Item U4
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
AGENDAITEMSU~ARY
Meeting Date: 19 February 2003
Division:
Growth Management
Bulk Item: Yes No -1L.
Department"
Marine Resources
AGENDA ITEM WORDING:
Discussion of issues and potential resolutions to concerns involving the connection cost for residential and
commercial properties to Key West Resort Utility.
ITEM BACKGROUND:
At its January meeting the Board heard from commercial and residential property owners on Stock Island
concerning the cost of certain requirements for connection to Key West Resort Utility. The discussion started
during a hearing on an ordinance to amend the connection requirements in the County's "Mandatory
Connection" Ordinance and new provisions for providing a longer timeframe to pay connection fees. Staff has
had an opportunity to meet internally and with Key West Resort Utility and has some suggestions about ways to
resolve some, but not all, of the property owners concerns.
PREVIOUS RELEVANT BOCC ACTION:
January 2003 - Review and Table of an Ordinance providing the means to extend connection fees payments
CONTRACT/AGREEMENT CHANGES:
NA
STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS;
Board discussion
TOTAL COST:
None
BUDGETED: Yes
No
COST TO COUNTY:
None
SOURCE OF FUNDS:
REVENUE PRODUCING: Yes
No -1L. AMOUNT PerMonth
Year
APPROVED BY: County Atty -1L.
DIVISION DIRECTOR APPROVAL:
DOCUMENTATION: Included
DISPOSITION:
AGENDA ITEM NO.:
OJ/
BC0302120
02/03/032:37 PM
AGENDA ITEM WITH LATE DOCUMENTATION
DIVISION
DEPARTMENT
SUBJECT
AGENDA ITEM NUMBER
Memorandum
DeD.rtment ofM.riDe Resources
2798 Overseas Highway, Suite 420
Marathon, Florida 33050
Voice: (305) 289 2507
FAX: (305) 289 2536
Email: earren-!!eon!e:i1monroecountv-tl.com
Board OfCouDtv Commissioners
Mayor Dixie Spehar, Dist. I
Mayor Pro Tem Murray Nelson, Dist. 5
Commissioner George Neugent, Dist. 2
Commissioner Chlrles "Sonny" McCoy, DisL 3
Commissioner Nora Williams, Dist. 4
DATE:
19 February, 2003
TO:
Board of County Commissioners
FROM:
George Garrett, Director of Marine Resources
SUBJECT:
Update on Key West Resort Utility Matters
Introduction
Staff has made a preliminary review of issues raised by numerous property owners
concerning connection requirements to Key West Resort Utility. Based on that
review staff offers the following information and suggests that an additional month
to two months be utilized to work with the Utility on a property by property basis
to consider connection options. A recommendation on policy and specific
solutions will be provided to the Commission at either its March or April regular
meeting.
Backeround
--"....
In late July 2002 at a special meeting of the Board, the Commission approved a
Contract with Key West Resort Utilities (Utility) to expand wastewater service to
the remainder of south Stock Island not currently served by the Utility.
Construction on the expanded wastewater project area began in October 2002 and
has progressed rapidly.
At the January Commission meeting, the Commission heard from a number of
individuals, homeowners associations, and private commercial property owners
concerning connection to Key West Resort Utility. Most concerns revolved
around technical requirements (engineering related) for connection to the utility
and around the Utility and Service Agreements required by the Utility. ~
BC0302121
02119/038:00 AM
-It .L.t
Since the January Commission meeting, staff has met internally, with Key West
Resort Utility, with a number of property owners, with the Florida Keys Aqueduct
Authority, and has participated in a teleconference with the Public Service
Commission. Staff has also talked with a number of individuals in telephone
conversations about the project. The most recent meetings occurred as late as
Monday and Tuesday of this week.
Actions Since BOCC Meetine
Meetings
1. 23 January 2003 - Internal staff meeting
. George Garrett
. Dave Koppel
. Ken Williams
2. January 2003 - Meeting withBoyd's Campground
. George Garrett
. Ken Williams
. Danny Hamilton
3. 10 February 2003 -Meeting withKWRU
. George Garrett
. Dave Koppel
. Ken Williams
. Doug Carter
. John Johnson
. Chris Johnson
. Ed Castle
4. 17 February 2003 - Teleconference with Public Service Commission staff
. Ralph Jeager - PSC staff
. Other PSC staff
. Tim Keonig - Coral Hammock
. Danny Hamilton - Boyd's Campground
. Representative ??? - Hurricane Hole Marina
. Representative ??? - Carlisle Group
. Representative ??? - PropertylProject ???M. Commissioner Nelson
. George Garrett
. Ken Williams
....
2
5. 18 February 2003 - FKAA Meeting
. George Garrett
. Ken Williams
. Jim Reynolds
. Jack Teague
. Ray Shimokubo
Telephone Communications
Doug Carter - Key West Resort Utility
Danny Hamilton - Boyd's Campground
Diana Moore - Harbor Shores Condominium
Jeff Weiler - Weiler Engineering
Kim Wigington - Harbor Shores Condominium
Issues
Engineering Design
· Options - buffer tanks versus vacuum pits and other considerations
Questions raised by property owners at January's Commission meeting are
mirrored in documents provided by CH2MHill in July 2002 (Exhibits 1 and 2).
The concerns revolve mostly around the responsibility of parties for potential
expenses, as they would be incurred by the Utility in providing a Utility connection
or by the property owner in preparing to acquire a connection.
Questions are raised about the issues of "connection equity" or whether one
property owner, in relatively similar physical circumstances to another property
owner, would pay similar amounts to acquire a Utility connection over and above
the Utility connection fees ($2,700 per Equivalent Dwelling Unit). In other words
is there relative equity in the costs that would be incurred for on-site improvements
in preparation to make a connection to the Utility?
