA ESTATES SUBdVSIO 291 INDIAN RIVER HEIGHTS UNITS 273 dANA PARK SUBpVSON 49 DALES UMNSUBdSION 278 STEVENPARKUMT1E2 2)PINETREEPARKUM 196 umroRTloxsudsREu�fw.���3gIia�i 1 ii�� r 1 i,iii r� /2"�f.�Gtlft+'9Ur�rb*'}'i1♦. gin n SSEBASTIAN HIGHUN0.UNIT 01 87 SEBSTIANWGMUNUMTD 143 VMER GRVE SMSIO 07 OPICOLO 32 HLLELUAH ACES 88 SEBSTIANHIGHUNSUMTI3 81SEBASTIANWGl11-ASUMT0Al /sF17 i Ii i 111E '491 ILI 41t��lf��i S° FINE INE �i\iViC'1'♦'v, �.St, ..` "-� e n-; 1A . i. ,p1ls„A�t.��'` b-t➢yAl m�Pt F �. � �. ,r • JIB' N gpl 0 Treasure Coast Newspapers I T- CmL.m Indian River Press Journal 1801 U.S. 1, Vero Beach, FL 32960 AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION STATE OF FLORIDA COUNTY OF INDIAN RIVER Before the undersigned authority personally appeared, Sherri Cipriani, who on oath says that she is Classified Inside Sales Manager of the Indian River Press Journal, a daily newspaper published at Vero Beach in Indian River County, Florida: that the attached copy of advertisement was published in the Indian River Press Journal in the following issues below. Affiant further says that the said Indian River Press Journal is a newspaper published in Vero Beach in said Indian River County, Florida, and that said newspaper has heretofore been continuously published in said Indian River County, Florida, daily and distributed in Indian River County, Florida, for a period of one year next preceding the first publication of the attached copy of advertisement; and affiant further says that she has neither paid or promised any person, firm or corporation any discount, rebate, commission or refund for the purpose of securing this advertisement for publication in the said newspaper. The Indian River Press Journal has been entered as Periodical Matter at the Post Offices in Vero Beach, Indian River County, Florida and has been for a period of one year next preceding the first publication of the attached copy of advertisement. Customer Ad Number Cooyline PO # 461741- INDIAN RIVER CO ATTORNEYS OFC 1664030 Hearing: 7/18/17: Septic to Sewer Hearing 7/18/17 Pub Dates July 4, 2017 July 11, 2017 Sworn to abed Sherri Cipriani (X) personally known to me or ( ) who has produced me thil day of, July 10, 2017, by who is as identification. Notary Public JUS Coujv*ry ]Assn. LINDA JOYCE KLEI<wNotary Public - State of„ �/Commiss;WlGG08U. K �tlll r v= �, s 11 ; Nlly Comm. Expires l4ar %r Q; r ��'• GonJed through National No IoA.) Treasure Coast Newspapers Tuesday, July 11, 2017 1D Anmunremeats Special Talnhg& Financial Employment Merchandise Free Ads Garage Pets Transportation Recreation Real Estate Real Estate Real Estate Services Legal Amamcemems Education sales Renals (ammerdal Offered �Einploymerrt TCN 166y6364 Legal Notices IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF Legal NotleeS-Auctions PUBLIC SALE Legal NotJces-Auction 3252 N US Highway I 1Legal Notices -Auctions Pamela A Penta Unit 123 1pppliances :;, .. .:""" ' PUBLIC SALE u 19TH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR MARTIN Notice Is herebygiven that Ft Pierce, FL 34946 772.577.8825 Nothing disclosed, Christo- pher Otto Unit 101Household Notice Is hereby given that - ; COUNTY, FLORIDA g Extra Space Storage will sell Extra July 27,2017 @ fpm Items DHyer/Transport -:f, cin "' "" CASE NO.: 2016DR676 at pub] c auction at the stor- Dorothy Oxe unit 2026 house- reilef ed, without further notice. ------------•-^--^----^ TRACKHOE -" —"- ST COLORS & IN RE: age facility listed below, to satisfy nal propertythe holdgghoods,Luis Vasquez unit l Adkinsounit 3 Purchases cash yymust be made with and the in REAR DUMP DRIVER FUJI time. Contact Bill 72 SIZES IN STOCK PRE -OWNED APPUANCES THE NAME CHANGE OF B.L.W., a minor child by STACY LITTLE, de cribed below be]on9ing fo those Individuals listed below at 13old household goods,Michael Wesley Unit 2108 household Items Melvi- above referencedfacility order to complete the trans - action. Extra Space Stor- -201.7105 Petitioner/Guardian location indicated: na Andrews unit 1722 house- age may refuse any bid and Training & tEd ucattoin chLS ools &I ristructions BECOME A CNAI No HS/GED Required 1 & 2 Week Classes • • Also Phlebotomyy & HHA www.CNAHHA.com (72) 882-4218 Financial ',, ��� -OLD MAN HAS MONEY FOR PROPERTY. Call Mark 954-612.1214. Garage Sete � •' �Es _tate Sales HOBE SOUND Downsizingll Entire Contents of House For Sale! 9 pc DR set w/6 chrs/buffet; ppalm tree end & cocktail tbls w/2 lamps (matchingg); Cal Kg BDRM set (5 Tics); Spc computer/desk set; Bay Marie wrought Iron butcher block, matching fist &stools; tools, etc. By Appt Onlyll Ca11772-545.3380 i PMs freePets ' FREE KITTENS - 2 F. 3 mos, I blck & 1 wht, fixed, shots, �Need —lid home, 561.733.2647 bogs t Cavalier King Charles Pupsl Lost Pet? Need a Compan- ion. Great Gifts Anytimel Home -raised, shots/hlth cert. $1575 ea. & 2 young adults $2300 ea 772-985-2186 Visa/MC(Disc Furmysunshlne.com CHIHUAHUA - Puppies, (Dear Head) Multiple Colors 1/M ales Female Health Cert. 1st s ots.$300 (772)501.4426 W EB W 1675645 �therpets' . GOAT FOR SALE - Male, exc. cond,pure bred nubian, 3.1/2 months, call for information (772)370.5149 ID 1681837 Washers/Dryers . 9893 Us Hw 1, hold goods,Reinhard Mar- may rescind any purchase Refrigera[on/Ranges . LOWEST PRICES ON THE TREASURECOAST All with lessons Exclusive Warranty AT OUR FT PIERCE WAREHOUSE STORE ONLY!II DELIVERY AVAILABLE 4145 S. US Hwy I, Ft. Pierce (772)464-7050(772)464-7050 - ercise Equipment . TREADMILL - NORDICTRACK C2255 Dura Soft 3, very good cond heart rate works. Retail $900; now $250 buyer must WEB 1676 11 674 111 772-216-3999 Furniture Choir -e' Farliiture Gallery Newyou have a Cheicel BUY - SELL - CONSIGN FREFurn�6Fi/ Aire Estates Furniture, tire Estates Consl9nment Store Open 7 days a week 772-872.1005 2020 NW Fed Hwyy. Stuart 34994 www.ehalceNmlturecanery.mm . Lie AB3423/AU4620/AU4629 PALM CITY AUCTION A1;vW Bu ng Furniture/Es ates Auction Every Wednesday 3355 SW 42nd Ave. paimcityauctioninc.com 72-283.1398 Uc. A81253 AU1126 THOMASVILLE DINING SET - White oak LARGE table, 44x68, exppands w/2 leafs to 108" ChairsA W. 2 arm. Pads, covers; some surface damage to corners: creden- za. Needs TLC (772)286.7071 GunstGuns && Ammunition, ' � GUN5HOW Saturday July 15 Sunday July 16 Melbourne Auditorium '. 625 E. Hibiscus Blvd. i Concealed Weapon Course taught at show JOam & 2pml (321) 77.7455 d41ed�Equpi &Supplies MOBILITY SCOOTER - Pride GoGo Sport, 3 whdel,1 yyr old. ' ike New! PeFPect Conti! Ear• disassembly for travel, $62; 954.815.8198 WEB 1676522 SCOOTER - TAO -TAO, built in 2011, rebuilt motor• new car- buretor, runs good. Must sell due to medico, issues. $200 AMENDED NOTICE OF ACTION (Formal Notice By Publication) TO: Robert Michael Wright. a/k/a Robert M. Wright, a/k/a Robert Wright Last Registered Address: 98.1030 Monalua Road, # 201, Alea, HI 96701 YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED that a Petition for Name Change of Minor Child has been filed and commenced In this court and you are required to serve a copy of Sebastian. FI 32958 ton unit 2706 household up until the winning bidder 772.388.3131 on goods,Hassan Baskett unit takes pposssession of the per- Cynthla2Fin/ey4330am.H House- Charles household gunt53053 rt Pubnlulyr11, 18Y2017 hold Goods. Kristoffer boating items. TCN 1665705 with the ty ,n and tor- takes possession of the per - and sonal orooerty. up until the winning bidder TCN 1665455 takes possession of the per- sonal property. Pub: lul 11 18 2017 wh"ose address is Oughtery TCN 166y6364 Notice Is hereby given that son, Sundhelm & Associates, Extra Space Storage will sell P.A., 612 SE Central Parkway, PUBLIC SALE at public auction, to satisfy Stuart. FL 34994 and file the the lien of the owner, person - original with the clerk of Notice Is hereby given that al property described below the above styled court on or Extra Space Storage will sell at the stor- belonging to those Individu- als listed below at location before July 20, 2017. Failure to serve and file writ- at public auction age facility listed below, to indicated: teeny defenses ai s required order result in gdemand- satisfy the lien of the owner below belonging tos those 525 SW South Macedo Blvd PortSt 772`618-059534983 reilef ed, without further notice. Individuals listed below at 07/27/1017 @ 2:45pm. WITNESS my hand and the seal of said Court at Stuart, location Indicated: . - Martin County, Florida on this 13th day of June, 2017. CAROLYN TIMMANN CLERK OF CIRCUIT COURT 100 SE Ocean Blvd. Stuart, FL 34994 By: Dennis Davis As Deputy Clerk Attorney for Petitioner: Sandra L Sundheim, Esq. Fla Bar. No. 0250200 Oughterson, Sundheim & Associates. P.A. 612 SE Central Parkway Stuart, FL 34994 772.287.0660 Email: oswpa@belisouth.net Pub: June 20, 27. July 4,11, 2017 TCN 1650538 egal Notices -Auctions PUBLIC C SALE 772.237.4281 WEB 1677689 Purchases must be made with WHEELCHAIR -KD Smart Chair, cash only and paid at the fortable electric wheelchair, above referenced facility in folds compact, perfect cond. order to complete the trans. $500. Call (772)621.8506 action. Extra Space Star - WEB ID 1677675 age may refuse any bid and may re"scwnd any. purchase Public Notices NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING ON PROPOSED SPECIAL ASSESSMENT NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Board of County Com- missioners of Indian River County,. Florida, will conduct a Public Hearing to con- sider approving a special assessment project (North Sebastian Septic to Sewer ES2S Phase 1 project) In con- nectton with a sewer main extension to benefit certain properties located along the east side of U.S. High- way I between 13230 and 14410 U.S. Highway 1, and including 12920 and 12950 U.S. Highway 1 within the unincorporated boundary of Indian River County; and 071Rl`7 � L O C G L d-� O v Q �+ Q V � 00 L N> a Z _ N C (o i. a Q) 0_ u) > U Q Q M X a L g r Z r Z L W M C a)z CL Eo a N O Q C Cn V 2D Tuesday, July 11, 2017 Treasure Coast Newspapers ACROSS 1 Paris turndown 4 Beehive State 8 Beliefs 12 Employ 13 Pleasant 14 Designer label 15 Snooze 16 Go off course 17 Does sums 18 Played hockey 20 Flu symptom 22 Jai - 23 Whodunit must 25 Fair-haired ones 29 Numskull 31 Kewple 34 Embroider, 35 Tree maybe trunk 36 Kind of molding 39 D.C. gun lobby 40 Fanfare 42 Party cheese 44 Quechua speaker 47 Pilots' sightings 49 Online notes 51 Client mtg. 53 Immediately 55 Famous mummy 56 - de fole gras 57 Rid of rind 58 Outback bird 59 Smell 60 Vended 61 9 -digit ID DOWN 1 Creatures of habit? 2 Portnear Kyoto Answer to Previous Puzzle 5 Evened the score 6 King beater 7 Juno, in 9 Delivery entrance, often (2 wds.) 10 "The - Squad" 11 Almost -grads 19 Place for a card game 21 Big rigs' radios 24 Type of lock 26 Butter substitute 27 Oaxaca boy 28 Fathomless 30 Swampy area 31 Put on 32 Nasty brute 33 Precede (3 wds.) 35 Safari leader 40 Med. plan 41 Walked haltingly 43 Pursuing 45 Makes a footnote 46 Homecoming visitors 48 Weakens 49 Rank below marquis 50 Shock 51 GI mail drop 52 Shoulder enhancer 54 - Paulo, Brazil 7.11 0 M17 1 S.D¢ by Ngews MGW Symll l nfor UrS PUbi1CNOtiCOS '•PUblicNotfceS :PUbhCNOt,eeS certain properties along the project, roceedings is made, which Pncludes east side of U.S. Highway 1 within the municipal bound- Any documents, testimony and evi- denceupon which the appeal or y of the City of Sebastian proposed Including the description Is based. between 13100 and 1614 U.S. of each property to be Highway 1, Including certain properties along Jackson assessed and the amount to be assessed to each prop- Anyone who needs a special accommodation for this street, Madison Street, DaviserI1 Street, N. Central Avenue may be ascertained by the public during regular meeting must contact the County s Americans With (south of Jackson Street) and business hours (8:30 a.m. to Disabilities Act (ADA) Coor- 1637 and 1727 N. 5:00 pin Monday through dinator at 772-226-1223 at Including ndian River Drive. Friday) at the Department of least 48 hours in advance of ThePublic Hearing will be held Utility Services (first floor) or the office of the Clerk to the meeting. onTuesday, July 18, 2017 at the Board of County Com- INDIAN RIVER COUNTY BOARD 9:05 a.m., or as soon there- after as the matter may be missioners (second floor), of Building A of the Coun- OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS JOSEPH E. FLESCHER, heard, In the County Com- mission Chambers located ty Administrative Complex, 180127th Street, Vero Beach, CHAIRMAN Pub: July 4, 11, 2017 on the first floor of Building Florida. TCN 1664030 A of the County Adminis- trative Comolex. 1801 27th Anvone who may wish to Ali :Merchandise i ;Bargain Box ' 3 -WHEEL WALKER - Excellent condition $45, (772)334-8862 4 -WHEEL WALKER - EX. COND. $45,(772)334-8862 AIR HOCKEY TABLE - Large Air Grt Shpe! $99, (772)564-1255 AKRIBOSXXIV WATCH - Multi Function, $99,(772)344.0327 ANCHOR - with rope $20, (772)626.1741 ANCHOR - with rope $25, (772)626-1741 ANDROID COMPUTER-Cnvrts TV to pc 510D, (772)453-5522 ANDROID TV -All stations free „legal $100,(772)453-5522 ANKER ROPE- 150' 7/8 diame- ter $30,(172)581.4384 ANTIQUE ANCHOR - 20"w x Bargain Box BIKE SEAT -BIKE SEAT, NEW $5,(772)871-0074 BIMINI TOP - Bit beam $100, (772)626-1741 BIRD CAGE 20X20X29 - good Gond $25, (772)559-6985 BOAT- inflatable, w/motor axe Cond. $100, (772)464-1935 805TITICH NAIL GUN - Mint Condition $65, (772)713-1055 CABINET CROWN TRIM - 1 1/4' in x 140' $100, (772)453-5522 CALCULATOR.SCIENTIF SHARP NIB $IO, 772-871-0074 CAMERA, mght,JAKKS Pacific Spynet$100,(772)569-4161 CAMP STOPS- nev: nas-er used $35(772)340-7455 CD -R,50 PK. - CD -R,50 pk., $7, (772)871-0074 CEDAR CHEST - w/blk Ithr Seating $100. (772)334-8862 CEILING FAN - 56" Mink. Aire Napoli $100, (772)979-4216_ TCPALM Localfieds L Ilargain Box COFFEEMAKER&GRINDER Cusineart $20, (772)626-1741 COKE COLLECTIBLE - vintage Cooler $25,(772)266-4976 COLEMAN CAMP STOVE -new not used $35, (772)340.7455 COLEMAN CAMP STOVE -new not used $35, (772)340-7455 COMPUTER - w/monitor Win- dows XP $49, (772)287-8900 COMPUTER CHAIR- Blk fabric. adj. $20,(772)567-6486 COMPUTER SYSTEM - Nice one $100,(772)453-5522 CONSOLE - for boat $50, (772)626-1741 COUCH SLtEFE: - tike i•.ew $100,(772)626-1741 COUNTERTOPS - Many sizes n Colors $100, (772)453-5522 CRAFTMANS SHOP VAC - 120 GL.CAPA $55, (772)334-8862 CRUTCHES- $10, (772)626-1741 public Notices NOTICE - The Martin Coun- ty School Board has sched- uled a Regular School Board meeting for general business purposes on Tuesday, July 18, 2017 at 4:00 p.m. The meet- ing will be held in the School Board Meeting Room, 500 E. Ocean Blvd., Stuart, Florida 34994. Pub: July 11, 2017 TCN 1652226 NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING AND REGULAR MEETING OF THE WATERSTONE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT to any matter consldered the meeting is advised the person will need a recol of the proceedings and the accordingly, the perse may need to ensure that verbatim record of the pn 1`haras no p]ra.co 1LLcts..hajrt�f R¢al Estate ;public Notices ceedings is made, including the testimony and evidence upon which such appeal is to be based. Rich Hans Manager Pub: July 11. 18,2017 TCN 1652071 ;Request faretds LEGAL ADVERTISEMENT CITY OF VERO BEACH BID NO. 180-17/CSS "ENVIRO MULCH SUPPLY CONTRACT" BID OPENING DATE & LOCATION: Tuesday, July 25, 2017 @ 2:30 P.M. T&D Building / Purchasing Office First Floor Conference Room, 3455 Airport West Vero Beach, FL 32960 LOCATION TO SECURE BID PACKAGE: Bid packagemaybe obtained on--Demand5tancom Telephone: (800)711-1712 Or Office of the Manager of Purchasing 3455 Airport West Drive, Vero Beach, FL 32960 Telephone: (772)978-5470 Email: purchase@covb.org Pub: July 11, 2017 TCN 1676055 TREASURE COAST REGIONAL PLANNING COUNCIL REQUESTFOR UALIFICATIONS RFQ No. 2017-01) (2ndRequest) Technical Assistance for Urban Design and Town Planning Services The Treasure Coast Region- al Planning Council (Coun- Cip is seeking to develop a list of qualified consultants to assist Inproviding urban design and town planning services to its local govern- ments. Interested consultants can obtain the required RFQ information package by con- tacting Ms. Liz Gulick at (772) 221-4060, Igulick@tcrpc.org; or bydownloading It from Council's website at http:// www. tcrpc.org/announce- ments.htin "Q responses must be received by the Urban Design Director no later than 2:00 p.m, on August 15, 2017. Each submission must specifically identify the proposal is in response to R No. 2017-01. Completed packets should be submitted diggitally to: Dana Little (dllttl*tcr c.ory) and Liz Gulick (Igulick@tcrpc. org). Dana Little Urban Design Director Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council 421 SW Camden Avenue Stuart, FL 34994 Pub: July 11, 2017 TCN 1679786 Real Estate There's no place like...here Ana •8argaln Box FRIGMAIRE APT SIZE - $100, (772)333-4519 GRANITE + COUNTERTOP - Scraps $100, (772)453-5522 GROUND COVER - Garden 5100,(772)453-5522 HARLEY HELMET- Mens XL NU $90,(772)713-1055 HD CONVERTER BOX- t0 SD TV signal $IS, (772)871-0074 HIGHWAYMEN ART- R. Demps $99,(772)794.0003 ]PHONE 6 - iGhone6 with case & charger $90, (772)521.0147 KITCHEN ISLAND - Countertop $100,(772)453-5522 LADDER BRACE - Great Condi- tion $45; (772)713-1055 LAMPS- Two matching UTTER- MOST PSL $75, (772)345-9606 LAWN MOWER - 21" Push Gas ex cd. $100. (772)888-3837 LAWN MOWER - Great Cond. $100,(772)713-1055 eargainBox PENN 5500 AND POLE - slmr drag spin $75. (772)581.4384 PHONE, CORDED - w/Caller ID -BELL, nu $5, 772-871-0074 PHONE, CORDLESS' w/Caller ID New $9,(772)871-0074 PHOTO PAPER 4X6" - 60 pk.ea. box $6, (772)871.0074 PIZZA STONE 13" - Parred Chef $10, (772)564-2643 PRINTER - HP Photosmart $35. (772)626-1741 PRINTER- HP Photosmart $50, (772)626-1741 PSI GAME -Tony Hawk Under- ground $10,(772)564-2643 PS3 GAME - Kindom Hearts 1,5$10,(772)56 -2643 PS3 GAME - Resident Evil 5 Collector$$ 10, (772)564-2643 RALEIGH BICYCLE - Mint con- dition $100, (772)713-1055 RALLY CENTERcam- erOD12up $20,(772)559.6985 �equestfor6ids •. , LEGAL ADVERTISEMENT CITY OF VERO BEACH BID NO.140-17/PJW WATER MAIN REPLACEMENT WS 15007 ON SR 60 FROM 38TH AVENUE TO 21ST AVENUE MANDATORY PRE-BID MEETING: Thursday, July 20, 2017 @ 10:00 a.m. Cityof Vero Beach Transmis- sion & Distribution Building First Floor Conference Room, 3455 Airport West Drive, Vero Beach, FL 32960 BID OPENING DATE & LOCATION: Thursday, August 10, 2017@ 2:30 p.m. T&D Building / Purchasing Office First Floor Conference Room, 3455 Airport West Drive Vero Beach, FL 32960 LOCATION TO SECURE BID PACKAGE: Bid package may be obtained on www.Demand5tancom Telephone: (800)711-1712 Or Office of the Manager of Purchasing 3455 Airport West Drive Vero Beach, FL 32960 Telephone: (772)976-5470 Email: purchase@covb.org Pub: July 11, 2017 TCN 1675957 > Estate rc Ji` ornes Far $ale_��� PORT ST LUCIE - 4bd/2ba/2cg CBS on 1/2 acre In 34953 zip code w/enclosed pool. Recently renovated W/room to roam: Builder's personal home. S379K; 772-528-3553 WEB ID 1679197 STUART 3bd/2ba main house/ Inground pool, garage, seperate entrance in-law suite, includes kitchen, bath, living room & bedroom, $398000. Call (724)417-3455 W EB ID 1670808 per_,...."..._.......,.-..--., •-,�,-.`i IrfrOrKlB�dt�pinpert$fj HUTCHINSON "'IS"'SYUART Dunes Club, Directly on beachl 3/2.5 Townhouse Furn• Super Clean! Face's pool, $299,000 Owner. grandcruyachi@icloud.com , SOS -692-9284 WEB ID 1652704 VERO BEACH IBR/IBA. Lagu- na lakefront. Furnished. Tile floors. Ceiling fans. New water heater. Gated commu- nity, gym, pool, & clubhouse. $99,000. Karl 772-532-5493 WEB ID 1649277 Manufactured Homes FORTPIERCE 55+ 5 apish Lakes CC, 2bd/2ba, ail new appls, W/D, shed, 3 -car car- port. 514K:(321)662-0127 HOBE SOUND - 2/2. 55+, No Pets, Beautiful, W/D, move in ready, new kit, scrnedPorch, new A/C, walk in closets, water softener, $59,999 772-546-6090 ID 1670466 SPEAKERS-LABTEC- for com- puter,new $7, (772)871-0074 STARWARS -12"Fig 20 total $100,(772)486-7105 STETSON - Hardly worn Cream $40,(772)285-7470 SWAROVSKI CRYSTAL Lg rose charm $100, (772)453-5522 TACOMA HANDLES NEW - dor Ugate S30, (772)559-6985 TRAILER - flatbed 5 X 12 Fixer upper $100,(772)453.5522 r Coast$30,(772)713.1055.-P esr�f - �t TRANSPORT CHAIR - brand /v II "Drive" $19, 772.569-4161 llll�17J TRUNKS - footlocker.aiiminum $20,(772)626.1741 TV BOX - All stations free „ legal $100, (772)453-5522 TV DISHMOUNT -adjustable 2E Friday�Ame X 2D17 reafure Coast Newspapers l:umIture - ^' Pect/BankJMOrtga0e {ultiRues Ch01ce Furniture G"lly, ANTIQUES f ART WANTED Indian River County Bankingg prDTessional descrbUpn courteous Palm Itaarh Ducar Seeks Ouallly DalnUnggs acMDturo mass. porcddin, For afiAl f Nis oDOOoerrtwu�n�lt1yy silvan jaswlry Tffam/, art. visit vnvw.awlinabonkenm pOcpulW BankY an EauM Carder. mode wcaMo Warlwl, e[e rUOold Mast¢m, Act bn Emryd cr ld/IIF/ buddMs. Ca11551-BU!-0312 OWO IryNe[ (Murines Clerical MOSTCOlO0.Sb+ ClwisW r�wltiElYPovWns WANTED TO BUY Ma0aNe Nava eNlettse, for Felt U. Part Md Great BenanWrautstanding work EnNronment A.E, eackusf W9Dwayyman DainUrlDs. zterikp tlalwY0. dderCNnesevazel nil out an apwlcatlon MOn-id 9_70Am4_lOpm; 266.E SE cuWg Amtrlean lNgs FedcralMwy,StuYL FL31991 gppd ppainalatle (IBaO1950) Beauty/Barber - flennkk GNkdes 772.562.5015 or BANBER WAstrED- ILD a Part Time, Walk-in 236/SBTN AVE m-696.4670 Vero eMchor Wl (TTAS67.7057 '(IpPllartCPS AppVANCESALE - Help Wanted hModn6 New 8 Uaed wamntYa Dolinry PR •TECH LANDSCAR OARUENWO APPLIANCE LOWESTPMMS FOIEUMI-O... UC Exp yyuUe6 RwRMnelitx SOfet•Senke•ParM Apf11Y..beSo. dYOOMO-ASAre ..be So. Ferl Pkrce-_KI,1. IenYin3Landsape.cem Vem8mb(TrZW-7N3 Florida Department of SMtu, Tdkhasue. nodda E+MduMWMa wa rruuuuyy Skills/cedes ® Merchandise SERVICE TECH Min¢tW Oet- AT W R FTXERQ WAROQDSF STORE OIAYM t frit Marty st Luaa a PB co, VYiIs OL Can ]72.287-135] p_ Buy UGI nEconaol27 1 y OL sell 0 =4 locally! puD:lune 30, 3011 IHSSUS \Scflods & InstruCNDns BECOME A CNA' NO=01'A JCI%k d ARESO111111E60AR 1f C TANPROPERTIESLOCATED WITHIN THEUNINCORPORA IdebQ •Ase PNeD 14 . H.U• &H CNAH (TR)882-1315-- BO UNDARYOFTHECITY01 STREET, N. CENTRAL pNTMETEEGFNiH NDiCIp�L�TME t5 PNASEI PROIECTI:P R.ZV TION OFTNE AREA TO BE s s.parra� goo - - "9I-5818 Lv nXg WEB ID !611981 Wµ FAFAS. Me Board ofCow nnptioy .�• df' of Ne <wn end - extensionn seM 1S0tl Ua.M yIwINU gu5lness (or5ale r5y'.�HkDw e(souN ofClackson5 '(old Equip&5u gifts P NOW. THEREFORE, BE n RES US t CAR IAT FOR SAE - Roomfa50toE0cars. 1. no Countyry does hered 2 INlces, 300INU5 NWY3 Fort wer<a FL 3/9x6 nal INTO IfS. Nipphwayy .t Me cast -1.f US Nlghw (7727ab9- 75 W01ID3STOR7 tokseerS 2VttL ] St {mesttnients - ' accorta-endnNoprorb - _ - ' W YAP HASMONEY OLD 3. measmssmaneMyca 61 w61 Do mmcrvadvcry sales FORPROPERTY. Call Mnrk 95#613-1331. E and estimated cost form _, ---SYCCESS UL •' - e atxssm< as shopwn on "'t MvyBWeNi[aUbK Cost REAL MAU 6ROIIER Wwidi iii modnpep eiiw' 1. AspeeMlazwssment peepr a, on the DYRABSe of toes E m a fwetlauraz-1MilnL dshort Ne c9ualidnt D Ras 3 ry 0 term Call Mar1,951.612-8555 _ �\ 4. me ¢Delo' assessments flits epalruttbe speWl Eu path In Mn epual Yearly ;/6"'7� tlue. Tiw unpaid balann TR[s-Contin Cal rtes naw SflkaWr,I,, =9A WATENAM #1 THOMAS A. STANLEY II end Utility servka ants the cut oDEEC es l:umIture - ^' '�eval Nonce, - - Ch01ce Furniture G"lly, ,.Leg tf ®` NOTICE UNDER FICTITIOUS _'� porryrdawp CSakeJ BUY - NAME LAW PURSUANT TO SECTION 865.09 FLORIDA °"O M -SELL -CONSIGN Mea0•nHWfrnxtl yA fumituro. En We ESMtes legal NOdCPS STATUTES -.671 SNEAE- BY WVW Nnt Me under- MOSTCOlO0.Sb+ Cwukm =Stan, Open Nonce UNDER FICTITIOUS signed d<Sldnq tu Gngap N Me I N2ESINSTOOt T, a-ak NAME LAW PURSUANT TO m ruu of ofONe m thus roma o} XaDe South PREDWHED APPLIANCES 772.872-1005 xoxO NHwrmS.trrwWrtryN99s SECTION 665.09. FLORIDA CNc B�I.Hpe RBoazNlotye0an. IoraSfE at 1 E. AB31�33/uAvU6/63DIAU1639 uHEREE- iTA�VEN that signed. deslrin9 to mgpg In ReDNN*avUPwget s PALM CITY AUC710N Dusin u s uMer 1M Octltlan I Amer4•"" WNlness SUR OttY u4 QSTS And. 6, LOWFSf PYOSONTHE AAvr1R8a1-ipy ca located at 2153 SE Ocean Bind. In Mo C."' No Said nomo with Me DN4 1, ai Corperatlons o} Me -COAST iumilwe/es ate5 p -UM Every Wednesday dh ofSLYYtln In Ne Gry o} Stu• Florida Department of SMtu, Tdkhasue. nodda E+MduMWMa wa rruuuuyy DYmcltrau Wie.wm reel sc�M�azsa%IdmmW xiN Me Dlvisbo of LorpwatDw tins 3)M daffy otlw�ie. i0la AT W R FTXERQ WAROQDSF STORE OIAYM t T1P383-1398 Ile AA253 Allll}6 f Ne Fxprid DepartmelN of surto, Mbazxe, Flori0a. �rypg�gpasS [eF; LLC DEWR/AVAIABIF Awn &Garden Dated at YuarL Roddy lhY EYd dor o/luny 2017' puD:lune 30, 3011 IHSSUS - Ce ters. TCN 1669564 F1 Pllror tTTLioWBSBPRNHJpSa i RIOMa uwNYOWER Brien 18'at w/twill P,ppt,puny TraMounnCenters.LLC pub:lune)D.3017 pNTMETEEGFNiH NDiCIp�L�TME REFRI� ACR 13Vo1 ask StSp s.parra� goo - - "9I-5818 Lv nXg WEB ID !611981 TCH 1668787 CIRCUIT IN AND FOR MARTIN new ST0071b3N•5815 NOTIC ND R FICTITIO COUNfY. FLORIDA CASENO: '(old Equip&5u gifts P NAME LAW PURSUMT TO 1017-000344-CMAx-Mk ELECTRIC IWIDI'CAP RACK SECTION 86509. FLORIDA STATUTES • NOTICE IS NEAE AW PARTNERS FLORIDA. I.I.C. f 3 V]heel Scooter In Great CaMi[ion W/Batt tllar9er. 51850 080 (563#14 N ytTOOVEN that N`pge In NOCdomWp�nY a Limited llaOUllr WEBID 1670691 pyy w • f Grepp a Compa- m. Iocatdd at 511 5. &ocF IM Roe4 tu Ne Couyntuy PoUR T5 FOREVER, LLC. THE FAN 8 LIGHT CONNE ON, Qaiscellatreou5 -Lm IitoIMree tV INC. CMItIRibleS TR[s-Contin Cal rtes naw FL 0, WATENAM #1 THOMAS A. STANLEY II end HUYMELS. BW o" G45s lako on; 4, 0215 -60 -RIE Bast offer over ,250. Call MRnds In repbtas the said M N IN.. of Ne nerlda , HICOURORTON De(Melants AND PRECIOUS YDYEIF� DO- -a OFFER. CAL IdT-1140116 S. (951))11-1336 SLCorporetlonf �A--� of Department 0f $Mia TWIp- bazsee, Fiodda. Dated at Fat Pierce Roddy NOTICE OFACTON CONSTNUCTWE SEAWCE Furniture ( I thilurd daY oflwa301]. UyYna&okay TO.. BED - TRUNDLE ggood C TRU 5150. Call (P2)MB- - - - Greg9 1 jjj5 NNd,,SE StM ie Blvd. %TE SeDaztienC¢met¢ry LDtS Pub:lurM 3Q 2017 TCN lfi6%l6 Stuart.RM%B CNMRS -3R. ueV ataapga y Green V¢N<t� 2 LATS - 1, Ft t Memorial Gardens In Ft Dieroe, Yde mom as 0.5tuniry- II 1735 Nd. eunnn eatk CHoln• Condition S187a by log In Gmd<n W NopeIZZIStuart ,1000 bet, (Trl"-3,61 L 4996 L FL 349% (7TU8115319 ID 166]600 349 QBuy&Sell fast! ll jInS SE SL Ledd BN4 Stuart, FL N9% ®egmbsdb*.. iffWlld$Si$ T�AIM LDolfieds YOUME an ting fer Forredo-- INDIA" RIVER COUNTY. FLORIDA, es fellows: Units( IAA Iade doped open N iris�pectlaMn 4=! - - 7. A proposed preliminary assessment TIMI with respect to Ne special assesamat3 is on file with the Department of U66ry S r,t-and the Clerk TO Ne Board. GTS -It -Fred Cats 8. Upon Me atloption Di NIS resoluUoe Mo Department of Udgry Servkes spall cause WsrosoluVon(al 'Mamap,bowing the eras# De served)to hep W60rd Av Vero 7Th%2-3381 IHhed al Least one time In URI Indian eNdr Preis loumal Deforo [he publIt bearing as rogWred by Section 10604 of m<COOe of Indian RNer Cou t The rts ludoe-Oven for adoption by Commissloner #Bryan, and the -don was secaWed by Commisaloner nese .G Md. upon being our W a wt.. Me v „GaraFR Sa'd •.fie. €z. Attest Ieffre =tb,derk03 AYE rr CiMinnon VI'm.. Enesp:" Vke Cholane' Paler D.0'Bryan AYE Garage Sales CCemmis"'0"nm 2 �e AY AYE ComMssbna Bab Salad NAY A Aul.' a me Chat—thereupon declared Ne resolution duty passed and Adopted this 20th day of 1w43017. GIE!* Y hh M0 1 V,h come BOAODOF COUNTYCOMwSSIONERS out 6 Support1 (MwinB Salts INOMN CNER COUNTY, FLORIDA PORT ST WOE 2901 % SAN By. Joseph E FI -he, Chair- te Sales - Attest Ieffre =tb,derk03 --WSW's- Court a4cempbdlkr Week-Eod Marketplace BY S. Gagner, O<Puy Oars Sa1Wdry 9:00-1:00 Suadar 10:!10-1:00 Apwoved as inform and legal su BY Oman Rdngol4 Cod Actor From Palm11-hhous<n 1 'Furniture Lrphlln Mkrors, 11 Lvno:. zA; cRl�u and Deareuke Acessodes 5560 GGwgia Aveoua WPB' `sd}:rl.com --+ (MwinB Salts PORT ST WOE 2901 % SAN l"0"0 RO •Set 6Y Ba12 Itooli' d:., awnme u D Nra sports eeuip, mord! SEBASTIAN 651 CRYSTAL MIST AVE-Sat55&, Sam Tools; wv� II furNlura Diaz LOOCss Morel LY" gkuutow YEIIO REACH 1525 130 Ste t 1/V1T. BUOam HWSeIw1IV Gdstmef/FumilulU GMlsware/Mlsc.11ema ASNON FRISS. H. Cert, WDIte, 1/F a VM. Bwks Pu Wes SLEOOea. 080 722-800.8989 WW ID I669E51 RED DOBERMAN PINSCNm 1 Female pedl9r«, B weeb pub. lune am M17 lYl• diner on prremt lseeotz, CR 1666171 773-6!46897 WeId 1665361 1'� NORTH N. SEILkeT1SEPTG TO SFiWER x PNASEI Coast Newspapers Indian River Press Journal 1801 U.S. 1, Vero Beach, FL 32960 AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION STATE OF FLORIDA COUNTY OF INDIAN RIVER Before the undersigned authority personally appeared, Sherri Cipriani, who on oath says that she is Classified Inside Sales Manager of the Indian River Press Journal, a daily newspaper published at Vero Beach in Indian River County, Florida: that the attached copy of advertisement was published in the Indian River Press Journal in the following issues below. Affiant further says that the said Indian River Press Journal is a newspaper published in Vero Beach in said Indian River County, Florida, and that said newspaper has heretofore been continuously published in said Indian River County, Florida, daily and distributed in Indian River County, Florida, for a period of one year next preceding the first publication of the attached copy of advertisement; and affiant further says that she has neither paid or promised any person, firm or corporation any discount, rebate, commission or refund for the purpose of securing this advertisement for publication in the said newspaper. The Indian River Press Journal has been entered as Periodical Matter at the Post Offices in Vero Beach, Indian River County, Florida and has been for a period of one year next preceding the first publication of the attached copy of advertisement. Customer Ad Number Cooyline PO # 461741- INDIAN RIVER CO ATTORNEYS OFC 1666173 Notice: Resolution 2017-063 PO S2S Pub Dates June 30, 201 / • r' to and 9.pkcribed before meis day o June 29, 2017, by Sherri Cipriah' (X) personally known to me or ( ) who has produced who is as identification. Notary Public a— Ikew lcouty . t:,.o:,�,•sW:^...,;''�,-:f%n<;'a°'�sP.;ra'x'%.m*_•?.�2sr� ;•'��yav_r \^,'•.,, LINDAJOYCE KLEIN fdotaryPublic- StateotFlorila ' 1l:.1S ,;l - `- Commis ion 0 GG81422 „y(',t�iirr rry yrs^: My Comm. Expires Phar 9,20021 •' lir;nded through National Notary Assn. ����,,„„' INDIAN RIVER COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSION REQUEST TO BE SCHEDULED FOR PUBLIC DISCUSSION Any organization or individual wishing to address the Board of County Commission shall complete this form and submit it to the Indian River County Administrator's Office. PUBLIC DISCUSSION INFORMATION Indian River County Code Section 102.04(10)(b) as a general rule, public discussion items should be limited to matters on which the commission may take action Indian River County Code Section 102.07(2): limit remarks to three minutes unless additional time is granted by the commission NAME OF INDIVIDUAL OR ORGANIZATION: Kate Wesner, Ygrene Energy Fund ADDRESS: 3390 Mary St, Suite #124 Miami, FL 33133 PHONE: 561-722-3654 SUBJECT MATTER FOR DISCUSSION: Property Assessed Clean Energy Program (PACE) IS A DIGITAL/ELECTRONIC PRESENTATION PLANNED? Fx I YES 71 NO IS THIS AN APPEAL OF A DECISION 1-1 YES Fx —1 NO WHAT RESOLUTION ARE YOU Board direction on consideration of adoption of PACE Program REQUESTING OF THE COMMISSION? p g ARE PUBLIC FUNDS OR ACTIVITIES REQUIRED? F-1 YES Fx NO WHAT FUNDS OR ACTIVITIES ARE Resolution by Board of County Commissioners providing authority REQUIRED TO MEET THIS REQUEST? to the County Administrator to enter into an interlocal agreement Transmitted to Administrator Via: Interactive Web Form E -Mail Hand Delivered Phone COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR: MEETING DATE: Jason E. Brown FACounty Admin\ExecAsst\AGENDA\Public Discussion Items Fomtdoc P164 07/18/2017 ■ Property Assessed Clean Energy (PACE) is a financing mechanism that enables low-cost, long-term funding for energy efficiency, renewable energy and hurricane protection improvements to private property. ■ Local governments join the Clean Energy Green Corridor (PACE DISTRICT) by passing a resolution and executing the agreement with the PACE districts, allowing Ygrene to offer their residents and businesses the PACE program. ■ PACE financing is repaid as an NON -AD VALOREM assessment on the property's regular tax bill, and is processed the same way as other local public benefit assessments (sidewalks, sewers) 16q.1 07/18/2017 PACE is a national initiative, but programs are established locally and tailored to meet regional market needs. State legislation passed in 2010 that authorizes municipalities to establish PACE programs, and local governments join one or more programs that have been implemented. - P �] 0Launched PACE programs 100% FINANCING Projects include Solar Panels Windows & Doors A Roofing Heating & AC Lighting Insulation Hurricane Protection And many more... 1��- 2 07/18/2017-- 16 �-- 3 07/18/2017 Ad Valorem Taxes nuam,.Dam Scticox 80aro SOW 89'0 OperY.mg 7.64400 653,8460 665,845 $.1,09799 Schoolepa-OOeWS—. OI3300 653845 0 653.845 $217,73 Smote ark OUct florNa mark Ndrtgauoe ow 003450 653,845 0 653,845 $22.56 SO= FW4aWatesh-^DW, 0.35230 653,845 0 655,805 $23035 Ev r91a0es C0rnuaca0n P q 005570 653 845 0 653.845 53838 CMIOrens Tract Aa131m9y 0.50000 653,845 0 663.845 $32602 M. -Daae County Cmxey vow Operauv 4 70350 653.845 0 653805 53.075.36 County Wine Debt S—ke 042200 653845 0 653846 5275.92 t twy Detract 0.17250 663.&x5 0 653845 5112.79 1IttM4xpal G9 ,e"lb" R'—Opera N 7.61460 653,645 0 663845 54,978.90 ldlam Debt So—* 061620 653845 0 653846 553367 Non -Ad Valorem Assessments GQEErr CORFUWA PACE 1 0000 $4.928 56 )6y- 4 07/18/2017 CREDIT CONSUMER PROTECTION YgreneWorkSTM HOME EQUITY � I CARDS/CONSUMER I z I LOANS FINANCE I Contractor Requirements x x ........... . ........... .................... X� ........ ..... Permit Requirements x x I Dispute Resolution Support I - I X I x I klm OPERATIONAL IN 6.1M population ON AGENDA 2.814 population UNDER REVIEW 6.2M population )�- 5 07/18/2017 "Opt -in" resolution process for local approval (Almost) NO STAFF TIME ZERO COST, RISK OR LIABILITY CONTRACTOR CONSUMER QUALITY TRAINING + DISCLOSURES ASSURANCE CERTIFICATION + CONTROL t��ate• • Recruiting R&R p • Contract Eligibility Review Training+Registration NTL Permit Verification • Initial Certification FA Consumer ID Confirmation • Trial Period CS • Contractor Agreement Final assessment Annual Re -Cert FINANCIAL PROTECTIONS p. Safe, Flexible Financing Platform • 3 -day Right to Cancel • Pricing Controls Dispute Resolution ��4'6 07/18/2017 RESIDENTIAL MULTI -Family & COMMERCIAL Use Financing to Pay for Upgrades CERTIFIED CONTRACTOR Utilize Financing to Market Building Upgrades WE PROVIDE... Consumer Protection Certified Contractors, Local Permits and Customer Approval are Required LOCAL /ERNMENT Authorize Program RA) ('y � ,� LOCAL LOCAL • REGIONAL ► CALL Government Contractor Account CENTER Relations & Training & Managers Expansion Community Certification Serve Representative Statewide S Communities )�1- 7 07/18/2017 • Environmental benefits, decrease energy consumption and helps local governments achieve sustainability goals • Structural hardening of properties to protect against wind damage • Economic Development: Lowers cost of doing business and creates local jobs for contractors e r o 00 JL $2.5M 100 kW $2M 15 1.200 Mlons ECONOMIC ENERGY ENERGY JOBS CREATED CO:AVOIDED' STIMULUS, PRODUCED SAVINGS &SUSTAINEW [4 L - 8 INDIAN RIVER COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSION REQUEST TO BE SCHEDULED FOR PUBLIC DISCUSSION Any organization or individual wishing to address the Board of County Commission shall complete this form and submit it to the Indian River County Administrator's Office. PUBLIC DISCUSSION INFORMATION Indian River County Code Section 102.04(10)(b): as a general rule, public discussion items should be limited to matters on which the commission may take action Indian River County Code Section 102.07(2): limit remarks to three minutes unless additional time is granted by the commission NAME OF INDIVIDUAL OR ORGANIZATION: Ardra Rigby and Bill Rigby ADDRESS: 8465 591h Avenue PHONE: 772-501-4753 SUBJECT MATTER FOR DISCUSSION: Drainage and Sewer Services in the Wabasso Community IS A DIGITAL/ELECTRONIC PRESENTATION PLANNED? F� YES Fx I NO IS THIS AN APPEAL OF A DECISION 1-1 YES a NO WHAT RESOLUTION ARE YOU Work on Drainage and Get Sewer Services in Remaining part of REQUESTING OF THE COMMISSION? Wabasso Community ARE PUBLIC FUNDS OR ACTIVITIES REQUIRED? FX I YES ❑ NO WHAT FUNDS OR ACTIVITIES ARE REQUIRED TO MEET THIS REQUEST? Transmitted to Administrator Via: _ Interactive Web Form _ E -Mail _ Hand Delivered x Phone COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR: MEETING DATE: Jason E. Brown July 18, 2017 DocumenU P165 PUBLIC NOTICE ITEMS: 7/18/17 Office Of INDIAN RIVER COUNTY Dylan Reingold, County Attorney William K DeBraal, Deputy County Attorney Bate Pingolt Cotner, Assistant County Attorney MEMORANDUM TO: Board of County Commissioners FROM: Dylan Reingold - County Attorney DATE: July 13, 2017 ATTORNEY RE: Public Notice of Public Hearing Scheduled for August 15, 2017 to Consider Amending Chapters 306 and 315 of the Code of Indian River County with regard to Medical Marijuana The Board of County Commissioners will hold a Public Hearing on Tuesday, August 15, 2017 at 9:05 a.m., or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard, to consider adoption of a proposed ordinance entitled: AN ORDINANCE OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, AMENDING CHAPTER 306 OF THE CODE OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY ENTITLED "MISCELLANEOUS OFFENSES AND PROGRAMS" TO CREATE SECTION 306.15 "MEDICAL MARIJUANA TREATMENT CENTER DISPENSING FACILITIES PROHIBITED" AND AMENDING CHAPTER 315 OF THE CODE OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY ENTITLED "INDIAN RIVER COUNTY PAIN MANAGEMENT CLINIC AND CONTROLLED SUBSTANCES ORDINANCE" TO ELIMINATE REGULATIONS AND PROHIBITIONS OF CERTAIN ACTIVITIES RELATING TO MEDICAL MARIJUANA; AND PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY, CODIFICATION AND AN EFFECTIVE DATE. The Public Hearing will be held in the County Commission Chambers located on the first floor of Building A of the County Administrative Complex, 1801 27th Street, Vero Beach, Florida 32960, at which time interested parties may be heard with respect to the proposed ordinance. /nhm /Oc/ P166 114 �gtvER Office of the INDIAN RIVER COUNTY *FLORI9P ADMINISTRATOR Jason E. Brown, County Administrator Michael C. Zito, Assistant County Administrator MEMORANDUM TO: Members of the Board of County Commissioners FROM: Jason E. Brown, County Administrator DATE: July 10, 2017 SUBJECT: Florida Institute of Technology (FIT) Request for Proposal for qualified buyers to bid for the purchase of the Vero Beach Marine Laboratory Property DESCRIPTIONS AND CONDITIONS: On June 1, 2017, Florida Institute of Technology issued a Request for Proposal (RFP) for the sale of the Vero Beach Marine Laboratory property, located at 805 46th Place East, adjacent to the Tracking Station Park. The parcel is 4.09 Acres zoned R -S3, has approximately 525 feet of direct oceanfront, is valued at $2,117,030 for the land and buildings by the Indian River County Property Appraiser, and is offered "as -is". Response to the RFP must be by sealed proposals, and be submitted on or before August 1, 2017. ANALYSIS: Staff attended the pre -proposal tour to do a preliminary inspection of the site. Upon completion of this site visit, staff prepared the following comments: Benefits to acquiring Florida Tech Parcel (Pros) • Increase the level of Service (Public Beach Access) o Additional parking o Location for additional park amenities ■ Pavilions ■ Grills ■ Playgrounds, etc. P167 • Public Health and Safety o The current Tracking Station Park can be redesigned to eliminate the blind spot that exists along the south-west park boundary and the current Florida Tech parcel's north-west boundary. o Provides direct emergency/heavy equipment beach access to the beach • Reduces the potential for residential development within the Coastal High Hazard Area. • Potential staging area for major functions of the County's Habitat Conservation Plan relative to sea turtle monitoring, strandings, and increased public education/outreach opportunities. Potential Issues (Cons) • Land purchase is As -Is o Unknown additional costs at this time ■ Demolition of structures ■ Environmental Site Assessments — Phase 1 • Need to assure no hazardous materials are onsite ■ Park Development Costs RECOMMENDATION: Staff requests the Board of County Commissioners provide direction on its interest in responding to the Request for Proposal for the Florida Institute of Technology Vero Beach Marine Laboratory Property. Attachment: Request for Proposal Document P168 FLORIDA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY MELBOURNE, FL REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL PROPERTY SALE VERO BEACH MARINE LABORATORY June 1, 2017 P169 REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL INTRODUCTION AND OVERVIEW Florida Institute of Technology ("The University") is seeking qualified buyers to bid for the purchase of the Vero Beach Marine Laboratory Property. The property known as the Vero Beach Marine Laboratory is located at 805 46th Place East, Vero Beach, Florida. The property is a 4.09 -acre property located in Indian River County, north of the City Limits of Vero Beach and south of the City Limits of Indian River Shores. The property has numerous buildings that have been used for research, with one building off-line. The University is seeking prospective Buyers to make proposals for the purchase of the property. Information relevant to the Request for Proposal is included in the appendix. The University reserves the right to waive any irregularity or defect in any submission, request clarification or additional information regarding Proposals at its sole discretion. The University will assume no liability for any expense incurred by a Proposer in replying to this RFP. "AS -IS" SALE The property will be conveyed "as -is" with no warranties or representations as to its condition or suitability for any particular purpose. OPTIONAL PRE -PROPOSAL TOURS Pre -proposal tours are scheduled for Tuesday, June 6, 2017 (lPin - 3pm) and Wednesday, June 14, 2017 (9am - l lam). Please RSVP your attendance to Dory Sigman at dsigmankfit.edu. These are the only tours scheduled. RFP TIMELINE Release date — June 1, 2017 Site Visits — June 6, 2017 (lpm — 3pm) & June 14, 2017 (9am — 11 am) Questions due by 1:00 pm — June 30, 2017 Questions and responses will be distributed by — July 14, 2017 Proposals due — August 1, 2017 Proposers under consideration will be notified — August 15, 2017 Decision — September 1, 2017 Negotiate Purchase and Sale Agreement — Completion by September 29, 2017 INSTRUCTIONS TO PROPOSERS Sealed proposals must be received on or before the August 1, 2017. Proposals received after the due date will not be considered. Florida Institute of Technology Page 2 of 6 P170 Proposers shall submit (1) clearly marked original, three (3) photocopies and one (1) electronic version (either email or on a flash drive) of their Proposal Package. Proposals must be received in one envelope marked "PROPOSAL" and sent to: Dory Sigman at dsigmankfit.edu Florida Institute of Technology 150 W. University Blvd. Miller Bldg Rm 112 Melbourne, FL 32901 Attn: Dory Sigman Proposal Packages must include: A letter of introduction A proposed timeline for taking occupancy of the Property An offer of payment for the Property A document providing evidence of Proposer's financial capability to complete the purchase Failure to provide any of the above requested information may result in disqualification of the Proposal. The University reserves the right to request additional information pertaining to the Proposal Package, or any other matters related to the Request for Proposal. Proposal documents, including the Offer of Payment, must be signed by persons authorized to contractually bind the Proposer. Questions regarding the Request for Proposal must be made in writing and submitted electronically to Dory Sigman dsi man e,fit.edu. Questions are due no later than 1:00 pm July 1, 2017. SELECTION CRITERIA Complete responses to this RFP will be evaluated by the University staff. Decisions to sell the Property are at the sole discretion of the University. This RFP process shall not create a binding obligation on the part of the University to sell the property unless and until a Purchase and Sale Agreement has been executed. The selection criteria shall include, but not be limited to the following: Completeness of the Proposal Packet Offered purchase price Timing of transaction Business terms associated with the purchase of the property Financial viability Florida Institute of Technology Page 3 of 6 P171 UNIVERSITY'S RIGHT TO WITHDRAW, CANCEL, OR SUSPEND RFP The University reserves the right to withdraw, cancel or suspend the RFP for any reason and at any time with no liability to any prospective Proposer for any costs or expenses incurred in connection with the RFP or otherwise. PROPOSER'S RIGHT TO WITHDRAW PROPOSAL A proposal may be withdrawn by written request of the Proposer prior to the proposal due date. CHANGES This Proposal shall not be modified, altered or changed except by mutual agreement confirmed in writing by an authorized representative of each party to this Proposal. CONFLICT OF INTEREST The Proposer affirms that, to the best of its knowledge, its proposal does not present a conflict of interest with any party, which may be affected by the terms of a Purchase Agreement, resulting from this RFP. The Proposer agrees that, should any conflict or potential conflict of interest become known, it will immediately notify the University. COLLUSION The Proposer has not, directly or indirectly entered into any agreement, participated in any collusion, or otherwise taken action in restraint of a free, competitive offering in connection with his proposal; and that all statements contained in the Proposal response are true and correct. HOLD HARMLESS The Proposer shall bear the full responsibility for all risks of loss relating to this proposal. The Proposer shall not hold the University responsible for any loss associated with the Proposal. CONFIDENTIALITY Information provided to the Proposer is the property of the University and will not be used for any purpose other than that specifically authorized in this Proposal without the written authority of the University. The University will not divulge information provided by the Proposer to other Proposers. Florida Institute of Technology Page 4 of 6 P172 APPENDIX SHORT LEGAL DESCRIPTION 805 46�h Place East Vero Beach, Florida 32963 Indian River County, Florida Parcel: 32402000000001000004.0 BEING A PARCEL OF LAND LYING IN E 10 A - OF GOV LOT I (A/K/A GOV TRACKING STATION) SEC 20-32-40 MORE PART DESC: FROM, SW COR OF SEC 20, RUN N 89 DEG 42 MIN - 15 SEC E ALONG SEC LINE, 346.80 FT MORE OR LESS TO A CONCRETE MONUMENT MARKING, SW COR OF GOV TRACKING STATION FOR - P.O.B, TH N 0 DEG 13 MIN 15 SEC E ALONG W LINE OF SAID TRACKING STATION, 212.0, FT TO CONCRETE MONUMENT: TH S 89 DEG 15 - MIN 45 SEC E, 116.00 FT TO CONCRETE MONUMENT, TH N 0 DEG 13 MIN 15 SEC E, 295.20 FT TO CONCRETE MONUMENT, TH S 89 - DEG 15 MIN 45 SEC E, 184.28 FT TO CONCRETE MONUMENT, TH CONT S 89 DEG 15 MIN, 45 SEC E, 46 FT MORE OR LESS TO MEAN HIGH WATER LINE OF ATLANTIC OCEAN, TH SELY ALONG MEAN HIGH WATER LINE, 519 FT, MORE OR LESS TO S LINE OF SEC 20, TH S - 89 DEG 42 MIN 15 SEC W ALONG SEC LINE 47 FT TO CONCRETE MONUMENT, TH CONT S 89, DEG 42 MIN 15 SEC W, 436.48 FT TO P.O.B." Florida Institute of Technology Page 5 of 6 P173 ' r i /i t+.. tit ."�.� ,♦�+ � .S .1 - pi - 04 imp ALS. •1 V•eo fi••o♦ • J _ i i INDIAN RIVER COUNTY BUILDING DIVISION INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM TO: Jason E. Brown County Administrator DATE: June 9, 2017 SUBJECT: Condemnation, Demolition and Removal of Unsafe Structures Located at 634585 1h Street; 4305 26th Avenue; and 4345, 4355 & 4365 28th Avenue THROUGH: Stan Boling, Director Community Development Department FROM: Scott P. McAdam, MCP, CBO Building Official It is requested that the data herein presented be given formal consideration by the Board of County Commissioners at its regular meeting of July 18, 2017. DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS: The structures listed in the attached condemnation list have been condemned and ordered repaired or removed by the Building Official. Said structures have been inspected by staff and are considered unsafe and detrimental to the health, safety, and welfare of the general public. As per county code requirements, the owners of the properties and others with an interest in the properties were issued notices to repair or remove the structures within 60 days, and advised of their right to appeal the condemnation order before the Indian River County Building Code Board of Adjustments and Appeals. In addition, condemnation cards were posted on the properties. The owners were also notified that the Board would consider a Resolution to demolish the buildings and impose liens, if they failed to demolish the structures or obtain permits to repair the structures. None of the owners have applied for repair permits, demolition permits, or appealed the decision of the Building Official. P175 ANALYSIS: The subject structures have been vacant for a considerable time. During that time, the buildings have continued to deteriorate. The structure located at 4305 26th Avenue has been frequented by vandals, transients, and has a history of drug activity according to the Sheriff s Department. For each of the subject properties, the owner has failed to maintain the structure(s) in compliance with the Minimum Standard Codes and they have failed to bring the structure(s) into compliance as required by posted notice. Since the owners have not filed an appeal to the condemnation order, the county may now proceed with demolition of the structures and with assessing a lien against the property for demolition and removal. Recent County demolition contracts have averaged $5,000 per residential site. The County Attorney's Office has reviewed the title reports on these three parcels and found the following encumbrances: Wabasso Area: 1. William Minnis, Sr. and William Minnis, Jr.: 6345 85th Street. There is an August 2011 County Utility Lien for water/sewer base charges in the amount of $221.64. The property taxes have not been paid for 2013, 2014, 2015 and 2016. The amount owned is $3,260.55. A Tax Deed Sale will be scheduled on this parcel later this summer. An estate has been opened in Circuit Court for William C. Minnis, Jr. Notice was sent to the estate and the attorney for the estate relayed that there are outstanding IRS or Social Security liens against the estate and the sale of the assets of the estate are not sufficient to cover the amount of the liens. For this reason, the estate is inactive. This property was previously considered by the Board on November 15, 2016, but was pulled from the demolition list in response to a request from Ardra Rigby for 90 days to try to bring the building up to code and preserve it (see attachment 44). At that time, the Board granted Mr. Rigby's request. Since the November 15 meeting, Mr. Rigby had an initial meeting with Building Official Scott McAdam. No permit for necessary repairs has been submitted, however, and over 240 days has passed. Two other Wabasso area properties were posted and owners recently demolished condemned structures on those properties. Those properties were 8395 63`d Court (Herring) and 8366 64th Avenue (Cartwright) and have been removed from the demolition list and no Board action is required. 2 P176 Gifford Area: 2. Willie and Florine Roberson, 4305 26th Avenue: There are outstanding taxes on the property from 2011, 2013, 2014, 2015 and 2016 totaling $2,785.42. There are no other liens or mortgages on the property. 3. Forty -Fourth Associates, LLC, 4345, 4355, 4365 28th Avenue. The taxes are current and no liens or mortgages were found on the property. There are two structures on this site, one being a single family house and one being a duplex. These two properties are located in the Gifford Neighborhood Plan area known as east Gifford. Demolition of unsafe structures on those sites, as proposed, will help meet the neighborhood plan objective of demolishing unsafe structures in east Gifford. Also, in accordance with the neighborhood plan, the demolition project will include weed removal/control on the subject lot. One other property in east Gifford was posted and the owner recently demolished the condemned structure. That property, 4729 29th Avenue (Gibson), has been removed from the demolition list and no Board action is required. FUNDING Funding in the amount of $20,000 (4 x $5,000) for the demolition and removal of the unsafe structures on the three residential sites with one site having two structures, is available in the MSTU Fund/Reserve for Contingency. After demolition bids are received and a demolition contract is awarded, a budget amendment will need to be processed to move those funds to the MSTU/Road & Bridge/Other Contractual Services - Account # 00421441-033490. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Board of County Commissioners: 1. Declare the referenced structures unsafe and a nuisance and order the buildings demolished, with related debris removed from the property by a private vendor approved through standard bid procedures; and 2. Adopt the attached resolution authorizing the Building Official to report the county's demolition and debris removal cost for said structures to the County Attorney for the preparation and recording of a lien to be placed on the real property of the owners of the demolished unsafe structures for the purpose of recovering the County's demolition costs. 9 P177 ATTACHMENTS: 1. Resolution 2. Condemnation List 3. Pictures of Condemned Structures 4. Minutes from November 15, 2016 BCC Meeting P178 RESOLUTION NO. 2017- A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, PROVIDING FOR THE DEMOLITION OF UNSAFE STRUCTURES AND THE RECOVERY OF COSTS. WHEREAS, Indian River County has adopted the Property Maintenance Code at Chapter 403, Indian River County Code; and WHEREAS, Section 403.08 of the Property Maintenance Code provides for the recovery of the costs of repairs to and/or demolitions of unsafe structures; and WHEREAS, Section 100.080 of the Indian River County Code provides that the Board of County Commissioners may cause, by resolution, a lien to be filed in the Official Record Books of the County against properties on which the county has incurred demolition costs; and WHEREAS, A notice of intent to adopt a lien resolution has been given to the proposed lienee(s), NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, that the unsafe structures on the properties described on the attached Condemnation List be demolished; and that any costs incurred by County government as a result of such demolition undertaken at the direction of the Board of County Commissioners shall be recovered from the property upon which each unsafe structure is located, as identified in the attached Condemnation List. The costs of such demolition shall be reported to the Building Director who shall notify the County Attorney's Office to prepare lien(s) for the recovery of those costs, to be placed upon the real property of the unsafe structures as listed in the attached Condemnation List, any such liens bearing interest at the rate established by the Board of County Commissioners for the calendar year in which the lien is recorded, such interest to commence accruing from the date the lien is recorded in the Public Records of Indian River County, Florida, until such time as the lien, including interest, is paid. Attachment 1 P179 RESOLUTION NO. 2017 - The foregoing resolution was offered , and seconded by Commissioner being put to a vote, the vote was as follows: Joseph E. Flescher, Chairman. Peter D. O'Bryan, Vice Chairman Susan Adams, Commissioner Bob Solari, Chairman. Tim Zorc, Commissioner by Commissioner _ and, upon . The Chairman thereupon declared the resolution duly passed and adopted this 18th day of July, 2017. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA By: ATTEST: Jeffrey R. Smith, Clerk By Clerk of Court and Comptroller APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGAL SUFFICIENCY: By William K. DeBraal Deputy County Attorney Joseph E. Flescher, Chairman Attachment 1 P180 CONDEMNATION LIST: 1. Owner: The Estate of William C. Minnis, Jr. Property: 634585 th Street Tax ID#: 31-39-32-00001-0030-00004.0 Legal Desc.: Lot No. 4, Block 3, of Colored School Subdivision, a subdivision of the N.E. '/4 of the N.W. '/4 of Section 32, Township 31 South, Range 39 East, according to the plat filed for record in the Clerk of the Circuit Court, Indian River County, in Plat Book 2, Page 52, less North 15 Feet for Road Right of Way. 2. Owner: Willie Hamp Roberson and Florine Roberson Property: 430526 th Avenue Tax ID#: 32-39-26-00002-0070-00006.0 Legal Desc.: Lot 6, Block 7, Hillcrest Subdivision, according to the Plat thereof, as recorded in Plat Book 2, at Page 67, of the Public Records of Indian River County. 3. Owner: Forty -Fourth Associates LLC, a Florida limited liability company Property: 4345, 4355 & 4365 28th Avenue Tax ID#: 32-39-27-00001-0000-00005.0 Legal Desc.: Lot 5, LESS AND EXCEPT THE FOLLOWING DESCRIBED PROPERTY: That part of Lot 5, Cannon Subdivision, as recorded in Plat Book 2, Page 77, of the Public Records of Indian River County, Florida, being more particularly described as follows: Beginning at the Southwest Corner of Lot 5, of aforementioned Cannon Subdivision, thence run North 09° 38' 25" West along the West line of said Lot 5, and the East right of way line of 28th Court, a distance of 96.83 feet; thence departing said East right of way run North 90° 00' 00" East a distance of 47.06 feet; thence run North 83° 53' 54" East a distance of 136.70 feet to the intersection with the West right of way line of 28th Avenue; thence run South 000 00' 00" West along said Westerly right of way a distance of 109.85 feet to the Southeast corner of said lot 5; thence departing said right of way line run South 89° 57' 00" West along said South line a distance of 166.78 feet to the Point of Beginning C:\Users\GRANIC-1\AppData\Local\Temp\BCL Technologies\easyPDF 7\@BCL@38050DOE\@BCL@38050DOE.docxcondemnation list.doc Attachment 2 P181 Fm WE AON' JvY ow 04A t -n % :i 177 m 4 1 N"- 40 40 177 m 4 1 N"- .� a ,�' _ �, fi # . -- — .� , �, � ��: a li .I i S �� ti -�+vrr _ _ - ;,'' , _._ J -.- ' � ,� `� _. ti , � f ,. _ t _ _ - y _: - ,�, ,_ q7�,L pw 5 h. -MIS �IFFYAt ^C rt rE: _ €1. �r•�.,.i -#x?P �' M1 Y' f. i ,��r.Y�,5�_.f - '� * { '..�,i s " -- ',,"` s..�, ; � t �� .t7y . ..- �, :" {�, ^,^'� .rte e � - � �- _ -{• .... - v .l.�•• <. ' v„,✓"x� # � � �. `.!"'4'x.,4 ". . !� 7,[. �>"'� � :�, � �. }tii - i' l a' rLle, +► i ir,+C'"�ytt*� v ���..r LN' ,:,r'?riC w tf Vs#W is # 1 47, jSy��e��' 'te� 1 a itf 4 L •r� �� � �'; L„� +N'1. Y_ +�'f� Ify i^ SA '�, 1'L+,fr � a' i •,i � ,5� a'�'r4jry . i* f'' `�'t }�, j {tff �� �i ,► } 3 i 4 r�,j�#.'+�"{`�fS , t jir ro i4_4 wb't S'j4' 't*K''*'YilP4 1Cy"y# A� �,7r.y Nii,. / rljgy�4,rjp '� ?,S'+.`3 t�S,i�' iii„'tL« !. 4 . . �yj�, �_ �rFwt���" ,i",� `' ��4, tib, �j���'✓i.� �. .a ,yet ��� }�, � • +! +t'.�� fii Jt�-aC #'i.� Ll TA AWL. oEg S A ',�`,i,� h� �t Jay ,C,�4'� ,�f46[:fi � ,�w,�' �'.� 'f'.=i.i�,..,,k ■ } m 4305 26th Ave 7-s V*491 .0 4345 25th Ave Attachment 3 5 2$ h Nv 434 _ 1 `10 Q. r . rN`•'`� 'fix-, a a� �i # ^5 i A i s 4355 & 4365 28th Ave Attachment 3 I N O 4355 & 4365 28th Ave Board of County Commissioners Meeting Minutes - Final November 15, 2016 12A1 16-948 Condemnation, Demolition and Removal of Unsafe Structures Located at 529 20th Street S.W., 2385 11th Court S.W., 4795 32nd Avenue, and 6345 85th Street Recommended Action: Staff recommends that the Board of County Commissioners declare the referenced structures unsafe and a nuisance and order the buildings demolished, with related debris removed from the property by a private vendor approved through standard bid procedures. Staff further recommends that the Board adopt the attached resolution authorizing the Building Official to report the county's demolition and debris .removal cost for said structures to the County Attorney for the preparation and recording of a lien to be placed on the real property of the owners of the .demolished unsafe structures for the purpose of recovering the County's demolition costs. Attachments: Staff Report Indian River County Florida Resolution Condemnation List 529 20th St SW Pictures 2385 11th Ct SW Pictures 4795 32nd Av Pictures 6345 85th St Pictures Building Official Scott -McAdam, in his PowerPoint Presentation, provided an overview of the properties proposed for condemnation and demolition. He explained that there.is an estate issue with regards to the property located at 6345 85th Street, owned by William C. Minnis, Sr. and William C. Minnis, Jr., and that staff would like that parcel removed from the proposed condemnation list at this time. Ardra Rigby, 8465 69th Avenue, Wabasso, declared his interest in fixing up the property at 6345 85th Street, and asked for at least a 90 -day time frame to try to bring the dwelling up to code. Chairman Solari cautioned that restoring the property would be very costly. He preferred to have the request for additional time come from the property owner. A motion was made by Commissioner O'Bryan, seconded by Commissioner Zorc, to approve Resolution 2016-117. as amended to exclude the William C. Minnis, Sr. and William C. Minnis, Jr. property located at 6345 85th Street from the Condemnation List, providing for the demolition of unsafe structures and the recovery of costs. The motion carried by the following vote: Aye: 5 - Chairman Solari, Vice Chairman Flescher, Commissioner Davis, Commissioner O'Bryan, and Commissioner Zorc Page 8 Attachment 4 P202 CONDEMNATIONS JULY 18, 2017 PROPERTY#1 OWNER THE ESTATE OF WILLIAM C. MINNIS, JR. 634585 TH STREET 31-39-32-00001-0030-00004.0 7/18/2017 ZaZ- i 7/19/2017 45 WH STREET 3 -7/13/17 45 85TH STREET 63 -7/1/17 L07 - 3 7/10/2017 634585 TH STREET 7/13/17 PROPERTY#2 OWNER WILLIE HAMP ROBERSON & FLORINE ROBERSON 430526 TH AVENUE 32-39-26-00002-0070-00006.0 2)Z- - 4 .. , "A x� ' !gyp �fj �[ ��i�� � 1 �•'� PROPERTY#2 OWNER WILLIE HAMP ROBERSON & FLORINE ROBERSON 430526 TH AVENUE 32-39-26-00002-0070-00006.0 2)Z- - 4 430526 TH AVENUE 7/13/17 430526 TH AVENUE 12/8/15 7/19/2017 212-- 5 �, t+ ������� M1yr vim' r.}(��yy�� �r ��r!'�' r � � -�-��tk,:� _t. �' � _ y �. � }} # (jJ} �_ '� '.i y.� `v n � � t , �,`, _t � c��f i { �� t y�. �- �lx ,� i s !_` 1�, ` f� �:, ..-� ,, ., � F�-. , a� < < � A� .� �� ;� � �..� F. z _ ,��.�_ , , j �, y,: E i .. _ /'. i f� I 11912011 n � fly, 26 P 430526 TH AVENUE 7/13/17 Remove from Condemnation List •4345, 4355 and 4365 28th Ave •A Representative with Forty -Fourth Associates, LLC,, Jeffre Berman, Manager contacted staff after the report went out and staff recommends pulling the next subject property off the list to allow time for owner and staff to discuss options. 7/18/2017 202. 8 PROPERTY#3 OWNER FORTY-FOURTH ASSOCIATES, LLC, A FLORIDA LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY 43451 4355 & 4365 28TH AVENUE (2 STRUCTURES - RESIDENCE & DUPLEX) 32-39-27-00001-0000-00005.0 4345 2/26/15 tr it F.x 1 7/19/2017 434528 TH AVENUE 2/26/15 4355 & 4365 28TH AVENUE 2/26/15 7/19/2017 2-dZ,10 4355 &-4365 28TH AVENUE 2/26/15 'y+iryti ,r ':.'T'.��'Y�����.>p: �'ti.y�'• L WY.:::,, � i '• - 4355 & TH AVENUE • • 7/13/17 t e.F 7/19/2017 Zd Z 11 434528 TH AV E N U E 7/13/17 Revised Staff Recommendations • Remove property #3 from the Condemnation List • Recommend the Board declare properties 1 and 2 on the condemnation list unsafe, a nuisance and order them demolished • Staff further recommends the Board adopt the attached resolution after being revised for the purpose of recovering the County's demolition costs 7/19/2017 2-02- 12 INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA MEMORANDUM TO: Jason E. Brown, County Administrator THROUGH: Richard B. Szpyrka P.E., Public Works Director FROM: Keith McCully, P.E., Stormwater Engineer 001 SUBJECT: Designation of Duperon Corporation as Sole Source Provider for Self - Cleaning Bar Screens Used in Stormwater Division Regional Stormwater Treatment Facilities DATE: July 6, 2017 DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS Duperon Corporation's self-cleaning bar screens are used at Stormwater Division's Egret Marsh Stormwater Park and PC Main Screening System and Utility Department's Osprey Marsh Algal Turf Scrubber System to remove harvested algae, water lettuce, and other material from treated and untreated canal water. The bar screens are self-cleaning and staff is very pleased with their performance and durability. Duperon's staff has always dealt fairly with Stormwater Division and is always responsive and willing to help solve any issue that arises from the harsh environments in which the equipment must operate. The Duperon self-cleaning bar screens were highly recommended to us by Mr. Arlindo "Butch" Diaz at South Florida Water Management District, which uses them in front of many of its large Stormwater Treatment Area pumping stations for debris capture and removal. Because of the integrity we have found in Duperon Corporation and staff's desire to ensure consistency and standardization throughout the County's regional stormwater treatment facilities, Public Works Department / Stormwater Division requests the Board of County Commissioners declare Duperon Corporation as the sole source manufacturer and provider for all self-cleaning bar screens used in Stormwater Division's regional stormwater treatment facilities, and authorize the waiver of the requirement for bids for their purchase, including interchangeable replacement parts. FUNDING Expenditures for Duperon self-cleaning bar screens may come from existing Egret Marsh and PC Main accounts and other accounts created for future regional stormwater treatment facilities. c:\users\granic—l\appdata\local\temp\bcl technologies\easypdf 7\@bcl@5c056802\@bcl@5c056802.doc P203 Page 2 DESIGNATION OF DUPERON CORPORATION AS A SOLE SOURCE PROVIDER FOR STORMWATER DIVISION SELF-CLEANING BAR SCREENS BCC Meeting —July 18, 2017 —DEPARTMENTAL June 6, 2017 RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends the Board of County Commissioners declare Duperon Corporation as the County's sole source provider for all Stormwater Division related self-cleaning bar screens, equipment, and parts and waive the requirement for bids for. their purchase, as needed. ATTACHMENTS Letter from Duperon Corporation regarding the self-cleaning screens .. DISTRIBUTION Michael Smykowski, Budget Division William K. DeBraal, Deputy County Attorney APPROVED AGENDA ITEM FOR July 18, 2017 C:\Users\GRANIC-1\AppData\Local\Temp\BCL Technologies\easyPDF 7\@BCL@5C056802\@BCL@5C056802.doc P204 Dueroon® PRE11M1NARYP1010=105SEPARAMNIKHMOUIS June 2, 2017 Keith McCully, P.E. Stormwater Division Dear Mr. McCully The Duperon FlexRakeTM - An Innovative Technoloqv for Wastewater Thank you for considering the Duperon FlexRakeTm for the Indian River County Stormwater application. We enjoy sole source and supplier of choice relationships with several municipalities in the United States. City of Dallas, City of Oxnard, City of Phoenix and others have utilized a sole source status to assure their choice for technology in their stormwater and wastewater applications. The sole source relationship is one in which Duperon Corporation feels honored and is handled with integrity and care. There are several advantages that the County will receive by having standardized Duperon FlexRake® equipment and lower total cost of ownership including the following reasoning: 1. Benefits for reduced inventory. 2. All units will be identical in fit and function and will maintain uniform look in facility. 3. Maintenance efficiencies by having standardized equipment. No additional training required to learn multiple operating systems. Troubleshooting & upgrades are easier with one system. FlexRake® requires annual visual inspection for maintenance. 4. Consistent performance — satisfied with FlexRake operation. 5. Quick delivery turnaround. Engineering has been completed and can be pushed through production for a speedy delivery. Other reasons customers choose to sole source are varied. 1. The FlexLinkTM system allows for specific advantages such as no carryover of debris into downstream processing, due to its front -cleaning, front -return style. 2. The link system bends in one direction only, forming a bar that becomes the unit's frame and. bending to become its own lower sprocket below. No underwater maintenance, no confined space entries are very important to our customers. 3. This FlexLinkTM technology also provides the ability to flex around large objects. The FlexRakeTM in Phoenix removed a 300 Ib. sewer plug with a long length of chain attached as easily as the debris it normally removes. Also, customers tell us it removes 2-3x more volume than their previous equipment. 4. Its adaptability is another asset — when Phoenix had a stone problem, an accessory was created and weights were placed on the scrapers - that handled the issue. 5. Another attraction for Phoenix is the savings of over a million dollars in building costs due to the FlexRake'sTM low profile. 6. The FlexRake'sTm simplicity is what we hear about most, but not simplicity for simplicity's sake. It drastically reduces cost of ownership in decreased installation and maintenance 515 N. Washington Avenue I Saginaw, MI 48607 1 P 989.754.8800 1 F 989.754.2175 1 TF 800.383.8479 1 www.duperon.com P205 05—.)o DiuP.vIMSEPAMI0tE(M0611Srone DRIUMINM costs, spare parts requirements, special manufacturer's on-site charges, and expensive rebuilds. 7. Also, this simplicity means easily disassembling a unit designed to breakdown into 2-3 segments in tight retrofit applications often saving the removal of a roof or other costly measures. Often in a sole source situation, the customer has to assure that "like" technology is not available through other sources. This is true with the FlexRakeTM, as Duperon Corporation is the inventor, patent owner, and only manufacturer. Often the Owner must define the advantages of the machine and research to be certain that it qualifies as unique enough to justify sole sourcing. Regardless of the reason that you may wish to go forward as a sole source, I can promise you, that you may rely upon our integrity and care in handling what we consider an honor and privilege. We will support you in any way that we can, and as always, we operate under the standard, "you'll like working with us." Please do not hesitate to contact me if we can be of further assistance. Sincerely, Duperon Corporation CA -SR UL-� Lorene Bruns Regional Sales Manager Duperon Corporation 515 N. Washington Avenue I Saginaw, MI 486071 P 989.754.88001 F 989.754.2175 1 TF 800.383.8479 1 www.duperon.com P206 INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA MEMORANDUM TO: Jason E. Brown, County Administrator THROUGH: Richard B. Szpyrka P.E., Public Works Director FROM: Keith McCully, P.E., Stormwater Engineer Ato SUBJECT: Designation of Xylem Water Solutions USA as Sole Source Provider for Pumping Systems Used in Stormwater Division Regional Stormwater Treatment Facilities DATE: July 3, 2017 DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS Stormwater Division's Egret Marsh Stormwater Park uses two large Xylem Water Solutions USA (Xylem)/Flygt submersible pumps and control systems to provide water to Egret Marsh Stormwater Park for treatment. The pumping systems are also equipped with control cabinet - based and internet cloud -based Xylem/Flygt computer pump control/monitoring systems that allows staff to monitor and control the pumps remotely. Since installation in April 2010, Xylem has always dealt fairly with Stormwater Division and is always responsive and willing to help solve any issue that develops from the harsh environments in which the pumps must operate. Because of the superior service and support we receive from Xylem and staff's desire to ensure consistency and standardization with pumps and their control systems throughout the County's regional stormwater treatment facilities, Public Works Department / Stormwater Division requests the Board of County Commissioners declare Xylem Water Solutions USA as the sole source manufacturer and provider for all pumping systems used in Stormwater Division's regional stormwater treatment facilities, and authorize the waiver of the requirement for bids for their purchase, including replacement parts. FUNDING Expenditures for Xylem Water Solutions USA may come from existing Egret Marsh accounts and other accounts created for future regional stormwater treatment facilities. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends the Board of County Commissioners declare Xylem Water Solutions USA as the County's sole source provider for all Stormwater Division related pumping systems and parts and waive the requirement for bids for their purchase, as needed. cAusers\granic-1\appdata\local\temp\bcl technologies\easypdf 7\@bcl@c405c662\@bcl@c4O5c662.doc P207 Page 2 DESIGNATION OF XYLEM WATER SOLUTIONS USA AS A SOLE SOURCE PROVIDER FOR STORMWATER DIVISION PUMPING SYSTEMS BCC Meeting —July 18, 2017 —DEPARTMENTAL July 3, 2017 ATTACHMENTS Letter from Xylem Water Solutions USA DISTRIBUTION Michael Smykowski, Budget Division William K. DeBraal, Deputy County Attorney APPROVED AGENDA ITEM FOR JULY 18, 2017 C:\Users\G RAN IC-1\AppData\Local\Temp\BCL Technologies\easyPDF 7\@BCL@C405C662\@BCL@C405C662.doc P208 xy,leAnii Letus Solve Water Mr. Keith McCully, P.E. Indian River County, Florida XYLEM WATER SOLUTIONS USA, INC. — FLYGT 15132 Park of Commerce Blvd/102 Jupiter, FL 33478 Phone: 561-515-1200 Re: Xylem, Inc. — Flygt Brand Submersible Propeller Pump Unit Reliability Dear Mr. McCully: June 28, 2017 Xylem, Inc. — Flygt brand heavy-duty electric submersible centrifugal and propeller pump units are particularly well suited for application in storm water pumping and flood -protection applications. Flygt delivers the highest level of operational availability and latest technology in impeller/propeller and wear- ring design coupled with superior motor unit monitoring that easily connects to supervisory systems including the Flygt MultiSmart unit. Xylem, Inc. Flygt brand pumps offer the most -broad range of centrifugal and axial flow propeller pumps, with individual pump units each capable of delivering from 1,000 GPM to beyond 100,000 GPM at heads of 3 -feet to beyond 575 -feet TDH. Motor sizes are available from 2 -HP to beyond 1,000- HP and capable of operating on power supply voltages from 200V to 4,160V. Flygt brand submersible pumps offer L10 minimum bearing life ratings of 50,000 hours for motors up to 100 -hp and L10 minimum bearing life ratings of 100,000 hours for motors above 100 -hp in size. There are as many as 11 individual internal motor unit sensors that can be installed to deliver operational feed -back to supervisory systems including the Flygt MultiSmart unit as well as a Pump Memory Chip that works with the Flygt Monitoring and Status (MAS -711) unit to record such things as: run time, cumulative number of motor starts, bearing temperature, motor temperature and vibration levels. Flygt Impellers and propellers utilize back -swept blades that provide unparalleled clog resistance. The patented backswept design readily sheds foreign material in conjunction with self-cleaning functionality delivered by the specific slot positioned in the wear -ring so to mitigate clogging before it can become an issue. Flygt propeller pumps also uniquely offers engineered and patented pump inlet formed -suction intake (FSI) that when employed in a pump station will allow for significant reduction of the pump station plan area while enhancing pump hydraulic operation. The reduction in pump station size can be as much as 25%, thus significant savings in civil works can be achieved. Xylem, Inc. — Flygt's local application and systems engineers stand ready to assist consulting engineers, municipal and agency engineers with the optimizing of pump station design and with pump unit selection. Xylem, Inc. employs 6 full time Flygt service personnel in the immediate area and offers 24 Hour service. Flygt has 3 service trucks and 2 additional crane trucks capable of lifting up to 10,000 lbs. All pump repairs are performed in our Jupiter FL location by factory trained technicians with genuine Flygt parts and no third party replacements. The Jupiter service facility has the ability to service pumps up to 15,000 pounds. All Flygt pumps are provided with a 5 year pro -rated warranty standard with extended warranties available. FLYGV a xylem brand P209 Flygt pumps are integrated with a state of the art control system including a MultiSmart controller which allows customers to easily manage all aspects of a pump station without requiring any third party engineered programing to adjust the operation and features as required with PLCs. The controller replaces the functions of pump controllers, HMIs, flow meters, energy and power meters, supply monitoring and protection, current monitoring, insulation resistance testers, motor protection relays, run timers, start counters, and seal failure relays all in one compact unit; thus reducing cost and size of control cabinets while increasing reliability. The MultiSmart unit also communicates with Flygt Cloud SCADA software that comes with pre -tailored and customizable configurations to meet the needs of any pump station. The Flygt controls service center is located in the Jupiter FL Flygt office and is equipped with plug in replacements to minimize downtime as much as possible. If you have any questions or comments, please feel free to contact me at your convenience to discuss them. Sincerely, Sincerely, Eric Johnson Xylem Water Solutions USA Inc. 15132 Park of Commerce Blvd./ Suite 102 Jupiter, FL 33478 (561)515-8710 eric.johnson xyleminc.com FX.V T a xylem brand P210 INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA MEMORANDUM I)A,3 TO: Jason E. Brown, County Administrator FROM: Richard B. Szpyrka, P.E., Public Works Director SUBJECT: Relocation of Indian River North County Offices - Purchase of Sebastian Corners Retail Center, LLC 1919-1931 US Highway 1 Sebastian, FL 32958 DATE: July 13, 2017 DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS For the convenience of Indian River County residents, Indian River County currently rents 2,875 square feet of office space at 11602 -11604 US1 in Sebastian Square (North County Offices) for the offices of the Property Appraiser, Clerk of Courts, Utilities Department and Veterans Services at an annual cost of $44,562.48. Additionally, in the same building, 11606-11612, US -1, the Tax Collector currently rents 3,587 square feet of office space at an annual cost of $55,598.40. The County has been renting a total of 6,462 square feet of office space at this location since 1991. The current lease will expire September 30, 2017. The County has been looking to purchase office space to relocate the North County Offices for approximately eight months. The County contacted Sebastian Corners Retail Center, LLC., about acquiring the property located at 1919-1931 US Highway 1 Sebastian, FL 32958. Sebastian Corners Retail Center consists of 2.35 acres of property with an 18,000 square foot building, 102 paved parking spaces, landscaping, and other improvements. Currently, there are five tenants in the building, Mattress Firm, Dollar Tree, AT&T retail, Sally's Beauty Salon, and a Cuban Restaurant. The Dollar Tree is currently completing a standalone store in the area and will be vacating the building shortly. The Dollar Tree currently occupies 6,000 square feet of space that will be renovated for use bythe Tax Collector, Property Appraiser, Clerk of Courts, Utilities Department, and Veterans Services if the County purchases the building. Sebastian Corners has agreed to sell the propertytothe County for $2,650,000.00. The property appraisal values the property at $2,900,000 in the "As -is" condition. The County will purchase the property "As -is", and will need to replace the roof, several air condition units and remodel the building for the relocation of the Indian River North County Offices. The costof this work is valued at approximately $300,000 to $400,000 and will take approximately 6 to 8 months to complete. FUNDING Funding for the purchase and improvements is available through a Budget Amendment from Impact Fees/Public Buildings/Cash Forward to Impact Fees/Facilities Mgmt/North County Offices Expansion, Acct # 10322019-066510-17017 for $570,000 and Optional Sales Tax/Cash Forward to Optional Sales Tax/Facilities Mgmt/North County Offices Expansion, Acct # 31522019-066510-17018 for $2,480,000. P211 Page 2 Relocation of Indian River North County Offices - Purchase of Sebastian Corners Retail Center, LLC 1919-1931 US Highway 1 Sebastian, FL 32958 For July 18, 2017 BCC Meeting RECOMMENDATION . Staff recommends the Board approve the Purchase Agreement for the property located at 1919-1931 US Highway 1 Sebastian, FL 32958, and authorize the Chairman to execute the purchase agreement on behalf of the Board. ATTACHMENTS One Original Purchase Agreement APPROVED AGENDA ITEM FOR: July 18, 2017 V! C:\Users\G RAN IC-1\AppData\Loca1\Temp\BCL Tech nologies\easyPDF 7\@BCL@C405E945\@BCL@C405E945.doc P212 AGREEMENT TO PURCHASE AND SELL REAL ESTATE BETWEEN INDIAN RIVER COUNTY AND SEBASTIAN CORNERS RETAIL CENTER, LLC THIS AGREEMENT TO PURCHASE AND SELL REAL ESTATE ("Agreement") is made and entered into as of the day of , 2017, by and between Indian River County, a political subdivision of the State of Florida ("the County"), and Sebastian Corners Retail Center, LLC, ("the Seller) who agree as follows: WHEREAS, Seller owns property located at 1919 -1931 US Highway 1 Sebastian, FL 32958. A legal description of the property is attached to this agreement as Exhibit "A" and incorporated by reference herein; and WHEREAS, the County is purchasing the retail center to relocate the Indian River North County offices; and WHEREAS, in order to proceed with the relocation, the County needs to purchase the property located at 1919 -1931 US Highway 1 Sebastian, FL 32958; and WHEREAS, the County contacted the Seller to purchase the property of approximately 102,365 square feet or 2.35 acres of property as depicted on Exhibit "A", and after negotiations with the County, the Seiler has agreed to sell the property to the County; WHEREAS, the Parties agree this is an arm's length transaction between the Seller and the County, without the threat of eminent domain. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual terms, conditions, promises, covenants and premises hereinafter, the COUNTY and SELLER agree as follows: 1. Recitals. The above recitals are affirmed as being true and correct and are incorporated herein. 2. Agreement to Purchase and Sell. The Seller hereby agrees to sell to the County, and the County hereby agrees to purchase from Seller, upon the terms and conditions set forth in this Agreement that certain parcel of real property located at 1919 -1931 US Highway 1 Sebastian, Sebastian, Florida 32958 and more specifically described in the legal description attached as Exhibit "A", fee simple, containing approximately 2.35 acres, all improvements thereon, together with all easements, leases rights and uses now or hereafter belonging thereto (collectively, the "Property"). 2.1 Purchase Price Effective Date. The purchase price ("Purchase Price") for the Property shall be $2,650,000.00 (Two Million, Six Hundred and Fifty Thousand and 00/100 Dollars). The Purchase Price shall be paid on the Closing Date. The Effective Date of this Agreement shall be the date upon which the County shall have approved the execution of Page I l P213 this Agreement, either by approval by the Indian River County Board of County Commissioners at a formal meeting of such Board or by the County Administrator pursuant to his delegated authority. 