Agenda 02/12/2018 Cedar Hammock Community Development District
Board of Supervisors
Tom Cook,Chairman Bob Koncar,District Manager
Gary McClellan,Vice Chairman Justin Faircloth,District Manager
Larry Minamyer,Assistant Secretary Dan Cox,District Counsel
Norman Day,Assistant Secretary Sam Marshall,District Engineer
Quentin Greeley,Assistant Secretary
Regular Meeting Agenda
February 12, 2018—3:00 p.m.
Regular Board Meeting
1. Roll Call
2. Approval of Agenda
3. Old Business
A. Bulkhead Presentation
i. Bridging Solutions Email-January 18,2018
ii.Proposals/Discussion
4. Audience Comments
5. New Business
A. Bridging Solutions Bridge Report
6. Manager's Report
A. Fiscal Year 2019 Draft Budget Presentation
B. Approval of the Minutes of the January 8,2018 Meeting
C. Acceptance of Financials
D. Follow Up Items
7. Attorney's Report
A. Approval of Resolution 2018-02,Spending Resolution
8. Engineer's Report
9. Communication to Master Board
10. Supervisors' Reports,Request, and Comments
11. Adjournment
Audit Committee Meeting
1. Audit Committee Selection Process for Fiscal Year 2018
A. Establishment of RFP Evaluation Criteria
B. Authorization to Proceed with RFP
2. Adjournment
THE NEXT REGULAR MEETING IS SCHEDULED FOR
MARCH 12,2018 at 3:00 P.M.
> Ad Proof
irs iuiut
Sales Rep:Mereida Cardenas(N9103) Phone: Email:
Aeo_anrtt INuttnaiion litscriio t Ink inutioc
Date:09;19/17 [his is a proof ofyour ad scheduled to run on the dates indicated below.
Please confirm placement prior to deadline by contacting your account
Account Number:531406(N056685)
Company Name:CEDAR FIAMM(XK COMMUNITY rep at
Ad Id: 1758137 P.O.No.: Total Cost:5294.00
Contact Name:
Email:Monet.Slaughtena;ST'Scrviccs.cetm Tag Line:Notice of Meetings Cedar Hammock Com
Address: 210 N UNIVERSITY DR #702. CORAL. SPRINGS, El.. Start Date:09./22/17 Stop Date:09//22.;17
33071
Number of Times: 1 Class:16251E-Public Notices
Phone:(954)753-0380 Fax:(954)775-6701 Publications:ND-Naples Daily News.ND-Interact-naplesnews.com
Thank you for your business. Our commitment to a quality product includes the advertising in our publications. As such,Gannett reserves the right to cat-
egorize,edit and refuse certain classified ads.Your satisfaction is important. II you notice errors in your ad,please notify the classified department immedi-
ately so that we cart make corrections before the second print date.The number to call is 239-263-4700. Allowance may not be made for errors reported past
the second print date.The Naples Daily News may not issue refunds for classified advertising purchased in a package tate:ads purchased on the open rate may
he pro-rated for the remaining full days for which the ad did not run.
Act Proof
t agree this ad is accurate and as ordered.
Notice of Meetings
Cedar Hammock
Community Development District
The Board of Supervisors of the Cedar Hammock
Community Development District will hold their meetings for
Fiscal Year 2018 at the Cedar Hammock Clubhouse,8660 Cedar
Hammock Boulevard,Naples,Florida at 3:00 p.m.on the second
Monday of the following months except as noted:
October 9,2017
November 13,2017
January 8,2018
February 12,2018
March 12,2018
April 9,2018
May 21.2018(third Monday)
There may be occasions when one or more Supervisors
will participate by telephone. Meetings may be continued to a
date and time certain which will be announced at the meeting,
In accordance withthe provisionsof theAmericans with
Disabilities Act,any person requiring special accommodations
at this meeting because of a disability or physical impairment
should contact the District Management Company, Severn
Trent Services at(954)603-0033. If you are hearing or speech
• impaired, please contact the Florida Relay Service by dialing
7.1-1 or(800)955-8771(TTY)/(800)955-8770(Voice)for aid in
contacting the District Office at least two(2)days prior to the
date of the hearing and meeting.