· Weiler quote and explanation of quote
Weiler Engineering was asked for and has provided a quote for additional services
(primarily the provision of 74 additional vacuum valve pits), principally for the
mobile home parks and campgrounds located alongMaloney Avenue (Exhibit 3).
....
3
~L/~~"~V~ ~~.UU ~U~-,O~-L~~O
r-LHNNJ.NI..l Vl:..t'J
t-'Abl:. l::l~
In subsequent discussion with the Utility, staff requested and received an
explanation from Weiler Engineering concerning the proposed location of each
new vacuum valve pit suggested in the quote noted above (Exhibit 4).
Utility and Service Aereements.
· PSC issues - Questions of Contract content
Staff was made aware of six complaints raised to the Public Service Commission
(PSC) against Key West Resort Utility as late as 5:00 PM Friday afternoon
February 14) 2003. On February 17,2003, staff participated in a teleconference
with the Public Service Commission to hear and discuss issues raised by the
complainants. Though there appear to be substantive issues concerning the content
of contracts required by the Utility, they appear to be contractual legal issues that
can best be resolved between PSC staff and the Utility or between the
complainants and the Utility. Complaints and issues, as raised to thePSC are
provided as Exhibit 5.
Recommendations
Staff feels that additional review of the issues is required, particularly including
· a thorough review of engineering options, on a property by property basis, with
Key West Resort Utility and Weiler Engineering.
· a thorough review of the Weiler Engineering quote for additional engineering
services in light of a review of current engineering plans. .
Staff feels that the issues surroWlding the Utility and Service Agreement requires
some additional review, including
· a review of example contract documents by the County Attorney's Office
· coordination with the Public Service Commission in their deliberation over
complaints from various potential Utility clients
Based on additional review:
· staff will provide policy recommendations concerning the individual property
connection options where not currently resolved.
· Any additional potential costs will be considered and a specific and detailed
recommendation concerning those costs will be provided.
· Staff will also provide additional recommendations as they would apply to
future projects.
4
CH2:MHill Documentation (2)
Weiler quote
Weiler Explanation of quote
PSC document
I ,..,......L. V.,J
Documents
5
EXIDBIT 1
...._-~._.
.,.
6
'~ CH2MHILL:
..
.~
/~
July 5,2002
Mr. Tim McGarry, D#ector
Division of Growth Management
Monroe County
2798 Overseas Highw~y, Suite 420
Marathon, Florida 33(1)50
Subject: KW Resort Utilities Wastewater Collection System Expansion
CH2M HILL
64 10 51h Street
SUil&2A
Key Wesl, FL 33040.5835
,., 305.284.1145
f'lx 3ClI.2N....,3
I
I
Dear Tim: .' I
We have made a general review of the drawings for the proposed vacuum sEtwer
system expansion. Out observations are summarized below. ,
i
1. It appears that all existing systems that are currently connected to package plants
are proposed to belconnected to the new vacuum sewer system by mearuf of buffer
tanks, a common type of connection to a vacuum system for larger c:once~trated
flows. It would be lJeneficial if I<W Resort Utilities would confirm this anclf. identify
the buffer tanks where these connections are to be made.
2. Are the proposed buffer tanks always immediately adjacent to the wastewater
treatment plants (WWTPs) or pumping stations to be abandoned?
3. How aTe the bufferitanks to be paid for? We did not see a unit price for buffer
tanks identified in the Bid Proposal. .
4. It is indicated that there are currently 1,775 existing equivalent dwelling ~nits
(EDUs) (KW Resort Utilities refers to these as equivalent residential conn~ons
CERCs]) that are not served by central sewers. I
5. It is also projected that approximately 1,000 EDUs will connect within one year,
with the balance to connect over the next five years (155 connections per ~ear).
Where are these 775 EOUs that will connect over the next five years? '
6. There are four area~ within the limits of the proposed sewer system exp+ion
with the note, " Area Required to Install Internal Vacuum Tanks". Exactly rhat is
reqiured, who is re~ponsible for both insta1Iing the internal vacuum tanks[and the
the associated costs; when will this work be done, and how many EDDs are in
these areas? i
7. Review of the drawings indicates there are other smaller trailer parks. some
housing areas, and other areas that do not have vacuum sewer facilities (vacuum
valve pits) adjacent: to the properties for easy connection to the new vaCU1.Jm
sewer system. How will these areas be connected to the new vacuum collection
system expansion? ' ...
Mr. Tim McGarry
~, July 5, 2002
Page 2
B. There are only 87 ~acuum valve pits included in the Bid Proposal for aU ithree
phases. Considering the buffer tanks used for connecting the approximately 410
BOlls currently mil package plants (the contributing flow from buffer tarlks is
limited in a vacuup1 sewer system), the 87 vacuum valve pits appear to ~ low.
There certainly is . good design reason for the low number of vacuum v~ve pits,
but the reason is ~t apparent to us. :
i
It is my understandin$ that three of the bids received on June 27 were just s,ghtly
above the $4,600,000 E1Stimate, and that I<W Resort Utilities expects to have~gotiated
a contract price of $4,600,000 with one of the three lowest bidders by the Jul 17 BOCC
meeting. In our opinion, the $4,600,000 is a reasonable price for the work in lved.
The fact that the threeilowest bidders were within about five percent of each lother also
confirms that the $4,600,000 is a reasonable price. . . '
i
,
Please let me know haw you want to proceed from here. Except for July 8 ~ 9, I am
,~, available to meet with I the County, and KW Resort Utilities, if you desire, at 1Y0ur
convience. In the meantime, f~l free to call me with any questions or comments.