3. Title. Seller shall convey marketable title to the Property by warranty deed free of claims, liens, easements and encumbrances of record or known to Seller; but subject to property taxes for the year of Closing and covenants, restrictions and public utility easements of record provided (a) there exists at Closing no violation of any of the foregoing; and (b) none of the foregoing prevents County's intended use and development of the Property ("Permitted Exceptions"). 3.1 County may order an Ownership and Encumbrance Report or Title Insurance Commitment with respect to the Property. County shall within thirty (30) days following the Effective Date of this Agreement deliver written notice to Seller of title defects. Title shall be deemed acceptable to County if (a) County fails to deliver notice of defects within the time specified, or (b) County delivers notice and Seller cures the defects within thirty (30) days from receipt of notice from County of title defects ("Curative Period"). Seller shall use best efforts to cure the defects within the Curative Period and if the title defects are not cured within the Curative Period, County shall have thirty (30) days from the end of the Curative Period to elect, by written notice to Seller, to: (i) to terminate this Agreement, whereupon shall be of no further force and effect, or (ii) extend the Curative Period for up to an additional 90 days; or (iii) accept title subject to existing defects and proceed to closing. 3.2 Seller shall within five (5) days from the effective date provide copies of all leases, option letters, and contact information of all tenants. 4. Representations of the Seller. 4.1 Seller is indefeasibly seized of marketable, fee simple title to the Property, and is the sole owner of and has good right, title, and authority to convey and transfer the Property which is the subject matter of this Agreement, free and clear of all liens and encumbrances. 4.2 From and after the Effective Date of this Agreement, Seller shall take no action which would impair or otherwise affect title to any portion of the Property, and shall record no documents in the Public Records which would affect title to the Property, without the prior written consent of the County. 4.3.1 There are no existing or pending special assessments affecting the Property, which are or may be assessed by any governmental authority, water or sewer authority, school district, drainage district or any other special taxing district. 5. Default. 5.1 In the event the County shall fail to perform any of its obligations hereunder, the Seller shall, at its sole option, be entitled to: (i) terminate this Agreement by written notice Page 12 P214 delivered to the County at or prior to the Closing Date and thereupon neither the Seller nor any other person or party shall have any claim for specific performance, damages, or otherwise against the County; or (ii) waive the County's default and proceed to Closing. 5.2 In the event the Seller shall fail to perform any of its obligations hereunder, the County shall, at its sole option, be entitled to: (i) terminate this Agreement by written notice delivered to the Seller at or prior to the Closing Date and thereupon neither the County nor any other person or party shall have any claim for specific performance, damages or otherwise against the Seller; or (ii) obtain specific performance of the terms and conditions hereof; or (iii) waive the Seller's default and proceed to Closing: 6. Closing. 6.1 The closing of the transaction contemplated herein ("Closing" and "Closing Date") shall take place within 45 days following the execution of the contract by the Chairman of the Board of County Commissioners. The parties agree that the Closing shall be as follows: (a) The Seller shall execute and deliver to the County a warranty deed conveying marketable title to the Property, free and clear of all liens and encumbrances and in the condition required by paragraph 3. (b) If Seller is obligated to discharge any encumbrances at or prior to Closing and fails to do so, County may use a portion of Purchase Price funds to satisfy the encumbrances. (c) If the Seller is a non-resident alien or foreign entity, Seller shall deliver to the County an affidavit, in a form acceptable to the County, certifying that the Seller and any interest holders are not subject to tax under the Foreign Investment and Real Property Tax Act of 1980. (d) The Seller and the County shall each deliver to the other such other documents or instruments as may reasonably be required to close this transaction. (e) The Seller shall execute and deliver to County an assignment of leases in effect at the time of closing. Seller shall transfer to County all deposits and rents held in escrow at closing. 6.2 Taxes. All taxes and special assessments which are a lien upon the property on or prior to the Closing Date (except current taxes which are not yet due and payable) shall be paid by the Seller. 7. Personal Property. 7.1 The Seller shall have removed all of its personal property, equipment and trash from the Property. The Seller shall deliver possession of the Property to County vacant and in the same or better condition that existed at the Effective Date hereof. Page 13 P215 7.2 The following items which are owned by Seller and existing on the Property as of the date of the initial offer are included in the purchase: range(s)/oven(s), refrigerator(s), dishwasher(s), disposal, ceiling fan(s), intercom, light fixtures(s), drapery rods and draperies, blinds, window treatments, smoke detector(s), garage door opener(s), security gate and other access devices, and storm shutters/panels. 7.3 Seller shall deliver at Closing all keys, garage door openers, access devices and codes to County, if applicable. 8. Closing Costs: Expenses. County or its agent shall be responsible for preparation of all Closing documents. 8.1 County shall pay the following expenses at Closing: 8. 1.1 The cost of recording the warranty deed and any release or satisfaction obtained by Seller pursuant to this Agreement. 8.1.2 Documentary Stamps required to be affixed to the warranty deed. 8.1.3 All costs and premiums for the owner's marketability title insurance commitment and policy, if any. 8.2 Seiler shall pay the following expenses at or prior to Closing: 8.2.1 All costs necessary to cure title defect(s) or encumbrances, other than the Permitted Exceptions, and to satisfy or release of record all existing mortgages, liens or encumbrances upon the Property. 8.2.2 Any real estate commissions, fees or cost associated with listing the Property. 9. Miscellaneous. 9.1 Controlling Law. This Agreement shall be construed and enforced in accordance with the laws of the State of Florida. Venue shall be in Indian River County for all state court matters, and in the Southern District of Florida for all federal court matters. 9.2 Entire Agreement. This Agreement constitutes the entire agreement between the parties with respect to this transaction and supersedes all prior agreements, written or oral, between the Seller and the County relating to the subject matter hereof. Any modification or amendment to this Agreement shall be effective only if in writing and executed by each of the parties. 9.3 Assignment and Binding Effect. Neither County nor Seller may assign its rights and obligations under this Agreement without the prior written consent of the other party. The terms hereof shall be binding upon and shall inure to the benefit of the parties hereto and their successors and assigns. Page 14 P216 9.4 Notices. Any notice shall be deemed duly served if personally served or if mailed by certified mail, return receipt requested, or if sent via "overnight" courier service or facsimile transmission, as follows: If to Seller: Sebastian Corners Retail Center, LLC 426 S.E. 6t' Street Dania Beach, FL 33004 Attn: Jay Dick and Joe Cataldo If to County: Indian River County 1801 27th Street Vero Beach, FL. 32960' Attn: Land Acquisition/Monique Filipiak Either party may change the information above by giving written notice of such change as provided in this paragraph. 9.5 Survival and Benefit. Except as otherwise expressly provided herein, each agreement, representation or warranty made in this Agreement by or on behalf of either party, or in any instruments delivered pursuant hereto or in connection herewith, shall survive the Closing Date and the consummation of the transaction provided for herein. The covenants, agreements and undertakings of each of the parties hereto are made solely for the benefit of, and may be relied on only by the other party hereto, its successors and assigns, and are not made for the benefit of, nor may they be relied upon, by any other person whatsoever. 9.6 Attorney's Fees and Costs. In any claim or controversy arising out of or relating to this Agreement, each party shall bear its own attorney's fees, costs, and expenses. 9.7 Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed in two or more counterparts, each one of which shall constitute an original. 9.8 County Approval Required: This Agreement is subject to approval by the Indian River County as set forth in paragraph 2. 9.9 Beneficial Interest Disclosure: In the event Seller is a partnership, limited partnership, corporation, trust, or any form of representative capacity whatsoever for others, Seller shall provide a fully completed, executed, and sworn beneficial interest disclosure statement in the form attached to this Agreement as an exhibit that complies with all of the provisions of Florida Statutes Section 286.23 prior to approval of this Agreement by the County. However, pursuant to Florida Statutes Section 286.23 (3) (a), the beneficial interest in any entity registered with the Federal Securities and Exchange Commission, or registered pursuant to Chapter 517, Florida Statutes, whose interest is for sale to the general public, is exempt from disclosure; and where the Seller is a non-public entity, that Seller is not required to disclose persons or entities holding less than five (5%) percent of the beneficial interest in Seller. Page 15 P217 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned have executed this Agreement as of the date first set forth above. INDIAN RIVER COUNTY,- FLORIDA BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS Joseph E. Flescher, Chairman Approved by BCC ATTEST: .Jeffrey R-. Smith, .Clerk of.. Court and,Comptroller By:: Deputy Clerk Jason E. Brown, County Administrator Approved as to Formand Legal Sufficiency: William K. DeBraal, Deputy County Attorney A Date 4z' M! 6 Date Page 16 P218 EXHIBIT' A" Commonly known as: 1919 -1931 US Highway 1 Sebastian, FL 32958 Parcel ID Number: 30-38-21-00001-0000-00027.0 PARCEL 1: That portion of Lot 27, lying Weal of U.S. Highway No. 1, Town of Walrregan, according to the plat thereat as recorded In Plat Book 1, pages 178 and 179, of the Public Reoords of Brevard County, Florlder; said land now lying and being in Indian River County, Florida, lees the North 20.0o feet and the South 135.00 feet thereof. Together with the East one-half of the abandoned road ONaur+egan Avenue) per Ordinance No. 88-17, recorded W 001olal Records Book 717, page 2907, of the Public Records of Indian River County, Florida. PARCEL 2: The South 135 feet of Lot 27, Town of Wauregan, according to the plat ftweof as recorded In Plat ;nook 1. pages 178 and 179, of the Public Records of Brevard County, Florida, said land now lying and being in Indian River County, Florida, lying West of U.S. Highway No. 1. T'ogetherwith the East one-half of the abandoned road Mauregan Avenue), per Ordinance No, 85-17, recorded in Official Records Book 717, page 2807, of the Public Records of Indian River County, Florida. ° ALSO i4Ni7irM AS: BEGIN AT the Westerly R3gl4 of Way of U.S. Highway No.1 and the South tine of Lot 27, TOWN OF 1+'titAUREGAN, according to Lha plat thereof, as recorded In Plat Book 1, pages 178 and 179, of the Public Records.of Brevard County, Florida, said lend now lying and being In Indian -River County, Florida, thence South 450 28' 02° West along said South One of lot 27, 325.18 feet thence Borth 4410 33` 58' West, 294.88 t, thence North 450 24' W East, 388.14 feet to said Westerly Right of Way of U.S. Highway No. 1, thence South 38' 3l}' Sr East along said line, 297.83 feat to the Point of Beginning. TOGETHER WITH: PARCEL! A: A non -excursive easement for ingress and gess cr%W to #hat certain Mutual Access Easement Agreement recorded In Official Records Book 1461, Page 2877, with Affidavit as to Notary A mowledgment recorded In Official Records Book 1488, Page 76, and aftbe ed by Non -Exclusive Assignment of Easement recorded to Official Records Book 1473, Page 849, Public Records of Indian Muer County, Florida. PARCEL B: 5XHISIT "A" A non -exclusive -easement fon ingress and egress created In that certain Aoaoss and utility Easement recorded In Offrclal Records Book 1466, Page 82, affected by Non -1 xclusnre Asalgnment of Easement recorded in Official Records Book 1473, Page 853, Public Records of Indian River County, Florida. P219 INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA /� v DEPARTMENT OF UTILTY SERVICES BOARD MEMORADNUM DATE: July 6, 2017 TO: Jason E. Brown, County Administrator FROM: Terry Southard, Operations Manager THRU: Vincent Burke, Director of Utilities Jennifer Hyde, Purchasing Manager SUBJECT: Request for Sole Source for Equipment, Repair and/or Replacement for Data Flow System Products BACKGROUND/ ANALYSIS: In 1990, the Indian River County Department of Utilities Services (IRCDUS) solicited bids for a Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition (SCADA) system that would monitor the county's growing sewage collection system. This system is our electronic eyes and ears for the collection and transmission of county sewage. In 1990, at the time of the bid, IRCDUS was collecting and transporting over 3.5 million gallons per day (MGD) of sewage, and now in 2017, that has increased to 5.0 MGD. SCADA monitors and alerts stand-by personnel of any power failures, high wet well levels and equipment malfunctions. With these alarms, it allows for quick responses and helps avoid sewer -back-ups into homes and sewage overflows on the ground. Data Flow Systems (DFS) of Melbourne, Florida, was awarded the bid. At this time, DFS monitors 324 lift stations and 22 reuse sites. In 1994, SCADA was expanded and installed on wastewater treatment facilities to monitor plant reuse water. The system monitors flow, chlorine, turbidity and pH levels. With the use of SCADA on the treatment plants, the county was able to reduce Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) permit staffing from 24 hours/day to 8 hours/day. On May 11, 2004, the Board of County Commissioners (BCC) approved SCADA upgrades to handle the additional growth of lift stations at a cost of $460,000, and again on May 11, 2011, for reuse sites at a cost of $127,000. Costs for ongoing operational maintenance and equipment was $41,169.00 in FY15/16 and $65,707 for year-to-date FY16/17. This includes $15,732 in repairs related to Hurricane Matthew. Expenditures to cover the remainder of the year are expected to be $10,000. P220 FUNDING: Funds for the items are available in the. Wastewater Collection Renewal and Replacement (R & R) account in the operating fund. Operating fund revenues are derived from water and sewer sales. Description Account Number Amount Wastewater Collection R & R 1 47126836-044699 $10,000.00 RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Board of County Commissioners declare Data Flow Systems of Melbourne, Florida, as the sole source provider for equipment, repairs and replacements for Indian .River County Department of Utility Services' wastewater collection and transmission SCADA system. Attachment(s)- Letter from Data Flow Systems regarding TAC II SCADA System P221 40 ON AAIA FYAWSWeENS July 10, 2017 Ms. Heather Alexander Indian River County Utilities Email: halexander@ircgov.com RE: TAC II SCADA System Sole Source Status Dear Ms. Alexander: Please consider this document official confirmation that Data Flow Systems, Inc. (DFS), of Melbourne, Florida, is the sole source provider for all TAC II SCADA System Remote Terminal Units (RTUs), Radio Interface Modules, Power Supply Modules, 1/0 Function Modules, TAC Pack TCUs, and HyperTAC II SCADA Software currently utilized by Indian River County, FL. DFS is also the sole source provider for all associated repairs, service and training. DFS is responsible for the design, manufacture, installation and service of the entire TAC II SCADA System. There are no other manufacturers, dealers, distributors or service organizations that offer the TAC II Telemetry System or associated repairs, service and training in the State of Florida. Please let me know if I can be of further assistance or if any additional information is required. You can contact me at 321-259-5009. Sincerely, Data Flow Systems, Inc. d&e1414hJmim Debbie Wilkinson Sales Administrator Email: debbie@dataflowsys.com PLEASE VISIT OUR WEBSITE @ www.dataflowsys.com Data Flow Systems, Inc. 1 605 North John Rodes Blvd. I Melbourne, Florida 32934-9105 1 PH: 321.259.5009 1 FAX: 321.259.4006 P222 INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF UTILTY SERVICES BOARD MEMORADNUM DATE: June 19, 2017 TO: Jason E. Brown, County Administrator FROM: Emory Bailes, Utilities Field Superintendent THRU: Vincent Burke, Director of Utilities Jennifer Hyde, Purchasing Manager SUBJECT: Request for Sole Source for Warranty Repair and/or Replacement for Master Meter Products BACKGROUND/ ANALYSIS: On December 16, 2014, the Board of County Commissioners (BCC) authorized the use of Municipal Water Works as the sole source distributor for Master Meter Brand 3G Automated Meter Reading (AMR) meters in this area. At the time, staff was unaware that Master Meter requires that all warranty items be returned and processed directly with them and not their distributor. Indian River County Department of Utility Services (IRCDUS) has been using Master Meter AMR meters since 2004. The meters and registers carry a 10 -year full warranty with an additional 10 -year pro -rated warranty. We are now experiencing the need to replace items utilizing the manufacturer's warranty. FUNDING: Funds for the warranty items are available in the water distribution R & R account in the operating fund. Operating fund revenues are derived from water and sewer sales. Description I Account Number Amount Water Distribution R & R 47126936-044699 $50,000.00 RECOMMENDATION: The staff of IRCDUS recommends that the BCC authorize the Purchasing Department to use the above authorized vendor as the sole source provider for warranty repairs and replacements for Master Meter products. ATTACHMENTS Letter from Master Meter P223 MMASTER UMETER April 5, 2017 Mr. Emory Bailes Superintendent Indian River County Utilities 4350 411t ST. Vero Beach, FL 32967 Subject: Sole Source for Warranty Repair/Replacement of Master Meter products, Mr. Bailes: Please.let this confirm that Master Meter, Inc. is the sole source provider for factory repair or replacement of warranted Master Meter products. Thank you for your continued business and support. Respectfully, Neal Farmer Regional Vice President of Sales Master Meter, Inc. cc: David Reas, Regional Sales Manager Master Meter, Inc. / 101 Regency Pkwy, Mansfield, TX 76063 / T: 817-842-8000 / F: 817-842-8100 / MasterMeter.com P224 INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF UTILITY SERVICES Date: July 5, 2017 To: Jason E. Brown, County Administrator From: Vincent Burke, P.E., Director of Utility Services Prepared By: Arjuna Weragoda, P.E., Capital Projects Manager Subject: Countywide Septic to Sewer Conversion Evaluation/Ranking Report — Results DESCRIPTIONS AND CONDITIONS: /a �3 On October 18, 2016, under Consent Agenda Item 8-G, the Indian River County Board of County Commissioners (BCC) authorized staff to proceed in the development of a more comprehensive septic to sewer (S25) priority ranking plan along with cost estimates for platted subdivisions currently on septic. As part of that approval, the BCC approved Work Order No. 2 for Schulke, Bittle & Stoddard, LLC, (SBS) to provide professional engineering services for a comprehensive countywide S2S priority ranking study based upon various physical and environmental factors as well as construction cost estimates. The study focused on platted subdivisions within the unincorporated Indian River County and City of Sebastian. ANALYSIS: SBS has completed the evaluation, and the entire report is attached as part of the subject staff report. The goal of the evaluation is to prioritize the areas based upon various physical and environmental factors, and determine the feasibility of incorporating the proposed systems into the 10 -year Capital Improvements Plan. An IRC -specific formula was developed and modeled after similar studies for Martin County (Martin County Septic System Evaluation Final Report, CapTec Engineering, Inc.; February 13, 2015) and Brevard County (Save Our Lagoon Project Plan for Brevard County, Florida; TetraTech, Inc and Close Waters LLC; July 28, 2016). The IRC formula was modified from the Martin and Brevard studies to consider and weigh physical and environmental factors that SBS and IRCDUS staff determined to be best representation of Indian River County conditions. The following factors were utilized in the initial ranking of the three hundred and twenty-five (325) platted subdivisions currently on septic: • Population Density for Loading Concentrations • Proximity to Surface Waters • Location of the Community in Relation to the 100 -year Flood Plain — FEMA Flood Plain • Depth of the Ground Water Table • Soil Conditions of the Drain Field — Soil Type • Age of the Surface Water Management System • Age of the Existing Onsite Sewage Treatment and Disposal Systems (OSTDS) Each factor was evaluated and assigned an index number that generally ranged from 0 to 12, with 0 being the minimum and 12 being the maximum impact. The formula used to determine the ranking is simply the sum of all the factors. The higher the resulting sum (the "score"), the higher the estimated impact to the Indian River Lagoon (IRL). This formula, initially developed for the Martin and Brevard P225 studies, weighed each factor relatively equally. However, SBS and IRCDUS staff agree that both factors, "Population Density" and "Proximity to Surface Waters", should be weighed more heavily. It is believed that these factors, at their worst conditions (systems close to surface waters communities with high density), will likely cause a disproportionately higher impact to the environment. Consequently, each of these factors, "Population Density" and "Proximity to Surface Waters", were adjusted by an "importance factor" that ranged from 1.0 to 2.0. The 325 subdivisions were ranked in the order of the overall score, where number 1 had the highest overall score (89.19) and number 325 the lowest (26.97). Once the initial ranking was finalized, an Engineers Opinion of Probable Cost (OPC) was computed for the top thirty five (35) ranked subdivisions. The top ranked subdivisions were further evaluated based on the following factors: 1. Aquatic Health - Environmental Impact Evaluation or the Initial Ranking 2. Sewer System Evaluation and Cost Data 3. TN/TP Efficiency - Since most references and studies showed that Phosphorus was removed by a functioning OSTDS, the TP efficiency computations were removed from the analysis 4. Public Health - Based on the availability of potable water The SBS study evaluated the total nitrogen (TN) and total phosphorus (TP) removed from the S2S conversion for each individual area and computed a cost per pound for TN removal on the top 35 ranked subdivisions. TP (as noted above) computations were removed from the analysis. As part of the evaluation, average and peak wastewater flows generated by each of the top 35 ranked subdivisions were tabulated. By using the methodology described in the study, the top thirty five (35) ranking subdivisions have been identified with the highest overall rating (largest potential impact to IRL) within the geographical area in Indian River County to benefit from a centralized sewer system as follows. 'Rank ... Subdivision Name -.Rank ."°' :SubdiGision.Name, ..,',` ;Ranks° x; ..eSubdivision:Name°°., 1 Floravon Shores Subdivision 14 Sebastian Highlands Unit 02 Replat PG 2 24 Dales Landing Subdivision Tropic Colony Subdivision 2 Sebastian Highlands Unit 02 Collier 14 Hobart Landing Unit 3 24 ^V 3 Sebastian Highlands Unit 05 16 River Shores Estates Units 1- 4 29 Winter Grove Subdivision 4 Hobart Landing Unit 2 17 Pine Tree Park Units 1-4 29 Kanawah Acres 5 Orchid Island No. 2 17 Indian River Heights Units 1 -9 31 Tropic Colony Subdivision 5 Sebastian Highlands Unit 04 17 Sebastian Highlands Unit 02 Replat PG 3 32 Halleluiah Acres 7 Orchid Island No. 1 20 Rain Tree Corner Subdivision 33 Little Portion Subdivision Replat OF 8 Sebastian Highlands Unit 01 21 Diana Park Subdivision 34 Sebastian Highlands Unit 02 Replat PG 4 * 8 Ambersand Beach Sub No 1 & 2 22 Verona Estates Subdivision 35 Heritage Trace at Hobart* 10 Sebastian Highlands Unit 03 22 Sebastian Highlands Unit 13; Little Portion Subdivision Replat Of 11 Sebastian Highlands Unit 02 24 Hobart Landing Unit 1 11 Naranja TR Shellmound Bch Replat of POR 24 Hallmark Ocean Subdivision 13 Orchid Isle Estates Subdivision 24 Stevens Park Unit 1 & 2 * These communities are included in the evaluation due to their proximity to one or more top 30 ranked communities. ** It is recommended that the Amos subdivision not be considered in the capital improvement program. Ranking results are due to an anomaly in the methodology. C:\Users\G RAN IC`i\AppData\Local\Temp\BCL Tech n ologies\easyPDF 7\@BCL@98057BB8\@BCL@98057BB8.doc P226 FUNDING: There is no funding required for the report delivery. On October 18, 2016, the BCC approved Work Order No. 2 for Schulke, Bittle & Stoddard, funded from the Utilities Capital Fund in the amount of $86,300. Capital fund revenues are generated from impact fees. Furthermore, new growth has created the need for the expansion or construction of the facilities, and that new growth will benefit from the expansion or construction of the facilities. On March 7, 2017, the BCC recommended the adoption of Resolution No. 2017-021 authorizing signatory authority to the County Administrator for finalizing the agreement accepting a Technical Assistance Grant in the amount of $35,000 from the Department of Economic Opportunity (DEO). This grant reduced the amount funded from the Utilities Capital Fund to $51,300. Description Account Number Amount Countywide Septic to Sewer 472-169000-17501 $51,300.00 DEO Technical Assistance Grant $35,000.00 Total Funding for Report $86,300.00 RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the following Countywide Septic to Sewer Ranking by adopting the report prepared by Schulke, Bittle & Stoddard, LLC. Work with Community Development Long Range planning staff to incorporate the findings into the IRC 2030 Comprehensive Plan Chapter 3A, Sanitary Sewer Sub -Element for BCC review and approval at a later date. Make the report available on-line. ATTACHMENT(s): Countywide Septic to Sewer Ranking Report by Schulke, Bittle & Stoddard, LLC (57 Pages) C:\Users\GRAN IC"1\AppData\Local\Temp\BCL Technologies\easyPDF 7\@BCL@98057BB8\@BCL@98057BB8.doc P227 Executive Summary To: Arjuna Weragoda, Capital Projects Manager, Indian River County Department of Utility Services From: Joseph Schulke, PE — Project Manager, SBS Date: June 20, 2017 Re: Executive Summary - Septic to Sewer Conversion Evaluation The Indian River Lagoon (Lagoon) is North America's most diverse estuary with more than 4,300 species of plants and animals, including 35 that are listed as threatened or endangered, more than any other estuary in North America. The Lagoon varies in width from .5 to 5 miles (0.80 to 8.0 km) and averages 4 feet (1.2 m) in depth. It serves as a spawning and nursery ground for many different species of oceanic and lagoon fish and shellfish. The Lagoon also has one of the most diverse bird populations anywhere in America. Nearly 1/3 of the nation's manatee population lives here or migrates through the Lagoon seasonally. In addition, its ocean beaches provide one of the densest sea turtle nesting areas found in the Western Hemisphere. The Lagoon has faced challenges and adversity over the years, and has seen the reduction in Fishery populations, the loss of salt marshes and mangrove wetlands, and shellfish harvesting areas are shrinking every year and are being closed. While there are many contributing factors, numerous symposiums on the health of the Lagoon have identified the proliferation of residential septic systems as one of the significant contributors to the degradation of the lagoon. The Indian River County Board of County Commissioners has recognized that the health of the Lagoon should be one of the county's top priorities. Consequently, it has directed staff to retain Schulke, Bittle & Stoddard, LLC to prepare a County -wide study to evaluate the impact of continued septic system use on the Indian River Lagoon, and consider alternative methods to provide public sewer to communities whose septic systems are causing the most harm to the environment. The final report prepared by Schulke, Bittle & Stoddard, LLC, titled "Septic to Sewer Conversion Evaluation", was prepared as an objective review of geographic areas in Indian River County that currently utilize on-site sewage treatment and disposal systems (OSTDS). The evaluation in the report provides a relative comparison of the negative environmental impact to the Indian River Lagoon that the various geographic areas (communities) in the County are causing due to the existence and use of septic systems. From this comparison, the communities have been ranked from the most to least impactful to the lagoon eco -system. The results can be used by IRCDUS for the development of a capital improvement program which identifies and prioritizes communities to be converted from OSTDS use to IRCDUS sewer utility system construction, connection and use. Factors considered for the final prioritization to convert communities to IRCDUS sewer utility use are: cost of system construction per P228 home site at each community, cost of system construction, cost per pound of pollutant removed at each community, and presence or absence of potable water. The evaluation is presented in three parts: Part 1—Aquatic Health: Evaluation of relative environmental impacts caused by each community (345) and ranking of communities. Part 2 — Master Wastewater System Data and Estimate of Pollutants Generated by Septic System Use: Evaluation of wastewater data from the top 30 communities from Part 1, including design average daily and peak hour flows generated, and estimate of pollutant loading. Part 3 - Capital Improvement Program Prioritization. The top 30 ranked communities from Part 1 will be evaluated and re -prioritized based on cost of sewer system construction, cost of pollutant reduction, and presence or absence of potable water. The Final report, "Septic to Sewer Conversion Evaluation", presents in detail, Schulke, Bittle & Stoddard, LLC's methods and results of the study. A summary of the results from the report is attached to this Executive Summary in both a graphic and tabular form: - Table EX -1: Summary Results - Priority Sites - Septic to Sewer Conversion - Exhibit EX -1: Map of the top 30 Priority Sites Other considerations: SBS and IRCDUS staff considered the results of the evaluation, and found that the communities identified as the worst contributors to the Indian River Lagoon Eco -system are consistent with our initial expectations. Most communities identified were located close to the primary waterbodies (Indian River Lagoon and Sebastian River), or close to primary tributaries to these water bodies. However, there was at least one outlier that was identified as a priority community in the evaluation, which IRCDUS would not likely consider for conversion. Amos A of E subdivision, which only has two home sites, clearly would not be feasible to expand sewer to, nor would it reduce pollutants significantly. This result is attributed to a rare happenstance — this community received the highest index number for several factors, including "importance factor", proximity to surface waters, flood plain, depth to groundwater, and soil condition, which numbers cumulatively predicted a high relative score. This appears to be one of the only communities inside the top tier of sites that we considered an anomaly in the results. This community, while listed, is struck through and should not be considered. Upon review of Table EX -1, the reader will find that the table lists 35 communities, while on Exhibit EX -1, the map graphically depicts only 30 communities. This is because, while evaluating factors such as cost to expand public sewer, several communities were not readily separated from other communities. In these cases, communities outside the top 30 are surrounded by communities in the top 30 — and preparing the conceptual design of and cost estimates for the construction of sewer systems was not feasible with -out including these lower ranked communities in the results. P229 TABLE EX -1 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM PRIORITY RECOMMENDATION SUMMARY Number Subdivision Name Initial Ranking New% GravitytawFressure Repriortrized or Vacuum (most Final Rankin cost p g effective per Grov/ Gravity Cost per tot Low Pressure Vacuum n�3orrl�us% Cost per tb of Pollution Reduction/ YR Gravity low Pressure Vacuum O&M -00100011s o&M44som oant-S60'OLVcs IRC Potable Water Available 48 Floravon Shores Subdivision 7 1 Gravity $10,531.72 $0.00 $0.00 $31.24 $0.00 $0.00 Yes 52 Sebastian Highlands Unit 02 Collier 9 2 Vacuum $21,344.64 $0.00 $12,669.04 $31.11 $0.00 $19,45 Yes 58 Sebastian Highlands Unit 05 12 3 Vacuum $21,344.64 $0.00 $12,669.04 $39.10 $0.00 $24.45 Yes 138 Hobart Landing Unit 2 1 4 Gravity $26,220.22 $32,331.87 $0.00 $39.22 $57.29 $0.00 Yes 18 Orchid Island No. 2 3 5 Low Pressure $61,902.03 $28,825.33 $33,220.65 $102.48 $57.98 $78.20 No 17 Orchid Island No. 1 2 7 Low Pressure $88,754.76 $29,133.51 $42,629.54 $146.73 $58.01 $107.24 No 1 Ambersand Beach Sub No 1 & 2 6 8 Gravity $25,186.91 $0.00 $29,493.95 $42.71 $0.00 $0.00 Yes 131 Naranja TR Shetimound Bch Replat of POR 8 11 Low Pressure $41,334.29 $29,249.95 $0.00 $102.69 $66.16 $0.00 No 50 Sebastian Highlands Unit 01 24 8 Vacuum $21,344.64 $0.00 $12,669.04 $49.88 $0.00 $31.19 Yes 57 Sebastian Highlands Unit 04 25 5 Vacuum $21,344.64 $uo $12,669.04 $49.90 $0.00 $31.21 Yes 19 Orchid Isle Estates Subdivision 14 13 Vacuum $49,749.53 $30,057.06 $21,365.00 $79.39 $55.40 $38.71 No 139 Hobart Landing Unit 3 4 14 Low Pressure $56,318.05 $33,987.79 $0.00 $84.90 $57.31 $0.00 Yes 272 Pine Tree Park Units 1-4 22 17 Vacuum $18,896.51 $0.00 $14,624.42 $85.89 $0.00 $73.63 Yes 320 River Shores Estates Units 1-4 10 16 Vacuum $24,444.12 $0.00 $21,979.98 $97.46 $0.00 $118.30 Yes 291 Indian River Heights Units 1-9 18 17 Vacuum $19,375.08 $0.00 $13,591.82 $139.86 $0.00 $104.88 Yes 51 Sebastian Highlands Unit 02 30 11 Vacuum $21,344.64 50.00 $12,669.04 $67.29 $0.00 $42.08 Yes 278 Stevens Park Unit 1 & 2 21 24 Vacuum $18,796.12 $0.00 $15,122.31 $184.15 $0.00 $179.49 Yes 212 Rain Tree Corner Subdivision 11 20 Low Pressure $40,184.62 $29,299.76 $0.00 $97.45 $70.85 $0.00 Yes 53 Sebastian Highlands Unit 02 Replat PGI' 38 14 Vacuum $21,344.64 $0,00 $12,669.04 $59.41 $0.00 $37.15 Yes 273 Diana Park Subdivision 19 21 Low Pressure $33,128.36 $28,527.86 $0.00 $78.40 $68.94 $0.00 Yes 49 Dales landing Subdivision 20 24 Low Pressure $52,887.18 $35,328.90 $0.00 $172.41 $94.32 $0.00 No 207 Tropic Colony Subdivision 27 31 Gravity $21,141.85 $0.00 $22,004.08 $151.54 $0.00 $202.21 Yes 2-76 Ani -_0-44+11 33 24 te•-..,FeSSUre51�`�� 541;320:89 $BAG 564837 $_� $"o we 2 Hallmark Ocean Subdivision 5 24 Low Pressure $130,635.31 $65,670.98 $0.00 $261.82 $99.87 $0.00 Yes 199 Verona Estates Subdivision 17 22 Low Pressure $43,570.90 $28,469.58 $0.00 $329.15 $200.11 $0.00 No 56 Sebastian Highlands Unit 03' 31 10 Vacuum $21,344.64 $0.00 $11,669.04 $41.97 $0.00 $26.24 Yes 54 Sebastian Highlands Unit 02 Replat PG 3' 45 17 Vacuum $21,344.64 $0.00 $12,669.04 $44.36 $0.00 $27,74 Yes 137 Hobart Landing Unit 1 13 24 Gravity $26,336.91 $30,618.92 $0.00 $188.51 $197.86 $0.00 Yes 143 Winter Grove Subdivision 26 29 Low Pressure $34,703.42 $28,384.58 $0.00 $89.83 $79.04 $0.00 Yes 213 Kanawah Acres 16 29 Low Pressure $91,971.34 $40,474.04 $0.00 $408.14 $185.68 $0.00 No 32 Hallelutah Acres 28 32 Low Pressure $94,292.08 $51,062.75 $0.00 $169.83 $80.24 $0.00 No 68 Sebastian Highlands Unit 13 29 22 Vacuum $22,483.78 $0.00 $14,124.59 $124.23 $0.00 $85.96 Yes 196 tittle Portion Subdivision Replat OF 23 33 Low Pressure $32,734.44 $27,729.70 $0.00 $226.87 $197.05 $0.00 Yes 55 Sebastian Highlands Unit02Replat PG4' 69 34 Vacuum $21,344.64 $0.00 $12,669.04 $71.58 $0.00 $44.76 Yes 136 Heritage Trace at Hobart' 281 35 Gravity $23,946.97 $27,984.56 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 Yes ' These communities are included in the evaluation due to their proximity to one or more top 30 ranked communities •• it is recommended that Amos subdivision not be considered In the capital improvement program. Ranking results are due to an anomaly in the methodology. This site has the highest Index numbers assigned for "Importance factor", proximity to surface water, flood plain, depth to groundwater and soll condition. As a result, the site is ranked much higher than would otherwise be expected. "U N W K? � t � wal a NEW vv . ;u� ii■■ 81e 512' 06 OWN rlt�i ■■■I f .!{nim 723Ye �. --a ■�■ih^i!I Kill 1'"`i�ij rhe:.'..-- ..—��� _,' +. ii. ! MI I'1 iFi{ p ! �E �■ i ?T 71'-1w 1 t 1 !1111i Eli {YID.. "Iht�t+� •f � v "rr i �■:■a +Sti � iA. rd Flip€•j�9 QIP , -; � 1i_■ ��� C�r'sM� ,�I� IIIIIIII � g I I ..aye 1 �: � , � €x��, i � !1111 r C�� i � t I ■ 6 ' 1 ��� ' .t' Cal ILL �I 1 �� Nr � 11 r,� I�Illllw � _ fl • I!� i IIR. a - i ■ it II it ! 1 r �y�lAii2.� ■: '"" SEPTIC TO SEWER CONVERSION EVALUATION, SBS IRCDUS Work Order No. 2 Prepared for, Indian River County Board of County Commissioners Prepared by: Schulke, Bittle & Stoddard,, LLC June 20, 2017 P232 Forward: Executive Summary Attachments: Table EX -1: Summary Results -.Priority Sites - Septic to Sewer Conversion - Exhibit EX -1:'. Map of the top 30 Priority Sites Contents of Report: Part 1— Aquatic Health: P. 1 Evaluation of relativeenvironmental impacts caused. . by each community (345) and ranking of communities Part 2 —Master Wastewater System Data and P. 12 Estimate of Pollutants Generated by Septic System. Use: Evaluation of wastewater data from the top 30 communities from Part 1., including design average daily and peak hour flows generated, and estimate of pollutant loading. Part 3 - Capital Improvement Program Prioritization P. 18 The top 30 ranked communities from Part 1 above will be evaluated and re -prioritized based on cost of sewer system. construction, cost of pollutant reduction, and presence or absence of potable water. P233 List of Exhibits and Tables (Listed in order of reference in the document) - Exhibit 'A' — Map of Study Area and Communities - Exhibit 'B'— Priority Summary Table. - Table 1. —Factors and Index Number Summary - Table 2. — Importance Factors - Exhibit'C' —Community Priority Map - Table 3. —Top 30 Ranked Communities Table 4. —Master Plan Wastewater System Data - _ Exhibit'D' — Estimate of Sewage Generated and Pollutant Reduction - . _Table 5. — Nitrogen Pollutant Loading Estimate - Table 6. — Gravity Sewer System Unit Costs - Table 7. — Low Pressure Force Main Transmission System Unit Costs - Table 8. —Vacuum System Unit Costs - Table 9. — Capital Improvement Program Priority Recommendation Summary - Exhibit 'E' — Cost Analysis - Exhibit 'F' - Capital Improvement Program, Priority Evaluation P234 IRCDUS Septic / Sewer Evaluation This report was prepared to provide an objective review of geographic areas in Indian River County that currently utilize on-site sewage treatment and disposal systems (septic systems). It is intended to provide an objective relative comparison of the negative environmental impact to the Indian River Lagoon that the various geographic areas (communities) in the County are causing due to the existence and use of septic systems. From this comparison, the communities will be ranked from the most to least impactful to the lagoon eco -system. The results will be used by IRCDUS for the development of a capital improvement program which identifies and prioritizes communities to be converted from on-site septic system use to IRCDUS sewer utility system construction, connection and use. Additional factors considered for the final prioritization to convert to IRCDUS sewer utility use are: cost of system construction per home site at each community, cost of system construction, operation and maintenance per pound of pollutant removed at each community, and presence or absence of potable water. The evaluation is presented in three parts: Part 1— Aquatic Health: Evaluation of relative environmental impacts caused by each community (345) and ranking of communities Part 2 — Master Wastewater System Data and Estimate of Pollutants Generated by Septic System Use: Evaluation of wastewater data from the top 30 communities from Part 1., including design average daily and peak hour flows generated, and estimate of pollutant loading. Part 3 - Capital Improvement Program Prioritization. The top 30 ranked communities from Part 1 above will be evaluated and re -prioritized based on cost of sewer system construction, cost of pollutant reduction, and presence or absence of potable water. Part 1. Aquatic Health: Environmental Impact Evaluation A. Background Indian River County Department of Utility Services (IRCDUS) sewage collection system(s) consists primarily of gravity sanitary sewers or low pressure force main transmission systems. IRCDUS has expanded the utility service area from its inception and provides sewage collection for over 28,950 homes. Its expansion has generally correlated with the expansion of new commercial and residential development in Indian River County, and has not typically expanded its systems into existing and established communities. Consequently, there are many areas that are utilizing on-site septic treatment and disposal systems (septic systems). For purposes of this study, these areas have been divided into 345 geographic areas, or "communities". (see Exhibit A — Map of Study area and Communities). The boundaries of each community were previously determined by IRCDUS staff as part of a preliminary study prepared in 2016 for the same purpose ("Septic to Sewer Update/ Presentation, Arjuna Weragoda, 2116). The same geographic areas determined by IRCDUS staff were used for this study. Following the commencement of this study, twenty (20) communities were removed from inclusion, because these communities are either already served by IRCDUS sewer collection systems, or are part of the current IRCDUS North County Gravity sewer system expansion area. Consequently, this study now includes 325 communities. P235 B. Septic System Information and Facts "On-site wastewater treatment systems (septic systems) have evolved from pit privies used widely through -out history to installations capable of producing a disinfected effluent that is fit for human consumption. Although achieving such a level of effluent quality is seldom necessary, the ability of on- site systems to remove settleable solids, floatable grease and scum, nutrients and pathogens from wastewater discharges defines their importance in protecting human health and environmental resources. In the modern era, the typical on-site system has consisted primarily of septic tank and a soil absorption field". (USEPA Onsite Wastewater Treatment Systems Manual, 2002). These systems work well if they are installed in areas with appropriate soils and hydraulic capacities, designed appropriately, installed properly and maintained. However, these criteria are often not met. Only about 1/3 of the land in the United States is suited for conventional septic systems, and many systems are located to close to ground waters and surface waters. As a result, many systems are not capable of minimizing Nitrogen contamination of groundwater, removing other nutrients, or attenuating pathogenic organisms. Wastewater characteristics entering a septic system vary by dwelling, use or establishment. Nitrogen, phosphorous, pathogens, and other contaminants are present in significant concentrations in most wastewaters treated by on-site septic systems. Although most can be removed to acceptable levels under optimal system operating conditions, some may remain in the effluent exiting the system. The wastewater effluent forms a plume that migrates downward from the drainfield "infiltration zone" until near saturated conditions in the soil, and then moves in response to the prevailing hydraulic gradient, downstream with and dispersing into the groundwater. Further treatment can occur while the plume travels through the soil, but the degree of additional treatment depends on numerous factors. In addition to the performance of the specific on-site system, other important considerations include the density of area systems, overall hydraulic loading, proximity of water resources, and the collective performance of all of the on-site systems in a watershed. Inadequately addressing these factors can lead to contamination of lakes, rivers, streams, wetlands, coastal areas and groundwater. (USEPA Onsite Wastewater Treatment Systems Manual, 2002). Past regulations governing system specifics have been proven to be inadequate. Consequently, the state has adopted at least three major changes to the regulations, each time providing more stringent rules that ensure the systems will work more effectively than prior regulations. In Indian River County, a majority of the homes in many communities were developed under prior regulations, and as a consequence, these older systems likely introduce contaminants into the environment that are above acceptable levels. It is estimated that there are approximately 30,369.septic systems in use in Indian River County. The age and effectiveness of these systems varies significantly. Older systems were permitted to be installed much closer to surface waters, with less effective depth of soil and with less distance to the groundwater table than that which is required today. Consequently, the pollutant contribution into the groundwater from septic systems from many home sites are likely causing direct impacts to the environment. Septic System Fact. There were four (4) major changes to the criteria for septic system placement, requirements and size of systems: P236 Four significant periods of septic regulations* o Rules Prior to '72 o Change: '72 to '82 o Change: '83 to '97 o Change: '98 to present *(Chapter 64E -Florida Administrative Code, Standards for On-site Sewage Treatment and Disposal Systems, 3/98) Methods discussed in this report were developed in an attempt to make an objective comparison of the environmental impact to the Indian River Lagoon eco -system caused by the use of septic systems found in various communities in Indian River County. Factors considered include the age of the systems, and physical characteristics that contribute to the effectiveness of the systems to treat and dispose of pollutants, such as: depth to groundwater, soil conditions, proximity to groundwater, surface waters and floodwaters, maximum intensity of land application, and minimum size of system components. Septic System Fact: 30,369 septic systems in Indian River County C. Method of Evaluation Each community was evaluated utilizing a formula developed to determine the relative comparison of the negative environmental impact to the Indian River Lagoon caused by each communities' use of septic systems. The formula was developed and modeled after similar studies for Martin County (Martin County Septic System Evaluation Final Report; CapTec Engineering, Inc.; February 13, 2015) and Brevard County (Save Our Lagoon Project Plan for Brevard County, Florida; TetraTech, Inc and CloseWaters LLC; July 28,2016). The formula was modified from the Martin and Brevard studies to consider and weigh physical and environmental factors that SBS and IRCDUS staff determined to be best representative of Indian River County conditions. The factors considered for determining the initial ranking and prioritization of the 325 communities were: • Population Density • Proximity to Surface Waters • Flood Plain • Depth to Ground Water Table • Soil Condition • Age of Surface Water Management System • Age of the Existing OSTDS A summary table of the results of the methodology and community rankings is provided in Exhibit B — Priority Summary Table, which includes the Factors and Index Numbers used to determine the respective "scores" for each community. Each factor was evaluated and assigned an Index number that generally ranged from 0 to 12. The formula used to determine the ranking is simply the sum of all the factors. The higher the resulting sum (the "score"), the higher the estimated impact to the Indian River Lagoon (IRL). This formula, initially developed for the Martin and Brevard studies, weighed each factor relatively equally. (max. index number of 12 for each). However, SBS and IRCDUS staff agree (reference IRCDUS letter report: "Septic to Sewer Update/ Presentation'; Arjuno Weragoda, PE; February 29,2016) that both Factors, "Population Density" and "Proximity to Surface Waters", should be weighed more heavily. It is believed that these Factors, at their worst conditions (systems close to surface waters; P237 communities with high density), will likely cause a disproportionately higher impact to the environment. Consequently, each of these Factors, "Population Density" and "Proximity to Surface Waters", were adjusted by an `Importance Factor" that ranged from 1.0 to 2.0. A summary of the Factors considered and corresponding Index Numbers are provided in Table 1. and a summary of the "Importance Factors" are provided in Table 2. below. Table 1- Factors and Index Number - Summa Factor Index Number Min. Max • Population Density 4(x1*) = 4 12(x2*) = 24 • Proximity to Surface Waters 0.1(x1*) = 0.1 12(x2*) = 24 • FEMA Flood Plain 0 12 • Depth to Ground Water Table 4 12 • Soil Condition 4 12 • Age of Surface Water Management System 4 12 • Age of the Existing OSTDS 4 12 20.1 108 * I is minimum Importance Factor, and 2 is maximum Importance Factor Table 2 - Importance Factor Description (Community distance to nearest surface water) Factor -Adjacent to Indian River Lagoon (IRL) 2.0 -Adjacent to Sebastian River (SR) 1.85 -Adjacent to and downstream of spillways for IRFWCD Main, North or South 1.85 relief canals or other streams/ channels within 1 mile of the IRL. -Adjacent to and downstream from spillways/ gates at SRID laterals C and L, 1.7 and City of Sebastian waterways; or other Laterals ("C" ), sub -laterals, streams / channels within 1 mile of SR. -Adjacent to and within 1 mile upstream of spillways for IRFWCD Main, North 1.4 or South relief canals or other streams/ channels from 1 to 2 miles of the IRL. -Adjacent to and within 1 mile upstream of spillways for SRID laterals C and L, 1.3 and City of Sebastian waterways; or other Laterals ("C" ), sub -laterals, streams / channels from 1 to 2 miles of the SR. -Adjacent to all other upstream surface waters 1.0 * "adjacent to" a surface water shall include any community within 100 ft. of a surface water. P238 D. Factors and Index Numbers - Methodology 1. Population Density: The Indian River County GIS maps were utilized to determine density of each community. The existing density was determined via parcel count (those with homes), gross acreage of the community, and adjustments were made to account for future home construction within the community (assuming a 10 year period, and an annual growth rate of 1.95% per year (1.21 multiplier for 10 years). Index Numbers / Population Density Density: Index No. <— 2 units/ac 4 (x I) 2 to 4.8/ac* 4 to 12* (x I) > 4.8 12 (x I) *sliding scale, Index no.= (2.85d-1.7); d = density (2 to 4.8) 1= Importance Factor An Importance Factor (a multiplier, from 1.0 to 2.0) is applied to the Index Number to account for the surface water the site is adjacent to, with 2.0 multiplier being applied to a site adjacent to a critical water body, and lesser values given for sites adjacent to surface waters that are further upstream from the critical water body. See Table 2, Importance Factor. 2. Proximity to Surface Waters: The location of surface water bodies and streams through -out the IRCDUS service area were utilized to measure the proximity of each community to a surface water. Maps depicting the Surface water bodies and streams were downloaded from the SJRWMD (SJRWMD website: www.sjrwmd.com; "Online GIS Maps/Tools'; Hydrology 1:24,000 Streams —SJRWMD http://www.sjrwmd.com/gisdevelopment/docslmetodatolhydro24k Stream.htm and Hydrography 1.24,000Waterbodies—SJRWMDhttp://www.sjrwmd.com/gisdevelopment/docslmetadatolhydro24k Waterbody.htm) and inserted into the base IRC GIS Project Maps. Index Number values (0.1 to 12) are assigned to each community based on their weighted average relative distance from adjacent surface waters that connect to the critical water body, with an Index Number of 12 for sites within 165 ft., 3.0 for sites between 165 ft. and 657 ft., and 0.1 for sites over 657 ft. The assigned index number corresponds to the distance the site is from a surface water. Numerous studies have shown that nutrients intercepted by adjacent surface waters varies based on the rate of dispersion and dilution of the pollutants, the decay rates of the pollutants (via natural chemical and biological processes), and the distance from the surface waters (which corresponds to a distance and time the effluent travels through the groundwater before entering an adjacent surface water). Data presented in the Brevard County Study (Save Our Lagoon Project Plan for Brevard County, Florida, TetraTech, Inc and Close Waters LLC; July 28, 2016) indicates that the concentration of pollutants in the effluent from typical domestic septic system(s) is negligible when the travel path of the effluent plume through the groundwater is over 657 ft. Consequently, an Index value of 0.10 is used. P239 A separate Importance Factor (a multiplier, from 1.0 to 2.0) is applied to the Index Number to account for the surface water the site is adjacent to, with 2.0 multiplier being applied to a site adjacent to a critical water body, and lesser values given for sites adjacent to surface waters that are further upstream from the critical water body. See Table 2, Importance Factor. Index Numbers / Proximity to Surface Water Measured value (ft.) Index No.* distance to surface water > 657 ft. 0.10* x l 165 ft. to 657 ft. 3.0* x I <165ft. 12.0*xI I = Importance Factor *Actual number = Calculate a weighted average number based on percentage of each community sub -area within each prescribed distance to surface water 3. Flood Plain: A sizeable portion of Indian River Counties' geographic area is located within FEMA designated Flood Hazard Areas (FHA). These areas are predicted to have a 1% chance of flooding in any given year. Many of the communities that currently use septic systems for sewage disposal are also located within these flood prone areas. Maps depicting the FEMA designated FHA's were provided by IRC GIS Department and developed by FEMA (FEMA Firm Maps — FEMA Map Service Center, Indian River County, Florida — December 4, 2012) and inserted into the base IRC GIS Project Maps, and utilized to determine the FHA designations) for each community. Communities within FHA's tend to be low lying, have high groundwater tables that are disproportionally affected by rainfall events (may rise considerably), are located close to surface waters, and tend to be subject to flooding in less severe storm events. Therefore, during any significant rainfall event, the chance of environmental contamination —the unintended introduction of pollutant loads into the critical surface waters — is greater due to potential septic system flooding and failures, and groundwater interception by floodwaters. Index numbers were assigned for each community which lies entirely, partially or not at all within a FHA. Index Numbers / Flood Zone Desienation Flood zone Desienation Index No. Outside 100 year FHA 0 <= 1/3 community in FHA 4 From 1/3 to 2/3 of community in FHA 8 P240 4. Depth to Groundwater table: Maps depicting the Soil type / composition through -out Indian River County were downloaded from the (USDA web soil survey; https://websoilsurvey.sc.egov.usda.gov/App/WebSoilSurvey.asp) and text: "USDA Soil Conservation Service Soil Survey of Indian River County Florida; Wettstein, Noble & Slabaugh, 1984) and inserted into the base IRC GIS Project Maps, and utilized to determine the Soil type(s) for each community. Table 17 — "Water Features", column labeled "High Water Table — Depth" from the same USDA document is referenced to determine the depth to groundwater associated with each soil type at each community. The assigned index number corresponds to the Depth to Groundwater. In reviewing the state of Florida's regulations governing on-site septic system construction and operation (64E-6 FAC), the regulations indicate that any depth to groundwater less than 24" is not ideal (and currently not permitted unless mitigating construction techniques are used, ie; mound system). Therefore, a change or "jump" in the Index Numbers assigned should occur at depth = 24". (GWT > 24", Index varies 4,5 or 6; if GWT <24", Index = 10; and when groundwater is above grade, 64E-6 would not permit the use of a system, Index =12) Index Numbers / Depth to Groundwater Depth to Groundwater Index no. >48" 4 36" to 48" 5 24" to 36" 6 0" to 23" 10 Above GWT 12 5. Soil condition: Maps depicting the Soil type / composition through -out Indian River County were downloaded from the (USDA web soil survey; https:Hwebsoilsurvey.sc.egov.usda.gov/App/WebSoilSurvey.asp)g and text: "USDA Soil Conservation Service Soil Survey of Indian River County Florida; Wettstein, Noble & Slabaugh, 1984) and inserted into the base IRC GIS Project Maps, and utilized to determine the Soil type(s) for each community. Table 12 - "Sanitary Facilities", column labeled "Septic Tank Absorption Fields", from the same USDA document is referenced to determine suitability of the soils. The soils are classified as to their suitability for use with septic absorption fields, as "severe, moderate or slight". This is consistent with 64E-6 FAC general soil descriptions of "severely limited, moderately limited or slightly limited" which the 64E-6 regulation references to determine septic system specifications for specific in-situ soil criteria. Index Numbers / Soil Permeability Soil Description Index no.* Slight (Slightly limited) 4 Moderate (Moderately limited) 8 Severe (severely limited) 12 *Actual number = Calculate a weighted average number based on percentage of each soil classification within each community P241 6. Age of Surface Water Management System: Surface water management systems (from the most rudimentary open ditches that capture and convey stormwater, to modern systems designed to capture, detain/retain and treat stormwater) typically incorporate physical features that will intercept base flow (groundwater), especially during rainfall events or other times when the groundwater is at its highest. When septic systems are located near these systems, the pollutant laden groundwater can be intercepted by the surface water management systems. Subsequently, the stormwater systems can transport the pollutants to its receiving water, which is often the Indian River Lagoon or its upstream tributaries. Early/rudimentary systems (open ditch conveyance with -out water quality treatment) will capture and transport the contaminated groundwater quickly and directly to its receiving water. However, newer systems were designed to capture, retain/detain stormwater and provide various levels of treatment of pollutants. Consequently, the pollutant loading is decreased as stormwater standards became more stringent. The Index Number(s) for this Factor have been assigned to correspond to the age of the stormwater management system, and more specifically, to correspond to specific years that newer and more stringent stormwater management systems regulations were adopted by the SJRWMD (reference www.dep.state.fl.us/water/wetlands/erp/rules/stormwater/background.htm). The age of each stormwater management system in each community was determined by referencing IRC Clerk of the Court Subdivision Plat records — and determining the year each community was platted. Index Numbers / Age of Stormwater Management System Year Index no. After 2008 2 '99 to 2008 4 '82 to '98 6 Before '82 12 SJRWMD/FDEPRegulations: www.dep.stote.fl.us/water/wetlands/erp/rules/stormwater/background.htm 1. 1981 — Florida's first rule adopted 1982 — In effect Feb. 82 o Remove 80% of TSS/95% if outstanding Florida Water from post -development run-off 2. 1990 — Guidelines for implementation of State water resource rule — guidelines to implement stormwater program and describe roles of FDEP and water management districts. o Maintain to degree possible, during and post construction, pre -development stormwater characteristics of site o Remove 80% of storwoter pollutant loadings of "pollutants" that cause or contribute to violations of water quality standards However, BMP design criteria at FDEP and water management districts never updated. 3. 1999 — Florida watershed restoration act was enacted — leading to implementation of Florida's waterbody restoration program establishment of total maximum daily loads (TMDLS) — that is, establishment of maximum amount of a specific pollutant that can be discharged to a waterbody and maintain water quality standards. 4. 2008 —Statewide storm water treatment rule (initiative by FDEP and Districts) — post development nutrient load will not exceed nutrient load from natural undeveloped areas. P242 7. Age of Existing OSTDS: The age of the communities in the study area vary significantly, with many communities developed and homes built prior to the first significant changes to the regulations governing the installation and operation of septic systems (1972). Older systems were permitted to be installed much closer to surface waters, with less effective depth of soil and with much less distance to the groundwater than that which is required today. Consequently, the pollutant loading contribution from septic systems has decreased as septic system regulations and standards became more stringent. The Index Number(s) for this Factor have been assigned to correspond to the average age of the septic systems installed within each community, and more specifically, to correspond to specific years that newer and more stringent septic system regulations were adopted by the State of Florida. (Reference Table V, p. 36, 64E-6 FAC, Standards for Onsite Sewage Treatment and Disposal Systems, 3198.) The age of each septic system in each community was determined by referencing the average age as determined by IRCDUS staff in the prior IRC preliminary study ("Septic to Sewer Update/Presentation, Arjuna Weragoda, 2116). Staff advised that this information was obtained via IRC GIS Department (GIS maps) and IRC DOH records. Based on data provided in 64E-6 FAC, there were 4 major changes to the criteria for septic system placement, requirements and size of systems. These changes correspond to a change in the Index Numbers applied to evaluate the impact to the environment. 64E-6 FAC Jour significant rule changes (p. 36-39) o Prior to '72 o '72 to '82 o '83 to '97 F significant changes o '98 to present Index Numbers/Age of Septic System Year Index no. o 198 to present 4 o '83 to '97 6 o '72 to'82 10 o Before'72 12 Standards for Onsite Sewage Treatment and Disposal Systems - Summary of System Changes (Reference Table V, p. 36, 64E-6 FAC, Standards for Onsite Sewage Treatment and Disposal Systems, 3/98). Criteria Prior to '72 172 to '82 '83 to '98 '98 to Present To private well 50' 50' 75' 75' Depth to wet season GWT 6" 6" 12" 24" To surface water 25' 50' 50' 75' Effective min. depth soil 12" 24" 36" 42" Min. drainfield size (1 bedroom = 100 gpd) SL undetermined I undetermined 75 sf 100 sf 83 sf / 111 sf* 83 sf / 111 sf* ML 154 sf / 285 sf* 154 sf / 285 sf* SL = Slightly limited soil ML = Moderately limited soil *Based on table III drainfield size and loading rate (p. 19). These are two different soil types within each soil classification (SL, ML) —therefore, two different loading rates and drainfield sizes. P243 E. Results of Evaluation: Aquatic Health The results of the initial priority evaluation are provided on the attached Exhibit B - "Priority Summary Table", which provides a list of the 325 communities evaluated in the study. The communities are listed in descending order, with the highest scoring community corresponding to the community with the highest relative impact to the Indian River Lagoon eco -system, and the lowest scoring community corresponding to the lowest impact to the eco -system. The results of the priority evaluation are also depicted graphically on the attached Exhibit C — "Community Priority Map", a map of IRC depicting the 325 communities, color coded as. follows: Map Color Coding Color Rank Red: 1-30 (top 30 communities - highest scores & impact) Yellow: 31-60 Blue: 61-120 Green: 121-325 The top 30 communities are listed in Table 3. below P244 TABLE 3 TOP 30 RANKED COMMUNITIES Number Subdivision Name Overall Score Initial Ranking 138 Hobart Landing Unit 2 89.19 1 17 Orchid Island No. 1 85.49 2 18 Orchid Island No. 2 84.65 3 139 Hobart Landing Unit 3 82.37 4 2 Hallmark Ocean Subdivision 78.45 5 1 Ambersand Beach Sub No 1 & 2 75.73 6 48 Floravon Shores Subdivision 75.57 7 131 Naranja TR Shellmound Bch Replat of POR 74.05 8 52 Sebastian Highlands Unit 02 Collier 73.05 9 320 River Shores Estates Units 1-4 70.92 10 212 Rain Tree Corner Subdivision 69.63 11 58 Sebastian Highlands Unit 05 68.96 12 137 Hobart Landing Unit 1 68.28 13 19 Orchid Isle Estates Subdivision 68.27 14 2 67.5i 4-5 213 Kanawah Acres 67.41 16 199 Verona Estates Subdivision 67.38 17 291 Indian River Heights Units 1-9 66.96 18 273 Diana Park Subdivision 66.85 19 49 Dales Landing Subdivision 66.33 20 278 Stevens Park Unit 1 & 2 66.17 21 272 Pine Tree Park Units 1-4 65.24 22 196 Little Portion Subdivision Replat OF 64.85 23 50 Sebastian Highlands Unit 01 63.99 24 57 Sebastian Highlands Unit 04 63.78 25 143 Winter Grove Subdivision 62.82 26 207 Tropic Colony Subdivision 62.60 27 32 Halleluiah Acres 62.50 28 68 Sebastian Highlands Unit 13 62.30 29 51 Sebastian Highlands Unit 02 62.09 30 56 Sebastian Highlands Unit 03 * 62.06 31 53 Sebastian Highlands Unit 02 Replat PG 2* 60.62 38 54 Sebastian Highlands Unit 02 Replat PG 3 * 60.02 45 55 Sebastian Highlands Unit 02 Replat PG 4 * 56.77 69 136 Heritage Trace at Hobart * 42.93 281 * These communities are included in the evaluation due to their proximity to one or more top 30 ranked communities ** It is recommended that Amos subdivision not be considered in the capital improvement program. Ranking results are due to an anomaly in the methodology. This site has the highest index numbers assigned for "importance factor", proximity to surface water, flood plain, depth to groundwater and soil condition. As a result, the site is ranked much higher than would otherwise be expected. P245 Part 2. Master Wastewater System Data and Estimate of Pollutants Generated by Septic System Use A. Background The top 30 ranked communities from Part 1 have been evaluated to determine applicable wastewater system data for master planning purposes, including estimated design average daily flow and design peak hour flow rates projected from each of the communities. The communities have also been evaluated to determine an estimate of the pollutant loading generated by the continued use of septic systems at each community. B. Master Wastewater System Data To enable IRCDUS to plan for the future expansion of infrastructure and connection of each community to the utility system, the impact that each community may have on the IRCDUS infrastructure and plant capacity is estimated by projecting the sewage generated from each site. The results for the top 30 ranked communities are listed on Table 4. below, which includes both the design average daily flow and design peak hour flow rates projected from each of the communities. Results for all 325 communities are provided in the attached Exhibit D — "Estimate of Sewage Generated and Pollutant Reduction". The projections were developed based on the following assumptions: -250 gallons per day per home (2.5 persons per home, 100 gallons per person per day) -projected number of homes in each community after 10 years. (1.95% annual growth rate = 1.21 multiplier) -peak hour factor of 4.0 (Recommended Standards for Wastewater Facilities, 2014 — the factor varies with population, but converges on 4.0 for populations less than 500 persons or 200 homes) See Table 4. — "Master Plan Wastewater System Data". See Exhibit D — "Estimate of Sewage Generated and Pollutant Reduction". P246 TABLE 4 MASTER PLAN WASTEWATER SYSTEM DATA Map or SID Number Subdivision Name Initial Ranking 10 YearADF (GPD) 10 Year PK HR (GDP) (GPM) 138 Hobart Landing Unit 2 1 6,500 26,000 18.06 17 Orchid Island No. 1 2 3,500 14,000 9.72 18 Orchid Island No. 2 3 5,500 22,000 15.28 139 Hobart Landing Unit 3 4 1,750 7,000 4.86 2 Hallmark Ocean Subdivision 5 750 3,000 2.08 1 Ambersand Beach Sub No 1 & 2 6 18,150 72,600 50.42 48 Floravon Shores Subdivision 7 9,000 36,000 25.00 131 Naranja TR Shellmound Bch Replat of POR 8 2,118 8,470 5.88 52 Sebastian Highlands Unit 02 Collier 9 6,655 26,620 18.49 320 River Shores Estates Units 1-4 10 30,000 120,000 83.33 212 Rain Tree Corner Subdivision 11 4,000 16,000 11.11 58 Sebastian Highlands Unit 05 12 101,035 404,140 280.65 137 Hobart Landing Unit 1 13 4,250 17,000 11.81 19 Orchid Isle Estates Subdivision 14 15,730 62,920 43.69 245 Ares-We4*11 46 3039� G$4 213 Kanawah Acres 16 3,000 12,000 8.33 199 Verona Estates Subdivision 17 1,815 7,260 5.04 291 Indian River Heights Units 1-9 18 193,000 772,000 536.11 273 Diana Park Subdivision 19 5,250 21,000 14.58 49 Dales Landing Subdivision 20 1,750 7,000 4.86 278 Stevens Park Unit 1 & 2 21 75,750 303,000 210.42 272 Pine Tree Park Units 1-4 22 121,908 487,630 338.63 196 Little Portion Subdivision Replat OF 23 5,143 20,570 14.28 50 Sebastian Highlands Unit 01 24 188,500 754,000 523.61 57 Sebastian Highlands Unit 04 25 107,993 431,970 299.98 143 Winter Grove Subdivision 26 6,353 25,410 17.65 207 Tropic Colony Subdivision 27 36,250 145,000 100.69 32 Halleluiah Acres 28 1,500 6,000 4.17 68 Sebastian Highlands Unit 13 29 143,385 573,540 398.29 51 Sebastian Highlands Unit 02 30 263,000 1,052,000 730.56 56 Sebastian Highlands Unit 03 • 31 38,720 154,880 107.56 53 Sebastian Highlands Unit 02 Replat PG 2* 38 16,500 66,000 45.83 54 Sebastian Highlands Unit 02 Replat PG 3 ` 45 32,250 119,000 89.58 55 Sebastian Highlands Unit 02 Replot PG 4 ' 69 13,915 55,660 1 38.65 136 Heritage Trace at Hobart • 181 1,210 4,840 1 3.36 • These communities are included in the evaluation due to their proximity to one or more top 30 ranked communities '• It is recommended that Amos subdivision not be considered in the capital improvement program. Ranking results are due to an anomaly in the methodology. This site has the highest index numbers assigned for "importance factor", proximity to surface water, flood plain, depth to groundwater and soil condition. As a result, the site is ranked much higher than would otherwise be expected. P247 C. Pollutants Generated by Septic System Use A conventional septic system is capable of nearly complete removal of suspended solids, biodegradable organic compounds, and fecal coliforms if properly designed, sited, installed, operated and maintained. However, other pollutants found in wastewater are a concern, including nutrients (nitrogen, phosphorous), pathogenic parasites, bacteria and viruses, toxic organic compounds and metals (USEPA Onsite Wastewater Treatment Systems Manual, 2002). Of concern for this study as it relates to the Indian River Lagoon ecosystem, are the levels of nutrients that travel downgradient in the groundwater and enter the lagoon or its surface water tributaries. Both Phosphorous and Nitrogen are aquatic plant nutrients that can contribute to eutrophication and dissolved oxygen loss in inland and coastal waters. Excessive nitrate -nitrogen in drinking water can cause methemoglobinemia in infants and pregnancy complications for women. Example of Soil Infiltration Performance -domestic septic system** Parameter Concentration of Effluent percent removal TSS 50-100 (mg/1) >90% BOD 130-150 90-98 Total nitrogen 45-55 10-40 Total phosphorous 8-12 85-95 Other* trace, varies >99 *bacteria, virus, organic chemicals, heavy metals **(data from Table 3-17 and 3-18, USEPA Onsite Wastewater Treatment Systems Manual, 2002) Most references / studies suggest that Phosphorous is almost completely removed by a functioning septic system (85-95% removal) as it passes through the drainfield infiltration zone, and additional treatment is provided as it passes through the soil. Consequently, Phosphorous from domestic septic effluent should not be considered a significant source of contamination of the lagoon ecosystem. However, Nitrogen, especially in the Nitrate form, is a concern because it is very soluble in water and moves readily in the effluent plume. Septic systems generally remove only 10 to 40% of the total Nitrogen in the effluent as it passes through the infiltration zone of the drainfield. Additional reduction of Nitrogen can occur as the effluent plume passes through the soil. However, experts disagree on the amount of additional reduction that can occur via de -nitrification of Nitrate. Some studies report 0 additional removal, and other studies report up to an additional 20% reduction. Regardless of the level of additional reduction, there is a measurable and significant concentration of Nitrate within a septic system effluent plume that is only reduced to acceptable levels (drinking water standard of < 10 mg/L) by dispersion, dilution, and reduction / decay. This will only happen if the flow path of the effluent is long enough (in both distance and time) for the additional reduction / removal to occur prior to entering an adjacent surface water. Basis of estimate: The reduction of Nitrate -Nitrogen in concentrations in the groundwater after it passes through the septic system is thought to be primarily through dispersion and dilution due to recharge of the groundwater via precipitation. However, some experts report that further denitrification occurs (up to P248 20% additional removal). While there is disagreement in the amount of reduction of nitrogen, all experts agree that nitrogen in the nitrate form is very soluble in water and moves readily in the effluent plume, and a sizable portion of the pollutant can become a source of contamination of groundwater and surface waters. For purposes of this study, an estimate of the Nitrogen pollutant loading generated by the continued use of septic systems at each community has been prepared. While there is not a consensus on the Nitrogen concentrations from the effluent of domestic wastewater, nor a consensus on the reduction / decay rates via infiltration zone treatment or dispersion in the soil, a reasonable and conservative calculation was incorporated in a similar study prepared for Brevard county (Save Our Lagoon Project Plan — Brevard County Florida; Tetra tech, Inc, and Closewaters LLC, July 2016), which has been incorporated in this study for this purpose. The calculations assume the estimated nutrient loads from the septic systems will travel through the groundwater until it intersects with a surface waterbody, or disperses/ decays to negligible concentrations. The assumptions are: Septic System Effluent Concentrations Parameter Concentration of Effluent (m /L) Total nitrogen 70 -Organic N 0.46 -Ammonia 10.5 -N itrate+N it rite 59.3 Organic P 0.3 OrthoPhosphate 0 (from Table 12: Save Our Lagoon Project Plan — Brevard County Florida; Tetra tech, Inc, and Closewaters LLC, July 2016) (from Table 14: Save Our Lagoon Project Plan — Brevard County Florida; Tetra tech, Inc, and Closewaters LLC, July 2016) Pollutant load — Pounds per year per Domestic septic system* Distance of home to adjacent surface water Parameter < 165 ft. 165 ft. to 657 ft. > 657 ft. Nitrate -Nitrite 38.6 lb 12.92 lb 0.00 *Based on the following assumptions: -concentrations of nitrate -nitrite listed in the above table(s) -reduction /decay of nutrients per table(s) above -250 gallons per day per home (2.5 persons per home, 100 gallons per person per day) P249 ,l-- Reduction in Concentration (mg/0 vs Travel Distance Parameter < 165 ft. 165 ft. to 657 ft. > 657 ft. Total Nitrogen 50.97 12.92 0.00 -Organic N 0.00 0.00 0.00 -Ammonia 0.00 0.00 0.00 -Nitrate+Nitrite 50.97 12.92 0.00 Organic P 0.044 0.00 0.00 OrthoPhosphate 0.00 0.00 0.00 (from Table 14: Save Our Lagoon Project Plan — Brevard County Florida; Tetra tech, Inc, and Closewaters LLC, July 2016) Pollutant load — Pounds per year per Domestic septic system* Distance of home to adjacent surface water Parameter < 165 ft. 165 ft. to 657 ft. > 657 ft. Nitrate -Nitrite 38.6 lb 12.92 lb 0.00 *Based on the following assumptions: -concentrations of nitrate -nitrite listed in the above table(s) -reduction /decay of nutrients per table(s) above -250 gallons per day per home (2.5 persons per home, 100 gallons per person per day) P249 The results for the estimate of the Nitrogen pollutant loading generated by the continued use of septic systems at each of the top 30 priority communities are provided below on Table 5. — "Nitrogen Pollutant Loading Estimate"._The estimates are based on a projection of the number of homes in each community after 10 years. (1.95% annual growth rate =1.21 multiplier). Results for all 325 communities can be found on Exhibit D —"Estimate of Sewage Generated and Pollutant Reduction". It is important to understand that the estimate on Table 5. below is NOT an estimate of the total Nitrogen load contributing directly to the Indian River Lagoon. It is an estimate of the total Nitrogen load from each community which is intercepted by an adjacent surface water that is a tributary (river, creek, canal, ditch, etc) to the Indian River Lagoon. P250 TABLE 5 NITROGEN POLLUTANT LOADING ESTIMATE Number Subdivision Name Initial Ranking Total # of Homes Pollutant Reduction Ib/yr 138 Hobart Landing Unit 2 1 26 965.00 17 Orchid Island No. 1 2 14 473.15 18 Orchid Island No. 2 3 22 737.76 139 Hobart Landing Unit 3 4 7 270.20 2 Hallmark Ocean Subdivision 5 3 115.80 1 Ambersand Beach Sub No 1 & 2 6 73 2,802.36 48 Floravon Shores Subdivision 7 36 949.44 131 Naranja TR Shellmound Bch Replat of POR 8 8 326.94 52 Sebastian Highlands Unit 02 Collier 9 27 1,027.53 320 River Shores Estates Units 1-4 10 120 1,663.11 212 Rain Tree Corner Subdivision 11 16 444.68 58 Sebastian Highlands Unit 05 12 404 13,577.22 137 Hobart Landing Unit 1 13 17 136.40 19 Orchid Isle Estates Subdivision 14 63 2,428.71 2-7-§ Ames (A of E)** 3-S 4 46-.74 213 Kanawah Acres 16 12 164.70 199 Verona Estates Subdivision 17 7 105.88 291 Indian River Heights Units 1-9 IS 772 5,759.18 273 Diana Park Subdivision 19 21 587.62 49 Dales Landing Subdivision 20 7 169.33 278 Stevens Park Unit 1 & 2 21 303 1,657.82 272 Pine Tree Park Units 1-4 22 488 6,221.58 196 Little Portion Subdivision Replat OF 23 21 201.17 50 Sebastian Highlands Unit 01 24 754 17,256.07 57_ Sebastian Highlands Unit 04 25 432 10,018.99 143 Winter Grove Subdivision 26 25 632.10 207 Tropic Colony Subdivision 27 145 1,114.80 32 Halleluiah Acres 28 6 231.60 68 Sebastian Highlands Unit 13 29 574 5,988.17 51 Sebastian Highlands Unit 02 30 1052 17,845.33 56 Sebastian Highlands Unit 03 * 31 155 4,569.76 53 Sebastian Highlands Unit 02 Replat PG 2* 38 66 1,268.19 54 Sebastian Highlands Unit 02 Replat PG 3 * 45 1 129 3,319.68 55 Sebastian Highlands Unit 02 Replat PG 4 * 69= 56 1 893.08 136 Heritage Trace at Hobart * 281 1 7 1 0.00 * These communities are included in the evaluation due to their proximity to one or more top 30 ranked communities ** It is recommended that Amos subdivision not be considered in the capital improvement program. Ranking results are due to an anomaly in the methodology. This site has the highest index numbers assigned for "importance factor", proximity to surface water, flood plain, depth to groundwater and soil condition. As a result, the site is ranked much higher than would otherwise be expected. P251 Part 3. Capital Improvement Program Prioritization The top 30 ranked communities from Part 1 have been re-evaluated based on the cost of pollutant reduction, presence of potable water, and cost of sewer system construction, and re -prioritized based on these Factors: A. Initial ranking of the top 30 communities B. Sewer cost per home site —ranked in ascending order of cost C. Nitrogen reduction cost —ranked in ascending order of cost D. Presence of potable water The formula used to re -prioritize the communities was the sum of the ranking of above listed Factors, and an adjustment was made to the sum due to the presence of potable water. The results of the Capital Improvement Program Prioritization are provided on Table 9. — "Capital Improvement Program Priority Recommendation Summary". Below is a brief description of the methods used to analyze the pollutants generated, presence of potable water, and cost of sewer system construction. A summary table of the results of the analysis necessary to assist in determining the re -prioritization of the top 30 communities is provided in the attached Exhibit E — "Cost Analysis". Data includes the Pollutant reduction (Ib/year) for each community, the annualized cost of pollutant removal ($ cost /lb /year), the cost to construct sewer infrastructure for each community ($cost) and cost per home site ($ cost / lot), and whether the community is served by potable water (or not). A. Pollutants Generated The method to estimate pollutants generated by septic system use in each community was described in Part 2. Conversely, the pollutants generated by septic system use is also the expected pollutant load removed from the environment if the community is connected to public sewer utility. Those results, pounds of pollutants per year removed, and the cost of pollutants per pound removed (annualized cost), were considered when re -prioritizing the top 30 ranked communities from Part 1. The annualized cost per pound of nitrogen removed for each community was calculated based on the following: -pollutant reduction per community (see Exhibit D) -interest rate: 3.25 -amortization period: 30 years -cost: construction cost to extend, construct and connect to sewer infrastructure (see Exhibit D) -maintenance cost: Gravity sewer system: $10000 per public lift station per year Low pressure system: $450 per simplex pump station per year See Exhibit D — "Estimate of Sewage Generated and Pollutant Reduction", and Exhibit E — "Cost Analysis". P252 B. Presence of Potable Water Nine (9) of the top thirty (30) communities did not have a public water system utility providing potable water. Within these communities, potable water is obtained via individual private wells, most of which withdrawal water from the shallow surficial aquifer. These communities were given priority over other community's due to the potential for contamination of the drinking water supply by the septic systems. Excessive Nitrate -Nitrogen in drinking water (> 10 mg/L) can cause methemoglobinemia in infants and pregnancy complications for women. A summary table of the results of the analysis necessary to assist in determining the re -prioritization of the top 30 communities is provided in Exhibit E — "Cost Analysis". Data includes whether the community is served by potable water (or not). C. Cost of Sewer System Construction Cost estimates for installing sanitary sewage collection system(s), including Gravity Sewer Collection Systems, Low Pressure Force Main Transmission Systems (with individual simplex lift stations), or Vacuum Sewer system were prepared for the top 30 ranked communities. The results, cost per home site (lot) were considered when re -prioritizing the top 30 ranked communities from Part 1. Unit prices were obtained from several recently bid or constructed projects including: -North County Commercial Sewer and Water Bid (April 2017) -West Wabasso Community Gravity sewer system- Phase 2 (Dec 2016) -West Wabasso Sewer and drainage improvements — (Jan 2013) -Several recent private development projects -Information and pricing provided by John Scott, HydraService, Inc. -Mitigated Sewer System, Rockridge Subdivision (March 2007) -Information and pricing provided by Bilfinger Airvac Water Technologies, Inc. Gravity system: Gravity Sewer Collection Systems are the preferred alternative for providing a sewer collection system for communities in the IRCDUS service area. These systems are considered the most reliable of all sewer systems, requiring the least maintenance, with provisions for emergency back-up power, and this system's infrastructure has the longest life cycle (30 to 50 years) compared to other alternatives, except that the control panels and pumps may need rehabilitation or replacement every 15 years. This system generally has a relatively high upfront costs, when compared to other systems. Estimates for the construction of Gravity Sewer Collection Systems for each of the 30 top ranked communities were prepared and a cost per lot was derived and compared to the cost per lot to install an alternative Low Pressure Force Main Transmission System or Vacuum Sewer System. Low Pressure System: Low Pressure Force Main Transmission Systems were initially developed as a low cost alternative to a conventional Gravity Sewer Collection Systems. A grinder lift station (pumping station) is placed at each lot line to receive wastewater from the household (typically one or two homes per station). The "wet well" of the lift station holds approximately 100 to 150 gal of sewage. The sewage is pumped out of the wet well and into an adjacent low pressure small diameter sewer force main system (typically 4" diameter) which is generally routed along the side of the street. These low pressure P253 mains typically connect to and discharge into the public utility infrastructure. These systems generally have a low up front cost (if the lift / pump station is deferred until home construction), but generally have the most expensive maintenance costs, are the least reliable system and are not readily provided with emergency back up power. The life cycle for the utility infrastructure (force mains in the road rights of way) is equal to that of the gravity sewer systems (30 to 50 years), but the simplex pump stations' life cycle expectancy is 15 to 30 years, and the control panels and pumps may need rehabilitation or replacement every 15 years. Cost estimates for Low Pressure Force Main Transmission Systems were prepared as an alternative to the Gravity Sewer Collection System when the estimated costs for a gravity sewer system were excessive. The cost was deemed excessive when it exceeded $ 28,000 per lot served in any community. Consequently, estimates for the costs of construction of Low Pressure Force Main Transmission Systems for 16 out of the 30 top ranked communities were prepared and a cost per lot was derived and compared to the cost per lot with the standard Gravity Sewer Collection System and the cost per lot for a Vacuum Sewer System (described below). The lower priced alternative of the three was the cost considered when re -prioritizing the top 30 ranked communities from Part 1. . Vacuum System: The vacuum system is a relatively new type of sewer collection system, first being used in the United States in the late 1960's and early 1970's. IRCDUS has recently installed (2007/ 2008) an AIRVAC vacuum system in the Rockridge community of predominantly single-family residential homes (500 +/- home sites). A collection chamber is placed at each lot line to receive wastewater from the household. This chamber holds a small amount (typically up to 10 gal) of sewage. The sewage is vacuumed out from the chamber and through a 3" service lateral and into a network of small diameter (4" to 8") vacuum mains typically routed along the side of the street, which discharge into a vacuum vessel and storage tank at the site of the vacuum / pump station. The sewage is then pumped in the conventional way via sewage pumps into a pressure sewer force main which connects and discharges into the public utility infrastructure. Emergency backup power is readily provided. A vacuum system will have a very high upfront cost due to the high cost of the collection chambers and the vacuum / pump station, and are therefore only feasible in communities / site areas where any one Vacuum Pump station can serve a large number of home sites. While not meeting the same standard as a gravity system, this system is considered reliable, but has considerable operation and maintenance requirements and costs. The life cycle for the utility infrastructure (low pressure mains in the road rights of way) is equal to that of the gravity sewer systems (30 to 50 years), but the collection chambers and vacuum valves need replacement every 7 to 15 years, and the control panels, pumps and tanks in the vacuum station may need rehabilitation or replacement every 15 years. Cost estimates for Vacuum Systems were prepared as an alternative to the Gravity Sewer Collection System when the estimated costs for a gravity sewer system were excessive, and where communities had 65 or more home sites. Consequently, estimates for the costs of construction of Vacuum Sewer Systems for 15 out of the 30 top ranked communities were prepared and a cost per lot was derived and compared to the cost per lot with the standard Gravity Sewer Collection System and cost per lot for a Low -Pressure Force Main Transmission System. The lower priced alternative of the three was the cost considered when re -prioritizing the top 30 ranked communities from Part 1. P254 1. Gravity Sewaae Collection Systems: A preliminary lay -out of each sewer system was designed assuming: -pipe slopes at 0.35% -8" gravity sewer mains generally centered in one travel lane of two lane streets -4 ft. dia manholes -lift stations with 10 ft. dia wet wells -road restoration (paved -1 %2" asphalt, 6" base and 8" subgrade); (unpaved — 3" shell over 8" stabilized subgrade) The general guideline to determine the number of sewage lift stations needed to serve a given communities' sewer collection system was based on a gravity sewer installed at a min. depth of 3 ft. and maximum depth of 12 ft. Costs for installation of sewer systems with greater depths generally increase significantly due to: -dewatering costs -bedding/ material replacement -excavation size / trench box required / potential extensive damage/ restoration -manhole size (increased diameter required) -increased pipe thickness (DR ratio) See Table 6. — "Gravity Sewer System Unit Costs". A summary table of the results of the analysis necessary to assist in determining the re -prioritization of the top 30 communities is provided in Exhibit E — "Cost Analysis". Data includes the cost to construct sewer infrastructure for each community ($cost) and cost per home site ($ cost / lot). 