Each person who decides to appeal any action taken at these
meetings is advised that person will need a record of the
proceedings and that accordingly, the person may need to
ensure that a verbatim record of the proceedings is made,
including the testimony and evidence upon which such appeal
is to be based.
Bob Koncar
District Manager
September 22,2017 No.1758137
5
BRIDGE REPLACEMENT
5 ton vs. 10 ton Design
Bridging Solutions has provided information for both 5 ton and 10 ton
replacement bridges - the heavier design load would handle emergency vehicles
in the event of a brush fire, hurricane or medical emergency requiring an
ambulance.
Costs for the 5 ton design are $40/SF and $55/SF for the 10 ton, or about
$200,000 more to do all the bridges.
Currently, all fairways can be accessed without using bridges except for holes
#17 and #18. Hole 5, for example, can be accessed by utilizing Cordgrass Way
and holes 7, 9 and 10 can be accessed from CH Boulevard.
One proposal would be to assume 5 ton designs for all bridges where fairways
can be accessed without using the bridges, and, for#17/18, consider one of the
following:
1 . Replace #18 bridge (2250 SF) now at 10 ton design - cost $ 123,750. Build
new bridge right next to existing bridge to avoid affectiing play on the course.
Demolish old bridge at completion.
2. Strengthen four-year old #17 bridge (700 SF) now. $ 24,750
3. Wait until 2028 and do only #17 bridge at 10 ton.
MINUTES OF MEETING
CEDAR HAMMOCK
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT
The regular meeting of the Board of Supervisors of the Cedar Hammock Community
Development District was held on Monday, February 12, 2018 at 3:00 PM at Cedar Hammock
Clubhouse, 8660 Cedar Hammock Boulevard,Naples,Florida.
Present and constituting a quorum were:
Thomas Cook Chairman
Gary McClellan Vice Chairman
Larry Minamyer Assistant Secretary
Norman Day Assistant Secretary
Quentin Greeley Assistant Secretary
Also present were:
Justin Faircloth District Manager
Sam Marshall District Engineer
Ralph Verrastro Bridging Solutions
Tom Read Cedar Hammock Golf&Country Club
Todd Legan Cedar Hammock Golf&Country Club
Residents
The following is a summary of the discussions and actions taken at the February 12, 2018
Cedar Hammock Board of Supervisors meeting.
FIRST ORDER OF BUSINESS Roll Call
Mr. Cook called the meeting to order and Mr. Faircloth called the roll.
SECOND ORDER OF BUSINESS Approval of Agenda
Mr. Cook stated the Audience Comments will immediately follow the Bridging Solutions
Bridge Report.
On MOTION by Mr. Greeley seconded by Mr. Minamyer with all
in favor the agenda was approved as amended.
THIRD ORDER OF BUSINESS Old Business
A. Bulkhead Presentation
i. Bridging Solutions Email—January 18,2018
ii. Proposals/Discussion
Unapproved 1
February 12, 2018 Cedar Hammock CDD
o Mr. Cook noted first we will have a presentation on bulkheads by Mr. McClellan, who
will discuss actions and decisions the CDD has taken. Afterwards, we will introduce
Bridging Solutions and hear their report and possible actions regarding the bridges.
o Afterwards there will be audience comments limited to three minutes per person.
o Then the CDD will look at the Fiscal Year 2019 budget, approve the January minutes,
review financial statements, adopt the spending resolution, discussion related to the Audit
Committee, and Supervisor Reports and Comments.
o Mr. McClellan read a summary of the bulkhead project to date. A copy of his Synopsis of
Discussions, Decisions and Actions by the Board of Supervisors of the Cedar Hammock
CDD on Bulkheads is attached hereto and made a part of the public record as Exhibit A.
o Mr. Cook thanked Mr. McClellan for the hard work he put into preparing his report.