I
I
~ce~, I
~H2M ~LL 7. . <<',#/ I)
, .~~
'(At.
eth F. Williams, RE.
...4'~'
c: George Garrett
~
..'"
....
EXHIBIT 2
to
..jiI..'
...
7
CHaM HILL
6410 5th Street
Suite 2A
~y West, Fl 33040-5835
_1305.2M.1M5
Pax 305.284.4913
r~'.. CH2MHILLi
.~
~
/
~
July 11, 2002
Mr. Tim McGarry, drector
Division of Growth Management
Monroe County
2798 Overseas Highway, Suite 420
Marathon, FL 33050
Subject: Estimated Number of EDUs Currently Connected to Existing Paclkage WWTPs
that are Proposed to Connect to the KW Resort Utilities Sewer Sy~tem Expansion
Dear Tim: I
One of the tasks of 00/ Work Order No.1 authorization is to estimate the n+ber of EDUs
currently connected to package wastewater treatment plants (WWTPs) withijn the KW
Resort Utilities Service Area. All these connections are proposed to connect tb the sewer
system expansion. This letter provides the EDU estimate and the approach t4.ken to arrive at
this estimate. I
To estimate the EDUs associated with existing package plants, the Consul~t requested and
obtained from FKAA lall their Stock Island water accounts and water use dat~ for the
ll-month period May 200l-March 2002. The Consultant then sorted these water accounts to
estimate the number of accounts that currently discharge to existing package I WWTPs and
that are proposed to connect to the KW Resort Utilities expanded wastewate1l' collection
system.
Two agencies, the Flotida Department of Health (DOH) and th. .e Florida De~fhnent of
Environmental Protedtion (DEP), permit and regulate WWTPs within the K~ Resort
Utilities Service Area.iThese WWTPs are summarized below. The phase of th~ collection
system expansion where these systems would connect is shown in parentheses,
I
DOH is responsible far:
I
· Spottswood comntercial strip mall along McDonald Avenue, which connected to the
inactive Pearl Trailer Park Secondary WWTP (Phase I). I
· Burger King Restaurant Secondary WWTP (Phase I) I
DEP is responsible for:
· Waters Edge Colony Secondary WWTP (Phase I)
· Roy's Trailer Park Secondary WWTP (Phase I)
~
.
Boyd's Campgroumd Secondary WWTP (Phase I)
Harbor Shores Mo~ile Home Park Secondary WWTP (Phase III)
.
~
,
Mr. Tim McGarry, Director
I
Page 2
July 11, 2002
137483.AP.SI
· Coconut Grove Mobile Home Park Secondary WWTP (Phase III)
· Peninsular Marine Enterprises Secondary WWTP (Phase III)
· Oceanside BAT WWTP (Phase III)
,
Exhibit 1 provides a summary, by phase, of the estimated EDUs currently on package plants
that are proposed to connect to the expanded wastewater collection system. IEDUs are
shown for both the I4W Resort Utilities EDU definition and the FKAA EDU definition. Both
entities define residential EDUs in the same manner-individually metered ~ving units,
whether they be single family homes, a mobile home, an apartment unit, a c~ndo unit, or a
unit of a duplex, triplex, or quadraplex-are defined as one EDU. Commerc,al EDUs are
defined differently. J{w Resort Utilities defines a commercial EDU to be eq~valent to a
water use of 205 gallons per day (gpd), with a minimum of one EDU, where~ FKAA
defines a commercial) EDU to be equivalent to a water use of 167 gpd, with alminimum. of
~~ I
I
!
~'.
EXHIBIT 1
Estimated EDUs of Systems Currently Served by Package WWTPSl
KW Resort Utilities
System EDU Definition
FKAA
EDU D8flnltlon
Phase I
Spottswood Commercial Strip Mall
Burger King
Waters Edge Colony
Roys Trailer park
Boyd's Campground
Subtotal Phase I
Phase III
Harbor Shores 1M0bile Home Park
Coconut Grove! Mobile Home Park
Peninsular Marine Enterprises
2
Oceanside Marina
Subtotal Phase III
13.8
5.4
65.0
108.0
44.3
236.5
i
I
I
!
1412
6.~
6811
108.0
54;5
70
34
9.8
3
60.6
3
174.4
251.4
I
!
~~
12Jo
14
69.5
4
185J5
_r:
GRA'ND TOTAL
3
410.9
. 4
436J9
1See Attachment A for more detail on EDU determination
20nly BAT facility, all others are secondary facilities.
321.6 are current EDUs; 39 are future ED Us for condos and restaurant.
426.5 are current EDUs; 43 are future EDUs for condos and restaurant.
,...,.r-___,
I
!
For Oceanside Marina, 39 EDUs (43 FKAA EDUs) (condo units and restaurant) do not exist
today, but construction of the condo units has started. It is therefore assumed I that the condo
I
units and restaurant will exist by the time the sewer system expansion is operational.
Therefore, the estimated number of ED Us connected to package plants per the KW Resort
Utilities definition is 410.9, and the estimated number of EDUs connected to packctge plants
per the FKAA definition is 436.9, a difference of 26 EDUs, which is only abou~6 percent
difference between thel two definitions. I
:~
Mr. Tim McGarry, ~ector
Page 3 '
July 11, 2002
137483.AP.SI
Only Oceanside M~a has a BAT facility, all the other eight WWTPs are secondary
facilities. :
Sincerely,
c George Garrett
DFB31003696181.doc/b21900001
--------...
~..