2. Low Pressure Force Main Transmission Systems A preliminary lay -out of each sewer system was designed assuming: -min. 4" low pressure force main installed within all streets within the unpaved grass shoulder -2" force main "laterals" terminating at a gate valve at each home site -private simplex grinder lift station at each home site -electric service provided from each home site See Table 7. — "Low Pressure Force Main Transmission System Unit Costs" A summary table of the results of the analysis necessary to assist in determining the re -prioritization of the top 30 communities is provided in Exhibit E — "Cost Analysis". Data includes the cost to construct sewer infrastructure for each community ($cost) and cost per home site ($ cost / lot). P255 3. Vacuum Sew&Systems A preliminary lay -out of each sewer system was designed assuming: -min. 4" Vacuum main installed within all streets (vertical saw tooth fashion at 0.20 % min. slope) within the unpaved grass shoulder. Mains were progressively upsized to 6" and 8" as flows increase towards the vacuum station. -3" vacuum service laterals terminate at vacuum chamber/ valve pit at every other lot line (each chamber.will serve two home sites) -Central Vacuum / Pumping station. The general guideline to determine the number of Vacuum Stations needed to serve a given communities' vacuum collection system was based on the following limitations: -Vacuum Pump stations must be centrally located where possible -serve up to 1200 home sites -vacuum mains can branch up to 10,000 ft. to furthest connection See Table 8. — "Vacuum Sewer System Unit Costs" A summary table of the results of the analysis necessary to assist in determining the re -prioritization of the top 30 communities is provided in Exhibit E — "Cost Analysis". Data includes the cost to construct sewer infrastructure for each community ($cost) and cost per home site ($ cost / lot). P256 TABLE 6 Gravity Sewer System Unit Costs Onsite Engineer's Estimate Unit Price Unit 4' Diameter Manholes - Depth 8'-12' $9,100.00 EA 4' Diameter Manholes - Depth 4'-8' $4,500.00 EA 8" Gravity Sewer - Depth 8'-12'/ Testing $142.00 LF 8" Gravity Sewer - Depth 4'-8'/ Testing $88.00 LF 8" D.I.P. Gravity Sewer -Shallow Depth <36" $60.00 LF Single Service Lateral $925.00 EA Double Service Lateral $1,250.00 EA 4" PVC Force Main/ Fittings $26.00 LF 4" HDPE Directional Bore $70.00 LF 4" Driveway Bore $50.00 LF Remove and Replace Shell/Gravel Driveways (at Force Main) $24.00 LF Sewer Service Connections House to Street / Abandon Septic Tank $2,900.00 EA Paved Road Resoration @ Gravity Sewer $105.00 LF Dirt Road Restoration @ Gravity Sewer $40.00 LF Lawn Restoration @ Force Main $6.00 LF Construct County Lift Station, Complete and Operable, Concrete Drive & Housekeeping pad $185,000.00 LS Maintenance of Traffic Varies upon LF of SS LS Survey Stake -out / As -Built ('%) 1.501yo % FPL 480 Vott Service $20,000.00 LS Offsite 4" PVC Force Main/ Fittings $26.00 LF 4" HDPE Directional Bore $70.00 LF 4" Driveway Bore $50.00 LF 6" PVC Force Main/ Fittings $32.00 LF 6" HDPE Directional Bore $80.00 LF 6" Driveway Bore $70.00 LF 4" Force Main Connection to Existing FM with Wet Tap and 4" Tapping Valve $2,760.00 EA 6" Force Main Connection to Existing FM with Wet Tap and 6" Tapping Valve $3,500.00 EA Remove and Replace Shell/Gravel Driveways (at Force Main) $24.00 LF Lawn Restoration @ Force Main $6.00 LF Oen Cut and Repair at Paved Road (at Ta $3,500.00 LS Dirt Road Restoration @ Force Main $24.00 LF Engineering/ Surveying (%) 7.50% % Contingen (%) 10.00% % Mobilization Varies, See S/D CE P257 TABLE 7 Low Pressure Sewer System Unit Costs Onsite Engineer's Estimate Unit Price Unit 4" PVC Force Main/ Fittings $26.00 LF 4" HDPE Directional Bore $70.00 LF 4" Driveway Bore $50.00 LF 4" Gate Valve $880.00 EA 4" Force Main Connection to Existing FM with Wet Tap and 4" Tapping Valve $2,760.00 EA 6" PVC Force Main/ Fittings $32.00 LF 6" HDPE Directional Bore $80.00 LF 6" Driveway Bore $70.00 LF 6" Force Main Connection to Existing FM with Wet Tap and 6" Tapping Valve $3,500.00 EA Remove and Replace Shell/Gravel Driveways $24.00 LF Paved Road Restoration (Trench) $40.00 LF Dirt Road Restoration @ force Main $24.00 LF Lawn Restoration @ Force Main $6.00 LF 2" Service Lateral - Short w/ Gate Valve $2,000.00 EA 2" Service Lateral - Long w/ Gate Valve $2,900.00 EA Sewer Service Connections Houseto Street /Abandon Septic Tank $2,900.00 EA Simplex Pump Station $13,500.00 EA Electric Service Connection $1,500.00 EA Maintenance of Traffic Varies upon LF of FM LS Survey Stake -out / As -Built (%) 1.50% % Engineering/ Surveying (%) 7.50% Contingency (%) 10.00% 9a Mobilization Varies, See S/D CE P258 TABLE 8 Vacuum Collection System Unit Costs Cost Estimate - Vacuum Engineer's Estimate Unit Price Unit 8" Vacuum Main/Fittings/Testing $50.00 LF 6" Vacuum Main/Fittings/Testing - $42.00 LF 4" Vacuum Main/Fittings/Testing $36.00 LF 3" Service Lateral -Short $900.00 EA' 3" Service Lateral - Long w/ Bored Casing - Paved $2,700.00 EA 3" Service Lateral - Long - Unpaved - , - $1,500.00 - , EA 8" HDPE Directional Bore $106.00 LF 6" HDPE Directional Bore - '$80.00 LF 4" HDPE Directional Bore $70.00 LF 8" Driveway Bore $90.00 LF 6" Driveway Bore $70.00 LF 4" Driveway Bore - $50.00 '. LF 8" Isolation Valve (Gate Valve) $1,700.00 EA 6" Isolation Valve (Gate Valve) • '$1,300.00 EA -- 4" Isolation Vatve (Gate Valve) $880.00 EA Dirt Road Restoration @ Vacuum Sewer $24.00 LF Lawn Restoration @ Vacuum Sewer $6.00 LF AIRVAC 6.0'- 2 Pc Hybrid Vatve Pit $5,500.00 EA Sewer Service Connections House to Street / Abandon Septic Tank $2,900.00 EA 4" Force Main Connection to FM with Wet Tap and 4" Tapping Valve $2,760.00 EA 4" PVC Force Main $26.00 LF 4" HDPE Directional Bore @ Force Main $70.00 LF 4" Driveway Bore @Force Main - $50.00 LF 6" Force Main Connection to FM with Wet Tap and 6" Tapping Valve $3,500.00 EA 6" PVC Force Main $32.00 LF 6" HDPE Directional Bore @ Force Main $80.00 LF 6" Driveway Bore @ Force Main $70.00 Lf Dirt Road Restoration @ Force Main $24.00 LF Lawn Restoration @ Force Main $6.00 _ LF Special Tools/ Spare Parts PER VS $11,000.00 SET Trailer Mounted Vacuum Pump PER VS $24,000.00 . LS Standard Vacuum Pump Station and Building PER VS $665,000.00 EA FPL 480 Volt Service PER VS $20,000.00: EA Back-up Generator PER VS $65,000.00 EA Landscaping PER VS $20,000.00 EA Land Acquisition (lot) per VS $100,000.00 EA Maintenance of Traffic - Varies upon LF of FM LS Survey Stake -Out/ As-Builts (%) 1.5% % Design/ Permitting -Final Engineering (%) 7.5%91 Conti ency (%) 10.0% % Mobilization I Varies, See S/D CE I LS P259 Results of Evaluation: Capital Improvement Program Prioritization: The results of the Capital Improvement Program Prioritization are provided on Table 9. —"Capital Improvement Program Priority Recommendation Summary" This table includes: -30 top ranked communities (initial ranking and re -priority ranking) -estimate of pollutant reduction per community (Ib/year) - annualized cost per pound of nitrogen removed at each community ($cost/Ib/year) -presence of potable water system -cost for gravity sewer system at each community (total $cost and $cost / lot) -cost for low pressure force main system at each community (total $cost and $cost / lot) -cost for vacuum sewer system at each community (total $cost and $cost / lot) The re-evaluation and re -ranking of the initial top 30 ranked communities is summarized in Exhibit 'F'— "Capital Improvement Program Priority Evaluation". The evaluation is based on the cost of pollutant reduction, presence of potable water, and cost of sewer system construction, and the.initial ranking of the communities. P260 TABLE 9 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM PRIORITY RECOMMENDATION SUMMARY Number Subdivision Name Initial Ranking New/ Gravitylow Pressure Reprioritired or Vacuum (most Final Ranking cost effective per lot) Gravity Cost per Cot Low Pressure Vacuum Cost per Ib of Pollution Reduction/ YR n--30 yr, i_3 �� Gravity Low Pressure Vacuum 08M410,00011s O&M4450/PS 0814460,000AS IRC Potable Water Available 48 Floravon Shores Subdivision 7 1 Gravity $10,531.72 $0.00 $0.00 $31.24 $0.00 $0.00 Yes 52 Sebastian Highlands Unit 02 Collier 9 2 Vacuum $21,344.64 $0.00 $12,669.04 $31.11 $0.00 $19.45 Yes 58 Sebastian Highlands Unit 05 12 3 Vacuum $21,344.64 $0.00 $12,669.04 $39.10 $0.00 $24.45 Yes 138 Hobart Landing Unit 2 1 4 Gravity $26,220.22 $32,331.87 $0.00 $39.22 $57.29 $0.00 Yes 18 Orchid Island No. 2 3 5 Low Pressure $61,902.03 $28,825.33 $33,220.65 $102.48 $57.98 $78.20 No 17 Orchid Island No.1 2 7 Low Pressure $88,754.76 $29,133.51 $42,629.54 $146.73 $58.01 $107.24 No 1 Ambersand Beach Sub No 1 & 2 6 8 Gravity $25,186.91 $0.00 $29,493.95 $42.71 $0.00 $0.00 Yes 131 _ Naranja TR Shellmound Bch Replat of POR 8 11 Low Pressure $41,334.29 $29,249.95 $0.00 $102.69 $66.16 $0.00 No 50 Sebastian Highlands Unit 01 14 8 Vacuum $21,344.64 $0.00 $12,669.04 $49.88 $0.00 $31.19 Yes 57 Sebastian Highlands Unit 04 25 5 Vacuum $21,344.64 $0.00 $12,669.04 $49.90 $0.00 $31.21 Yes 19 Orchid Isle Estates Subdivision 14 13 Vacuum $49,749.53 $30,057.06 $21,365.00 $79.39 $55.40 $38.71 No 139 Hobart Landing Unit 3 4 14 Low Pressure $56,318.05 $33,987.79 $0.00 $84.90 $57.31 $0.00 Yes 272 Pine Tree Park Units 1-4 22 17 Vacuum $18,896.51 $0.00 $14,624.42 $85.89 $0.00 $73.63 Yes 320 River Shores Estates Units 1-4 10 16 Vacuum $24,444.12 $0.00 $21,979.98 $97.46 $0.00 $118.30 Yes 291 Indian River Heights Units 1-9 18 17 Vacuum $19,375.08 $0.00 $13,591.82 $139.86 $0.00 $104.88 Yes 51 Sebastian Highlands Unit 02 30 11 Vacuum $21,344.64 $0.00 $12,669.04 $67.29 $0.00 $42.08 Yes 278 Stevens Park Unit 1 & 2 21 24 Vacuum $18,796.12 $0.00 $15,122.31 $184.15 $0.00 $179.49 Yes 212 Rain Tree Comer Subdivision 11 20 Low Pressure $40,184.62 $29,299.76 $0.00 $97.45 $70.85 $0.00 Yes 53 Sebastian Highlands Unit 02 Replat PG 2` 38 14 Vacuum $11,344.64 $0.00 $12,669.04 $59.41 $0.00 $37.15 Yes 273 Diana Park Subdivision 19 21 Low Pressure $33,128.36 $28,527.86 $0.00 $78.40 $68.94 $0.00 Yes 49 Dales Landing Subdivision 20 24 Low Pressure $52,887.18 $35,328.90 $0.00 $172.41 $94.32 $0.00 No 207 Tropic Colony Subdivision 27 31 Gravity $21,141.85 $0.00 $22,004.08 $151.54 $0.00 $202.21 Yes 215 Ames{A-ef-E -LL 4S 24 LOW PFessUFe $196,601.06 $A1,320..80 $9:99 $64831 $}1i 6} $659 we 2 Hallmark Ocean Subdivision 5 24 Low Pressure $130,635.31 $65,670.98 $0.00 $261.82 $99.87 $0.00 Yes 199 Verona Estates Subdivision 17 22 Low Pressure $43,570.90 $28,469.58 $0.00 $329.15 $200.11 $0.00 No 56 Sebastian Highlands Unit 03• 31 10 Vacuum $21,344.64 $0.00 $12,669.04 $41.97 $0.00 $26.24 Yes 54 Sebastian Highlands Unit 02 Replat PG 3' 45 17 Vacuum $21,344.64 $0.00 $12,669.04 $44.36 $0.00 $27.74 Yes 137 Hobart Landing Unit 1 13 24 Gravity $26,336.91 $30,618.92 $0.00 $188.51 $197.86 $0.00 Yes 143 Winter Grove Subdivision 26 29 Low Pressure $34,703.42 $28,384.58 $0.00 $89.83 $79.04 $0.00 Yes 213 Kanawah Acres 16 29 Low Pressure $91,971.34 $40,474.04 $0.00 $408.14 $185.68 $0.00 No 32 Halleluiah Acres 28 32 Low Pressure $94,292.08 $51,062.75 $0.00 $169.83 $80.24 $0.00 No 68 Sebastian Highlands Unit 13 29 22 Vacuum $22,483.78 $0.00 $14,124.59 $124.23 $0.00 $85.96 Yes 196 Little Portion Subdivision Replat OF 13 33 low Pressure $32,734.44 $27,729.70 $0.00 $226.87 $197.05 $0.00 Yes 55 Sebastian Highlands Unit 02 Replat PG 4• 69 34 Vacuum $11,344.64 $0.00 $12,669.04 $71.58 $0.00 $44.76 Yes 136 Heritage Trace at Hobart 281 35 Gravity $23,946.97 $27,984.56 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 Yes 1 nese communmes are mcluoeo In the evaluation aue to tnelr proximity to one Or more top 30 ranked communities •• It Is recommended that Amos subdivision not be considered in the capital improvement program. Ranking results are due to an anomaly In the methodology. This site has the highest Index numbers assigned for "Importance factor", proximity to surface water, flood plain, depth to groundwater and soil condition. As a result, the site is ranked much higher than would otherwise be expected. t9 I mill n. � � � � �� " � ���^� . \ 'tow »: ._\ �..:._�} .n.,. �\ F. . . . . . . . . . . . . . EXHIBIT 8 - PRIORITY SUMMARY TABLE Number Subdivision Name importance Factor Population Density Index # Proximhy o1 &u7oce Water Index # Flood Plain # index depth to Groundwater Soft Condition Index Index a # Ape 4$44 eW.W Mmmaemnrsymnn rner.N Age of Existing OSTDS Index # Overall Score Initial Ranking 138 Hobart Landing Unit 2 2.00 9.19 24.00 12 10 12.00 12 10 89.19 1 17 Orchid Island No. 1 2.00 9.61 19.88 12 10 12.00 12 10 85,49 1 SS Orchid Island No, 2 2.00 8.80 19.85 12 10 32.00 12 10 84,65 3 139 Hobart Landing Unit 3 2.00 10,37 24.00 8 10 12.00 12 6 82.37 4 2 Hallmark Ocean Subdivision 2110 8.00 19.33 12 10 11.11 12 6 78.45 5 1 Ambersand Beach Sub No 1 & 2 2.00 8.00 17.27 12 10 10,46 12 6 75.73 6 48 Floravon Shores Subdivision 2.00 9.33 18.24 B 10 12,00 12 6 75.57 7 131 Naranjo TR Shelimound Bch Replat of POR 2.00 $110 14.05 12 12 12.00 12 4 74.05 8 52 Sebastian Highlands Unit 02 Collier 1.30 10.31 14.74 4 10 12.00 12 ." 10 73.05 9 320 River Shores Estates Units 1.4 2.00 14.36 8.56 4 10 12.00 12 10 70.92 10 212 Rain Tree Corner Subdivision 1.40 5.60 12,03 12 10 12.00 12 6 69.63 11 58 Sebastian Highlands Unit 05 1.70 12.30 16.66 0 10 12A0 12 6 68.96 12 137 Hobart Landing Unit 1.85 13.04 3.24 12 10 12.00 12 6 68.28 13 19 Orchid Isle Estates Subdivision 2110 8,00 14.27 12 12 12.00 6 4 1 68.27 14 275 340 446 6.5.3 32 36 38.00 i2 s,2 6745,4 3.5 213 Kanawah Acres 1.40 5.60 3,81 12 10 12.00 12 12 67,41 16 199 Verona Estates Subdivision 140 4.00 5,38 12 10 -12.00 12 12 67.38 17 291 Indian River Heights Units 1-9 1.85 18.92 4.03 0 10 12.00 12 10 66.96 18 273 Diana Park Subdivision 1.00 6.89 7.97 12 20 12.00 12 6 66.85 19 49 Dates Landing Subdivision 2.00 8.00 12.33 12 10 12.00 6 6 66.33 20 278 Stevens Park Unit 1 & 2 1.00 12.00 2.17 12 10 12,00 12: 1 6 66.17 21 272 Pine Tree Park Units 1.4 1.00 9.97 3128 12 10 12.00 12 6 65.24 22 196 tittle Portion Subdivision Rapist OF 1.00 6.85 12.00 0 10 12.00 12 - 12 64.85 23 50 Sebastian Highlands Unit 01 130 10.33 9.66 4 10 12.00 32 6 63,99 24 57 Sebastian Highlands Unit 04 1,30 10.08 9.70 4 10 12.00 12 6 63.78 25 143 Winter Grove Subdivision 1.85 7.40 11.42 12 10 1100 6 4 62.82 26 207 Tropic Colony Subdivision 1.40 14.00 2.59 0 10 - 12.00 12 12 62.60 . 27 32 HaBetuiah Acres 1.00 4.00 10.50 a 10 12,00 12 6 6250 28 68 Sebastian Highlands Unit 13 1.85 11.67 6.63 4 10 12.00 12 6 1 62.30 29 51 Sebastian Highlands Unit 02 1.30 11.17 6.92 4 10 12,00 12 6 62.09 30 56 Sebastian Highlands Unit 03 1.30 10.11 11.95 '0 10 12.00 12 6 62.06 31 61 Sebastian Highlands Unit 08 1.30 1049 7.83 4 10 12.00 12 6 61.93 32 277 Indian River Aerodrome 1.00 4.00 5.61 12 10 12.00 , 12 :. 6 61.61 '.. 33 " 10 Oceanaire Heights Unit No 1 1.00 9.01 0.10 8 30 1240 12 10 6131 34 236 Sun Acres 1.00 8.76 6.16 0 10 --'"'12.00 12-. 12 60,92. 35 322 Granada Gardens Unit No 1 1.40 8.67 8.25 0 10 12.00 12 10 60.91 36 2S8 Hallmark Homes 1.00 12.00 2.72 0 10 '. 12.00 12 "' 12" 60.12 37 53 Sebastian Highlands Unit 02 Replat PG 2 1.30 9.81 6.81 4 10 12.00 12 6 60.62 38 25$ Fresard Glendale Subdivision 1.00 11,82 2.74 0 10 42100 12 . - 12 60.56 39" 344 Forest Lake Subdivision Units 1 & 2 1.00 4.00 4.56 12 10 12.00 12 6 60.56 40 59 Sebastian Highlands Unit 06 1.30 10.96 5.53 4 10; 12,00 12 a -' --� 6 60.49 41 239 Bel -Porte Park Subdivision 1.00 8.87 5.52 0 10 12.00 12 12 6039 42 70 Sebastian Highlands Unit 14- - 1.30 8.77 } .7.57 ; :•4 5 :' 10 . _;. : ;12,00" 32:.F' 6": 60.35 . , 43 66 Sebastian Highlands Unit 11 130 10.51 5.78 4 10 12,00 12 6 60.30 44 54 Sebastian Highlands Unit 02 Repiat PG 3 1.30 • '-9.81' _' 10.21 " 0 " " " - .� 10" 1" ,,'12.00" •:= ' IZ -! 6'- -60.02 45 • 65 Sebastian HE hlands Unit 10 1.30 9.83 6.13 4 10 12.00 12 6 59.95 46 148 North Carloina Colon Subdivision 1.00 8.90 4.97 -0 10" . 12.00 12 12 59,88 47 197 Sunnydale Acres Subdivision 1.00 7.82 &04 0 10 12.00 12 10 $9.87 48 172 Anita Park Subdivision iRF 1.00 31.56 4.05 0 30 12.00 12' 10 $9.61 49 336 Lakewood Terrace Units I & 21.00 9.25 2.07 4 10 12.00 ZZ 10 59.32 9G N taT1 ii -- --------------- Number Subdivision Nome 193 Greenbrier5udivision 334 Green Acres Estates 191 Vero Tropical Gardens 9 Oceanaire Heights Unit No 2 186 Westgate Colony Subdivision 218 Melrose Gardens Subdivision 192 Kenilworth Estates Subdivision 329 Boxwood Estates Subdivision 210 Idlewild Subdivision 328 Oslo Park Subdivision 134 Indian River Highlands Block 2 11 Oceanaire Heights Unit No 3 221 Greenwood Village 132 Indian River Highlands Unit 2 217 Rosedale Manor Subdivision 256 Glendale Park Subdivision 335 Greenleaf Subdivision 5 Turtle Cove Subdivision 55 Sebastian Highlands Unit 02 Replat PG 4 288. Vero Beach Homesites 23 Sunnyfield Subdivision 183 Rivera Estates 237 Cooks Subdivision 289 Graves Annes Subdivision 171 Kings Highway Subdivision IRF 125 Gallentine Subdivision 279 Westlake Park Subdivision 270 West Meadows Subdivision 234 Glen Acres Subdivision 231 Glendale Terrace Subdivision 286 Emerson Park Subdivision 181 Pine-Metto Park Subdivision 338 Vero Beach Highlands - Units 3 & 5 - A portion of this subdivision has sewer available 69 Sebastian Highlands Unit 13 Replat 260 Suburban Acres Subdivision 71 Sebastian Highlands Unit 15 264 Clemann Estates Unit 1 & 2 271 Indian Oaks Subdivision 155 Lindsey Pines Subdivision 156 Acres C Subdivision 216 Malaluka Gardens Subdivision 226 SunHaven Subdivision 287 Pine Hill Park Subdivision 140 Wabasso Manor 306 Miraflores 77 San Sebastian Springs IV River Oaks 246 Miller Subdivision 254 Royal Poinciana Park EXHIBIT 8 -PRIORITY SUMMARY TABLE Importance Factor Population Density Index# Proximity of Surface waterindex# 1.00 12.00 1.31 1.00 4.00 8.62 1.00 4.00 2.33 1.00 10.16 0.10 1.00 10.76 1.26 1.00 9.35 2.65 1.00 4.00 1.90 1.00 9.36 2.52 1.00 10.74 0.75 1.00 1.00 12.00 11.95 1.49 1.45 1.00 9.08 0.10 1.00 9.65 1.52 1.00 9.45 3.66 1.00 8.23 2.64 1.00 8.70 4.16 1.00 4.00 6.82 1.85 7A0 5.38 1.30 9.72 7.05 1.00 11.16 1.28 1.85 1.00 7.40 12.00 8.34 0.26 1.00 7.80 2.37 1.00 12.00 0.10 1.00 12.00 0.10 1.00 12.00 0.10 1.00 4.00 0.10 1.00 4.00 0.10 1.00 7.93 2.12 1.00 8.17 1.86 1.00 9.68 2.20 1.00 6.05 3.80 1.00 9.24 2.12 1.85 7.40 7.94 1.00 4.00 7.22 1.30 10.35 5.40 1.00 12.00 3.10 1.00 6.69 2.33 1.00 4.00 3.00 1.00 4.00 2.92 1.00 8.69 2.12 1.00 6.66 2.11 1.00 8.66 0.10 1.00 8.63 0.10 1.40 5.60 5.08 1.85 7.40 13.26 1.00 8.55 0.10 1.00 9.25 1.32 In Index Depth to Groundwater Soil Condition Index If Index If # Ao. olsayan warn. mamxeavaesrae.a, raee:a Age of Existing OSTDS Index# 0 10 12.00 12 12 12 10 12.00 6 6 12 30 12.00 12 6 8 10 12.00 12 6 0 10 12.00 12 12 0 10 12.00 12 12 12 10 12.00 12 6 12 10 12.00 6 6 0 10 12.00 12 12 4 10 12.00 0 30 12.00 12 12 6 10 8 10 12.00 12 6 0 10 12.00 1 12 12 0 10 12.00 12 10 0 10 12.00 12 12 0 10 11.99 12 10 12 10 12.00 6 6 8 6 12.00 12 6 0 10 12.00 12 6 0 10 12.00 12 10 4 6 8.59 0 10 12.00 12 12 30 10 0 10 12.00 12 12 0 10 12.00 12 10 0 30 12.00 12 10 0 10 12.00 12 10 12 10 12.00 12 6 12 10 12.00 12 6 0 10 12.00 12 12 0 10 12.00 12 12 0 10 12.00 12 10 0 10 12.00 12 12 4 10 12.00 12 6 0 10 12.00 12 6 0 10 12.00 12 30 4 6 11.43 12 6 0 10 12.00 12 6 LZ 10 12.00 6 6 8 10 12.00 12 6 4 10 12.00 12 10 0 10 12.00 12 10 0 10 12.00 12 12 0 10 12.00 12 12 0 10 12.00 12 12 0 10 12.00 12 10 0 12 12.00 6 4 010 12.00 12 12 0 10 12.00 12 10 Overall Score 58.33 57.49 57.40 57.18 57.17 57.11 56.87 56.85 56.33 56.26 56.17 56.10 56.10 56.10 56.10 56.10 56.05 56.03 55.88 55.85 55.36 55.34 55.22 55.18 55.10 55.02 55.00 54.92 54.81 54.76 54.76 Initial Ranking 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 74 74 74 74 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 91 93 94 95 96 97 98 EXHIBIT 8 - PRIORITY SUMMARY TABLE Number Subdivision Name Importance Factor Population Density Index # Proximity ofSurfooe Waterindex # Flood Pain # Index DepthtoGroundwater Sol/CondftlonIndex Index # # AWOf$Lgo.wars MemPm•^tSyr• W X # Age of Existing OSTDS Index # gall Score Initial Ranking 263 Florida Acres Subdivision 1.00 4.00 4.41 0 10 12.00 12 12 54.41 99 298 Dixie Highlands Subdivision 1.00 9.52 0.81 0 10 12.00 12 10 54.34 100 15 Summerplace Unit 3 1.00 12.00 0.10 4 6 10.09 12 10 54.19 101 198 Breezewood Park Subdivision IRF 1.00 6.50 3.61 0 10 12.00 12 10 54.11 102 72 Sebastian Highlands Unit 16 1.00 4.00 6.03 4 10 12.00 12 6 54.03 103 293 Moreland Subdivision 1.40 6.69 3.32 0 10 12.00 12 30 54.01 104 232 Heritage Estates Subdivision 1.00 6.07 1.93 0 10 12.00 12 - 12 53.99 105 240 Rivenbark Subdivision 1.00 6.75 1.47 0 10 11.72 12 12 53.94 106 130 Cadenhead Subdivision 1.00 7.79 0.10 0 10 12.00 12 12 53.89 107 268 Citrus Gardens 1.00 9.78 0.10 0 10 12.00 12 10 53.88 108 274 Lost Hammock PD 1.00 4.00 7.77 12 10 12.00 4 4 53.77 109 100 Vero Lake Estates Sub Unit H -1 1.70 7.67 6.05 0 10 12.00 12 6 53.72 110 73 Sebastian Highlands Unit 17 1.00 4.95 5.06 4 10 11.54 12 6 53.56 111 184 Wildwood 1.00 1 4.00 5.44 0 10 12.00 12 10 53.44 112 245 South Side Park Subdivision 1.00 7.34 0.10 0 10 12.00 12 12 53.44 113 304 Rebel Acres 1.40 5.60 3.83 0 10 12.00 12 10 53.43 114 28 Roseland Lake No 1 1.00 9.23 0.10 0 10 12.00 12 10 53.33 115 26 Haven View Addition No 1 1.00 11.19 2.05 0 6 12.00 12 10 53.25 116 243 Vero Land Companys Subdivision 1.85 7.40 1.61 0 10 12.00 12 10 53.01 117 244 Shady Grove Subdivision 1.00 6.89 0.10 0 10 12.00 12 12 52.99 118 290 Clear View Terrace 1.00 8.84 0.10 0 10 12.00. 12 10 52.94 119 2S9 Carl] Heights 1.00 6.81 0.10 0 10 12.00 12 12 52.91 120 164 Naomi Place Subdivision Unit 1 1.00 4.00 2.89 0 10 - '12.00 12 12 52.89 121 182 Pine-Metto Park Subdivision Replat 1.00 8.25 0.54 0 10 12.00 12 10 52.79 122 326 Dixie Heights 1A0 16.80 1.47 4 6 6.44 12 6 52.71 123 312 West Side Subdivision 1.00 4.00 4.64 0 10 12.00 12 10 52.64 124 342 Pinewood Lane Subdivision 1.40 5.60 6.89 0 10 12.00 12 6 52.49 125 327 Pompeys Subdivision 1.00 4.00 2.48 0 10 12.00 12 12 52.48 126 74 San Sebastian Springs 1.85 7.40 7.04 4 10 12.00 6 6 ' 52.44 127 228 Braschs Green Acres 1.00 4.00 2.33 0 10 12.00 12 12 52.33 128 180 Cherry Lane Manor Subdivision 1.00 5.55 2.78 0 X10 12.00' _ 12 30. 52.33 129 127 Wabasso Lows Park Subdivision 1.00 4.21 0.10 4 10 12.00 12 10 52.31 130 187 Westgate Colony Subdivision Unit 2 1.00 6.65 1.66 0 10. -12.00 12 10 52.31 131 160 Ponderosa Estates Subdivision No 1 IRF 1.00 6.04 2.19 0 10 12.00 12 10 52.23 132 319 Oslo Park Subdivision 1.00 8.40 3.83 0- 10 -12.00 ' 12 6 52.23 133 25 Haven View Subdivision 1.00 10.89 2.54 0 6 10.74 12 10 52.17 134 333 The Grove 1.00 4.63 3.48 12 10 12.00 6 - 4 52.11 • 135 123 Orange Heights Unit No 2 1.00 12.00 0.10 0 10 12.00 12 6 52.10 136 124 Orange Heights Unit No 3 1.00 1 12.00 . 0.10 0 10 - - 12.00 12 6, - 52.10 -136- 136-214 214 Banyan Acres 1.00 4.00 0.10 4 30 12.00 12 10 52.10 136 144 Quay Forbes & Hamiltons Plat of 1.00 . . 5.88 . 0.10 - 0, 10 -12.00 - • 12 ' ' ° 12 51.98 - 139- 6 Ocean Way Subdivision 1.85 7.40 4.56 12 6 12.00 6 4 51.96 140 27 Rose Haven Subdivision - . 1.70 6.80- 6.88 4 ' 10 ;- � 4'12.00 - - 6 .- 6, • 51:68 - 141, , 345 Lakes at Brookhaven 1.00 4.00 5.37 12 10 12.00 4 4 51.37 142-- 84 Roseland Acres Subdivision - _1.70 6.80: - 4.51••'. - ''0' - - 10-i X12.00 - -12' '- - _6 51.31 143' 248 Gloria Gardens Subdivision 1.00 4.91 0.10 0 10 12.00 12 12 51.01 144 93 Vero Lake Estates Sub Unit B 1 1.30 1 5.58' - 5.42 0 10 12.00 12 6 51.00 145 174 Albrecht Acres Subdivision 1.00 4.00 2.94 0 10 12.00 IZ 10 50.94 146 145 Jennings Add to quay Plat of 1.00 4.82 0.10 0 10 12.00 12 12 50.92 147 229 Sun Crest Terrace Units 1 & 2 1.00 5.26 1.65 0 So 12.00 12 10 50.91 148 N 4 V MARY TAKE OePtht06fVUndWVfef S0IfCDndltlQnIndeX MdLx# # Age of kafaft Wm Age of E;dsffng OSTDS Index # overaftsmm Inittal Rankfog 10 12-00 6 4 SO.$9 149 to 12.00 12 10 50.88 ISO 10 MOO 12 6 so.83 151 20 12.00 12 6 50.72 152 10 12.00 12 6 50.66 153 10 12.00 12 10 50.63 154 10 12.00 12 to 50.61 Iss 10 22.00 12 10 50.55 155 10 12.00 12 12 $0.52 157 10 12.00 12 to 50.50 158 10 12,00 12 6 50A8 159 10 12.00 12 10 5029 160 10 12.00 12 12 $0.27 161 10 Moo 12 to $0.21 162 10 Moo 12 10 50.18 163 10 12.00 12 6 50.16 164 10 12.00 12 10 50.12 165 5 .5.34 12 12 SOJO 166 10 12.00 12 '12 50.10 167; to 12.00 12 12 50.10 167 10 -12I)0 12 12 50.10 167 10 12.00 12 12 SOJO 167 10 12.00 12 -32 50.10 167 10 12.00 12 10 50.06 172 10 12,00 12 30* 50.04 173• 6 11.68 12 6 50.01 174 10 12,00 12 30, 49.97 175 10 12,00 12 10 49,88 176 ��10. "12.00 22 '10, 49.69 477- 6 9.91 12 6 49.60 178 10 -12.00 12 6 49.43 179 10 12.00 6 6 49AO ISO 40 12.00 1.2 . 49.30 1811i 10 2100 lz 10 49.10 182 10 12.00 32 6- 49.09 10 12.00 12 6 48.96 184 10. 12.00 12 •6 48.94 -185. 10 12.00 12 10 48.88 186 10 -.12.00 12 6 48.77 ".187 10 12.00 12 6 48.71 188 10 12.00 12., 4 '48,70 189 6 9.33 6 4 48.67 190 10. 11.59 6' 6 48.56 191 10 12.00 12 6 48.52 192 10 42.00 12, 6.1 4848 '193 1000 48AS 194 to ii i , 6� 48J6 igs 10 22.00 6 6 49,29 196 EXHIBIT 8 - PRIORITYSUMMARY TABLE Number Subdivision Name Importance Factor Population Density Index# Proximity ofSurface water Index# Flood Plaln # Index Depth to Groundwater Solt Condition Index Index # # AV fSLy a.W- nr�-srmmfrd.,x Age of Exlstfng OSTOS Index# Overall Score Initial Ranking 332 Shady Oaks Subdivision 1.00 4.00 4.23 0 10 12.00 12 6 48.23 197 104 Vero Lake Estates Sub Unit 1 1.30 6.47 1.70 0 10 12.00 12 6 48.18 198 230 Shady Acres 1.00 4.00 0.14 0 10 12.00 12 10 48.14 199 147 Winter Beach Highlands Subdivision 1.00 6.47 1.64 0 10 12.00 12 6 48.12 100 12 Summerplace Unit 1 1.00 9.69 _ 0.10 4 5 7.32 12 30 48.10 201 295 Hager Highlands Subdivision 1.00 4.00 0.10 0 10 12.00 12 10 48.10 202 8 Spring Place 1.00 4.00 0.10 8 6 12.00 12 6 48.10 202 170 Kings Highway Subdivision Replat of Blocks 1.00 4.00 0.10 0 10 12.00 12 10 48.10 202 201 Sundowners 1.00 4.00 0.10 4 10 12.00 12 6 48.10 202 102 Vero Lake Estates Sub Unit H-3 1.00 7.11 2.88 0 10 12.00 12 4 47.99 206 96 Vero Lake Estates Sub Unit E 130 5.20 4.65 0 10 12.00 12 4 47.85 207 167 Floral Park Subdivision 1.00 5.68 2.16 0 10 12.00 12 6 47.84 208 179 SunnilendHomesitesIRF 1.00 4.89 2.81 0 10 12.00 12 6 47.70 209 95 Vero Lake Estates Sub Unit D 1.30 1 5.20 4.24 0 10 12.00 12 4 47.44 110 14 SummerplaceUnit 2 1.00 8.09 0.10 4 6 7.09 12 10 47.29 211 343 Vero Glen Subdivision 1.40 6.30 6.95 0 10 12.00 6 6 47.25 112 161 Crystal Sands Unit 11 1.00 4.00 3.17 0 10 12.00 12 6 47.17 213 108 Vero Lake Estates Sub Unit M 1.00 7.60 1.57 0 10 12.00 12 4 47.17 214 321 Dixie Gardens Sub & Unit 2 1.00 12.00 0.10 0 4 7.02 12 12 47.12 215 175 Kingsway Subdivision 1.00 4.00 3.11 0 10 12.00 12 6 47.11 216 195 Westlake Estates 1.00 4.00 2.99 0 10 12.00 12 6 46.99 217 75 San Sebastian Springs II Oak Creek 1.85 7.40 5.55 0 10 12.00 6 6 46.95 218 4 Webasso Estates Subdivision 1.85 7.40 7.52 4 6 12.00 6 4 46.92 219 110 Vero Lake Estates Sub Unit O 1.00 6.35 2.39 0 10 12.00 12 4 46.74 220 253 Colonial Terrace Units 1-2 1.00 4.59 2.11 0 6 11.94 12 10 46.64 221 112 Vero Lake Estates Sub Unit Q 1.00 5.66 2.98 0 10 12.00 12 4 46.64 222 89 Vero Lake Estates Sub Unit SA 1.30 5.20 1.42 0 10 12.00 12 6 46.62 223 315 Hammock Acres Subdivision 1.00 4.00 2.51 0 10 12.00 12 6 46.51 224 146 Winter Beach Park 1.00 4.00 2.46 0 10 12.00 12 6 46.46 225 106 Vero Lake Estates Sub Unit K 1.00 5.00 3.08 0 10 12.00 12 4 46.08 226 223 Glenwood 1.00 4.00 1.97 0 10 12.00 12 6 45.97 227 233 Hidden Acres Subdivision 1.00 4.00 1.97 0 10 12.00 12 6 45.97 228 88 Vero Lake Estates Sub Unit 4 1.30 5.20 0.76 0 10 12.00 12 6 45.96 229 129 John W Massey 1R Subdivision 1.00 12.00 0.10 0 4 7.83 12 10 45.93 230 85 Vero Lake Estates Sub Unit 1 1.30 5.20 0.70 0 10 12.00 12 6 45.90 231 340 Vero Beach Highlands Sub Unit 1 1.00 8.51 2.51 4 4 4.85 12 10 45.87 _ 232 299 Whispering Palms Units 1.5 1.00 12.00 0.44 0 4 5.40 12 12 45.83 233 330 Stirling Lake Estates Subdivision 1.00 6.83 4.98 0 10 12.00 6 6 45.81 234 203 Old Sugar Mill Estates 1.00 4.00 1.79 0 10 12.00 12 6 45.79 235 173 Palm Villa Estates Subdivision 1.00 4.00 1.71 0 10 12.00 12 6 45.71 236 303 Rivularis Subdivision 1.00 7.61 3.97 0 10 12.00 6 6 45.59 237 97 Vero Lake Estates Sub Unit F 1.00 4.00 1.57 0 10 12.00 12 6 45.57 238 297 Peterson Country Estates Unit 1 & 2 1.85 15.92 6.48 0 6 5.14 6 6 45.55 239 168 Treasure Trail 1.00 8.48 2.98 0 10 12.00 6 6 45.46 140 159 Whippoorwill Estates Subdivision 1.00 5.02 6.43 0 10 12.00 6 6 45.45 241 109 Vero Lake Estates Sub Unit N 1.00 4.45 2.97 0 10 12.00 12 4 45.42 142 121 South Moon Under Subdivision 1.00 4.00 3.87 8 6 11.54 6 6 45.41 243 105 Vero Lake Estates Sub Unit 1.00 4.01 3.35 0 10 12.00 12 4 45.35 244 122 Orange Heights Unit Not 1.00 11.89 0.10 0 69.36 12 6 45.35 24S 311 Moss Pointe Subdivision 1.40 7.80 5.43 0 10 12.00 6 4 45.23 246 EXHIBITB - PRIORITYSUMMARY TABLE Number Subdivision Name Importance Factor Population Density Index# ProximityoJSurpce Water Index# FloodPlaln # Index Depth to Groundwater So1lCondition Index Index # # AorolSvdonwarr ^*^'�^a^Sy l^d,=N AgeoJExisting OSTDS Index# Overall Score /n/t1a/Rankln g 305 Oak Meadows Subdivision 1.40 6.40 4.82 0 10 12.00 6 6 45.23 247 113 Vero Lake Estates Sub Unit R 1.00 4.98 2.15 0 10 12.00 12 4 45.13 248 13 Summerplace Unit 1 - Replat 1.00 4.00 0.10 4 5 9.97 12 10 45.07 249 158 44th Street Community Subdivision 1.00 4.00 8.98 0 10 12.00 6 4 44.98 250 94 Vero Lake Estates Sub Unit C 1.30 5.20 1.70 0 10 12.00 12 4 44.90 252 120 Collier Creek Estates Phase 6 1.00 1 4.00 2.77 8 10 12.00 4 4 44.77 151 107 Vero Lake Estates Sub Unit L 1.00 5.47 1.27 0 10 12.00 12 4 44.75 253 153 Kingslake Subdivision 1.00 4.00 0.72 0 10 12.00 12 6 44.72 154 251 Pineaest Subdivision Units 1-3 1.00 7.79 1.67 0 6 11.06 12 6 . 44.53 255 309 Courtside Subdivision 1.40 5.60 4.90 0 10 12.00 6 6 44.50 256 98 Vero Lake Estates Sub Unit G 1.00 4.00 0.47 0 10 12.00 12 6 44.47 2S7 292 Whispering Pines Subdivision 1.00 10.36 0.10 0 10 12.00 6 6 44.46 258 119 Collier Creek Estates Phase 5 1.00 4.00 2.45 8 10 12.00 4 4 44.45 259 111 Vero Lake Estates Sub Unit P 1.00 4.04 2.41 0 10 12.00 12 4 44.45 260 185 West Side Villas 1.00 4.00 0.38 0 10 12.00 12 6 44.38 261, 31 Meidel Subdivision (The) 1.00 4.00 0.26 0 10 12.00 12 6 44.26 162 282 Woodlands Subdivision 1.00 6.39 1.85 0 10 10.00 6 6 44.24 - 263 265 Woodbridge Estates 1.00 10.08 0.10 0 10 12.00 6 6 44.18 264 341 Florida Ridge 1.00 12.00 0.10 0 4 4.08 12 _ 12 44.18 265 128 Hill Side Subdivision 1.00 4.81 3.31 0 1 5 9.04 12 10 44.16 266 117 Collier Creek Estates Phase 3 1.00 4.00 6.16 4 10 12.00 4 4 - 44.16 267 318 Hi -Land Acres Unit No. 1 1.00 4.00 2.10 0 10 12.00 12 4 44.10 268 266 Bentwood Terrace Subdivision 1.00 4.00' 0.10 0 -10 "' "12.00 - 12 "" 6 44.10 - 269 ' 269 Westwind Subdivision 1.00 4.00 0.10 0 10 12.00 12 6 44.10 269 60 Sebastian Highlands Unit 07 1.00 4.00 0.10 -0 10 '12.00 12 6 44.10 --s;269r 206 Hampton Woods Subdivision 1.00 4.00 0.10 0 10 12.00 12 6 44.10 269 209 Briarwood Subdivision 1.00 4.00 0.10 0 10 - -12.00 12 _ ,- 6': a 44.10 .169'• 313 Coral Wind Subdivision 1.00 7.40 2.57 1 0 10 12.00 6 6 43.97 174 241 Ridgewood Subdivisin 1.00 4.90 0.10 0 6 r8.83 12 •12-�+'. - 43.83 -?'27S,- 157 Black Bear Reserve 1.00 4.00 1.80 8 10 12.00 4 4 43.80 276 114 Harbor Point Subdivision 1.00 4.00 7.62 0 10 '12.00 6 4 43.62 277: 103 Vero Lake Estates Sub Unit H-4 1.00 4.00 1.48 0 10 12.00 12 4 43.48 178 283 Hidden Oaks Subdivision 1.00 7.47 1.82 '0 10 12.00 6 6 43.29 ,- 279 - 165 Sylvan Lakes Subdivision 1.00 6.13 2.84 0 10 12.00 6 6 42.97 280 136 Heritage Trace at Hobart 1.00 6.83 0.10 . 4 ' 10 12.00 6 _ 4 42.93 281 242 Ridge Acres Subdivision 1.00 8.61 0.10 0 5 5.17 12 12 42.88 282 250 Hickory Sands Subdivision 1.00 5.60 0.10 - 0 5 7.80 . 12 12 - 42.50 -283 133 Indian River Highlands Section 1 1.00 4.78 3.62 0 10 12.00 6 6 42.40 184 115 Collier Creek Estates Phase 1 1.00 4.00 6.40 0 10 '12.00 • .6 4 42.40 285 " 116 Collier Creek Estates Phase 2 1.00 4.00 2.35 4 10 12.00 6 4 42.35 286 78 Fischer Lake Island Phase 1 1.85 7.40 4.75 , 0 ' '10 r-12.00 • 4 4,.' _ 42.15 •287 90 Vero Lake Estates Sub Unit SG 1.00 4.00 0.10 0 10 12.00 12 4 42.10 288 92 Vero Lake Estates Sub Unit AReplat 1.00 4.00- .0.10 0• '10' .12.00, - 12 'r��'4 .- _ _ 42.10 288e- 150 High Pines Subdivision 1.00 4.05 3.71 0 10 12.00 6 6 41.76 290 24 Gervais Subdivision 1.00 4.00 1.59 6' 12.00 12" _ .:6s,t-. .- • .41.59 - 191. 220 Country Walk Subdivision 1.00 4.00 3.33 0 10 12.00 6 6 41.33 292 162 Meadowlark Woods Subdivision 1.00 5.10 1.79 '.0 •10 ;12.00 6 .6' ,40.89 ' 293 281 Meadows Subdivision (The) 1.00 4.00 2.82 0 10 12.00 6 6 40.82 294 261 Fox Haven Subdivision 1.00 4.00 2.79 0' 10 -12.00 6 . 6' `= 40.79 •295 82 Fischer Lake Island Phase S 1.85 7.40 3.17 0 10 12.00 4 4 40.57 296 N V O EXHIBIT B - PRIORITYSUMMARY TABLE Number Subdivision Name Importance Factor Population Density Index # Proximity of Surface water Index # Flood Plain # Index Depth to Groundwater Soft Condition Index Index # # xa..jS..jb . Wm.. Mmnp. Shrnn Md-. Age of Existing OSTDS Index # Overall Score Initial Ranking 316 Wood Hollow Phase 1 & 2 1.00 4.00 2.48 0 10 12.00 6 6 40.48 297 314 Walking Horse Hammock Subdivision 1.00 4.90 1.40 0 10 12.00 6 6 40.29 298 262 The Crossing 1.00 4.00 6.25 0 10 12.00 4 4 40.25 299 280 DU -JS Subdivision 1.00 4.00 4.22 0 10 12.00 6 4 40.22 300 83 Fischer lake Island Phase 6 1.85 7A0 2.82 0 10 12.00 4 4 40.22 301 118 Collier Creek Estates Phase 4 1.00 4.00 2.20 4 10 12.00 4 4 40.20 302 194 Tamara Gardens Condo 1.00 . 4.00 2.16 0 30 12.00 6 6 40.16 303 225 Timberwood Estates Subdivision 1.00 4.00 2.08 0 10 12.00 6 6 40.08 304 224 Kirkwood Estates Subdivision 1.00 4.15 1.87 0 .10 12.00 6 6 40.02 305 276 White Fences 1.00 4.00 5.97 0 10 12.00 4 4 39.97 306 163 Country Pines Subdivision 1.00 4.00 1.91 0 10 12.00 -:6 6 39.91 81 Fischer lake Island Phase 4 1.85 7.40 2.40 0 10 12.00 4 4 39.80 308 79 Fischer lake Island Phase 2 1.85 7.40 2.07 -0 10 12.00 4 4 39.47 309 80 Fischer lake Island Phase 3 1.85 7.40 1.96 0 10 12.00 4 4 39.36 310 149 Cobblestone Subdivision 1.00 4.00 5.08 0 10 12.00 4 4 39.08 311 324 Oak Terrace Unit 1 1.00 4.00 9.04 4 4 8.00 6 4 39.04 311 7 Sanderling Subdivision 1.00 4.00 -0.10 8 6 8.88 6 6 38.98 313 252 Hickory Hill Estates 1.00 4.00 0.10 0 5 7.74 12 10 38.84 314 257 Carriage lane Subdivision 1.00 4.00 0.10 0;. 10 .12.00 6 6 ' -.38.10. '' _ :31S 267 Florence Acres Subdivision 1.00 4.00 0.10 0 10 12.00 6 6 38.10 315 202 Rosewind Subdivision 1.00 1 5.33. -=` 0.10 0 ;', 10 12.00 6 ' 4 37.43' • _ 317 323 Oak Ridge Subdivision & Unit 2 1.00 8.13 1.74 4 4 6.78 6 6 36.65 318 300 J R Ashton Subdivision 1.00 8.39- 0.10 0 - 6 ' ` '10.13 6 - '.6' . 36.63 , 319 " 296 Citrus Ridge Subdivision 1.00 8.18 0.10 0 5 10.11 6 6 35.38 320 249 Colonial Heights 1.00 4.00 - 0.10 0 6 - 7.06. 12 ' 6 35.16 247 Reams Glen Subdivision 1.00 6.16 0.10 0 5 5.77 12 6 35.03 322 284 MITI Creek" 1.00 4.30 _ `O.iQ 0-�' • +" "- 10. -12.00- ' 4 4 34.40 '° ;323.;' • 325 Oslo Ridge Subdivision 1.00 6.99 0.10 0 4 4.00 6 6 27.09 324 339 Plantation Ridge Subdivision' 1.00 6.14 " 0.61. - 0 - 4 4.21 '6 + - 6 46.97 .'315 . A Portion of this subdivision Is served by COVB Utilities •• It Is recommended that Amos subdivision not be considered in the capital Improvement program. Ranking results are due to an anomaly In the methodology. This site has the highest Index numbers assigned for "Importance factor", proximity to surface water, flood plain, depth to groundwater and soil condition. As a result, the site is ranked much higher than would otherwise be expected. �� Et��' _ '14 a ��pp ti t a is el Arlo .r 0iiin�■ �+. •�r�ICF�A � �i , �, ,� � 'maw �_ +,..� n � � !cam �a€A ■ ► PV --.sib �y !_;7W R. MIN Iani,r11 oi 'rw 11 p! EXHIBIT 0 - ESTtMA Number Subdivision Name initial Ranking initial # of Hames c 163' 138 Hobart Landing Unit 2 1 25 17 Orchid Island No.1 2 10 18 Orchid island No. 2 3 16 139 Hobart Landing Unit 3 4 7 2 Hallmark Ocean Subdivision 5 3 1 Ambersand Beach Sub No 1 & 2 6 60 48 Floravon Shores Subdivision 7 19 131 Naranja TR Shelimound Bch Replat of FOR 8 7 52 Sebastian Highlands Unit 02 Collier 9 22 320 River Shores Estates Units 1.4 10 32 212 Rain Tree Corner Subdivision 11 10 S8 Sebastian Highlands Unit 05 11 276 137 Hobart Landing Unit 1 13 1 19 Orchid Isle Estates Subdivision 14 52 244 33 a 213 Kanawah Acres 16 3 199 Verona Estates Subdivision 17 1 291 Indian River Heights Units 1-9 18 77 273 Diana Park Subdivision 19 12 49 Dales Landing Subdivision 20 3 278 Stevens Park Unit 1 & 2 21 23 272 Pine Tree Park Units 1-4 22 80 196 Little Portion Subdivision Replat OF 23 0 s0 Sebastian Highlands Unit 01 24 295 57 Sebastian Highlands Unit 04 25 176 143 Winter Grave Subdivision 26 11 207 Tropic Colony Subdivision 27 11 32 Halleluiah Acres 28 6 68 Sebastian Highlands Unit 13 29 56 51 Sebastian Highlands Unit 02 30 248 56 Sebastian Highlands Unit 03 31 91 61 Sebastian Highlands Unit 08 32 16S 277 Indian River Aerodrome 33 29 10 Oceanalre Heights Unit No 1 34 0 236 Sun Acres 35 12 322 Granada Gardens Unit No 1 36 4 258 Hallmark Homes 37 6 53 Sebastian Highlands Unit 02 Replat PG 2 38 21 25S Fresard Glendale Subdivision 39 13 344 Forest Lake Subdivision Units 1 & 2 40 14 59 Sebastian Highlands Unit 06 41 58 239 Bel -Porte Park Subdivision 42 15 70 Sebastian Highlands Unit 14 43 54 66 Sebastian Highlands Unit 11 44 332 54 Sebastian Highlands Unit 02 Replat PG 3 45 62 EXHIBIT D -ESTIMATE OF SEWAGE GENERATED AND POLLUTANT REDUCTION Number Subdivision Name SBS Ranking Initial # of Homes < 165' Initiallfof Homes 165' to 657' Initial # of Homes >6S7' 10 Year Growth Factor (DID 1) 10 YeorADF (GPD) 10 Year PK HR (GDP) Pollutant Reduction Ib/yr Importance Factor (IM) 65 Sebastian Highlands Unit 10 46 342 833 121 1.21 392,040 1,568,160 25,831.01 1.30 148 North Carloina Colony Subdivision 47 6 17 0 1.21 6,958 27,830 481.41 1.00 197 Sunnydale Acres Subdivision 48 14 9 0 1.04 6,000 24,000 655.74 1.00 172 Anita Park Subdivision IRF 49 12 42 0 1.17 15,750 63,000 1,019.62 1.00 336 Lakewood Terrace Units 1 & 2 50 5 30 25 1.21 18,150 72,600 588.54 1.00 193 GreenbrierSudivision 51 0 27 29 1.02 14,250 57,000 268.78 1.00 334 Green Acres Estates 52 14 6 0 1.00 5,000 20,000 599.08 1.00 191 Vero Tropical Gardens 53 10 10 8 1.21 8,470 33,880 585.40 1.00 9 Oceanaire Heights Unit No 2 54 0 0 29 1.14 8,250 33,000 0.00 1.00 186 Westgate Colony Subdivision 55 0 13 IS 1.04 7,250 29,000 131.68 1.00 218 Melrose Gardens Subdivision 56 4 11 15 1.00 7,500 30,000 261.98 1.00 192 Kenilworth Estates Subdivision 57 0 7 6 1.21 3,933 15,730 82.84 1.00 329 Boxwood Estates Subdivision 58 4 30 14 1.00 7,000 28,000 252.20 1.00 210 Idlewild Subdivision 59 0 21 59 1.01 20,250 81,000 207.95 1.00 328 Oslo Park Subdivision 60 32 241 681 1.21 288,585 1,154,340 4,346.54 1.00 134 Indian River Highlands Block 2 61 0 11 9 1.21 6,050 24,200 130.17 1.00 11 Oceanaire Heights Unit No 3 62 0 0 24 1.08 6,500 26,000 0.00 1.00 221 Greenwood Village 63 2 40 SO 1.02 23,500 1 94,000 478.58 1.00 132 Indian River Highlands Unit 2 64 7 12 10 1.14 8,250 33,000 441.02 1.00 217 Rosedale Manor Subdivision 65 3 10 14 1.00 6,750 27,000 213.60 1.00 256 Glendale Park Subdivision 66 17 50 27 1.00 23,500 94,000 1,145.20 1.00 335 Greenleaf Subdivision 67 6 2 0 1.00 2,000 8,000 251.16 1.00 5 Turtle Cove Subdivision 68 2 8 6 1.21 4,840 19,360 188.08 1.85 55 Sebastian Highlands Unit 02 Replat PG 4 69 10 36 0 1.21 13,915 55,660 893.08 1.30 288 Vero Beach Homesites 70 11 58 158 1.08 61,250 245,000 1,070.49 1.00 23 Sunnyfield Subdivision 71 2 5 0 1.00 1,750 7,000 126.10 1.85 183 Rivera Estates 72 0 15 50 1.08 17,500 70,000 157.98 1.00 237 Cooks Subdivision 73 3 30 30 1.13 26,000 241.46 1.00 289 Graves Annes Subdivision 74 0 0 12 1.00 00 12,000 0.00 1.00 171 Kings Highway Subdivision IRF 74 0 0 15 1.00 50 15,000 0.00 1.00 125 Gallentine Subdivision 74 0 0 5 1.00 L6,900 50 5,000 0.00 1.00 279 Westlake Park Subdivision 74 0 0 13 1.00 50 13,000 0.00 1.00 270 West Meadows Subdivision 74 0 0 27 1.04 00 28,000 0.00 1.00 234 Glen Acres Subdivision 79 2 11 13 1.00 6,500 26,000 184.78 1.00 231 Glendale Terrace Subdivision 80 2 9 10 1.05 5,500 22,000 173.09 1.00 286 Emerson Park Subdivision 81 8 56 39 1.06 27,250 109,000 906.37 1.00 181 Pine-Metto Park Subdivision 81 2 5 2 1.00 2,250 9,000 126.10 1.00 338 Vero Beach Highlands - Units 3 & 5 - A portion of this subdivision has sewer available 83 34 107 192 1.21 100,733 402,930 ' 2,854.22 1.00 69 Sebastian Highlands Unit 13 Replat 84 1 2 0 1.21 1 908 3,630 70.37 1.85 260 Suburban Acres Subdivision 85 19 12 0 1.03 8,000 32,000 878.20 1.00 71 Sebastian Highlands Unit 15 86 97 279 53 1.18 127,000 508,000 7,664.78 1.30 264 Clemann Estates Unit 1 & 2 87 27 67 54 1.12 41,500 166,000 1,903.91 1.00 271 Indian Oaks Subdivision 88 6 3 27 1.00 9,000 36,000 260.94 1.00 EXHIBIT D -ESTIMATE OF SEWAGE GENERATED AND POLLUTANT REDUCTION Number Subdivision Name SBS Ranking Initial # of Homes < 165' Initial pof Homes 165' to 657' Initial p of Homes >657, 10 Year Growth Factor (DID 1) 10 YeorADF (GPD) 10 Year PK HR (GDP) Pollutant Reduction Ib/yr Importance Factor (IM) 155 Lindsey Pines Subdivision 89 4 11 8 1.04 6,000 24,000 273.37 1.00 156 Acres J C Subdivision 90 1 3 6 1.21 3,025 12,100 82.21 1.00 216 Malaluka Gardens Subdivision 91 17 47 84 _ 1.05 38,750 155,000 1,168.64 1.00 226 SunHaven Subdivision 92 2 7 14 1.00 5,750 23,000 145.66 1.00 287 Pine Hill Park Subdivision 93 0 0 27 1.00 6,750 27,000 0.00 1.00 140 Wabasso Manor 94 0 0 8 1.00 2,000 8,000 0.00 1.00 306 MiraFlores 95 2 14 0 1.00 4,000 16,000 214.12 1.40 77 San Sebastian Springs IV River Oaks 96 9 9 0 1.06 4,750 19,000 459.61 1.85 246 Miller Subdivision 97 0 0 12 1.08 3,250 13,000 0.00 1.00 254 Royal Poinciana Park 98 13 43 146 1.07 54,250 217,000 990.83 1.00 263 Florida Acres Subdivision 99 8 8 0 1.00 4,000 16,000 387.04 1.00 298 Dixie Highlands Subdivision 100 0 6 25 1.10 8,500 34,000 64.36 1.00 15 Summerplace Unit 3 101 0 0 40 1.20 12,000 48,000 0.00 1.00 198 Breetewood Park Subdivision IRF 102 2 17 0 1.11 5,250 21,000 269.09 1.00 72 Sebastian Highlands Unit 16 103 6 7 1 1.21 4,235 16,940 363.07 1.00 293 Moreland Subdivision 104 9 19 37 1.06 17,250 69,000 566.03 1.40 232 Heritage Estates Subdivision 105 4 17 31 1.00 13,000 52,000 320.66 1.00 240 Rivenbark Subdivision 106 4 21 41 1.00 16,500 66,000 359.78 1.00 130 Cadenhead Subdivision 107 0 0 8 1.21 2,420 9,680 0.00 1.00 268 Citrus Gardens 108 0 0 100 1.07 26,750 107,000 0.00 1.00 274 Lost Hammock PD 109 8 0 0 1.00 2,000 8,000 308.80 1.00 100 Vero Lake Estates Sub Unit H -1 110 31 82 26 1.21 42,048 168,190 2,418.26 1.70 73 Sebastian Highlands Unit 17 111 221 397 80 1.21 211,145 844,580 15,020.04 1.00 184 Wildwood 112 7 7 0 1.00 3,500 14,000 338.66 1.00 245 South Side Park Subdivision 113 0 0 12 1.00 3,000 12,000 0.00 1.00 304 Rebel Acres 114 0 3 0 1.00 750 3,000 29.34 1.40 28 Roseland Lake No 1 115 0 0 11 1.00 2,750 11,000 0.00 1.00 26 Haven View Addition No 1 116 0 30 1 1.18 3,250 13,000 115.58 1.00 243 Vero Land Companys Subdivision 117 1 0 34 1.21 10,588 42,350 46.71 1.85 244 Shady Grove Subdivision 118 0 0 11 1.00 2,750 11,000 0.00 1.00 290 Clear View Terrace 119 0 0 24 1.08 6,500 26,000 0.00 1.00 259 Carll Heights 120 0 0 12 1.00 3,000 12,000 0.00 1.00 164 Naomi Place Subdivision Unit 1 121 1 4 4 1.00 2,250 9,000 77.72 1.00 182 Pine•Metto Park Subdivision Replat 112 0 2 11 1.08 3,500 14,000 21.06 1.00 326 Dixie Heights 123 13 124 346 1.21 146,108 584,430 2,074.57 1.40 312 West Side Subdivision 124 6 8 2 1.00 4,000 16,000 309.84 1.00 342 Pinewood Lane Subdivision 125 4 8 0 1.00 3,000 12,000 232.64 1.40 327 Pompeys Subdivision 126 1 7 1 1.21 2,723 10,890 129.54 1.00 74 San Sebastian Springs 127 9 72 1 2 1.17 24,250 97,000 1,228.93 1.85 228 Braschs Green Acres 128 6 10 10 1.04 6,750 27,000 342.07 1.00 180 Cherry Lane Manor Subdivision 129 4 5 7 1.13 4,500 18,000 228.71 1.00 127 Wabasso Lows Park Subdivision 130 0 0 14 1.21 4,235 16,940 0.00 1.00 187 Westgate Colony Subdivision Unit 2 131 0 13 15 1.00 7,000 28,000 127.14 1.00 N v V EXHIBIT D - ESTIMATEOFSEWAGE GENERATED AND POLLUTANT REDUCTION Number Subdivision Name SBS Ranking Initial N of Homes c 165' Initial Ifof Homes 165' to 6S7' Initialll of Homes >6S7' 10 Year Growth Factor (DID,) 10 Year ADF (GPD) SO Year PK HR (GDP) Pollutant Reduction Ib/yr Importance Factor (IM) 160 Ponderosa Estates Subdivision No 1 IRF 132 2 10 6 1.00 4,500 18,000 175.00 1.00 319 Oslo Park Subdivision 133 2S 42 11 1.21 23,595 94,380 1,664.67 1.00 25 Haven View Subdivision 134 0 9 0 1.21 2,723 10,890 106.50 1.00 -333 -The Grove 13S 13 55 0 1.00 17,000 68,000 1,039.70 1.00 123 Orange Heights Unit No 2 136 0 0 23 1:13 6,500 - 26,000 0.00 1.00 124 Orange Heights Unit No 3 136 0 0 35 1.09 9,500 38,000 0.00 1.00 214 Banyan Acres 136 0 0 4 1.00 1,000 4,000 0.00 1.00 144 Quay Forbes & Hamiltons Plat of 139 0 0 11 1.09 3,000 12,000 0.00 1.00 6 Ocean Way Subdivision 140 0 0 0 0 0 0.00 1.85 27 Rose Haven Subdivision 141 1 S 0 1.21 1,815 7,260 105.88 1.70 345 Lakes at Brookhaven 142 0 0 0 0 0 0.00 1.00 84 Roseland Acres Subdivision 143 3 3 9 1.20 4,500 18,000 174.17 1.70 248 Gloria Gardens Subdivision 144 0 0 15 1.21 4,538 18,150 0.00 1.00 93 Vero Lake Estates Sub Unit B 145 it 38 7 1.21 16,940 67,760 963.45 1.30 174 Albrecht Acres Subdivision 146 1 2 0 1.21 908 3,630 70.37 1.00 145 Jennings Add to Quay Plat of 147 0 0 14 1.21 4,235 16,940 0.00 1.00 229 Sun Crest Terrace Units 1 & 2 148 4 16 28 1.00 12,000 48,000 310.88 1.00 76 San Sebastian Lakes 149 5 5 0 1.20 3,000 12,000 290.28 1 1.85 189 Westgate Colony Subdivision Unit 3 150 0 0 12 1.00 3,000 12,000 0.00 1.00 308 Club Grove Estates_ iS1 3 23 0 1.04 6,750 27,000 353.85 1.40 307 Miraflores Unit 2 152 2 14 0 1.00 4,000 16,000 214.12 1.40 301 Westwood Subdivision 153 2 12 0 1.00 3,500 14,000 194.56 1.40 152 Wilson Acres 154 3 2 0 1.00 1,250 5,000 135.36 1.00 178 Cherrywood Estates 155 1 7 7 1.07 4,000 16,000 114.20 1.00 227 Apple Way 156 1 4 3 1.00 2,000 8,000 77.72 1.00 204 Silver Oaks Estates 157 0 3 10 1.00 3,250 13,000 29.34 1.00 294 Bonny - Vista Acres Subdivision IRF 158 0 0 31 1.06 8,250 33,000 0.00 1.00 331 Grovenor Estates - 1S9 29 107 167 1.14 86,500 346,000 2,473.23 1.00 188 Westgate Colony Subdivision Unit 2 REP POR OF 160 0 3 0 1.00 750 3,000 29.34 1.00 142 Wabasso Manor Unit 1 Addition 161 0 0 7 1.21 2,118 8,470 0.00 1.00 169 Palm Gardens 162 6 20 12 1.18 11,250 45,000 505.89 1 1.00 219 Sun Villa West 163 2 6 4 1.08 3,250 13,000 147.20 1.00 337 Vero Beach Highlands Sub Unit 4 - A portion of this subdivision has sewer -164 33 132 180 1.15 99,250 397,000 2,951.33 1.00 166 Ranch Estates Subdivision 16S 2 9 11 1.21 6,655 26,620 199.92 1.00 62 Sebastian Highlands Unit 09 166 0 6 85 1.05 24,000 96,000 61.90 1.00 141 Wabasso Manor Unit 1 Replat 167 0 0 5 1.20 1,500 6,000 0.00 1.00 135 Hobart Estates Sub Unit 1 167 0 0 3 1.21 908 3,630 0.00 1.00 126 Douglas Subdivision 167 0 0 48 1.21 14,520 58,080 0.00 1.00 205 Magnolia Estates Subdivision 167 0 0 7 1.14 2,000 8,000 0.00 1.00 211 Orangewood Estates Subdivision 1 167 1 0 1 0 8 1 1.00 1 2,000 8,000 0.00 1.00 285 Bobbi J Subdivision 172 2 4 6 1.08 3,250 13,000 126.01 1.00 238 Yorkshire Subdivision 173 2 2 22 1.08 7,000 28,000 104.20 1.00 190 Paradise Park 174 35 158 226 1.21 126,748 506,990 3,504.45 1.00 176 Squire Subdivision (The) 175 2 3 6 1.09 3,000 12,000 116.23 1.00 '0 N V OD EXHIBIT D -ESTIMATE OF SEWAGE GENERATED AND POLLUTANT REDUCTION Number Subdivision Name SBS Ranking Initial # of Homes < 165' Initioll/of Homes 165'to 657' Initialll of Homes X657' 10 Year Growth Factor (DID 1) 10 YearADF (GPD) 10 Year PK HR (GDP) Pollutant Reduction Ib/yr Importance Factor (IM) 177 Shadow Brook Subdivision 176 5 7 12 1.00 6,000 24,000 261.46 1.00 222 Pinewood Estates 177 1 4 4 1.00 2,250 9,000 77.72 1.00 16 Summerplace Unit 4 178 0 0 56 1.13 15,750 63,000 0.00 1.00 317 Emerson Villas Subdivision 179 0 17 43 1.21 18,150 72,600 201.17 1.00 302 Misty Meadow Subdivision 180 2 22 0 1.00 6,000 24,000 292.36 1.40 235 Block Villa Subdivision 181 0 0 16 1.06 4,250 17,000 0.00 1.00 215 Glendale Lakes Subdivision 181 0 0 80 1.04 20,750 83,000 0.00 1.00 99 Vero Lake Estates Sub Unit H 183 17 38 26 1.21 24,503 98,010 1,243.69 1.30 154 Kings Music Lands Subdivision 184 11 43 9 1.21 19,058 76,230 1,022.62 1.00 29 Roseland Lake No 2 185 0 0 12 1.00 3,000 12,000 0.00 1.00 208 Pinewood Subdivision • 186 0 4 8 1.21 3,630 14,520 47.34 1.00 86 Vero Lake Estates Sub Unit 2 187 8 23 16 1.19 14,000 56,000 635.95 1.30 87 Vero Lake Estates Sub Unit 3 188 8 23 14 1.21 13,613 54,450 645.83 1.30 101 Vero Lake Estates Sub Unit H - 2 189 14 42 37 1.21 28,133 112,530 1,150.90 1.70 3 Seaview Subdivision 190 0 6 1 1.21 2,118 8,470 71.00 1.85 30 Berrys AA Subdivision 191 28 42 25 1.21 28,738 114,950 1,804.79 1.85 151 Reece Subdivision 192 0 1 0 1.21 303 1,210 11.83 1.00 91 Vero Lake Estates Sub Unit A 193 5 29 22 1.21 16,940 67,760 576.71 1.30 310 WaldosWay Subdivision 194 4 16 0 1.00 5,000 20,000 310.88 1.40 67 Sebastian Highlands Unit 12 195 1 11 4 1.21 4,840 19,360 176.88 1.30 200 Kingswood Estates PH 1, 2 & 3 196 10 16 22 1.04 12,500 50,000 565.08 1.00 332 Shady Oaks Subdivision 197 13 26 11 _ 1.00 12,500 50,000 756.08 1.00 104 Vero Lake Estates Sub Unit 1 198 5 28 75 1.21 32,670 130,680 564.88 1.30 230 Shady Acres 199 2 4 0 1.00 1,500 6,000 116.32 1.00 147 Winter Beach Highlands Subdivision 200 0 13 5 1.17 5,250 21,000 148.33 1.00 12 Summerplace Unit 1 201 0 0 37 1.11 10,250 41,000 0.00 1.00 295 Hager Highlands Subdivision 202 0 0 10 1.00 2,500 10,000 0.00 1.00 8 Spring Place 202 0 0 15 1.00 3,750 15,000 0.00 1.00 170 Kings Highway Subdivision Replat of Blocks 202 0 0 10 1.21 3,025 12,100 0.00 1.00 201 Sundowners 202 0 0 15 1.00 3,750 15,000 0.00 1.00 102 Vero Lake Estates Sub Unit H-3 206 17 71 52 1.21 42,350 169,400 1,634.20 1.00 96 Vero Lake Estates Sub Unit E 207 22 32 19 1.21 22,083 88,330 1,406.21 1.30 167 Floral Park Subdivision 208 2 7 8 1.21 5,143 20,570 176.25 1.00 179 Sunniland Homesites IRF 209 1 5 9 1.13 4,250 17,000 99.17 1.00 95 Vero Lake Estates Sub Unit D 110 12 36 30 1.21 23,595 94,380 986.49. 1.30 14 Summer lace Unit 2 211 0 0 19 1.21 5,748 22,990 0.00 1.00 343 Vero Glen Subdivision 212 -6 10 0 1.00 4,000 16,000 329.40 1.40 161 Crystal Sands Unit II 213 7 12 7 1.21 7,865 31,460 468.95 1.00 108 Vero Lake Estates Sub Unit M 214 7 77 71 1.21 46,888 187,550 1,238.14 1.00 321 Dixie Gardens Sub & Unit 2 215 0 0 54 1.06 14,250 57,000 0.00 1.00 175 Kingsway Subdivision 216 6 1 13 1 12 1 1.00 1 7,750 1 31,000 1 358.74 1.00 195 Westlake Estates 217 8 6 19 1.05 8,684 34337 386.82 1.00 75 Ssan Sebastian Springs II Oak Creek 218 0 14 0 1.00 3,500 14,000 136.92 1.85 4 Wabasso Estates Subdivision 219 1 6 0 1.21 2,118 8,470 117.71 1.85 110 Vero Lake Estates Sub Unit 0 220 8 58 73 1.21 42,048 168,190 1,060.01 1.00 EXHIBIT D -ESTIMATE OF SEWAGE GENERATED AND POLLUTANT REDUCTION Number Subdivision Name SBS Ranking Initial JI of Homes < 165' Initial J/of Homes 165' to 657' Initial p of Homes a6S7' 30 Year Growth Factor (DID,) 10 Year ADF (GPD) 10 Year PK HR (GDP) Pollutant Reduction Ib/yr Importance Factor (IM) 253 Colonial Terrace Units 1-2 221 9 22 30 1.00 15,250 61,000 562.56 1.00 112 Vero Lake Estates Sub Unit Q 222 13 76 37 1.21 38,115 152,460 1,506.55 1.00 89 Vero Lake Estates Sub Unit SA 223 0 13 10 1.13 6,500 26,000 143.72 1.30 315 Hammock Acres Subdivision 224 2 4 2 1.00 2,000 8,000 116.32 1.00 146 Winter Beach Park 225 4 15 15 1.06 9,000 36,000 318.81 1.00 106 Vero Lake Estates Sub Unit K 126 19 50 43 1.21 33,880 135,520 1,479.10 1.00 223 Glenwood 227 2 4 6 1.00 3,000 12,000 116.32 1.00 233 Hidden Acres Subdivision 228 2 6 6 1.07 3,750 15,000 145.59 1.00 88 Vero Lake Estates Sub Unit 4 229 0 13 29 1.21 12,705 50,820 153.84 1.30 129 John W Massey JR Subdivision 230 0 0 14 1.21 4,235 16,940 0.00 1.00 85 Vero Lake Estates Sub Unit 1 231 0 18 51 1.21 20,873 83,490 213.01 1.30 340 Vero Beach Highlands Sub Unit 1 232 15 21 46 1.21 24,805 99,220 949.10 1.00 299 Whispering Palms Units 1-5 233 0 8 211 1.05 57,250 229,000 81.81 1.00 330 Stirling Lake Estates Subdivision 234 7 14 0 1.00 5,250 21,000 407.12 1.00 203 Old Sugar Mill Estates 235 15 12 39 1.03 17,000 68,000 717.46 1.00 173 Palm Villa Estates Subdivision 236 2 4 3 1.00 2,250 9,000 116.32 1.00 303 Rivularis Subdivision 237 2 9 0 1.00 2,750 11,000 165.22 1.00 97 Vero Lake Estates Sub Unit F 238 3 10 48 1.21 18,453 73,810 258.46 1.00 297 Peterson Country Estates Unit 1 & 2 239 1 5 0 1.21 1,815 7,260 105.88 1.85 168 Treasure Trail 240 4 12 12 1.00 7,000 28,000 271.76 1.00 159 Whippoorwill Estates Subdivision 241 12 5 0 1.06 4,500 18,000 542.22 1.00 109 Vero Lake Estates Sub Unit N 242 13 51 42 1.21 32,065 128,260 1,210.70 1.00 121 South Moon Under Subdivision 243 13 16 12 1.10 11,250 45,000 722.50 1.00 10S Vero Lake Estates Sub Unit J 244 17 49 26 1.21 27,830 111,320 1,373.86 1.00 122 Orange Heights Unit No 1 245 0 0 31 1.06 8,250 33,000 0.00 1.00 311 Moss Pointe Subdivision 246 2 17 0 1.00 4,750 19,000 243.46 1.40 305 Oak Meadows Subdivision 147 2 14 0 1.00 4,000 16,000 214.12 1.40 113 Vero Lake Estates Sub Unit R 148 9 59 43 1.21 33,578 134,310 1,118.55 1.00 13 Summerplace Unit 1- Replat 249 0 0 7 1.21 2,118. 8,470 0.00 1.00 158 44th Street Community Subdivision 250 4 2 0 1.17 1,750 7,000 202.95 1.00 94 Vero Lake Estates Sub Unit C 151 7 19 61 1.21 26,318 105,270 551.78 1.30 120 Collier Creek Estates Phase 6 152 4 2 2 1.21 2,420 9,680 210.49 1.00 107 Vero Lake Estates Sub Unit L 253 3 21 99 1.21 37,208 148,830 388.63 1.00 153 Kingslake Subdivision 254 2 6 37 1.00 11,250 45,000 135.88 1.00 251 Pinecrest Subdivision Units 1-3 255 12 33 85 1.00 32,500 130,000 785.94 1.00 309 Courtside Subdivision 256 3 26 0 1.00 7,250 29,000 370.08 1.40 98 Vero Lake Estates Sub Unit G 257 0 6 62 1.21 20,570 82,280 71.00 1.00 292 Whispering Pines Subdivision 258 0 0 34 1.00 8,500 34,000 0.00 1.00 119' Collier Creek Estates Phase 5 259 5 30 14 1.21 8,773 35,090 351.87 1.00 111 Vero Lake Estates Sub Unit P 260 16 46 37 1.21 29,948 119,790 1,291.65 1.00 185 West Side Villas 261 0 7 23 1.03 7,750 31,000 70.74 1.00 31 Meidel Subdivision (The) 262 0 1 5 1.00 1,500 6,000 9.78 1.00 282 Woodlands Subdivision 163 4 24 26 1.00 13,500 54,000 389.12 1.00 265 Woodbridge Estates 264 0 0 53 1.13 15,000 60,000 0.00 1.00 341 Florida Ridge 265 0 0 166 1.12 46,500 186,000 0.00 1.00 N O 0 EXHIBIT D -ESTIMATE OF SEWAGE GENERATED AND POLLUTANT REDUCTION Number Subdivision Name SBS Ranking Initial # of Homes < 165' Initial nofHomes 16S' to 657' Initial ti of Homes >657' 10 Year Growth Factor (DID j) 10 Year ADF (GPD) 10 Year PK HR (GDP) Pollutant Reduction Ib/yr Importance Factor (IM) 128 Hill Side Subdivision 266 3 12 0 1.21 4,538 18,150 282.12 1.00 117 Collier Creek Estates Phase 3 267 16 14 2 1.13 9,000 36,000 848.84 1.00 318 Hi -Land Acres Unit No. 1 268 0 0 0 0.00 0 0 0.00 1.00 266 Bentwood Terrace Subdivision 269 0 0 7 1.14 2,000 8,000 0.00 1.00 269 Westwind Subdivision 269 0 0 29 1.00 7,250 29,000 0.00 1.00 60 Sebastian Highlands Unit 07 269 0 0 8 1.21 2,420 9,680 0.00 1.00 206 Hampton Woods Subdivision 269 0 0 7 1.00 1,750 7,000 0.00 1.00 209 Briarwood Subdivision 269 0 0 3 1.21 908 3,630 0.00 1.00 313 Coral Wind Subdivision 274 4 10 12 1.00 6,500 26,000 252.20 1.00 241 Ridgewood Subdivisin 275 0 0 22 1.21 6,655 26,620 0.00 1.00 157 Black Bear Reserve 276 1 9 10 1.21 6,050 24,200 153.21 1.00 114 Harbor Point Subdivision 277 24 0 0 1.00 6,000 24,000 926.40 1.00 103 Vero Lake Estates Sub Unit H-4 278 7 31 39 1.21 23,293 93,170 693.79 1.00 283 Hidden Oaks Subdivision 279 2 10 13 1.00 6,250 25,000 175.00 1.00 165 Sylvan Lakes Subdivision 280 9 21 32 1.05 16,250 65,000 579.53 1.00 136 Heritage Trace at Hobart 281 0 0 4 1.21 1,210 4,840 0.00 1.00 242 Ridge Acres Subdivision 282 0 0 20 1.05 5,250 1 21,000 0.00 1.00 250 Hickory Sands Subdivision 283 0 0 16 1.00 4,000 16,000 0.00 1.00 133 Indian River Highlands Section 1 284 2 1 1 1.21 1,210 4,840 105.25 1.00 115 Collier Creek Estates Phase 1 285 14 5 0 1.16 5,500 22,000 682.35 1.00 116 Collier Creek Estates Phase 2 286 5 11 10 1.12 7,250 29,000 335.26 1.00 78 Fischer Lake Island Phase 1 287 1 9 0 1.10 2,750 11,000 139.28 1.85 90 Vero Lake Estates Sub Unit 5G 288 0 0 33 1.21 9,983 39,930 0.00 1.00 92 Vero Lake Estates Sub Unit A Replat 288 0 0 1 1.21 303 1,210 0.00 1.00 150 High Pines Subdivision 290 13 40 11 1.00 16,000 64,000 893.00 1.00 24 Gervais Subdivision 291 0 9 3 1.17 3,500 14,000 102.69 1.00 220 Country Walk Subdivision 292 4 11 it 1.00 6,500 26,000 261.98 1.00 162 Meadowlark Woods Subdivision 193 2 12 3 1.06 4,500 18,000 206.00 1.00 281 Meadows Subdivision (The) 294 2 8 6 1.00 4,000 16,000 155.44 1.00 261 Fox Haven Subdivision 295 4 11 13 1.04 7,250 29,000 271.34 1.00 82 Fischer Lake Island Phase 5 296 0 7 3 1.10 2,750 11,000 75.31 _ 1.85 316 Wood Hollow Phase 1 & 2 297 4 16 12 1.00 8,000 32,000 310.88 1.00 314 Walking Horse Hammock Subdivision 298 1 7 36 1.02 11,250 45,000 109.49 1.00 262 The Crossing 299 12 11 0 1.04 6,000 24,000 595.60 1.00 280 DUAS Subdivision 300 1 1 0 1.00 S00 2,000 48.38 1.00 83 Fischer Lake Island Phase 6 301 0 1 0 1.21 303 1,210 11.83 1.85 118 Collier Creek Estates Phase 4 302 5 11 12 1.18 8,250 33,000 354.26 1.00 194 Tamara Gardens Condo 303 0 16 0 1.00 4,000 16,000 156.48 1.00 225 Timberwood Estates Subdivision 304 2 6 10 1.00 4,500 18,000 135.88 1.00 224_ Kirkwood Estates Subdivision 305 2 6 8 1.00 4,000 16,000 135.88 1.00 276 White Fences 306 2 0 0 1.21 605 2,420 93.41 1.00 163 Country Pines Subdivision 307 2 6 8 1.00 4,000 16,000 135.88 1.00 81 Fischer Lake Island Phase 4 308 0 2 2 1.21 1,210 4,840 23.67 1.85 79 Fischer Lake Island Phase 2 309 0 7 5 1.00 3,000 12,000 68.46 1.85 80 Fischer Lake Island Phase 3 310 0 3 2 1.21 1,513 6,050 35.50 1.85 N 00 EXHIBIT D -ESTIMATE OF SEWAGE GENERATED AND POLLUTANT REDUCTION Number Subdivision Name SBS Ranking Initial d of Homes < 165' Initial ltof Homes 165' to 657' Initial Jt of Homes >657' 10 Year Growth Factor (DID t) 10 Year ADF (GPD) 10 Year PK HR (GDP) Pollutant Reduction Ib/yr Importance Factor (IM) 149 Cobblestone Subdivision 311 9 15 0 1.04 6,250 25,000 514.69 1.00 324 Oak Terrace Unit 1 312 0 0 0 0.00 0 0 0.00 1.00 7 Sanderling Subdivision 313 0 0 7 1.21 2,118 8,470 0.00 1.00 252 Hickory Hill Estates 314 0 0 7 1.21 2,118 8,470 0.00 1.00 257 Carriage Lane Subdivision 315 0 0 12 1.00 3,000 _ 12,000 0.00 1.00 267 Florence Acres Subdivision 315 0 0 13 1.00 3,250 13,000 0.00 1.00 202 Rosewind Subdivision 317 0 0 18 1.11 5,000 20,000 0.00 1.00 323 Oak Ridge Subdivision & Unit 2 318 7 21 5S 1.00 20,750 83,000 475.58 1.00 300 J R Ashton Subdivision 319 0 0 46 1.09 12,500 50,000 0.00 1.00 296 Citrus Ridge Subdivision 320 0 0 20 1.00 5,000 20,000 0.00 1.00 249 Colonial Heights 321 0 0 26 1.00 1 6,500 1 26,000 1 0.00 1.00 247 Reams Glen Subdivision 322 0 0 12 1.21 3,630 14,520 0.00 1.00 284 Mill Creek 323 0 0 23 1.04 6,000 24,000 0.00 1.00 325 Oslo Ridge Subdivision 324 0 0 18 1.21 5,445 21,780 0.00 1.00 339 Plantation Ridge Subdivision 325 0 9 32 1.10 11,250 45,000 96.61 1.00 A Portion of this subdivision is served by COVE Utilities .. It is recommended that Amos subdivision not be considered in the capital improvement program. Ranking results are due to an anomaly in the methodology. This site has the highest Index numbers assigned for "importance factor", proximity to surface water, flood plain, depth to groundwater and soil condition. As a result, the site is ranked much higher than would otherwise be expected. N CD N r EXHISITE -COST ANALYSIS Number Subd&tstan Name 11111161 Ranking Polhtam Reduction Rr/yr Grority5ewer Cost Estimate smrrtrem.v_ Oma Vacuum System TOWINUmber Of Cost Estimate Lots 0-ity Cast per Lot towpressure Vacuum Cost per lb of PoRuton Reductionf YR a Oyr".12t1r 0-Ity, Law Pressure Vacuum OSA141CA00AS O&WM501" oaM+$W'wV'W tRCPatablawater Available 138 Hobart Landing Unit 2 1 965.00 $681,725.64 $840,628.56 $0.00 26 526,220.22 $32,331.87 $0.00 $39,22 557.29 50.00 Yes 17 Orchid Island No.1 2 1 473,15 $124256659 5407 9.10 $596 81352 14 508 754.76 529,133.57 W,629.54 $146.73 $S&Ol 530724 No SS Orchid Island No.2 3 737.76 $1,361,84459 $634,157.32 $730,854,19 22 $61,902.03 $28,825.33 $33,220.65 $102.48 $57.98 $78.20 No 139 Hobart landing Unit 3 4 270.20 $394,225.3} $237,914.50 $0.00 7 $S6 318.05 533,987.79 $0.00 $84.90 $57.31 $0,00 Yes 2 Hallmark Ocean Subdivision 5 11}.80 $391,905.94 $197032.95 $0.00 3 5130,635.31 $65,670,98 SOM $261.82 $99.87 50.00 Yes 1 Ambersand Beach Sub No 1 & 2 6 2,802.36 $211151700.05 50.00 $2,477,492.14 84 $25,386.91 $0.00 529 493.95 $42.71 $0.00 567.25 Yes 48 Floravon Shores Subdivision T 949.44 $379,141.81 $0.00 $0.00 36 $10,531.72 1 $0.00 50.00 $31.24 1 50.00 $0.00 Yes 131 Naranjo TR SheOmound Bch Rapist of POR 8 326.94 $454,677.16 5321,749.47 $0.00 11 541,334.29 1 529,249.95 $0.00 $102.69 $66.16 50.00 No 52 Sebastian Highlands Unit 02 Collier 9 1,02753 $597,650.02 $0.00 $354,733.12 28 $21,344.64 50.00 $12,669,04 $31.32 $0.00 $19.45 Yes 320 River Shores Estates Units 1.4 20 1,66331 52,933,294.23 $0.00 $2,637597.27 120 524,444,12 $0.00 $21,979.98 $97.46 50,00 5118.30 Yes 212 Rain Tree Corner Subdivision 11 444.68 $641,953.84 5468,796.20 $0.00 16 $40,184.62 $29,299.76 $0.00 $97,45 570.85 $0.00 Yes 58 Sebastian Highlands Unit 05 11 13577.22 $9,9251259.20 $0.00 $5,893,10352 " 465 521340.64 50.00 $12,669.04 $39.30 $0,00 S24AS Yes 137 Hobart Landing Unit 1 13 136,40 5447 727,48 $520,521.70 1 $0.00 17 $26,336.91 $30,618.92 $0.00 $188,51 $197.86 $0.00 1 Yes 19 Orchid Isle Estates Subdivision 14 2,428,71 $3,333,218.23 52,013,823.07 $1,433,455.30 67 549,749.53 $30,057.06 S21.M.DD $79.39 55$.40 $55126 No 225 An+os{A-effr}ed 46 46..74 339412tk'r.BB 682,641,59 60.88 2 6F95t691,in $43;32&04 58.48 664831 6&U-94 $0.40 . we 213 kanawah Acres 16 164.70 $1103,656.03 $485,688.54 $0.00 12 $91,973.34 $40,474.04 • 50,00 $408.14 5185.68 $0.00 No, 199 Verona Estates Subdivision 17 ifism $479,279.92 $313,165.34 $0.00 21 543570.90 $28,469.58 $0100 $329.15 $200.11 $0.00 No 291 Indian River Heights Units 2 -9 18 5,759.18 $14,957563.80 $0.00 510,492,88546 772 $39,375.08 S0.00 ' $13,591.82 5139.86 S0.00 $lOd.88 Yes 273 Diana Park Subdivision 19 587.62 $695,695.59 $59A085.22 $O.OD 21 $33,128.36 $28527.86 $0.00 _ $78.40 $68.94 $aoo Yes 49 Dales Landing Subdivision 20 169.33 $370,210.24 S247,302.27 $O.OD T $52887.38 $35,328.90= $0,00 $372.41 ' $4432 $0.40 No 278 Stevens Park Unit 1 & 2 21 1,657.82 55,695,223.22 $0.00 $4,582,05855 303 $18,796.12 $0.00 $15,122.31 $184.15 50.00 1 $179.49 Yes 272 Pine Tree Park Units 1.4 22 6,22158 $9,920,666,20 $0.00 $7,677,82057 525 $181846.51 $0.00 $14,624.42 585.89 50,00 $73.63 Yes 196 Uttle Portion Subdivision Re tat OF 23 201.17 $687,423.16 5582,323.72 $0.00 21 $32,734.44 $27,729.70 $0.00 $226.87 $197.05 $0.00 Yes 50 Sebastian Highlands Unit 01 24 17,256.07 $16,093,861.16 $0.00 $9 52,456.04 754 $21,344.64 $0.40 $12,669.04 $49.88 $0.00 $3139 - Yes 57 Sebastian Highlands Unit 04 25 101038.99 $9,348,953.83 $0.00 $5549,039.45 438 $23,344.64 $0.00 $12,669.04 549.90 $0.00 $31.21 Yes 143 Water Grove Subdivision 26 632.10 $902,288.86 $737,949.00 - $0.00., 26 $34,703.42 $28,384.58 $0.00• $89.83 '$79.04 50.40. Yes 207 Tropic Colony Subdivision 27 1,134.80 $3,065,567.91 $0.00 $3,190591.25 145 $23,141.85 $0,00 $22,004.08 $151.54 $0.00 $202.21 Yes 32 Hallelulah Acres 28 231,60 _$565752.50, $306,376.52 $0.06 , 6 $94292.08 $51062.75. $0.00. $169.83* $80,24 $0.00 Noy 68 Sebastian Highlands Unit 13 29 5,98817 $13,962,424,72 $0.00 $8,771,369.64 621 $22,483.78 $004 $0.00 $124.23 $0.00 585.96 Yes 51 Sebastian Highlands Unit 02 30 17,845.33 $22,454564.91 $0.00 $13,327,829.91- 1052 $21,344.64 $0.00 $12,669.04 567.29 $0.00 $42.08 Yes 56 Sebastian Htphhand, Ung 03' 31 456$75 $3585,900.10 $0.00 $;!2$398.69 168 $4344.64 $0.00 $IZ669.04 $41.97 Saw $26.24 Yes 53 Sebastian Highlands Unit 02 Rapier PG 2' 38 1,168.19 $4408,746.47 Saw $836,I5863 66 $21,344.64 r $0.00 $1166904 _ $59.42 saw $3725 Yes 54 Sebastian Htphkrnds Un1t02 Repkt PG 3' 45 3,319.68 $2253,459.01 saw $1,634,306.14 119 $11344.64 SawSIZ66A04 $44136 $0.00 $27.74 Yet 55 SefotJen HfphW& Volt 02 Repkrt M 4' 69 89308 $1195,300.03 Saw $709,466,23 - 56$21,34464 Soon $12669.04 $71.58 $44.76 Yes 136 Heritage trace or Hobart' IBI 0,00 $167,618.77 $195,89194 Saw 7 9.97 $2346 $27,98456 $0.00 $0.00 $000 $0.00 Yes •a It Is recommended that Amos subdivision not be considered in the capital Improvement program.. Ranking results are due to an anomaly, In the methodology. This site has the highest Index numbers assigned for "Importance facto', proximity to surface water, flood plain, depth to groundwater and soil condRlom As a result, the site is ranked much higher than would otherwise be expected. C C F E}QLEL�L�EEELL���gEEgELEEEpEgLi£F££F e StF Q.i o SaRa.1«AR^:,SREfRA1ARAx."ARAka. .. �, $p � 8"R88A88�a8�8A Sts„astgxa„:ak RSSfaaA�„54ddSk'a�aaaa 88888'a81A8A8x8ka:zg �4�gqsq m688^8888$8 ""sa ksfs $"8d 9 agaa5U "^.88g!88a8k88 IRst9sfaxgRa$1 a 9& &i§S1 6 6AA�a�^ka^^•2 RI�Sa1a��E;A1R9j�aR'^i omo 0 $ F��IRRRRI_F.SR:RRRmAaA63^ mo��o�mmm axe«"" 8R St�T 8R 88s68R868888��8$�8g8k�js"x as as a5t5fS�NANwSf St: �B _aa .r �.,•.,««a ?668z886' a 88 9 88 A888886 „stR 9 St_aSiba �AR^se^sARa^aaAP x88'" a- OR iaa^ ARM SRaaasaR %� 1 i AM^.^. A .^. d^a!A1 �x�d»... A 45154 �� RSA«^xRaRalylA"=ass^^R „A�AR„S '°Gg�0a1" NA S� ss° a 1 aha sN x s g a;gaasmOmall �g�:k� ?a�� F� a"8s,kgR`=,Ra��a a�,.E��g« "Q9C b� Sk���l " NER� ..1 16E� S g�ao`.:��� SN„AaAdA G � 8^ R 49 RB..SaQ�.. ,se9$a �$ ggggggg;ggg3ga�gsggggR„gPc"g ,�pq��m "g �{ •3'.AaS11a11RAAA1AAA1RREq:CS� � y n SS„R+F-+ESaNy+RakxAxx7� C omo 0 mo��o�mmm C P284 omo 0 P284 INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF UTILTY SERVICES DATE: July 6, 2017 TO: Jason E. Brown, County Administrator FROM: Cindy Corrente, Utilities Finance Manager THRU: Vincent Burke, P.E., Director of Utility Services SUBJECT: Request to Waive Bid Requirement for a Comprehensive Water, Wastewater, and Reclaimed (Reuse) Water Rate Study, and Water and Sewer Impact Fee Study BACKGROUND On December 20, 2016, the Indian River County Board of County Commissioners (BCC) approved the following items in regards to the North County Septic to Sewer (S2S) Phase 1 project: 1. Approved the county's funding mechanism. 2. Begin implementation of a Phase 1 S2S assessment project for the construction costs for all benefitting properties both inside the city of Sebastian and the unincorporated county. 3. Approved the special 2% APR interest rate for the Phase 1 S2S project area. 4. Directed staff to finalize the bid package and go out for competitive bids. S. Formalized a connection policy for existing structures within the Phase 1 S2S area with a 5 - year timeline for mandatory hook-up. 6. Directed staff to conduct an updated rate study to include looking at recouping any cost of the construction and the future renewal and replacement (R & R) costs. As of June 20, 2017, all items except the comprehensive rate study are in progress or have been completed. ANALYSIS In addition to the Sebastian Phase 1 portion of the Septic to Sewer Project, there is a second phase being formulated, which will be dependent on grants or other funding sources. In recent months, staff has been overseeing various assessment projects throughout the county and is working with the county's Current Development Division for private developments that continue to expand the county's infrastructure footprint. As approved by the BCC on October 18, 2016, staff was tasked to work with a consulting engineer to create a countywide S2S matrix based on a priority ranking for certain subdivisions within the county. Such a ranking is being finalized and will be presented to the BCC in the near future. This action began earlier in the year when, on March 8, 2016, the Board approved a general four -step phased approach for the countywide S2S initiative. The phases are as follows: P285 Phase I: Develop a more comprehensive priority ranking plan along with cost estimates Phase II: Proposed changes to the County's Comprehensive Plan Phase III: Financing Options and Public Outreach Phase IV: Encumber Funds and implementation of priority ranking Therefore, based on BCC direction, it is imperative to review our current method of user rates and fees. Indian River County Department of Utility Services (IRCDUS) has not conducted a comprehensive rate study since 1999. In the past eighteen years, the utility has steadily grown, along with related revenues and operating expenses. With this in mind, it is important to evaluate the appropriateness of existing rate structures and either determine or confirm if the existing rates provide sufficient revenues for near - and long-term fiscal needs. It is also important to review system capacity, impact fees, and line extension charges in order to ensure they are meeting the capital costs affiliated with the related growth. Since compiling, advertising and awarding a contract for a comprehensive rate study utilizing the standard RFP or RFQ format would be an estimated six to nine month process, staff sought other options. The possibility of piggybacking another bid was explored. However, since most utilities conduct rate studies every five to seven years to gauge the effectiveness of current rate structures, and IRCDUS has not done one for eighteen years, we were unable to find any other bids that would closely match our needs. Thus, the possibility of a piggyback option was eliminated. In 1999, staff worked with Marco (Mike) Rocca of Hartman and Associates to complete a comprehensive water and sewer systems rate study. Over the past years, staff has continued to consult with Mr. Rocca on minor matters related to the utility. Mr. Rocca is currently employed by Raftelis Financial Consultants, Inc (Raftelis) as Principal Consultant. Given Mr. Rocca's previous experience with the county and familiarity with the existing rate structure, staff reached out to Raftelis to provide a scope of work in order to conduct a Comprehensive Water, Wastewater, and Reclaimed (Reuse) Water Rate Study as well as Water and Wastewater Impact Fee Study. (See attached for Raftelis' Statement of Qualifications (SOQ) and associated information for the project team that will be providing the professional services.) The first scope of services describes services in order to conduct a Comprehensive Water, Wastewater, and Reclaimed Water Rate Study. The estimated timeline for this study is one hundred and fifty (150) days. This scope consists of two major tasks. The cost of task one is not to exceed $81,500. The first task deliverables include: • A review of customer data to be used in developing the user rates and charges • A review of utility financial information to use as the basis for revenue requirements • An allocation of fiscal requirements based on cost of service principles • A five-year pro forma operating statement • A capital improvements plan (CIP) funding module to allow for reviews of alternative funding sources • A uniform S2S policy • A draft report to be finalized only after meetings with staff and the BCC • A final report P286 The second task is to update the ancillary charges and fees for a not -to -exceed amount of $17,900. If done concurrently with task one, there is no additional timeline. The second task deliverables include: • Update the ancillary services list to current time and material costs • Meeting with county staff to discuss findings • A draft report to be finalized only after meeting with county staff • A final report The second scope of services is for a Water and Wastewater Impact Fee Study for a not -to -exceed amount of $65,100. If the work is done concurrently with the Comprehensive Rate Study, there is no additional timeline required. However, if done separately, the work would require one hundred and fifty (150) days. This work would include: • A review of current capital costs, near term expansion plans, system capacities, and customer demand • A development of impact fees • A review of the level of service criteria for each utility service • Meeting with county staff to discuss findings • A draft report • A final report Scope of Service Task Description Amount 1 1.1 User Rates and Charges $ 81,500.00 1.2 Ancillary Charges & Fees $ 17,900.00 2 2.1 Impact Fee Study $ 65,100.00 Total $164,500.00 Staff presents three options for the rate study. Option 1: Do nothing. Utilize the existing rate structure. Option 2: Award the two Scope of Services items as individual projects. The first Scope of services would be to conduct a Comprehensive Water, Wastewater, and Reclaimed Water Rate Study. The estimated timeline for this study is one hundred and fifty (150) days. Once that work is complete and the Board and staff are satisfied with the results, determine if the Board desires to proceed with the Water and Wastewater Impact Fee Study. If so, then issue the Notice to Proceed for the second Scope of Services. The estimated timeline for this study is one hundred and fifty (150) days. Therefore, if the Board were to direct the consultant to proceed with both studies in a sequential manner, the timeline for completion would be three hundred (300) days. Option 3: Award the two Scope of Services items to be done concurrently. The estimated timeline for proceeding in this manner is one hundred and fifty (150) days. P287 FUNDING: Funds for the Comprehensive Water, Wastewater, and Reclaimed Rate Study, and the Water and Wastewater Impact Fee Study, are available in the Other Professional Services account in the Operating Fund. Operating fund revenues are derived from water and sewer sales. Description Account Number Amount Other Professional Services 47123536-033190 $164,500 RECOMMENDATION: The staff of the Indian River County Department of Utility Services recommends that: 1. The Board of County Commissioners waive the bid requirements in regards to services related to conducting a Comprehensive Water, Wastewater, and Reclaimed (Reuse) Water Rate Study, and Water and Sewer Impact Fee Study. 2. Authorize the Chairman to execute the attached Professional Services Agreements with Raftelis Financial Consultants, Inc. after review and approval by the county attorney 3. Approve awarding the scope of services using Option 3 directing that both studies run concurrently in the interest of completing the studies within the one hundred and fifty (150) day timeline and looking at all utility rates, not just the operating fund rates. 