o Mr. Cook noted when Mr. Day addressed the last Master Board meeting,he did it without
the knowledge or approval of the rest of the CDD Board. He acted alone. When he said
he was not there as a CDD representative, that was wrong. Once he started talking about
CDD business, namely the bulkheads, that was representing the CDD and was
inappropriate. He neglected to tell the audience, one week earlier he had voted with the
other four Supervisors in favor of the Board's action, to monitor the bulkheads and to fix
them when they need repair. Not reporting his support was wrong. He hopes to not
experience this again going forward.
o Mr. Faircloth introduced Ralph Verrastro of Bridging Solutions.
o Mr. Verrastro reviewed the executive summary. It summarizes the findings of their
inspection of the eight golf cart bridges in the District. The bridges are approximately 19
years old. Constructional condition of bridge elements ranges from poor to satisfactory.
o Construction damages were due to overload. Estimated costs for bridge repair is
$190,000.
o He recommended contacting Artistic Structure for immediate repairs. Mr. Faircloth
contacted Artistic Structure and spoke to Travis. Travis, depending on the timeframe, he
may be able to get a crew together. Immediate repairs could possibly be completed in one
day. Regarding extensive repairs, it depends on working it out with Travis' time
schedule. The next golf course shutdown will be Memorial Day Weekend and will be a
10-day shutdown, which could be extended to 14 days.
Unapproved 2
February 12,2018 Cedar Hammock CDD
On MOTION by Mr. Minamyer seconded by Mr. McClellan with
all in favor engaging Artistic Structure for the short term repairs,
but not be limited to Artistic Structure if they cannot find the time
to do the repairs and proceed with seeking another vendor to
complete the work as soon as possible was approved.
o Mr. Verrastro recommended that all aprons be replaced as we replace the bridges.
On MOTION by Mr. Greeley seconded by Mr. Minayer with Mr.
Minayer, Mr. McClellan, Mr. Greely and Mr. Cook voting aye and
Mr. Day voting nay to accept the report and proceeding with the
recommended short term and long term repairs as noted in the
report.
o Since the Executive Summary is going to become a matter of record there are a couple of
items to report on. The bridge on#17 is three and 1/2 years old and not 10 years old. In
the second paragraph where it says, "There is also evidence of structural damage due to
overloads on some of the bridges". Is there any evidence to that?
Mr. Greeley MOVED to accept the February 5, 2018 Bridging
Solutions Report and proceeding with the recommended short term
and long term repairs at a cost of$190,000 on bridge repairs as
noted in the report and Mr. Minamyer seconded the motion.
o Mr. Day agreed emergency repairs should be done as soon as possible. But before
investing a sizeable amount of money on any of the other bridges that are going to be
used for bulkhead work, we should decide on what and when the bulkheads will be done
because the bridges may not handle the type of bulkhead wall we are going to put in. For
bridges 4 and 5A we have to figure out what we are doing about bulkhead walls.
o Mr. Faircloth noted at the last meeting we decided we would wait ten years to move
forward with bulkheads.
o Mr. Cook stated I will make an exception and take Audience Comments now.
o Mr. Jake is concerned with the first sentence in the second paragraph of the Engineer's
Report where it states the Master Board is responsible for maintenance of the bulkheads
and bridges. From our Memorandum of Agreement that was negotiated and signed, the
Unapproved 3
February 12,2018 Cedar Hammock CDD
fact is there is very limited maintenance that we do. I would like that corrected with the
word maintenance changed to limited maintenance.
On VOICE vote with Mr. Greeley, Mr. Minamyer, Mr. McClellan
and Mr. Cook voting aye and Mr. Day voting nay, the prior motion
passed.
o Mr. Faircloth will send out to selected bidders and get proposals.
o If we do the repairs and replace the stringers, the bridges are salvageable for another ten
years.
o Mr. Marshall noted one possible solution to the bidding is you can hid it straight out as it
is and always ask for an alternate for two bridges or whichever ones you select.