....
r--,
ATTACHMENT A
Detailed EDU Determination Process for Systems Curren6y Served by Package WWTPs
Spottswood Commercl*1 Strip Mall
Note: This is a new facility, so long term water use data generally is not
available. .
FKAA accounts, 54501 McDonaid Avenue, all <167 gpd, or 205 gpd
FKAA account First State Bank
Average daily water u~e, 360 gpd
I
Burger King
FKAA account, average daily water use 1,107 gpd
Waters Edge Colony I
FKAA individual acc04nts, per lot
FKAA account, ITNOR Corp.
Average daily water use, 2,860 gpd
.r---.......
Roy's Trailer Park
FKAA individual accounts, per lot
Boyd's Campground
4 FKAA accounts
Total average daily water use, 9,080 gpd
Harbor Shores Mobile Home Park
FKAA individual accounts, per lot
FKAA account, Harbor:Shores, Inc.
Total average daily water use, 110 gpd
Coconut Grove Mobile Home Park
FKAA individual accou~ts, per lot
Peninsular Marine Enterprises
No FKAA account foun41
ED Us Estimated from WWTP flow
Average daily flow, 2,OQO gpd
Oceanside Marina
Note: Per Monroe Courity Planning Department, 22 Condo Units and a . .
2,500 sq ft expansion to restaurant are proposed
22 condo units
Expanded restaurant1
78 seats @ 40 gpC!l = 3,120 gpd
20 bar @ 20 gpd = 400 gpd
Total estimated average daily water use, 3,520 gpd
FKAA water account
Average daily water usel 8,850 gpd
Assumed that 50% of water use goes to boat washing, etc.
Net average daily water use, 4,425 gpd
lNo recent water use history available as restaurant has been closed
DFB31003696181.00ClO21900001
N,. eous
KW Resort.
FKAA
12 12
1.8 2.2
13.8 14.2
5.4 6.6
51 51
14.0 17.1
65.0 68.1
108 108
44.3
54.5
69
69
1
70
1
70
44
44
9.8
12.0
_.~. ;
22
22
17
21
21.6
60.6
26.5
69.5
....
EXHIBIT 3
'Ol
8
~~/~~/L~~~ ~~:~~
~~~tl~"'/.LtI'"
...< ...,,~=:;;2.~~d;2iCj,;~;;~;;1~t;;;~~:,1i.iZ.
..-i....
Weiler Engineering
Memo
To:
FftHn:
ce:
DMe:
CCIIl.!cnr Ne,sorv117 l<7
Ft JI1f'Weil8l', P.E. V 7.{v/lJ!A
BlU Smith, Ed Cari., ~.E.., Jot1nJOhnson, F.E.
2J2aI20Q3
Stock J!Jand Sewer :cpsrlCigr'I/WEC No, 02013
ReI
COrnrn/$$ianer.
We hav. evalulted the ~ddmonal C:OS~ to prgvide valve oito Witnln tne County right-of-way to servQ the
traIler par" and C8mpgrouna aniilS on South Stock Island. Ol:r ear/mate of sao9.. is tQ PrcvIde one
varve pit per I~ ~OU's per t~e manufacture's design CliterJa. The estimate might be reduCl!d by as
rnud'l as $153,000 to iJcc"Ol:imatel~ SS,5e,S9S if the exl9Mg cn-!IIle collection and distribtmon systems
can be utU~ :0 buffer the discharge rate to lese; than three gallons per r"invte pit val"'l! pit pr10r 10
dlscharging to the COJnty rtght--of~y, It appears that utJ1iz1ticr't af some cf the exisUng, on.
systems is feasible fer at least so,'. d the pro~,1ies. others, ~ may be more eco"omj~l to eltnet'
provide new services to tMe I\ght4-NBY er ;onst1iels YIlQ./um coll~" sysmam on;ile.
~l_e understb lQ tnat rnj~ estimatfl has b~ co"'I)Ieted withOI.l: , detailed design and may vary.
As aIY.iays, please feel free to Sive me ;J caU at (941) 764-64.4; if yeL: have any Questicns or wish to
diseus; mat1ers further.
...
~2/~4IL~~~ ~~:~~
~l:lOt:l~~(lb:':
I."UMM NELSON
PAGE B4
,- . .....
.:' '::'?~:l~~f:;'~:~~~':;)i ::;:::t{:;'?~i',;\,:;~;.:
". .. ',' :'. ",'. ....
.'. ,".
..
'. '.-,
: .~
. .
. .. . .
,'..... .." .,......... ..'
-
" ,
"J. '" '. ......,
-_;:--;: ::-2~.3 1e: 23
The L..allJ Offices of SHB&B
13129397765
P.El2
srOCK ISLAND V ACUtJM SEWER PROJECT
COST ESTIMAtE 'OR ADDmONAL WORK TO SERVICE TR..l n I:R PARKS
rttM , UI\'lT
NO. Dl.5CIUPTIOS Q~. tINtT Rille! AMOl.1NT
(S) (S)
l. MArNnNANCE OF TMmC J LS 10.000 10,000
z. COXST. STAn OUT" ASaaUf'_TS 1 LS 10,000 10,000
), 6~ PVc. SDItJ J v ACtTtlM SEVtlJl. ~.'SO L1' 4& ao.soo
4 3" PVC. SDIU! VACUUM SiV.T.1. 1,000 LF 410 :to,lXlO
s. 6" pvc. StiR. z' GRA VrlY UvnR. J,ooO U' 1 45 4:f,OOO
6. 6~ DIVIS!ON VAlVES 15 U "6 9."Q
,. VACUUM m nn ',e' COMPlm" 74 EA 4.810 3%.000
I, ASPIW. "f' R.ESTOltAnoN 200 SY 2S 5,'00
9, CONO!n SIDEWALK W:'AC!MENT 500 sy 30 I $,000
iO. CONCR.!TE ~A y ImPIJR. !OO sv 30 1$.000
11. SHELL DlUVEWAY ~PAI\K:'NC:WAlP. 500 sy 7 ~oo
12- SERVICE CL~OUTS 100 EA J4~ 14.900
13. CONC:RETE ENCASEMENT 100 LF' 26 2.600 ,;I
stm-tl;)r AL ~$TIMAu Uil,()90
iNGlM"EiRING I: ~SPECnON @ ''fa S49,d4 .,
"'OMlNlS'I'R.'~TION.t 1.ECW. @ l06A $61.109
CONTINGENCY i 10% S61.IOP
nmNGi3~ IJa,S4J
't"OT,\L ESTiMATE $109,'9'
.