4. Authorize the Chairman to sign the Municipal Advisor Disclosure Acknowledgement Letter after review and approval by the County Attorney. ATTACHMENTS Professional Services Agreement between Indian River County and Raftelis Financial Consultants, Inc. for a Comprehensive Water, Wastewater, and Reclaimed Rate Study Professional Services Agreement between Indian River County and Raftelis Financial Consultants, Inc. for a Water and Wastewater Impact Fee Study Statement of Qualifications Municipal Advisor Disclosure Acknowledgement Letter P288 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT BETWEEN INDIAN RIVER COUNTY. FLORIDA AND RAFTELIS FINANCIAL CONSULTANTS, INC. FOR A COMPREHENSIVE WATER, WASTEWATER, AND RECLAIMED WATER RATE STUDY This Consulting Agreement ("Agreement") is entered into this _ day of 2017 (hereinafter referred to as the Effective Date) by and between Indian River County, Florida (the "County" or "Client") and Raftelis Financial Consultants, Inc., 227 W. Trade Street, Suite 1400, Charlotte, NC 28202 ("Raftelis" or "Consultant"). Witnesseth WHEREAS, Consultant has substantial skill and experience in water and wastewater finance, management, and pricing; and WHEREAS, the Client desires to hire Raftelis, and Raftelis desires to provide services to the Client, NOW, THEREFORE, for good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, the Parties agree to the terms and conditions set forth herein. Article 1. Statement of Work Raftelis shall provide professional consulting services to prepare a utility rate study for the Client. Raftelis will perform these services as set forth in more detail in Attachment A. Article 2. Time for Completion This Agreement will commence upon approval by the Client and remain in effect for a period of one year. Further renewals of this Agreement are at the option of the Parties and shall be in writing. Article 3. Compensation Client shall pay to Raftelis the sum not to exceed Ninety-nine Thousand Four Hundred Dollars ($99,400.00), which includes professional fees and direct expenses incurred in performing the scope of services outlined in Attachment A. This sum is based upon the scope of work contained herein at Raftelis' current standard hourly rate schedule included in Attachment B. . The Consultant shall invoice the Client upon the completion of each task or deliverable in accordance with the Project Schedule, or on a monthly basis if the Project Schedule does not otherwise specify. The Client shall pay Consultant in accordance with the Local Government Prompt Payment Act. Article 4. Additional Services At the Client's request, Raftelis may submit change orders or proposals for additional professional services. Each change order or proposal submitted shall detail: (1) scope of work for the additional services, (2) period of services to be performed, and (3) method and amount of compensation. The Client shall provide written acceptance and authorization to Raftelis prior to the commencement of work on any proposed additional services. Each change order or proposal for additional services accepted and approved by the Client shall Page 1 of 6 P289 become part of this Agreement and shall be governed by the terms and conditions contained in this Agreement. Article S. Place of Performance Raftelis shall be responsible for maintaining its own office facilities and will not be provided with either office facilities or support by the Client. Article 6. Indemnification Raftelis hereby agrees to indemnify the Client, its commissioners, officers, employees, and agents and to hold the Client, its commissioners, officers, employees, and agents harmless against any and all claims, action, or demands against the Client and against any and all damages for injury to or death of any person and for loss of or damage to any and all property arising out of the negligent acts, errors or omissions of Raftelis under this Agreement. Raftelis shall not be held responsible for any claims caused by the negligence of the Client. Article 7. Insurance Consultant shall maintain the types and levels of insurance during the life of this Agreement as specified below. The Client will be named as additionally insured on the Raftelis' Certificates of Insurance, and Raftelis will provide the Client with these Certificates of Insurance by July 28, 2017. Commercial general liability insurance—$1,000,000 for each occurrence and $2,000,000 in the aggregate Comprehensive automobile liability insurance—$1,000,000 combined single limit each occurrence Workers Compensation insurance—Statutory limits Professional liability insurance—$1,000,000 in the aggregate Excess or Umbrella Liability—$3,000,000 in the aggregate Article 8. Public Records Compliance A. Indian River County is a public agency subject to Chapter 119, Florida Statutes. Raftelis shall comply with Florida's Public Records Law. Specifically, the Contractor shall: (1) Keep and maintain public records required by the County to perform the service. (2) Upon request from the County's Custodian of Public Records, provide the County with a copy of the requested records, or allow the records to be inspected or copied within a reasonable time at a cost that does not exceed the cost provided in Chapter 119 or as otherwise provided by law. (3) Ensure that public records that are exempt, or confidential and exempt from public records disclosure requirements are not disclosed except as authorized by law for the duration of the contract term and following completion of the contract if the contractor does nottransferthe records to the County. (4) Upon completion of the contract, transfer, at no cost, to the County all public records in possession of the Contractor, or keep and maintain public records required by the Countyto perform the service. Page 2 of 6 P290 If the Contractor transfers all public records to the County upon completion of the contract, the Contractor shall destroy any duplicate public records that are exempt, or confidential and exempt from public records disclosure requirements. If the contractor keeps and maintains public records upon completion of the contract, the Contractor shall meet all applicable requirements for retaining public records. All records stored electronically must be provided to the County, upon request from the Custodian of Public Records, in a format that is compatible with the information technology systems of the County. B. IF RAFTELIS HAS QUESTIONS REGARDING THE APPLICATION OF CHAPTER 119, FLORIDA STATUTES, TO THE CONTRACTOR'S DUTY TO PROVIDE PUBLIC RECORDS RELATING TO THIS CONTRACT, CONTACT THE CUSTODIAN OF PUBLIC RECORDS AT: (772) 226-1424 publicrecords@irceov.com Indian River County Office of the County Attorney 180127th Street Vero Beach, FL 32960 C. Failure of Raftelis to comply with these requirements shall be a material breach of this Agreement. Article 9. Independent Contractor Status It is understood and agreed that Raftelis will provide the services under this Agreement on a professional basis as an independent Contractor, and that during the performance of the services under this Agreement, Raftelis' employees will not be considered employees of the Client within the meaning or the applications of any federal, state, or local laws or regulations including, but not limited to, laws or regulations covering unemployment insurance, old age benefits, worker's compensation, industrial accident, labor, or taxes of any kind. Raftelis' employees shall not be entitled to benefits that may be afforded from time to time to Client employees, including without limitation, vacation, holidays, sick leave, worker's compensation, and unemployment insurance. Further, the Client shall not be responsible for withholding or paying any taxes or social security on behalf of Raftelis' employees. Raftelis shall be fully responsible for any such withholding or paying of taxes or social security. Article 10. Reliance on Data In performance of the services, it is understood that the Client and others may supply Raftelis with certain information or data, and that Raftelis will rely on such information. It is agreed that the accuracy of such information is not within Raftelis' control, and Raftelis shall not be liable for its accuracy, nor for its verification, except to the extent that such verification is expressly a part of Raftelis' scope of services. Article 11. Opinions and Estimates Raftelis' opinions, estimates, projections, and forecasts of current and future costs, revenues, other levels of any sort, and events shall be made on the basis of available information and Raftelis' expertise and qualifications as a professional. Raftelis does not warrant or guarantee that its opinions, estimates, projections or forecasts of current and future levels and events will not vary from the Client's estimates or forecasts or from actual outcomes. Raftelis identifies costs, allocates costs to customer classes and provides rate models. It does not establish rates, which is the legislative responsibility of the Client. Page 3 of 6 P291 Article 12. No Consequential Damages To the fullest extent permitted by law, neither party shall be liable to the other for any special, indirect, consequential, punitive or exemplary damages resulting from the performance or non-performance of this Agreement notwithstanding the fault, tort (including negligence), strict liability or other basis of legal liability of the party so released or whose liability is so limited and shall extend to the officers, directors, employees, licensors, agents, subcontractors, vendors and related entities of such party. Article 13. Termination of Work This Agreement may be terminated as follows: 1. By Client (a) for its convenience on 30 days' notice to Raftelis, or (b) for cause, if Raftelis materially breaches this Agreement through no fault of Client, and Raftelis neither cures such material breach nor makes reasonable progress toward cure within 15 days after Client has given written notice of the alleged breach to Raftelis. By Raftelis (a) for cause, if Client materially breaches this Agreement through no fault of Raftelis, and Client neither cures such material breach nor makes reasonable progress toward cure within 15 days after Raftelis has given written notice of the alleged breach to Client, or (b) upon five days' notice if Work under this Agreement has been suspended by either Client or Raftelis in the aggregate for more than 30 days. 3. Payment upon Termination. In the event of termination, Raftelis shall be compensated for all work performed prior to the effective date of termination. Article 14. Notices All notices required or permitted under this Agreement shall be in writing and shall be deemed deliverable when delivered in person or deposited in the United States mail, postage prepaid, addressed as follows: If for the Client: Vincent M. Burke, PE Director Indian River County Department of Utility Services 180127th Street Vero Beach, FL 32960 If for Raftelis: Marco H. Rocca, CMC Principal Consultant Raftelis Financial Consultants, Inc. 950 S. Winter Park Drive Suite 240 Casselberry, FL 32707 Page 4 of 6 P292 Article 15. Compliance with Applicable Laws Raftelis agrees not to discriminate in its employment practices, and will render services underthis Agreement without regard to race, color, religion, sex, national origin, veteran status, political affiliation or disabilities. Any act of discrimination committed by Raftelis, or failure to comply with these statutory obligations when applicable, shall be grounds for termination of this Agreement. Article 16. General Provisions A. Entire This Agreement represents the entire and sole agreement between the Parties with Agreement: respect to the subject matter hereof. B. Waiver: The failure of either Party to require performance by the other of any provision hereof shall in no way affect the right to require performance at any time thereafter, nor shall the waiver of a breach of any provision hereof be taken to be a waiver of any succeeding breach of such provision or as a waiver of the provision itself. All remedies afforded in this Agreement shall be taken and construed as cumulative; that is, in addition to every other remedy available at law or in equity. C. Relationship: Nothing herein contained shall be construed to imply a joint venture, partnership, or principal -agent relationship between Raftelis and the Client; and neither Party shall have the right, power, or authority to obligate or bind the other in any manner whatsoever, except as otherwise agreed to in writing. D. Assignment Neither Party shall assign or delegate this Agreement or any rights, duties, or and obligations hereunder without the express written consent of the other. Subject to Delegation: the foregoing, this Agreement shall inure to the benefit of and be binding upon the successors, legal representatives, and assignees of the Parties hereto. E. Severability: If any provision of this Agreement is declared invalid or unenforceable, such provision shall be deemed modified to the extent necessary and possible to render it valid and enforceable. In any event, the unenforceability or invalidity of any provision shall not affect any other provision of this Agreement, and this Agreement shall continue in force and effect, and be construed and enforced, as if such provision had not been included, or had been modified as above provided, as the case may be. F. Governing This Agreement shall be governed by, and construed in accordance with, the laws Law: of the State of Florida. Venue and jurisdiction shall be in Indian River County, Florida, Circuit Court. G. Paragraph The paragraph headings set forth in this Agreement are for the convenience of the Headings: Parties, and in no way define, limit, or describe the scope or intent of this Agreement and are to be given no legal effect. H. Third Party Nothing in this Agreement shall be construed to create or confer any rights or Rights interest to any third party or third party beneficiary. It is the intent of the parties that no other outside, non-party claimant shall have any legal right to enforce the terms of this Agreement. Page 5 of 6 P293 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties have executed this Agreement by their duly authorized representatives. By: INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA Signature Joseph E. Flescher Print Name Chairman, Board of County Commissioners Title Date RAFTELIS FINANCIAL CONSULTANTS, INC. By: Signature Marco H. Rocca Print Name Principal Consultant Title July 11, 2017 Date Page 6 of 6 P294 ATTACHMENT A COMPREHENSIVE WATER, WASTEWATER AND RECLAIMED WATER RATE STUDY SECTION I SCOPE OF SERVICES This comprehensive rate study addresses five primary objectives expressed by the County: 1) revenue sufficiency; 2) appropriateness of existing rate structure; 3) funding of or modification to the Capital Improvement Program (CIP); 4) updating cost recovery associated with ancillary charges and fees; and 5) updating the wastewater industrial surcharge. METHODOLOGY The methodology used for the comprehensive rate study consists of cost of service rate principles with consideration given to community standards. This methodology includes an emphasis on the relationship between customer demand and usage characteristics within each customer classification and budgeted operating fiscal requirements associated with such demand and usage characteristics. The objective is to equitably recover operating expenses from customers in relative proportion to demand and usage characteristics through rates that are easily managed by the utility and understood by the customers. This process includes the avoidance or minimization of subsidization between services. PROJECT APPROACH The Consultant will coordinate with County staff to obtain or develop historic, current and projected information, data and assumptions necessary to formulate findings and conclusions relative to the customer base and operating fiscal requirements. Data will be incorporated into a dynamic computer model where findings and results associated with various scenarios and alternatives can be evaluated for appropriate compliance with financial, legal, customer and utility requirements. Activities include: a) Identifying customer characteristics through a billing frequency analysis for rate design/rate structures, rate setting and revenue projection purposes; b) Evaluation and modification if necessary of the existing water, wastewater and reclaimed water rate structure; c) Allocation of fiscal requirements based on cost of service principles relative to customer service, demand and usage; d) Projection of fiscal requirements based on escalation factors relevant to each budgeted line item; e) Review and development of near and long term sources and uses to address CIP; f) Development of equitable and appropriate user rates and charges, which together with certain other revenues are sufficient to pay 100 percent of all operating expenses, debt service associated with all outstanding debt and any projected revenue bonds, renewal and replacement requirements, debt service coverage provisions, capital provided through user fee revenues, required transfers, and other authorized fiscal requirements not including CIP; g) Development of uniform septic to sewer policy. h) Adjustment of ancillary charges base on review of personnel, equipment and material costs; i) Review, evaluation and adjustment of wastewater industrial surcharge; j) Development of a computer rate model with provisions for multi-year projections to provide options and address future operating requirements; and k) Meetings, discussions and presentations to County staff. A modified cost of service methodology will be used that incorporates reviews, investigations and analyses necessary to identify costs of services and customer determinants required to establish appropriate user rates reflecting just and equitable recovery of water, wastewater and reclaimed water service costs. The approach includes the development of a computer rate and financial feasibility model platform to analyze, develop, review and provide forecasts of customers, usage and fiscal requirements with the ability to activate a strategic funding module addressing the Utility's CIP. The model is designed to provide graphic outputs reflecting the salient results of alternatives and scenarios providing comparisons for quick and understandable presentations. Page 1 of 6 P295 ITEM 1 — WATER, WASTEWATER AND RECLAIMED WATER USER RATE AND CHARGE STUDY TASKS 1-1. Project Initiation — An on-site or telephone meeting with County staff will be held to initiate the study process, which in general includes: a) Discussion of primary goals and objectives; b) Updating data previously provided by the County and availability of any new data; c) Operating and administrative policies and procedures; d) Current and future economic constraints; e) Customer base and other service agreements; 0 Customer growth assumptions; g) Utility's desired approach to funding the CIP including septic to sewer; h) Consultant/County staff communications process; and i) Overview of time schedules, meetings and deliverable formats. 1-2. Customer Data — A review and evaluation of historic and current water, wastewater and reclaimed water customer activity and user fee revenue data will be conducted to identify customer characteristics. To facilitate this task a request for data will be directed to the County for either a comprehensive billing frequency analysis if available through the current billing system, or an electronic file containing information for 12 consecutive months of bills by customer classification and meter size on the number of. (i) accounts; (ii) dwelling units if applicable; (iii) equivalencies; (iv) usage; and (v) the user fee amount for each bill. In addition, billing, demand and usage data for all customers provided service(s) through special agreements. The billing frequency analysis is necessary to identify the water, wastewater and reclaimed water usage characteristics by customer class and size of service. Once the billing frequency analysis is completed, the Consultant will coordinate with the County to verify the results and obtain concurrence on the findings for use in developing the user rates and charges. An important element in the billing frequency process is the identification of "outliers" and/or events where billing corrections were made but usage amounts in the billing data were not corrected. Additionally, flow, strength and frequency data with be requested on customers subject to the wastewater industrial surcharge. 1-3. Fiscal and Revenue Requirements — A review and evaluation will be conducted of utility financial and accounting information, including but not limited to budgets, historical and current financial records, operation and maintenance reports, R&R activities, CIP and schedules of existing, proposed debt service and policies regarding reserve fund balances. The results and findings will be discussed with County staff to obtain concurrence and then used as the basis for fiscal and revenue requirements. This item includes reconciling affiliated activities such as allocation of interest and other income. 1-4. Rate and Fee Architecture — The existing rate structures, including policy relative to Guaranteed Revenue, will be evaluated to identify conformance with goal and objectives. Of interest to the County is an evaluation of water, wastewater and reclaimed water equivalency criteria by customer class, usage block allowances, correlation to impact fee equivalency criteria and other revenue generation items as may be appropriate. Items of interest will be evaluated and developed as necessary together with comparative results on customer billing impacts, revenue sufficiency and other utility concerns including use of automatic indexing. 1-5. Allocation of Cost and Rate Adjustments —Net revenue requirements for each utility function will be allocated to individual rate structure components pursuant to the proposed rate structure criteria. Based on customer classes, equivalency/demand determinants and allocated revenue requirements, user rates will be developed independently for water, wastewater and reclaimed water. Tables and schedules identifying changes in the proposed rates together with customer impacts and comparison to other communities will also be developed and included in the study process. 1-6. Forecast of Customer Equivalencies and Billable Usage — Pursuant to historical and planning data provided by the County, projections of the number of equivalencies and billable flows by customer class and rate structure configuration for each utility service will be developed and reviewed with County staff for concurrence. Page 2 of 6 P296 1-7. Forecast of Revenue Requirements and Operating Results — A 5 -year proforma operating statement will be developed for each utility service and combined into one consolidated statement. The proforma will include projections of revenue, O&M expenses, net revenue, debt service, transfer from other utility funds and other fiscal activities/requirements of the Utility. The projected operating results will be used to demonstrate the sufficiency of recommended rates. 1-8. Capital Improvement Funding Module — A CIP module will be incorporated into the rate model to allow for reviews of alternative sources of funding the capital improvement requirements, including pay as you go, debt, grants and a combination of other sources. Unless provided individually by the County, general financing assumptions for revenue bonds, State Revolving Fund (SRF) loans and bank qualified loans will reflect the Consultant's understanding of current and anticipated financing requirements. 1-9. Uniform Septic to Sewer Policy — Forecasts of occurrences and timing of septic to sewer conversions including policy on connection requirements, as provided by County staff, will be evaluated to determine potential annual operating cash flow and marginal revenue available to assist with utility enterprise funding of localized connection facility costs. A matrix of the analysis results will be utilized to: 1) illustrate attributes of selected ranges of utility enterprise funding; and 2) assist with selection of components of a uniform septic to sewer policy. 1-10. Preliminary Findings — Upon completion of the initial analysis, the Consultant will meet with County staff for the purpose of (i) reviewing the findings and conclusions; (ii) discussing any issues or concerns County staff may have regarding the findings; and (iii) obtaining County staff comments, observations and directions on proceeding with the development of an initial draft report. 1-11. Draft Reports — A draft report will be prepared containing discussions, tables and supporting documentation associated with the major elements of the study, including but not limited to customer data, fiscal requirements, rate design and projections of operations. Copies of the draft report will be provided in electronic format to County staff for review and comments. 1-12. Draft Report Meeting — One meeting is contemplated with County staff to present and discuss the draft report. It is anticipated that upon completion of this meeting County staff will provide a sufficient level of comments and directions for the Consultant to: 1) modify the draft report as necessary; and 2) work with County staff to schedule one-on-one and/or public workshop meetings with Board of County Commissioners (BCC). 1-13. Meetings With BCC — Pursuant to the type of meeting, the Consultant will prepare appropriate presentation materials, have interactive computer model available and provide discussions associated with the rate study findings and conclusions. It is understood that the BCC may direct changes or alternatives requiring reevaluation and necessitate additional meetings. 1-14. Final Report — One printed signed copy together with an electronic copy of the final report will be provided to the County. 1-15. Assist with Draft Ordinance — Assist County staff with preparation of draft ordinance/resolution together with providing reviews and comments of the final ordinance/resolution as prepared by County. 1-16. Final Meeting — The Consultant will attend one public hearing to assistwith the presentation of the findings of the final report to the County Commission. Page 3 of 6 P297 ITEM 2 — ANCILLARY CHARGES AND FEES UPDATE STUDY TASKS 2-1. Data Acquisition — Coordinate with County staff to obtain labor, material and administrative resources associated with: a) Meter Replacement and Removal b) Water and Sewer Service Connections c) Meter Installation d) Water Service Reconnection e) Meter Test f) Engineering Services g) Inspection Fee. 2-2. Update Charges and Fees — Update services listed above pursuant to current time and material costs 2-3. Preliminary Findings —Meet with County staff to: (i) review the updated service charges and fees; (ii) discuss issues and/or concerns that County staff may have regarding the findings; and (iii) obtain County staff comments, observations and directions on proceeding with the development of an initial draft report. 2-4. Draft Reports — A draft report will be prepared containing discussions, tables and supporting documentation associated with the major elements of the updated charges and fees, including comparisons where applicable to ancillary charges of other utilities. 2-5. Draft Report Meeting — One meeting is contemplated with County staff to present and discuss the draft report. It is anticipated that upon completion of this meeting County staff will provide a sufficient level of comments and directions to allow the Consultant to .finalize the study. 2-6. Final Report — One printed signed copy together with an electronic copy of the final report will be provided to the County. 2-7. Assist with Draft Ordinance — Assist County staff with preparation of draft ordinance/resolution together with providing reviews and comments of the final ordinance/resolution as prepared by County. 2-8. Final Meeting — The Consultant will attend one public hearing to assist with the presentation of the findings of the final report to the County Commission. ITEM 3. ADDITIONAL SERVICES Pursuant to Item 1 and 2 of the above Scope of Services, the Consultant will respond to requests by the County for additional services. The additional services may include, but are not limited to: assistance with obtaining billing data from new software environment, verification of customer data at County level; requests for development of alternative rate structures and/or customer classes after the submittal of the draft report; requests for development of alternative and/or different ancillary charges after the submittal of the draft report; Item 2 meetings that are not concurrent with meetings in Item 1; any one-on-one meetings with large users or other parties as requested by the County; preparation in lieu of assisting in developing the draft ordinance/resolution; implementation assistance; negotiations with other entities relative to bulk services; capital funding assistance and utility strategic planning. ITEM IV. ITEMS TO BE FURNISHED AT NO EXPENSE TO THE CONSULTANT The County will assist the Consultant by furnishing, at no cost to the Consultant, all available pertinent information including data if applicable to customers, billing frequency reports, operating reports, financial statements, budgets, unencumbered fund balances, cost estimates, agreements, ordinances, codes, and any other data relative to performance of the above services for the project. It is agreed and understood that the accuracy and veracity of said information and data may be relied upon by the Consultant without independent verification of the same. Page 4 of 6 P298 The County will designate in writing a person to act as the County's representative with respect to the services to be performed under this Agreement. Such person shall have complete authority to transmit instructions, receive information, interpret and define the County's policies and decisions with respect to materials, equipment, elements and systems pertinent to the Consultant's services. SECTION II TIME OF PERFORMANCE Scope of Services for Item 1 will be completed within approximately one hundred and fifty (150) calendar days from receipt of Notice to Proceed except for delays beyond the reasonable control of the Consultant. Item 1 Study Tasks 1-1 through 1-9 of the Scope of Services are anticipated to be completed within eighty-five (85) days. Item 1 Study Tasks 1-10 through 1-16 and Item III of the Scope of Services will be completed as mutually agreed. The probable time table by Study Tasks for the rate study is provided below in the graph. Item i Rate Study Probable Time Table 160 145 ise 140 145 120 1 100 00 SS 100 100 80 75 75 75 75 75 60 75 40 40 4050 15 40 20 5 1 25 25 25 25 1 1 0 1-1 1 1-2 1-3 1 1.6 1S 1 1.6 1.7 1 1-8 1 1-9 1 1-10 1 1.11 1 1-12 1 1-13 1.14 DYIn 1 1 5 2S 25 2S 25 SO 75 1 40 1 90 1 100 1 100 145 End 15 1 40 40 1 75 7S 75 75 75 23 1 90 1 1001 23011451 190 Scope Task Scope of Services for Item 2 will be completed within approximately seventy-five (75) calendar days from receipt of Notice to Proceed except for delays beyond the reasonable control of the Consultant. Item 2 Study Tasks 2-1 through 2-3 of the Scope of Services are anticipated to be completed within forty (40) days. Item 2 Study Tasks 2-4 through 2-8 of the Scope of Services will be completed concurrently with similar Study Tasks in Item 1. The probable time table by Study Tasks for the ancillary rate and fee study is provided below in the graph. Item II Ancillary Charges A. Fees Probable Time 'Table 160 140 130 120 100 100 100 1009A F 05 80 a90 60 40 40 40 - Meetingsschedule coordinated With40 13 Item 1 Comprehensive Rate Study 20- 0 2-1 2-2 2-3 1 2.4 1 2-5 1 2.6 1 2.7 1 2.8 Seriesi 1 1 40 1 40 1 90 100 1 100 14S Ssrlss3 1S 40 SS 90 1 100 130 1 14S 1S0 Scope Task Page 5 of 6 P299 SECTION III COMPENSATION The Consultant for Scope of Service Item 1, except Study Task 1-13, will be paid based on the Hourly Rate Schedule, with the amount not to exceed Eighty -One Thousand Five Hundred Dollars ($81,500.00) including reimbursable expenses and as per the services authorized and performed in accordance with Section I Item 1 of the Agreement. The Consultant for Scope of Services Item 2 will be paid based on the Hourly Rate Schedule, with the amount not to exceed Seventeen Thousand Nine Hundred Dollars ($17,900.00) including reimbursable expenses and as per the services authorized and performed in accordance with Section I Item 2 of the Agreement. The not to exceed amount for Item 2 is predicated on meetings associated with Study Tasks 2-3, 2-4 and 2-5 being conducted concurrently with similar Study Tasks in Item 1. Compensation for Scope of Services Item 1 Study Task 1-13 and Item 3 Additional Services, will be as mutually agreed and issued in the form of a change order. Invoices for services shall be submitted by the 101b of the month, and payments shall be made net thirty (30) days. Payments shall be made provided the submitted invoice is accompanied by adequate supporting documentation and is approved by the County. Page 6 of 6 P300 Attachment B - Raftelis' 2017 Billing Rates Position Rate Administrative Support Personnel $62 Technician $98 Associate $136 Consultant $165 Senior Consultant $187 Manager $200 Senior Manager $255 Principal Consultant $213 Senior Manager $255 P301 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT BETWEEN INDIAN RIVER COUNTY. FLORIDA AND RAFTELIS FINANCIAL CONSULTANTS, INC. FOR A WATER AND WASTEWATER IMPACT FEE STUDY This Consulting Agreement ("Agreement") is entered into this _ day of 2017 (hereinafter referred to as the Effective Date) by and between Indian River County, Florida (the "County" or "Client") and Raftelis Financial Consultants, Inc., 227 W. Trade Street, Suite 1400, Charlotte, NC 28202 ("Raftelis" or "Consultant"). Witnesseth WHEREAS, Consultant has substantial skill and experience in water and wastewater finance, management, and pricing; and WHEREAS, the Client desires to hire Raftelis, and Raftelis desires to provide services to the Client, NOW, THEREFORE, for good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, the Parties agree to the terms and conditions set forth herein. Article 1. Statement of Work Raftelis shall provide professional consulting services to prepare a utility rate study for the Client. Raftelis will perform these services as set forth in more detail in Attachment A. Article 2. Time for Completion This Agreement will commence upon approval by the Client and remain in effect for a period of one year. Further renewals of this Agreement are at the option of the Parties and shall be in writing. Article 3. Compensation Client shall pay to Raftelis the sum not to exceed Sixty -Five Thousand One Hundred Dollars ($65,100.00), which includes professional fees and direct expenses incurred in performing the scope of services outlined in Attachment A. This sum is based upon the scope of work contained herein at Raftelis' current standard hourly rate schedule included in Attachment B. . The Consultant shall invoice the Client upon the completion of each task or deliverable in accordance with the Project Schedule, or on a monthly basis if the Project Schedule does not otherwise specify. The Client shall pay Consultant in accordance with the Local Government Prompt Payment Act. Article 4. Additional Services At the Client's request, Raftelis may submit change orders or proposals for additional professional services. Each change order or proposal submitted shall detail: (1) scope of work for the additional services, (2) period of services to be performed, and (3) method and amount of compensation. The Client shall provide written acceptance and authorization to Raftelis prior to the commencement of work on any proposed additional services. Each change order or proposal for additional services accepted and approved by the Client shall Page 1 of 6 P302 become part of this Agreement and shall be governed by the terms and conditions contained in this Agreement. Article S. Place of Performance Raftelis shall be responsible for maintaining its own office facilities and will not be provided with either office facilities or support by the Client. Article 6. Indemnification Raftelis hereby agrees to indemnify the Client, its commissioners, officers, employees, and agents and to hold the Client, its commissioners, officers, employees, and agents harmless against any and all claims, action, or demands against the Client, and against any and all damages for injury to or death of any person and for loss of or damage to any and all property arising out of the negligent acts, errors or omissions of Raftelis under this Agreement. Raftelis shall not be held responsible for any claims caused by the negligence of the Client. Article 7. Insurance Consultant shall maintain the types and levels of insurance during the life of this Agreement as specified below. The Client will be named as additionally insured on the Raftelis' Certificates of Insurance, and Raftelis will provide the Client with these Certificates of Insurance by July 28, 2017. Commercial general liability insurance -$1,000,000 for each occurrence and $2,000,000 in the aggregate Comprehensive automobile liability insurance -$1,000,000 combined single limit each occurrence Workers Compensation insurance -Statutory limits Professional liability insurance -$1,000,000 in the aggregate Excess or Umbrella Liability -$3,000,000 in the aggregate Article 8. Public Records Compliance A. Indian River County is a public agency subject to Chapter 119, Florida Statutes. Raftelis shall comply with Florida's Public Records Law. Specifically, the Contractor shall: (1) Keep and maintain public records required by the County to perform the service. (2) Upon request from the County's Custodian of Public Records, provide the County with a copy of the requested records or allow the records to be inspected or copied within a reasonable time at a cost that does not exceed the cost provided in Chapter 119 or as otherwise provided by law. (3) Ensure that public records that are exempt, or confidential and exempt from public records disclosure requirements are not disclosed except as authorized by law for the duration of the contract term and following completion of the contract if the contractor does nottransferthe records to the County. (4) Upon completion of the contract, transfer, at no cost, to the County all public records in possession of the Contractor, or keep and maintain public records required by the Countyto perform the service. Page 2 of 6 P303 If the Contractor transfers all public records to the County upon completion of the contract, the Contractor shall destroy any duplicate public records that are exempt, or confidential and exempt from public records disclosure requirements. If the contractor keeps and maintains public records upon completion of the contract, the Contractor shall meet all applicable requirements for retaining public records. All records stored electronically must be provided to the County, upon request from the Custodian of Public Records, in a format that is compatible with the information technology systems of the County. B. IF RAFTELIS HAS QUESTIONS REGARDING THE APPLICATION OF CHAPTER 119, FLORIDA STATUTES, TO THE CONTRACTOR'S DUTY TO PROVIDE PUBLIC RECORDS RELATING TO THIS CONTRACT, CONTACT THE CUSTODIAN OF PUBLIC RECORDS AT: (772) 226-1424 publicrecords@irceov.com Indian River County Office of the County Attorney 180127" Street Vero Beach, FL 32960 C. Failure of Raftelis to comply with these requirements shall be a material breach of this Agreement. Article 9. Independent Contractor Status It is understood and agreed that Raftelis will provide the services under this Agreement on a professional basis as an independent Contractor and that during the performance of the services under this Agreement, Raftelis' employees will not be considered employees of the Client within the meaning or the applications of any federal, state, or local laws or regulations including, but not limited to, laws or regulations covering unemployment insurance, old age benefits, worker's compensation, industrial accident, labor, ortaxes of any kind. Raftelis' employees shall not be entitled to benefits that may be afforded from time to time to Client employees, including without limitation, vacation, holidays, sick leave, worker's compensation, and unemployment insurance. Further, the Client shall not be responsible for withholding or paying any taxes or social security on behalf of Raftelis' employees. Raftelis shall be fully responsible for any such withholding or paying of taxes or social security. Article 10. Reliance on Data In performance of the services, it is understood that the Client and others may supply Raftelis with certain_ information or data, and that Raftelis will rely on such information. It is agreed that the accuracy of such information is not within Raftelis' control, and Raftelis shall not be liable for its accuracy, nor for its verification, except to the extent that such verification is expressly a part of Raftelis' scope of services. Article 11. Opinions and Estimates Raftelis' opinions, estimates, projections, and forecasts of current and future costs, revenues, other levels of any sort, and events shall be made on the basis of available information and Raftelis' expertise and qualifications as a professional. Raftelis does not warrant or guarantee that its opinions, estimates, projections or forecasts of current and future levels and events will not vary from the Client's estimates or forecasts or from actual outcomes. Raftelis identifies costs, allocates costs to customer classes and provides rate models. It does not establish rates, which is the legislative responsibility of the Client. Page 3 of 6 P304 Article 12. No Consequential Damages To the fullest extent permitted by law, neither party shall be liable to the other for any special, indirect, consequential, punitive or exemplary damages resulting from the performance or non-performance of this Agreement notwithstanding the fault, tort (including negligence), strict liability or other basis of legal liability of the party so released or whose liability is so limited and shall extend to the officers, directors, employees, licensors, agents, subcontractors, vendors and related entities of such party. Article 13. Termination of Work This Agreement may be terminated as follows: 1. By Client (a) for its convenience on 30 days' notice to Raftelis, or (b) for cause, if Raftelis materially breaches this Agreement through no fault of Client, and Raftelis neither cures such material breach nor makes reasonable progress toward cure within 15 days after Client has given written notice of the alleged breach to Raftelis. 2. By Raftelis (a) for cause, if Client materially breaches this Agreement through no fault of Raftelis, and Client neither cures such material breach nor makes reasonable progress toward cure within 15 days after Raftelis has given written notice of the alleged breach to Client, or (b) upon five days' notice if Work under this Agreement has been suspended by either Client or Raftelis in the aggregate for more than 30 days. Payment upon Termination. In the event of termination, Raftelis shall be compensated for all work performed prior to the effective date of termination. Article 14. Notices All notices required or permitted under this Agreement shall be in writing and shall be deemed deliverable when delivered in person or deposited in the United States mail, postage prepaid, addressed as follows: If for the Client: Vincent M. Burke, PE Director Indian River County Department of Utility Services 180127th Street Vero Beach, FL 32960 If for Raftelis: Marco H. Rocca, CMC Principal Consultant Raftelis Financial Consultants, Inc. 950 S. Winter Park Drive Suite 240 Casselberry, FL 32707 Page 4 of 6 P305 Article 15. Compliance with Applicable Laws Raftelis agrees not to discriminate in its employment practices, and will render services underthis Agreement without regard to race, color, religion, sex, national origin, veteran status, political affiliation or disabilities. Any act of discrimination committed by Raftelis, or failure to comply with these statutory obligations when applicable, shall be grounds for termination of this Agreement. Article 16. General Provisions A. Entire This Agreement represents the entire and sole agreement between the Parties with Agreement: respect to the subject matter hereof. B. Waiver: The failure of either Party to require performance by the other of any provision hereof shall in no way affect the right to require performance at any time thereafter, nor shall the waiver of a breach of any provision hereof be taken to be a waiver of any succeeding breach of such provision or as a waiver of the provision itself. All remedies afforded in this Agreement shall be taken and construed as cumulative; that is, in addition to every other remedy available at law or in equity. C. Relationship: Nothing herein contained shall be construed to imply a joint venture, partnership, or principal -agent relationship between Raftelis and the Client; and neither Party shall have the right, power, or authority to obligate or bind the other in any manner whatsoever, except as otherwise agreed to in writing. D. Assignment Neither Party shall assign or delegate this Agreement or any rights, duties, or and obligations hereunder without the express written consent of the other. Subject to Delegation: the foregoing, this Agreement shall inure to the benefit of and be binding upon the successors, legal representatives, and assignees of the Parties hereto. E. Severability: If any provision of this Agreement is declared invalid or unenforceable, such provision shall be deemed modified to the extent necessary and possible to render it valid and enforceable. In any event, the unenforceability or invalidity of any provision shall not affect any other provision of this Agreement, and this Agreement shall continue in force and effect, and be construed and enforced, as if such provision had not been included, or had been modified as above provided, as the case may be. Governing This Agreement shall be governed by, and construed in accordance with, the laws Law: of the State of Florida. Venue and jurisdiction shall be in Indian River County, Florida, Circuit Court. G. Paragraph The paragraph headings set forth in this Agreement are for the convenience of the Headings: Parties, and in no way define, limit, or describe the scope or intent of this Agreement and are to be given no legal effect. H. Third Party Nothing in this Agreement shall be construed to create or confer any rights or Rights interest to any third party or third party beneficiary. It is the intent of the parties that no other outside, non-party claimant shall have any legal right to enforce the terms of this Agreement. Page 5 of 6 P306 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties have executed this Agreement by their duly authorized representatives. INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA By: Signature Joseph E. Flescher Print Name Chairman, Board of County Commissioners Title Date RAFTELIS FINANCIAL CONSULTANTS, INC. By: Signature Marco H. Rocca Print Name Principal Consultant Title July 11, 2017 Date Page 6 of 6 P307 ATTACHMENT A WATER AND WASTEWATER IMPACT FEE STUDY SECTION I SCOPE OF SERVICES This impact fee review and update study addresses the County's objective that water and wastewater impact fees materially reflect the current cost, less applicable credits, per level of service (LOS) and are in compliance with F.S. 163.31801. METHODOLOGY This impact fee review and update utilizes a "Buy-In/Consumption" based methodology, which assumes that new service connections utilize portions of both existing and new facilities. The methodology provides that costs for Treatment and Transmission assets for each functional service are identified on a per gallon per day of capacity basis, by using adjusted facility costs and average day capacity of such facilities. Adjusted facility costs consist of local current cost plus financing expenses less amounts provided by other revenue sources. PROJECT APPROACH The Consultant will coordinate with County staff to obtain or develop historic, current and projected information, data and assumptions necessary to formulate findings and conclusions relative to the stated methodology. Activities include: a) Identifying original and current costs associated with water and wastewater Treatment and Transmission assets; b) Reviewing the historic and forecasted funding for water and wastewater Treatment and Transmission assets; c) Formulating total asset costs and appropriate credit provisions from other revenue sources; d) Reviewing the design capacity and actual demand characteristics of the water and wastewater systems; e) Reviewing the ordinance provisions for application of Treatment and Transmission impact fees; f) Development of a computer rate model to manage data and calculate the Treatment and Transmission impact fees; g) Reviewing findings with County staff; and h) Meetings, discussions and presentations to County staff. ITEM 1. IMPACT FEE STUDY TASKS 1. Project Initiation — A meeting with County staff will be held to initiate the study process and in general includes: a) Discussion of primary goals and objectives; b) Data availability and acquisition; c) Administrative policies and procedures; d) Future funding assumptions; e) Current and future economic constraints; f) Capital improvements; g) Consultant/County communications; and h) Time schedules, meetings and deliverable formats. 2. Data Collection — A request will be made to obtain data and information concerning: (i) the current costs for property, plant and equipment; (ii) probable near term system expansion improvements; (iii) system component capacities and associated design criteria relative to maximum day, average day, line loss, inflow/infiltration, and/or other related capacity criteria; (iv) system and customer demands, Page 1 of 4 P308 flows and equivalencies; (v) sources and related terms of funding for existing and proposed system capacity expansion improvements; and (vi) other data as such becomes evident. 3. Data Analysis — Capital costs for existing and proposed property, plant and equipment will be reviewed and accumulated pursuant to major functional system categories, (i.e., source of supply, treatment, transmission, disposal, general plant, etc). Original costs may be adjusted to current replacement costs pursuant to an appropriate nationally published construction inflation index or current cost information maintained by the County, County's Utility Engineer and/or Consulting Engineer. System and customer demands, capacities and relevant criteria will be reviewed to identify the appropriate determinants for use in the development of each impact fee. Existing and proposed financing costs associated with expansion related facilities will be identified and included as appropriate. County staff will be included in the process of clarifying information and data concerning the costs, capacities, useful lives and condition of the existing facilities, probable near term system expansion capital improvements and customer demands. Upon completion of the data analysis, a meeting will be scheduled with County staff to review and obtain concurrence with the findings. 4. Impact Fee Development — The development of impact fees will be based on the information and data obtained and developed for this study. The approach, in addition to current facility costs, will include necessary adjustments to reflect financing costs and credits as applicable. Additionally, a schedule will be developed comparing existing and proposed single family water and wastewater impact fees of the County to those of nearby communities. 5. Level of Service Appropriateness — A billing frequency, engineering design and industry data will be utilized in reviewing the appropriateness of the LOS criteria assigned to an equivalency for each utility service. 6. Presentation of Preliminary Findings — A meeting with County staff will be requested to present the findings associated with this Scope of Service items 1 through 5. The objective of the meeting will be to obtain concurrence any direction from County staff with respect to the salient items affecting the preparation of a draft report. 7. Draft Report — Pursuant to consideration of comments from County staff concerning the preliminary findings, a draft report will be prepared containing discussions, tables, schedules and supporting documentation of the study process, methodology, approach, facility costs, development of impact fees, comparisons, findings and conclusions. The draft report will be provided to County staff for review and comments in electronic format. 8. Draft Report Meeting — One meeting will be held with County staff to present the draft report. It is anticipated that upon completion of the draft report meeting County staff will provide sufficient level of comments and directions to finalize the report. 9. Final Report — A signed electronic copy of the final report will be provided to the County. 10. Assist with Draft Ordinance — Assist County staff with preparation of draft ordinance/resolution together with providing reviews and comments of the final ordinance/resolution as prepared by County. 11. Public Presentation— Attendance at one public hearing to presenting the findings and respond to questions from the County Commission. Deliverables for Items 1 and 2: 1) Data request letter. 2) Draft Report. Page 2 of 4 P309 3) PowerPoint presentations as applicable for scheduled public meetings. 4) Draft ordinance provisions and/or comments. 5) Final Report. ITEM 2. ADDITIONAL SERVICES Additional Services will be provided as specifically requested by the County for related matters concerning impact fees, such as but not limited to: development of reclaimed water impact fees; preparation and attendance at public workshop meeting; additional meetings including individually with County Commissioners and/or representatives of concerned organizations; meetings with County staff not included in the above Scope of Service Items 1 through 11; modification to the impact fees after the preparation of the draft report; request to fully draft portions of the ordinance; and/or calculation of special circumstances. ITEM 3. ITEMS TO BE FURNISHED AT NO EXPENSE TO THE CONSULTANT The County will assist the Consultant by furnishing, at no cost to the Consultant, all available pertinent information including but not limited to listing of all utility fixed assets by functional system (water and wastewater) with date of original installation, original cost, size, capacity, type of material if applicable, funding, agreements, ordinances, codes, and any other data relative to performance of the above services for the project. It is agreed and understood that the accuracy and veracity of said information and data may be relied upon by the Consultant without independent verification of the same. The County will designate in writing a person to act as the County's representative with respect to the services to be performed for this project. Such person shall have complete authority to transmit instructions, receive information, interpret and define the County's policies and decisions with respect to materials, equipment, elements and systems pertinent to the Consultant's services. SECTION II TIME OF PERFORMANCE Scope of Services for Item I will be completed within one hundred and fifty (150) calendar days from receipt of Notice to Proceed except for delays beyond the reasonable control of the Consultant. Item I Study Tasks 1 through 8 of the Scope of Services are anticipated to be completed within ninety (90) days. Item I Study Tasks 9 through 11 and Item II of the Scope of Services will be completed as mutually agreed. The probable time table by tasks for the study is provided below in the graph. Impact Fee Study Probable Time Table 160 140 120 115 100 95 its 85 80 �+ so 75 75 93 60 p AS 60 a0 40 FLJ- 2" 40 20 1 5 i 1 2 5 1 4 1S 6 1 7 a 9 10 _ Btyin 1 1 S 1 60 1 25 1 40 1 25 1 85 1 95 Us Gqd 15 40 60 7s 75 so 85 95 115 150 1W Scope Task you.. Page 3 of 4 P310 SECTION III COMPENSATION For Item 1 of the Scope of Services the Consultant will be paid based on the Hourly Rate Schedule, with the amount not to exceed Sixty -Five Thousand One Hundred Dollars ($65,100.00) including reimbursable expenses and as per the services authorized and performed in accordance with Section I of the Agreement. For Item 2 of the Scope of Services, Additional Services, compensation will be as mutually agreed and issued in the form of a change order. Page 4 of 4 P311 Attachment B - Raftelis' 2017 Billing Rates Position Rate Administrative Support Personnel $62 Technician $98 Associate $136 Consultant $165 Senior.Consultant $187 Manager $200 Senior Manager $255 Principal Consultant $213 Senior Manager $255 P312 },e p313 rf EM RAFTELIS FINANCIAL CONSULTANTS, INC. March 17, 2017 Vincent Burke, P.E. Utilities Director, Indian River County 180127th Street Vero Beach, FL 32960 950 S. Winter Park Drive Phone 407. 960 .1806 www.raftelis.com Suite 240 Fax 407. 960 .1803 Casselberry, FL 32707 Subject: Statement of Qualifications for Professional Consulting Services Dear Mr. Burke: Raftelis Financial Consultants, Inc. (RFC) is pleased to submit our Statement of Qualifications for Professional Consulting Services to provide Indian River County (IRC) with assistance, reviews, updates and program development for a multitude of projects including but not limited to septic to sewer programs, user rate, charge and fee reviews and impact fee update. We believe that our unique combination of qualifications, resources, local presence, experience, and knowledge provides the financial, management, strategic, and technology solutions that will benefit the Indian River County utility system and its customers. RFC is the largest financial, management, and technology solutions company focused on the municipal utility industry and can assemble a qualified team to meet each specific assignment. Either Mike Rocca or Tony Hairston will be responsible for contractual representations with the County and overall project accountability. Collectively, they have almost 6o years of providing financial, rate and man- agement consulting services to the utility industry throughout Florida and the southeast U.S. To assist the County with the various projects, we have assembled a team with extensive experience and a reputation for quality service. Our team is comprised of professionals with wide-ranging backgrounds, thereby providing the needed perspectives to solve any challenge. Our project team also has extensive experience working with local Florida governments, including Indian River County. In addition to Mr. Hairston and Mr. Rocca, the project team includes Habib Isaac, Andrew Rheem, and Joe Williams all of whom have successfully work together on many similar projects. RFC is registered with the U.S. Securities Exchange Commission (SEC) and the Municipal Securities Rule- making Board (MSRB) as a Municipal Advisor. The registration requirement is a new rule covered under the Dodd -Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act. RFC's registration allows our clients to be confident that RFC is fully qualified and capable of providing financial advice related to debt issuances in compliance with the applicable regulations of the SEC and the MSRB. As an independent, professional services firm, RFC can provide objective recommendations that are in the best long-term interest of the City of Palm Bay. Both Mr. Hairston and Mr. Rocca have successfully meet the municipal advisory professional qualifications standards and requirement, and passed the Series 5o exam. P314 We are proud of the resources that we can offer and welcome the opportunity to be of assistance. We are confident we bring significant strengths that will contribute to successful completion of the challenges involved with cost recovery programs for local governments. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact us with the following information: Tony Hairston, Senior Manager P: 407.960.1811 / E: ahairston@raftelis.com Mike Rocca, Principal Consultant P: 407.960.1809 / E: mrocca@raftelis.com Sincerely, RAFTELIS FINANCIAL CONSULTANTS, INC. Tony Hairston Mike Rocca Senior Manager Principal Consultant P315 4BLE C 'CINTFh Cover photo courtesy of Dawn Pennington (Fiickr) AFC has the largest practice in the U.S. focusing on the financial, management, and operational aspects of water industry utilities. In 1993, Raftelis Financial Consultants, Inc. (RFC) was founded to provide services that help utilities function as sustainable organizations while providing the public with clean water at an affordable price. With this goal in mind, RFC has grown to have the largest and most experienced practice in the U.S. focusing on the financial, management, and oper- ational aspects of water industry utilities. RFC has experience providing these services to hundreds of Visit www.raftelis.com to learn more about RFC's story. RAFTELIS FINANCIAL CONSULTANTS. INC. utilities across the country, allowing us to provide our clients with innovative and insightful recommenda- tions that are founded on industry best practices. Throughout our history, we have maintained a strict focus on the financial, management, and operational aspects of utilities, building a staff with knowledge and skills that are extremely specialized to the ser- vices that we provide, and thus allowing us to provide our clients with independent and objective advice. / 1 / P317 DEPTH OF RESOURCES With more than 60 utility financial, management, and operational consultants, RFC has the firm in the U.S. solely focusing on the financial, rate, and management aspects of water industry utilities. BENEFIT TO OUR CLIENTS Our depth of resources allows us to sufficiently staff this project with the qualified per- sonnel necessary to efficiently and expeditiously meet our clients' objectives. \z\ 61 FOCUS RFC's services are solely focused on providing financial, management, and operational consulting services to water -industry utilities. BENEFIT TO OUR CLIENTS This focus allows RFC pro- fessionals to develop and maintain knowledge and skills which are extremely specialized to the services that we provide, and allows us to provide our clients with inde- pendent and objective advice. UNPARALLELED EXPERIENCE RFC staff have assisted hundreds of water industry utilities throughout the country with financial, man- agement, and operational consulting services. BENEFIT TO OUR CLIENTS Our extensive experi- ence allows us to provide innovative and insightful recommendations to our cli- ents, and provides validation for the proposed methodology ensuring that industry best practices are incorporated. RAFTELIS FINANCIAL CONSULTANTS, INC. P318 RATE ADOPTION EXPERTISE RFC has assisted numerous agencies with getting proposed rates successfully adopted. BENEFIT TO OUR CLIENTS Our experience has allowed us to develop an approach that effectively communicates with elected officials about the financial consequences and rationale behind rec- ommended rates to ensure stakeholder buy -in and successful rate adoption. This includes developing a "mes- sage" regarding the changes in the proposed utility rates that is politically acceptable, and conveying that message in an easy -to -understand manner. MODELING EXPERTISE RFC has developed some of the most sophisticated yet user- friendly financial/rate models available in the industry. BENEFIT TO OUR CLIENTS Our models are tools that allow us to examine different policy options and cost allo- cations and their financial/ customer impacts in real time. Our models are non-proprie- tary and are developed with the expectation that they will be used by the client as finan- cial planning tools long after the project is complete. INDUSTRY LEADERSHIP Our senior staff is involved in shaping industry standards by chairing various committees within the American Water Works Association (AWWA) and Water Environment Federation (WEF). RFC's staff members have also contributed to many industry standard books regarding utility rate setting. BENEFIT TO OUR CLIENTS Being so actively involved in the industry allows us to keep our clients informed of emerging trends and issues, and for them to be confident that our recommendations are insightful and founded on sound industry principles. RAFTELIS FINANCIAL CONSULTANTS, INC. / 3 / P319 highlighted in yellow serve a customer base of 100,000+ accounts. RFC has provided financial, rate, management, and/or operational consulting assistance to hundreds of utilities across U.S. In the past year alone, RFC worked on more than 400 financial, rate, and management consulting projects for over 300 utilities in 36 U.S. states, the District of Columbia, Canada, and Puerto Rico. The Flordia matrix on the following page followed by the national matrix includes more detail on the different types of engagements we have provided to many of our clients \ 4 \ RAFTELIS FINANCIAL CONSULTANTS, INC. P320 FLORIDA EXPERIENCE RFC's staff have extensive experience serving Florida utilities. The map below and the matrix to the right show some of the Florida utilities that RFC staff have served and the services provided for these utilities. City of Alachua I I lei City of Auburndale • • • • • City of Bartow • • • • • • • City of Cape Canaveral To • • Charlotte County • • • • City of DeLand CCCCL—'i - �CCCC❑COCj •�� Destin Water Users I•(•1 1•( I 1•) I•(•(•I I ( 1•) City of Eustis •� • • I�CCI � C❑�,� •�❑ Florida ryysAqueduct AthoriI•I•I I•� I•I•I �•I•I•( I II I• City of Fort Walton Beach CCL–!l – CC •�=e TE7CICCI •C City ofGrovelancJ I•I•I I•I I•I 11•I•I I I 1 1 I•', Indian River County •C'G'C�C'CCC��CC��� •�'� Village of Islamorada I I• I I 1 I I.1 I• I I• I I 1 1.1 • Sea Town of Lauderdale -by -the- F FFFEEFEC LLL'LLK City of Lake Wales 1.1.1 1.1 1 1 1 1.1 1 1 1 1 1 1 City of Marathon ❑l – •� =i ❑FCEC�C�� • City of Margate I.1 • I• I I 1 1 1 1• I• I I I I I I• City of Mascotte •❑�❑C • 'i��CI�C,��', • Town of Oakland 1.1 • I I I 1 1.1 1.1.1.1 I I I• I• City of Ocala CI,CC — CIL it — CCS — li=FE�t - City of Oldsmar 1.1.1.1.1 1.1.1 1.1 • I • I I II I City of Orlando CCC❑CEE17FE=:1❑ El E ^^^^^^IE City of Oviedo i • 1.11.1 1.1��--1 1.1.1.1.1 1 1 • I • City of Palm Bay CC,C • CCC,CCCCC,C• C Town of Palm Beach 1 1 1 I L I I.1 1• I 11.1 1 1 1 Pinellas County CCC • CCC • l__]L!!JLi = City of Plant City 1.1.1.1.1 1.1 1P • 1.1 1 1 1 1 I • City of Pompano Beach Ct – LJI____1L__.'t – :C C• CCCCC,C City of Port St. Lucie I le 1.1 1 I.1 I • I • � • Irrr---0 ---1.1 I.1. St. Johns County CCCaC,CC❑aC❑ - ❑CI - • City of Sanford 1.^1.1.1.1 �•1 I �•I•I•I I I I.I• South Walton Utility Co., Inc. ,I�C�C1`C�ICCi,C,CCCC,CC AthorityligaWater I•10; 101 (-I• City of Tavares ICCCCCCfCCCC❑�❑ - • Volusia County (• I.1 1.1 1.1.1 1.1.1•—+I • II 1 101 City of Wilton Manors t •CCCC'C!❑C • rCICIC City of Winter Haven �•�•�•I•1 1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1 1 Isle RAFTELIS FINANCIAL CONSULTANTS, INC. / 5 / P321 \ 6 \ RAFTELIS FINANCIAL CONSULTANTS, INC. P322 AND RATE z 0 a F W O z J Q NATIONAL EXPERIENCE W o Z z a F 2 0 _ U v_, Q v Q O a. v, This:matrix shows a brief a d' z z W o J z W Q W 1zF z z O sample of some of the utilities throughout the U.S. o a g o F w z W ° z °° a F Lu o o g o a a and Canada that we have °zz a 2 W o zLu a LU W z z z assisted and the services performed for these utilities. � F Oa z � w ° a N o a 2. a U s 5° a a G w 0 � FKF U cr a � z OF Q a 'y a OJ Q O o i Q J Q N J W W Q Q w LL N N > � m Q w Q W p rn U K Z N w z F (Q a Q in (J F z w U.a .� � z Q z' U Q w W Q Y O O w Q G p a w 1 02 J 0 F Q G o w v Lu UJ O aaLD a vFi v~i 3 AL Birmingham Water Works Board • • • • • • LCLJEE�TLJ • • • • AL^ �obile Area Water &Sewer System _7�� � �• �� ,tI e r ---7F] 1 L-71 _ 1l ��l_- T_1L_LTi_T AR Central Arkansas Water _ ❑❑❑�❑❑ •��❑❑❑il❑❑��❑❑,❑�� _ AR LI tle Rock Wastewater Utility - C EI17F� ,� �T aL��❑� ,�. L� ,'L ��'�_�L �_.;L :L� AZ Peoria, City of - -�_ _ _ __ _� _ AZ ilPhoenix,Cityof-iL _ T^ ^❑�❑�C❑��❑❑�❑a�❑❑❑❑ - - l-.1_ �•_�� 1_`L L__ I AZ JAZ Pima County -_�_L��� ��_❑❑❑ • J -----❑���a��❑�❑❑❑❑t- TucsonWater CA Anaheim, City of ❑!,r❑r❑jTEIEEK❑❑ ❑❑` ❑❑❑❑�❑� E:1E CA Beverly Hills, City�•�C• 1t[ _ I�.�r �I`J�-J' j L• - T l CA MWD of Southern California • • • • San Diego, City of --- 7� -_T�-- CA r r r❑❑r❑❑❑]j❑r r CA San Francisco PUCCA ara Valley Water District ^Ioo�00000�oaoao""oma ❑a❑❑❑�❑,❑�❑�❑❑�❑❑�� l CA We tem Municipal Water Di tract CO T�Denver Water -- ;l f �_IL_��_ aE [-��_.L� �- Tll_ �1 CO Denver Wastewater, City of - - ❑I� ❑❑❑_ ar❑_(cj❑o[❑`opr ---Te_il__I D`C IID j Water- -- -- - --7-ET-4714_ Jl 1'l jo❑❑_ •. �� � ��_ _Y I ��• 'I--� :�� _ L 1'�_ I [ • " DE Wilmington, City of ❑ ❑��j❑j❑�❑ - .- -FL ,,CClearwater, - ���❑a❑❑❑_ City of �l r ._L ETT T -1 1� -- j 1 `F ( • Fe i7,111 �_ -�L__ 1 -.L FL � Pompano Beach, City of -- FL FL E Port St. Lucie, City of �,I St Johns County j❑❑j❑�❑j❑rC,(❑❑❑❑❑��❑❑❑r❑r❑r❑ - ❑�❑��'❑��❑❑❑❑❑❑❑❑❑❑� 1_71 1 � 1 I! • ,l -a����� ._ '� IIl _ . T 7L- F_ ,l — _ ,L -^ _ _ � Columbus Water Works .- lC l r• - L • !� �� � L__ -l- j • }� J( HI Honolulu ENV, City and County ofIL (Cile, City of ❑❑`❑�❑❑j�❑❑❑❑❑L❑6❑❑L�_ • • !� �- I ,I - ❑ KS Wichita ty of ❑❑ - _ _ ..L -- KY Hardin County Water District #1 -- L- LA New Orleans, Sewerage & Water Board of n� • ���� n� • • • • \ 6 \ RAFTELIS FINANCIAL CONSULTANTS, INC. P322 RAFTELIS FINANCIAL CONSULTANTS, INC. / 7 / P323 FINANCIAL . - z O a Z W Q. w U Z z U Z v U LL p a F- O > W z aU Z.. w a i Z <- `—" = a a i a in z F- W w a o >: U W co a w Ir 5 N W z O a a g w O W t7 z p J ZO Z a ►- w i O Z O i a OJ a OJ Q_ a ►- m a O w > Q a_ O. O. P. ¢ N W i D U U 0 w p z Z Q . N Q a' a Z J a = z Z W j a W Z O a- p W 2 J y H Z a 7 W U - ' J O < U p Z _ �. a a O J ~ m g 0 a to W Q 2 O Q w U Q a 0 O O w W a a W Z �n zw m Q 9 OW W cr J U W w ~ w W U. O N � Z ~ Q D w tOif > ~ Z Q K a W Q F Q W Z Wco U LL Q F o Z LL U W w Q he i m 0 y O H W U O H (n U y Q o Q O W a � a U J a g a'. Q W 3 (n C.n MD Baltimore, City of _ • • — • J • • •� • f • 1 • ! • • • MO IFMetopolit.. St. Louis Sewer District t❑• ❑E� �•�`_�❑LL❑ IVIS r -- ---� Jackson, C ity of ;LL❑-L� _ . -11U�L�•� :� l❑''L❑-❑_4E❑ �❑L�J N Ahevile, Cry of ❑��(❑���L��t�(��`❑❑�r_ L_�_j NC ] ___ Cary, Town of - -- �� 1t Jl .L_,L •� �L__,L L* I�(�❑_�_ j❑j��_ NCCharlotte-Mecklenburg Utilities ��❑(([[���j©�❑jjaj�j�jj(�jr�`j❑�( NC- j[Durham,Cityof -���L�����_ �L� L,�� LCL 1Lr�L-_-.1 -IL- ��L__ NC Raleigh, City of j❑l�❑[ NV-��Henderson, City jLvJ� J�-"L�L _�a❑�❑I�❑r❑❑j�f❑❑Ij❑r�j❑I� L NY New York City Water Board OH ',[Northeast N -Ta���❑������������ Ohio Regional Sewer District!f� �( C �� •,� ��-�-.[• ��] �� �� •]�� OR Portland Water Bureau, City of �a❑�❑❑(�j��j❑j❑�r��❑j PA�vLPhiladelphia Water Department - '[ ! 'L* .L _.'r - 'L- L I[-LL1 L-�ILr:L �L__ JL' -9'f_ _❑j❑j❑lj❑j� __ L _JL-J • ' J RI IFN.wport. City of o��00000aaoo�oaac_ o� RI �LProvidence - - -- Water Supply Board ��� IL_��� J,��� L_L•_.L• IL� JEL]LjLe L� L4�L _:[ - L L SC71Greenville Water/ReWa - ❑[�❑j❑(�j�j❑�❑j❑❑( •�j SC�LSpartanburgWaterSystem -_._ �___-L-� ;�_�L���`�L >I`•_L�'!' f�'L���L�L•,l-�L-�;L -�j❑j�r❑j❑ L�_l�_ TN Johnson City, City of �a�Q�❑�❑❑�❑❑❑�❑❑�❑ TN 1Nashville and Davidson County MWS L�!L•�I� JL� J!L1 j�L♦ �L-_JL JL _,L_�I,L�L• jt• it `jL� �ll-_IL.� TX TX Dallas, City of �El Paso Water Utilities PSB" - - ��`� I�❑❑❑�r❑j�(❑❑j❑r '�� ',L♦ L�__I'l __ lL � 1L -�� �Jl - li _�(C❑❑(❑j�j�[� ;L �� - 1-�L _ IL L - TX San Antonio Water System aocc�j0001o1o�o�oojooa_ UT - _ Lalt Lake_City, City of --- - i _-LJ[__�L� [�� .L - _t - .�L-.'I_.__JL IF -=L_,L-- VA Newport News Waterworks, City of • • • • • V A !ERicm hond DPU, City of _ _ _ II_E�-�f-� L--- �__�L_ �!L 1Le .� l -- -:L� L IL_ �_ FVASuffolkCityofr1jjjjjfj(j[LTacoma,Cityof -1----'L__JIL_JLd-IL�'L--1 - -- - ,L_-=4�_IL �L�'L� L--i�. L�L—L---'L�.I WI Milwaukee Water Works --- ��❑�❑�• - �• o���,������ ;l �I Can [Ottawa, City of I I • '� l • I� l �I ;f I • l l 1 RAFTELIS FINANCIAL CONSULTANTS, INC. / 7 / P323 mm PROJECT TEAM Our Project Team consists of some of the most knowledgeable and skilled financial and rate consultants. For this project, we have included senior -level personnel to provide experienced leadership for the project, with support from talented consultant staff. RFC places a high priority on being responsive to our clients and, therefore, actively manages each consul- tant's project schedule to ensure appropriate availability for addressing client needs. Below, we have included an organizational chart showing the structure of our Project Team and roles for each Team member. INDIAN RIVER COUNTY TONY HAIRSTON will ensure that the project stays on schedule, is within budget, and effectively meets the County's objectives. He will also lead the consulting staff In conducting analyses and preparing deliverables for the project. Mr. Hairston will serve as the County's main point of contact for the project. r � V JOE WILLIAMS & ROBIN CHACKO will work at the direction of Mr. Hairston to conduct analyses and prepare deliverables for the project. RAFTELIS FINANCIAL CONSULTANTS, INC. MIKE ROCCA, CMC will be responsible for overall project accountability, and will be available to provide insights into various cost of service and rate -setting matters. HABIB ISAAC & ANDREW RHEEM will provide oversight for the project ensuring it is completed in a timely manner and meets both RFC and industry standards. RFC CURRENTLY HAS A TEAM OF 60+ CONSULTANTS SPECIALIZING IN FINANCIAL, MANAGEMENT, AND OPERATIONAL CONSULTING SERVICES. IN ADDITION TO OUR DEDICATED PROJECT TEAM, THE COUNTY WILL HAVE THE SUPPORT OF RFC'S FULL STAFF FOR THIS PROJECT, / 9 / P325 OUR TEAM RFC consists of some of the most knowledgeable and skilled financial, man- agement, and operational consulting professionals in the utility industry. In addition, many of our consultants are subject matter experts in spe- cific areas of utility finance, management, and operations from innovative pricing structures to organizational optimization. Our personnel are able to leverage the depth of their expertise to provide our clients with solutions to the most complex situations. FIRM -WIDE ORGANIZATIONAL CHART This organizational chart shows a list of RFC's full consulting staff. On the following pages, we have included profiles for project team along with detailed resumes of our key project team members. \ 10 \ CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER Peiffer Brandt CHIEF COMPLIANCE OFFICER Lex Warmath EXECUTIVE TEAM VICE PRESIDENTS Jon Davis Sanjay Gaur Rick Giardina, CPA Sudhir Pardiwala, PE Keith Readling, PE Harold Smith Darin Thomas Lex Warmath FINANCIAL & RATE CONSULTING MANAGEMENT Tom Beckley Elaine Conti Rocky Craley Joe Crea David Fox Steve Gagnon, PE Tony Hairston Habib Isaac BartKreps Melissa Levin Hannah Phan Andrew Rh am Mike Rocca John Wright, CPA CONSULTING STAFF Akbar Alikhan Delaney Bolger Robin Chacko Joe Collins Magu Diagne, PE Josh Doran Collin Drat Angie Flores Karter Harmon Erik Johnson Erik Jorgensen, PE Will Kerr Brian Kirsch Kevin Kostiuk Khanh Phan Nancy Phan Corrine Schrall Laura Slavin Victor Smith GabiStoyanova-Rozenova Gregg Tobler Sally Van Etten Rob Wadsworth, CPA Joe Williams CHARIMAN William Stannard, PE FOUNDER & CHAIR EMERITUS George Raftelis, CPA MANAGEMENT & STORMWATER CONSULTING MANAGEMENT Tom Arn Doug Bean Seth Garrison Henrietta Locklear, MPA Chris McPhee Cara Wilson, PE CONSULTING STAFF Catherine Noyes Carter Townsend Collins Katie Cromwell Austin Dixon Jenn Fitts Rob Garrett Lindsey Knight Mary Tchamkina Marcella Wigg Jill Wu RAFTELIS FINANCIAL CONSULTANTS, INC. P326 Wit` MIKE ROCCA Mr. Rocca has been providing professional services to the pri- vate and public sectors in Florida since 1979. These services CMC focus on water, wastewater, reclaimed water, and stormwater PROJECT DIRECTOR utility rate studies; impact fees; interlocal agreements; finan- Principal Consultant cial planning and funding; utility acquisition; and financial programs to address the development and replacement of infra- structure facilities for transportation, drainage, and utility EXPERIENCE: 37 years requirements of communities. Additionally, Mr. Rocca has an CAREER HIGHLIGHTS extensive background pertaining to the formation and opera- • Co-author of Water and Wastewater tion of community development and special districts, requiring Finance and Pricing the preparation, presentation, and implementation of master • Financial/rate consulting experience with St. Johns County, Fort Walton Beach, financing plans, feasibility studies, rate studies, assessment Port St. Lucie, Winter Haven, Toho Water programs together with the documentation for debt financing, Authority, & Tavares utility valuations and acquisitions, and cost of service studies. EDUCATION • BA — Florida Atlantic University Mr. Rocca has extensive working knowledge of governmental processes, funding alternatives, accounting procedures, financial reports, enterprise operations, and administrative requirements. He has prepared and presented public awareness and informa- tion programs related to municipal projects and developed and presented a seminar on the acquisition of utilities. He has also developed procedures and supervised the preparation of com- puter programs for utility rate studies, financial control, data retrieval and analysis, financial feasibility studies, product expansion programs, capital acquisition alternatives, and real estate investment analysis. In addition, Mr. Rocca co-authored a chapter entitled, "Projecting Customer Demand," for the Fourth Edition of the industry guidebook, Water and Wastewater Finance and Pricing: The Changing Landscape. RAFTELIS FINANCIAL CONSULTANTS, INC. P327 TONY HAIRSTON PROJECT MANAGER Senior Manager EXPERIENCE: 19 years CAREER HIGHLIGHTS • Founding Chair of AWWA Florida Section Rates and Finance Committee • Co-author of Water and Wastewater Finance and Pricing • Financial/rate consulting experience with Pinellas County, Emerald Coast Utilities Authority, Volusia County, & Florida Keys Aqueduct Authority EDUCATION • MS — Florida State University • BS — Florida State University HABIB ISAAC TECHNICAL ADVISOR (Senior Manager) EXPERIENCE: 14 years CAREER HIGHLIGHTS: Financial/rate consulting experience with Elk Grove Water District, Coachella, Irvine, Lompoc, Modesto, Phelan Pinon Hills Community Services District, San Fernando, Sierra Madre, & Tulare EDUCATION • BS —Applied Mathematics, San Diego State University \ 12 \ Mr. Hairston currently serves as Senior Manager in RFC's Casselberry, FL Office. He has 19 years of experience imple- menting solutions for utility and other municipal clients. He has both managed and provided technical analysis on a vari- ety of complex financial and management projects including comprehensive utility rate studies, impact fees, bond feasibility reports, and assisting numerous municipalities and utilities in addressing their rate -setting and financial planning goals. He has assisted governmental clients with projects including the creation and planning of several new wastewater utilities to protect the near shore water quality of the Florida Keys. Mr. Hairston has presented papers at the WaterReuse Foundation, Florida and Alabama/Mississippi AWWA conferences, and regional conferences such as the Tampa Bay Water Shortage Management workshop. Mr. Hairston also co-authored a chapter entitled, "Projecting Customer Demand," for the Fourth Edition of the industry guidebook, Water and Wastewater Finance and Pricing: The Changing Landscape. Mr. Isaac has extensive experience in financial and utility rate modeling and has been serving public agencies as a lead con- sultant for more than 14 years. With a background in applied mathematics and computer programming, Mr. Isaac has devel- oped a number of financial models and has recently incorporated sophisticated macros into his models to create a user-friendly interface that can save and store scenarios "on -the -fly" for com- parative analysis. Mr. Isaac is also well -versed with the cost of service principles and special benefit provisions of Proposition 218. In addition, he has also provided consulting services for conducting fiscal impact analyses for agencies in determining the impact generated by new development on services, and has prepared cash flow pro formas for securing bond issues, including mello-roos bonds, revenue bonds, and a number of refunding. Mr. Isaac has assisted clients in the preparation and presentation of public awareness and information programs related to municipal projects ranging from utility rate studies to agency -wide taxes, and feasibility studies. He has developed procedures and super- vised the preparation of extensive computer models for utility rate studies. Such experience generally relates to performing budget analyses, customer and usage analyses, development of revenue requirements, and cost of service allocations related to the imple- mentation of rate structures designed to promote conservation while accounting for revenue sufficiency and price elasticity. As a mathematician, Mr. Isaac understands the sensitivity between competing variables that are commonly present in utility rate studies, such as, cost based tiers and economic price signaling. RAFTELIS FINANCIAL CONSULTANTS, INC. P328 ANDREW RHEEM TECHNICAL ADVISOR Manager EXPERIENCE: 13 years CAREER HIGHLIGHTS: Financial/rate consulting experience with Denver, Longmont, Greeley, Pueblo, Broomfield, Salida, & EI Paso Water Utilities EDUCATION • BA -University of Michigan at Ann Arbor JOE WILLIAMS PROJECT ANALYST Consultant EXPERIENCE: 4 years CAREER HIGHLIGHTS: Financial/rate consulting experience with Pinellas County Utilities, Florida Keys Aqueduct Authority, Marathon, Tavares, & Volusia County EDUCATION • BS - University of Central Florida ROBIN CHACKO PROJECT ANALYST \i11WJ Associate Consultant EXPERIENCE: 4 year CAREER HIGHLIGHTS: Extensive rate surveys with AWWA on U.S. surveys and multiple state water surveys since 2012 EDUCATION • MS - University of Central Florida • BS - University of Central Florida RAFTELIS FINANCIAL CONSULTANTS, INC. Mr. Rheem has been providing financial and rate consulting services to water, wastewater, reclaimed water, and stormwater utilities for over 13 years including conducting rate studies for numerous Colorado and Southwestern U.S. municipal utili- ties. He has served as project manager and/or lead analyst for multiple long-standing clients providing a range of municipal financial planning, rate and fee assistance through multiple engagements. Mr. Rheem is also a skilled presenter and has presented study findings and recommendations to management and governing bodies. Mr. Rheem holds Bachelors in Business Administration, Finance and Accounting from the University of Michigan - Ann Arbor. Mr. Williams has a background in accounting and possesses extensive analytical, financial modeling and presentation skills. His expertise lies in the areas of research, compiling and analyzing data, and computer financial and rate model devel- opment. Mr. Williams has participated in a full complement of assignments supporting project managers in RFC's Orlando, Sarasota, Charlotte, Cary, Denver and Austin offices. Mr. Wil- liams was also involved in conducting the comprehensive 2012 and 2014 Florida Water and Wastewater Rate Surveys of local gov- ernment utilities located throughout Florida. Mr. Chacko has extensive experience with water rate surveys including the AWWA/RFC Bi -annual Water and Wastewater Rate Survey (2012, 2014, 2016), Florida Water Rate Survey (2012, 2014, 2016), California -Nevada, and Washington -Oregon. Mr. Chacko has also conducted numerous bill frequency analysis, financial modeling, and customized local rate and impact fee comparisons for RFC clients. / 13 / P329 TECHNICAL SPECIALTIES MIKE ROCCA, CMC C�mCI� •. - PROJECT DIRECTOR Principal Consultant �vEdl " �omwaim' • PROFILE �m� Mr. Rocca is a Principal Consultant for RFC. He has been providing » C. • • • • professional services to the private and public sectors in Florida mpunflo since 1979. These services focus on water, wastewater, reclaimed » :.90 ftmam water, and stormwater utility rate studies; impact fees; assessments; interlocal agreements; financial planning and funding; utility » ' • • - acquisition; and financial programs to address the development and • replacement of infrastructure facilities for transportation, drain- age, and utility requirements of communities. Additionally, Mr. » Rocca has an extensive background pertaining to the formation and „ operation of community development and special districts, requir- ing the preparation, presentation, and implementation of master ., . financing plans, feasibility studies, rate studies, assessment pro- grams together with the documentation for debt financing, utility PROFESSIONAL HISTORY valuations and acquisitions, and cost of service studies. » G3G• • - ° • • CC • • Mr. Rocca has extensive working knowledge of governmental • processes, funding alternatives, accounting procedures, financial reports, enterprise operations, and administrative requirements. He has prepared and presented public awareness and information pro- • • grams related to municipal projects and developed and presented a » CaaO = seminar on the acquisition of utilities. He has also developed pro- cedures and supervised the preparation of computer programs for • .. , • • utility rate studies, financial control, data retrieval and analysis, „a financial feasibility studies, product expansion programs, capital G'ly)3t((i1rSim acquisition alternatives, and real estate investment analysis. In addition, Mr. Rocca co-authored a chapter entitled, "Projecting Cus- tomer Demand," for the Fourth Edition of the industry guidebook, EDUCATION Water and Wastewater Finance and Pricing: The Changing Landscape. » C p(W o .. VM5Wft6WQ RELEVANT PROJECT EXPERIENCE CERTIFICATIONS CITY OF PALM BAY » Edi • • u From 1994 through 2009 Mr. Rocca assisted the City of Palm Bay M-10 0= with the financial aspects of numerous projects involved commu- nity and utility infrastructure rehabilitation and expansion. Along PROFESSIONAL with utility user rates, changes and fees, he was instrumental in MEMBERSHIPS the design of impact fees, Main Line Expansion Fees and assess- ment programs that provided a cost recovery mechanism to assist ' community growth along with reducing pollution from septic » Edi ••GCS• tanks. Mr. Rocca was directly involved with the funding and cor- responding assessment methodologies/programs that provided \ 14 \ RAFTELIS FINANCIAL CONSULTANTS, INC. P330 water and wastewater line extension into many areas throughout the City including Units 9 and 31. Along with water and/or wastewater line facilities, improvements in many of these Units also address stormwater and road needs. CITY OF WINTER HAVEN (FL) The City of Winter Haven first procured the services of Mr. Rocca in 1997 for the acquisition of an investor owned utility. Since that time, Mr. Rocca has con- ducted periodic water, wastewater, reclaimed water and stormwater rate and feasibility studies for the City. These studies have included the introduction of conservation rates, industrial strength waste- water rates, impact fees and assessment programs. Financial feasibility studies and documentation in support of underlining ratings were provided in support of utility acquisition and major capital improvement programs. In addition to the utility studies, Mr. Rocca has provided the City with con- sulting services relative to municipal impact