On MOTION by Mr. Greeley seconded by Mr. Minamyer with all
in favor the design and engineering services related to the repairs
for the seven bridges by Bridging Solutions in the estimated
amount of$18,000 including final design drawings/specifications,
bidding services and construction engineering inspections was
approved and then the Board will consider bridges 4 and 5 when
the Board meets again in March,2018.
o Mr. Cook asked the Board to consider the possibility of upgrading bridges 4 and 5 to 10-
ton load ratings if possible. He presented a handout for possible repairs.
o This item will be tabled until the next meeting.
FOURTH ORDER OF BUSINESS Audience Comments
o An audience member commented on the Synopsis read aloud earlier.
o Jack commented on CDD communication to the community.
o A resident commented on the link on the Cedar Hammock website. He requested the
Board follow the lead of the Master Association, Mr. Read and staff. They send notices
of when the next meeting will be held. They get reports from all the committees noting
what issues they are dealing with. He does not see that from the CDD. Residents have to
chase after the CDD to get information. He asked whether Mr. McClellan's Synopsis
will be posted on the website.
Unapproved 4
February 12, 2018 Cedar Hammock CDD
o Dave is concerned with the Board postponing the bulkhead and the bridge repair projects.
It sounds like the bridges are more of a concern than the bulkheads.
o Gene asked about insurance for the CDD should there be an incident regarding the
bulkheads.
FIFTH ORDER OF BUSINESS New Business
A. Bridging Solutions Bridge Report
Discussed above.
SIXTH ORDER OF BUSINESS Manager's Report
A. Fiscal Year 2019 Draft Budget Presentation
o The tentative budget was included in the agenda package.
B. Approval of the Minutes of the January 8,2018 Report
Minor corrections were made to the minutes and will be incorporated into them.
On MOTION Mr. Day seconded by Mr. Greeley with all in favor
the minutes of the January 8, 2018 meeting were approved as
amended.
C. Acceptance of Financials
o Mr. Faircloth noted as of today you are approximately 91% to 92% collected on your
assessments.
o The fund balance has gone up due to holding down of expenses.
o At this point in time,the District is in a good financial position.
Let the record reflect, Mr. Verrastro and Mr. Marshall left the meeting,
On MOTION Mr. McClellan seconded by Mr. Greeley with all in
favor the financial statements were accepted.
SEVENTH ORDER OF BUSINESS Attorney's Report
A. Approval of Resolution 2018-02 Spending Resolution
Unapproved 5
February 12, 2018 Cedar Hammock CDD
o Mr. Cook noted we discussed at the January meeting that it would have helped if we had
this in the event of a catastrophic failure on a bulkhead, to be able to proceed immediately
with repairs.
o The resolution included in the agenda package is incorrect.
o In Section 1, the blank for General Maintenance Expenses will be in an amount not-to-
exceed $5,000.
o In Section 2, the blank for Emergency Expenditures will be in an amount to expend no
more than $50,000.
Mr. Greeley MOVED to adopt Resolution 2018-02 as amended
authorizing the disbursement of funds for payment of certain
expenses for General Maintenance Expenses with a limit in an
amount not-to-exceed $5,000 and for Emergency Expenditures in
an amount to expend no more than $50,000 was adopted as
amended and Mr. McClellan seconded the motion.
o More discussion ensued on the resolution.
On VOICE vote with all in favor the prior motion passed.
SIXTH ORDER OF BUSINESS Manager Report(Continued)
D, Follow Up Items
o Mr. Faircloth noted this has been discussed with District Counsel. Between the last
meeting and today, he was made aware two supervisurs were at the Master Association
meeting. It is very important we follow Sunshine Laws as a CDD because you are a
government entity. There could be a potential discussion of items that could come before
this Board for a vote and you are going to be at a meeting. That meeting should be
noticed.
o Mr. Day noted you arc telling me I cannot go to a Master Association meeting if there is
another supervisor there?
o Mr. Faircloth noted I am not saying that. I'm advising you of the Sunshine Law. If you
as a Board want the ability to attend those meetings, as a resident, which you are entitled
to do,there is no reason why you should be prohibited from going.