" Based upon apP%'OXJmate1y : tmlc pE:r 6 \1r1its or existing fow data with an additional 5
contingency raab.
...
EXHIBIT 4
_",Co.
~
9
_,. ,..1M I LL
.".. ....... "" ..... V' ...... U".I. I". v U.L u
PHONE NO. : 305 294 4913
"O:.L.LOCJ ....Ub.LUocel.LU.
Feb. 18 2003 09:53AM P3
lIIJUU":/UU",
"Excellenu In Engineen'1g"'
~0020 Vmlilm Blvd.. St:irc '7.9
PMt Ch:\dotl:c FL 33954
(5" 1) i6';.6447 ph
(9!'\) ;64-8915 €a.\:
-;.. : WEILER ENGINEERING
CORPORATION
DOClClli656
Februmy 12. 2003
Mr. Georae Gmrett, Director Divi!;ion of Marine Resources
Monroe COunty Regional Service ':emet
2798 O\'erseas Highway
Marathon. FL 33050
RE: K W Resort Utilities - SWf;.k bland Expansion- Design Criteria
Dear Mr. Garrett:
The purpose of this letter is to provide requested information cona:ming additional resources
!eQUired to provide vacuum Pits at County CXpCDJC for the larier mobile home parks on Stock
Island. Following are peniJ3ent poiats from the meeting;
1, The following are the affeeted propertie$ that have been provided a VICUWIl sewer stub
rather than vacuum pits _VOt butter tanks:
o Leo's Campground
o Stock Island Trailet
o !2 Mobile; on Lawel Ave
o Coral Isle
o WaterE Edge Colony
o OQe8D Spray
o E1 Senor Roughy
o Rolphs
o Woodso:1S
o Boyds
c Coconut ("!'Ow
o Oceanside
o StyroDs
o 19 Apanmems on Maloney
2. The above propcniC5 were ~rovided a StUb only because based upon our analysis and
AirVsc's COJ1ClDTe:DCe this '>.'as the preferred approach for the following r~ns:
o The ~'eriDg configuration for optimal system reliance was for the aOOve
properties to iDstall and or convert their eximne; sysr.ems to a vacmnn system ~;th
Stock IslaDd Sewer Project - Rnpoll9! Letter
Page ]
~
... ....~ :~~HILL
F~NE NO. : 305 294 4913
---.. -----..--~
Feb. 18 2003 09:53AM P4
'C:.I """'"" vv't
SWQk lsllJld Sewer Project - Response Leiter
individual vacuum pits on their property. AirVae insisted upon this type of
configuration at the time of project bidding.
o Requirlni the aOOVI: properties to instaII vacuum pits ort their property was in
accordance with M.)nrDl: Caumy Orrl~ ()4..2000 Section 1 and Chapter 381,
F.A.C. Secticn381 .0065 (2)(a) since their flows exeeed 1000 gpd.
o Given that all pfopl:rties must expend resources to hook up to the vacuum system,
(or a gravity, low p:~sure, or force main system) it did not appear to be an
unreasonable expec:tation that residentiel propcni~ with more than 6 ttailers be
req uired to install the '\"KUUnl pitA at their expense.
o Given that the best ::onfiguration for 1be phs was to be located on priv~
property, our SC4lpc of service and aad1ori't}. did not exten4 to include installation
. on their property,
3. The properties that receivel buffer tanks are mta.u~,. apttt'tment buildm8s and
1rUlI'inas. ~ properties ,~ given tlIr1ks even though their flows exc:eed 1000 gpd
because the most feasible CJ.eaI1S for them to hook up is for a buffer taDk to be placed in
the R/W.
4. We recently provided an estimate to provide tanks for the properties listed in Item l
above. 'The estimate was iJ'lXOximatcly $600.000 to $800.000 to provide ww in the
R/W fer the referenced properties. While this option is ~chnical1y &!sible. the additional
County expendi':ure will net equal the reduction in ~sts to the private properties. For the
vast majority oftb.e a1Iecte;j properties, the overall (public and private) lo'West cost
alternative will be far the vacuum pits to he installed on private property.
S. The question was presented &3 to why these tanks were not provided in the original
desigD, as if a mimke has heen made on our part. This could not be further from the
trUth.. We desipd the system ror maocim.um :eliability, lowest cost and within the
provisions of county ami state ordinauces. We could not be expected to foresee that the
County may wish to a.c:commodate the Mobile Home Parks: beyond that stipulated by
relevant mtu1es.