fees, fire assessments and other non-utility revenue enhancement programs. CITY OF PORT ST. LUCIE (FL) Mr. Rocca began serving the City of Port St. Lucie in 1994 and continues providing the City's utility a broad range of rate and financial consulting services. In 1994, and several years thereafter, Mr. Rocca assisted with the transfer of the utility from St. Lucie County to the City, and litigation resulting from the County's original acquisition process. The City's exceptional growth, facilitated by a City-wide assessment pro- gram to install distribution and collection facilities throughout the service area, required expansion of the utility's supply, treatment, transmission and disposal facilities to meet the existing and fore- casted demands. Feasibility studies in support of over $600 million in Bonds including participation in rating interviews have been provided by Mr. Rocca since 1994. In 2009 and 2010, Mr. Rocca worked on: 1) a financial feasibility report for the $11o,000,000 Series 2009 Bonds; 2) a water and wastewater impact fee study in 2009; in 2o10 a comprehensive bulk rate study for outside city large users; in 2014 a financial forecast in support of a bond refuneing; and in 2015 a comprehensive rate study and impact fee update. RAFTELIS FINANCIAL CONSULTANTS, INC. Mr.Rocca also assisted the City with the redesign of stormwater charges. This redesign included the analysis and development of appropriate property classifications and the apportionment of stormwater utility operating, debt and capital costs on cost of service principles. ST. JOHNS COUNTY (FL) As the County's utility consultant since 1997, Mr. Rocca assisted and continues to assist in the financial growth, stability and maintenance of the utility's investment grade bond rating. The existing cost of service rates were originally developed by Mr. Rocca and is often referenced by the St. Johns River Water Management District as an appropriate exam- ple of conservation rates. Mr. Rocca conducted the financial feasibility studies and documentation to support over $230 million in bonds, State Revolving Loans and long term leases. The County retained his services to assist with the negotiations of an interlocal agreement with an outside county entity to provide utility services in certain northern por- tions of the County. Mr. Rocca's assistance with the negotiations, feasibility studies and financing for the acquisition of two large investor-owned utilities effectively doubled the customer base of the Coun- ty's existing utility and increased the level of service to customers in the acquisition areas. Projects in 2015 include a multi-year rate studies and impact fee updates for both the Main and Ponte Vedra Systems and various other financial services CITY OF FORT WALTON BEACH (FL) In 2000, Mr. Rocca's services were retained by the City's Finance Director to review a rate study by another firm that did not appear to address the utility's needs. The review resulted in the City commissioning a comprehensive rate study by Mr. Rocca in 2001 to provide multi-year rate adjustments and a conservation rate structure in support of rev- enue stability and funding for an extensive capital improvement program. The initial cost of service rate study was followed in 2005, 20o9, and 2014 by revenue sufficiency, impact fee and feasibility studies to support additional capital improvements. The comprehensive rate study in 2014 provided multi-year rate adjustment to accommodate fund- / is / P331 ing and operating costs associated with regulatory requirements. Annual update are conducted to ensure revenue sufficiency TOHO WATER AUTHORITY (FL) The Toho Water Authority provides water, waste- water and reclaimed water services to the majority of Osceola County and portions of Polk County. In 2005, Mr. Rocca conducted a comprehensive cost of service reclaimed water rate study providing uniform conservation rates to address the rapidly expanding reclaimed water system. In addition, to the reclaimed water rates, Mr. Rocca provided water, wastewater impact fee study, which incor- porated reclaimed water facilities. Studies were also conducted to move toward uniform water and wastewater rate structure and rates. Capital pro- grams to address regulatory requirements in 2010 resulted in the Authority requesting Mr. Rocca to provide a financial feasibility report to support a s95 million bond issue plus a s10 million loan. In 2009 and 2010, Mr. Rocca worked on: 1) A rate equalization study; 2) a potable irrigation rate restructuring and rate setting study incorporating a budget based rate methodology; and 3) a financial feasibility report for a Series 2o1oA refunding bond issue. CITY OF HOLLYWOOD (FL) Mr. Rocca conducted an impact fee study for the City's utility system to ensure compliance with a new provision in the Florida Statutes. Section 16331801 of the Florida Statutes requires in part that "In any action challenging an impact fee, the government has the burden of proving by a pre- ponderance of the evidence that the imposition or amount of the fee meets the requirements of state legal precedent or this section. The court may not use a deferential standard:' In compliance of the statue and to achieve appropriate cost recovery the study was fully documented in a report, which was adopted by the City in 2009. CITY OF TAVARES (FL) Since 2001, Mr. Rocca has provided the City of Tav- ares with utility financial services for its water, wastewater and reclaimed water utility. Studies \ 16 \ have included uniform rate structure, ongoing reve- nue sufficiency, miscellaneous charges, impact fees, along with financial feasibility studies and reports in support of bond funding programs. In 2009, Mr. Rocca worked on: i) a water and wastewater revenue sufficiency rate study; 2) a reclaimed water rate and impact fee study; and 3) feasibility studies pertain- ing to funding alternatives for a sizeable capital improvement program. CASSATT WATER COMPANY (SC) The Cassatt Water Company is a Section 501(c)(12) organization pursuant to Section 501(a) of the Inter- nal Revenue Code, formed to provide potable water services to a significant service area consisting of mostly rural customers in Kershaw, Lancaster and Sumter counties in central South Carolina. The company, realizing that the capital improvement program could not be supported by the existing rates, retained the services of Mr. Rocca to conduct a comprehensive rate and impact fee study. The results of the study, which were adopted by the Board in 2008, provided a uniform conservation rate structure and multi-year rate adjustments to address the operational and improvement fiscal needs of the utility. In addition, Mr. Rocca has assisted in the development of a funding program and policies to leverage and maximize the Company's assets. COMPREHENSIVE EXPERIENCE • Utility rate studies for both municipal and investor-owned utilities using cost of ser- vice methodology including provisions for conservation rate, budget base rates, life line rates, including water, wastewater, reclaimed water rates, impact fees, bulk service and miscel- laneous charges • Studies in the formation of stormwater utilities, stormwatrer rates and funding • Master financing plans and feasibility studies for capital expansion and improvement programs with projects ranging from several hundred thou- sand to several hundred million dollars • Assistance and documentation for general obli- gation, revenue, special assessment, and other RAFTELIS FINANCIAL CONSULTANTS, INC. P332 special forms of tax-exempt bond financing for over $2.5 billion in funding • Preparation of initial operating budgets and benchmarking for water, wastewater, reclaimed water, and stormwater utilities, and annual review of utility and other governmental operat- ing budgets • Assistance in developing interlocal, large user and other forms of agreements for governments, utilities and developers • Water and wastewater utility acquisition assistance and utility transition assistance for governmental entity pursuant to acquisition of investor-owned utility • Line extension and infrastructure improvement assessment programs • Market sensitivity and risk partitioning studies • Special and benefit assessment programs for water, wastewater, water management, roadway, and similar improvement projects OTHER RELEVANT PROJECT EXPERIENCE • Acme Improvement District • City of Apopka • City of Atlantic Beach • City of Bartow • City of Bonita Springs • City of Cape Canaveral • City of Clermont • City of Coral Springs • Coral Springs Improvement District • City of Deland • Dovera Community Development District • Downtown/Uptown Community Development District • Dunes Community Development District • East County Water Control District • Englewood Water District • City of Fellsmere • City of Flagler Beach • Flagler County • City of Fort Walton Beach • Indian River County • Indian Trace Community Development District • City of Juno Beach RAFTELIS FINANCIAL CONSULTANTS, INC. • City of Lake City • City of Lantana • Lauderdale -by -the -Sea • City of Miramar • City of Melbourne • City of Miami Springs • City of Moore Haven • City of North Lauderdale • City of New Port Richey • City of North Miami Beach • City of North Palm Beach • North Springs Improvement District • Okeechobee Utility Authority • City of Orange City • Orlando Utility Commission • City of Orlando • City of Palatka • City of Palm Beach Gardens • City of Palm Bay • Pelican Bay Improvement District • Reedy Creek Improvement District • Village Of Royal Palm Beach • City of Sanibel • Seacoast Utility Authority • Schroeder Manatee Ranch, Inc. • South Florida Water Management District • South Broward Drainage District • Spring Lake Improvement District • St. Johns County • Sunshine Drainage District • City of Tamarac • City of Tavares • Village of Tequesta • Toho Water Authority • Viera East Community Development District • City of West Palm Beach / 17 / P333 TECHNICAL SPECIALTIES TONY HAI RSTO N PROJECT MANAGER » - : . - - Senior Manager aamw » EM.. PROFILE Mr. Hairston currently serves as Senior Manager in RFC's Casselberry, >> f f jt 3 FL Office. He has 18 years of experience implementing solutions for utility and other municipal clients. He has both managed and provided PROFESSIONAL HISTORY technical analysis on a variety of complex financial and management " LBW&MM01mao. projects including comprehensive utility rate studies, impact fees, bond ammmsw iquiMMOMMEW feasibility reports, and assisting numerous municipalities and utilities • • in addressing their rate-setting and financial planning goals. He has „ .b. MM2031. assisted governmental clients with projects including the creation and 0=01WOMM94P ON& planning of several new wastewater utilities to protect the near shore an water quality of the Florida Keys. Mr. Hairston has presented papers at "aMMMU V the WaterReuse Foundation, Florida and Alabama/Mississippi AWWA • • �am� CW conferences, and regional conferences such as the Tampa Bay Water Shortage Management workshop. Mr. Hairston also co-authored a chap- EDUCATION ter entitled, "Projecting Customer Demand," for the Fourth Edition of „ the industry guidebook, Water and Wastewater Finance and Pricing: The Qom= • . Changing Landscape. >' 0@95M RELEVANT PROJECT EXPERIENCE CITY OF MARATHON (FL) The City of Marathon is one of several jurisdictions located in the Florida PROFESSIONAL Keys that has been mandated by the State of Florida to provide central MEMBERSHIPS wastewater service to its residents. The City also implemented extensive 0 • stormwater infrastructure improvements concurrent to the wastewater • Cli>�iCfl • . project. Mr. Hairston initially provided public outreach and financial and ftwmaaw@Mp, rate planning support to the City beginning in 2006. As the program G�33 became more developed, Mr. Hairston led a financial forecast study to » @DOM provide the City with a planning tool for future policy decisions and loan 9MIMIM°' MW procurement. In 2008, Mr. Hairston managed a financial feasibility » . • . @•]G study/report which was used by the and its financial advisor to secure am $30 million of bank-qualified financing and over $8o million of SRF loan financing for the stormwater and wastewater project. Later in 20o8, Mr. Hairston led the City's initial rate study including public outreach and presentation to the City Council. The proposed rates and stormwater assessments were adopted and implemented by the City. Mr. Hairston continues to manage ongoing utility rate and financial consulting ser- vices to the City of Marathon. \ 18 \ FLORIDA KEYS AQUEDUCT AUTHORITY (FL) Mr. Hairston served as Project Manager for numerous water and waste- water rate projects for the Florida Keys Aqueduct Authority since 1999. RAFTELIS FINANCIAL CONSULTANTS, INC. P334 Various projects have included the bond feasibility report for the Series 2007 Water Revenue Bonds ($53,975,000) and Series 2006 Water Revenue Bonds ($49,700,000) along with feasibility reports for var- ious wastewater program initiatives, development of wastewater rates in five (5) separate wastewater service areas and the eventual consolidation of wastewater rates. Mr. Hairston provided public out- reach to future customers in each of these service areas and presented rates to the Aqueduct Board for adoption. Mr. Hairston conducted a comprehensive water rate and impact fee study for the Aqueduct and provided periodic updates of the water financial forecast and capital financing plan. Mr. Hairston also developed initial reclaimed water rates and financial policy for the Aqueduct's initial reclaimed water program in the Big Coppitt service area. VOLUSIA COUNTY (FL) Mr. Hairston has been the Project Manager or Lead Consultant on numerous engagements with Volu- sia County. In 2016 RFC is providing an alternative water supply cost allocation analysis to the County and three nearby municipal utilities. In 2010, Mr. Hairston managed a utility rate study including a five-year financial forecast and design of potable water, wastewater, and reclaimed water rates. The County was enduring several years of stagnate growth while addressing several regulatory chal- lenges such as alternate water supply planning and effluent disposal quality and capacity. The financial forecast element was focused on capital finance planning including the purchase of a strategic land area for the purpose of developing alternative water sources. The rate design efforts included the adjustment of base water rates to increase revenue stability, adjustments to water conservation rates including non-residential customers, wastewater rate adjustments, and reclaimed water rate align- ment with potable water incentives. The proposed rates were presented to the County Council during a public workshop and again at a public hearing for adoption by resolution. Other projects provided to the County have included service area evaluations, impact fee studies, developer fee analysis, and ongo- ing capital finance planning. RAFTELIS FINANCIAL CONSULTANTS, INC. PINELLAS COUNTY (FL) Mr. Hairston has served as Project Manager for a Utility Business Case and Rate Sustainability Study for the Pinellas County potable water, wastewater, and reuse water utility. This project is a compre- hensive analysis that combines business planning with rate sustainability analysis. The rate sustain- ability analysis included a review of all potable water, wastewater, and reuse water rates. A pric- ing objectives workshop was conducted with key stakeholders in order to prioritize the rate structure pricing objectives. After a review of all monthly rates with the County, potable water and wastewa- ter rate structures that included base charges by meter size, potable water conservation rates, and modifications to multi -family base charges were all designed and validated by the County steering committee. Relevant bill impact and comparisons were reviewed in order to gain an understanding of impacts to customers. The business plan involved the review of various busi- ness processes and impact analysis on a number of potential process changes including conversion from bi-monthly billing to monthly billing and implemen- tation of AMI metering infrastructure. The steering committee included staff from all utility functions including budget, operations, maintenance, field services, revenue collection, customer service rep- resentatives and management. Through a series of workshops with the County, a business case was developed that included both the financial and organization and customer service impacts to each initiative. The results of both the rate sustainability and business case were reviewed and validated by the County steering committee. Final results are sched- uled for completion and presentation to the Board of County Commission in early 2015. EMERALD COAST UTILITIES AUTHORITY (PENSACOLA, FL) ECUA has identified over $233 million of water/ wastewater capital improvements to be imple- mented in order to be consent order and maintain its utility infrastructure. RFC developed an interac- tive utility financial model to support ECUA s bond / 19 / P335 and provide a decision support tool for ECUA staff. The financial model provided a five year forecast, interactive dashboard, and capital funding/bond analysis features in order for ECUA to evaluate various alternative funding scenarios. RFC col- laborated with ECUA staff to develop a strategy of bond sizing placements to complete critical capital improvements while maintaining a strong financial position. RFC also develop a financial feasibility report for inclusion in ECUA's official statement for the proposed Utility System Refunding Revenue Bonds, Series 2o15 and provided support to ECUA's team of financial advisors. CITY OF AUBURN (AL) Mr. Hairston served as Project Manager on several projects with the City of Auburn (City) and the Water Works Board of the City of Auburn (AWWB). He assisted the AWWB with its drought rate poli- cies in 2008 and 2011 in response to severe drought conditions affecting the AWWB water supplies. Mr. Hairston led a review of historical water usage pat- terns and recommended a phased approach for the implementation of drought rates corresponding to changing drought conditions. He also conducted comprehensive water and wastewater rate and access fee studies on behalf of the AWWB and the City. In 2011, Mr. Hairston conducted a review of the City's solid waste residential collection rates and assisted the City in a multi-year phase of rates to better align revenues with costs while mitigat- ing customer impacts. All studies required several public workshops and meetings with the City Coun- cil and AWWB Board and recommendations were subsequently adopted by the applicable governing bodies. Most recently in 2014 both the water and sewer rate studies were updated. In particular the water rates were reviewed for sufficiency to meet the financing requirements of a reconstruction of major water supply facilities along with rate structure options for Board consideration. The 2014 study also included a review and recommended changes to the fire protection charges to better reflect costs and ease the administration of this service by sim- plifying the fee structure. \ 20 \ ALABASTER WATER WORKS (AL) Mr. Hairston has managed RFC's projects with the Alabaster Water Board. RFC was initially engaged by Alabaster Water Board in 2013 to review revenue sufficiency and debt service coverage associated with a recent revenue bond issue. Following this engage- ment, in 2014 RFC was retained to conduct a rate study including a review and comparison of various miscellaneous utility fees with other nearby service providers. RFC worked with Alabaster Water Board staff to review the actual cost of providing various services, and approaches to future service charges balancing cost and customer service. In addition to miscellaneous charges, RFC developed a six year financial forecast that included capital funding and water sales scenario analysis based on recent trends and possible future outcomes. RFC staff reviewed the financial model and various scenarios during several onsite and web based work sessions. In addition, cer- tain rate structure options were reviewed including options to increase fixed revenue recovery. These options were presented to the Board in September 2014 and the option to increase base charge recovery was adopted by the Board in October 2014. DAPHNE UTILITIES (AL) Mr. Hairston managed a water and wastewater rate study for Daphne Utilities (DU). DU wanted to conduct a rate study in order to ensure a cost jus- tified rate schedule that could be communicated to its customer base and ensure adequate and appropriate cost recovery. The rate study included several components such as: 1) Pricing Objectives Workshop: RFC held a kick-off meeting with util- ities staff and the Board chairman to review the existing rate structure and identify the key pricing objectives of Daphne Utilities. The session included the identification of cost based rates, affordability, and revenue stability as the most important pric- ing objectives that the new rate structure should achieve. ; 2) Cost of Service Model and Rate Design Model: RFC developed a cost of service model for the water and wastewater systems, which included an allocation of administrative activities to the natural gas activities. Based on the cost of service model and the pricing objectives parameters, RFC developed a RAFTELIS FINANCIAL CONSULTANTS, INC. P336 rate design model that included various features including the input of various minimum gallons to be included in the monthly base charge. Other parameters included readiness -to -serve factors by meter size, billing charge components, and outside surcharges. 3) Bill Impacts and Comparisons: Based on a thorough analysis of the water and wastewa- ter billing statistics, RFC was able to identify usage levels of various customer classes and indicate the potential change in monthly bills that would occur under any proposed rate structure. Also the existing and proposed bills were compared to other utility providers; and 4) Presentation: Mr. Hairston presented the study to the Board in May 2o15 and the Board accepted the recommendations. Implementa- tion is scheduled for October 2015. CITY OF TUSCALOOSA (AL) This City of Tuscaloosa has been experiencing rapid growth related to increasing enrolment at the University of Alabama and other factors. The City reports that this growth is placing a direct burden on City infrastructure engaged RFC to conduct an impact fee study in order to determine a defensi- ble methodology and calculation of impact fees in order to recover the proportionate share of costs that growth imposes on City infrastructure. The identified infrastructure includes water, sewer, stormwater, streets/roads, police, and fire services. Mr. Hairston is managing the first phase of this pro- ject which includes analysis and recommendations for water and wastewater impact fees and a feasibility analysis related to other potential impact fees. The completion of this first phase is scheduled for Fall 2015 with additional phases to be completed in 2016. VILLAGE OF ISLAMORADA (FL) The Village of Islamorada, located in the Florida Keys, is implementing a $115 million central waste- water program by 2015 in order to comply with State of Florida mandates regarding near shore water quality. The wastewater project involves the retrofit of essentially its entire incorporated area, which is currently served by septic tanks and package plants. Mr. Hairston has served as Project Manager with RAFTELIS FINANCIAL CONSULTANTS, INC. regard to ongoing financial planning and waste- water rate policy for the Village. Originally, the financial model included a ten-year forecast based on the Village's planned method of delivery using the traditional design -bid -build procurement pro- cess. However, in 2010 the Village began to explore the design -build -operate (DBO) procurement process as an expedited and more cost effective approach to complete this project. The Village has also main- tained two options for treatment services, including onsite wastewater treatment facilities or wholesale treatment services from a nearby special utility dis- trict. The financial forecast has evolved to include the DBO procurement method and include the two treatment options, along with additional funding and other options. The financial forecast has been used by the Village for securing $20 million in grant funds, $46 million in low-interest loans, and addi- tional line of credit funding. In addition to financial forecasting and rate policy consulting, Mr. Hairston participated as a selection committee member with regard to the qualifications and selection process of the DBO procurement. Mr. Hairston led the com- mittee member efforts regarding evaluation of the various pricing proposals submitted by qualified DBO entities, and presented the results which were accepted by the Village Council. Mr. Hairston is currently conducting a wastewater rate study for the Village and continues to manage ongoing utility rate and financial consulting services for the Village. KEY LARGO WASTEWATER TREATMENT DISTRICT (FL) Mr. Hairston has served as Project Manager for the initial wastewater rate and rate policy development for the Key Largo Wastewater Treatment District. The Key Largo Wastewater Treatment District was created by the Florida legislature in June 2002 for the purpose of constructing wastewater treatment sys- tems in the Upper Florida Keys. In 2005, the District was nearing completion of construction in two areas and needed to establish utility rates for these areas and future wastewater service areas where addi- tional construction was planned. Mr. Hairston led a study of the District's near and long-term revenue requirements with respect to serving these areas. / 21 / P337 Because the initial wastewater service area was relatively small, a careful analysis of potable water consumption patterns was conducted in order to reasonably forecast future wastewater billings. Ini- tial rates were developed for the first service areas, and these rates were tested and revised in order to provide a consistent rate policy and structure as new areas were added and economies of scale were anticipated. The initial rates and financial forecast were presented to the District Board and adopted as proposed in 2005. Updates to the wastewater finan- cial forecast were provided in 2007 and 2009 which showed that the initial rate development remained valid. The 2009 update was utilized by the District to secure $ao million in a bank qualified loan to finalize its capital funding efforts. CITY OF BOCA RATON (FL) Mr. Hairston managed several projects including a utility revenue sufficiency analysis and a utility rate study for the City of Boca Raton. The rate study was completed at the time of decreasing water demand and uncertain economic conditions while signif- icant capital improvements were being completed by the City. Rates were proposed and adopted by the City Council based on recommendations from the rate study and subsequent presentations by Mr. Hairston. Other studies completed for the City include electric pass-through costs analysis and wastewater availability charge analysis. CITY OF OVIEDO (FL) Mr. Hairston has managed several projects for the City of Oviedo including an acquisition analysis of the Alafaya Utilities wastewater system (Utilities), financial feasibility report for the Series 2oioA and 2oioB Bonds ($35,9oo,000), and ongoing financial forecasts for the City's utility system. The acquisi- tion analysis included a review of historical Utilities' operations and several meetings with the owner's representatives and City representatives. The acqui- sition analysis considered the historical net revenue stream and reflected certain adjustments for opera- tions under City ownership including a combination of benefits from management synergies as well as lost revenue due to property and franchise fee col- \ 22 \ lections. The City negotiated a successful agreement for the purchase of the Utilities system and has integrated the system into the City's operations. Mr. Hairston also led utility rate studies that included new reclaimed water service to existing City potable water customers. A financial and demand model was created in order to assist the City in anticipat- ing potable water demand reductions in response to increasing reclaimed water availability. Rate structures were recommended to the City in order to mitigate the impact of the expected loss of potable water revenue on the City's financial condition. CITY OF SANFORD (FL) Mr. Hairston has led numerous rate studies to assist the City in meeting several regulatory and economic challenges. Many utility capital improve- ment initiatives were mandated to the City over the past several years at a time when the City was enduring severe economic hardship. Mr. Hairston managed a detailed utility financial forecast in order to evaluate numerous capital improvement initiatives and sensitivity analyses regarding future conditions. A special emphasis was placed on rate phasing and avoiding large one-time rate adjust- ments. The financial forecast was used by City staff in budget planning and resource allocation. The financial forecast also provided the basis for several ad hoc analyses as needed by the City. Mr. Hairston presented numerous forecasts and rate recommendations to the City Commission and such recommendations have been adopted by the City. He also conducted a stormwater rate analysis for the City with an emphasis on capital planning under the existing utility billing structure. OTHER RELEVANT PROJECT EXPERIENCE • City of Alachua (FL) - Reclaimed Water Rate Analysis • Alabaster Water Board (AL) - Water rate study and miscellaneous charge review • City of Alabaster (AL) - Sewer Rate Study • City of Auburn (AL) - Water and Wastewater Rate and Access Fee Studies, Drought Rates, and Solid Waste Rate Review RAFTELIS FINANCIAL CONSULTANTS. INC. P338 • City of Auburndale (FL) - Water and Wastewater Financial Feasibility Report • City of Boca Raton (FL) - Utility Rate Study, Sewer Availability Policy • Charlotte County Utilities (FL) - Comprehensive Utility Financial Forecasts, Impact Fees and Wholesale Water Cost Dispute Resolution • Daphne Utilities (AL) - Utility Cost of Service and Financial Forecast • Destin Water Users (FL) -Rate Study, Financial Planning, Resource Planning • Emerald Coast Utilities Authority-ECUA (FL) Series 2o15 Bond Feasibility Study • Enterprise Community Development District (FL) - Cost of Service Rate Study, Wholesale Cost Pass - Through Analysis • City of Eustis (FL) - Utility Rate Studies, Business Planning, Impact Fee Studies, Stormwater Utility Rate Analysis • Fairfax County (VA) - Wastewater Financial Fore- casting and Sufficiency Studies • Florida Keys Aqueduct Authority (FL) - Bond Fea- sibility Report, Service Area Expansion, System Development Charges, Miscellaneous Charges, Reclaimed Water Rate Study, Utility Policy, Water Rate Study, Sewer Rate Study • City of Fort Myers Beach (FL) - Water Rate Study • City of Groveland (FL) - Utility Rate Studies, Financial Forecasts, Utility and Municipal Impact Fee Studies • City of Hallandale Beach (FL) - Utility Impact Fee Study, Alternative Water Supply Planning • City of Lake Alfred (FL) - Water and Wastewater Rate Study • Indian River County (FL) - AMI Feasibility and Business Case Analysis • Village of Islamorada (FL) - Wastewater Rate Study, PPP procurement and alternative project delivery evaluation • Key Largo Wastewater Treatment District (FL) - Wastewater Rate Study • City of Lake Wales (FL) - Utility Revenue Suffi- ciency Analysis and Financial Model • City of Largo (FL) - Wastewater Financial Forecast and Rate Study, Wholesale Rate Analysis ter Rate Study, Financial Forecast and Financial Policy Development • City of Marco Island (FL) - Water and Wastewater Rate Design • City of Margate (FL) - Wastewater Rate Study, Impact Fee Study, Alternative Water Supply Plan- ning, Stormwater Rate Study • City of Marianna (FL) - Utility Rate Study • City of Mascotte (FL) - Wastewater Rate Study; Impact Fee Study • Town of Montverde (FL) - Water Impact Fee and Rate Revenue Sufficiency Studies • City of Minneola (FL) - Police, Fire, and Recreation Impact Fee Study • City of Mt. Dora (FL) - Impact Fee Study, Utility Rate Study • Town of Oakland (FL) - Water Rate Study, Impact Fees (Water, Wastewater, Police, Roads, Parks, Administrative); SRF Loan Business Plan • City of Ocala (FL) - Utility Rate Studies; Revenue Sufficiency Analysis; Water and Wastewater Impact Fees; • City of Oldsmar (FL) - Water Resource Planning, Utility Rate Study, Impact Fee Study, Stormwater Study • City of Oviedo (FL) - Utility Acquisition Analy- sis, Bond Feasibility Report, Utility Rate Study, Reclaimed Water Rate Analysis, Impact Fee Anal- ysis • Pinellas County Utilities (FL) - Utility Business Case and Rate Sustainability Study • City of Plant City (FL) - Water and Wastewater Rate Study, Solid Waste Rate Study, Stormwater Rate Study, Impact Fee Study, Financial Forecast- ing • Prichard (AL), Water Works and Sewer Board of City of Prichard - Utility Revenue Sufficiency Study • City of Sanford (FL) - Utility Rate Study, SRF Loan Assistance, Stormwater Rate Study, Utility Impact Fee Analysis, Police -Fire -Recreation Impact Fee Analysis • St. John River Water Management District (FL) - Alternative Water Supply Analysis and Impact on Utilities • City of Marathon (FL) - Wastewater and Stormwa- . South Walton Utilities (FL) - Water Resource RAFTELIS FINANCIAL CONSULTANTS, INC. / 23 / P339 Planning, Wholesale Rate Analysis, Utility Rate Studies • City of Titusville (FL) - Water Resource Planning • City of Treasure Island (FL) - Wastewater Rate Study, Cost Pass-Thru Analysis • City of Tuscaloosa (AL) - Water and Sewer Impact Fee Study and Impact Fee Feasibility • Volusia County (FL) - Utility Rate Studies, Service Area Evaluations • City of West Melbourne (FL) - Utility Rate Study • West Volusia Water Suppliers (FL) - Alternative Water Cost Allocation for cities of Deland, Del- tona, Orange City and Volusia County Utilities • City of Wilton Manors (FL) - Utility Rate Study • City of Winter Springs (FL) - Fire Impact Fee Study PRESENTATIONS • Alabama Water and Wastewater Institute Annual Conference, "Rate Structures and Financial Plan- ning" (November 2, 2015, Point Clear, AL) • Alabama/Mississippi AWWA, "Capital Finance Planning and Communication" (October 12, 2015, Biloxi, MS) • Caribbean Water Works Association, "Funding Central Wastewater Retrofits in the Florida Keys" (August 27, 2015, Miami, FL) • Florida Section AWWA Fall Conference, "Practical Approaches to Finance Infrastructure Projects in the Current Market" (November 27, 2012, Orlando, FL) • Alabama/Mississippi Section AWWA Conference, "Right Sizing the Fixed Component in Your Rate Structure" (October 15, 2012, Mobile, AL) • -Water Reuse Foundation Annual Conference, "Valuing Reclaimed Water" (May 12, 2o1o, Tampa, FL) • Florida Section AWWA Fall Conference, "Imple- menting Water Conservation into Rate Structure" (Dec. 1, 2009, Orlando, FL) • Presentation to Tampa Bay Water Regional Water Shortage Management Workshop, "Drought Sur- charge Rates" (May 5, 20o9, Tampa FL) • Presentation to Florida Section AWWA, "Utility Impacts/Reaction/Response to Current Economic Factors" (Water Panel, Feb. 10, 2009, Orlando, FL) \ 24 \ RAFTELIS FINANCIAL CONSULTANTS, INC. P340 Utility cost of service Rate structure studies Financial planning studies Bond feasibility pro formas Gonnecti_on fees 11, i., 16 I TECHNICAL ADVISOR Senior Manager PROFILE » &M Mr. Isaac has extensive experience in financial and utility rate modeling » softy and has been serving public agencies as a lead consultant for more than R0=0D&MW9WW 13 years. With a background in applied mathematics and computer pro - PROFESSIONAL HISTORY gramming, Mr. Isaac has developed a number of financial models and has » [ ftwo. recently incorporated sophisticated macros into his models to create a eft" MMEW user-friendly interface that can save and store scenarios `on -the -fly" for ommafflamw a m comparative analysis. Mr. Isaac is also well -versed with the cost of service principles and special benefit provisions of Proposition 218. In addition, he » .. , has also provided consulting services for conducting fiscal impact analyses for agencies in determining the impact generated by new development on » w• • j£3 services, and has prepared cash flow pro formas for securing bond issues, moommaMED including mello-roos bonds, revenue bonds, and a number of refunding. EDUCATION Mr. Isaac has assisted clients in the preparation and presentation of public » `m O" ftow awareness and information programs related to municipal projects rang- R0=0D&MW9WW ing from utility rate studies to agency -wide taxes, and feasibility studies. 30ftp . - .. I@M He has developed procedures and supervised the preparation of extensive QMURIMS• • computer models for utility rate studies. Such experience generally relates to performing budget analyses, customer and usage analyses, development of revenue requirements, and cost of service allocations related to the implementation of rate structures designed to promote conservation while accounting for revenue sufficiency and price elasticity. As a mathematician, Mr. Isaac understands the sensitivity between competing variables that are commonly present in utility rate studies, such as, cost based tiers and economic price signaling. RELEVANT PROJECT EXPERIENCE TOWN OF SOUTHWEST RANCHES, (UPDATE FIRE ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY AND RATES) (FL) Mr. Isaac serves as Project Manager for updating the Town's Fire Assess- ment Program. The existing assessments were not updated since 2002 and Mr. Isaac updated the analysis to reflect a more balanced representation of the Town's fire service activities and clearly described how each parcel with the Town receives special benefits from the provision of fire. The new methodology and corresponding assessment rate schedule was adopted for Fiscal Year 2011-12. OKEECHOBEE COUNTY, (FIRE ASSESSMENT UPDATE STUDY) (FL) Mr. Isaac serves as Project Manager for updating the Town's Mr. Isaac served as Project Manager with the County to update their fire assessment program. RAFTELIS FINANCIAL CONSULTANTS, INC. / 25 / P341 Through extensive database research and quality control, Mr. Isaac was able to significantly increase assessment revenues, while ensuring a technically defensible methodology that met County objectives. CITY OF ARCADIA CITY-WIDE LIGHTING ASSESSMENT (CA) The City desired to re -ballot the current lighting assessment to include all parcels within the City of Arcadia and eliminate inequities between parcels that were "In" the Lighting Assessment District and "Out" of the Lighting Assessment District. As Project Manager, Mr. Isaac led a re-engineering of the City's existing lighting district to include all parcels within the City and develop a special benefit methodology that incorporated the type of lighting adjacent to each parcel as well as proximity to the lighting facilities. The Assessment Balloting results exceeded a 70% approval of the new approach and corresponding assessments. The City now has a true "City -Wide' assessment that specifically identifies general ben- efits versus special benefits and various assessment amounts based on each parcel's specific location to street lighting. With the success of the new lighting district, the City disbanded the original district and new assessment revenue now exceeds S3ook per year. CITY OF COVINA LIGHTING AND LANDSCAPING ASSESSMENT (CA) Mr. Isaac served as Project Manager to the City of Covina for updating its city-wide lighting district. The City's existing lighting assessment was a non-contig- uous boundary that didn t include all parcels within the City and was driven by how growth occurred within the City with each development required to annex into the lighting district. As part of the re-en- gineering of the existing lighting district, all street lights within the City were plotted on a map to develop a special assessment methodology which took into account the types of street lighting (arterials, versus, collectors, and decorative lighting) and the proximity of such lighting to parcels subject to the assessment. PHELAN PINON HILLS CSD STANDBY ASSESSMENT (CA) The CSD hired Mr. Isaac with RFC to assist them with \ 26 \ justification of an assessment that they inherited from the County of San Bernardino when the CSD was originally formed. Although an assessment was levied against all parcels within the service area for many years, an assessment report did not exist to confirm the validity of the assessment and clearly identify that only costs associated with special ben- efits were being assessed against affected parcels. As part of the assessment update, RFC developed an Engineer's Report for the CSD to use on an annual basis as part of each Fiscal Year's assessment levy. The Engineer's Report described the original formation, the basis by which parcels receive a special benefit and the methodology for calculating the degree of special benefit conferred on each affected parcel. NORTH TAHOE FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT AND TRUCKEE FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT, CA (FIRE ASSESSMENT STUDY) (CA) Mr. Isaac successfully formed two fire assessments for the North Tahoe Fire Protection District and the Truckee Fire Protection District to create a valuable and reliable new funding source for fire suppression services. The economic and political environment compelled the Districts to find and implement a secure stable funding source for these critical services. Mr. Isaac served as project manager and provided testimony as an expert witness for each fire assessment program. SACRAMENTO METROPOLITAN FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT (FIRE ASSESSMENT STUDY) (CA) Mr. Isaac is currently working with the second largest independent fire district in the State of Cal- ifornia with the development of a fire assessment program. The agency encompasses over 200,000 parcels and the fire assessment program is expected to generate $12 Million in additional revenue. Mr. Isaac is serving as project manager of a team that includes polling, public relations, special counsel, and District staff. CITY OF NORTH PORT DEPENDENT FIRE DISTRICT (FIRE ASSESSMENT STUDY) (FL) The City's objective was to create a fire assessment RAFTELIS FINANCIAL CONSULTANTS, INC. P342 program to establish a long-term reliable revenue stream for fire services. As project Manager, Mr. Isaac assisted the City in developing and evaluating options, and produced a comprehensive property owner database and assessment methodology. Mr. Isaac also coordinated resources and oversaw the technical work on the project to meet the City's goals. CITY OF DANIA BEACH, (UPDATE OF FIRE AND STORMWATER ASSESSMENT PROGRAMS) (FL) The City is undertaking a very ambitious exami- nation of two assessment programs, as well as its utility rate schedule and utility impact fees. The revised assessment program rates were presented and approved by the City Commission. The new assess- ment methodology utilized additional detail and generated a more fair and equitable apportionment of assessments. The fire assessment rates are for Fiscal Years 2010-2011 through Fiscal Year 2014-2015. ZONE 7 WATER AGENCY (CA) In July, 2015, RFC was selected to conduct a com- prehensive Cost of Service Wholesale Rate Study for the Zone 7 Water Agency (the Agency) and Mr. Isaac served as Project Manager for this engage- ment. Given the recent state-wide emphasis for retail water agencies to meet conserve mandates of the Governor's Executive Order, the Agency experienced a significant reduction in water sales when compared to the previous Fiscal Year. These cutbacks also affect the Agency's revenue stability as nearly l00% of the Agency's revenue is recovered through variable rates and fixed revenue recovery is negligible, even though a majority of the Agency's costs are fixed. As a result, the Agency has seen a $5M reduction in expected sales or 15% revenue loss. Given the severity of the financial impact, Mr. Isaac completed the cost of service rate study over an aggressive timeline and RFC presented rates in September 2015. After reviewing the Agency's current financials and revenue requirements over a.5 -year planning period, RFC developed the following recommenda- tions to meet the Agency's critical short-term needs: 1) recover lost revenue due to a reduction in sales through a Temporary Conservation Surcharge, 2) the Temporary Conservation Surcharge would be in place while revenue adjustments of 1o% are made to permanently replace revenue generated by the Temporary Conservation Surcharge, 3) Fund capital through a combination of Pay -As -You -Go (PAYGO) (cash on hand) and Debt financing, and 4) Build up reserves to meet minimum target level over the three year planning period. Mr. Isaac also reviewed the current rate structure and recommended the following adjustments to the current rate structure: i) adjust the current l00% variable rate structure and to one that includes both fixed and variable, with approximately 35% of required revenue generated through fixed charges. Given that the Agency is a wholesaler, fixed charged would be based on historical water sales for allocat- ing the 35% of revenue recovery to each retailer. The Public Hearing is scheduled for October 21, 2015. EAST VALLEY WATER DISTRICT (CA) Mr. Isaac served as Project Manager to the East Valley Water District (District) and assisted the District with changing their rate structure from a basic uniform rate to tiered budget -based rates that accounted for household size and actual irrigable area of each account through the use of GIS. From inception, the District desired to adjust from the current uniform rate structure to one that compli- mented their long-term strategic goals of ensuring water efficiency and assisting with water manage- ment. Given the District's uniform rate structure, Mr. Isaac lead a detailed cost of service analysis to establish a sound nexus for determining appropriate tiered breakpoints per account as well as unit costs by tier. The model analyzed usage at the account level and provided water allotments to each for "indoor needs" and "outdoor needs." The adopted rates, resulting from the comprehensive cost of service analysis, unbundled rate components to convey the true cost of various service components and to continue to equitably pass on the cost of water services to users. The Board adopted the water budget RAFTELIS FINANCIAL CONSULTANTS, INC. 27 / P343 rate structure on March 25, 2015. The findings and recommendations resulting from the Study were summarized and documented in the Study Report. HELIX WATER DISTRICT (CA) Mr. Isaac is currently completing a comprehensive Cost of Service Water Rate Study for the Helix Water District (the District). The District provides water service to approximately 55,000 customer accounts, serving a population of approximately 270,00o resi- dents in San Diego County. More than 10 years had passed since the District's last adopted "Cost -of -Service" study. Given the length of time since the last adopted comprehen- sive rate study, one specific project challenge was determining the best rate structure for the District to implement moving forward. As such, Mr. Isaac conducted a pricing objective workshop with the Board to explore rate alternatives that would best fit the District's goals and objectives. Based on the results from the pricing objectives workshop, RFC was able to develop a rate structure that met the District's needs and was fully compliant with Prop- osition 218. In addition, Mr. Isaac recommended that the District incorporate a pass-through component for any potential rate increases implemented by the District's wholesale water supplier and update the current rate structure as follows: 1) maintain a 3 -tiered rate structure for Domestic accounts, with slight modifications to the Tier 1 and Tier 2 allotments, 2) adjust Irrigation rates from a 3 -tiered budget -based rate structure to a 2 -tiered budget based rate structure. The District had previously defined efficient use for each account by providing a unique water allotment each month; therefore, Tier 1 would reflect the amount of water needed (within their water budget) and Tier 2 would signal when an account went over their water budget. Over the course of this 12 -month project, Mr. Isaac presented at 10 public meetings and the Public Hear- ing is scheduled for October 7th 2015. RINCON DEL DIABLO WATER DISTRICT (CA) In 2014, the Rincon del Diablo Water District (Dis- trict) contracted with RFC to conduct a Water Cost of Service and Rate Study to develop a financial plan as well as design water rates for the District for the next five years. The District is located approximately 25 miles north of the City of San Diego and serves a population of approximately 30,000 customers. Like many water agencies in California, the District was faced with challenges related to the reduction in water usage as a result of conservation, the slow economy, increasing water supply costs, and the recent Executive Order by Governor Brown to reduce water consumption by 25% Statewide. The District was operating in an environment where operational costs and external costs associated with imported water from continue to increase and the reinvestment of funds to its infrastructure is required as outlined within the District's updated Master Plan. Mr. Isaac served as Project Manager and presented RFC's findings and recommendations at all public meetings. Mr. Isaac recommended that the Dis- trict adjust revenue by 5% for each of the next five years and incorporate a pass-through provision for increased costs incurred from the San Diego County Water Authority (SDCWA). In addition, Mr. Isaac recommended certain adjust- ments to the District's reserve targets. Adjustments included increasing the Operating Reserve to go days of operating expenses and adjusting the Rate Stabili- zation Reserve Target to 10-io of purchased water costs. Mr. Isaac also provided recommendations to the rate structure to ensure compliance with the cost of service principles of Proposition 218. Residential rates were adjusted from a 5 -tiered rate structure to a 3 -tiered inclining rate structure that can be clearly supported by cost incurred. Non -Residential (Com- mercial/Industrial and Medical Care Facilities) rates were adjusted from a 3 -tiered rate structure to a uni- form rate structure as Non -Residential commercial uses and related water needs can vary drastically between accounts. Finally, RFC recommended changing the Agricultural and Irrigation rate struc- \ 28 \ RAFTELIS FINANCIAL CONSULTANTS, INC. P344 ture from a 5 -tiered budget based rate structure to a 2 -tiered budget based rate structure. The Rate Study and all recommendations were approved at a Public Hearing held on June 9, 2015. CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE (CA) Mr. Isaac is currently serving as lead rate consult- ant on a comprehensive cost of service analysis and financial plan for the City of Arroyo Grande. The City currently has ground water and a supplemen- tal water supply from the Lopez Dam that is debt financed. As part of the cost of service analysis and tiered -rate structure, costs were built up based on water supply costs, delivery costs, and peaking to substantiate why each tier has a different rate per unit of water. Doing so provided a clear understand- ing on the costs incurred by the city's utility and provided a nexus in compliance with Proposition 218. The project is almost complete and is proceed- ing with the Proposition 218 noticing. CITY OF SIERRA MADRE (CA) Mr. Isaac recently completed a long-term financial plan update for the City of Sierra Madre's water and sewer enterprises. The project also included a rate redesign of the City's water rate structure to promote water conservation while meeting the City's Water Utility's financial needs. The Public Hearing con- cluded on January 28th 2014 and new rates will go into effect in March, 2014. The new proposed rate structure moves from a three -tiered water rate to a four -tiered water rate structure that includes a new Tier 1 allotment to reward customers that are very efficient with their water usage. In recent times, the City has experienced a significant reduction to their available groundwater and the new rate design will now account for additional costs incurred from the inclusion of supplemental water from MWD. As a result, the City long-term financial plan has been updated and a comprehensive water consumption analysis has been completed to ensure revenue suf- ficiency in the near-term as well as the long-term. ELK GROVE WATER DISTRICT (CA) In 2013, Mr. Isaac served as Principal -in -Charge RAFTELIS FINANCIAL CONSULTANTS, INC. and assisted the District with a very extensive and thorough redesign and public outreach campaign for its water rates. The District's previous study was conducted in 2007 and was expedited because the District was not in compliance with its existing bond covenants. The results of the study recommended rev- enue adjustments from Fiscal Year 2007-08 through 2011-12 of 32%, 20%,15%, 3%, and 3%, respectively. The District was able to reduce the third year from a 15% revenue adjustment down to 12% and deferred the last two years of 3% revenue adjustments. Given the circumstances from the last rate study, the District wasn't completely aware how their cur- rent rates were developed and wished to take a more measured approach to the 2013 Water Rate Study. As such, the study included meetings with District staff, a Citizens' Advisory Committee, Finance Committee, and the District Board. Mr. Isaac presented the cost of service analysis and rate redesign through multiple meetings that dissected each item into discrete com- ponents. Separate meetings were held to discuss the following components: l) the District's fiscal policies, 2) District objectives, 3) establishment of new reserve funds, 4) fire protection services, 5) cost of service analysis, 6) customer classes, 7) refinancing of exist- ing debt, 8) consumption forecast, and 9) customer impact analysis. The ultimate objective of the District was to mitigate rate increases while accounting for future obligations of the District, such as escalating debt service payments. The Proposition 218 Notices were mailed in May 2013 and all of the material discussed and presented over the course of the last 9 months is on the District's website at http://www.egws.org/2o13waterrates- tudy.html. District staff and Board members clearly understand the basis for the proposed new rates and are comfortable with the new rate structure. In addition, Mr. Isaac is continuing to provide ser- vices to the District through annual updates for Fiscal Year 2014 through Fiscal Year 2018. ENCINA WASTEWATER AUTHORITY (CA) Mr. Isaac assisted the Encina Wastewater Author- / 29 / P345 ity (EWA) with the Asset Allocation for the Phase V Expansion Project of their Wastewater Treat- ment Plant (2013). The update adjusted initial cost estimates using actual figures based on: exist- ing facilities and the most recently completed CAFR; project costs based on actual amounts paid according to EWA financial records; and, actual Engineering News Record, Los Angeles (ENRLA) at the defined mid -point of construction. The analysis accounted for the specific discharge characteristics of the EWA's member agencies as well as total capac- ity necessary to serve each member, which includes: City of Vista, City of Carlsbad, Buena Sanitation Dis- trict, Vallecitos Water District, Leucadia Wastewater District, and City of Encinitas. The analyses deter- mined the updated amount of any debits or credits to each EWA Member Agency and established EWA Member Agency Ownership percentages for com- pleted capital improvements. PHELAN PINON HILLS COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT (CA) Mr. Isaac served as lead rate consultant on a recently completed comprehensive cost of service analysis and financial plan for the Phelan Pinion Hills Community Services District (CSD). The study accounted for the CSD's policy objectives and achieves a strong financial outlook in future years. As the CSD was undertaking a study of this type for the first time since becoming an independent local agency, Mr. Isaac's primary objective was to develop a robust and custom-de- signed financial rate model that would clearly reveal the current financial health of the Water Enterprise Fund and provide a sound financial plan reflecting a continued strong financial outlook. To ensure stable short- and long-term financial stability, historical and future financial informa- tion was collected and analyzed, including water operations, planned capital improvement projects, existing debt obligations, and the acquisition of additional water rights. As this was the CSD's first independent financial and rate analysis, Mr. Isaac collaborated closely with CSD staff to prepare and tailor a comprehensive financial model that focused \ 30 \ on District policies and fiscal objectives. Mr. Isaac assisted with not only ensuring a healthy financial outlook for the utility in future years, he also took this opportunity to provide a thorough under- standing to District Board Members on rate -setting principles and best management practices. Mr. Isaac is continuing to work with the District on annual updates for Fiscal Year 2014 through Fiscal Year 2018. CITY OF COVINA (CA) Mr. Isaac served as lead consultant in a redsign of the City's water rate strcuture. The new rate str- cuture incorporated a three -tiered water rate design that secured a stable revenue stream while promot- ing efficient use of water. One of the City's primary goals was to restructure the existing water rates to reach a 20% reduction in water consumption by cal- endar year 2020. CITY OF DANIA BEACH (FL) Mr. Isaac conducted a a comprehensive review and financial plan update for the City's water and waste- water utilities and restrcutured the rates to reflect a cost of service methodology. Mr. Issac also served as lead consultant in restrcuting the City's method of assessment for its stormwater and fire assessments. Due to his breadth of knowledge for each service discipline identified in this engagement, Mr. Isaac operated as principle -in -charge for the entire pro- ject. Each Enterprise Fund involved the creation of a detailed financial plan to account for current and future operations; maintenance and facilities; and the development and implementation of new fee, rate, and assessment structures.Through Mr. Isaac's review, the existing rate structure demonstrated that current utility rate revenues were not sufficient to fund operating and maintenance costs, as well as necessary capital improvements. The updated rate analysis established distinct customer classes for each utlity that distributed the full cost of services to the customer base, in proportion to service demands placed on utility systems. RAFTELIS FINANCIAL CONSULTANTS, INC. P346 PUBLICATIONS • "Cryptography with Cycling Chaos," Physics Letter A, V 303; Pages 345-351(2002) OTHER RELEVANT PROJECT EXPERIENCE • City of:Coachella (CA) - Water Rate Study • City of Dania Beach (FL) - Water and Wastewater Financial Plan Update • Town of Danville (CA) - Cost Allocation Plan City of Delano (CA) - Water, Wastewater, Refuse, and Street Sweeping Rate Study • .Encina Wastewater Authority (CA) - Asset Allo-. cation for the Phase V Expansion Project of the Wastewater Treatment Plant • City of Irvine (CA) -Cost Allocation Plan and UF" • City of La Mirada (CA) - Cost Allocation Plan and OF • City of Lompoc (CA) - Water and Wastewater Rate Study • City of"Modesto (CA) - Cost Allocation Plan • City of Pacifica (CA) - Cost Allocation Plan and OF City of San Fernando (CA) - Water and Wastewa- ter Rate Study • " City of Sierra Madre (CA) Financial Plan Update • City of Tulare (CA) - Water Rate Study and Cost Allocation Plan RAFTELIS FINANCIAL CONSULTANTS. INC. / 31 / P347 TECHNICAL SPECIALTIES ANDREW R H E E M >) aumaw il;•7ve�jmsl � GCaD TECHNICAL ADVISOR • - • • - • amm�' Manager ap r • . . - - • b5immmc•7v ' "- PROFILE Mr. Rheem has been providing financial and rate consulting services » I$�+IGd, , • ((i3� to water, wastewater, reclaimed water, and stormwater utilities for over 13 years including conducting rate studies for numerous Col- &@f MOM - • SCI ^ . orado and Southwestern U.S. municipal utilities. He has served as project manager and/or lead analyst for multiple long-standing cli- ents providing a range of municipal financial planning, rate and fee PROFESSIONAL HISTORY assistance through multiple engagements. Mr. Rheem is also a skilled » 3(.M20EQR6 presenter and has presented study findings and recommendations to management and governing bodies. Mr. Rheem holds Bachelors in v ' Business Administration, Finance and Accounting from the Univer- sity of Michigan - Ann Arbor. » G- _ _ , RELEVANT PROJECT EXPERIENCE CITY OF SCOTTSDALE (AZ) L3 Mr. Rheem served as the Quality Assurance / Quality Control Manager FTaYi •7 • • • • • for a 2016 Biennial Audit of Land Use Assumptions, Infrastructure Improvements Plan and Development Impact Fees Study completed for » . the City of Scottsdale. The City assesses water system, water resource and wastewater system development impact fees, adopted and in compliance with the requirements of Arizona Revised Statutes (ARS §9-463.05). Mr. EDUCATION Rheem assisted the RFC Project Manager for the engagement to initially „ OR develop and refine the approach to completing the Biennial Audit, one of • the first to be completed following the implementation of ARS §9-463.05 in 2014. Mr. Rheem also reviewed preliminary and final study findings providing quality control review and overall evaluation of study ser- vices. The final report was issued to the City and the study was finalized in October 2016 and presented to City Council. \ 32 \ CITY OF PHOENIX (AZ) Mr. Rheem is the Project Manager an on-going Biennial Audit of Land Use Assumptions, Infrastructure Improvements Plan and Develop- ment Impact Fees Study completed for the City of Phoenix. The City assesses libraries, parks, fire protection, police, major arterials (road- way facilities), stormwater, water, wastewater and water resource development impact fees, implemented in 2015 in compliance with the requirements of Arizona Revised Statutes (ARS §9-463.o5). The water resource development impact fee is assessed throughout the City while the eight other development impact fees are assessed within growing areas in the periphery of the City that vary within eight different service areas. Mr. Rheem is leading the overall study RAFTELIS FINANCIAL CONSULTANTS, INC. P348 including development and implementation of the study approach and methodology, managing the analysis and audit efforts of the study team and serving as the primary RFC point of contact work- ing closely with the City Project Manager and project team. Study findings will be documented within a draft and final report. This study was initiated in December 2016 and is anticipated to be completed before June 30, 2017. CITY OF SURPRISE (AZ) Mr. Rheem served as the Project Manager for a utility and non-utility development impact fee study. We assisted the City to develop an infra- structure improvements plan and update the City's non-utility, water, water resource and sewer system development impact fees for compliance with Ari- zona Revised Statutes (ARS §9-463.05). We also assisted the City during the non-utility and utility development impact fee public hearing and public notice process completed in May 2014. Mr. Rheem assisted the City to complete an exten- sive review of the over 12o development agreements the City has completed that documented previous, outstanding and future reimbursement liabilities amongst the City's general fund and utility and non-utility funds. This study was initiated in 2012 with the final study findings issued in 2013. Mr. Rheem previously assisted the City to complete a historical review of development impact fee funded expenditures finalized in early 2011. This review was completed by fee area from a period of fiscal year 2007 through fiscal year 2010 to compare the fund- ing sources of completed capital projects against the growth -related portion of development impact fee eligible facilities identified in a previous develop- ment impact fee study by fee area. The results of the review were a series of correcting journal entries and interfund loans. The study results were presented to City Council and implemented. CITY OF AVONDALE (AZ) Mr. Rheem is the Project Manager an on-going Bien- nial Audit of Land Use Assumptions, Infrastructure RAFTELIS FINANCIAL CONSULTANTS, INC. Improvements Plan and Development Impact Fees Study completed for the City of Avondale. The City assesses general government (grandfathered), libraries, parks and recreation, fire, police, streets, water, and wastewater development impact fees, implemented in 2014 in compliance with the require- ments of Arizona Revised Statutes (ARS §9-463.05). All fees are assessed system -wide throughout the City's service area. Mr. Rheem is leading the overall study including development and implementation of the study approach, managing the analysis and audit efforts of the study team and serving as the primary RFC point of contact working closely with the City Project Manager and project team. Study findings will be documented within a draft and final report. This study was initiated in January 2017 and is anticipated to be completed before June 30, 2017. CITY OF STEAMBOAT SPRINGS (CO) Mr. Rheem is serving as Project Manager for a com- prehensive water and wastewater rate study for the City of Steamboat Springs. Separate water and wastewater financial planning models were updated to evaluate current and potential funding sources to support each utility operation over the next ten years including future adjustments necessary to fund oper- ations and the annual capital project requirements (including regulatory driven and capacity expan- sion improvements), and maintain a financially viable utility. A cost -of -service evaluation was then completed for each utility. The results of the cost -of - service and financial planning tasks were integrated into developing three water rate structure alterna- tives and two wastewater rate structure alternatives for full service City customers and a single alternative for wholesale water and sewer customers. The utility tap fees were also updated as part of the study. The findings and recommendations will be presented to City Council in August 2016 and summarized in a report issued at the completion of the study. This study was an update of a comprehensive rate and fee study completed for the City in 2010. MT. WERNER WATER AND SANITATION DISTRICT (CO) Mr. Rheem is serving as Project Manager for a com- / 33 / P349 prehensive water and wastewater rate study for the Mt. Werner Water and Sanitation District serving Steamboat Ski Resort as well as residential and commercial customers nearby. Separate water and wastewater financial planning models were devel- oped to evaluate current and potential funding sources to support each utility operation over the next ten years including future adjustments nec- essary to fund operations and the annual capital project requirements, and maintain a financially viable utility. A cost -of -service evaluation was then completed for each utility. The results of the cost -of - service and financial planning tasks were integrated into developing two water rate structure alternatives and two wastewater rate structure alternatives for full service District customers. The utility tap fees were also updated as part of the study. The findings and recommendations will be presented to the District Board in August 2016 and summarized in a report issued at the completion of the study. Elec- tronic copies of models created as part of the study will be delivered to the District for their use. CITY OF TRINIDAD (CO) Mr. Rheem is serving as Project Manager for a phased comprehensive water and wastewater rate study for Trinidad. Separate water and wastewater financial planning models were developed to evaluate cur- rent and potential funding sources to support each utility operation over the next six years including future adjustments necessary to fund operations and the annual capital project requirements, and maintain a financially viable utility as part of Phase 1. As part of Phase 1, RFC recommended increases to the City's wastewater rates effective in 2016. Future phases anticipated to start in 2017 will include water and wastewater cost of service evaluation and rate structure alternatives. Phase 2 includes a review and update of City water and wastewater plant investment fees anticipated to be completed in September 2016. CITY AND COUNTY OF DENVER (CO) In October 2014, RFC began both an Organizational Assessment Study and Financial Plan for the City and County of Denver's Wastewater Management Division within the Department of Public Works. Mr. \ 34 \ Rheem served as the financial planning task project manager that evaluated multi-year rate revenue increases for the City and County of Denver Waste- water Management Division. The Division provides separate sanitary and storm sewer conveyance for 155,000 customers utilizing over 1,500 miles of san- itary sewers and 800 miles of storm sewers. RFC assisted the City to complete a 10 -year financial plan for the City's sanitary sewer and storm drain- age utilities and proposed rate revenue adjustments for 2016 through 202o and effective January 2o16. The City's financial planning model was enhanced with additional capabilities including graphical dashboard and user interface, scenario capabilities, and capital funding alternatives. RFC evaluated a variety of capital improvement project alternatives and funding options to develop recommended alter- natives for consideration by the City. Additionally, recommendations from the Phase 1 Organization Assessment were also incorporated within the financial planning evaluation. The recommenda- tions were summarized in a report presented to and adopted by City Council in 2016. Following the rate study, RFC completed a bond financial feasibility study in October 2016 associated with stormwater utility revenue bonds issued to fund extensive capi- tal requirements identified by the City. CITY OF LONGMONT (CO) Mr. Rheem served as project manager for a 2014 water financial planning, rate and fee assistance for the City's water and wastewater utilities. As part of the study, we completed a comprehensive water rate and fee study. We populated a 20 -year water finan- cial plan in projecting future adjustments to utility revenues and projected debt issues to fund future capital expenditures. We then completed a water cost - of -service analysis. Capital improvement scenarios related to consolidating to one water treatment plant or maintaining two water treatment plants were evaluated including capital funding and impact to the multi-year rate revenue increases. RFC profes- sionals worked with the City to evaluate changes to the tiered rate structure to simplify and increase the conservation pricing signal to customers for discre- RAFTELIS FINANCIAL CONSULTANTS. INC. P350 tionary and wasteful water use. Schedules of water rates over a five-year period were adopted. Findings and recommendations were presented to the City and a report was issued. RFC professionals also updated the City's water and wastewater system development fees and miscellaneous charges assessed by the util- ities as part of this study. Mr. Rheem was Project Manager for a 2011 engage- ment that updated the utility water and wastewater rate models to incorporate additional user defined scenarios and reflect changes to the water and wastewater utility operations and fund structure. We delivered a user manual and completed training sessions with utility staff at the completion of the model update. In 2012, Mr. Rheem served as Project Manager assisting utility staff in updating the wastewater financial planning model to reflect updated capital improvements and revenue requirements. The cost of service analysis was updated to reflect adjusted revenue requirements and annual user charge adjustments were developed for 2013 through 2017• The City Council adopted the recommended rates. CITY OF GREELEY (CO) Mr. Rheem served as Project Manager for a variety of water and wastewater utility financial studies for the City of Greeley (City) since 2013. The assistance includes updating the City's water and wastewater utility financial planning, rate and fee analyses. Recent assistance includes evaluating the rate of return and rate base for contract water customers, reviewing the water and wastewater system develop- ment fee structure, developing revenue requirement projections and review of the capital improvement program and reassessment of proposed debt service issues for both the water and wastewater utilities. We are currently assisting the City in enhancing the water and wastewater rate models to incorporate graphical dashboard and user interface, scenario capabilities, and capital funding alternatives. Mr. Rheem also served as Project Manager for a completing a comprehensive stormwater financial RAFTELIS FINANCIAL CONSULTANTS, INC. planning and capital funding evaluation in 2015. The City is proposing to accelerate the timing of capital improvements and is evaluating debt and rate revenue increases through this study. CITY OF PUEBLO (CO) Mr. Rheem served as Project Manager for a 2015 study to update of the wastewater utility financial plan and proposing annual rate adjustments over a five-year period of 2016 through 2020. To meet more stringent federal and State of Colorado regulations on wastewa- ter effluent, the utility scheduled significant upgrades to the treatment plant and will be completing addi- tional regulatory -driven upgrades to the treatment plant and collection system through 2025. RFC designed and updates an 11 -year financial plan incor- porating the latest billing data and customer usage trends, projected annual operating costs adjusted for inflation, staffing requirements and treatment plant process requirements, and the capital improvement program needed to meet the utility's replacement schedule and regulatory requirements, federal guide- lines. We developed a forecast of revenue adjustments needed to maintain the utility's financial health to be presented to City Council and during public hearings in 2015. City Council meetings and public hearings will be held prior to adoption with rate adjustments effective January 1, 2o16. CITY AND COUNTY OF BROOMFIELD (CO) Mr. Rheem served as Deputy Project Manager for a 2012 comprehensive water and sewer rate and fee study for Broomfield. We populated separate 30 -year water and sewer financial plans in projecting future adjustments to utility revenues and projected debt issues to fund future capital expenditures. We also updated the City's water and wastewater license fees. We completed separate water and sewer cost -of - service analysis. RFC professionals worked with the City to evaluate changes to the tiered rate structure working with City Council and City staff to review changes to the existing uniform rate structure. Sewer rates were developed to fund annual revenue requirements including projected wastewater treat- ment plant upgrades including the development of a surcharge assessed to each equivalent residential / 35 / P351 unit to fund requirements associated with meeting more stringent wastewater effluent requirements. Schedules of water and sewer rates for 2013 were presented to City Council and adopted. Findings and recommendations were presented to the City and a report was issued. Previous assistance includes lead analyst to com- plete a non -potable reuse system financial analysis regarding potential investments and expansion of the existing non -potable reuse water system. The analysis included multiple scenarios focused on the incremental effect to reuse financial plan and revenue requirements of investments to expand the reuse system. LOCKWOOD WATER AND SEWER DISTRICT (MT) Mr. Rheem is the Project Manager for a comprehen- sive water and sewer financial planning, impact fee, cost of service and rate design study being com- pleted for the Lockwood Water and Sewer District. Lockwood is located just outside of Billings, Mon- tana and provides water and sewer services. RFC is also facilitating a system development fee advisory committee, as required by Montana Code Anno- tated, to review and refine proposed water and sewer system development fees. The sewer utility has been recently installed with effluent being conveyed to the City of Billings wastewater treatment plant for treatment and disposal. Previously water customers had individual septic systems and there are many such system still in place which will be connected to the District's sewer system as drain fields fail and/ or through future phases of the sewer system expan- sion. The District will also be conveying pre-treated wastewater flows to the City of Billings generated by ExxonMobil at a refinery adjacent to the District service area and RFC assisted the District during the contracting phases as well as development of the one-time system development fee to be assessed to ExxonMobil upon connection to the District's system. The study was initiated in July 2016 and is anticipated to be completed by March 2017 with rates and fees implemented effective July 1, 2017. A report will be issued documenting study findings and rec- ommendations to be presented to the District Board. \ 36 \ EL PASO WATER UTILITIES (TX) Mr. Rheem served as Project Manager and/or Lead Analyst for a variety of engagements completed for El Paso Water Utilities since 2003. The following are examples of the various projects completed since 2003. Project manager for nine annual updates of wholesale water and wastewater financial planning and cost -of -service rate models using the base -extra capacity method. Individual wholesale customer reports are issued at the completion of the annual studies. Project manager for an on-going review of the retail water and sewer customer utility rates. The update includes an evaluation of alternative rate structures to recovery identified revenue require- ments. Project manager for a reclaimed water rate analysis that calculated both full cost and subsidized reclaimed water rates. Calculated projected trans- fers from water fund to enable subsidized reclaimed rate to encourage customer growth and reduce long-term water resource capital costs. Developed ten-year cash flow and financial plan including debt service coverage and ending cash balance to evalu- ate the subsidy provided by reduced rates compared to other water resource expansion project costs. EAST LARIMER COUNTY WATER DISTRICT (CO) Mr. Rheem served as Project Manager for a plant investment fee, financial planning, cost of service and rate design models for East Larimer County Water District. He proposed 2008 plant invest- ment fees, retail and wholesale user charges were adopted by the District Board. Updated models were delivered to the District at the end of the study. The financial plan and rate were service were updated in 2009 to reflect reductions to customer growth and customer water use and presented to the District Board for adoption. CITY OF SALIDA (CO) Mr. Rheem served as Project Manager for a 2015 comprehensive water and wastewater rate study for the City. RFC completed a pricing objectives ranking process to assist in developing recommendations to the City's water and wastewater rate structures. The pricing objectives evaluation was completed with both City finance and public works staff and City RAFTELIS FINANCIAL CONSULTANTS, INC. P352 Council to rank twelve pricing objectives. As part of the study, RFC is developing separate water and wastewater financial planning models to evaluate current and potential funding sources to support each utility operation over a io-year study period. RFC will work with City staff to project future rate revenue adjustments necessary to fund operations and the annual capital project and maintain a finan- cially viable utility. A cost -of -service evaluation will then completed for each utility. The results of the cost -of -service and financial planning tasks will be incorporated in the evaluation and development of rate structure alternatives for City customers. RFC is also evaluating the sufficiency of the City's water and wastewater system development fees in recover- ing the costs of facilities serving new development. Findings and recommendations will be summarized in a report and presented to the City Council at the completion of the study. LAKE HAVASU CITY (AZ) Mr. Rheem also served as Project Manager for a Wastewater Expansion Financial Feasibility Analy- sis that included eight annual studies that updated and enhanced a multi-year financial planning and rate model related to a $400 million, to -year sewer expansion project. The model is used to calculate rate increases required in meeting bond covenants in support of annual bond issues funding the majority of the expansion project. The results of the feasibility analysis were documented in a system report and rate change recommendations were pre- sented to City Council. He assisted the City as part of the financing team with annual presentations to three bond rating agencies and the Water Infrastruc- ture Financing Authority of Arizona (WIFA) related to annual loan applications. The expansion program was completed in 2012. In 2015, RFC served as the feasibility consultant for a successful debt restructuring of the City's wastewater debt issued to fund the wastewater capital expansion program that extends the maturity of the debt ser- vice payments to reduce annual debt service while improving the inter -generational equity by matching the liabilities more closely with the lift of the con- RAFTELIS FINANCIAL CONSULTANTS, INC. structed facilities. RFC assisted the City and the City's financial advisor in presenting the proposed plan to the three major rating agencies. The independent financial feasibility report was developed evaluating the feasibility of the proposed financing and impact to the City's wastewater rates. The debt restructuring was completed in October 2015. Mr. Rheem served as Deputy Project Manager for a comprehensive water rate and fee study. The study included the development of a ten-year water finan- cial plan, cost -of -service and rate design model. An evaluation of capital improvement project growth and non -growth funding and funding scenario analysis was included. The financial plan evalua- tion included multi-year rate revenue increases to meet established financial performance thresholds while fully funding operations and capital expendi- tures. Three water rate structure alternatives were presented to City Council that modified the exist- ing system -wide rate structure and replaced it with customer class specific tiered rate structures with increase conservation pricing signals. City Council adopted one of the proposed alternatives. The find- ings and recommendations were summarized and presented to the City Council at the end of the study. CITY OF PRESCOTT (AZ) Mr. Rheem served as the Project Manager for a utility and non-utility development impact fee and water and wastewater rate study completed in 2014. We assisted the City to develop an infrastructure improvements plan and update the City's non-utility, water, water resource and sewer system development impact fees for compliance with Arizona Revised Statutes (ARS §9-463.05). We also assisted the City during the public hearing and public notice process as part of the non-utility and utility development impact fee update adopted in May 2014. We also assisted the City to complete a comprehen- sive water and sewer rate study. The study included evaluating a five-year financial plan and revenue requirements to fund on-going operations, debt service and current and projected water and sewer system capital improvements and exceed estab- / 37 / P353 lished financial performance thresholds. Following the financial plan and revenue requirements eval- uation, a water and sewer cost of service and