Unapproved 6
February 12, 2018 Cedar Hammock CDD
o In order to comply with the Sunshine Law, we should cross notice those Master
Association meetings.
o In order to cross notice, you have to meet three conditions:
o #1 It has to be open to the general public. If the Master Association says their meetings
are not open to the public and we will not allow the public to attend,you as a CDD Board
member should not attend.
o #2 If they allow the public to attend and we publicly notice it and minutes are taken, then
there is no reason why you could not attend that meeting.
o #3 It could be presumed that there could be a violation of Sunshine Law meaning two
supervisors discussed an item that could come before this Board for a vote, such as the
bulkhead wall,then the public could challenge that.
o He recommended if multiple Board members are going to attend Master Association
meetings or HOA meetings where items that could come before you as Board members
and discussed,that we cross notice those meetings.
o Staff recommended the CDD cross notice Master HOA meetings and also recommended
future communication to the Master HOA Board from the CDD Board be completed via
motion by the Board determining how the communication will be drafted and who will
bring the communication to the Master HOA Board.
o A very long discussion ensued on bidding on bulkhead walls.
o Mr. Minamyer noted two years ago when we started talking about the bulkhead needs,the
cost was about $200,000 to $500,000. As time progressed, the last number was $5
million and borrowing money so we can pay for it and strap the community with a $5
million debt.
o Mr. Cook stated the whole idea of cross noticing the meetings is dead in the water
because of the conditions that exist at the Master.
o Conditions for attending or not attending a Master Association or HOA meeting were
discussed at length.
o If Board members have questions whether to attend or not, they can also contact District
Counsel.
Audit Committee Meeting
1. Audit Committee Selection Process for Fiscal Year 2018
Unapproved 7
February 12,2018 Cedar Hammock CDD
2. Establishment of RFP Evaluation Criteria
3. Authorization to Proceed with RFP
o Mr. Faircloth noted per Statute, every three years you are to re-evaluate your auditor and
by law you are required to have an audit every year to make sure the finances are being
handled properly. We are coming up on the third year. When we approved the contract
with your current audit provider, there was a one-year contract with two optional one year
renewals. They were renewed every year and we are now on the third year. We need to
re-evaluate your auditor.
o In the past the entire Board was the Audit Committee. We need to evaluate the RFP
criteria.
o Once we get responses from the RFP you need to review that. We will put responses to
the RFP in the agenda package.
On MOTION by Mr. Greeley seconded by Mr. McClellan with all
in favor the Board of Supervisors was approved to act as the Audit
Committee.
On MOTION by Mr. Greeley seconded by Mr. McClellan with all
in favor the RFP evaluation criteria was approved.
On MOTION by Mr. Greeley seconded by Mr. McClellan with all
in favor authorization to proceed with the RFP was approved.
SIXTH ORDER OF BUSINESS Manager's Report(Continued)
A. Fiscal Year 2019 Draft Budget Presentation
o Mr. Faircloth spoke about the process of adoption of the budget.
o At the next meeting, the tentative Fiscal Year 2019 budget will be approved.
o At the May 21,2018 Board meeting,the Fiscal Year 2019 budget will be adopted.
o There were some minor changes from last year's budget.
o There is an increase in the Inframark's fee by 3%.
EIGHTH ORDER OF BUSINESS Engineer's Report
There not being any,the next item followed.
Unapproved 8
February 12, 2018 Cedar Hammock CDD
NINTH ORDER OF BUSINESS Communication to Master Board
o Mr. Faircloth believes this year many boards will be required by law to have four hours of
Ethics Training. That has not been passed yet.
o Mr. Cook noted we continue to have a lot of algae in our lakes. Do the aerators make a
difference? We switched water management companies five or six times. We looked for
input from Severn Trent and tried to follow their suggestions.
o Mr. Read responded noting he is disappointed with issues with several vendors.
o Mr. Cook suggested visiting other communities and golf courses to look at their lakes and
make a spread sheet with notes on what they do and the vendor they use. Then report
back with the results.
o Mr. Read noted Lake Masters is used by a number of communities throughout Southwest
Florida and they have better results than they have here.
o Mr. Faircloth recommended testing be done. We could have other companies come in
and do testing on the lakes and see what their readings are.