6. Mr. Williams persistently hdicat.ed that perhaps a vacuum system is not the preferred
approach and that a force a1&ic c.xteDSion would be preferable. This analysis is flawed
from the o~ since a force: main system would DOt provide "Available" seJ'\.ice to
properties with less than 1 {IOO gpd tom! :tl.;>w 3IId most properties will prefer the vacuum
system once they have analyzed the long term expenses associated with pumping
stations. We have complet!d an a-tensive analysis of available technology and
concluded that a "QCuum ~:'Stem is the best al.terDat:i.ve for a safe, reliable and affordable
sewer 5yStem for &'tock !slane. CH2Mhill in the Master Plan for Monroe Cou."1ty also
shared this conclusion and this is not significantly deeted by ih~ pos:5ibility of
Smck !s1aJ:ld S~ Project - R..'"SpODSC Letter
Page 2
....
:;..:;:MH I LL
.- .....,"" ..' "'v ...&a.u. ",...,. .... ""...,
PI-GE NO. : 305 294 4913
It\J..L~1 ~.u,",,,,.& .1.&.&0
Feb. 18 2003 l1l9: 54AM PS
llWUU'f.' \,I\,/'t
~mck IsJud Stwer Project - RMpcmsIlar
traDSfening $600,000 to SSOO.OOO of total costs ii"om private property owners to the
County .
7. Determinine the best altmtative for each facility noted in Item 1 above will :require a
d~cd anaJ.ysis of t.beir ~'ltem. Such an aua1ysis was DOt iDcluded in our O:riginal or
CWTel1t scope ~f &erVices.
S. We desi&ned the ~ to be capable of providing sewer service in accordance with
COlmty and stGte stItUtt4I. Ow- design ~ the best sewer alternative b Stock Island
and we are confident tho d.::sign will withstaad an>" crcch'ble critical analysis,
If I can be of any further assislancI: with this issue, please do not besitate to contact me at 941-
764-6447.
Sincen:ly,
~
Joh11 Johnson PE
Weiler EDlinecriJJg Corporation
CC: Dave Koppel, Monroe County
Ken Williams, CH2Mbil1
Bill Smith., KW Resort TJtiities
Doug Carter, KW Resort ltilities
Jeff Weiler. Weiler Etlsine:ring
f/
Stock [sland Sewer Project - RespODSe Letter
Pato 3
....
EXHIBIT 5
_.._"If' .
.....
10
,>.--
~_:~
~_:___~_ ~.~1_;_<_
, ,.,.
i7/~E103 11:58
185134137180
FPSC
PAGE 02
;.::::: , .- ,j :
< ..' { ...,;.
-.."...
summary of complaints an~ Commission concerns regarding service
availability agreements of KW Resort Utilities Corp.
(The opinions contained ~Ln this document are those of Commission
';_3.== and do not bind tbe commission's decision on any future vote
on this matter.)
CCMPLAlNANTS
CC'ral Hammock, LLC new development, has signed developer
c~~eement noting objections to certain sections and provisions of
a~reement - System Construction, Property Rights, Indemnification,
aLd Insurance provisions. In prooess of ;f1ling formal complaint
""if:.b. Commission.
Hclrbor Shores Condomin.ium Owners Associatioin Inc.
delvelopment, has not YE!t signed developer agreement.
,::c':lcerns about overall tc-ne of agreement language.
New
General
Boyd's Campground - Existing development, has not signed developer
=~~reement due to concern:3 over Property Rights, Indemnification,
:r:s'...:rance, and sees no nef!d for bill of sale, etc. if not conveying
::.nes to KW.
-'. =2isle Group - New development in early stages of permitting.
.:::y concerns related to e.greement, payment of service availability
charges, tariff availability, and graVity/vacuum system
1"equirements and readinee:s.
Sd.fe Harbour Marina - Existing marina already connected to KW
'ste~, service availability charges established in early 2002. KW
c.. aims a change in type,' amount of service and wishes to charge
additional capacity. Chc~nge in service centers around additional
restaurant seating capacity and concerns over
existence/installation of commercial grease trap.
-,.~:,'.
j{ilrricane Hole Marina - :~xisting marina, trying to connect to KW
'C:Tstem. Main dispute is with ERe calculation. Hurricane Hole under
:'l~~W ownership and expanding/planning to expand. Requesting
sllpporting information justifying ERe estimates.
~::-ILITY AGREEMENT
.....~!"Icerns over the Utility Agreement center around the following
-1-
.......
.. ,,~--
;..,. 3:5:'-
-i> S<f-:<
'.. ...-.....>
~. ~W~
_ ,- i ~ 2103 11 : 58
18504137180
FPSC
PAGE 03
areas:
~SSUE 1} Section 2, System Conatruction, subsection {all
"Prior to the construction and installation of the system, Developer
shall, at its sole cost ana expense, cause to be prepared and provide to
service company plana and specifications of the system ("Plans ana
specifications"), which Plans and Specifications shall be prepared by
8ZJgJ.ueers acceptable tc> Serv:Lce campeu2Y, :l.u :its sole jUJd absolute
disaret.iol1, in accordance with all policies and practices of Service
Company and all applicakle lawa and regulations and standards adopted by
the Department ot Envircnmental Protection and Monroe County."
=-"velopers have expressed concern that this clause may constitute
a conflict of interest.
':::;~~ission Staff Preliminary Concerns: Standards related only to
::ertification and licensing should provide sufficient safeguards to
- :.~ 'utility with regardi3 to any engineer's qualifications and
~.;.'"aiity of service. Su::h approval should not be withheld for
:)t.herwise qualified engineers absent specific justific;ation by the
utility.
~"ference:
Rules 25-30.540
Administrc.ti ve Code
( 7) ,
25-30.545, Florida
::::nstJE 2} Section 3, 'Syst.em Records I subsections (a) through (j):
2~reral1, this section SElems to be inconsistent with regards to
\'lhether or not KW is to take possession of the collection system.