rate design analysis was completed. Recommendations and findings were summarized in the study report and presented to City Council for adoption and implementation in 2015. OTHER RELEVANT PROJECT EXPERIENCE FINANCIAL PLANNING, RATE AND FEE DESIGN CO: City and County of Denver, Aurora Water, Thornton, Greeley, Pueblo, Longmont, Broomfield, Boulder, Superior, Salida, Rifle, Fort Lupton, Steam- boat Springs, Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment Technical, Managerial and Finan- cial Capacity Development Program, Fort Cason, Rocky Mountain Arsenal National Wildlife Refuge, East Cherry Creek Valley Water and Sanitation Dis- trict, East Larimer County Water District (ELCO), Arapahoe County Water and Wastewater Author- ity, Widefield Water and Sanitation District, Eagle River Water and Sanitation District, Upper Eagle Valley Water Authority, Willows Water District; AZ: Lake Havasu City, Kingman, Glendale, Metro- politan Water District; TX, UT, MT, CA, FL: El Paso Water Utilities, Salt Lake City, Kearns Improvement District, Granger Hunter Improvement District, Moulton Niguel Water District, Missoula, Great Falls, Columbus, Tavares, Hernando County NON -POTABLE AND REUSE WATER CO: Denver Water, Denver Public Schools, Aurora Water, Thornton, Longmont, Broomfield; TX, UT, MT, CA, FL: El Paso Water Utilities, Salt Lake City, Kearns Improvement District, Granger Hunter Improvement District, Moulton Niguel Water Dis- trict, Tavares IMPACT FEE STUDIES CCO: Aurora Water, Thornton, Longmont, Broom- field, Superior, Trinidad, Mt Werner Water and Sanitation District, Pueblo West Metropolitan Dis- trict, Steamboat Springs, Los Pinos Fire Protection District, East Larimer County Water District (ELCO), \ 38 \ Widefield Water and Sanitation District, Eagle River Water and Sanitation District, Upper Eagle Valley Water Authority; AZ: Fountain Hills, Buckeye, Sur- prise, Kingman, Chino Valley. Lake Havasu City, Prescott, Tempe, Glendale; TX, UT, MT, CA, FL: El Paso Water Utilities, Lockwood Water and Sanita- tion District, Kearns Improvement District, Granger Hunter Improvement District FINANCIAL PLANNING, RATE AND FEE DESIGN CO: City and County of Denver, Aurora Water, Thornton, Greeley, Pueblo, Longmont, Broomfield, Boulder, Superior, Salida, Rifle, Fort Lupton, Steam- boat Springs, Mt. Werner Water and Sewer District, Trinidad, Pueblo West Metropolitan District, Colo- rado Department of Public Health and Environment Technical, Managerial and Financial Capacity Development Program, Fort Cason, Rocky Mountain Arsenal National Wildlife Refuge, East Cherry Creek Valley Water and Sanitation District, East Larimer County Water District (ELCO), Arapahoe County Water and Wastewater Authority, Widefield Water and Sanitation District, Eagle River Water and San- itation District, Upper Eagle Valley Water Authority, Willows Water District; AZ: Lake Havasu City, King- man, Glendale, Metropolitan Water District; TX, UT, MT, CA, FL: El Paso Water Utilities, Salt Lake City, Lockwood Water and Sanitation District, Kearns Improvement District, Granger Hunter Improvement District, Moulton Niguel Water District, Missoula, Great Falls, Columbus, Tavares, Hernando County STORMWATER CO: City and County of Denver, Aurora Water, Thorn- ton, Longmont, Boulder, Superior; AZ: Surprise, Kingman; TX, UT, MT, CA, FL: El Paso Water Utilities UTILITY CREATION AND IMPLEMENTATION CO: Thornton, Soldier Canyon Filter Plant (Tri -Dis- tricts); AZ: Surprise, Kingman, Lake Havasu City; TX, UT, MT, CA, FL: El Paso Water Utilities, Salt Lake City RENEWABLE ENERGY CO: Fort Cason, Rocky Mountain National Wildlife Natural Refuge RAFTELIS FINANCIAL CONSULTANTS, INC. P354 ECONOMIC AND INDIRECT COST EVALUATIONS CO: Thornton, Longmont, Denver Public Schools, Colorado Department of Public Health and Environ- ment; AZ: Lake Havasu City; TX, UT, MT, CA, FL: El Paso Water Utilities BOND AND LOAN FEASIBILITY CO: Aurora Water, City and County of Denver, Thornton, Longmont, Steamboat Springs, Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment; AZ: Lake Havasu City, Glendale, Metropolitan Water District; TX, UT, MT, CA, FL: El Paso Water Utilities, Tavares, Hernando County PUBLICATIONS AND WORKSHOPS • Rheem, A., Davis. F "Conducting Audit of Infra- structure Improvements Under Arizona Revised Statutes 9-463.05 - Scottsdale Arizona Case Study", Growth Infrastructure Consortium Con- ference, Denver, CO October 2016. • Thomas, D., Rheem, A., "How Lake Havasu City's Pro -Active Wastewater Asset Management Program Makes Every Dollar Count", AZ Water Conference, Glendale, AZ May 2016. • Rheem, A., Thomas, D., "Expense, Project and Budget Management Tactics to Provide Wastewa- ter Service Delivery Without Increasing Rates", AZ Water Conference, Glendale, AZ May 2016. • Rheem, A. "Comparing Utility Rates, Fees and Financial Results," Colorado Special Districts Association Conference, Keystone, CO September 2016. • Rheem, A., "Utility Financial Planning in Advance of Issuing Debt," presented at a 2015 Water Bond Workshop, Loveland, CO, May 2015. • Navarrete, M., Rheem, A. "Time for a Change? El Paso Water Utilities Considers a New Rate Struc- ture;' Utility Management Conference, Austin, TX, February 2015. • Walker, P., Cregger, H. Rheem, A. "CIP Planning - Cradle to Grave;' Colorado Government Finance Officers Association Metro Coalition Workshop, Westminster, CO, September 2009. • Wegley, L., Rheem, A. "Mixed Use Water and Wastewater Rates and Development Fees - City of Longmont Case Study," presented at the Rocky RAFTELIS FINANCIAL CONSULTANTS, INC. Mountain Section American Water Works Asso- ciation /Water Environment Federation, Vail, CO, September 20o6. Rheem, A., Malesky, C., "Revenues, Water Rates, and Reserves;' presented at the Colorado Govern- ment Finance Officers Association 3rd Quarter 2007 Educational Seminar, Gunnison, CO, July 2007. / 39 / P355 TECHNICAL SPECIALTIES JOE WILLIAMS QMGMmlam PROJECT ANALYST affomm MMWA mmma Consultant " =• •• PROFILE " • • maD Mr. Williams has a background in accounting and possesses extensive oda '' analytical, financial modeling and presentation skills. His exper- tise lies in the areas of research, compiling and analyzing data, and computer financial and rate model development. Mr. Williams has PROFESSIONAL HISTORY participated in a full complement of assignments supporting project �C@Moles managers in RFC's Orlando, Sarasota, Charlotte, Cary, Denver and . - r Austin offices. Mr. Williams was also involved in conducting the com- • • ' prehensive 2012 and 2014 Florida Water and Wastewater Rate Surveys of local government utilities located throughout Florida. EDUCATION " (W �.. RELEVANT PROJECT EXPERIENCE .. PINELLAS COUNTY UTILITIES (FL) • • ' Mr. Williams is assisting with development of the long term Revenue Sufficiency and Sustainability Forecast. This includes rate design for the water and sewer systems that targets enhanced revenue stabil- ity, strong equity amongst various customer classes, and continuity between the systems. He is also assisting with incorporating scenarios developed in the Business Case into the Revenue Sufficiency Forecast. \ 40 \ CITY OF MARATHON (FL) RFC is currently engaged with the City of Marathon to provide a financial forecast for the Wastewater and Stormwater Utilities. Mr. Williams assisted with the model development, which includes highly detailed budget projections due to operating contracts and evolving customer characteristics in addition to revenue generation, reserve balances, capital improvement funding. He also played in integral role in the development of the council presentation materials and the combined system revenue sufficiency report. FLORIDA KEYS AQUEDUCT AUTHORITY (FL) Mr. Williams has been involved with several projects for the Flor- ida Keys Aqueduct Authority (FKAA) since 2013 including a system development charge study, a comprehensive review of existing mis- cellaneous charges and a wastewater sufficiency analysis for a greatly expanded customer base. Several options for updating miscellaneous charges were reviewed including (i) indexing of existing charges and (ii) an activity -based cost approach. RAFTELIS FINANCIAL CONSULTANTS, INC. P356 CITY OF TAVARES (FL) RFC has been engaged with the City of Tavares for multiple studies and continuing service contracts. Mr. Williams has been assembling, reviewing, and compiling key data required for an ongoing feasi- bility review to fund stormwater facilities. This has involved modeling the financial impact various fund- ing alternatives will have on cost recovery through rates, fees, and charges. He has also assisted with the research and data acquisition for rate and impact fee comparisons of surrounding utilities which are used in presentations and study reports. VOLUSIA COUNTY (FL) RFC has assisted the County with various studies since 2012. Mr. Williams played a key role in data collection, modeling, and meetings with key staff for a net pres- ent value calculation of the potential sale of a service area within the County. RFC was also retained by the County to determine the feasibility of acquiring a wastewater system within the County in order to pro- vide better and higher quality service to the customers. WINTER HAVEN (FL) RFC has been engaged by the City of Winter Haven to develop an analysis for potential Fire Assessments within the City at targeted revenue levels. Mr. Wil- liams is leading in the development of the model and will be tasked with generating various assess- ment roles for multiple entities including the City, the City's mailing agency for mailed notices to all parcels as mandate by Florida state statutes, and to the Polk County property appraiser and tax collector for inclusion on the annual tax bills. CITY OF AUBURN (AL) In 2014 RFC was hired by the City of Auburn (City) and the Water Works Board of the City of Auburn (AWWB) to complete water and sewer studies. In order to review future revenue sufficiency of the rates, historical consumption trends were ana- lyzed in conjunction with meeting the financing requirements of major water supply facilities in the capital plan. The study also included recommended changes to the fire protection charges as well as a review of the miscellaneous charges. RAFTELIS FINANCIAL CONSULTANTS, INC. DAPHNE UTILITIES (AL) Mr. Williams assisted with the model, presentation and report development for this project, which includes a full cost of service allocation along with a rate design element. The model is based on com- prehensive customer statistics, individual line item budget analysis and cost allocations based on fixed assets, peaking factors, etc. OTHER RELEVANT PROJECT EXPERIENCE • Alabaster Water Board (AL) -Water Rate Study • City of Alachua (FL) - Reclaimed Water Study • City of Atwater (CA) - Water Rate Study • City of Auburndale (FL) - Revenue Sufficiency Study • City of Bartow (FL) - Fire Fees • Cassatt Water Company (SC) - Water Rate Study • Charlotte County (FL) - Dispute Resolutions • City of Clarksville (TN) - Water and Wastewater Financial Planning • City of Clearwater (FL) - Utility Customer Service Efficiency Review • Emerald Coast Utilities Authority (FL) - Water and Wastewater Bond Feasibility • City of Fort Walton Beach (FL) - Water, Wastewa- ter and Stormwater Rate Study • Indian River County (FL) - AMR/AMI Feasibility Study • City of Groveland (FL) - Utility Rate Study • Village of Islamorada (FL) - Wastewater Update • City of Margate (FL) - Development of a Utility Financial Model • Town of Oakland (FL) - Water Rate Study I Waste- water Rate Development I Municipal Impact Fee Study I Utility Impact Fees • Port St. Lucie (FL) - Water, Sewer and Reclaimed Water Rate Study I Water and Sewer Impact Fee Update • City of Sanford (FL) - Municipal Impact Fee Study • St. Johns County (FL) - UCF Study • City of Winnipeg - Cost of Service Analysis • City of Winter Springs (FL) - Municipal Impact Fee Study / 41 / P357 TECHNICAL SPECIALTIES ROBIN CHACKO ftemam U • • PROJECT ANALYST Associate Consultant PROFESSIONAL HISTORY PROFILE „ 0M=M Mr. Chacko has a background in accounting and possesses extensive research and analytical skills. He joined RFC initially in 2012 as an • Oi usma1 intern and then became full-time upon graduating from the Univer- sity of Central Florida in July 2016. Mr. Chacko has contributed to the development of financial models and conducted analyses for water EDUCATION and wastewater rate studies, bond feasibility studies, and water and " �J(I`►��7diC� wastewater rate surveys. OIEO .. „ mQfbf RELEVANT PROJECT EXPERIENCE ® me-Q00fte VOLUSIA COUNTY (FL) . .. • Completed tasks on multiple projects for Volusia County including a financial evaluation model and analysis in the County's northeast peninsula service area. This task included development of a finan- cial model with custom built scenarios based on different ownership assumptions and service area characteristics. \ 42 \ ST. JOHNS COUNTY (FL) Developed utility bill frequency analysis by customer class based on detailed billing reporting. Other tasks include revenue analysis, rate comparisons, and impact fee comparisons. FLORIDA KEYS AQUEDUCT AUTHORITY (FL) Developed rate and impact fee comparisons for comparable service pro- viders. Other billing and data analysis performed on multiple studies. MOSS CREEK OWNERS ASSOCIATION, INC. (SC) Mr. Chacko served as an Associate Consultant on a water and wastewa- ter rate study for the Water Oak Utility (WOU) which is a department of the Moss Creek Owners Association. The project included a review of the WOU's rates necessary to meet the projected revenue require- ments of the combined water and wastewater utility operations. As part of the study, Mr. Chacko developed a customer billing frequency analysis and financial rate model. He also assisted in the creation of the tables and graphs used in the final written report to Moss Creek. CITY OF LARGO (FL) Mr. Chacko serves as an Associate Consultant on a project for the City of Largo (City) to provide wastewater rate and impact fee and stormwater rate consulting services. As part of the study, Mr. Chacko developed a bill frequency analysis to study the available historical RAFTELIS FINANCIAL CONSULTANTS. INC. P358 water consumption of the City's difference customer types in order to better understand the consumption patterns for each type of customer. SURVEYS FLORIDA WATER AND WASTEWATER RATE SURVEY Mr. Chacko served as the Project Manager for the 2o16 and 2014 Florida Water and Wastewater Rate Survey. The Florida survey focused on residential potable water/wastewater bills and rate structures of public utilities. Mr. Chacko helped lead the data collection, analysis, and preparation of the final survey report. 2016 WATER AND WASTEWATER RATE SURVEY Mr. Chacko is currently assisting in the firm's 2016 National Water and Wastewater Rate Survey. The biennial survey is completed by RFC in conjunction with the American Water Works Association. Mr. Chacko will help to lead the data collection, analysis, and preparation of the 2016 survey. OTHER RELEVANT EXPERIENCE City of Auburndale (FL) - Bond Feasibility Study City of DeLand (FL) - Utility Rate and Impact Fee Study Pinellas County Utilities (FL) - Utility Business Case and Rate Sustainability Study RAFTELIS FINANCIAL CONSULTANTS, INC. / 43 / P359 950 South Winter Park Drive Suite 240 Casselberry, FL 32707 RAFT ELIS ' FINANCIAL CONSULTANTS, INC. July 11, 2017 Mr. Vincent M. Burke, PE Director Indian River County Department of Utility Services 180127 Ih Street Vero Beach, FL 32960 Subject: Municipal Advisor Disclosure,''►' Dear Mr. Burke As a registered Municipal Advisor under the Dodd"Frannk Act, Raz (Raftelis) is required to inform our clients of any existti�?2r poli be relevant to any proposed scope of services that may in Twee p defined in the Dodd -Frank Act. As ofithe date of the ag imt Wastewater and Reclaimed Water Rate Study1 (Rate Study) an IZI, Fee Study (Impact Fee Study), no conflicts�p 1.iint gest are known Phone 407. 960.1806 www.raftelis.com Fax 407. 960.1803 elis Financial 'KIMu'ltants, Inc. al conflicts of iqq ?rest that may vfding "advice" as that term is s for a Comprehensive Water, ,Water and Wastewater Impact Under the Dodd -Frank Act the definition of `radvice?Ah' iudes priov4ding any opinion, information or assumptions related to ��t qes size, timing",# 01 terms�'o, possible future debt issues or borrowing. This type ofs mforrr04on may be integrated inQo the capital and financial planning components of the I,al!°� ,Study andNinpact Fee Study. This definition is applicable regardless of whether this information" is dev, ed and usedIsolely for planning and decision making 1. - purposes. For the service`s;Qdrress-40i ,�Jh e. scoge� of work identified for this engagement, any information,tlia s"wd%eloped byaRaftelis that. U under this definition of municipal advice is not 4, 1i intended to represent dhetommendation that the County should issue debt based on the terms and as used to dere 5`pthe financiaJ�plan or forecast, or that the County will, in fact, be able to issuetd%t under the exZ rms angic�onditions assumed and used to develop the financial plan or forecast'C�'The information developed as part of these studies, including any related municipal advice, h intbnded only to p���ide information useful in evaluating the potential impact on the utility and futu eirkte,adjustr�,ents of one potential course of action for the County. If the County decides at some future .date rto issue debt, then at that time the County will need to engage an .N 01. independent, registered,F nancial Advisor to assist in evaluating the availability of different types of debt, and the specific terms and conditions for issuing debt, which will be affected by market conditions and the County's credit rating at the time of issuance. At that time, as a registered Municipal Advisor, Raftelis can also provide additional assistance related to a specific bond or debt issue, such as preparing a bond feasibility report or financial forecast for inclusion in bond documents, without requiring additional oversight or supervision by the Financial Advisor. P360 Mr. Vincent M. Burke, PE Municipal Advisor Disclosure July ,2017 Page 2 By signing this disclosure letter indicating its approval and acceptance of the proposed scope of work and fees, the County is also explicitly acknowledging that Raftelis has provided the necessary disclosures addressing conflicts of interest and any limitations on the scope of Municipal Advisory services to be provided by Raftelis as part of this engagement. Sincerely, RAFTELIS FINANCIAL CONSULTANTS, INC. Marco H. Rocca CMC Principal Consultant INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA Signature r p°11.�. f[ Yy I it >� Print Nap' � ,i 41 t itle V Mfr �I Date `'i 4 •,t: ,ipl, is P361 Ise/ INDIAN RIVER COUNTY SIVE SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL DISTRICT J BOARD MEMORANDUM Date: July 7, 2017 To: Jason E. Brown, County Administrator Thru: Vincent Burke, Director of Utility Services From: Himanshu H. Mehta, P.E., Managing Director, Solid Waste Disposal District Subject: Approval of Engineering Consulting Services Agreement to CDM Smith for IRC Landfill DESCRIPTIONS AND CONDITIONS: On behalf of the Solid Waste Disposal District (SWDD) and in accordance with Florida Statute (FS) 287.055, Requests for Qualifications (RFQs) were solicited on March 19, 2017 for professional consulting engineering services for planned projects at the landfill, including cell closure and new cell design by the Indian River County Purchasing Department. The due date to receive the Statement of Qualifications (SOQs) from potential firms was April 7, 2017, at which time proposals were received from CDM Smith, GeoSyntec, Cornerstone Environmental and CBI. A selection committee comprised of Himanshu Mehta, PE, SWDD Managing Director; Vincent Burke, PE, Director of Utility Services; and Michael Smykowski, Budget Director, independently evaluated and scored the received statements of qualifications. This was followed by phone interviews of the top three ranked firms in accordance with FS 287.055 and the County Purchasing Manual. On June 6, 2017, the Board approved the committee's final ranking and authorized negotiations with the top ranked firm, CDM Smith, (and the subsequently ranked firms, should negotiations with any higher ranked firms fail) in accordance with FS 287.055, Consultant's Competitive Negotiation Act. ANALYSIS: Staff has successfully negotiated with CDM Smith on the attached agreement for engineering consulting services. The highlights of the agreement are as follows: 1. All work performed under this agreement shall be approved by the SWDD Board per a duly authorized work order or an amendment to an approved work order. 2. A schedule of current hourly billing rates are provided as an exhibit to the agreement and shall be valid through July 31, 2022. These new rates represent a 9% increase compared to their previous rates approved on November 4, 2014. Staff supports this increase as we were able to @BCL@A805B6BD - Page 1- P362 negotiate that these remain the same for the next five years. 3. The initial term of the agreement is for a period of five (5) years beginning on the effective date of the agreement. At the sole option of SWDD, the agreement may be renewed for one (1) additional term of five (5) years under the same terms and conditions as the initial term, including amendments. The Indian River County Purchasing Manager, as directed by the SWDD Board, shall issue a notice of renewal prior to the termination of the initial term. 4. The primary scope of work involves landfill closure and cell construction projects including associated improvements to the landfill gas system and leachate system as well as their ancillary services. FUNDING: Funding for this work is budgeted and available in the Engineering Services account number (41121734- 033130), which is funded from SWDD assessments and user fees. The account has a total available budget of $225,271 for the remainder of the 2016/2017 fiscal year. Description Account Number Amount Engineering Services 41121734-033130 $225,271 RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Board: a. Approve the Agreement for Engineering Consulting Services with CDM Smith Inc. for the Indian River County Landfill in regard to professional consulting engineering services for planned projects at the landfill, including cell closure and new cell design. Authorize the Chairman to execute the attached agreement after review and approval by the County Attorney as to form and legal sufficiency, and receipt and approval of the required insurance. ATTACHMENTS: Attachment 1: Agreement for Engineering Consulting Services with CDM Smith Inc. @BCL@A805B6BD - Page 2 - P363 AGREEMENT FOR ENGINEERING CONSULTING SERVICES THIS AGREEMENT for ENGINEERING CONSULTING SERVICES FOR INDIAN RIVER COUNTY LANDFILL ("Agreement"), entered into as of this day of , 2017 by and between Indian River County Solid Waste Disposal. District (SWDD), a dependent special district of Indian River County, Florida, a political subdivision of the State of Florida, whose address is c/o Indian River County Utilities Department, 1801 27th Street, Vero Beach, FL 32960, and CDM Smith Inc.., a Massachusetts. corporation authorized to do business in Florida, whose local address is 1701 Highway A -1-A, Suite 301, Vero Beach, FL 32963 ("Consultant"). BACKGROUND RECITALS: A. In accordance with the Consultants' Competitive Negotiations Act (CCNA), Section 287.055, Florida Statutes, the SWDD solicited Requests for Qualifications (RFQ) #2017048 for,professional Engineering Consulting Services ("Services") related to landfill closure, landfill gas system expansion and cell construction projects ("Projects") made a partof this Agreement by this reference. B. As a result of its response, the SWDD has selected Consultant to provide certain professional services as more fully set forth in in the Scope of Services Section contained in the Request for'Qualifications #2017048. C. The Consultant is. willing and able to perform the Services for the SWDD on the terms and conditions set forth below; and D. The SWDD and, the Consultant wish to enter into this Agreement for Consultant's Services. NOW THEREFORE, in accordance with. the mutual covenants herein contained and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged,. the parties agree as follows: 1. GENERAL. 1,.1: All professional services provided by the Consultant for the SWDD shall .be identified in Work Orders approved by the SWDD Board and performed in a timely, efficient; cost effective manner, and in accordance with the current professional standards of the applicable discipline. The Work Orders shall include a description of services to be performed; a statement of fees; a schedule of deliverables; proposed schedule for compensation and whether compensation -is lump sum-maximum-amount-not=to exceed -task -based oor any combination of the foregoing; a budget establishing the amount of compensation to be paid with sufficient detail so as to identify all of the'Various elements of costs; a projected schedule for completion of the work to be performed by the Consultant; and any other additional instructions or P364 provisions relating to the specific Services -authorized that does not conflict with the terms of this Agreement. 1.2. Whenever the term "Work Order" is used herein, it is intended to mean that formal document that is dated; serially numbered; and executed by both the. SWDb and the Consultant by which the SWDD accepts Consultant's proposal for specific services and Consultant indicates a willingness to perform such specific services for the terms and under the conditions specified in this Agreement. Each Work Order must be fully executed by the SWDD Board prior to issuance of the related Notice -to -Proceed. 1.3. Additional services not contained in the Work Orders which would increase, decrease or which are otherwise outside the scope of Services or level of effort contemplated by the Work Orders shall be Services for which the Consultant must obtain -the prior written approval as an Amendment to the Work Order from the SWDD as provided by this Agreement. All terms for the performance. of such Services must be agreed upon in 'a written document prior to any deviation from the terms of the Agreement, and when properly authorized and executed by both the Consultant and the SWDD shall become an amendment to the Agreement. 1..4.. A schedule of current hourly billing rates is set forth in Exhibit A attached to this Agreement and made a part hereof by this reference. The current rates shall be valid through July 31., 2022. Thereafter, the Consultant may submit a rate adjustment request for approval by the County Administrator or their designee. 1..6. The Background Recitals are true and correct and form a material part of this Agreement. 2. SWDD OBLIGATIONS.. 2.1. The SWDD will provide the Consultant with a copy of any preliminary data or reports available as required in connection with the services to be performed under this Agreement, together with all available drawings, surveys, right�of- way maps, and other documents in the possession of the SWDD pertinent to the Project: The Consultant shall satisfy itself as to accuracy of any data provided. The Consultant is responsible for bringing to the SWDD's attention, for the SWDD's resolution, material inconsistencies or errors .in such data that come to the Consultant's attention. 2.2. The SWDD shall arrange foraccess to, and make provisions forthe Consultant to-enter==upon, public=and-private-property-(where-required)-as-necessary-for the Consultant to perform its Services, upon the timely written request of Consultant to SWDD. 2.3. The SWDD shall promptly execute all permit applications necessary to the Project. 2 P365 2.4. The SWDD shall examine any and all studies, reports, sketches, drawings, specifications, proposals and other documents presented by the Consultant, and render., in writing, decisions pertaining thereto within a reasonable time. 2.5. Approval by the SWDD of any of the Consultant's work, including but not limited to drawings,, design specifications, written reports, or any work products of any nature whatsoever furnished hereunder, shall not in any way relieve the Consultant of responsibility for the technical accuracy and adequacy of the work. Neither the SWDD's review, approval or acceptance of, or payment for, any of the Services furnished under this Agreement shall be construed to operate as a waiver of any rights under this Agreement or of any cause of action arising out of the performance of this Agreement. The Consultant shall be and remain liable in accordance with all applicable laws for all damages to the SWDD caused by the negligent performance by the Consultant of any of the Services furnished under this Agreement. 2.6. The. SWDD reserves the right to appoint one or more Project Managers for the specific Services in connection with this Agreement. The Project Manager shall: (a) act as the SWDD's agent with respect to the Services rendered hereunder; (b) transmit instructions to .and receive information from the Consultant; (c) communicate the SWDD's policies and decisions to the Consultant regarding the Services; and (d) determine, initially, whether the Consultant is fulfilling its duties, responsibilities, and obligations .hereunder. 2.7. The SWDD shall give prompt written notice to' the Consultant whenever the SWDD observes .or otherwise becomes aware .of any development that affects the .timing or delivery of the Consultant's Services. If the Consultant has been delayed in completing its Services through no fault or negligence of either the Consultant or any sub -consultant, and, as a result, will be unable to perform fully and satisfactorily under the provisions of this Agreement, then the Consultant shall promptly notify, the Project Manager. In the SWDD's sole discretion.; and upon the submission to the SWDD of evidence of the causes Of the: delay, this Agreement shall be modified in writing, subject to the SWDD'S rights to, change, terminate,. or stop any or all of the Services at any time in accordance with this Agreement. 2.8. The Consultant shall not be considered in default for a failure to,perform if'such failure arises out of causes reasonably beyond the Consultant's control and through no fault or negligence of the Consultant. The parties acknowledge that adverse weather conditions, acts of God, or other unforeseen circumstances of a similar nature, may necessitate modifications to this Agreement. If such conditions and circumstances do in fact occur, -then the SWDD and Consultant shall mutually agree,_ in writing, to the modifications to be made to this ,Agreement. — -- _ _ � _— - - - -- - ---- 3 P366 3. RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE CONSULTANT. 3.1. The Consultant agrees to perform all necessary professional engineering, project design, construction phase services, and other Services in connection with the assigned Project(s) as set forth in the mutually agreed Work Orders and in this Agreement. 3.2. The Consultant will endeavor not to duplicate any previous work done on any Project. Before beginning work, the Consultant shall consult with the SWDD to clarify and define the SWDD's requirements for the Project. 3.3. The Consultant agrees to complete the Project within the time frame specified in the Work Order. 3.4. The Consultant will maintain an adequate staff of qualified personnel. 3.5. The Consultant will comply with all present and future federal, state, and local laws, rules, regulations, policies., codes., and guidelines applicable to the Services _performed under this Agreement. 3.6. The Consultant, as a part of the consideration hereof, does hereby covenant and agree that: (1) in connection with the .furnishing of Services to the SWDD hereunder, no person shall be excluded from participation in,denied the benefits of, or otherwise subjected to discrimination in regard to the services to be performed by Consultant under this Agreement on the grounds of such person's race, color, creed, national origin, religion, physical disability, age or sex; and (2) the Consultant shall comply with all existing requirements concerning discrimination imposed by any and all applicable local, state, and federal rules, regulations, or guidelines, as such rules, regulations, or guidelines may be from time to time amended. 3.7: 'The Consultant shall, during the entire term of .this Agreement, procure and keep in full force, effect, and good standing any and all necessary licenses, registrations,. certificates, permits, and any and all other authorizations as are required liy local, state, or federal law, in order for the Consultant to render its. Services as described in this Agreement. The Consultant shall also require all sub -consultants to comply by contract with the provisions of this section. 3.8. The Consultant will prepare all necessary sketches and completed application forms to accompany the SWDD's applications for any required federal, state, or local permits. 3.9. The Consultant will cooperate fully with the SWDD in order that all phases of the •wor-k-maybe-properly-scheduled-and,soordinated. 310.. The Consultant will cooperate and coordinate with other SWDD consultants, as directed by the SWDD. 4 P367 3.11. The Consultant shall report the status of the Services under this Agreement to the SWDD Project Manager upon request and hold all drawings, calculations and related work open to the inspection of the SWDD Project. Manager or his authorized agent at any time, upon reasonable request. 3.12. All documents, reports, tracings, plans, specifications, field books, survey notes and information, maps, contract documents, and other data first developed by the Consultant for the purpose of this Agreement, are and shall remain the property of the SWDD. The foregoing items will be created, maintained, updated, and provided in the format specified by the SWDD. Please note, SWDD is currently using AutoCAD Civil 2013; however, will be upgrading to AutoCAD 2017 format soon. When all work contemplated under this Agreement is complete, all of the above data shall be delivered in both electronic and hardcopy format within thirty (30) calendar days to the SWDD Project Manager. 3.13. The Consultant will confer with the SWDD during the further development of improvements for which the Consultant has provided design or other services, .and the Consultant will interpret plans and other documents; correct errors and omissions; and prepare any necessary plan revisions not involving a change in the scope of the work required, at no additional cost to the SWDD, within thirty (30) calendar days of notice by the SWDD, or upon a determination of the Consultant of the existence of such errors or omissions, whichever event shall first occur. The foregoing is not intended to include construction management services provided by the Consultant. 3.14. The Consultant agrees to maintain complete and accurate.books and records ('Books"), in accordance with sound accounting principles and standards for all Services, costs, and expenditures under this Agreement. The Books shall identify the Services rendered during each month of the Agreement and the date and type of each Project -related expense. The SWDD shall have the .right, at any .reasonable time and through any of its designated agents or representatives, to inspect and audit the Books for the purpose of verifying .the accuracy of any invoice. The Consultant shall retain the Books, and make them available to the SWDD as specified above, until the later of three (3) years after the date of termination of this Agreement, or such longer time if required by any federal; state, or other governmental law, regulation, or grant requirement. 3.15. The Consultant shall not assign or transfer any work under this Agreement without the prior written consent of the SWDD. When applicable and upon receipt of such consent from the SWDD, the Consultant shall cause the names of the engineering and surveying_ firms responsible for the major portions of each separate specialty of the work to be inserted on the reports or other data. 3.16. All documents, including but not limited to drawings and specifications, prepared by the Consultant pursuant to this Agreement become the property of SWDD as a deliverable; however, are related exclusively to the Services 5 P368 described herein and are not intended or represented to be suitable for reuse by the SWDD or others on any other project. Reuse of any document or drawing shall be at the SWDD's own risk. The Consultant shall not be held liable for any modifications made to the documents by others. 4. TERM; TIME FOR COMPLETION. 4.1. Initial Term 4.1.1.. The term of this Agreement shall be for a period of five (5) years beginning on the Effective Date of. this Agreement. 4.2. Renewal Option 4.2.1.. At the .sole option of SWDD, this Agreement may be renewed for one (1) additional term of five (5) years under the same terms and conditions as the initial term, including amendments. The Indian River County Purchasing Manager, as directed by the SWDD Board, shall issue a notice of renewal prior to the termination of the initial term.. 4.3. 'The time for completion of each Project shall be defined in the Work Order. 5. COMPENSATION. 5.1: The SWDD shall pay to the Consultant the mutually agreed upon lump sum or maximum amount not -to -exceed professional fee for each Work Order, to be paid in monthly installments or on a deliverable basis, all as set forth in a Work Order. Duly certified invoices, electronic invoices are acceptable, phased as' per the Exhibits, shall be submitted to the SWDD Project Manager, in detail sufficient for proper prepayment and post payment audit. Upon submittal of a proper invoice the SWDD Project Manager will determine if the tasks or portions thereof have been satisfactorily completed. Upon a determination of satisfactory completion; the SWDD Project Manager will authorize payment to be made. All payments .for services shall bemade to the Consultant by the. SWDD .in accordance with the Local Government Prompt Payment Act, as may be amended from time to time (Section .218.70, Florida Statutes, et seq.). :5.1.1. The Consultant acknowledges and agrees that it will not be reimbursed. for any local travel associated with its Services on this Project. 5.1.2. The SWDD shall make direct payment of all permit fees paid to regulatory agencies for approvals directly attributable to the Services under the Project. These permit fees do not include those permits req uir-ed_for any_construction.contractor.. 5.2. The SWDD may at any time notify the Consultant of requested changes to the Services under an existing Work Order., and thereupon the SWDD and the Consultant shall execute a mutually agreeable amended Work Order or a new Work Order. 6 P369 5.3. The SWDD shall have the sole right to reduce or eliminate, in whole or in part, any portion of the Services under any Work Order at any time and for any reason, upon written notice to the Consultant specifying the nature and extent of the reduction. In such event, the Consultant shall be paid for the Services already performed and also for the Services remaining to be done and not reduced or eliminated, upon submission of 'invoices as set forth in this. Agreement. 5.4. The SWDD may, at any time and for any reason, direct the Consultant to suspend Services, in whole or in part under this Agreement. Such direction shall be 'in writing, -and shall specify the period during which Services shall be .stopped. The Consultant shall resume its Services upon the date specified, or upon such other date as the SWDD may thereafter specify .in writing: Where the SWDD has suspended the services under this Agreement fora period. in excess. of six (6) :months, the compensation of Consultant for such suspended Services maybe subject to modification. The period during which the Services are stopped by,.the SWDD shall be added to the time of performance of this Agreement. 6. ADDITIONAL WORK. 6.1. If services in addition to the Services provided hereunder are required or desired by the SWDD in connection with the Project, the SWDD may, at the sole option of the SWDD: separately obtain .same outside of this Agreement; or request the Consultant to provide, either directly by the Consultant or by a sub -consultant, such additional services by a new Work Order or by a written amendment to a specific Work Order. 7. INSURANCE AND INDEMNIFICATION. 7.1. The Consultant shall not commence work on this Agreement until it has obtained all insurance. required under this Agreement and such insurance has been approved by the Indian River County Risk Manager. 7.2. Consultant shall procure and maintain, for the duration of this Agreement, the minimum insurance coverage as set forth herein. The cost of such insurance shall be included in the Consultant's fee: 7.2.1. General Liability • Each Occurrence $500,000 _ • Fire Damage^enyone fire $50,000 • Medical Expenses -any one person $5,000 • Personal and Advertising Injury $500,000 7 P370 • General Aggregate $500,000 • Combined Single Limit $500,000 7.2.2. Automobile Liability— Combined Single Limit $500,000 7.2.3. Worker's Compensation and Employer's Liability as required by the State of Florida Each accident $100,000 .• Each Disease — Each employee $100,000 Each disease — policy limit $500,000 7:2.4. Professional .Liability Insurance $1,000,000 per occurrence $2,000,000 aggregate combined single limit $5.,0.0.0 maximum deductible per claim 7.3'. Consultant's insurance coverage shall be primary. 7.4. All required insurance policies shall be placed with insurers licensed to do business in Florida and with a Best's rating of A VI I or better. 7.5'. The in policies procured shall be occurrence forms, not claims made policies with the exception of professional liability. 7.6. A: certificate of insurance shall be provided to the Indian River County Risk Manager for review and approval,, ten (10) business days prior to commencement of any work under this Agreement. Both Indian River County and the SWDD shall be named as an additional insured on all policies except Workers' compensation and professional liability. 7.7. The insurance companies selected shall send written verification to the Indian River County Risk .Manager that they Will provide 30 business days prior written notice to the Indian River County Risk Manager of its intent to cancel or modify any required policies of insurance. 7.8. Consultant shall include all sub-consultantsas insured under its policies or shall furnish separate certificates and endorsements for each sub -consultant. All. coverages for sub -consultants shall be subject to all of the requirements .stated herein. 7.9. The SWDD, by' and through the Indian River County Risk Manager, reserves the right periodically to, review any and all policies of insurance and reasonably 8 P371 to adjust the limits of coverage required hereunder, from time to time throughout the term of this Agreement. In such event, the SWDD shall provide the Consultant with separate written notice of such adjusted limits and Consultant shall comply within thirty (30) calendar days of receipt thereof. The failure by Consultant 'to provide such additional coverage shall constitute a default by Consultant and shall be grounds for termination of this Agreement by the SWDD. 7.10. The Consultant shall 'indemnify and hold harmless both Indian River County and the SWDD, and its commissioners, officers, employees.and agents,. from liabilities, damages, losses, and costs, including, but not limited to, reasonable attorneys' fees, to the extent caused by the negligence, recklessness, intentional tort, breach of contract or breach of applicable law or intentionally wrongful conduct of the Consultant and other persons employed or utilized by the Consultant, including :subcontractors or sub -consultants, in the performance of this Agreement. 8. "TERMINATION. 8.1. This Agreement may be terminated: (a) by the SWDD,. for any reason, upon thirty (30) days' prior written notice to the Consultant; or (b) by the Consultant, for any reason, upon thirty (30) days' prior written notice to the SWDD; or (c) by the mutual Agreement of the parties; or d), as may otherwise be provided below. In the event of the termination of this Agreement, -any liability of one party to the other arising out of any Services rendered, or for any act or event occurring prior to the termination, shall not be terminated or released. 8.2. In the event of termination by the SWDD, the SWDD's sole obligation to the Consultant shall be payment for"those portions of satisfactorily completed.work previously authorized by approved Work Order. Such payment shall be determined on the basis of the hours, of work performed by the Consultant, or the percentage of work complete as estimated by the Consultant and agreed upon by the SWDD up to the time of termination., In the event of such termination, the SWDD may, without penalty or other obligation to the Consultant, elect to employ other persons to perform the same or similar services. 8.3. The obligation to provide services under this Agreement may be terminated by either party upon thirty (30), days prior written, notice in the event of material failure by theother party to perform in accordance with the terms of this Agreement through no fault of the terminating party. Either party shall have fourteen (14) days to cure. 8.4 In the event that the Consultant merges with another company, becomes a subsidiary of, or makes any other substantial change in structure, the SWDD reserves the right to terminate this Agreement in accordance with its terms. 0 P372 8.5. In the event of termination of this Agreement, the Consultant agrees to surrender within thirty (30) calendar days any and all documents electronic or hardcopy prepared by the Consultant for the SWDD in connection with this Agreement. 8.6. The SWDD may terminate this Agreement for refusal by the Consultant to allow public access to all documents, papers, letters, or .other material subject to the provisions of Chapter 119 Florida Statutes and made or received by the Consultant in conjunction with this.Agreement. 8.7. The SWDD may terminate this Agreement in whole or in part if the Consultant submits a false invoice to the SWDD. 9. TRUTH -IN -NEGOTIATION CERTIFICATE: CONTINGENCY FEES. 9.1. Execution of this Agreement by the Consultant shall act as the execution of a truth -in -negotiation certificate certifying that the wage rates and costs used to determine the compensation provided for in this Agreement are accurate, complete and current as of the date of the Agreement and no higher than those charged the Consultant's most favored customer for the same or substantially similar service. The wage rates and costs shall be adjusted to exclude any significant sums should the SWDD determine that the wage rates and costs were increased due to inaccurate, incomplete or noncurrent wage rates or due to inaccurate representations of fees paid to outside consultants. The SWDD shall exercise its rights under this "Certificate" within one (1') year following final payment. SWDD. has the authority and right to audit Consultant's records under this provision. The SWDD does not hereby waive any other right it may have pursuant to Section 287.055, Florida Statutes, as it may be from time -to - time amended. 9.2. Pursuant to the Consultants' Competitive Negotiations Act, F. S. section 287.055, the Consultant Warrants that it has not employed or retained any company or person other than a bona fide employee working solely for the Consultant to, solicit or secure this.Agreement and that it has not paid or.agreed to pay any company or person other than a bona fide employee -working solely for the Consultant any fee, commission, percentage fee, gifts or any other considerations, contingent upon or resulting from the award or making of this contract. For breach, of violation of this provision, the SWDD shall have the right to terminate this Agreement without liability and, at its discretion, to deduct from the contract price, or otherwise recover, the full amount of such fee, commission, percentage, gift, or consideration. 10.—MISCELUANOUS PROVISIONS:" 10.1. Independent Contractor. It is specifically understood and acknowledged by the parties hereto that the Consultant or employees or subconsultants of the Consultant are in no way to be considered employees of the SWDD, but 10 P373 are independent contractors performing solely under the terms of the Agreement and not otherwise. 10.2. Mercer; Modification. This Agreement incorporates and includes all prior and contemporaneous negotiations, correspondence, conversations,, agreements or understandings applicable to the matters contained herein and the parties agree that there are no commitments, agreements, or understandings of any nature whatsoever concerning the subject matter of the Agreement that are not contained in this document. Accordingly, it is agreed that no deviation from the terms hereof shall be predicated upon any prior or contemporaneous representations or agreements, whether oral or written. No alteration, change, or modification of the terms of this .Agreement shall be valid unless made in writing and signed by the Consultant and the SWDD. 10..3. Governing Law; Venue. This Agreement, including all attachments hereto, shall be construed according to the laws of the State of Florida. Venue for any lawsuit brought by either party against the other party or otherwise arising out of this Agreement shall be in Indian River County, Florida, or, in the event of federal jurisdiction, in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida. 10.4. Remedies; No Waiver. All remedies provided in this Agreement shall. be deemed cumulative and additional, and not in lieu or exclusive of each other or of any other remedy available to either party, at law or in equity. Each right, power and remedy of the parties provided for in this Agreement shall be cumulative and concurrent and shall be in addition to every other right, power or remedy provided for in this Agreement or now or hereafter existing at law or in equity or by statute or otherwise. The failure of either party to insist upon compliance by the other party with any obligation, or exercise any remedy, :does not waive the right to so in the .event of a continuing or subsequent delinquency ordefault.. A party's waver of one or, more defaults does not constitute a waiver of any other delinquency or default. if any legal action or other, proceeding is brought .for the enforcement of this Agreement or because of an alleged dispute, breach, default or misrepresentation in connection With any provisions of this Agreement, each party shall bear its own costs. 10.5. Severability, If any term or provision of this Agreement or the application thereof to any person or circumstance shall, to any extent, be held invalid or unenforceable for the remainder of this Agreement, then the application of such term or provision. to persons or circumstances other than those as to-which_itis.held,invalid.or_unenfor-ceable_shall,not, be. affected,.and_every_,_�._� other term and provision of this Agreement shall be deemed valid and enforceable to the extent permitted by law. 10.6. Availability of Funds. The obligations of the SWDD under this Agreement are subject to the availability of funds lawfully appropriated for its purpose 11 P374 by the Indian River County Solid Waste Disposal District Board of Commissioners. 10.7. No Pledge of Credit. The Consultant shall not pledge the SWDD's credit or make it'a guarantor of payment or surety for any contract, debt, obligation', judgment, .lien or any form of indebtedness-. 10.8. Public Records. The Consultant shall comply with the provisions of Chapter 11.9, Florida Statutes (Public Records Law) in connection .with this Agreement. 10.9. Notices: Any notice, request, demand, consent, approval, or other communication required or permitted by this Agreement shall be given or made in writing and shall be served, as elected by the party giving such notice,. by any of the following methods: (a) Hand .delivery to the other party; (b) Delivery by commercial overnight courier service; or (c) Mailed by registered or, certified mail (postage prepaid),, return receipt requested at. the addresses of the parties shown below, unless otherwise specified by :the Project Manager: SWDD: Indian River County Solid Waste Disposal District Attn: Himanshu H. Mehta, P.E., Managing Director 1325 74th Avenue SW Vero Beach, FL 32968 Facsimile: (772) 770-5296 Email: hmehta@ircgov.com Consultant: CDM Smith Inc. Attn: Eric Grotke, P.E. 1701 Highway A=1 =A, Suite 301 Vero .Beach, FL 32963 Fax: (772)'231-4332 Email: GrotkeEJ@cdmsmith:com Notices shall be effective when received at the address as specified above. Facsimile transmission is acceptable notice effective when received, provided, however, that facsimile transmissions received :(Le., printed) after 5:00 p.m. or on weekends or holidays, will be deemed'received on the next day that is not a Weekend day or a holiday. The original of the notice must additionally be mailed. Either party may change its. address, for the purposes of this section, by written notice to the other party given in accordance with the provisions of this section. _ 10.10. Survival. Except as otherwise expressly provided herein, each obligation in��� this Agreement to be performed by Consultant shall survive the termination or expiration of this Agreement. 12 P375 10.11, Construction. The headings of the sections of'this Agreement are for the purpose of convenience only; and shall not be deemed to expand, limit, or modify the provisions contained in such Sections. All pronouns and any variations :thereof shal(be deemed to refer to the masculine, feminine or. neuter, singular or plural, as the identity of the -party or parties may .require. The parties hereby acknowledge and agree that each was properly represented by counsel and 'this, Agreement was -negotiated .and drafted at arm's-length so that the judicial rule of construction to the effect that a legal ,document shali..be. construed against the draftsperson shall be inapplicable to this Agreement. 10.1.2. Counterparts, This Agreement may -be executed :in one or more counterparts, each of which shall be deemed to be an original copy and all Of whichshall constitute but one and the same instrument. 13 P376 IN WITNESS WHEREOF the parties hereto have executed this Agreement as of the date first written above. Attest: Jeffrey R. Smith, Clerk of Court and Comptroller By: By Owner: Solid Waste Disposal District Indian River County, Florida Deputy Clerk Joseph E. Flescher, Chairman .Date Approved by SWDD: Approved By: Jason E. Brown, County Administrator Signed, sealed, and delivered in the presence of: / 4s _V_e� Vrint Name: r¢_ Print Name: ever ,C a/FSrEQtuND Approved as to Form and Legal Sufficiency By: Dylan T. 'Reingold, County Attorney By Consultant: CDM Smith Ino 9 Name: Print Title: a;�G, I Gni✓,�u�t'4�� ���C'�' 14 P377 Exhibit A GIDIVI Smith Inc. 'Hourly ly . Billing Rates Through July 31, 2022 P378 smith JULY 2017—JULY.2022 SCHEDULE OF HOURLY BILLING RATES CATEGORIES PROFESSIONAL SERVICES Senior Officer Senior Technical Expert Officer Associate Principal Senior Professional Professional II Professional I PROFESSIONAL SUPPORT SERVICES Senior'Support Services: Staff Support Services FIELD SERVICES Senior:Professional Professional PROJECTSUPPORT SERVICES Document Control Specialist $240 $235 $230 $215 $210 $17.5 $140 $120 $130 $95 $90 Subconsultants and direct expense's are not included in the hourly billing rates. All su'bconsultant and other direct project related expenses are subject to a minimum handling/administrative charge of 10 percent. Consultant reserves the right to adjust the Contract'hourly billing rates beginning in August 2022 as negotiated with and agreed to by SWDD and the County.Administrator. RATES EFFECTIVE THROUGH JULY 31, 2022 RFQ 2017048_ Utes4dom P379 INDIAN RIVER COUNTY IVE. c SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL DISTRICT BOARD MEMORANDUM lcyCtf4� Date: July 11, 2017 To: Jason E. Brown, County Administrator From: Vincent Burke, Director of Utility Services Prepared By: Himanshu H. Mehta, P.E., Managing Director, Solid Waste Disposal District Subject: IRC Landfill Work Order No. 1 to CDM Smith, Inc. DESCRIPTIONS AND CONDITIONS: On June 6, 2017, the Solid Waste Disposal District (SWDD) Board authorized negotiations with the top ranked firm, CDM Smith, Inc. (CDM Smith), in accordance with FS 287.055, Consultant's Competitive Negotiation Act per the Request for Qualification #2017048 for Engineering Consulting Services for Landfill Closure, Landfill Gas System Expansion, and Cell Construction. The Board is scheduled to approve the contract agreement with CDM Smith on July 18, 2017. Staff requested a proposal from CDM Smith to provide professional engineering services for the proposed Class I Landfill, Segment 3, Cell 2 expansion, partial closure of Segment 2, and expansion of the landfill gas collection system (Project). The proposed new cell is Cell 2 of Segment 3 (approximately 10.6 acres in size), which will be located immediately to the east of the existing Segment 3, Cell 1. The proposed partial closure of Segment 2 (approximately 25 acres in size) includes closure of the Segment 1/Infill vertical expansion area and the final elevations of Segment 2. Expansion of the landfill gas system within Segment 2 is proposed to be constructed concurrently with the partial closure of Segment 2 so that the final components can be installed prior to the closure cap being constructed. Staff has also requested an evaluation of an alternative cover design as well as preliminary planning for a new lift station. This project will be completed in multiple phases. Phase I includes evaluation of available information and developing sufficient information to update/revise existing permit design drawings, and complete the final design and specifications that will be used for procurement. Subsequent phases will include preparation of the final design and bid package, permitting/regulatory agency support, bidding assistance, and engineering services during construction. This agenda item requests authorization to CDM Smith to initiate Phase 1 of the Project under Work Order No. 1. ANALYSIS: CDM Smith has prepared IRC Landfill Work Order No. 1, provided in Attachment 1, for engineering services detailing the scope of work, budget, and schedule for the project. The fees to be paid by @BCL@C4055D3D Page 1 P380 SWDD for the execution of this work authorization are in accordance with the engineer's continuing consulting services master agreement. The table below shows the expected completion date and their estimated fees. TASK DESCRIPTION DUE DATE AMOUNT 41121734-033130 Task 1- Meetings, Data Collection, Survey, and Phase 1 Geotechnical Investigation October 2017 $131,820 Task 2 — Project quality Management TOTAL (Lump Sum)_ $131,820 The costs above are consistent with what SWDD has paid historically for these services. FUNDING: Funding for this work is budgeted and available in the Engineering Services account number (41121734-033130), which is funded from SWDD assessments and user fees. DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT NO. AMOUNT Engineering Services 41121734-033130 $131,820 RECOMMENDATION: SWDD staff recommends that the Board approve the following: a) Approve IRC Landfill Work Order No. 1 with CDM Smith Inc. in the amount of $131,820 to provide engineering services related to Phase 1 of the Class I Landfill, Segment 3, Cell 2 expansion; partial closure of Segment 2; and expansion of the landfill gas collection system. b) Authorize the Chairman to execute the same, as presented. ATTACHMENT: 1) IRC Landfill Work Order No. 1 @BCL@C4055D3D Page 2 P381 IRC LANDFILL WORK ORDER NUMBER 1 Phase 1- Segment 3 Expansion, Segment 2 Partial Closure And Landfill Gas System Expanshion This Indian River County (IRC) Landfill Work Order Number 1 is entered into as of this _ day of 201 in accordance with FS 287.055, Consultant's Competitive Negotiation Act per the Request for Qualification #2017048 for Engineering Consulting Services for Landfill Closure, Landfill Gas System Expansion, and Cell Construction, dated July 18, 2017 (referred to as the "Agreement"), by and between INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, a political subdivision of the State of Florida ("COUNTY") and CDM Smith Inc. ("Consultant"). The COUNTY has selected the Consultant to perform the professional services set forth on Exhibit A (Scope of Work), attached to this Work Order and made part hereof by this reference. The professional services will be performed by the Consultant for the fee schedule set forth in Exhibit B (Fee Schedule), attached to this Work Order and made a part hereof by this reference. The Consultant will perform the professional services within the timeframe more particularly set forth in Exhibit A (Time Schedule), attached to this Work Order and made a part hereof by this reference all in accordance With the terms and provisions set forth in the Agreement. Pursuant to Section 1 of the Agreement, nothing contained in any Work Order shall conflict with the terms of the Agreement and the terms of the Agreement shall be deemed to be incorporated in each individual Work Order as if fully set forth herein. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Work Order as of the date first written above. CONSULTANT: CDM Smith Inc. By: Print Name: Crit T &ramAcc. Title: V W.t.r- t rerprja BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY 'By: , Chairman BCC Approved Date: Attest: Jeffrey R. Smith, Clerk of Court and Comptroller By: Deputy Clerk Approved: Approved as to form and legal sufficiency: Jason E. Brown, County Administrator Dylan T. Reingold, County Attorney P382 EXHIBIT A WORK ORDER NO.1 INDIAN RIVER COUNTY LANDFILL SEGMENT 3 CELL 2 EXPANSION, SEGMENT 2 PARTIAL CLOSURE, AND LANDFILL GAS SYSTEM EXPANSION PHASE I - MEETINGS, DESIGN DUE DILIGENCE, SURVEY, AND GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION This Work Order, when executed, -shall be incorporated in and become part of the Agreement for Engineering Consulting Services for Indian River County Landfill between Indian River County Solid Waste Disposal District (SWDD) and CDM Smith Inc., (CONSULTANT), dated July . 2017 hereafter referred to as the CONTRACT. BACKGROUND The SWDD, the owner and operator of the Indian River County Landfill, has requested that CONSULTANT prepare this Work Order to provide professional engineering services for the proposed Class I Landfill Segment 3 Cell 2 expansion, partial closure of Segment 2, and expansion of the landfill gas collection system (Project). The proposed new cell is Cell 2 of Segment 3 (approximately 10.6 acres in size), as shown on Drawing No. 5 of the 20 -Year Permit Drawings dated September 2015. Segment 3 Cell 2 will be located immediately to the east of the existing Segment 3 Cell 1. The proposed partial closure of Segment 2 (approximately 25 acres in size) includes closure of the Segment 1/Infill vertical expansion area and the final elevations of Segment 2, which has been historically been referred to as the Segment 2C area. Expansion of the landfill gas system within Segment 2 is proposed to be constructed concurrently with the partial closure of Segment 2 so that the final components can be installed prior to the closure cap being constructed. This Project will be completed in multiple phases. Phase I includes evaluation of available information and developing sufficient information to update/revise existing permit design drawings and complete the final design and specifications that will be used for procurement. Subsequent phases will include preparation of the final design and bid package, permitting/regulatory agency support, bidding assistance, and engineering services during construction. The Scope of Services for Phase I of this Project is described below: SCOPE OF SERVICES CONSULTANT will undertake the design, bidding, permitting, and engineering services during construction of the Class I Landfill Segment 3 Cell 2 expansion, Segment 2 partial closure, and landfill gas system expansion located at the Indian River County Landfill. The design will include the Segment 3 Cell 2 bottom liner system, leachate collection and conveyance systems, and stormwater management facilities; Segment 2 partial closure cap liner system and stormwater management facilities, and the Segment 2 landfill gas system expansion. This scope of services includes work necessary to revise the existing_permit drawingsras necessary and torprepare final design drawings and specifications suitable for procurement of construction services by the SWDD. Based on recent discussions with SWDD staff and our familiarity with the.landfill site, the proposed Scope of Services in this Work Order includes the following tasks: A-1 jj2046 e>dehits.docx P383 TASK 1.0 - MEETINGS, DATA COLLECTION, SURVEY, AND GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION This task focuses on obtaining the necessary preliminary information to prepare detailed engineering plans and construction specifications. Subtask 1.1 Meeting and Site Visit CONSULTANT will attend a meeting with SWDD to discuss the proposed cell expansion, partial closure, landfill gas system expansion, and associated infrastructure and utility work. SWDD shall further define their requirements of the project. This subtask includes a site visit by the CONSULTANT to observe pertinent site features and conditions. CONSULTANT will prepare and distribute meeting minutes. Subtask 1.2 Previous Design Due Diligence CONSULTANT will collect and review available existing data and information already obtained including as-built/record drawings, site surveys, previously performed design calculations, analysis, drawings, permits and applications, and reports that were prepared by SWDD's previous engineering consultant and their subconsultants for both the cell expansion, partial closure, and landfill gas expansion portions of the project. Upon review of available existing data, CONSULTANT will prepare a data request letter for any additional data that is needed and submit it to SWDD for assistance with obtaining the additional data. If the requested additional data is not available, CONSULTANT will provide a list to SWDD to determine the appropriate manner to obtain it, which may include an amendment to this Work Order. Subtask 1.3 Survey CONSULTANT will subcontract with Masteller, Moler & Taylor, Inc. (MMT) to collect detailed field and topographic survey information necessary to refine the existing permit designs of the proposed Segment 3 Cell 2, the proposed partial closure and landfill gas system expansion of Segment 2, and the associated infrastructure and utility work. MMT will also confirm the depth of cover over the existing Segment 1 and Segment 2 closure caps at the points of tie-in, and collect the geotechnical investigation auger boring locations. This subtask includes obtaining survey information in the area where the proposed leachate pump station will be located. CONSULTANT will assist MMT in the field with confirming the depth of cover over the existing caps. This proposal does not include any field verification activities other than those specifically defined in the task. Subtask 1.4 Geotechnical Investigation CONSULTANT will perform a review of the Segment 3 expansion geotechnical reports, analyses, and data that were prepared by SWDD's previous engineering consultant and their subconsultants. This includes checking and verifying the -previouslyyperformed_settlement,_b_easing_capacity.,_and.global_stability_analy_ses. _ This proposal assumes that there are no major issues with the previously prepared and approved geotechnical design, and that the previous analyses will not have to be performed again. If additional analysis is determined to be required, CONSULTANT reserves the right to seek additional compensation. A-2 jj2046 Exhiblts.dou P384 CONSULTANT will also perform an additional geotechnical site investigation for the partial closure portion of this project consisting of hand auger borings on the proposed Segment 2 partial closure area to confirm the thickness and type of the existing intermediate cover material. CONSULTANT will subcontract with Keller, Schleicher and MacW.illiam (KSM) Engineering and Testing to perform an estimated total of up to 25 auger borings. CONSULTANT will stake all the expected boring locations in the field before KSM Engineering and Testing arrives at the site. Once the samples have been collected and classified in the field, they will be placed in appropriate sample containers for transport to a geotechnical laboratory. Up to 12 of the collected samples will be tested in the geotechnical laboratory and evaluated by a professional geotechnical engineer licensed in the State of Florida to determine the nature of the intermediate cover (e.g., particle size, plasticity, and organic content). The proposed number of hand augers and laboratory tests are based on the anticipated variability of the composition of the intermediate cover material. This information will be logged on the existing topographic survey and used during final cover and slope stability design. This subtask also includes one SPT boring to 30 -feet below grade at the location of the proposed Segment 3 leachate pump station, SPT sampling will be performed continuously within the top 10 -feet, and then at 5 -feet intervals thereafter. The boring will be field located based on the boring location plan provided by CONSULTANT. Four grain size analyses will be performed and a boring log with laboratory data will be provided. Based on the results of the evaluation, an engineering design memo will be prepared that includes the following: ■ Summary of previous geotechnical investigations and available data; ■ Results of the additional testing performed; ■ Logs of the test holes; ■ Diagram of the site/boring layout; ■ Veneer slope stability analyses; • Geocomposite drainage transmissivity analyses; • Global slope stability analyses; and ■ Settlement analyses. Subtask 1.5 Initial Coordination with the Florida Department of Environmental Protection This subtask includes the initial coordination with FDEP to discuss the procedure to notify them of the intent to finalize design and construct the previously permitted cell expansion and confirm permitting or notification of the final design and construction of the Segment 2 partial closure and landfill gas expansion. CONSULTANT will prepare for and attend a telephone conference with SWDD and FDEP. Results of this initial coordination will be used to define the regulatory support/_permitting.assistance_services,that wil1,be.needed_and_perfor_med_undera subsequent phase of this project. Included in this subtask are discussions of what will be required for the Environmental Resource Permit and NPDES permit. CONSULTANT will prepare and distribute meeting minutes after the conference call. A-3 j12046 Exhibits.doa P385 Subtask 1.6 Initial Alternative Cover Evaluation This subtask includes an initial evaluation of an alternative geosynthetic closure cover system for the partial closure of Segment 2, such as a closure turf type product/technology. The evaluation will vet the potential risks of using a closure turf type product/technology, permitting procedures, and impact on the overall schedule if this design alternative was selected by SWDD. The evaluation will include a comparison of the anticipated design, permitting, short and long-term maintenance, and construction costs. CONSULTANT will prepare a Technical Memorandum documenting the evaluation and recommendations. TASK 2 - PROJECT QUALITY MANAGEMENT Activities performed under this task consist of those generally administrative functions required to maintain the project on schedule, within budget, and that the quality of the work products defined within this scope is consistent with CONSULTANT's standards and SWDD's requirements. CONSULTANT will meet with SWDD staff as necessary for project planning and coordination. CONSULTANT's project manager will prepare and submit monthly invoices and attend status reporting meetings throughout the life of the project. It is estimated that meetings will be held on the average of once a month. Preparation of a health and safety plan, project administration, and an internal' project quality planning meeting will also be performed under this task. CONSULTANT maintains a quality management system (QMS) on its projects. This task includes performing a technical specialist review on the technical reports and memos prepared by the CONSULTANT under this Work Order. ASSUMPTIONS No design, permitting assistance, bidding assistance, and/or engineering services during construction are included in this Work Order. Subsequent phases of this project will include these services. SWDD will provide all available existing data, as-built/record drawings, site surveys, previously performed design calculations, analysis, drawings, permits and applications, and reports. All previously performed design calculations, analysis, drawings, and reports that were prepared by Geosyntec Consultants or their subconsultants as part of, and/or referenced in, the 20 -Year Renewal Permit Application and Drawings (dated September 2015), are complete, sufficient, accurate,'and do not require any revisions/corrections. If CONSULTANT determines that the previously prepared design calculations, analysis, drawings, and reports are incomplete or require revisions/corrections, CONSULTANT reserves the right to seek additional compensation. No sinkhole evaluation is included in this Work Order. It is assumed that this was addressed during the 20 -Year Renewal Permit Application process. New survey will be obtained of the area where the proposed leachate pump station will be,eonstruction: However, the -existing -survey along -the -route of the proposed-6-inch-- leachate roposed-6-inch— --- - - - - -- leachate forcemain is assumed to be sufficient. If it is determined that additional survey is needed along this route, it will be added under the next phase/work order. CONSULTANT reserves the right to seek additional compensation for work performed, as agreed to by SWDD, beyond what is described in this Work Order. A-4 p2046 Ezhiblts.doa P386 • CONSULTANT and subcontractors shall have access to the site for field investigations, surveying, and the geotechnical investigation. • The initial alternative cover evaluation does not include a detailed technical analysis or any design calculations. PROJECT SCHEDULE The following preliminary project schedule has been developed based on authorization for Work Order No.1 being received by July 18, 2017. Milestone Completion Date Work Order No. 1 Authorized July 18, 2017 Receive Notice to Proceed July 25, 2017 Initial Meeting and Site Visit August 4, 2017 Data Collection and Review August 25, 2017 Initial Coordination With FDEP August 25, 2017 Survey September 22, 2017 Geotechnical Design Memo October 13, 2017 *Project schedule will be dependent on field activities and receipt of laboratory results. Schedule will be adjusted accordingly. PAYMENT AND COMPENSATION Compensation for this Work Order No.1 described herein shall be made in accordance with the Contract between SWDD and CONSULTANT on the basis of a lump sum. The Lump Sum amount for this Work Order No.1 is $131,820. CONSULTANT will submit monthly invoices for services rendered in accordance with this Contract. Payments for the Scope of Services described in this Work Order shall be made based on the percentage of work completed. A-5 j12046 Exhibits.do P387 EXHIBIT B-1 ESTIMATED LABOR HOUR REQUIREMENTS INDIAN RIVER COUNTY LANDFILL SEGMENT 3 EXPANSION, SEGMENT 2 PARTIAL CLOSURE, AND LANDFILL GAS SYSTEM EXPANSION PHASE I - MEETINGS; DATA COLLECTION, SURVEY, AND GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION B-1 W 00 w plat„bwm — Sr. Officer Officer Associate Principal Senior profession8l Professional 11 Professional Sr. Teehnical Expert Senior Support Services Staff Support Services Document Control Specialist e Hours g Task y Task 1- Meetings, Data Collection, Survey, and Geotechnical Investigation Subtask 1.1 Meeting and Site V sit 4 0 4 0 6 6 6 4 0 0 2 32 Subtask 1.2 Previous Design Due D11lgence 0 0 2 10 20 30 30 2 2 4 4 104 Subtask 1.3 Survey 0 0 2 4 16 4 16 0 2 6 2 52 Subtask 1.4 Geotechnical investigation 8 2 2 24 16 120 16 2 0 0 8 248 Subtask 23 initial Coordination with FOEP 0 0 4 0 4 4 4 0 0 0 2 18 Subtask 1.6 Initial Alternative Cover Evaluation 2 2 10 4 10 10 30 2 0 0 2 72 Subto1a1= 14 4 24 42 72 174 102 10 4 10 1 20 476 Task 2- Project QualityManagement'l 4 0 48 0 0 0 0 8 0 0 8 68 I Total= 18 4 72 42 72 174 102 18 4 10 28 544 B-1 W 00 w plat„bwm — EXHIBIT B-2 BUDGET PROJECT: Indian River County Landfill Segment 3 Expansion, Segment 2 Partial Closure, and Landfill Gas System Expansion Phase 1— Meetings, Data Collection, Survey, and Geotechnical Investigation PROJECT DESCRIPTION: As Outlined in the Scope of Services, Attachment A REFERENCE: Agreement between Indian River County Solid Waste Disposal District and CDM Smith Inc. Labor Category Hours Rat& Labor Sr. Officer 18 $240 $4,320 Officer 4 $230 $920 Associate 72 $215 $15,480 Principal 42 $210 $8,820 Senior Professional 72 $175 $12,600 Professional II 174 $140 $24,360 Professional I 102 $120 $12,240 Senior Technical Expert 18 $235 $4,230 Senior Support Services 4 $130 $520 Staff Support Services 10 $95 $950 Document Control Specialist 28 $90 $2,520 TOTAL HOURS 544 TOTAL LABOR COST $86,960 OUTSIDE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES Survey $17,380 Geotechnical $18,150 Regulatory $3,850 .$39,380 OTHER DIRECT COSTS $5,480 (Prints, field supplies, field safety equipment, field vehicle, etc.) TOTAL PROJECT AMOUNT (LUMP SUM) $131.820 WN jj2046_Exhibits.dotx P389 INDIAN RIVER COUNTY �gIVF,/t SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL DISTRICT q J .�LCI`C1S'� BOARD MEMORANDUM Date: July 11, 2017 To: Jason E. Brown, County Administrator Thru: Vincent Burke, Director of Utility Services From: Himanshu H. Mehta, P.E., Managing Director, Solid Waste Disposal District Subject: Amendment To Option Agreement with Alliance Bioenergy +, Inc. BACKGROUND: On January 24, 2017, Commissioner Tim Zorc requested a time -sensitive emergency item be added to the Indian River County (IRC) Board of County Commissioners (BCC) meeting agenda related to Alliance Bioenergy +, Inc. (Alliance Bioenergy) and their interest in obtaining processed yard waste from the Solid Waste Disposal District (SWDD). Mr. Daniel de Liege, Chairman/CEO for Alliance Bioenergy, expressed that they have made an offer for the former Indian River BioEnergy Center operated by INEOS New Planet BioEnergy, LLC (INEOS). The BCC directed staff to draft a 90 -day Option Agreement, including several conditions contained within the memorandum as well as additional terms concerning hurricane debris, and bring it back to the February 7, 2017, BCC meeting. On February 7, 2017, the Solid Waste Disposal District (SWDD) approved an Option Agreement for Processed Vegetative Waste with Alliance Bioenergy that will expire on August 6, 2017. On July 11, 2017, both Commissioner Zorc and Mr. Daniel de Liege addressed the Board to express an interest in extending the Option Agreement. Per Board direction, the attached Amendment to the Option Agreement is provided for Board consideration and approval. ANALYSIS: Per Board direction, the County Attorney's Office has prepared the attached Amendment to Option Agreement for Processed Vegetative Waste with Alliance Bioenergy for SWDD Board review and approval. The existing terms and conditions of the Option Agreement remain with the exception of the following: 1) The Option Agreement shall immediately terminate if Alliance Bioenergy is unable to close on the property, or within 90 days of the execution of the Amendment of the Option Agreement, whichever occurs first. @BCL@3005EFB2 Page 1 I.58-3 P390 Staff supports the Amendment to Option Agreement as it provides an alternate cost-effective disposal option for our processed vegetative waste should Alliance Bioenergy be the successful owner of the former Indian River BioEnergy Center. If approved on July 18, 2017, the 90 -day option granted in this amendment will set to expire on October 16, 2017.. FUNDING: There is no cost associated with this Amendment to Option Agreement. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the SWDD Board approve and authorize the Chairman to sign the Amendment to Option Agreement with Alliance Bioenergy +, Inc. Attachment 1: Amendment to Option Agreement with Alliance Bioenergy +, Inc. Attachment 2: Option Agreement for, Processed Vegetative Waste with Alliance Bioenergy +, approved February 7, 2017. @BCL@3005EFB2 Page 2 P391 AMENDMENT TO OPTION AGREEMENT FOR PROCESSED VEGETATIVE WASTE BETWEEN INDIAN RIVER COUNTY SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL DISTRICT AND ALLIANCE BIOENERGY +, INC. THIS AMENDMENT TO OPTION AGREEMENT FOR PROCESSED VEGETATIVE WASTE BETWEEN INDIAN RIVER COUNTY SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL DISTRICT AND ALLIANCE BIOENERGY +, INC. ("Amendment") is entered into as of this _ day of July, 2017, by and between Indian River County Solid Waste Disposal District, a dependent special district of Indian River County, Florida whose address is 1801 27`h Street, Vero Beach, Florida, 32960 (the "County"), and Alliance Bioenergy +, Inc., 400 N. Congress Avenue, Suite 130, West Palm Beach, Florida, 33401 ("Alliance Bioenergy"): RECITALS WHEREAS, Alliance Bioenergy is pursuing obtaining the former INEOS New Planet Bioenergy, LLC property located at 925 74th Avenue SW, Vero Beach_ , Florida (the "Property"); and WHEREAS, if Alliance Bioenergy is able to obtain the Property, Alliance Bioenergy intends on utilizing a portion of the County's processed vegetative waste as part of its business operations; and WHEREAS, on -February 7, 2017, County and Alliance Bioenergy entered into an Option Agreement for Processed Vegetative Waste (the "Agreement"), in which County granted to Alliance Bioenergy the exclusive right and option to a portion of County's processed vegetative waste (the "Option"); and WHEREAS, under the Agreement, the Option will expire on August 6, 2017; and WHEREAS, the County and Alliance Bioenergy desire to extend the duration of the Option in order to allow Alliance Bioenergy more time to close on the purchase of the Property; NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual undertakings herein and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and adequacy of which is hereby acknowledged, the parties agree, as follows: 1. Recitals. The above recitals are true and correct and are incorporated in this Amendment. 2. Extension of Option. The Option set forth in the Agreement shall immediately terminate if Alliance Bioenergy is unable to close on the Property, or within 90 days of the execution of this-Amendinent, whic eveh r occurs first. 3. Remaining Terms and Conditions of Agreement. Except as amended in this Amendment, the terms and conditions of the Agreement shall remain in full force and Page I of 2 P392 effect. To the extent of any conflict between the terms of this Amendment and the terms of the Agreement, the terms of this Amendment shall control. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Lessor and Lessee have executed this instrument this _ day of July, 20.17. INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA By: Joseph E. Flescher, Chairman Board of County Commissioners . Date Approved: ATTEST: Jeffrey R. Smith Clerk of the Court and Comptroller By: Alliance Bioenergy +, Inc. y: DanieKbe Liege CEO APPROVED AS TO FORM Dylan Reingold, Esq. County Attorney Page 2 of 2 P393 OPTION AGREEMENT FOR PROCESSED VEGETATIVE WASTE BETWEEN INDIAN RIVER COUNTY SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL DISTRICT AND ALLIANCE BIOENERGY +, INC. THIS OPTION AGREEMENT FOR PROCESSED VEGETATIVE WASTE BETWEEN INDIAN RIVER COUNTY SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL DISTRICT AND ALLIANCE BIOENERGY +, INC. ("Option Agreement") is entered into as of this Uhday of February, 2017, by and between Indian River County Solid Waste Disposal District, a dependent special district of Indian River County, Florida whose address is 1801 27"' Street, Vero Beach, Florida, 32960 (the "County"), and Alliance Bioenergy +, Inc., 400 N. Congress Avenue, Suite 130, West Palm Beach, Florida, 33401("Alliance Bioenergy"): RECITALS WHEREAS, Alliance Bioenergy is pursuing obtaining the former INEOS New Planet Bioenergy, LLC property located at 925 74th Avenue SW, Vero Beach, Florida (the "Property"); and WHEREAS, if Alliance Bioenergy is able to obtain the Property, Alliance Bioenergy intends on utilizing a portion of the County's processed vegetative waste as part of its business operations; and WHEREAS, Alliance Bioenergy seeks to obtain an option on a portion of County's processed vegetative waste in order to facilitate obtaining the Property; and WHEREAS, Alliance Bioenergy has approximately 180 days to close on the Property; and WHEREAS, historically the County has paid a fee for the disposal of processed vegetative waste; and WHEREAS, Alliance Bioenergy has agreed to accept the County's processed vegetative waste at no charge to the County; NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual undertakings herein and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and adequacy of which is hereby acknowledged, the parties agree, as follows: 1. Recitals. The above recitals are true and correct and are incorporated herein. 2. Grant of Option. County does hereby grant to Alliance Bioenergy the exclusive right and _A option to a portion of County's processed vegetative waste (the "Option"). 3. Exercise of Option; Term; Expiration of Option. Alliance Bioenergy may exercise the Option at any time during the Option Term, by giving 90 calendar days' written notice to the County. The Option Term shall mean that period of time commencing on the date on Page I of 3 P394 which Alliance Bioenergy closes on the Property and terminates one year from that date. In no event, shall the Option Term extend more than 18 months from the date of execution of this Option Agreement. The Option shall immediately terminate if Alliance Bioenergy is unable to close on the Property, or within 180 days of the execution of this Option Agreement, whichever occurs first. 4. County Retainage of Processed Vegetative Waste. If Alliance Bioenergy exercises the Option, the County will have the right to retain up to 40,000 tons of processed vegetative waste per year. 5. Ouality and Ouantity of Processed Vegetative Waste. The County does not guarantee the quality or quantity of processed vegetative waste that will be provided to Alliance Bioenergy. 6. No Charge or Fee for Processed Vegetative Waste. Alliance Bioenergy will not charge the County any fee or charge for accepting or receiving County's processed vegetative waste. 7 Acts of God. In the event of a hurricane or other significant act of God, which impacts the amount of vegetative waste, the County shall retain the right to utilize other methods of disposal of processed vegetative waste. 8. Final Contract. Upon exercise of the Option, County and Alliance Bioenergy shall have 60 calendar days to enter into a contract for the processed vegetative waste on mutually agreeable terms, which shall include the terms and conditions contained within this Option Agreement. 9. Governing LawNenue. This Option Agreement shall be governed by the laws of the State of Florida. Venue for any lawsuit brought by either party against the other party or otherwise arising out of this Agreement shall be in Indian River County, Florida, or, in the event of federal jurisdiction, in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida. 10. Notices. Any notice required hereunder shall be in writing and shall be delivered by personal delivery, courier, express or overnight mail, or certified mail, return receipt requested, addressed to the appropriate party as follows: If to County Jason Brown County Administrator Indian River County 1801 27th Street Vero Beach,Florida 32960 Page 2 of 3 P395 If to the Alliance Bioenergy: Daniel De Liege 400 N. Congress Avenue .Suite 130 West Palm Beach, FL, 33401 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Lessor and Lessee have executed this instrument this 7tltiay of February, 2017. INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA jt Flescher, Chairman of County Commissioners Date Approved: ATTEST: Jeffrey R Smith Clerk of the Court and Comptroller By: _ Ajaljl�la /7.�-) ' Depu C r Alliance Bioenergy +, Inc. L I/ � �j �4 By: Daniel De Liege CEO APPROVED AS TO FORM an Reingold, Esq. County Attorney Page 3 of 3 P396 say INDIAN RIVER COUNTY SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL DISTRICT BOARD MEMORANDUM Date: July 12, 2017 To: Jason E. Brown, County Administrator Thru: Vincent Burke, Director of Utility Services From: Himanshu H. Mehta, P.E., Managing Director, Solid Waste Disposal District Subject: Termination of Feedstock Supply Agreement and Landfill Gas Agreement with INEOS New Planet BioEnergy, LLC BACKGROUND: On July 15, 2011, the Indian River County Solid Waste Disposal District (SWDD) entered into a Feedstock Supply Agreement (FSA) with INEOS New Planet BioEnergy, LLC (INPB) for supplying vegetative waste for the production of bioethanol energy product and renewable power. The term of the agreement was for a period of twenty (20) years. The Indian River BioEnergy Center operated by INPB has ceased operations of its facility at 925 74th Avenue SW effective December 31, 2016. On December 20, 2016, the SWDD Board approved the Ninth Amendment with INPB that provided for a transition of vegetative waste from the Indian River BioEnergy Center to SWDD's vegetative processing area from January 2, 2017, through March 30, 2017. On March 7, 2017, the SWDD Board approved the agreement for yard waste processing and disposal services to Mr. Mulch, Inc. to provide services on SWDD's vegetative processing area beginning April 1, 2017. Overall, the transition from the INPB facility to SWDD's facility was smooth, and staff and INEOS have been mutually working on officially terminating the existing FSA and the accompanying Landfill Gas Agreement (LFGA). Staff has also been coordinating with Arbor One, ACA (Arbor One), who is the bank that provided the bond guaranteed in part by the U.S. Department of Agriculture to INPB for their project. ANALYSIS: Staff and INPB personnel have mutually agreed to the provisions in the attached Termination of Feedstock Supply Agreement and Landfill Gas Interconnect Agreement and as highlighted below. RETURN A PORTION OF PERFORMANCE CASH DEPOSIT - On July 12, 2017, staff received a letter from Arbor One authorizing the release of $51,551.55 to INPB to cover the fees for a three (3) year environmental tail coverage policy of the former INPB property. Staff recommends that the remaining balance of @BCL@DC0585BE Page 1 P397 $148,448.45 and any applicable interest be disbursed to Arbor One once the property transfer has been completed. LANDFILL GAS ASSETS AND EASEMENTS — INPB has removed all of their assets on SWDD's property related to the transmission of landfill gas to the INPB property with the exception of the pipeline between our properties. Both parties agree that this pipeline may provide a beneficial use in the future and wish to maintain the existing easement associated with the pipeline. TERMINATION OF FSA AND LFGA — Staff recommends approval for the termination of the FSA and LFG agreements noting the following provisions: a. INPB, or its authorized representative, is required to provide utility and inspection services on the INPB site until all the vegetative waste is removed from the property or the property is sold. b. INPB is required to maintain water and electric connections to the site until the property is sold. c. INPB is required to ensure that the vegetative waste piles are maintained in accordance with the approved site plan. INPB is required to and has provided a certificate of insurance for both pollution and environmental remediation extending three years beyond the termination date, which is April 1, 2017. Staff is in support of returning a portion of the deposit to INPB as they have met all of their contractual requirements and have provided the necessary insurance. However, staff recommends that we hold off on the disbursement of the remaining deposit with interest to Arbor One until the property transfer has been completed. FUNDING: In accordance with Section 2 and Section 3 of the 2nd Amendment to the Feedstock Supply Agreement, dated April 25, 2012, a cash deposit in the amount of $200,000 was provided by INPB as security to ensure the performance under the agreement. The cash deposit has been held by SWDD in an escrow fund account. Per the Termination to the FSA and LFG agreements, staff is recommending release of the funds as follows: DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT NO. AMOUNT Reimbursement to INPB Escrow Fund 601-220-003 $ 51,551.55 without Interest Reimbursement to Arbor One* Escrow Fund 601-220-003 $148,448.45 with Interest Total Security Deposit to be Reimbursed $200,000.00 with Interest Once property transfer is complete. @BCL@DC0585BE Page 1 P398 RECOMMENDATION: SWDD staff recommends that its Board approve the following: a) Approve the Termination to the Feedstock Supply Agreement and Landfill Gas Interconnect Agreement with INEOS New Planet BioEnergy, LLC. b) Authorize the Indian River County Finance Department to disburse $51,551.55 to INPB with no interest. C) Authorize the Indian River County Finance Department to disburse $148,448.45 and any applicable interest to Arbor One once the property transfer has been completed. d) Authorize the Chairman to execute the same, as presented. ATTACHMENT(s): 1. Termination to the Feedstock Supply Agreement and Landfill Gas Interconnect Agreement with INEOS New Planet BioEnergy, LLC. 2. July 12 Letter from Arbor One and Certificate of Insurance and associated invoice. @BCL@DC0585BE Page 1 P399 TERMINATION OF FEEDSTOCK SUPPLY AGREEMENT AND LANDFILL GAS INTERCONNECT AGREEMENT by and between INEOS New .Planet BioEnergy, LLC and Indian River County Solid Waste Disposal District Dated as of , 2017 P400 TERMINATION OF FEEDSTOCK SUPPLY AGREEMENT AND LANDFILL GAS INTERCONNECT AGREEMENT THIS TERMINATION AGREEMENT ( "Agreement") is made by and between INEOS New Planet BioEnergy, LLC ("Company"), a Delaware limited liability company, and the Indian River County Solid Waste Disposal District ("District"), a special district of Indian River County, Florida on this _ day of , 2017 ("Effective Date"). WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, on July 15, 2011, the Parties entered into the Feedstock Supply Agreement ("FSA"), which was subsequently amended by the First Amendment to Feedstock Supply Agreement, dated March 13, 2012 ("First Amendment"), by the Second Amendment to Feedstock Supply Agreement Concerning Cash Deposit and Escrow Agreement of Section 7.4, dated April 25, 2012 ("Second Amendment"), by the Third Amendment to Feedstock Supply Agreement, dated November 13, 2012 ("Third Amendment"), by the Fourth Amendment to Feedstock Supply Agreement, dated March 19, 2013 ("Fourth Amendment"), by the Fifth Amendment to Feedstock Supply Agreement, dated May 21, 2013 ("Fifth Amendment"), by the Sixth Amendment to Feedstock Supply Agreement, dated August 20, 2013 ("Sixth Amendment"), by the Seventh Amendment to Feedstock Supply Agreement, dated December 17, 2013 ("Seventh Amendment"), and by the Eighth Amendment to Feedstock Supply Agreement, dated November 22, 2016 ("Eighth Amendment"), and by the Ninth Amendment to Feedstock Supply Agreement, dated December 20, 2016 ("Ninth Amendment"); and WHEREAS, on December 13, 2011, the Parties entered into the Landfill Gas Interconnect Agreement ("LFGA" ), which was subsequently amended by the First Amendment to Landfill Gas Interconnect Agreement, dated March 13, 2012 ("First Amendment to LFGA"); and WHEREAS, ArborOne, ACA ("Arborune") is the Servicer for certain INEOS New Planet BioEnergy LLC bonds (the "Bonds"), guaranteed in part by the U.S. Department of Agriculture; and WHEREAS, all Conditions Precedent were met and the FSA and LFGA were put -----into-operation;-and- WHEREAS, --into_operation;_and WHEREAS, the Company has determined to cease all operations of its Facility as defined in the FSA as of December 31, 2016 and the Company and District have agreed to return yard waste receiving and processing operations to the District as of P401 January 2, 2017 and to terminate the FSA and all its amendments and the LFGA and its amendment; and WHEREAS, the District and the Company have negotiated the terms of this Agreement, which are mutually acceptable to both Parties. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual promises contained herein and other good and valuable considerations, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, the Company and District agree to be bound by and comply with the following: 1. Recitals. The foregoing recitals are true and correct, and incorporated as if fully restated herein. 2. Definitions. Unless otherwise provided herein all words and phrases defined in the FSA and/or LFGA shall have the same meaning when used herein. In the event of a conflict between the definition or meaning of a word or phrase used herein and as set out in the FSA or LFGA the use herein shall prevail. The following definitions shall also apply: "Effective Date" shall mean the date on which the last of the Parties hereto has executed this Agreement. "Termination Date" shall mean April 1, 2017. "Property Transfer Date" shall mean the date on which the Facility Site as defined in the FSA title is transferred from the Company to the new owner. "Vegetative Waste Storage Area" shall mean the processed or unprocessed Vegetative Waste on the Facility Site as defined in the FSA. 3. Return of Performance Cash Deposit. Within thirty (30) days of the Termination Date the District shall deliver and return to the Company $51,551.55of the $200,000 cash deposit being held by the District as provided by Section 7.4 as set out in the Second Amendment to the FSA. Within thirty (30) days of the Property Transfer Date the District shall deliver and return to ArborOne the $148,448.45 cash deposit being held by the District, together with total interest on the initial cash deposit less any costs determined by the District needed for any unpaid or future costs. 4. Landfill Gas Credits. Section 3.2 G. 12. of the FSA and Article 7 of the LFGA as modified by the First Amendment to LFGA (the "Credit Provisions") provide for the marketing of LFG carbon credits (Credits). In the event that there are any Credits that have not been fully marketed and compensation received by the Company and P402 distributed to the Parties by the Termination Date, for which the Parties believe compensation could be received, the provisions of the Credit Provisions shall continue in effect until December 31, 2017and then shall also terminate. 5. Landfill Gas Assets and Easements. The Parties acknowledge that all of the Company's LFG Assets have been removed from the District's property except for the pipeline connecting the Delivery Point to the Company's property that remains in the ground, and that there remains in existence the grants of easements provided in Section 4.1 of the LFGA and more specifically evidenced by Exhibits B-1 (for LFG Equipment and Pipeline) and B-2 (for Ingress and Egress to the assets) attached hereto (hereafter the "Easements"). The Parties agree to allow these Easements to continue in existence for possible use in the future by a potential successor in title to the Company's original Facility Site (as defined in the FSA before amendments). Company agrees that prior to the conveyance of the original Facility Site as defined in the FSA the Company shall confer with the District to determine if the District desires to allow the Easements to be transferred to the Company's successor in title or if the District prefers the Easements be released. In the event the District requests the Easements be released the Company shall forthwith execute a Quit Claim instrument releasing all right, title and interest of the Company in the Easements to the District. 6. Final Payment for Processing. In accordance with the provisions of the Ninth Amendment to the FSA, Section 4, the Company is continuing to receive and Process Vegetative Waste until March 31, 2017 and billing the District on a monthly basis, and the District is paying the Processing Fee to the Company. Within five calendar days of the Termination Date the Company shall provide to the District the Company's final invoice for any and all remaining unpaid Processing Fees through March 31, 2017. Upon receipt of the Company's final invoice, the District may verify any of the information contained therein. The District shall pay all undisputed amounts in compliance with the Local Government Prompt Payment Act, Sections 218.70 et seq., Florida Statutes. If the District disagrees with any amounts, calculations, or other information set forth in the Company's final invoice, the District shall notify the Company of the dispute in accordance with the Local Government Prompt Payment Act and the Parties shall immediately attempt to resolve their dispute in accordance with Section 8.1 of the FSA. Section 8.1 of the FSA shall survive the termination of the FSA and shall be incorporated herein by reference. Termination_of,FSA.and,LFGA. The Partiesracknowledge and_agree that except as otherwise specifically set out in this Agreement there are no remaining obligations or duties to be performed by either Party, and there are no outstanding claims, either known or that should be known by reasonable due diligence, of either Party against the other Party that have not been satisfied or resolved. Except as specifically provided or reserved in this Agreement, all provisions, rights, interests, duties, and/or obligations of P403 all Parties, or beneficiaries thereof, under the FSA and its nine amendments and the LFGA and its amendment are hereby forever terminated on the Termination Date. The following exceptions regarding the Facility Site as defined in the FSA are noted and agreed by both parties: a. Company shall provide for such utility and inspection services as necessary to maintain and operate fire safety systems in the Vegetative Waste Storage Area until the earlier of (i) the date all Vegetative Waste is removed from the Facility Site as defined in the FSA or (ii) the Property Transfer Date. b. The Company is obligated to maintain water and electric connection to the property and to maintain accounts in good standing until the Transfer Date. c. Company shall provide for pile dimensions and perimeter road clearances in the Vegetative Waste Storage Area consistent with the approved site plan. d. The Company has provided a certificate of insurance for .both pollution and environmental remediation extending three (3) years beyond the Termination Date. Proof of the environmental impairment insurance with a minimum coverage of $2,000,000 per occurrence has been provided. 8. Survival. Notwithstanding the termination of the LFGA, to the extent permitted by law, the provisions of Sections 14.4, 14.5 and 14.8 of the LFGA shall survive the termination of the LFGA. 9. Miscellaneous. A. Further Assurances. Each Party agrees to execute and deliver any instruments and to perform any action that may be necessary or reasonably requested in order to give full effect to this Agreement. Each Party shall use all reasonable efforts to provide such information, execute such further instruments and documents, and take such action as may be reasonably requested by the other Party, not inconsistent with the provisions of this Agreement and not involving the assumption of obligations other than those provided for in this Agreement, to carry out the intent of this Agreement. — ';---Ownership -of-Ve izetat.ive-W-aste.--T-he-P-arties-agree that -all -Vegetative _ --- Waste material located on the Facility Site as defined in the FSA is and shall remain the property of Company and the District releases and transfers to Company any and all claim to said material to the extent District had any claims to said material. P404 C. Notices. Any notices or communications required or permitted under this Agreement shall be in writing and may be either delivered in person, transmitted by telecopy followed by a mailed confirmation copy, or sent by recognized express mail or courier service, postage prepaid, at the following addresses of the Parties. Notices sent under this Agreement shall be deemed received upon actual receipt. Facsimile is acceptable notice and is effective when received; however, facsimiles received (i.e., printed) after 5:00 P.M. will be deemed received on the next business day. The original of a notice must still be mailed as required herein. Changes in the telephone numbers through which telecopy may be transmitted or the address to which notices are to be delivered may be made by written notice given in accordance with this Subsection. As to County: County Administrator Indian River County Administration Building 1801 27th St. Vero Beach, FL 32960 Phone: (772) 226-1408 FAX: (772) 978-1822 and a copy to the County Attorney at the same address Phone: (772) 226-1424 FAX: (772) 569-4317 As to Company: Charles Saunders Chief Legal Officer INEOS Marina View 2600 South Shore Boulevard, Suite 500 League City, TX 77573 Phone: (281) 535-6630 FAX: (281) 535-6765 .D. Waivers. No provision of this Agreement shall be deemed waived without the express written consent of the Party granting the waiver. The waiver by either Party of a default or a breach of any provision of this Agreement by the other Party shall not operate or be construed to operate as a waiver of any subsequent default or breach. The making or the acceptance of a payment by either Party with knowledge of the existence of a default or breach shall not operate or be construed to operate as a waiver of any subsequent default or breach. E. Entire Agreement; Modifications; Exhibits. The provisions of this Agreement (except captions), including the exhibits annexed hereto, shall (a) constitute P405 the entire agreement between the Parties, superseding all prior or contemporaneous negotiations, understandings or agreements and (b) not be modified in any respect except by express written agreement executed by the Parties. The exhibits attached hereto are incorporated by reference. In the event of any conflict between the text of this Agreement and such exhibits, the text of this Agreement shall govern. F. Headings. Captions and headings in this Agreement are for ease of reference only and do not constitute a part of this Agreement. Captions and headings shall not be deemed to affect the meaning or construction of any of the terms or provisions hereof. G. Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed in more than one counterpart, each of which shall be deemed to be an original. H. Venue. Any and all suits for breach of this Agreement shall be instituted and maintained in a state or federal court of competent jurisdiction having jurisdiction over Indian River County, Florida. I. Governing, Law and Construction. This Agreement and any questions concerning its validity, construction and performance shall be governed by the laws of the State of Florida, without giving effect .to any conflicts -of -law rules requiring the application of the substantive laws of other jurisdictions. The language of this Agreement shall be construed according to its fair meaning, not strictly for or against the Company or District, and not against either Party as its drafter, because both Parties agree they had an equal hand in drafting this Agreement. The singular shall include the plural; use of the feminine, masculine, or neuter genders shall be deemed to include the genders not used. J. Waiver of Jpa Trial. Each Party hereby knowingly, willingly, and irrevocably waives its right to a trial by] ury concerning claims arising under this Agreement. K. Severability. In the event that any provision of this Agreement shall, for any reason, be determined to be invalid, illegal, or unenforceable in any respect, the Parties shall negotiate in good faith and agree to such amendments, modifications or supplements of, or to, this Agreement or such other appropriate changes as shall, to the maximum extent practicable in light of such determination, implement and give effect to the intentions of the Parties as reflected herein, and the other provisions of this Agreement shall, as so amended, modified, supplemented, or otherwise effected by such action remain in full force and effect. L. Binding_ Agreement. This Agreement, which has been duly authorized, executed and delivered by the respective Parties, constitutes a legal, valid and binding obligation enforceable in accordance with its terms, except as enforcement may be 6 P406 limited by bankruptcy, insolvency, reorganization, moratorium or similar laws affecting the enforcement of creditors' rights generally, or by general equitable principles concerning remedies. M. Reasonableness Standard. All determinations, consents, reviews and approvals to be granted and conducted by the Parties under this Agreement and any other acts calling for the exercise of discretion shall be performed in good faith and, unless otherwise so specified, under a standard of reasonableness that is consistent with normal industry practices for the type of work involved. Where time periods are not specified, a reasonable period of time shall be allowed. N. Attorney Fees. In any civil judicial action brought to enforce the provisions of this Agreement, the prevailing party may recover from the non -prevailing party all reasonable court costs., including attorney's fees and court preparation costs, and including any appeals thereof. O. Time of Essence. The Parties each understand and acknowledge that time is of the essence of this Agreement. P. Publicity and Property Rights. Unless otherwise required by law, District shall not advertise or otherwise use its relationship with Company hereunder in any public disclosure without the prior written consent of Company. Such prohibition shall include,, without limitation, brochures, listings, references, advertisements, announcements or other release of information concerning the existence, content or performance under this Agreement to any third party. District shall not use or permit the use of the trade or service names, marks or logos of Company or any of its Affiliates in any manner without the express written consent of Company. The express consent of the Company required herein may be withheld in the absolute and complete discretion of Company. District's obligations under this Section 9. P, shall survive the expiration or termination of this Agreement. P407 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties have caused this Agreement to be executed by their respective authorized representatives. ATTEST: Jeffrey R. Smith, Clerk Deputy .Clerk APPROVED: By: Jason E. Brown, County Administrator APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM AND SUFFICIENCY: By: Dylan Reingold, County Attorney DISTRICT: INDIAN RIVER COUNTY SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL DISTRICT Joseph E. Flescher, Chairman Date: COMPANY: INEOS NEW PLANET BIOENERGY,, LLC: WITNESSES: By: Name: Timothy Avery Title: Chief Financial Officer INEOS'Olefin &Polymers USA Authorized Representative Date: 8 P408 EXHIBIT B-1 LFG EQUIPMENT AND PIPELINE EASEMENT P409 EXHIBIT "B-1" THIS INSTRUMENT PREPARED BY AND RETURN TO: 13ERNARD A. CONKO, ESQ. COHEN, NORRIS, SCHERER, WEiNBERGER & WOLMER 712 U.S. HIGHWAY ONE, SUITE 400 NORTH PALM BEACH, FL 33408 GRANT OF NON-EXCLUSIVE EASEMENT FOR LANDFILL GAS EQUIPMENT AND PIPELINE THIS EASEMENT is made, granted and entered into this 13th clay of December, 2011, by INDIAN RIVER COUNTY SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL DISTRICT, a dependent special district of Indian River County, Florida, (hereinafter referred to as "Grantor"), to INEOS NEW PLANET BIOENERGY, LLC, its successors and assigns, whose real property is adjacent to the real property of the Grantor, (hereinafter referred to as "Grantee). WITNESSETH That Grantor, for and in consideration of the sum of Ten Dollars ($10.00) in hand paid by the Grantee and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt of which is hereby acluiowledged, does hereby grant to the Grantee, its successors and assigns, a non-exclusive easement which shall permit Grantee authority to enter upon the Easement Property of the Grantor, including the flare station pad constructed thereon, at any time during the Grantor's normal business hours and at other times upon receiving the Grantor's prior consent, which shall not be unreasonably withheld or delayed, to install, operate, maintain, Service, construct, reconstruct, remove, relocate, repair, replace, improve, and inspect the Grantee's Landfill Gas Assets and other improvements that are located in, on, over, under, and across the Easement Property. The Grantee's Landfill Gas Assets include, but are not limited to, the Grantee's pipelines, wires, compressors, coolers, metering equipment, valves, controls and other related equipment for the measurement, transmission, connection, handling, monitoring and management of landfill gas (collectively, the "Facilities"). The Easement Property hereby granted covers that certain land lying, situate and being in Indian River County, Florida, and being more particularly described as follows: SEE EXHIBIT "A" ATTACHED HERETO AND MADE A PART HEREOF together with the right and privilege from time to time to reconstruct, inspect, alter, improve, enlarge, replace, remove or relocate such Facilities and with all rights and privileges necessary or convenient for the full enjoyment or use thereof for the herein -described purposes, including, but not limited to the right to cut and keep clear all trees and undergrowth and other obstructions within said area that may interfere with the proper construction, operation and maintenance of such Facilities, the right to mark the location of any underground Facilities by above -ground and other suitable markers and the right of ingress, and egress for personnel airil eryriipment ofTGrarrtee; its-contractars ii gents, successors or ---- assigns, over the adjoining lands of the Grantor, for the purpose of exercising and enjoying the rights granted by this easement and any or all of the rights granted hereunder. P410 The Grantor, however, reserves the right and privilege to use the above-described property for any such purposes suitable to the Grantor except as might interfere or be inconsistent with the use, occupation, maintenance or enjoyment thereof by Grantee orits successors or assigns, or as might cause a hazardous condition. It is understood and agreed that this easement will continue in effect for the benefit of Grantee, its successors and assigns until the occurrence of the first of the following events: (a) the easement is uo longer used by Grantee, its successors and assigns, for the purpose forwhich this grant is provided; (b) the Feedstock Supply Agreement (dated July 15, 2011) between the Grantor and the Grantee is terminated or expires and is not replaced by another agreement requiring the same easement; or (c) the Landfill Gas Interconnect Agreement (dated December 13th, 2011) befiveen the Grantor and Grantee is terminated or expires and is not replaced by another agreement requiring the same easement. At such time as one of these three events occur, the rights herein granted shall terminate and full use of the Easement Property shall be enjoyed by Grantor, its successors or assigns, and Grantee shall execute a release of all rights under this grant of easement. Grantor hereby covenants with Grantee that it is lawfully seized and in possession of the real property herein described and that it has good and lawful right to grant the aforesaid easement free and clear of mortgages and other encumbrances unless specifically stated to the contrary. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Grantor has hereunto set its hand and affixed its seal of the date first above written. ATTEST: GRANTOR: Jeffrey K. Barton, Clerk INDIAN RIVER COUNTY SOLID WASTE ••,yGpMMISO) DISPOSAL DISTRICT, a dependent special �•9�1;: ••.F.DJ,ti(istrict of Indian River County, Florida By: eputy+Clerlcary Gheeler, Chairman 1.����a t—\t\z. n. :Ayq'•�•��0� CApproval date: 12-13-11 Print Name ••.NERC APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM AND SUFFICIENC By - C Ian S. Polackwich, Sr. 9__--County Attorney -- P411 EXHIBIT "A" LEGAL DESCRIPTION P412 SKETCH OF DESCRIPTION PART OF TRACT 10, SECTION 25, TOWNSHIP 33 SOUTH, RANGE 38 EAST INDIAN RIVER FARMS COMPANY SUBDIVISION INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA. AN EQUIPMENT EASEMENT, LYING AND BEING IN A PORTION OF TRACT 10, SECTION 25,1TOWNSHIP 33 SOUTH. RANGE 38 EAST ACCORDING TO THE.LAST GENERAL PLAT OF LANDS OF THE INDIAN RIVER FARMS COMPANY SU86MSION AS RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 2, PAGE 25 OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF ST. LUCIE COUNTY. FLORIDA, NOW LYING AND BEING IN INDIAN RIVER COUNTY FLORIDA. BEING MORE PARTICULARLY'DESCRISED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCING AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF TRACT 9, SECTION 26, TOWNSHIP 33 SOUTH, RANGE 38 EAST OF THE AFOREMENTIONED PLAT OF'LANDS OF THE INDIAN RIVER FARMS COMPANY SUBDIVISION RUN SOUTH 00'14'48, WEST ALONG THE EAST LINE OF SAID TRACT 9 A DISTANCE OF 149.55 FEET TO A POINT: THENCE LEAVING SAID EAST LINE OF TRACT 9, RUN NORTH 89.4228" WEST, PARALLEL WITH AND NORMAL TO THE NORTH LINE OF SAID TRACT AND TRACT 10, SECTION 25, A DISTANCE OF 2173.18 FEETTO A POINT, THENCE RUN NORTH 00.08'29' WEST A DISTANCE OF 15.00 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. FROM SAID POINT OF BEGINNING CONTINUE NORTH 00'08'29" WEST A DISTANCE OF 104.55 FEET TO THE SOUTH RIGHT-OF-WAY UNE OF SUB -LATERAL C-5 CANAL. (INDIAN RIVER FARMS WATER CONTROL DISTRICT 60 FEET WIDE RIGHT-OF-WAY, AS RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 2, PAGE 25 PUBLIC RECORDS OF ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA. NOW LYING AND BEING IN INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA). THENCE RUN SOUTH 89'4228" EAST ALONG SAID SOUTH RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE, PARALLEL WITH AND NORMAL TO THE NORTH LINE OF SAID TRACT 10, A DISTANCE OF 83.00 FEET., THENCE LEAVING SAID SOUTH RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE, RUN SOUTH 00'08'29' EAST A DISTANCE OF 104.55 FEET: THENCE RUN NORTH 89'4228- WEST, PARALLEL WITH AND NORMAL TO SAID NORTH LINE OF TRACT 10. A DISTANCE OF 83.00 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. SAID EAST MORE OR Serving Florida Since 1911 REVISED: 12-08-11 TYPE OF SURVEYOR'S GENERAL NOTES AND REPORT: 1. UNLESS IT BEARS THE SIGNATURE AND THE ORIGINAL RAISED SEAL OF A FLORIDA LICENSED SURVEYOR AND MAPPER, THIS DRAWING, SKETCH, PLAT OR MAP IS FOR INFORMATIONAL PURPOSES ONLY AND IS NOT VALID. 2. BEARINGS SHOWN HEREON ARE BASED UPON THE NORTH AMERICAN DATUM OF 1983, ADJUSTMENT OF 1999, AND ARE PROJECTED IN THE FLORIDA STATE PLANE COORDINATE SYSTEM, FLORIDA EAST ZONE (901) AND ARE REFERENCED TO THE ESTABLISHED AND MONUMENTED LINE SHOWN HEREON LABELED AS THE BEARING BASIS. 3. ALL BOUNDARY DIMENSIONS USED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO BEARINGS. ANGLES AND DISTANCES ARE PREDICATED UPON BOUNDARY SURVEY BY CARTER ASSOCIATES. INC. JOB NO. 11 412S, DATED FEBRUARY, 2011. ALL DIMENSIONS SHOWN HEREON ARE DISPLAYED IN U.S. SURVEY FEET AND DECIMAL PARTS THEREOF. 4. THIS IS A SKETCH AND DESCRIPTION OF A PROPOSED EOUIPMENT EASEMENT ONLY AND NOT A BOUNDARY SURVEY. THIS PROPERTY WAS NOT ABSTRACTED OR RESEARCHED BY THIS OFFICE FOR ANY ENCUMBRANCES OF RECORD. THE HEREON DESCRIBED PROPERTY IS SUBJECT TO RESTRICTIONS, RESERVATIONS. EASEMENTS AND RIGHTS-OF-WAY OF RECORD. IF ANY. MATTERS OF RECORD NOT BROUGHT TO THE SURVEYOR'S ATTENTION BY THE CLIENT, THEIR AGENT OR AS DISCLOSED BY A FURNISHED TITLEINSURANCE POLICY ARE NOT INCLUDED. CONTAINING 8677.65 SQUARE FEET OR 0.20 ACRES, 5. THIS SKETCH Of DESCRIPTION CONSISTS OF TWO SHEETS ONE IS NOT VALID UNLESS BOTH SHEETS ARE PRESENT. CARTER ASSOCIATES, INC. CONSULTING ENGINEERS AND LAND SURVEYORS 1708 21sf STREET 772=562-4191 (PHONE) V£RO BEACH. FLORIDA 32960 772-562-7180 (FAX) DAVID :E.LU6ETHJE.E DATE: 11-02-11 BY SO N.SCALE: I"=200' 11-371S DVIG.,(I 19110—A2 FLORIDA LICENSE No. 5728 SHEET 1 OF 2 T PER CLIENT, SG CARTER ASSOCIATES. INC. LB 205 _ __ __ SKETCH PART OF TRAC TOWNSHIP 33 INDIAN RIVER F� INDIAN RI PROPOSED 6" MOPE GAS LINE AND EXISTING PAD FOR - EQUIPMENT SITE — 89142128" -E— Pof Q. m O �=_�i�4- N 00'08'29" W� N 8'. 15.00' 10' WIDE N189'< NOR' 83.00' f—POINT OF TERMINUS RIVER CC ACCESS EASEMENT DINT OF BEGINNING ��q�1 A EOUIPM.ENT EASEMENT NOT fA Serving Florida Since 1911 - DESCRIPTION 9 AND 10, SECTION 25, UTH, RANGE 38 EAST I 1 ' I > I 1 I c 1 a 1 I 1 A AS COMPANY SUBDIVISION ( ? COUNTY, FLORIDA. _ c ,V a I I TSI^n In W � In wF O a Im I � Immina )�/jam m m Q Y IDEo Q I° o _ TRACT 8 W ' NOT INCLUDEDo S 50.00' ADDITIONAL R/W c m I a W DEDICATED TO INDIAN n l l o RR COUNTY t m z I I n RIVER I OEED BOOK 110 PAGE 57 --tet = Q tet' II = m aI�1� FOUND PK NAIL & DISC PROPOSED 6' HDPE GAS LINE STAMPED "CARTER LB 205" c 'NORTH OF RI1=I GHT-OF-WAY UNE I i NORTHEAST CORNER TRACT 9 IN 1 ! SUB -LATERAL CANAL C-5 (60' RESERVED FOR ROAD POINT OF COMMENCEMENT 150, I 0 CENTERLINE OF PROPOSED 10' WIQE 1 AND CANAL) PER INDIAN RIVER FARMS COMPANY PROPOSED.EOUIPMENT I CAS LINE Ell SEM T SUBDIVISION PLAT BOOK 2. PACE 25. PUBLIC EASEMENT SO' .AS LME EASEMENT RECORDS ST. LUCIE COUNTY. FLORIDA 1 30.00' 301-^- . _ _ __ J NORTH RIGHT-OF-WAY SUB -LATERAL C 5 CANAL _�__--__—_--_--_- I N 694228°-W- 902.77 1_ _r _ _ N 89'42'28" W 1281.03LRL F-28"7— 1331.03'(R�— I i— _ _- = 1`N_OR_TH UNE OF TRACT i& 1 /4 SECTION_U_NE_ i LINE OF TRACT 10 & 1/4 SECTION JUNE 5.00' PROPOSED 30.00' WIDE ,n SOUTM RIGHT-OF-WAY 30.00'J RIGHT -OF -.WAY 15.00' ACCESS EASEMENT 1 ml 1 SUB -LATERAL -5 CANAL O1 -- _— ----�—_—=-----_-------- ------ ----� --—_---_---� -- 1 L— 15.00. CENTERLINE OF PROP SED LpROPO5E0 30.00' WIDE CENTERUNE OF PROPOSE I I CORNER OF 30' NIDE ACCESS En MENT ACCESS EASEMENT 30' vnDE ACCESS EASEMENT I 1 I 'XISTING FLARE 15.00' 6'MENT 1, INDIAN TY�/LANDFILL TRACT (� EAST LINE TRACT 9 9 U U 0 I U 0 UAC 0 9 O too 200 SCALL• (I Inch 200 Feet) NOT INCLUDED CARTER ASSOCIATES, INC. CONSULTING ENGINEERS AND LAND SURVEYORS 1708 21st STREET 772-S62-4191 (PHONE) VERO BEACH. FLORIDA 32960 772-562-7180 (FAX) DATE: 11-02-11 BY SG H.SCALE: i"-100' 11-3715 DViG.y 19110—A2 SHEET 2 OF 2 I� 14 WEST 9/2 0= EI1ST fl2 OF "1` TRACT TRACT 2 - I //////���---FOUND 51Are / CAP .1.'L0 IRON R00& .4'etRACt - LMC 1 (0.17' ii O.1G'Y4 GW.UTC) 4167417- W M.q'( I rouNO t/7'e INGN RDD &CAP I MIINESS -NOT LCDax (IV OrrSCT WEST) I R Iv 1PROPOSED CCNTER.T Or -. 10' -IDE GS LINE CASEMENT-- + n PROPOSED 40' WOE= CAS UNC EASEMENT w + 3 TRACT 7 I � AOTIICLLCED 11) V MOPE GS LINE (5-INORM OF RIdN-Or-MAY LINE) PROPDRD CENTERLINE OF S 00n7'50' w—t0' M'OC GAS LMC CA$MMT _ _ 5 00' —��~V TN•4J 77 _907. Ir -1 LX1511NG rcNU ', PROPOSED G' � LST +PAD'ON FLANC ' -- STA110V DRTHEAS1 CORNER OF r NCC AF EXISnNC RAREf f SIATM SEGMENT 11. vo 4 Serving Florida Since 1911 SKETCH OF DESCRIPTION PART OF TRACTS 7 AND 8, SEC77ON 25, TOWNSHIP 33 SOUTH, RANGE 38 EAST INDIAN RIVER FARMS COMPANY SUBDIVISION INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA. ' TRACT 1 I rITT 181 �J i ; l� �o i� 11 F0UK0 t 2 e IR04 ROD ACA I 1POINT d 1 5YAMPCCANILH ASSOC.- NORT N 878''12' w '23.1 00' (SEARING aNCAS .ASs) ✓. AS — — — —74 N e9',—t''7' w 1260.161011s)o-" TMC NORTH LINO Or TRACT e� a I i dCl ell�l � .III 5[t 1/2'e 6104 ROD & up I N( .PONT Or gyNATYC VAMPED 'CARTER ASSOC: N 89443107- W t700.54'(O05) i N 8742'07- W 1280.54'(ODS) , A a01I1D 1/7'e M04YM & GPi STAMPED YO 4644- (5 89'4707- C SOQI') v FOUND S/0' IRON ROD & CAP),n I ' StA N, LO 76].1. , (04Y•SoITN• J.97tAST) o Ia+ + gI ZZ, 7RACT 8 3e IarIM7.uAeo n I 5D.00' ADD'DOVAL R/W Z OSDICATEC TOMD'Ni--I�I�+ RIKCOUNTY a 0¢D BOOKq 110 PAGE 57 1 sO.D7 LATERAL CANAL C-5 (Gr RESMUM FOR ROAD I ,�I.3000' AND CANAL) PER INDIAN.RMR rARMS COMPANY SUOR 2 DOINSION PLAT DOPACE 75. PUDUC r�.00. RECORDS ST. LODE COUNTY. rLORCA�rOUNO PX I 7NptM RG'_Dr_wAY l ETR. C-5 ell 1 'STAMPED Cl Sow ,.,w - =r- I INptAN RUR 6yUN:Y� 0 100 400 SCALE: (I Inch = 400 Feet) FLORIDA LICENSE No. 5728 CARTER ASSOCIATES, INC. L8 DESCRIPTION: A 10.00 FEET W DE GAS UNE EASEMENT. BEING 5.00 FEET EACH SIDE OF THE FOLLOWING DESCRIBED CENTERLINE. LYING AND BEING IN A PORTION OF -TRACTS 7 AND Q SECTION 25. TOWNSHIP 33 SOUTH: RANGE 33 EAST ACCORDING TO THE LAST GENERAL PWT OF LANDS OF THE INDIAN RIVER FARMS'COMPANY SUBDIVISION AS RECORDED IN PWT BOOK 2. PAGE 25 OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF ST. LUCIE COUNTY. fLORIOA. NOW LYING `k AND BEING IN INDIAN RIVER COUNTY. FLORIDA. SAID CENTERLINE BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCING AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SAID TRACT S RUN NORTH 89'41'12' WEST ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF TRACT 8 A DISTANCE OF 1233.90 FEET TO A POINT: THENCE LEAVING SAID NORTH UNE, RUN SOLITHI OO.00'4r EAST A DISTANCE OF 461.12 PEETTO THE POINT OF BEGINNING OF SAID CENTERLINE; FROM SAID POINT OF BEGINNING CONTINUE SOUTH OVW41r EAST A DISTANCE OF 855.72 FEET TO A POINT LYING S.GO FEET NORTHERLY OF THE NORTH RIGHT -OF -WAV UNE OF INDIAN RIVER FARMS WATER CONTROL DISTRICT LATERAL C-5 CANAL (60 FEET WOE RIGHT-OF-WAY): THENCE RUN NORTH 89'472W WEST ALONG A UNE LYING S.00 FEET NORTHERLY OF, PARALLEL WITH AND NORMAL TO SAID NORTH RIGHT-OF-WAY A DISTANCE OF 902.77 FEET TO A POINT; THENCE LEAVING SAID PARALLEL UNE. RUN SOUTH Onr50' WEST A DISTANCE OF 5.00 FEET TO A POINT ON SAID NORTH RIGHT OF WAY LINE AND POINT OF TERMINUS OF THE DESCRIBED CBNTERUNE. DMNCNCEMCNT THE SIDE LINES OF SAID 10.00 FEET WOE GAS UNE EASEMENT TO BE PROLONGED OR SHORTENED At ALL I CO -L." Or POINTS OF INTERSECTION, LAND LINES AND RIGHT-OF-WAY LINES. ICI 8 SAID EASEMENT CONTAINING 17435.00 SQUARE FEET. MORE OR LESS SURVEYORS GENERAL NOTES AND REPORT 1. UNLESS R BEARS THE SIGNATURE AND THE ORIGINAL RAISED SEAL OF A FLORIDA LICENSED SURVEYOR AND MAPPER THIS DRAWING. SKETCH, PWT OR MAP IS FOR INFORMATIONAL PURPOSES ONLY AND IS NOT VALJO. 2. BEARINGS SHOWN HEREON ARE BASED UPON THE NORTH AMERICAN DATUM OF 1083, ADJUSTMENT OF 1909• AND ARE PROJECTED IN THE FLORIDA STATE PLANE COORDINATE SYSTEM. FLORIDA EAST ZONE (901) ANDARE REFERENCED TO THE ESTABLISHED AND MONUMENTED UNE SHOWN HEREON LABELED AS THE SEARING BASIS. 3. ALL BOUNDARY DIMENSIONS USED. INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO BEARINGS. ANGLES AND DISTANCES ARE PREDICATED UPON BOUNDARY SURVEY BY CARTER ASSOCIATES. INC. JOB NO. 111-212S. DATED FEBRUARY. 2011. ALL DIMENSIONS SHOWN HEREON ARE DISPLAYED IN U.S. SURVEY FEET AND DECIMAL PARTS THEREOF. 4. THIS IS A SKETCH AND DESCRIPTION OF A PROPOSED UTILITY EASEMENT ONLY AND NOTA BOUNDARY SURVEY. THIS PROPERTY WAS NOT ABSTRACTED OR RESEARCHED BY THIS OFFICE FOR ANY ENCUMBRANCES OF RECORD. THE HEREON DESCRIBED' PROPERTY IS SUBJECT TO RESTRICTIONS. RESERVATIONS. EASEMENTS AND RIGHTS-OF-WAY OF RECORD, IF ANY. MATTERS OF RECORD NOT BROUGHT TO THE SURVEYORS ATTENTION BY THE CLIENT. THEIR AGENT OR AS DISCLOSED BY A FURNISHED TITLE INSURANCE POLICY ARE NOTINGLUDEO. CARTER ASSOCIATES INC. CONSULTING ENGINEERS AND LAND SURVEYORS 1708 21st STREET 772-562-4t9f (PHONE) VERO BEACH. FLORIDA 32960 772-562-7180 (FAX) DATE. 10-17-11 . 8Y SG H.SCALE: 1 "=400' 17-371S DWG.(/ 19110—A SHEET 1 OF 1' EXHIBIT. B-2 INGRESS AND EGRESS TO LFG SITE EASEMENT P416 EXHIBIT "B-2" THIS INSTRUMENT PREPARED BY AND RETURN TO: BERNARD A. CONKO, ESQ. COHEN, NORRIS, SCHERER, WEINBERGE•R & WOLMER 712 U.S. HIGHWAY ONE, SUITE 400 NORTH PALM BEACH, FL 33408 GRANT OF NON-EXCLUSIVE EASEMENT FOR ACCESS THIS EASEMENT is made, granted and entered into this 13th clay of December, 2011, by INDIAN RIVER COUNTY SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL DISTRICT, a dependent special district of Indian River County, Florida, (hereinafter referred to as "Grantor"), to INEOS NEW PLANET BIOENERGY, LLC, its successors and assigns, whose real property is adjacent to the real property of the Grantor, (hereinafter referred to as "Grantee). WITNESSETH That Grantor, for and in consideration of the sum of Ten Dollars ($10.00) in hand paid by the Grantee and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt of which is hereby acluuowledged, does hereby grant to the Grantee, its successors and assigns, a non-exclusive easement which shall permit Grantee authority to enter upon the Easement Property of the Grantor at any time during the Grantor's normal business hours and at other times upon receiving the Grantor's prior consent, which shall not be unreasonably withheld or delayed, for Ingress and egress to the Grantee's Landfill Gas Assets located on Grantor's property, to install, operate, maintain, service, construct, reconstruct, remove, relocate, repair, replace, improve, and inspect the Grantee's Landfill Gas Assets and other improvements that are located in, on, over, under, and across the Grantor's property. The Grantee's Landfill Gas Assets include, but are not limited to, the Grantee's pipelines, wires, compressors, coolers, metering equipment, valves, controls and other related equipment for the measurement, transmission, connection, handling, monitoring and management of landfill gas (collectively, the "Facilities"). The Easement Property hereby granted covers that certain land lying, situate and being in Indian River County, Florida, and being more particularly described as follows: SEE EXHIBIT "A" ATTACHED HERETO AND MADE A PART HEREOF together with the right and privilege from time to time to alter, repair and improve if necessary, the Easement Property for ingress and egress purposes, and with all rights and privileges necessary or convenient for the full enjoyment or use thereof for the herein -described purposes, including, but not limited to the right to cut and keep clear all trees and undergrowth and other obstructions within said area that may interfere with the proper use of such Easement Property, and the right of ingress and egress for personnel and equipment of Grantee, its contractors, agents, successors or assigns, for the pu rpose-of-exci-eisiiig-aiid-eiijoyiiig-tlie-i-iglits granted -by -this-casement -and -any -or° all -of -the rights --- granted hereunder. P417 The Grantor, however, reserves the right and privilege to use the above-described property for any such purposes suitable to the Grantor except as might interfere or be inconsistent with the use, occupation, maintenance or enjoyment thereof by Grantee or its successors or assigns, or as might cause a hazardous condition. It is understood and agreed that this easement will continue in effect for the benefit of Grantee, its successors and assigns until the occurrence of the first of the following events: (a) the easement is no longer used by Grantee, its successors and assigns, for the purpose'for which this grant is provided; (b) the Feedstock Supply Agreement (dated July 15, 2011) between the Grantor and the Grantee is terminated or expires and is not replaced by another agreement requiring the same easement; or (c) the Landfill Gas Interconnect Agreement (dated Decemberl 3th, 2011) between the Grantor and Grantee is terminated or expires and is not replaced by another agreement requiring the same easement. At such time as one of these three events occur, the lights herein granted shall terminate and full use of the Easement Property shall be enjoyed by Grantor, its successors or assigns, and Grantee shall execute a release of all rights under this grant of easement. Grantor hereby covenants with Grantee that it is lawfully seized and in possession of the real property herein described and that it has good and lawful right to grant the aforesaid easement free and clear of mortgages and other encumbrances unless specifically Stated to the contrary. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Grantor has hereunto set its hand and affixed its seal of the date first above written. ATTEST: GRANTOR: Jeffrey K. Barton, Clerk INDIAN RIVER COUNTY SOLID WASTE ......+& DISPOSAL DISTRICT, a dependent special ,. •�pMMISs• •• • • district of Indian River County, Florida c�.• .fir: Oul_ Y: eputy Clerk• :oars Gary reeler, Chairman Print Name °btRr,uu-oe BCC Approval date: 12-13-11 APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM AND SUFE CIE CY• By: , r. Alan -S- olackwiclI Sr.z — --- -�-- --. County Attorney P418 EXHIBIT "A" LEGAL DESCRIPTION P419 SKETCH OF DESCRIPTION PART OF TRACTS 9 AND 10, SECTION 25; TOWNSHIP 33 SOUTH, RANGE 38 EAST INDIAN RIVER FARMS COMPANY SUBDIVISION INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA. A 30.00 FEET WIDE ACCESS EASEMENT, LYING AND BEING INA PORTION OF TRACTS 9 AND 10. SECTION 25, TOWNSHIP 33 SOUTH, RANGE 38 EAST ACCORDING TO THE LAST GENERAL PLAT OF LANDS OF THE INDIAN RIVER FARMS COMPANY SUBDIVISION AS RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 2. PAGE 2S OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA, NOW LYING AND BEING IN INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA. SAID EASEMENT BEING 15.00 FEETEACH SIDE OF THE FOLLOWING DESCRIBED CENTERUNE AND BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCING AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SAID TRACT 9 RUN SOUTH 00.14'48' WEST ALONG THE EAST LINE OF TRACTS A DISTANCE OF 100.35 FEET TO A POINT; THENCE LEAVING SAID EAST LINE, RUN NORTH 89.42281 WESTAND PARALLEL WITH THE NORTH LINE OF SAID TRACTS, A DISTANCE OF 80.00 FEETTO A POINT ON THE WEST RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF 74TH AVENUE (RANGE LINE ROAD) AS RECORDED IN DEED BOOK 110, PAGE 57, PUBLIC RECORDS OF INDIAN 'RIVER COUNTY;j FLORIDA AND POINT OF BEGINNING OF SAID CENTERLINE; FROM SAID POINT OF BEGINNING CONTINUE NORTH 89'42'28" WEST ALONG A LINE PARALLEL WITH AND NORMAL TO THE NORTH LINE OFJSAID TRACT 9, A DISTANCE OF 595.95 FEET, THENCE RUN SOUTH 45'17W WEST A DISTANCE OF 69.58 FEET TO A POINT "A"; FROM SAID POINT 'A" RUN NORTH 89.4728" WEST ALONG A LINE PARALLEL WITH AND NORMAL TO SAID NORTH LINE OF TRACT 9 AND THE NORTH LINE OF AFOREMENTIONED TRACT 10, A DISTANCE OF 1447.99 FEET TO A POINT OF TERMINUS; THENCE RETURNING TO AFOREMENTIONED POINT"A" RUN SOUTH 89'4228" EASTALONG ALINE .PARALLEL WITH AND NORMAL TO THE AFOREMENTIONED NORTH LINE OF TRACT 9, A DISTANCE OF 645.19 FEET TO AFORESAID WEST RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF 74TH AVENUE (RANGE LINE ROAD) AND THE POINT OF TERMINUS. THE SIDE LINES; OF SAID 30.00 FEET WIDE ACCESS EASEMENT TO BE PROLONGED OR SHORTENED AT ALL ANGLE POINTS. POINTS OF INTERSECTION,"LAND LINES AND RIGHT-OF-WAY LINES. SAID EASEMENT CONTAINING 82.124.92 SQUARE FEET OR 1.89 ACRES. MORE OR LESS Serving Florida _ h Since 1911 DAVID E. LUETrWE, P.S.M. SIGNATU E DATE FLORIDA LICENSE No. 577.8 CARTER ASSOCIATES. INC. LB 7.05 SURVEYOR'S GENERAL NOTES AND REPORT: 1. UNLESS IT BEARS THE SIGNATURE AND THE ORIGINAL RAISED SEAL OFA FLORIDA LICENSED SURVEYOR AND MAPPER, THIS DRAWING, SKETCH, PLAT OR MAP IS FOR INFORMATIONAL PURPOSES ONLY AND IS NOT VALID. 2. BEARINGS SHOWN HEREON ARE BASED UPON THE NORTH AMERICAN DATUM OF 1983, ADJUSTMENT OF 1999, AND ARE PROJECTED IN THE FLORIDA STATE PLANE COORDINATE SYSTEM, FLORIDA EAST ZONE (901) AND ARE REFERENCED TO THE ESTABLISHED AND MONUMENTED LINE SHOWN HEREON LABELED AS THE BEARING BASIS. 3. ALL BOUNDARY DIMENSIONS USED. INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO BEARINGS, ANGLES AND DISTANCES ARE PREDICATED UPON BOUNDARY SURVEY BY CARTER ASSOCIATES. INC. JOB NO. 11-212S, DATED FEBRUARY, 2011. ALL DIMENSIONS SHOWN HEREON ARE DISPLAYED IN U.S. SURVEY FEET AND DECIMAL PARTS THEREOF. 4. THIS IS A SKETCH AND DESCRIPTION OF A PROPOSED ACCESS EASEMENT ONLY AND NOT A BOUNDARY SURVEY. THIS PROPERTY WAS NOT ABSTRACTED OR RESEARCHED BY THIS OFFICE FOR ANY ENCUMBRANCES OF RECORD. THE HEREON DESCRIBED' PROPERTY IS SUBJECT TO RESTRICTIONS, RESERVATIONS, EASEMENTS AND RIGHTS -OF --WAY OF RECORD. IF ANY. MATTERS OF RECORD NOT BROUGHT TO THE SURVEYOR'S ATTENTION BY THE CLIENT, THEIR AGENT OR AS DISCLOSED BY A FURNISHED TITLE INSURANCE POLICY ARE NOT INCLUDED. 5. THIS SKETCH OF DESCRIPTION CONSISTS OF TWO SHEETS ONE IS NOT VALID UNLESS BOTH SHEETS ARE PRESENT. CARTER ASSOCIATES SNC. CONSULTING ENGINEERS AND LAND SURVEYORS 1708 21st STREET 772-562-4191 (PHONE) VERO BEACH, FLORIDA 32960 772-562-7180 (FAX) DATE: I1-02-11 BY SG H.SCALE: 1"=200' 11-3715 DWG.// 19110—A1 SHEET 1 OF 2 SKETCH OF DESCRIPTION PART OF TRACTS 9 AND 10, SECTION 25, TOWNSHIP 33 SOUTH, RANGE 38 EAST INDIAN RIVER FARMS COMPANY SUBDIVISION INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA. TRACT 7 NOTINCLUDED PROPOSED 6' MOPE GAS LINE (5S' NORTH OF RIGHT-OF-WAY UNE) PROPOSED 6" MOPE PROPOSED CENTERLINE OF GAS LINE AND 10' MADE 'GAS LINE EASEMENT \ EIASTING PAD FOR -EQUIPMENT SITE _r— T I m I I I U N �$ RIVER COUNTY 1 m z O m m IW C O �,ey C �I is V n �I m �Im W 4\y o p I N Z�J N o ¢ I NORTHEAST CORNER TRACT 9 C -PROPOSED 10' "QE GAS LINE EASEMIT N 89'42'28'tv �---NORTH UNE OF TRACT 10 & 1/4 SECTIONiLINE 15.00' NORTHEAST CORNER OF 15.00' FENCE AT EX1NFLARE STATION SEGMEENTT 1. INDIAN POINT OF TERMINUS RIVER COUNTY LANDFILL ACCESS EASEMENT %O� 1 A `�0 CT 1® 1 NOTINCLUDEO Serving Florida $IDCe loll 0 100 100 SCALE.' (I loch = 100 Foot) N J • • 1 50.00' ADDITIONAL R/W m m I DEDICATED_ TO INDIAN nI RIVER COUNTY 1 m z nl DEED BOOK .110 PAGE 57 —�T� W m �I FOUND PK NAIL & DISC .I - � x I STAMPED CARTER LB 205" c NORTHEAST CORNER TRACT 9 C I I SUB -LATERAL CANAL C-5 (60' RESERVED FOR ROAD POINT OF COMMENCEMENT I AND CANAL) PER INDIAN RIVER FARMS COMPANY PROPOSED 30' WIDE ACCESS SUBDIVISION PLAT BOOK 2, PAGE 25, PUBLIC EASEMENT 1 30.00' RECORDS ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA 130)r - �`— _J ,—NORTH L0,IT_OF-WAY SUB -LATERAL C-5 CANAL N 69*42'28_W 1281.03 : _ 5 0014'e8 W 1CNORTH UNE OF TRACT 9 &_1/4 SECTION UNE 100.35 ti- 60.OD' 4 4517 32— V! x15.00' ,PROPOSED i 3000' HIDE N 89='4_2'28" W 30.00' RIGHT15.00' ACCESS 80.00/_-, E+ iI cePOINT_?A`s�_�—�II I I 1 10POSED 30.00' HIDE CENTERLINE OF P ACCESSEASEMENT 30' WIDE ACCESS LL,s.00' t P. t5.00' I A POINT OF TERMINUS ACCESS EASEMENT EAST LINE TRACT 9 I CARTER ASSOCLATES, ITVC. CONSULTWG ENGINEERS AND LAND SURVEYORS 1708 211<I STREET 772-561-4191 (PHONE) VERO BEACH. FLORIDA 32960 772-562=7180 (FAX) DATE. 11-02-11 BY SC H.SCALE: 1"=200' 11-3715 OWC:# 19110-A1 SHEET 1 OF 2 QNE d�® FARM CREDIT July 12, 2017 Honorable Jason E. Brown County Administrator Indian River County, Florida 1801 27th Street Vero Beach, FL 32960-3365 Post Office Box 1036 Conway SC 29528 1720 Mill Pond Rd. Conway, SC 29527 843.248.4214 arborone.com Re: INEOS New Planet BioEnergy LLC Ethanol Facility located in Vero Beach, Indian River County, Florida Dear Mr. Brown: This letter is in reference to the deposit in the amount of $200,000 (the "Deposit") which INEOS New Planet BioEnergy LLC ("INPB") placed with Indian River County, Florida ("IRC"), to secure certain obligations INPB had to IRC in connection with its ownership and operation of INPB's biofuels production facility located on its property located in Indian River County (the "Plant"). Please be advised that notwithstanding any earlier communications to the contrary you may have received from ArborOne, ACA, in its capacity as the Servicer ("ArborOne") for certain INPB bonds (the "Bonds"), guaranteed in part by the U.S. Department of Agriculture, ArborOne hereby authorizes IRC promptly to release directly to INPB $51,551.55 of the Deposit to reimburse it for its procurement of an environmental liability insurance policy with respect to the Plant and the real property on which it is located. If you have any questions or need additional information, please do not hesitate to contact the undersigned, Emily Pace, at (843) 438-4718, or by email at EPacea-ArborOne.com. Thank you for your cooperation. Very truly yours, ArborOne, ACA n. poCyl- Ernily By: T. Pace Vice President AO/rb cc: Tim A. Avery, CFO, INEOS New Planet BioEnergy LLC Dylan Reingold, Esq., County Attorney, Indian River County Lending support to rural America" SGR/16405783.1 P422 ,4` OR"® CERTIFICATE OF LIABILITY INSURANCE page 1 of 1 04/21/20 7 THIS CERTIFICATE IS ISSUED AS A MATTER OF INFORMATION ONLY AND CONFERS NO RIGHTS UPON THE CERTIFICATE HOLDER. THIS CERTIFICATE DOES NOT AFFIRMATIVELY OR NEGATIVELY AMEND, EXTEND OR ALTER THE COVERAGE AFFORDED BY THE POLICIES BELOW. THIS CERTIFICATE OF INSURANCE DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A CONTRACT BETWEEN THE ISSUING INSURER(S), AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE OR PRODUCER, AND THE CERTIFICATE HOLDER. IMPORTANT: If the certificate holder is an ADDITIONAL INSURED, the policy(ies) must have ADDITIONAL INSURED provisions or be endorsed. If SUBROGATION IS WAIVED, subject to the terms and conditions of the policy, certain policies may require an endorsement. Astatement on this certificate does not confer rights to the certificate holder in lieu of such endorsement(s). PRODUCER CONTACT Willie of Texas, Inc. c/o 26 Century Blvd. P.O. Box 305191 PHONE 677-945-73 6 FAX 888-467-2378 E-MAILq. certificates@willia.com anDRFS_ TN 37230-5191 INSURERS FORDING COVERAGE MAIC# INSURERA:The Insurance Company of the State of Pen 19429-101 /1/2017 INSURED TN80S New Planet Bioenergy LLC INSURERB:ACE American Insurance Company 22667-302 INSURERC:Evanston Insurance Company 35378-000 2600 South Shore Blvd League City, TX 77573 INSURER D: INSURER E: INSURER P RAWF$FE�Iteo E.D ce) S 100,000 COVERAGES CERTIFICATE NUMBER: 25450563 REVISION NUMBER:See Remarks THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT THE POLICIES OF INSURANCE LISTED BELOW HAVE BEEN ISSUED TO THE INSURED NAMED ABOVE FOR THE POLICY PERIOD INDICATED. NOTWITHSTANDING ANY REQUIREMENT, TERM OR CONDITION OF ANY CONTRACT OR OTHER DOCUMENT WITH RESPECT TO WHICH THIS CERTIFICATE MAY BE ISSUED OR MAY PERTAIN. THE INSURANCE AFFORDED BY THE POLICIES DESCRIBED HEREIN IS SUBJECT TO ALL THE TERMS, EXCLUSIONS AND CONDITIONS OF SUCH POLICIES. LIMITS SHOWN MAY HAVE BEEN REDUCED BY PAID CLAIMS. INSR TR TYPEOFINSURANCE DOL SUB POLICY NUMBER POLICY EFF POLICY EXPI OMITS A X COMMERCIALGENERALLIABILITY GL7129922 /1/2017 4/1/2018 EACH OCCURRENCE S 2,000,000 X CLAIMS-MADEa OCCUR RAWF$FE�Iteo E.D ce) S 100,000 MED EXP (Any oneperson) S 10,000 X $2,000,000 SIR PERSONAL 3ADVINJURY 5 2,000,000 GENERALAGGREGATE S 2,000,000 GENIAGGREGATE LIMIT APPLIES PER., X POLICY ❑ ,ECT F� LOC PRODUCTS-COMPIOPAGG S 2,000,000 S OTHER: B AUTOMOBILE LIABILITY ISAH09054406 /1/2017 4/1/2018 ((.g E�DtSINGLEUMIT S 2,000,000 BODILYINJURY(Perperson) S X ANYAUTO OWNED SCHEDULED AUTOS ONLY AUTOS BODILYINJURY(Peral) S HIRED NON -OWNED AUTOS ONLY AUTOS ONLY AMAGE (PeraxideM S $ UMBRELLAUAB OCCUR EACHOCCURRENCE S AGGREGATE S EXCESS LIAR CLAIMS -MADE DED I IRETENTioNs S B 8 WORKERS COMPENSATION AND EMPLOYERS' LIABILITY Y� ANY PROPRIETORIPARTNEWEXECUTIVE OFFICERIMEMBEREXCLUDED? LL.JJ (MandatorynNH) If desai� under NIA WLRC49112038 SCFC4911204A /1/2017 /1/2017 4/1/2018 4/1/2018 X E.L. EACH ACCIDENT S 2,000,000 E.L. DISEASE -EA EMPLOYEE S 2,000,000 E.LDISEASE -POLICY LIMIT 5 2,000,000 yyes, DESCRIPTIONOFOPERATIONSbelow C Fixed Site Pollution MELV2ENV100093 5/l/2017 5/1 2020 Per Pollution $3,000,000 Limit Legal Liability Condition Aggregate $3,000,000 Limit Self -Insured Ret. $35,000 Limit DESCRIPTION OF OPERATIONS I LOCATIONS I VEHICLES (ACORD 101, Additional Remarks Schedule, may be attached If moro space Is required) THIS VOIDS AND REPLACES PREVIOUSLY ISSUED CERTIFICATE DATED: 4/4/2017 WITH ID: 25378919 Additional Insured on General Liability in favor of certificate holder as required by written contract subject to policy terms, conditions, & exclusions. SHOULD ANY OF THE ABOVE DESCRIBED POLICIES BE CANCELLED BEFORE THE EXPIRATION DATE THEREOF, NOTICE WILL BE DELIVERED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE POLICY PROVISIONS. Iridian River County Landfill AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE Indian -River County Solid Waste Disposal District 1325 74th Avenue SW Vero Beach, FL 32968 ACORD 25 (2016/03) C011:5065639 Tnl:2140069 Cert:25450563 0198810015 ACORD CORPOROTIOki_ All rinhte raearvad The ACORD name and logo are registered marks of ACORD P423 1mWINS Brokerage April 26, 2017 Margaret Gibson Willis of Texas 920 Memorial City Way Suite 500 Houston, TX 77024 ArnWINS Brokerage NE Suite LLC 3630 Peacntice, P6. NE JUIN 1700 Atlanta GA 30326 amwrns.aom License Pio.. 10 G 2 RE: INEOS New Planet Bioenergy, LLC Pollution Legal Liability POLLUTION LEGAL LIABILITY CONFIRMATION OF COVERAGE Dear Margaret: In accordance with your instructions to bind coverage, this Confirmation of Coverage confirms that coverage is bound for your client as follows: DATE OF ISSUANCE: 4/26/2017 NAMED INSURED: INEOS New Planet Bioenergy, LLC MAILING ADDRESS:. 2600 South Shore Blvd Suite 500 League City, TX 77573 CARRIER: Evanston Insurance Company POLICY NUMBER: MKLV2ENV100093 POLICY PERIOD: From 5/1/2017 to 5/1/2020 12:01 A.M. Standard Time at the Mailing Address shown above POLICY PREMIUM: $49,050.00 Premium _ $2,501.55 Surplus Lines Taxes $51,551.55 Total TRIA PREMIUM: Rejected by Insured. MINIMUM EARNED PREMIUM: 25% COMMISSION: 0.000% of premium excluding fees and taxes SURPLUS LINES DISCLOSURE Florida SURPLUS LINES INSURERS' POLICY RATES AND FORMS ARE NOT Page 1 of 3 P424 APPROVED BY ANY FLORIDA REGULATORY AGENCY. This insurance is issued pursuant to the Florida Surplus Lines Law. Persons insured by surplus lines carriers do not have the protection of the Florida Insurance Guaranty Act to the extent of any right of recovery for the obligation of an insolvent unlicensed insurer. Surplus Lines Licensee: Producing Agent: Name: Mirhaal Arran f hrictian Name: _ Willis Towers'Watson Address 3630 Peachtree Road NE St. 1700 Address: Wflllis Natural Resources I Willis of Texas, Inc. Atlanta rA 3r)'M _ 920 Memorial City Way, Suite 5001 Houston, TX 770241 USA License _ An Signature: POLICY PREMIUM AND SURPLUS LINES TAXES SUMMARY SURPLUS LINES TAX CALCULATION: Description Taxable Taxable Fee Tax Basis Rate Tax Premium Florida Surplus Lines Tax $49,050.00 $0.00 $49,050.00 5.00% $2,452.50 Stamping Fee $49,050.00 $0.00 $49,050.00 0.10% $49.05 Total $2,501.55 Total Surplus Lines Taxes and Fees $2,501.55 IMPORTANT NOTICE: THE NONADMITTED & REINSURANCE REFORM ACT (NRRA) WENT INTO EFFECT ON JULY 21, 2011. ACCORDINGLY, SURPLUS LINES TAX RATES AND REGULATIONS ARE SUBJECT TO CHANGE WHICH COULD RESULT IN AN INCREASE OR DECREASE OF THE TOTAL SURPLUS TAXES AND FEES OWED ON THIS PLACEMENT. IF A CHANGE IS REQUIRED, WE WILL PROMPTLY NOTIFY YOU. ANY ADDITIONAL TAXES OWED MUST BE PROMPTLY REMITTED TO AMWINS. ADDITIONAL TERMS AND Per Carrier Binder. CONDITIONS: The attached Binder from the carrier sets out the precise coverage terms and conditions being bound. Please review this information carefully. If after review, you find any errors in this Confirmation of Coverage or the carrier's Binder, please contact us immediately to discuss. Should you have any questions or need anything further, please feel free to contact me. Thank you for your business. We truly appreciate it. Page 2 of 3 P425 Sincerely, Elizabeth Hartsig Associate Broker AmWINS Brokerage of Georgia, LLC T 404.920.3667 F 404.920.3789 1 elizabeth.hartsig@amwins.com 3630 Peachtree Rd. NE I Suite 1700 1 1 Atlanta, GA 30326 1 amwins.com On behalf of, Heath Cunningham Executive Vice President I AmWINS Brokerage of Georgia, LLC T 404.920:3666 M 404.229.4484 1 ,F 404.920.3789 heath.cunningham@amwins.com 3630'Peachtree Rd. NE I Suite 1700 I I Atlanta, GA 30326 I amwins.com In California: AmWINS Brokerage of Georgia Insurance Services, LLC I License No.; OF56593 An AmWINS .Group Company Page 3 of 3 P426 INDIAN RIVER COUNTY SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL DISTRICT BOARD MEMORANDUM 1565 Public Presentation �gIVE o 0 Date: June 30, 2017 To: Jason E. Brown, County Administrator From: Vincent Burke, P.E., Director of Utility Services Thru: Himanshu H. Mehta, P.E., Managing Director, Solid Waste Disposal District (SWDD) Prepared By: Stephanie C. Fonvielle, Recycling Education and Marketing Coordinator, SWDD Subject: Quarterly Recycling Update — Second and Third Quarter FY2016/17 QUARTERLY UPDATE: On June 30, 2017, the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) published the recycling rates for all counties in Florida and Indian River County has reached an overall recycling rate of 53% for Calendar Year (CY) 2016. Concrete tonnages (not previously used for historical overall recycling rates) are incorporated for CY 2016 which contributed to the increase. We are excited to reach this 50% milestone, and we hope to continue to see a positive trend as we continue our recycling efforts. Forthe secondand third quarter of Fiscal Year (FY) 2016/17, the recycling tonnages under Single -Stream Recycling (SSR) were relatively comparable tothose in FY 2015/16, with the exception of January where tonnages were 25% higher in FY 2016/17. Although the trends under SSR are comparable, these tonnages are still about 60% higher than the amount collected under the previous Dual -Stream recycling program. The summaries for the second and third quarter are as follows: Month FY 2015/16 SSR Tonnages FY 2016/17 SSR Tonnages / Change January 1,613 2,030 25.8% February 1,585 1,606 1.4% March 1,941 1,900 -2.1% April 1,656 1,629 -1.7% May 1,626 1,803 10.9% June 1,493 1,648 10.4% Recycling Collection Events: During the second quarter, the Solid Waste Disposal District (SWDD) hosted a Household Hazardous Waste (HHW) and Electronics Recycling Event on January 21, 2017 at the North County Pool. The event brought in 230 cars and recycled 8,000 lbs. of electronics as well as various HHW such as paint cans, propane tanks, pesticides, and fire extinguishers. Mr. Edward O'Neal won the raffle and received a laptop that was generously donated by NWI Recycling. On August 12, 2017, Waste Management and SWDD will host a second HHW and Electronics Recycling @BCL@C005BC4B Page —1 — P427 event in the south part of the county at the Intergenerational Recreation Center from 9 am to 12 pm. All residents of IRC are welcome to attend. During the third quarter, SWDD partnered with Southeast Secure Shredding (SESS) to co -host the spring Residential Paper Shredding Event on April 8, 2017 at their facility at 3910 US -1. The popularity of the event is increasing and our spring event brought in around 700 cars and recycled 20,829 lbs of paper (compared to the 450 cars and 15,588 lbs of paper at the fall event in 2016). Because of the positive responses from IRC residents and the increasingly large turnout, staff would like to continue to offertwo papershredding events perfiscal year, one in the fall and one in the spring. Outreach: Providing a clearand consistent message about proper recycling habits is keyto encouragingthe public participation in the program and keeping contamination rates low. Throughout the second and third quarter, SWDD continued a recycling educational campaign that included radio interviews, radio advertisements, print advertisements and email blasts to announce upcoming events and provide general recycling information. In an effort to reach those not tuned into local media, a poster was on display in the AMC Theatre lobby from November 2016 to April 2017 and a 30 second video advertisement aired on Comcast from February 2017 to May 2017. The increased tonnages under single stream recycling program and the low contamination rates (6.9%) reported by our processor, Tropical Recycling, indicatethat oureducational efforts are successful in encouraging proper recycling in Indian River County. On a related note, as reported recently by TC Palm, the increase in recycling tons has allowed Tropical Recycling in 2015 to expand from West Palm Beach to the former Tree Sweet citrus plant in Ft. Pierce. The transition has created 22 jobs, and they plan to hire about 10 people a year, up to 50 with an average annual salary of about $37,000. Our goals for the remainder of the fiscal year are 1) to send out a postcard to all the residents in the county about proper recycling, 2) to begin the application process for a grant that would enable us to implement a pilot school recycling program, and 3) to find a way to have recycling picked up at the eight county beaches. We are also hoping to encourage more local businesses to sign up for commercial recycling. . FUNDING: This agenda item is for a quarterly recycling update to the SWDD Board and does not require funding. 9BCL@C005BC4B Page — 2 — P428 Recycling Update: 2nd & 3rd Quarter FY 2016/17 Solid Waste Disposal District Stephanie Fonvielle Recycling Education and Marketing Coordinator July 18th, 2017 7/18/2017 Recycling Tonnages for FY 201 2nd Quarter 25.8% lA% 2,000 0 1,500 V a, 1,000 m C 0 nn O 500 0 7/18/2017 2,030 1,613 1,585 1,606 ILI January February ® FY 15-'16 a FY 16-'17 7 -2.1% 1,941 1,900 March 7/18/2017 15.8.5. 1 Recycling Tonnages for FY 201 3rd Quarter EHI HE 7 HE 7/19/2017 Recycling Tonnages for 2nd and 3rd Quarter 2,500 2,000 1,500 1,000 500 gz,; Nrt p� 7/19/2017 Recycling Tonnages for 2nd and 3rd Quarter 2,500 2,000 1,500 1,000 500 0 --] 0 Jan. Feb. I Mar. April May J I une 7 -FY14/15 -FY15/16 -FY16/17 Old Electronics and Household Hazardous Waste Saturday, August 12, 2017 9 am to 12 pm Intergenerational Recreation Center 1590 9th St. S.W. • Vero Beach L ,; -- RECYCLE! Enter the Raffle to Win a Free Laptop 11[SR courtesy of NWI Recycling 7/1®/2017 3 Recycling Outreach 2nd & 3rd Quarter 2nd & 3rd Quarter • Poster at AMC Theater (Nov. '16 —April '17) • 30 sec. Video Ad on Comcast (Feb. — May '17) • Hurricane Campaign (June '17) 4t" Quarter Goals • General Recycling Marketing Campaign • Postcard to all IRC residents • Grant for School Recycling Program • Recycling at the County Beaches • Visiting Multi -family 7/18/2017 NMIW,�m The numbers are in for CY 2016.... 7/18/2017 2016 Recycling Rate for Indian River County 53% 7/18/2017 4 2016 Recycling Rate 2016 FIDEP Report: Recycling Slice Report: Recycling Rate 7/18/2017 __Recycling from private sector (Concrete & 79% •Asphalt Companies) U (168,182 tons) Outgoing tons from landfill (44,386 tons) 7/18/2017 INDIAN RIVER COUNTY SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL DISTRICT '�LoRTOA BOARD MEMORANDUM 1584 Date: July 7, 2017 To: Jason E. Brown, County Administrator From: Vincent Burke, P.E., Director of Utility Services Prepared By: Himanshu H. Mehta, P.E., Managing Director, Solid Waste Disposal District Stephanie C. Fonvielle, Recycling Education and Marketing Coordinator, SWDD Subject: Traditional Recycling Opportunities and Options DESCRIPTIONS AND CONDITIONS: In 2010, the State Legislature passed House Bill (HB) 7243, which established a recycling goal of 75% by December 31, 2020, along with interim goals as shown below with the comparison of the Solid Waste Disposal District (SWDD) recycling rate and the associated tonnages. Calendar Year Population Tons Landfilled Tons Combusted & Stockpiled Tons Recycled & Renewable Energy Total Tons SWDD Annual Recycling Rate State Goal 2012 139,446 130,195 24,650 90,966 245,811 37% 40% 2013 139,586 136,290 32,246 93,577 262,113 37% 40% 2014 140,955 153,759 5,669 88,594 248,022 36% 50% 2015 143,246 156,254 34,465 96,787 287,506 34% 50% 2016 146,410 162,644 36,783 220,461 419,888 53% 60% 2017 TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD 60% 2018 TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD 70% 2019 TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD 70% 2020 TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD 75% The ambitious goal set by the Florida State Legislature is riddled with challenges, such as variations in market conditions, contamination issues with single stream recycling, relying on private commercial businesses to voluntarily report their recycling tonnages, and the overall difficulty in changing the personal habits of the general public. Despite these obstacles, the recycling rate in Indian River County (IRC) has risen from 34% in Calendar Year (CY) 2015 (ranked 24 out of 67 counties) to 53% in CY2016 (ranked 14 out of 67 counties). SWDD has implemented or initiated several of the Phase 1 recommendations of the 2014 Solid Waste Master Plan, including converting to carted single stream recycling, hiring a recycling program coordinator, and expanding public outreach on recycling. Reaching a recycling rate greater than 50% is a huge milestone for IRC; however, we will not reach the 75% recycling goal by 2020 based on the current programs. On September 13, 2016, the SWDD Board directed staff to report back to the Board with recycling data from January 2016 to January 2017 in order to further discuss costs and means for increasing recycling volumes. Staff requested the assistance of our consultant, Kessler Consulting, Inc., to help us look at traditional recycling opportunities and options. Kessler Consulting provided the attached Technical Memorandum, @BCL@A80586C5 Page 1 of 6 P429 dated April 7, 2017, which provides an analysis of traditional recycling programs forvarious counties in Florida for CY2015 and potential opportunities for IRC to increase our recycling rate based on varying investments and involvement. Please note, Kessler Consulting's analysis was based on preliminary data submitted by staff to the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) for CY2016, which estimated a 37% recycling rate. Subsequently, staff submitted additional recycling information to the FDEP in June 2017, which raised our rate to 53% and was published by the FDEP on July 1, 2017. ANALYSIS: IRC RECYCLING RATE AND OTHER FLORIDA COUNTIES The overall recycling rate in IRC is calculated by combining the recycling efforts from the public sector that is processed through county means, and the privately -owned commercial sector that reports their recycling efforts directly to the FDEP. FIGURE 1 2016 IRC SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT REPORT 2016 FDEP Report Total = 419,888 Tons • Landfill • Recycled . Renewable Energy . Stockpiled 2016 FDEP Report Breakout of Public vs. Private Recycling Total - 212,568Tons MSWDD-SS+ 13SWDD-0ther OIRC Private Sector The majority of the increase in the recycling rate was due to the recycling efforts in the private sector where private entities such as Publix, Wal-Mart, Target, Mr. Scrap, etc., directly send their recyclables out of IRC for processing. The total recycling tonnages reported to FDEP in CY2016 in the private sector was 168,182 tons compared to 62,332 tons in CY2015. Overall, for CY2016, 21% was recycled by the county and 79% was recycled by the private sector. When the combined recycling efforts by public and private entities in IRC from January 2016 through December 2016 are compared to the total amount disposed in our landfill, the resulting overall recycling rate for 2016 is 51%. We also received 2% in Renewable Energy Credits for the electrical production by the Indian River BioEnergy Center. The other 47% is composed of stockpiled clean concrete and yard waste as well as material disposed in the landfill. Specfically, we stockpiled clean concrete (10,878 tons) and yard waste (25,905 tons) that was delivered to the landfill in 2016. In general, the total recycling rate reported by each county is a combination of their traditional recycling rate plus their rate from renewable energy credits. In 2016, only 4 out of 67 counties in Florida had a traditional recycling rate exceeding 60% and only 13 counties had an overall recycling rate exceeding 60%. Eight (8) of these 13 counties have waste -to -energy facilities, four (4) received recycling credits for landfill gas recovery @BCL@A80586C5 Page 2 of 6 P430 or other renewable energy credits, and only one (1) — Sumter County — achieved a 63% overall rate by traditional methods only. In looking at just traditional recycling rates (no energy credits), in CY2016, 18 counties had rates exceeding 50%, and only 4 of those counties exceeded 60%. The traditional recycling efforts focus on four areas: Construction and Demolition (C&D) Debris, Organics Recycling, Commercial Recycling, and Multi -Family Recycling. OPPORTUNITIES He OPTIONS FOR IRC Using the 2016 data submitted to the FDEP, it is estimated that 38% of the waste in CY2016 consisted of materials that are recyclable but were stockpiled or disposed ("potentially recyclable") (see Figure 2). Of that 38%, approximately 15% was composed of organics and 13% was composed of C&D debris that could not be captured or recycled under the existing recycling programs. The remaining 10% was recyclable and in the future could be pursued with a rigorous recycling campaign aimed at residential and commercial businesses; however, no recycling program, no matter how rigorous, would recover all of these materials. What is actually recycled will depend on the participation and cooperation of the public and local businesses. Potentially Recyclable per 2016 FDEP Report C&D Recovered, FIGURE 2 POTENTIALLY RECYCLABLE RES paper & Containers, 13,349 Renewable Energy Credit,\ 7,893 MF Paper & Containers, 8,450 Vag Waste Recovered, 63,277 M . . . . . . . . . . Mulch Stock ed, 25,905 Other Waste, 37,568 9% Not Recyclable other Compostables,12,450 COMM Yard & .Food Waste, 7,918 h1F Yard & Food Waste, 3,851 RES Yard & Food Waste, 1S,S76 In order to encourage more participation in the existing programs and pursue the recyclable C&D and organics that are currently being stockpiled or disposed, the SWDD Board needs to consider the following programs: @ BCL@A80586C5 Page 3 of 6 P431 Construction and Demolition Debris (C&D): • The large increase in IRC's recycling rate from CY2015 to CY2016 can be credited to the addition of recycling data from three large C&D debris companies in the private sector that was not previously being reported. For CY2016, they represent 87% or 97,217 out of 111,690 tons of C&D recovered in IRC. • In contrast, SWDD disposed 100% of incoming C&D (44,802 tons) into the landfill in CY2016. SWDD also received 14,187 tons of clean concrete in CY2016, out of which 77% (10,878 tons) was stockpiled and not counted towards our recycling rate. The remaining 23% (3,309 tons) of clean concrete was recycled for landfill road base material, which is utilized in and on the active landfill site to facilitate various traffic patterns. • The disposed/stockpiled material represents an opportunity by the county to directly increase our recycling rate and save valuable landfill space. Other counties such as Charlotte, Sarasota, Alachua, and Lee have successful C&D debris recycling programs. However, these counties have tipping rates in the range of $40 to $50 per ton compared to our $31.80 per ton, and have processing costs that range from $25 to $35 per ton. • SWDD is currently going through a permit renewal for the C&D landfill and has received a draft permit from the FDEP that includes the operations of a C&D Debris Recycling facility. The permit allows for the mining of our existing C&D landfill as well as approval for concrete crushing. Option 1: A procurement process is needed to determine the interest from private vendors, costs to build/operate/maintain a processing system and the recycling rate that could be achieved. Site improvements, permit modifications and tipping fee adjustments may be needed as the result of this process. Out of the 13% of the C&D debris that is potentially recyclable, it is estimated that an additional 2% (concrete crushing only) to 71-6 (C&D Debris Recycling facility) can be practically recycled from this effort. Organics: • In 2016, nearly 26,000 tons of ground vegetative waste was stockpiled for use as daily cover, which was not considered recyclable by the FDEP. This is now resolved per the new contract with Mr. Mulch in 2017. We are no longer stockpiling large quantities of cover material; instead, it is on an as -needed basis with the majority of the material being shipped off-site for recycling. This has increased our costs; however, it will provide an additional 7% of recycling credits for CY2017. • In 2016, it is estimated that 27,000 tons of yard waste and post -consumer food waste was disposed in the landfill as part of the mixed residential and commercial waste streams. Option 1: We need a systematic and concentrated educational campaign to educate residents about not putting yard waste into their garbage. There is a potential to recover an additional 1-2% of recycling credits with this option. Option 2: An alternative aggressive option is to consider universal collection of yard waste within the urban service area. However, this may only be cost-effective to our residents with universal collection of residential waste. Therefore, this stand-alone option for universal collection of yard, waste is not recommended at this time. @ BCL@A80586C5 Page 4 of 6 P432 • In 2016, it is estimated that 12,000 tons of other potentially compostable materials, such as non - recyclable paper and clean wood waste, were disposed in the landfill. In 2016, the county disposed of 8,000 tons of dewatered sludge into the landfill. Option 3: Initiate a procurement process for a public or private compost facility. The procurement process is to see what interest there is by the private sector to establish a public facility on the landfill property or a private facility on their own property. In addition, we would have a proposed tipping fee to compare to our existing rate to evaluate the financial impact to our residents. Once a facility is established then a pilot for commercial food waste collection can be explored, followed by a residential food waste collection program in the future. Currently, the majority of residential and commercial yard waste is covered through the non -ad valorem assessment with large size materials being charged at a rate of $22 per ton. Kessler Consulting estimates that a tipping fee of $25- $40 per ton would be required for a private compost operation. Staff recently visited the NuTerra composting facility in Fellsmere and were informed that they expect to charge a tipping fee of $37.50 per ton. There is a potential to recover an additional 1- 2% of recycling credits with this option. Out of the 15% of organics that are potentially recyclable, it is estimated that an additional 7% will be recovered through the contract with Mr. Mulch and another 24% can be practically recycled from educational efforts and/or composting. Commercial and Multi -Family Recycling: • Based on information from our local haulers, it is estimated that 16% of the commercial businesses (approximately 659 out of 4,250 businesses) in IRC voluntarily subscribe for recycling services. In 2016, an estimated 11,000 tons of commercially generated and 22,000 tons of residentially generated recyclable paper and containers were landfilled. Option 1: Provide leniency for existing commercial/multi-family complexes that do not have an enclosed structure for recycling. Option 2: Establish a building code amendment requiring all new commercial and multi -family complexes to have an enclosed structure for recycling. Option 3: Establish a Technical Assistance Program to maximize voluntary efforts. Option 4: Consider a mandatory recycling ordinance. Due to the open market condition stipulated by the Florida Legislature, commercial businesses can still choose their own provider but they would be required to recycle. Lee and Sarasota counties have a mandatory commercial recycling program that has greater than 90% compliance resulting in higher recycling rates. These counties have over half a dozen full and part time staff members dedicated to helping businesses set up a recycling program and ensuring compliance. Out of the 10% of Commercial and Multi -Family materials that are potentially recyclable, it is estimated that an additional 2% to 5% can be practically recycled from this effort. @ BCL@A80586C5 Page 5 of 6 P433 Realistically, achieving the 75% goal by the year 2020 is not possible; however, we are now at over 50% of the recycling goal with about 38% of the material going into our landfill that is potentially recyclable. The various options outlined will require additional costs by the county along with an intensive and consistent education effort to increase our overall recycling rate for CY2016 from the 53% to 65%. The pursuit of incrementally higher overall recycling rates will require substantial investments (i.e., waste -to -energy) as the results of the Request for Information process indicated and presented to the SWDD Board on September 13, 2016. The time frame to achieve these rates will depend on a variety of factors including constituent participation and the programmatic policies typically set by the Board. Staff and KCI will provide a detailed presentation of the above to obtain further direction from the SWDD Board. FUNDING: Kessler Consulting was directed by staff to utilize funding that was available in the approved Work Order No. 1 and No. 2 to complete the additional work for this effort. Funding for these services came from the Other Professional Services account in the SWDD Landfill Fund account, which is funded from SWDD assessments and user fees. Description Account Number Amount Other Professional Services 41121734-033190 $584.72 RECOMMENDATION: Staff will discuss the above options to obtain further direction at the upcoming Board meeting. At this time, staff recommends that the SWDD Board approve the following: 1. Authorize staff to issue a Request for Proposal (RFP) to obtain bids for implementation of concrete and C&D recycling at the landfill. A procurement process will help us evaluate private sector interest, their costs and their recovery rates to adequately determine both the financial impact as well as the impact to the overall recycling rate. C&D recycling has the potential to increase the county's overall recycling rate by an estimated 7%. ATTACH M E NT(s): 1) Technical Memorandum —Kessler Consulting, Inc. @ BCL@A80586C5 Page 6 of 6 P434 IRC LANDFILL WORK ORDER NUMBER 1 Phase 1- Segment 3 Expansion, Segment 2 Partial Closure And Landfill Gas System 'Expanshion This Indian River County (IRC) Landfill Work Order Number 1. is entered into as of this _ day of 201, in accordance with FS 287.055, Consultant's Competitive Negotiation Act per the Request for Qualification #2017048 for Engineering Consulting Services for Landfill Closure, Landfill Gas System Expansion, and Cell Construction, dated July 18, 2017 (referred to as the "Agreement"), by -and between INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, a political subdivision of the State of Florida ("COUNTY") and CDM Smith Inc. ("Consultant"). The COUNTY has selected the Consultant to perform the professional services set forth on Exhibit A (Scope of Work), attached to this Work Order and made part hereof by this reference. The professional services will be performed by the Consultant for the fee schedule set forth in Exhibit B (Fee Schedule), attached to this Work Order and made a part hereof by this reference. The Consultant will perform the professional services within the timeframe more particularly set forth in Exhibit A (Time Schedule), attached to this Work Order and made a part hereof by this reference all in accordance with the terms and provisions set forth in the Agreement. .Pursuant to Section 1 of the Agreement, nothing contained in any Work Order shall conflict with the terms of the Agreement and the terms of the Agreement shall be deemed to be incorporated in each individual Work Order as if fully set forth herein. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Work Order as of the date first written above. CONSULTANT: CDM Smith Inc. By: Print Name: Crit T. 4rcm+lct Title: J';yc i rct BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY By: , Chairman BCC Approved Date: Attest: Jeffrey R. Smith, Clerk of Court and Comptroller By: Approved: Approved as to form and legal sufficiency: Deputy Clerk Jason E. Brown, County Administrator Dylan T. Reingold, County Attorney P435 EXHIBIT A WORK ORDER NO.1 INDIAN RIVER COUNTY LANDFILL SEGMENT 3 CELL 2 EXPANSION, SEGMENT 2 PARTIAL CLOSURE, AND LANDFILL GAS SYSTEM EXPANSION PHASE I - MEETINGS, DESIGN DUE DILIGENCE, SURVEY, AND GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION This Work Order, when executed, shall be incorporated in and become part of the Agreement for Engineering Consulting Services for Indian River County Landfill between Indian River County Solid Waste Disposal District (SWDD) and CDM Smith Inc., (CONSULTANT), dated July . 2017 hereafter referred to as the CONTRACT. BACKGROUND The SWDD, the owner and operator of the Indian River County Landfill, has requested that CONSULTANT prepare this Work Order to provide professional engineering services for the proposed Class I Landfill Segment 3 Cell 2 expansion, partial closure of Segment 2, and expansion of the landfill gas collection system (Project). The proposed new cell is Cell 2 of Segment 3 (approximately 10.6 acres in size), as shown on Drawing No. 5 of the 20 -Year Permit Drawings dated September 2015. Segment 3 Cell 2 will be located immediately to the east of the existing Segment 3 Cell 1. The proposed partial closure of Segment 2 (approximately 25 acres in size) includes closure of the Segment 1/Infill vertical expansion area and the final elevations of Segment 2, which has been historically been referred to as the Segment 2C area. Expansion of the landfill gas system within Segment 2 is proposed to be constructed concurrently with the partial closure of Segment 2 so that the final components can be installed prior to the closure cap being constructed. This Project will be completed in multiple phases. Phase I includes evaluation of available information and developing sufficient information to update/revise existing permit design drawings and complete the final design and specifications that will be used for procurement Subsequent phases will include preparation of the final design and bid package, permitting/regulatory agency support, bidding assistance, and engineering services during construction. The Scope of Services for Phase I of this Project is described below: SCOPE OF SERVICES CONSULTANT will undertake the design, bidding, permitting, and engineering services during construction of the Class I Landfill Segment 3 Cell 2 expansion, Segment 2 partial closure, and landfill gas system expansion located at the Indian River County Landfill. The design will include the Segment 3 Cell 2 bottom liner system, leachate collection and conveyance systems, and stormwater management facilities; Segment 2 partial closure cap liner system and stormwater management facilities, and the Segment 2 landfill gas system expansion. This scope of services includes work necessary to revise the existing -permit drawings=as:necessary and=to_prepare_final. design drawings and specifications suitable for procurement of construction services by the SWDD. Based on recent discussions with SWDD staff and our familiarity with the landfill site, the proposed Scope of Services in this Work Order includes the following tasks: A-1 jj2046EXh1bits.docx P436 TASK 1.0 - MEETINGS, DATA COLLECTION, SURVEY, AND GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION This task focuses on obtaining the necessary preliminary information to prepare detailed engineering plans and construction specifications. Subtask 1.1 Meeting and Site Visit CONSULTANT will attend a meeting with SWDD to discuss the proposed cell expansion, partial closure, landfill gas system expansion, and associated infrastructure and utility work. SWDD shall further define their requirements of the project. This subtask includes a site visit by the CONSULTANT to observe pertinent site features and conditions. CONSULTANT will prepare and distribute meeting minutes. Subtask 1.2 Previous Design Due Diligence CONSULTANT will collect and review available existing data and information already obtained including as•built/record drawings, site surveys, previously performed design calculations, analysis, drawings, permits and applications, and reports that were prepared by SWDD's previous engineering consultant and their subconsultants for both the cell expansion, partial closure, and landfill gas expansion portions of the project. Upon review of available existing data, CONSULTANT will prepare a data request letter for any additional data that is needed and submit it to SWDD for assistance with obtaining the additional data. If the requested additional data is not available, CONSULTANT will provide a list to SWDD to determine the appropriate manner to obtain it, which may include an amendment to this Work Order. Subtask 1.3 Survey CONSULTANT will subcontract with Masteller, Moler & Taylor, Inc. (MMT) to collect detailed field and topographic survey information necessary to refine the existing permit designs of the proposed Segment 3 Cell 2, the proposed partial closure and landfill gas system expansion of Segment 2, and the associated infrastructure and utility work. MMT will also confirm the depth of cover over the existing Segment 1 and Segment 2 closure caps at the points of tie-in, and collect the geotechnical investigation auger boring locations. This subtask includes obtaining survey information in the area where the proposed leachate pump station will be located. CONSULTANT will assist MMT in the field with confirming the depth of cover over the existing caps. This proposal does not include any field verification activities other than those specifically defined in the task. Subtask 1.4 Geotechnical Investigation CONSULTANT will perform a review of the Segment 3 expansion geotechnical reports, analyses, and data that were prepared by SWDD's previous engineering consultant and their subconsultants. This includes checking and verifying the _ previously_perfor_med_settlement,_bear_ing_capacity, and_global_stability_analy_ses.^—__ This proposal assumes that there are no major issues with the previously prepared and approved geotechnical design, and that the previous analyses will not have to be performed again. If additional analysis is determined to be required, CONSULTANT reserves the right to seek additional compensation. A-2 j12046 Eahibits.dom P437 CONSULTANT will also perform an additional geotechnical site investigation for the partial closure portion of this project consisting of hand auger borings on the proposed Segment 2 partial closure area to confirm the thickness and type of the existing intermediate cover material. CONSULTANT will subcontract with Keller, Schleicher and MacWilliam (KSM) Engineering and Testing to perform an estimated total of up to 25 auger borings. CONSULTANT will stake all the expected boring locations in the field before KSM Engineering and Testing arrives at the site. Once the samples have been collected and classified in the field, they will be placed in appropriate sample containers for transport to a geotechnical laboratory. Up to 12 of the collected samples will be tested in the geotechnical laboratory and evaluated by a professional geotechnical engineer licensed in the State of Florida to determine the nature of the intermediate cover (e.g., particle size, plasticity, and organic content). The proposed number of hand augers and laboratory tests are based on the anticipated variability of the composition of the intermediate cover material. This information will be logged on the existing topographic survey and used during final cover and slope stability design. This subtask also includes one SPT boring to 30 -feet below grade at the location of the proposed Segment 3 leachate pump station, SPT sampling will be performed continuously within the top 10 -feet, and then at 5 -feet intervals thereafter. The boring will be field located based on the boring location plan provided by CONSULTANT. Four grain size analyses will be performed and a boring log with laboratory data will be provided. Based on the results of the evaluation, an engineering design memo will be prepared that includes the following: ■ Summary of previous geotechnical investigations and available data; ■ Results of the additional testing performed; ■ Logs of the test holes; ■ Diagram of the site/boring layout; ■ Veneer slope stability analyses; ■ Geocomposite drainage transmissivity analyses; ■ Global slope stability analyses; and ■ Settlement analyses. Subtask 1.5 Initial Coordination with the Florida Department of Environmental Protection This subtask includes the initial coordination with FDEP to discuss the procedure to notify them of the intent to finalize design and construct the previously permitted cell expansion and confirm permitting or notification of the final design and construction of the Segment 2 partial closure and landfill gas expansion. CONSULTANT will prepare for and attend a telephone conference with SWDD and FDEP. Results of this initial coordination will be used to define the regulatory ---,--,-support/-permitting-assistance services,that will_be_needed_and_performed_under_a_ subsequent phase of this project. Included in this subtask are discussions of what will be required for the Environmental Resource Permit and NPDES permit. CONSULTANT will prepare and distribute meeting minutes after the conference call. A-3 jj2046 Exhiblts.doa P438 Subtask 1.6 Initial Alternative Cover Evaluation This subtask includes an initial evaluation of an alternative geosynthetic closure cover system for the partial closure of Segment 2, such as a closure turf type product/technology. The evaluation will vet the potential risks of using a closure turf type product/technology, permitting procedures, and impact on the overall schedule if this design alternative was selected by SWDD. The evaluation will include a comparison of the anticipated design, permitting, short and long-term maintenance, and construction costs. CONSULTANT will prepare a Technical Memorandum documenting the evaluation and recommendations. TASK 2 - PROJECT QUALITY MANAGEMENT Activities performed under this task consist of those generally administrative functions required to maintain the project on schedule, within budget, and that the quality of the work products defined within this scope is consistent with CONSULTANT's standards and SWDD's requirements. CONSULTANT will meet with SWDD staff as necessary for project planning and coordination. CONSULTANT's project manager will prepare and submit monthly invoices and attend status reporting meetings throughout the life of the project. It is estimated that meetings will be held on the average of once a month. Preparation of a health and safety plan, project administration, and an internalproject quality planning meeting will also be performed under this task CONSULTANT maintains a quality management system (QMS) on its projects. This task includes performing a technical specialist review on the technical reports and memos prepared by the CONSULTANT under this Work Order. ASSUMPTIONS • No design, permitting assistance, bidding assistance, and/or engineering services during construction are included in this Work Order. Subsequent phases of this project will include these services. • SWDD will provide all available existing data, as-built/record drawings, site surveys, previously performed design calculations, analysis, drawings, permits and applications, and reports. • All previously performed design calculations, analysis, drawings, and reports that were prepared by Geosyntec Consultants or their subconsultants as part of, and/or referenced in, the 20 -Year Renewal Permit Application and Drawings (dated September 2015), are complete, sufficient, accurate,'and do not require any revisions/corrections. If CONSULTANT determines that the previously prepared design calculations, analysis, drawings, and reports are incomplete or require revisions/corrections, CONSULTANT reserves the right to seek additional compensation. • No sinkhole evaluation is included in this Work Order. It is assumed that this was addressed during the 20 -Year Renewal Permit Application process. • New survey will be obtained of the area where the proposed leachate pump station will be-constr-uctionrHowever, the existing -survey along•the route -of -the proposed -6 -inch— -- leachate forcemain is assumed to be sufficient. If it is determined that additional survey is needed along this route, it will be added under the next phase/work order. • CONSULTANT reserves the right to seek additional compensation for work performed, as agreed to by SWDD, beyond what is described in this Work Order. A-4 h2046_Exh1bits.docx P439 • CONSULTANT and subcontractors shall have access to the site for field investigations, surveying, and the geotechnical investigation. • The initial alternative cover evaluation does not include a detailed technical analysis or any design calculations. PROJECT SCHEDULE The following preliminary project schedule has been developed based on authorization for Work Order No.1 being received by July 18, 2017. Milestone Completion Date Work Order No. 1 Authorized July 18, 2017 Receive Notice to Proceed July 25, 2017 Initial Meeting and Site Visit August 4, 2017 Data Collection and Review August 25, 2017 Initial Coordination With FDEP August 25, 2017 Survey September 22, 2017 Geotechnical Design Memo October 13, 2017 *Project schedule will be dependent on field activities and receipt of laboratory results. Schedule will be adjusted accordingly. PAYMENT AND COMPENSATION Compensation for this Work Order No. l described herein shall be made in accordance with the Contract between SWDD and CONSULTANT on the basis of a lump sum. The Lump Sum amount for this Work Order No.1 is $131,820. CONSULTANT will submit monthly invoices for services rendered in accordance with this Contract. Payments for the Scope of Services described in this Work Order shall be made based on the percentage of work completed. A-5 JJ2046_Exhibits.do" P440 EXHIBIT B-1 ESTIMATED LABOR HOUR REQUIREMENTS INDIAN RIVER COUNTY LANDFILL SEGMENT 3 EXPANSION, SEGMENT 2 PARTIAL CLOSURE, AND LANDFILL GAS SYSTEM EXPANSION PHASE I - MEETINGS, DATA COLLECTION, SURVEY,'AND GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION B-1 VRu6 c.aau.aov Officer Officer Associate Principal Senior professional Professional 11 Professional Sr. Technical Expert Senior -Support Services Staff Document Support Services control Specialist e Hours By Task Task 1- Meetings, Data Coilection,'Survey, and Geotechnical investigation Subtask 1.1 Meeting and Site Vrgti 4 0 4 0 6 6 fi 4 0 0 2 32 Subtask'S.Z Previous Design Due 0111gence 0 0 2 10 20 30 30 2 2 4 4 104 Subtask 1.3 Survey 0 0 2 4 16 4 16 0 2 6 2 S2 Subtask 1.4 Geatechnical investigation 8 2 2 24 16 120 16 2 0 0 8 198 Subtask 1.5 Initial Coordination with FDEP 0 0 4 1 0 4 4 4 0 0 0 2 18 Subtask 1.6 Initial Alternative Cover Evaluation 2 2 10 4 10 10 30 2 0 0 2 72 Subtotal= 1 14 4 24 42 72 174 102 10 4 10 20 475 Task 2- Project Quality Management) 4 0 48 0 0 0 0 8 0 0 8 68 1 Total= 18 4 72 42 72 174 102 IS 4 10 ZB 544 B-1 VRu6 c.aau.aov EXHIBIT B-2 BUDGET PROJECT: Indian River County Landfill Segment 3 Expansion, Segment 2 Partial Closure, and Landfill Gas System Expansion Phase 1- Meetings, Data Collection, Survey, and Geotechnical Investigation PROJECT DESCRIPTION: As Outlined in the Scope of Services, Attachment A REFERENCE: Agreement between Indian River County Solid Waste Disposal District and CDM Smith Inc. Labor Category Hours Rat& Labor Sr. Officer 18 $240 $4,320 Officer 4 $230 $920 Associate 72 $215 $15,480 Principal 42 $210 $8,820 Senior Professional 72 $175 $12,600 Professional II 174 $140 $24,360 Professional I 102 $120 $12,240 Senior Technical Expert 18 $235 $4,230 Senior Support Services 4 $130 $520 Staff Support Services 10 $95 $950 Document Control Specialist8— $90 $2,520 TOTAL HOURS 544 TOTAL LABOR COST $86,960 OUTSIDE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES Survey $17,380 Geotechnical $18,150 Regulatory $3,850 $39,380 ,OTHER DIRECT COSTS $5,480 (Prints, field supplies, field safety equipment, field vehicle, etc.) TOTAL PROJECT AMOUNT (LUMP SUM) $131.820 RON jj2046_Exhibits.duu P442 Traditional Recycling Opportunities & Options SWDD Board Meeting July 18, 2017 VER O G2 kessler consulting inc. in -t' Cwastr s4xi ns Indian River County WILL NOT reach State 75% Recycling Goal by 2020!* * The current programs are not sufficient to reach the goal. ��,E�RgCO .�c) kesslerconsultin inc. 7-15.17 15.13.6. 4-4a<1 2016 Objective Identify traditional recycling 75% approaches to assist in 53% striving to achieve the State 75% recycling goal STATE Today's Meeting 2020 • Recap actions to date • Identify opportunities Review approaches in other counties • Options for Indian River County State Goal & County Progress Year State Goal County Recycling Rate 2012 40% by December 31, 2012 37% 2013 Same as above 37% 2014, 50% by December 31, 2014 36% 2015 Same as above 34% 2016 60% by December 31, 2016 53% 2018 70% by December 31, 2018 TBD 2020 75% by December 31, 2020 TBD �!cti•c�t' 4 kessler consulting Inc. 4 LI -2- 2 2014 Master Plan Update Phase 1 Recommendations • Carted single stream recycling • Weekly garbage collection • Recycling program coordinator • Expanded public outreach ➢ 51% increase in residential recyclables with Us...RECYCLE� �•-,?�? kessler consulting inc. 5�.k 2014 Master Plan Update Phase 1 Recommendations • RFI to explore high diversion processing technologies • 12 submittals - broad range of technologies ➢ Explore traditional recycling approaches �tttF.It CQ ,« e- kessler consulting inc. 6 w 4-4)-- 3 Annual State Solid Waste Reporting • Less than perfect system • Certified recycling - processors report to DEP by county of origin • Non -certified recycling - counties find on their own • Traditional recycling vs. energy credits ➢ Focus on traditional recycling ��tF.RCO kessler consulting inc. SWDD 2016 FDEP REPORT 7,893.E r 2% 36,783 ,9% € POTENTIALLY RECYCLABLE 162+644: 47% 212,568 3- 59.°l0 g Total = 419,888 Tons m Landfill a Recycled a Renewable Energy a Stockpiled C Q� kessler consulting inc. 4�c" 4 Recycling in Charlotte County 59%(2015) • C&D recycling - 58% of recycling rate • Concrete (non -certified) - vast majority of C&D recycled • Single stream conversion • Education ➢ —30% recycling rate without concrete l_e6 kessler consulting inc. Recycling in Sarasota County 59% (2015) • C&D recycling - 65% of recycling rate • C&D recycling ordinance • C&D recycling at County facility • Concrete - —60% of C&D recycled • Mandatory residential recycling - SF & MF� W v • Mandatory commercial. recycling • Technical assistance ' • Education kessler consulting inc. 10 mnwr.-...nurt�da•.;nm Recycling in Alachua County 48%(2015) • C&D recycling - 39% of recycling rate • Pay -as -you -throw (1994) • Mandatory commercial & multi -family recycling • Mandatory separate yard waste collection • Technical assistance • Education Recycling in Lee County 46% (2015) • C&D recycling - 38% of recycling rate • Mandatory C&D recycling • C&D recycling at County facility • Mandatory commercial & multi -family recycling • Technical assistance • Education � ��r_ kessler consulting inc. kessler consulting inc. 12 Y- 6 IRC Waste Generation - C&D Recover 100,526 Snapshot in Time Renewable Energy. Credit, 7,893 RES Paper& Containers, 13,349 MF Pape, & Containers, 8,450 COMM Paper Containers 11,474 Other Recyclables, 7,179 _C&D Debris • Potentially Recyclable, 55,706 _Other Waste, 37,569 Other Compostables, 12,450 Veg waste Recovered, ---COMM Yard & Food 63,277 Waste, 7,918 MF Yard & Food Waste, 3,851 Recycled/Reused, 48,765 mulch Stockpiled RES Yard & Food 1. ... Waste, 15,576 IRC Recycling Opportunities C&D Debris RES Pape, S Renewable Energy Containers, 13,349 I)AF Paper & Credit, 7,893 Contafners,8,450 COMMPaper& Containers, 12,474 C&D Rec vere 100,526 other Recyclable, 7,179 C&D Debris Potentially 41— Recyclable, 55,706 _'W ... Waste, 37,56 ,?ty_ Other Compostables, 12,450 Vag Waste Recovered_, 63,277 Recycled/Reused, 48,765 Mulch Stockpiled; &----CofOM Yard & Food D� Waste, 7,918 MF Yard & Food Waste, 3,851 RES Yard 9 food Waste, 15,576 14 4 q2,7 1s IRC Recycling Opportunities Oraanics RES Paper & Renewable Energy _* Containers, 13,349 Credit, 7,893 •\ C&D RecoverAt. 100,526 MF Paper & Containers, 8A50 COMM Paper & Containers, 11,474 { ` Other Rerydable 7,179 Debris Potentially Recyclable, 55,706 Other Waste, 37,51 \�• Other Compostables \;... _12A50 Veg Waste Recovered,/ 63,277 Recycled/Reused, rr 48,765 Mulch Stot COMM Yard & Food Waste, 7,918 MF Yard & Food Waste, 3,851 RES Yard & Food Waste, 15,576 16 Est. Diversion Level'of IApproach Est. Cost Staffing Potential Acceptance Private Minimal Minimal 16% High concrete recycling Contract for $0 cap cost 0.1 FTE —50% of High unless tip C&D recovery $25-35/ton C&D fee increased (up to 7%) Construct $1.0-1.5M 6-10 FTE —50% of High unless tip 'C&D recovery cap cost C&D fee increased line $20-30/ton (up to 7%) 1s IRC Recycling Opportunities Oraanics RES Paper & Renewable Energy _* Containers, 13,349 Credit, 7,893 •\ C&D RecoverAt. 100,526 MF Paper & Containers, 8A50 COMM Paper & Containers, 11,474 { ` Other Rerydable 7,179 Debris Potentially Recyclable, 55,706 Other Waste, 37,51 \�• Other Compostables \;... _12A50 Veg Waste Recovered,/ 63,277 Recycled/Reused, rr 48,765 Mulch Stot COMM Yard & Food Waste, 7,918 MF Yard & Food Waste, 3,851 RES Yard & Food Waste, 15,576 16 17 IRC Recycling Opportunities MSW - Commercial & Multi -Family RES Paper & Renewable Energy, Containers, 13,349 MF Paper & Credit, 7,893 I Containers, 8,450 COMM Paper & Containers, 11,474 C&D Recovered,, f` r 100,526 _Other Recyclables 7,179 pff }�! S�t7Fr _C&D Debris Potentiagy j Recyclable, 55,706 ' „Other Waste, 37,568 0' ms Other Compostables, POTENTIALLT —_•� X12,450 l / F 'r Vag Waste Recovered,/ -COMM Yard & Food 63,277 —_ tir'_rWaste, 7,918 MF Yard & Food Waste, 3,851 Recycled/Reused,.% RE5 Yard & Food 48,765 Mulch Stockpiled, 25,905 Waste, 15,576 18 LP3'9 A .. .. Potential; Recycle ' Minimal � 5 Minimal ' High. High K �stoc"kpilecl' :� •��� '�(°.�?%��; . Universal Minimal Minimal Moderate Moderate collection in USA Require$x15=20k. 2' c eF3 2'a W 0.2xFTE a��- �Highrif rnfoM. ' Moderate, separate yard . Education & enforced waste % enforcement 00: ' Commercial $25-50k; 0.5 FTE Moderate if High food waste . need voluntary collection processing (-1%) �Co�mpos�ting,; $20-40/.to,n°• 0 ,�F�TE;� See�abo.ve High system A depending,on � �who�o erates 17 IRC Recycling Opportunities MSW - Commercial & Multi -Family RES Paper & Renewable Energy, Containers, 13,349 MF Paper & Credit, 7,893 I Containers, 8,450 COMM Paper & Containers, 11,474 C&D Recovered,, f` r 100,526 _Other Recyclables 7,179 pff }�! S�t7Fr _C&D Debris Potentiagy j Recyclable, 55,706 ' „Other Waste, 37,568 0' ms Other Compostables, POTENTIALLT —_•� X12,450 l / F 'r Vag Waste Recovered,/ -COMM Yard & Food 63,277 —_ tir'_rWaste, 7,918 MF Yard & Food Waste, 3,851 Recycled/Reused,.% RE5 Yard & Food 48,765 Mulch Stockpiled, 25,905 Waste, 15,576 18 LP3'9 - - `, � 7bCy, `-,��"���...� % ••-,�,_ d.K'` ..moi, ? , MI As MOWi l I'C mmerc'ial,' �M n al�'-: No additionaL&,,De �,oe' uilingeplement:. n Technical $50-100k 0.5 FTE Low- • High assistance Moderate (1-2%) Maa�ry�200k � ,� 1.�FT•'�E, H ghif- Lo Hig �• '` ,commercial 19 10 � ����Edueation & enforced; x. ��recycling,enfor£cement t(2�3%) 19 10 Summary of Key Approaches Target Ai;hes__ Practical Increase in Overall Recycling— Relative Cost and Resources C&D • Concrete recycling • 2% • Low • C&D recovery system • 5% • Moderate -High Organics • Use stockpiled mulch • 7% • Low • Universal collection in USA • Unknown • Low • Education on separate • 1-2% • Low yard waste from trash • Commercial food waste • 1-2% • Moderate, collection requires proc. • Composting system • See above • Moderate -High Commercial • Building code amendment • Unknown • Low Recyclables • Technical assistance • 1-2% • Low • Mandatory commercial • 2-3% • Moderate recycling Residential • Building code amendment • Unknown • Low Recyclables • Expanded E&O • 1% • Low • MF technical assistance • 1% • Low • Mandatory residential • 3% • Moderate recycling 21 lcn� innovative waste solutions TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM DATE: April 7,2017 TO: RimanshuMehta, Managing Director Indian River County Solid Waste Disposal District FROM: Robin Mitchell, Project Manager SUBJ; Traditional Recycling Opportunities and Approaches �����L00;73-O5.O 1. INTRODUCTION The purpose of this memorandum is to identify traditional and demonstrated recycling approaches that will assist Indian River County (County) |nstriving toachieve the State recycling goal. Table 1provides ' the various tiers of the State recycling goal and the County's reported recycling rate for each year. The (_ County came close to meeting the 2012 State goal, but failed to achieve the 2014 or 2016 goals. Table 1: Florida Recycling Goal and Indian River County Recycling Rate 2012 40Yo by December 31, 2012 37% 2013 Same as above 37% 2014 SO% by December 31, 2014 36Y6 201S Same as above 34% 2016 60% by December 31, 2016 37% 2018 70% by December 31, 2018 TBD 2020 75% by December 31, 2020 TBD |n2014, Kessler Consulting, Inc. (KCI) was part ofateam that developed an update to the County's Solid Waste Management Plan. Aapart nfthat update, KO developed three phases mfrecycling 'Phased approach isprovided inAttachment 1ofthis memorandum. The Solid Waste Disposal District (SVVDD)has implemented orinitiated several of -the Phase 1 recommendations, including hiring h coordinator, converting stream — and expanding puicoutreach onrecycling. These changes increased the quantity or residential recyclables by approximately 51%. Because residential waste representsonly aportion of waste generated in the County, the impact on the countywide recycling rate was only about 2-3%. wozuw.Nebraska me,Bldg, D,Tampa, rLsa6o|Tel: x/3yuz.8»o|Fax: a/ay//.85nz| Traditional Recycling Opportunities and Approaches 14/7/2oz |pa.geao[no The County also issued aRequest for Information (RFUonMay 22,2O16toexplore the viability nf processing technologies that achieve high material recovery rates. This was also a Phase 1 recommendation |nthe Management Plan Update. |nJuly 2O16,the County received 12submittals in response to the RFI that offered a range of technologies, including mixed waste processing, gasification, pyrolysis, and bionn!idoand organics processing. Following a briefing on the RFI results during a September 13, 2016 meeting, the SWDD Board of Directors decided not to proceed with a Request for Proposals (RFP), but instead requested SWDD staff to look at traditional recycling programs implemented in Florida counties with high recycling rates, including the costs and resources to implement such programs and associated waste diversion. SWDD requested KCI's assistance in compiling this information and identifying traditional recycling options for consideration by the SWDD Board of Directors. The results of this work are summarized in this memorandum. 2. FLORIDA COUNTY DATA ANALYSIS AND RESEARCH KCI analyzed Florida Department ofEnvironmental Protection's (FDEP)2O1Srecycling data bycuuntyz Before discussing this data, we offer aword of caution. Solid waste professionals throughout the State acknowledge that the accuracy ofthis data is less than perfect. Itbbased onself-reporting bycounties and facilities, the latter of which must make determinations regarding the county of origin for the materials it manages. Some counties also seek out existing reuse and recycling activities that are not reported to FDEP (non -certified recycling), especially for heavy materials such as concrete, in order to boost their recycling rates. While FDEP makes an effort to cross-check data, it is not a perfect system. It is, however, the current system used by FDEP to measure progress toward recycling goals. |n2015,mmcounty had atraditional recycling rate exceeding 60%and only nine counties had an overall recycling rate exceeding 60%.2 Six ofthese nine counties have waste -to -energy facilities and the other / \ three counties received recycling credits for landfill gas recovery nrother renewable energy. This discussion focuses nntraditional recycling rates (not including energy recovery cne6ts)'|nZU1S 20 counties had rates exceeding 40% and only 10 of those counties exceeded 50%. As noted in Table 2 (see next page),construction anddemolitiondebris({&D) contributed as much asG[%and onaverage of 36% of all materials recycled in the 20 counties with the highest traditional recycling rates. Other material streams contributing high percentages to the recycling rates were yard trash and process fuel.' Combined, these three material streams (C&D, yard trash, and process fuel) represented as much as O0&andanovenaQeof57Y6ofmateda|svecydedinthesemountkas.|nfactforthneeofthefourcountiey repmtinQthah|ghestneqc|io8rotes,thesethroematoha|streamsrepnesente6mumethan7596mfa|| tons recycled in2D1S. Fo,cumpahyonpurposes, Table 2also includes Indian R��er{�un�Yardtrashandpmoo�sfue| contributed 64% of the total tonnage of material recycled in 2015, but C&D recycling lagged far behind compared to most of the top 20 counties. While other material streams certainly contributed to the necycling rates in these counties, this analysis demonstrates the role of C&D, yard trash, and process fuel �nachieving high recycling rates. IFD[Phad hotY6tpDbU§hedZ016data b¢thetWe of,qPortp��8mt��' , ���m���� �T��umn�i��cn��^��9vo in�ud����v��p�u���c��Y�9v�������f�����Y�v�__'__-----__ credits. sFDEP defines process fuel as the use of yard trash, other clean wood waste, orpaper waste to produce alternative clean - burning fueb,urhas ethanol v,mconvert these materials to clean -burning fuel for the production of energy for use at facilities other than awamem*nenmfacility. kessler consulting Inc. ^TT° /'��/J-� / Traditional Recycling Opportunities and Approaches 14/7/2017 1 Page 3 of 20 ! Ji2 - Florida Coundas High -es J adi ion:!l 'F-acvdii!_ "',et as in 2015 Note: Indian River County's overall recycling rate was 3476, but the traditional recycling rate (not including energy recovery credits) was 33%. KCI surveyed five of the top 20 counties to identify the programs and policies that contributed to the recycling rate in each. This included the two counties reporting the highest traditional recycling rates in 2015 (Charlotte and Sarasota), St. Lucie County because of its proximity to Indian Rivers County, and two counties selected by KCI based on their note -worthy programs (Alachua and Lee). Table 3 provides a summary of the key findings of this survey. Additional information regarding specific programs and policies are included as case studies in appropriate sections of this report. All case study information provided in this report is based on information provided by the respective government personnel or obtained by reviewing contracts or other available information. kessler consulting inc. innovative wast,! solutions 1/? ,cim;"R.: o: C bn; Op•uons Ti -.1 F .,i 442-/y CT �!!.r.(�li�ifoli�.l �',�I'�l!'1'�•6�.+�. ii1• e x� la"+.•�a1c:E ��.I�r�,i=fes•=.i�';Car�t;• Charlotte 5_9% 58% 24_% 0% __.--------------- 82% ---___...----- Sarasota �---.._59/ 0 ---65�-----•-------....--------..__.._......_-- 0 0 12/ ----- 0/----... 0 --------...- 77% ._ ....--- - — ----- -- Brevard -------------- 58% -------._.._�.-- 31% 36% 17% 84% Martin 58% 14% 3% 36% 52% Collier 56% 34% 38% 0% 72% St. Lucie 54% 23% 21%5% -------- ----------- .--- --- 49% -----.... -- ----.._.._......_. Orange -----.._ .. 52% _ .._-....._..................._.........._._.-..._... 50% 6% 0% 55% Pinellas 52% 53% 18% 0% 71% Citrus 51% 10% 16% 0% 25% Leon 51% 64% 2% 6% - ---... _--- - 71% ---.._-_.._._.—......... 49% - ...--_-.... ......... --._...._...._-._.. .......... -. _ 8% �-------- 0% _---- 52% - - _Hillsborough Alachua 48% ----�- _44% 39% -- 27% - 0% 66% Duval 47% 36% 13% Manatee 47% 22%19% ..._..-------- 32% - 73% _._..- - ._..._........ - ----........... .... _-... Marion - ---- -- 47% ................._._._...._..---._._... 28% _ 1491G 0% 42% Lee 46% 38% 20% 0% 58% Broward 43% 66% 2% 0% 68% Madison 43% 1% 2% 0% 3% Palm Beach 42% 43% 5% 16% 64% Putnam 42% 0% 21% 0% 21% Average 50% 36% 15% 6% 57% Indian River 33% 6% 30% 27% 64% Note: Indian River County's overall recycling rate was 3476, but the traditional recycling rate (not including energy recovery credits) was 33%. KCI surveyed five of the top 20 counties to identify the programs and policies that contributed to the recycling rate in each. This included the two counties reporting the highest traditional recycling rates in 2015 (Charlotte and Sarasota), St. Lucie County because of its proximity to Indian Rivers County, and two counties selected by KCI based on their note -worthy programs (Alachua and Lee). Table 3 provides a summary of the key findings of this survey. Additional information regarding specific programs and policies are included as case studies in appropriate sections of this report. All case study information provided in this report is based on information provided by the respective government personnel or obtained by reviewing contracts or other available information. kessler consulting inc. innovative wast,! solutions 1/? ,cim;"R.: o: C bn; Op•uons Ti -.1 F .,i 442-/y Traditional Recycling Opportunities and Approaches |4/7/2017|Page 4 of 20 Table 3/, Key Recycling Programs in Select Florida Counties by ow,ew*vm� Alachua 48% � 254;883 " Mandatory commercial and multi -family recycling~`source. i separadonofatleast 3reny6ables inspect aUbusinanas . � annua��educatenqnnompUontb �nexues�oapeatoffenders --` ---' i brought toenforcement board; $l2Sfine allowed but has never been � levied Mandatory separate yard trash collection | Pay-ao-ywu-thnow(PAYT)residential collection —18%*decneasminsolid waste and %S%increase |nrecycling infirst year implemented (1994) Education and outreach; Tools for Schools Charlotte Sg% 167,141 ° Concrete recycled for road projects — County sought non -certified recycling tonnage and identified 126,0DOtons ofconcrete and other � materials recycled inroad projects with noCounty involvement ' (represents nearly half ofall recycled material |n2U1S) Conversion tocarted single stream recycling ° Education and outreach Lee 46% 665,845 ^Mandatory C&Orecycling —yWatedobKAanagementPlan required ! ' prior to work; diversion fees must be paid if 50% diversion not achieved ���COm�be��e��D���|r��d|��mu�me� � . . � minimum 50&diversion ([&Drepresents 38%ofrecycled material) Mandatory commercial recycling — must recycle mtleast 1racyduhhe making uplargest portion ofwaste stream; compliance inspections ! (~1,2DD/year);Advance Disposal Fee (ADF)of$10D'5ODmay belevied | for non-compliance but -has never been used; 90%compliance . ° Mandatory multi -family recycling — requires onsite recycling program foe recyclable paper and containers, white goods, and electronics; | � |nspectionm;fines ofupto$5O0allowed but never levied; 100% compliance kessler consulting Inc. innovative waste solutions ` Total SW: Personnel '$33M Operations -$17.4K8 Recycling: MRF -$2.3M Waste Alternatives: Enforcement -$7SOOO E&O'$325,000 Admin -S37Sl0O Total SW: Sanitation -$14SKx Landfill - $27.1M Recycling: Collection -$3.2M Estimated Recycling - $2.6Kn(includes MRF capital &operating ^§s;� G6 - FTE Total 1OFTE -MRF SFTE-VVoste Alternatives 31 — FTE Total 1.7FTE ' Recycling 96 - FTE Total 1FTE -MRF 6FTE 'C&D 4FTE -compost 2FTE — recycling E&O SPTE ' inspections mc//m,^,*.^w/.0 Traditional Recycling Opportunities and Approaches 14/7/2017 1 Page S of 20 i a Conversion to carted single stream recycling -22% increase in residential recyclables after conversion; >90% participation o County owned and operated C&D recycling facility -45% recycled; 1; represented <10% of total C&D recycled (remainder by private companies) l; o Education and outreach Sarasota 5 11 9% 392,090 o Mandatory C&D recycling — requires all mixed C&D dispensed within Total 5W: unincorporated county be delivered to any C&D recycling facility Personnel - $2.3M (C&D represents 65% of recycled material) Operations - $34.3M o Mandatory residential recycling — estimates 66% of residential waste Estimated Recycling: is recycled; includes all multi -family properties Personnel - $211,035 o Mandatory commercial recycling — estimates 90% of unincorporated Operations - $175,600 county businesses in compliance; compliance inspections (^'1,100/year); educate businesses not in compliance and re -inspect; never issued a fine, but occasionally code enforcement inspects t o C&D recycling contractor at County facility —38% recycled; recycled represented <5% of total C&D rec remainder b p y ( y private companies) o Education and outreach —delivers E&O materials to multi -family ' property manager to distribute to tenants E' o Green Business Partnership certification program — county does not believe this program had a significant impact St. Lucie 54% 287,749 o C&D recycling contractor at county facility Total SW: c Education and outreach — recycling challenge in 2014 periodically Personnel - $4.51VI awarded $100 to residents recycling right; distributed ^'$5,000/month Operations - $13.1M Recycling: NA Note: Information provided in this table is based on information provided by county staff or found on county websites. Key: E&O = Education and Outreach FTE = Full -lime Equivalents LF = Landfill MRF =Material Recovery Facility NA = Not Available PTE = Part -Time Employee SW = Solid Waste TS = Transfer Station WTE = Waste -to -Energy i icessler consulting inc. innovative waste solutions 34 - FTE Total (LF, etc.) 2.5 FTE - Recycling 72 - FTE Total (LF, MRF, etc.) 22 FTE - MRF 2 FTE — tecycline E&O IIM120 17 Rri;rhng/1I9.jI :Ipwur i- :d. Traditional Recycling Opportunities and Approaches 1 4/7/2017 1 Page 6 of 20 Table 3 also provides budget and staffing information for each county. Because of the range of services included and differences in the types of facilities each county owns and/or operates, caution should be used when making comparisons. SWDD's FY 2017 budget is $13.1 million, with $6.7 million earmarked for convenience centers and recycling activities. Of this, approximately $240,000 is for recycling education and outreach. SWDD employs 10 FTE, one of which focuses on recycling efforts. 3. INDIAN RIVER COUNTY RECYCLING OPPORTUNITIES To identify the greatest recycling opportunities in Indian River County, KCI used SWDD's 2016 facility tonnage data, 2016 data reported to FDEP, and results of the 2014 waste composition study. By opportunities, we mean where the largest quantities (tons) of potentially recyclable materials exist that might be feasible to recover. Figure 1 depicts the 37% of materials that were recycled in 2016 and also provides a breakdown of the types and sources of materials that were landfilled. The quantities and types of waste generated can vary greatly year over year, therefore, this figure is provided merely as a planning tool. It depicts the estimated composition of waste generated within the County at a given point in time. Figure 1: Materials Management in Indian River County,2016 (% by weight) C&D Recovered, Recycled/Recovered 37% 8,153,3% Recycled/Reused, Disposed: 63% I 38,088,12% Recyclable Paper & Containers 11% Other Recyclables 2% Compostables 20% RES Paper & Containers, Recyclables C&D Debris 9% Ak All Other Materials 21% = 13,349,4% MF Paper & Containers, Veg Waste Recovered,' ' d A}'� a `yY '" ; y►��\ 8,450,3% 71,170,22% I,:ti �'�a ro COMM Paper & Containers, 11,474, 4/ ?•�,, •�'T; -� : .� fY•3.s 1`n�iii�~'dI' .f,"- nb°°° v°ePe ° °a9 iV._•�...a..= �°� •, �t.. , :� o ° o Other Recyclables, _ 7,179, 2% Mulch Stockpiled, �'"%r' C&D Debris Potentially 25,905,8% r +'•' ,"� Recyclable, 27,853,9% ♦ 1p • , °, RES Yard & Food Waste, 15,576,5% 7 ion I !•.•+ r lion LOther C&D Debris, MF Yard & Food Waste, ' ;' /� 27,853,9% 3,851, 1% f COMM Yard & Food Waste, I 7,918,2% Other Compost Ibles, Other Waste, 37,568, 12,450; 4% 12% RES = Residential MF = Multi -family COMM = Commercial Source: This figure was developed based on data co'mpjled by SWDD and provided by FDEP. The breakdown by source and material type was based on results of a 2014 waste composition study conducted by KCI for SWDD and adjusted to account for Implementation of single stream recycling. Other Recyclables includes electronics, polystyrene, ferrous and nonferrous metals, and white goods. Icessler consulting inc. inno-:ativc rastc solutions l Traditional Recycling Opportunities and Approaches 14/7/2017 1 Page 7 of 20 Based on Figure 1, an estimated 42% of the waste generated consisted of potentially recyclable or compostable materials that were disposed. The County does not have the programs and infrastructure in place to recover and process all of these material types, and even if it did, it is not realistic to assume that they would all be recovered. However, the greatest opportunities to increase recycling include the following: C&D — On a tonnage basis, C&D offers one of the greatest opportunities to increase the recycling rate. In 2016, SWDD received nearly 45,000 tons of mixed C&D and approximately 14,000 tons of clean concrete. An estimated 3,300 tons of this material was recycled at the SWDD facility as road base. SWDD appears to receive most of the C&D generated within the County, although IRC Recyclers, a C&D processor located near the landfill, recycled nearly 5,000 tons of C&D in 2016. Based on a visual audit of bulky waste conducted by KCI for the County in 2014 (see Figure 2), at least 50% of the C&D received at the landfill consisted of potentially recyclable materials (rock/gravel/grit, yard waste, untreated wood, cardboard, metals, and appliances). Figure 2: Visual Audit of Bulky Waste and C&D Debris (% by weight) Carpet/Padding, Rigid Plastics, \� Rock/Gravel/Grit, Drywall, 14.1%____ 26.3% Other Waste, 2.0% Treated Wood, Bagged Waste\:+ 4°, _Yard Waste, 17.0% �c 14.9/0 f r Metals/Appliances Untreated Wood, 0 1.1/o Cardboard, 1.8% 11.9% Organics — In 2016, nearly 26,000 tons of ground vegetative waste appears to have been stockpiled for future use as alternative daily cover (ADC). This material cannot be considered recycled. In addition, an estimated 27,000 tons of yard trash and food waste (approximately 8% of all waste generated in 2016) were disposed as part of the mixed residential and commercial waste streams. G Traditioha['recyclable materials =An estirrate433,000 tons of recyclable paper and containers _. (approximately 11% of.all waste.generated in 2016)_were.also disposed as.part of.the.mixed residential and commercial waste streams. This figure is estimated to have dropped by more than 4,000 tons in 2016 following implementation of residential single stream recycling. kessler consulting inc. Inno•:ative :•.asta solutions r':rl7••72'1 dv_v:(:n:f�.i=::;.� ... -..pan: i..I : �., d � Lil�-Ig Traditional Recycling Opportunities and Approaches 14/7/2017 1 Page 8 of 20 In the following sections, each of these material streams is discussed in greater detail. The potential diversion opportunity is reiterated and any applicable Florida laws regarding the material stream or generator sector is provided. This is followed by case studies of how other jurisdictions have increased recycling of each particular stream and approaches for consideration by the County. All cost estimates are based on other similar programs and are very preliminary in nature. They are subject to change based on more detailed implementation plans for any selected approaches. 4. C&D DEBRIS Opportunity: The quantity of C&D generated can fluctuate widely year to year. In 2016, nearly 45,000 tons of C&D were disposed at the SWDD landfill and nearly 11,000 tons of concrete and dirt/sod were stockpiled. Based on a 2014 visual audit, at least half of the C&D received by SWDD consisted of potentially recyclable materials. Applying this to the 2016 C&D tonnage, C&D recycling has the potential to increase the County's overall recycling rate by an estimated 9%. Florida Law: Florida law requires each county to implement a program to recycle C&D (Section 403.706(2)(b), F.S.). It further requires that, to the extent economically feasible, all C&D debris must be processed prior to disposal, either at a permitted MRF or permitted disposal facility (Section 403.707(9)(g), F.S.). Case Studies: KCI surveyed five Florida counties to identify initiatives that helped achieve a high level of C&D recycling. In two counties (Alachua and Charlotte), C&D recycling was conducted by private recyclers with no county involvement or policy driving it. The other three counties (Lee, Martin, and Sarasota) use mandates, contracted processors, and/or publicly owned facilities. Table 4 provides relevant information regarding C&D recycling mandates in Lee and Sarasota counties. Table 4: Mandatory C& D Recycling Ordinance Case Studies kessler consulting inc. innovative :vaste solutions fi.Year established 2008 2003 Requirements a Permitted projects must recycle at a All mixed C&D dispensed within least 50% of C&D generated unincorporated county must be a Materials Management Plan prior to delivered to a C&D recycling facility receiving permit a County attorney gave opinion that o Proof of recycling prior to receiving ordinance does not apply to C&D Certificate of Compliance or generated in Sarasota County but Certificate of Occupancy disposed out -of -county • C&D facilities must recycle at least 50% of materials received Enforcement a If 50% recycling.not achieved, o Written warning for first offense diversion fees imposed o Penalties starting at $200 for 2nd a Diversion fees range from $110- offense up to $500 for 41h offense $5,00 based on project type/size a Not actively enforced Compliance Reports 90% compliance Not actively enforced Diversion - -Reported 53% of C&D-recycled in 2015- Reported 76% of C&D recycled in 2015 j-- 229,172 tons).__ Staffing �l FTE _ Not actively enforced kessler consulting inc. innovative :vaste solutions Traditional Recycling Opportunities and Approaches 14/7/2017 1 Page 9 of 20 Currently, Sarasota County does not actively enforce its ordinance. Lee County has a more structured program and actively works to enforce its ordinance. They estimate that 90% of C&D projects comply and 53% of C&D was reportedly recycled in 2015. Martin and Sarasota counties contract for processing mixed C&D received at their facilities. Table 5 provides relevant information regarding these programs. Material recovery rates at the two facilities are similar (42% and 38%). The Martin County representative indicated that if they had it to do over again, they would construct the C&D processing facility themselves and contract for operation. Table 5: C&D Recycling Contractor Casa Studies . - Contractor .. h�l_L�°fll:�.�I'll if,\ij:,l;l_ R3 Recycling y ff .. .. .\ 1 a \Ce f' fla_L'• WCA Location County facility County facility Requirements c' R3 provides equipment and labor o WCA provides equipment and o Recycle at least 65% of C&D labor received o Recycle at least 50% of C&D No penalty specified for not received achieving recovery rate $2,500 penalty for each percentage point below 50%, calculated semi-annually Throughput 26,337 tons (2015) 48,597 tons (2015) Materials recovery 11,185 tons (2015) 18,686 tons (2015) Recovery rate 42% (represents 70% of total C&D 38% (represents 5% of total C&D recycled in county) recycled in county) Staffing 0.2 County FTE 0.1 County FTE 6 WCA HE & 2 temp. labor County tip fees o $42.00/ton c $48.96/ton o $8.00/cubic yard (cy) a $16.32/cy o $21.00/ton for concrete Contractor fees c $32.50/ton a Same as tip fees (pass-through e $8.00/cy to WCA) o $18.00/ton for concrete o Tiered rebate to county of e Contractor pays tip fee for C&D $1.00-2.00/ton for tonnage landfilled exceeding 2,000 TPM o County pays $2.34/ton for recovered screen material (RSM) o WCA pays tip fee for C&D landfilled Comments If county had it to do over again, Most C&D generated in county is would construct the facility and delivered to private facilities coritracfforoperation kessler consulting inc. ilmova[ne Vlas[e solutions Traditional Recycling Opportunities and Approaches 14/7/2017 1 Page 10 of 20 County -owned and -operated C&D processing facilities are not common in Florida; therefore, Table 6 provides relevant Information about one facility in Lee County, Florida, as well as a publicly owned and operated facility in Horry County, South Carolina. Table 60: Publllclycltwn�E!d and Oper-ated C,?,D 10-cycli-jig Faciiii&y Case Stild;Z3 owner& operator County; constructed 2011 HCSWA; constructed 2012 Capacity 500 TPD 72,800 TPY Throughput -50,000 TPY 14,049 tons (FY2014/15) 49,835 tons (2015) Materials recovered 22,669 tons (2015) 10,092 tons (FY 2014/15) Concrete, rubble, brick, roofing tile, Clean wood, dirt, concrete, wood, ferrous and non-ferrous cardboard, scrap metal, carpet, metals, cardboard, and select scrap plastic, mattresses/pads, plastics. May add asphalt shingles PET plastic, and aluminum to recycle into pavement Recovery rate 45% (represents -10% of total C&D 72% recycled in county) Equipment 9 Designed by Machinex - Low -technology portable e Finger screen, sorting line, system that can be moved magnetic separator, trommel around the site. screen, density separator - Trommel screen, sorting line with magnetic separator, and baler Staffing Single shift 4-5 days/week 5-10 workers 6 FTE (1 supervisor and 5 equipment operators) 13 temporary laborers (10 to sort and 3 for traffic control) Capital cost $15M, including $1.8M for $1.0M, including rolling stock equipment (trackhoe excavator, wheel loader, and skid steer) Annual costs & revenues Costs: $1.3-1.9M ($26-39/ton), Costs: $271,897 ($20.40/ton) Includes amortized equipment costs Revenue: $273,017 ($20.48/ton) Revenue: $1.SM (-$30/ton) kessler consulting Inc. innovative V)."sle solutions 4�1-Ll Traditional Recycling Opportunities and Approaches 14/7/2017 1 Page 11 of 20 Approaches: Some counties have boosted their recycling rates by identifying C&D recycling activities, especially concrete recycling, that are not reported to FDEP (non -certified recycling). While SWDD receives most of the C&D generated within Indian River County, it may be worth researching whether unreported concrete recycling is occurring. Because SWDD receives the vast majority of C&D, establishing at least a basic recovery system at the SWDD facility would be key in recycling this material. SWDD could either contract for development and operation of a processing system, or construct a processing line and then operate or contract for operation. To ensure the long-term financial viability of this investment, the County should ensure that C&D will continue to be delivered to the SWDD facility in the future. This could be accomplished through a nonexclusive license orfranchise system. If passed, recently proposed State legislation to add wood, asphalt, and concrete to the list of materials included in the legislative definition of recovered materials could Iimitthe;County's ability to direct these materials to the SWDD facility. Table 7 summarizes C&D recovery approaches that have been demonstrated to be successful in other jurisdictions and could be implemented in Indian River County. If SWDD continues to receive the vast majority of C&D generated within the County and establishes a recovery system at the SWDD ;facility, then the last approach (mandate) would not be needed. Table 7: C&D Recovery Approaches Research Private To get credit for any non- None Concrete & C&D certified recycling by Recyclers ; private companies I Contract for C&D Recovery ...... Construct C&D Recovery Line; ( Mandatory C&D I Recycling Ordinance I" To process 50,000-60,000 tons of C&D received at SWDD facility To process 50,000-60,000 tons of C&D'received at SWDD facility To require minimum recycling rate for C&D generated in County No capital costs $25-35/ton Capital cost -. $1.0-1.5M Operations - $20-30/ton No capital costs Minimal 0.1 FTE 3-5 equipment operators 5-10 sorters 1.0 FTE Icessler consulting inc. innovative waste solutions Unknown High if SWDD receives most of C&D Low -Moderate if C&D ;oes to private facilities High if SWDD receives most of C&D Low -Moderate if C&D oes to private facilities High if enforced High High unless tip fee is increased i High unless tip fee is increased Moderate public support j Low -Moderate support by generators j High support by recyclers II(Q.!bVllrcyn++G;; l?.., r, up'. u;,; r.•n: 1'. ,.; Traditional Recycling Opportunities and Approaches /4/7/20171��12 of 20 5' ORGANICS RECOVERY AND PROCESSING Opgplrtunit :|n2816 an estimated 26,000 tons of mulched vegetative waste was stockpiled for future use as ADC at the landfill. An estimated 27,00tons of yard trash and food waste (-8% ofall waste generated) were disposed at the SWDD landfill -as part of the mixed residential and commercial waste streams, amwell as about 12,000 tons of other potentially compostable materials (-4% of all waste generated) such as non -recyclable paper and clean wood waste (see Figure 1). Putting the stockpiled mulch to beneficial use would have increased the recycling rate by approximately 8%. Combining this with an expanded organics recovery and processing program has the potential to increase the County's overall recycling rate by an estimated 10-12%, depending on the program initiated. Additionally, the County receives more than 8,000 tons of sludge annually, which is currently clewatered and landfilled. Although FDEP does not count sludge as solid waste for the purposes of calculating recycling rates, establishing an organics composting system would put these blosolids to beneficial use, preserve landfill space, and eliminate the special handling of this material required on the working face. Inaddition, co -composting biosoxhdsauWyardt,axh,xviththeposs)b}eaddit|onoffoodwoste,resu|ts|na high'quaUty,marketable end product. Florida Law: Florida law bans disposal ofyard trash inClass | landfills unless (2)the landfill has mmactive gas -collection system and the landfill gas is put to beneficial use or (2) the yard trash is mulched and used oslandfill cover (4QB.7O8(12)(c),F.S.).|naddition, counties are encouraged toconsider plans for composting or mulching organic materials that would otherwise be disposed of in a landfill (403'7O6(2)(|),F'S.).Landfill gas from the SVVDDlandfill had been delivered to|NEDSwhere itwas used for energy recovery. Because the |NEOSfacility iscurrently not operational, landfill gas isnow being flared. Therefore, otherthan cle minimis amounts, yard trash should not knowingly be disposed in the SWDDlandfill atthis time. / Case Studies: Numerous Florida counties have separate collection of yard trash and have achieved \ compliance through education, making separate collection convenient through curbside service, and,in some cases, requiring separation. Food waste recycling bless common inFlorida and has generally been Initiated by the private sector - either by large food waste generators je.g., Walmart, Publix, large venues) seeking to reduce their environmental footprint or by organics processors seeking feedstock for their facilities. This was confirmed by KCI's su rvey of fou r Florida counties that reported recycling relatively high quantities of food waste. None of these counties were directly involved in the food waste recycling occurring intheir respective county (see Table 8). Table 8: Food Waste Recycling Reported inSelect Florida Counties, 2015 145 Charlotte 2,900 Private entities reporting to DEP, food bank Martin 14,496 Genuine Biofuels (11,500 tons of FOG); Viesel Fuel (used cooking oil); Walmart (food waste) Orange 20,831 Walmart, Disney, Universal Studios, Convention Center, Griffin Industries (FOG), Organic Matters (processor) 435 Private entities reporting to DEP including food -' [--Sarasota ----- '--- 'b�n��' ----~~- - -- '---'- FOG = fats, oil, and grease kessAe uessxsr consulting Inc.( m=w��esolutions U�~�� ^ � �/ ~] �/ Traditional Recyclin.- Opportuniti=_s and Approaches 14/7/2017 1 Pa.ge 13 of 20 The vast majority of Florida counties simply mulch yard trash; however, a more robust processing system is needed for food waste and biosolids. Therefore, KCI focused on relatively low-cost systems capable of co -composting yard trash, biosolids, and food waste. Because few examples exist in Florida of publicly owned composting facilities, Table 9 provides information regarding one in-state facility and one out-of-state facility that are owned and operated by public sector entities. Both facilities use the Modified Static Aerobic Pile (MSAP) composting method. KCI has worked with both facilities, as well as other clients throughout the country, in piloting the MSAP method with exceptional results. The MSAP method, developed by Harvest Quest International, relies on a proprietary microbial inoculant that expedites the composting process and minimizes turning requirements, which translates into lower operating costs. Reducing the number of turnings also controls odor better than traditional windrow composting. Table 9: Publicly Owned and Operated Composting Facilities ( kessler consulting inc. innoc, ike i•:as4' solutions yv..� acl9rl�fCi.;tCC. tU-iiy"i;tC .. , .._. . 11.0 Owner & operator Owner County ECUA Types and quantities of Yard waste ^75,000 tons/year _ Yard waste —20,000 tons/year feedstocks Food waste —5,000 tons/year Biosolids ^20,000 tons/year _ Size of the facility (total & active Total — 20 acres Total —16 acres composting area) Compost & curing —16 acres Compost & curing —9 acres Composting method MSAP MSAP Primary equipment utilized Peterson horizontal grinder Morbark tub grinder (6710D) 2 CAT loaders 2 CAT loaders Backhus windrow turner (ASS) Scarab windrow turner (16) Komptech multi -deck screen Doppstadt screen (726) (1-3) Doppstadt trommel screen (726) Staffing 14 FTEs 3 FTEs _ Capital cost Total not available: $2.5 million active pad ^'$480,000 Operating costs & revenues Annual cost: $2,504,000 Annual cost: $537,000 Annual revenue: $234,000 Annual revenue: $104,000 Net annual cost: $2,270,000 Net annual cost: $433,000 Net cost/ton: $35/ton Net cost/ton: $11/ton MSAP = Modified Static Aerobic Pile ( kessler consulting inc. innoc, ike i•:as4' solutions yv..� Traditional Recycling Opportunities and Approaches |4/7/au7|Page 14vf20 Approaches: The County has ' Programs in place for separate yard trash collection (subscription curbside collection and citizen convenience centers (�,CCs)).Establishing universal collection |othe Urban Service Area (USA) would make separate collection of yard waste more convenient to residents in the USA that do not currently subscribe for curbside service. In addition, the County could do more to educate residents and businesses that yard trash should be separated from other solid waste prior to collection or delivery to the CCCS. Toinitiate afood waste recycling program, SVVDUwill need toestablish both collection and processing in�astmodure'The /o��|coUedimnfocus should 6e|onlarge commercial food vvaxte generators. collectinglisegee gatedcommemda|foodwaute,onoUmwedfvrinthefimnchisoogneement(Smctiun11.2).|fonaccepta6|efeestructurecannotbe negotiated Section 11.2 further states that the agreement does not preclude other options for food waste diversion. The County could expand food waste collection to residents once the processing infrastructure and commercial program is established. KCI understands tha1theCuuntyhesinitiateddiucuomionsvvithAUianoetoprocesave8etativewastenhou)dthocnmpapypurchasetheproperty previously operated by INECIS. Based on our understanding, the technology they plan to use would not be conducive to processing food waste or biosoUds.The County could potentially develop a system capable of processing yard trash, food waste, and biosolids-at the SWDD facility or contract with a private vendor. Ground yard waste is needed as a bulking agent when composting these other organic materials. Table 10 summarizes organic materials recovery and processing approaches that are most likely to be successful in Indian River County. Tahle10, Organics Recovery and Processing Approaches ?� � Put stockpile materials to beneficial use r \ inUrban Service iAnaa(USA) Require separate � yard trash Commercial food -_-s=n�rx?!N�' _�°����:�n'^n-/. `�.s�p/�ym1y��e/"�� ! Toobtain recycling credit for Minimal Noextra staff High High stockpiled materials needed xoprovide all residents in Minimal Noextra staff Moderate �Moderate USA with easy access to yard needed | trash collection / Torequire separation ofyard Low 0.2 FTE High if enforced � Moderate ---` trash from solid waste E&O;enforce | To collect tood waste from Low 0.5 FTE Moderate if voluntary � High if volumtary --| iwaste collection large commercial generators i Contract for :� T000mpo�yard tn�h,food Nocap�a|co�o D'r TE — --- ' composting services waste, and biosolids $25-40/ton participation Compost system � ^ To yard ` , Capital . ��FTE Depends level of -��-��—'------ on High !SVVDD Facility waste, andbioaoUds $2.5-3,5M participation ' kessler consulting inc. innovative waste sotutions oo^w^,~°^m* ~4� � Traditional Recycling- Opportunities and Approaches ! 4/7/2017 ! Page 15 of 20 6. COMMERCIAL RECYCLING Opportunity: In 2016, an estimated 11,000 tons of commercially generated recyclable paper and containers (-4% of all waste generated) were landfilled as part of the mixed waste stream (see Figure 1). Recycling even half of this material has the potential to increase the County's overall recycling rate by an estimated 2%. Florida Law: According to Florida law, newly developed commercial property receiving a certificate of occupancy, or its equivalent, must provide adequate space and adequate receptacles for recycling by tenants and owners of the property (403.706(2)(c), F.S.). This provision applies to counties, such as Indian River County, that have established residential and commercial recycling programs. Case Studies: Table 11 provides relevant information regarding mandatory commercial recycling programs in Lee and Sarasota counties. Both counties report at least 90% compliance with the mandatory ordinance; however, neither was able to provide an accurate estimate of the increase in recycling tonnage or recycling rate resulting from the mandatory program. Lee County's program requires businesses to recycle at least one material, but they are considering expanding this to more materials to increase diversion. Table 11: Mandator/ Commercial Recycling Ordinance Case Studies kessler consulting inc. iftllu':a live l+asle solutions yyz- S� i;C(pcCl?I��(111 Year established 2007; implemented in 2008 1991 Requirements o Businesses in unincorporated county o Commercial customers in must recycle at least one material unincorporated county must (recyclable material comprising contract for pick up or deliver largest portion of waste stream) program recyclables to recycling o Fixed service fees in collection facility contracts so recycling is cheaper o Franchised collector must offer than waste collection commercial recycling service Enforcement o Compliance inspections o Compliance inspections ("'1,200/year) (^'1,100/year) 0 1" offense —warning and technical a 1" offense — warning and assistance assistance to set up program and education o Additional offenses — monthly o Additional offenses — penalties advance disposal fee (ADF) ranging ranging from $200-$500; no from $100-$500, depending on penalties assessed to date business classification; no ADFs assessed to date _ fCompliance Reports 98% compliance Reports 90% compliance I Diversion No measurement available No measurement available 1 Considering expanding to more than one material to increase diversion Staffing 2_FTE - outreach. to businesses Part. of responsibilities of 2.5 recycling 6 PTE —compliance inspectors FTEs Comments — Elected official and business groups were supportive of program kessler consulting inc. iftllu':a live l+asle solutions yyz- S� Traditional Recycling Opportunities and Approaches |4/7/2017|Page 16 of 20 Approaches The County's existing collection franchise agreement includes provisions ' that ensure recycling collection service bavailable tnall commercial businesses inthe unincorporated county. Section 83ofthe agreement requires the franchisee to encourage commercial customers torecycle and tocollect recydubless¢acost less than the collection rate charged for servicing a solid waste container of equal size and frequen 'The agreement also provides a system for SWDD to monitor participation in commercial recycling byrequiring the franchisee to providelist each month of commercialcustomersno:eiving,recydab|escoUecUnnuemime,|ndudingthecuotomernome,addnems,nontainer size, frequency ofcollection, billing rate, mndtypesofmateha|scoUected(Section12.2.2'c).Accondin0tothefranchisedhao|er,axofk4arzh 2017, 283 of the 1,431 commercial businesses in the unincorporated county receiving garbage service also contracted for recycling service. ' While a system for collecting and processing commercial recyclables is in place, the key istoincrease recycling participation bybusinesses and institutiwn'.|ncreasingpardcipadonconbeoccomp|ishedthnnughvu|untorymeonsorbyman6oteo.Ta6|e12summohzesbo1hvo(untaryond mandatory, approaches. Voluntary mea just mgen�a|kvin6udesons�e wm�emud�� p|n8in-house oo||ocDwn|o�sdc�otno|Ntprov�� in�ep'by�tepinstnucUonsform�tinguparecyd|ng program, U���fsemicepnmideo,sample education and promotion mateha|�and assbtancexv�hemployee training. While technicn|aysbe tancepno�mscanbeefex1�de^they�ena��donot achieve the dkerslonrate/ofamandatory program. Hmweve�an effective t�ch�ca|assistance program isusuaUy|nplace phortoos�b||shinQamandatory program. Au6emonut�te6inthe case studies above, amandatory program can take different forms. ' Table 12:1 'nmmnero|al Recycling Approaches �Building cc'de Torequire new yNhnimo| No additional Depends on Moderate amendment' davm|opme�stoprovide staff enforcement . ! recycling space and receptacles Commercia To encourage and assist $50-100k 0.5 FTE Low -Moderate High i Technical Assistance businesses and institutions to depending on Program recycle assistance provided I Mandatory To require and assist $100-200k I FTE Moderate -High Moderate -High public I Commercial businesses and institutions to depending on support Recycling recycle assistance and Low -Moderate support by enforcement businesses depending on i cost and assistance provided kessler consulting inc. ~ waste solutions I—A Traditional Recycling Opportunities and approaches 14/7/2017 1 Page 17 of 20 7. RESIDENTIAL RECYCLING Opportunity: In 2016, an estimated 22,000 tons of residentially generated recyclable paper and containers (-7% of all waste generated) were landfilled as part of the mixed waste stream (see Figure 1). Recycling half of this material has the potential to increase the County's overall recycling rate by an estimated 3-4%. Florida Law: As with commercial properties, Florida law requires newly developed multi -family residential property receiving a certificate of occupancy, or its equivalent, to provide adequate space and adequate receptacles for recycling by tenants and owners of the property (403.706(2)(c), F.S.). Case Studies: Table 13 provides relevant information regarding mandatory residential recycling programs in Lee and Sarasota counties. Sarasota County's mandate applies to all residential customers in the unincorporated county. Lee County's mandate applies only to multi -family residential properties because the county estimated that more than 90% of single-family residential customers were already participating in recycling. Table 13: Mandatory Residential Recycling Ordinance Case Studies KCI also considered looking at Pay -As -You -Throw (PAYT) as an option to incentivize residents to recycle by charging them for solid waste service based on the size of the cart they select. PAYT programs are not common in Florida; in fact, Alachua County is the only county that has implemented such a program. PAYT can be an effective incentive to reduce waste and increase recycling; however, it is more conducive to universal programs than the subscription system currently in place in Indian River County. Ressler consulting inc. innovative .taste colutiois t:IFli, 'xl_if!E . ' lcC°C.Lii.Vj.j Year established 2007; implemented in 2008 2006' Requirements o Multi -family residential properties a Residential customers in unincorporated must institute recycling programs county must contract for pick up or for recyclable paper, containers, deliver program recyclables to recycling white goods, and electronic devices facility a Multi -family property responsible a Multi -family property owners or agents for educating tenants on recycling must post mandatory recycling notice in all units Enforcement a Compliance inspections o Compliance inspections a V offense —warning and technical a V offense —warning and technical assistance assistance a Additional offenses—$300-$500 a Additional offenses—$200-$500 penalties allowed, but never penalties, but never assessed assessed Compliance Reports 100% compliance Most complexes in compliance Diversion No measurement available —370 pounds/unit/year Staffing Included as part of commercial staffing Part of responsibilities of 2.5 recycling FTEs KCI also considered looking at Pay -As -You -Throw (PAYT) as an option to incentivize residents to recycle by charging them for solid waste service based on the size of the cart they select. PAYT programs are not common in Florida; in fact, Alachua County is the only county that has implemented such a program. PAYT can be an effective incentive to reduce waste and increase recycling; however, it is more conducive to universal programs than the subscription system currently in place in Indian River County. Ressler consulting inc. innovative .taste colutiois Traditional Recycling Opportunities and Approaches \qj7/2017|Page 18 of 20 Approaches Through its franchise collection agreement, SWDD provides recycling collection service toall County residents, including those living in single-family and multi -family dwellings. Residents pay for this service through the solid waste assessment.8asednninfonnation provided bvthe 6anchisee,monthk/podi�potom|nthe cu�aNeprogram hasbeensoh�hns779&en6hesavora8ed54%.CoUe�adnecydab|es are received at the SWDD facility where they are transferred to a contracted recyclables processorfor separation and marketing. Therefore, a system for collecting and processing residential recyclables is in place. The key to capturing additional residential recyclables is encouraging participation in the program, both in terms of the number of residents who recycle as well as asking residents to recycle to the maximum extent (i.e., recycle all types of materials accepted in the program). As with commercial recycling, increasing participation In residential recycling canbeacromp{bhedthvmo#hvoiuntarymeansorbymandates.Tob|e14summadzeatboseapprnaches.|ftheCounty converts to universal collection in the future, a PAYT program might also be considered. Numerous examples of comprehensive education and outreach programs exist. Key features of an effective program include consistent branding ormosaa0in8./use ofmultiple media (e.g., website, video, social media, audio, print), and frequent and ongoing communications. In addition, some communities are integrating community-based social marketing (e.g., pledges,peer-to'peereducation, block leaders) into their programs toinfluence sustainable behavior change. � As with commercial recycling, an active technical assistance program is more effective for multi -family complexes then simply providing educational materials. Many of the same materials would be used, but targeted to property owners, managers, and tenants. Mandatory approaches can take different forms, and have been demonstrated by numerous studies to be more effective than voluntary approaches. Table 14: Residential Recycling Approaches To $50-100h 0.5 FTE Low -Moderate High i Technical Assistance complexes imestablishing ���� - Building code Torequire new multi -family Minimal No additional Depends on Moderate . amendment developments to provide staff enforcement Moderate -High public recycling space and receptacles specified materials depending on Expanded Education To encourage residents to Minimal No additional Low High and Outrea"Ch recycle and recycle right staff enforcement iMulti-Family To $50-100h 0.5 FTE Low -Moderate High i Technical Assistance complexes imestablishing depending on ! i Program / effective recycling programs assistance provided / Mandator To require residents to recycle $100-200k 1 FTE Moderate -High Moderate -High public Residential! Recycling specified materials depending on support assistance and Low -Moderate support by enforcement owners and managers kmssler consulting inc, Traditional Recycling Opportunities and Approaches 14/7/2017 1 Page 19 of 20 8. SUMMARY AND NEXT STEPS This report identifies key opportunities, in terms of tonnage, for Indian River County to increase its recycling rate. Approaches for targeting these opportunities or sectors are detailed in various sections of this report and summarized in Table 15 below. These approaches include programs, policies, or facilities that have been successfully implemented elsewhere. They should not be considered exhaustive, but are those considered most applicable for Indian River County. Table 15: Summary of Key Recycling approaches C&D a Research private concrete a Unknown a Low recyclers a C&D recovery at SWDD a 9% a Moderate -High facility Organics a Put stockpiled mulch to o 8% o Low beneficial use a Universal collection in USA a 1% a Low o Require separate yard trash o 2% a Low collection a Commercial food waste a 1% o Moderate, requires collection processing system a Composting system (at o Provide processing o Moderate - High _ SWDD or contracted) for above _ Commercial a Building code amendment o Unknown a Low Recyclables a Commercial technical a 1-2% a Low assistance program a Mandatory commercial o 2-3% o Moderate recycling Residential a Building code amendment a Unknown a Low Recyclables o Expanded education and a 1% o Low outreach o Multi -family technical a 1% o Low assistance program a Mandatory residential a 3-4% o Moderate Note: Potential Increase in Overall Recycling Rate and Relative Cost and Resources are preliminary estimates based on the County's 2016 tonnage data and similar programs implemented in other jurisdictions. Education and outreach is a critical component of any recycling program, but has been demonstrated to be insufficient to achieve the recycling goal established by the State. Therefore, with the exception of residential recycling; education is not defined as a stand-alone approach but is an element of any program that is implemented, _ Once the County decides which approaches to pursue, more detailed feasibility studies and/or implementation plans will need to be developed. As demonstrated by the case studies in this report, Icessler consulting inc. innovative v.-aste solutions yy� . 3'0 Traditional Recycling Opportunities and Approaches /*/7/u0n|Po.ge 20n[20 programs and policies can be structured in various ways. These studies and plans will detail program specifics and more accurately estimate the costs and resources needed for implementation. Indian River [ouoty�otscn�suoods.The County bevo�ing interms ofgrowth hompredominantly rumltoemuneurbanized community. |thas valuable solid waste assets |uits landfill and SVVDDfacility. It also receives the vast majority of waste generated within the County, giving itcontrol over how that waste is managed. Closure of the INEOS facility provides the County with an opportunity to develop a more comprehensive organics program that could potentially include food waste and biosolids. The policies, .programs, and infrastructure developed over the next few years will steer the couefuture waste minagement and determine whether a concerted effort is made to achieve the State goal. Whatever course is chosen, periodic reassessment will be needed to evaluate progress, update information, and realign priorities tostay ontrack. 417—�—�/) m V F m C �v a aj m 0 Ln0 H ul x IL Traditional Recycling- Opportunities and Approaches 14/7/2017 1 Attachment 1, Page 1 Attachment 1 Solid Waste Management Plan 2014 Update Recycling Recommendations Phase 1 Recommendations to Target 50% Recycling W ri 0 N Ln N i a, c G i= a N 0 M 0 CL Target Increase in Countywide Recycling Rate- 11%_ ate I;♦_5.`II?I�h'.'iaJe`le • 'ic(�I�hli�ilFl;Cll.'I. (St'a��l'�IclEl:li`` Inter -Local Agreements—work with the municipalities to update and execute ° to ILAs that will commit all tonnage controlled by each entity to a countywide, integrated resource and waste management system ° RFI/RFP Process—conduct an RFI/RFP process to explore the viability of processing • technologies that achieve high material recovery rates ° Renewable energy credit through INEOS—audit INEOS and ensure County is receiving the appropriate energy credit for vegetative debris processed by INEOS Curbside collection changes — convert to carted single stream recycling and weekly garbage collection as discussed in Table 6-1 (new collection agreement commences 10/1/2015) c Multi -family program — implement a comprehensive multi -family recycling program that includes technical assistance to property owners or managers ° Comprehensive public outreach — implement a strategic, comprehensive public outreach campaign a Recycling program manager — designate a full-time position to implement Program recommendations 11% • Commercial recycling at not -to -exceed service fees — in new franchise agreement, require franchisees to collect full range of commercial recyclables upon request at not -to -exceed service fees ° Monitor commercial recycling — require franchisees to report on commercial recycling activity ° Green County Program — lead by example by ensuring all County facilities and public schools have effective waste reduction and recycling programs • County Ordinance — amend to require new developments to provide for recycling as required by State law ° Small Quantity Generator (SQG) hazardous waste center - provide a center to receive SQG waste 1% kessler consulting inc. imio:a;i:•e ::•ante solution; C&D debris recycling program — implement a program to educate contractors of recycling opportunities and benefits, as required by State law 1% 11q -2 - 3_1_� Traditional Recycling Opportunities and Approaches 14/7/2017 1 Attachment 1, Page 2 Phase 2 Recommendations to Target 60% Recycling kessler consulting inc. itnovativewas•. SDIUVO.15 3 Processing technology implementation — if the RFl/RFP process results in viable technologies, then initiate implementation, which might include public-private partnerships, updated ILAs, facility permitting/construction, etc. (current recyclables processing contract expires 9/11/2017; current landfill operating contract expires 12/30/2017) The following actions may be taken to complement the selected technologies 4. Cu co 'I or in lieu of such technologies if none are deemed feasible: CD o Residential recycling p Commercial recycling o C&D debris incentives — if target program — implement a recycling incentives recycling rates are not comprehensive recycling - establish policies achieved, consider program that includes a and incentives to oincorporating E incentives, recycling toolkit with step- encourage C&D F_ such as pay -as -you -throw or by -step instructions, recycling, such as a N a) En a rewards program hands-on technical diversion fee and Ui 0 CL Residential organics assistance, and networking rebate program 3: program — once a viable opportunities composting infrastructure is o Commercial organics established, pilot the program — initiate a collection and processing of commercial organics other compostables (i.e., program, which will food waste and non- require establishing the recyclable paper) along with collection and processing yard trash infrastructure Target Increase in Countywide 2% 3% 6% Recycling Rate kessler consulting inc. itnovativewas•. SDIUVO.15 3 Target Increase in Countywide Recycling Rate Traditional Recycling Opportunities and Approaches 14/7!2017 1 attachment 1, Page 3 Phase 3 Recommendations to Target 75% Recycling 51: a Processing technology start-up — if processing technologies are implemented, initiate facility start-up and ongoing monitoring and fine-tuning to maximize recovery The following actions may be taken to complement the selected technologies or in lieu of such technologies if none are deemed feasible: • Comprehensive organics recovery program — expand organics recovery, such as through universal collection of organics from residents and businesses • Policies that drive recycling— if recycling targets are not met, consider establishing and enforcing policies that incentivize or require recycling, such as disposal bans or recycling mandates 15% l(essler consulting inc. innovative •J.'aste solutions