Mr. McClellan MOVED to complete a water quality test and Mr.
Greeley seconded the motion.
o Discussion ensued on water quality testing.
On VOICE vote with all in favor the prior motion was passed.
TENTH ORDER OF BUSINESS Supervisor's Reports, Requests and
Comments
o Mr. Day noted he has two motions. But, first he would hope we all recognize the
community is very concerned about what is going on and we should be listening to them.
Mr. Day MOVED to get bids for linear foot price rather than a
total price to replace rotted cap boards on bulkheads and Mr.
McClellan seconded the motion.
o Discussion ensued on the above motion.
o It would take at least one month to get proposals back.
o Mr. Cook asked Mr. Day to modify the motion to follow the bridge repairs.
Unapproved 9
February 12, 2018 Cedar Hammock CDD
o Mr. Day withdrew his prior motion.
Mr. Day MOVED to have Bridging Solutions complete plans for
Hole #16 wooden bulkhead to be constructed from the water side
and a vinyl bulkhead with a small excavator from the shore
without damaging the turf and get contractor bids for each and Mr.
McClellan seconded the motion.
On MOTION by Mr. Day seconded by Mr. McClellan with all in
favor the prior motion was revised to read for Bridging Solutions
to complete plans for wooden bulkhead on Hole #16 to he
constructed from the water and a vinyl bulkhead from shore
without damaging the turf and complete the project between May
15, 2019 to June 30,2019.
o Mr. Faircloth suggested reviewing Mr. Verrastro of Bridging Solutions who addressed
questions raised at a previous meeting including recommendations for cost of the wall.
o Mr. Cook noted at the January Board meeting when we decided that we had a neighbor
who had bulkheads that had extended life. We know that if we were to started replacing
bulkheads we would incur a lot of money. The approach was monitoring and doing
repairs as repairs are needed. It is the most balanced financial approach. I do not believe
anyone's safety is compromised. Is there a risk going forward? Yes, it is possible.
However,the decision the CDD Board has taken is the most prudent.
o Mr. Minamyer agreed. The reason we are not moving ahead is because we keep backing
up. We already have a decision and he does not want to change that decision. The
approach being taken is the correct approach.
o Mr. Day stated I do not think we have a good budget number without a bid. We should
be looking more towards doing something rather than putting it off.
o Mr. Cook asked does this need to be voted on today?
o Some supervisors felt the motion should be postponed until the Board meeting in March.
o Mr. Cook noted he is not ready to cast a vote. If the Board wants his vote, he will
abstain.
o Mr. Faircloth stated you are not allowed to abstain by law unless there is a conflict of
interest. He would have to fill out a specific form explaining why you are abstaining.
Unapproved 10
February 12, 2018 Cedar Hammock CDD
o Mr. Faircloth noted there would be increased cost for a vinyl wall. We do not have any
plans at all for a vinyl wall. With this motion, you would be authorizing the expense to
pay Mr. Verrastro whatever fee it would cost.
o Mr. Faircloth asked where would we get the money to do the bulkhead? It is $300,000.
o Mr. Day stated take it out of the Roads.
o Mr. Faircloth stated you have $117,000 in Roadways; $29,000 in the Lakes, $67,000 in
bulkheads and $118,000 in Bridges. We are looking at $190,000 in Bridge costs alone.
You do not have the cash to do the project without getting a loan. You can get a five-
year loan without having to get it validated. If you go over five years, you have to get it
validated.
o Mr. Cook noted he does not feel prepared to vote at this time. He wanted time to
consider and mull this over and then vote in March.
o Supervisors debated back and forth on this issue.
Mr. Cook MOVED to table the prior motion to the March 12,
2018 Board Meeting and Mr. Greeley seconded the motion.
On VOICE vote with Mr. Cook, Mr. Greeley, Mr. Day and Mr.
McClellan voting aye and Mr. Minamyer voting nay, the prior
,motion passed.
o Mr. Faircloth pointed out the motion that was made earlier did not include the dates and
all the other information. In order for that motion to be considered, it would need to be
changed.
o The below motion will be tabled to March, 2018.