Many of the subsection!3 ( (d) through (h)) appear applicable
=E"3ardless of whether or not KW takes possession of lines.
S'4bsections (a) through (c) and subsection (j) appear to only be
l ~y~r:t in the eve::lt thclt KW is to take possession of the lines.
- ~ .'.
CmDlnission Staff Prelimirlary Concerns: This area of the agreement
!"-,~eds to be clarified and/or should be divided into separate
~'~ctions. It is staff's opinion that for upkeep, repair,
(':):J.nection, and disconnec!tion concerns, it is in KW's interest to
_ _q~ire that all lines be conveyed to the utility. However, KW is
entitled to establish r'3asonable standards that the collection
s:{stem must meet prior tc such conveyance. If there are to remain
c~rcumstances where KW is not conveyed the collection system, then
-::::e record keeping requirements should be separated accordingly.
-2-
.......
~......... ..........
. ,- ~
.,' ,'4-.
i. '-r..;;-
-. .~..
. - ;Je3 11:58
1851341371813
FP:il,;
PAGE 134
Referenoe: Rule 25-30.530 (3), Florida Administrative Code
ISSUE 3) Section 4, Property Rights:
T:,is section also
~~.: ~ership of the
expressed concern
appeal:S to be inconsistent with regards to
collec':ion system. Several developers have
over qranting these property rights to the
-_.~~:.:.ty .
CcDad..ion Staff Preliminary CODoerns: This area of the agreement
also needs to be clarifiE!d as to whether or not ownership of the
c~llection system has boen conveyed to KW. If the developer
maintains ownership of thE~ collection system, then why would it not
.Co: -che developer who is responsible for upkeep, maintenance, and
repair of the collection :3ystem? In this case, staff is concerned
tr..at such property right~:, easements, etc. should relate only to
tJ:..ose instances where thE! collection system has been conveyed to
~.. Similar to Issue 2, if there are to be instances where the
cc.llection system is to be owned by the developer and instances
wt.ere KW owns the collection system, the agreement should address
eccch of these circumstances separately.
n:st7B 4) Section 5, Existing System, subsection (e):
"In the event that Dl:!veloper's syseem after connection to service
companies system needs; repair (other than non-emergency repairs) then
Developer agrees to make said repairs within 30 days of notice by Service
:~~any. In the event of failure by Developer to make repairs eo its
system within saicj time periocj t:btm !Jer'VJ.ce Campill.1Y sball be permitted
(but DOC obligated) to Jllak. [laid repairs. Any costs expended by Servi.ce
CampiU2Y .:in ..J::iDg repa:l.r:. to Developarl s system sllall upon presentation of
a b:i.ll to Developer be immediately due IIDd payable.
In the eveDt of t:be Dc,,~d for emergency repa:i.rs to Developer's sys tem I
Service Company shall be autbor.1J:8d to make sai.d rePairs (but .,ball not: be
obligated) and upon pre.ll1enf:ation of a bill eo .Developer for said repairs
sai.d bill s.hall be .:imm8d:i.aeely due iIl.1d payable."
Commission Staff Preliminary Concerns: Through review of past,
commission approved developer agreements, the language above has
only been utilized during the conveyance of collection or
d:_stribution systems. In the event that the developer owns the
collection system and dCles not make timely repairs, why is the
:::'(~medy of discontinuance of service at the point of connection not
n.. ::::icient?
-3-
"II'-
...1.........,.
"
..(
J
_ ',/~ ae3. 11: 58
185B413718B
FPSC
PAGE ElS
:=.~ r erence I
Rules 25-30.231, 25-30.225(6), 25-30.320 (2) (b),
Florida A~ninistrative Code
iSSUE 5)
Section 6, Rates, Pees, Charges, sub.ection (b)z
~In the event that Develcper and Service Company shall not agree as to the
number of Connectionlil rec;:uired by Developer for the Property, the deed.ion
of the Service C~y "hall control, and Developer shall pay for, ana
Service Company will reserve for Developer, the number of Connections
specified by Service company.
':'.;.:nmissi.oD. Staff Preliminary Concerns: Pursuant to Rule 25-
30.560(1), Florida Administrative Code, such disagreements may be
directed to the Public Service Commission for disposition by filing
a written complaint in compliance with Rule 25-22, Florida
Administrative Code.
R~ferenc.: Rule 25-30.560, Florida Administrative Code
~SSUB 6) Secti.on 14, indemnification:
::~velopers, along with Commission staff,
:y~~ the circumstances flnd extent that
utility is prudent and reasonable.
have expressed concerns
indemnification of the
:.: :=:-.i.ssion Staff Prelimin.!1ry Concerns f Should this indemnification
.c~ clarified regarding circumstances in which it applies? For
i::.stance; \\..... for damagHs resulting from providing wastewater
s€~rvice which occur at or beyond the Customer's side of the Service
Connection".
~~~.
I~:StJE 7) Seeti.on 15 - Insurance:
Ccmcern has been expressed by developers over how much, and to what
ey.tent liability can be avoided by the utility, and whether or not
it is the developer's responsibility to insure against ~uch
:!OJ,abilities of the utility.
~clmmiBBion Staff Preliminary Concerns: Staff is UDsure of the
rElasonableness of requi:r'ing the developer, at its expense, to
:':,s~,=e the utility againut liability. Also, how long should the
_.<vsloper be required to maintain in,surance, and when would the
:'wmeowner's association become responsible? As in Issues 3 and 4
-4-
..
l
1
j
i'
t
f
h ' .' : ~03 11 : 58
18504137180
FPSC
PAGE 06
above, why wouldn' t thE~ remedy of discontinuing service be
sufficient in instances wh~re the collection system remains in the
possession of the developer?
ISSUE 8} Section 18 - MiscellaneouB ProviB~ons. subsection (j):
Ccnce,rn has been expressed by developers, as well as staff, about
~te requirement to waive the right to a jury trial.
Ce,mmdssion Staff Preli~nary Concerns: Where the developer must
request service from the utility, is the requirement to waive the
right to a jury trial appropriate or enforceable?
:::~STJE 9) General Concerns
Cc~ssion Staff Preli~nary Concerns: Similar to concerns
:::':?:ressed in Issues 2 and 3 above, staff reconunends that KW review
::..ts :billing and disconnect:ion practices pursuant to which entity is
o\O'Iler of the collection system. For example, if a developer is to
mE.intain ownership of the collection system after connecting to
~"s treatment facilities, the final point of connection for which
'::':~ utility is responsible is where the developer's collection
system meets the utility line. In this circumstance, staff
b~dieves the entire development is normally treated as one single
customer. Any service interruptions, billing, etc. should only be
handled at this single c\:.stomer, developer level. (i.e., failure
to pay by one individual landowner could result in KW having to
c.~.sconnect the entire development.)
This single customer issue is also important in that KW would only
be responsible for billing the developer, providing one bill which
would then be the responsibility of the developer to pay I<W and
:.;:en divide and collect from each individual property owner within
-:.be development.
-:.~:~.
=::: KW wishes to bill, connect, and disconnect each property owner
?i: ,'.:'1 individual cuetorner, why is it not necessary that the utility
t(~ke possession of the lines and collection system at the time the
d(~veloper agreement is entered?
-5-
-.
: 7/~'a03 11: 58
18504137180
FPSC
PAGE 07
SERVICE AGREBMBNT
Upon review by staff, it a~pear6 the following areas of the service
2.::!reement do not comply with Commission rules and/or Florida
Statutes.
~~s~m 1) RATES, FEES, CH~GES. & TARIFF
(c') The actual costo! collecting c!lny delinquent bill shall be
assessed to the customer.
Commission Staff Prel~nary ConcernB: It appears that KW has no
s1.:,ch provision for any la-:e charge contained in its tariff on file
-,..'i -=h this Commission.
Reference: Section 367.091(4), Florida Statutes
ISSUE 2} (i i) CaDaci ty R.eservation Fee
Ccmmi8sion Staff prelimiIl.ary Concerns: Staff is unclear as to why
!\.v1 would need to re-eva,luate service availability charges for
changes in type of service for residential customers. Under what
s:.!:"cumstances might this apply?
::!lSUE 3) BILLING FOR SEF:VICES PROVIDED
Bills for service provided are due when rendered and considered
d(~linquent if not paid wi thin 10 days of the billing date. Past due
accounts accrue a penalty of lot of the delinquent amount after a
p(~riod of 30 days from tiIe bill date. -.....,
Commission Staff Prelimil:1ary Concerns: It appears that bills are
being treated delinquent sooner than allowed by Commission Rule.
Kli has no such provision for any late charge contained in its
tariff on file with this Commission.
Reference:
Rule 25-30.335(4), Florida Administrative Code
Section 367.091(4), Florida Sta~utes
-6-
....
1
j
I
i:
t
J
i
-::-,':383 11:58
18504137180
FPSC
PAGE 08
:3SUE 4) IUSCONNECTION F:>R NONPAYMENT
Ct:stomer agrees to allow access on customer's property for all
disconnections of service.
~cmmdBBion Staff PreliDd~ary CODcerns: While this topic may be
a~propriate in instances where the developer wishes to have the
utility handle disconnect:ions and developer is the owner of the
collection system, staff believes that it should not be included in
a service agreement.
?"E!ference: .
Rule 25-30.320(2) (g), Florida Administrative Code
ZSSUE 5) REQUESTED DISCONTINUANCE OF SERVICE
-:':-pc..r.: termination of service and settlement of all outstanding
~70unts, any existing apjjlication/agreement will, become void and
:-."curity deposit will be refunded. .
Commission Staff PrelimirLary Concerns: KW should take note that
a:'l customer deposits hElld for security are to accrue interest
while held by the u~ilit).. In addition, these deposits are to be
returned to the customer. with said interest, after 23 months of
satisfactory payment.
R(!ference: Rules 25-'30.225(6), 25-30.311,
Florida Administrative Code
:25-30.320 (:2) (b) ,
ISStJ'E 6) SERVICE C~MP~;' S RIGHTS RESERVED
_.J',
I'; is agreed that the Service Company resery-es the right to
't.-:ansgress on the described property for the purpose of installing,
m~intaining, repairing, or removing lines in the event of an
emergency or otherwise.
:::: :>1tImission Staff Prelimin.ary Concerns: Similar to Issues 1 and 2 of
-:. 1e Utility Agreement, noted above, staff believes that these
rights are a product of ownership of the lines and collection
system of the development. While a separate agreement may be
p::>ssible where the developer maintains ownership of the collection
system, should it be at 1:he discretion of the developer to either
allow ingress to its lines for the purpose of individual
-7-
-
.-;:~e:;; 1:':58
185134137180
FPSC
PAGE 09
-...~
1 ;';."
I ,;
,"
I
:ii9connection? And if thE: developer wishes to decline, should the
::u,c.-off be limited to the point where the developer's lines
interconnect with the utility's?
P.sference:
Rule 25-30.231, Florida Administrative Code
_..4~.
-8-
-