On MOTION by Mr. Day seconded by Mr. McClellan with all in
favor the prior motion was revised to read for Bridging Solutions
to complete plans for wooden bulkhead on Hole #16 to be
constructed from the water and a vinyl bulkhead from shore
without damaging the turf and complete the project between May
2019 to June 2019.
Unapproved 11
February 12,2018 Cedar Hammock CDD
ELEVENTH ORDER OF BUSINESS Adjournment
There being no further business,
On MOTION by Mr. McClellan seconded by Mr. Cook with all in
favor the meeting was adjourned at 6:09 p.m.
Justin Faircloth Tom Cook
Secretary Chairman
Unapproved 12
EXH;8;; A
Synopsis of Discussions,Decisions,and Actions By the Board of Supervisors of the
Cedar Hammock Community Development District(CDD)on Bulkheads
The Board of Supervisors of the Cedar Hammock CDD is keenly aware of the increased
interest by the Cedar Hammock membership in what discussions,decisions,and actions
the CDI)has been taking regarding the bulkheads within the community. Being
responsible for the infrastructure assets in Cedar IIammock,the CDD monitors,
maintains,and,as needed,repairs,replaces,enhances,and improves these assets. One of
the major assets is the bulkheads and in the last few years they have captured a growing
amount of the CDD's attention due to their advancing age and needed maintenance and
repairs and potential replacement.
With the turnover of Cedar Hammock from the developer to the members in 2004,the
COD Board of Supervisors also came under community control. At that time the
infrastructure assets were relatively young and generally in good condition, Nonetheless,
issues did come up from time to time and were addressed, including a few involving the
bulkheads.
As time moved on,however, and plans by the Master Association included the golf
course regrassing project for 2014,the CDD reviewed the status of the bulkheads to
determine what action might be necessary to coincide with that event. In the Spring of
2012,the CDD commissioned an inspection of the bulkheads by James E.Hirst and
Associates,Inc.,a local civil and structural engineering company. While the report given
pointed out some issues,none were considered serious,and the overall conclusion was
that the engineers "would estimate approximately ten years plus before this system will
express conditions which would prompt the consideration of complete replacement."
With that input, the CDD Board decided that the bulkheads were good for another decade
and longer and needed no replacement or major work when the course regrassing was
done in 2014.
After the golf course project was completed,some bulkhead issues occurred that caused
the CDD in early 2015 to have another inspection done,this time by the firm Artistic
Structures,a well respected bulkhead construction company that has done work at Cedar
Hammock over the years,along with the structural engineering firm Bridging Solutions
which specializes in bridge and retaining wall engineering services. The concerns were
primarily about holes 4, 5, 16,and 17 and dealt largely with problems with some whalers
(the horizontal boards on the face of the bulkhead)which were bulging. A plan for
repairs was developed and would be carried out by Artistic Structures. Since special
brackets required to accomplish the repairs needed to be manufactured,the entire repair
process proceeded over the next year. Additional maintenance was also carried out
including power washing the bulkhead surfaces and applying sealer.
During the Summer of 2015,the bulkhead along the tee box on hole 16 experienced a
failure of the tie-back cables on one of the soldier piles causing a major bulge and
concern about potential further damage. The bulkhead was inspected again by Artistic
Structures and Bridging Solutions to determine needed repairs. The normal repair to the
bulkhead would be to excavate back to where the existing pile deadman was located
(approximately 20 feet back from the wall)and run new cable. Artistic Structures was
fully engaged in other projects and could not do the work. Plus, it would have closed
most of the tee box during the repair and necessitate regrassing the tee area. An
alternative option was to bore into the existing wall and the tee arca with an auger which
creates its own deadman and does not require excavation of the tee surface. This was a
more costly procedure,but the repairs needed to be done. Adjacent bulkhead surfaces
were inspected and it was decided to do similar repairs in several areas as a preventative
measure. This work was accomplished by the N Square company.
During 2015 some$70,000 in repairs and maintenance were performed on the bulkheads
and the results were successful in the areas addressed. However,in the Summer of 2016,
there was another tie-hack failure on 16. It was not as serious as the previous one and
repairs were able to be done by Cedar Hammock's own golf course maintenance crew
after having the site evaluated by Bridging Solutions.
With such issues becoming more frequent and concerning, the Board of Supervisors
focused greater attention on eventually replacing the four bulkheads. In October 2016 the
CDL)contracted with Bridging Solutions to provide recommendations,replacement cost
estimates,and priority ranking for bulkhead replacement. At the November 2016
meeting,a preliminary report stated that a timber wall replacement similar to the existing
bulkheads would have a 35 year life expectancy at an estimated cost of$40 per square
foot and a concrete segmented block wall retaining system would have a 75 year life
expectancy at an estimated cost of$50 to$55 per square foot. Either of these options
would require significant encroachment into the course(excavation up to 30 feet from the
bulkhead)and take several weeks or longer to accomplish per hole. In addition,once
completed, repairs to the course would be required and possibly take up to three months
to recover.This would cause a major disruption to play on the course, impact revenue for
the Club,have a significant impact on the Club staff,and limit the availability of certain
amenities such as food and beverage services. All these consequences must be taken into
consideration. Looking at potential cost and longevity,the small concrete block
construction was viewed as a likely choice.
At the December 2016 meeting,Bridging solutions was contracted to provide engineering
services for design,bid preparation,and bid review for the bulkheads on holes 16 and 17.
On site visits and inspections were accomplished by Bridging Solutions, along with a
representative of Banks Engineering(the CDD's "in house"engineering consultants)
during January 2017. In an update report at the February 2017 meeting, Bridging
Solutions estimated the cost for both walls to be$280,000. General Manager Tom Read,
who had attended numerous previous CDD meetings and given valuable input to issues
under discussion,again highlighted the impact on the course and Master Board budget
considerations as well as the difficulty of booking a golf course contractor on short
notice. Advanced planning for a project of this nature is a necessity. This also holds true
for scheduling a bulkhead contractor,many of whom are booked well in advance,
especially for prime time to do such work which is at the end of Season and before the
rainy season get into full gear and the ponds start to refill. It was then decided by the
Supervisors to delay the project until April 2018.
At the March 2017 meeting, an alternative construction option was discussed. Supervisor
Day had contacted a local firm(Garland and Garland)that could construct a wood
bulkhead similar to what currently exists but do it from the water side and minimize
damage to the course. They use an auger method similar to what was used to repair 16
previously,but this one is much larger and provides greater support to the new wall. The
process would also allow for the existing wall to remain in place and the new wall erected
in front of it.
The April 2017 meeting continued the discussion of the bulkheads with Bridging
Solutions addressing a persistent concern about the possibility of having to bore into
bedrock if the soldier piles can not be driven in sufficiently. If additional boring were
required, it would significantly increase the cost. (The issue of hitting bedrock or not has
been an ongoing point of discussion between the engineers and Board members.
1-listorically in Cedar Hammock there has never been a problem due to a soldier pile
being dislodged from the bottom.) But looking at the estimated costs provided by
Garland and Garland of approximately$70 per square foot,the cost for the four
bulkheads would be approximately$1.3 to$1.5 million.
The next CDD meeting was not until October 2017. Four Supervisors were present;Mr.
Day could not attend. When the issue of bulkheads came up, Bridging Solutions
provided a 90%complete design package,which is all that was required at the time. It
also presented an estimate for a timber retaining wall budget. Il was noted that the
previous Garland and Garland cost estimate did not include the possibility of hitting
bedrock and the subsequent need to drill into it if it were encountered. Bridging
Solutions contacted another construction company,TSI Disaster Recovery LLC,for a
budget estimate. In their calculations the estimate went from$70 to$186 per square foot;
roughly two and a half times more. This was sobering to the Supervisors present and
further discussion was undertaken on the cost and longevity of construction options,
funding options,contingency plans for a bulkhead failure and how to keep the course
open,and contractor scheduling. It was agreed by those present that the cost of a wood
replacement as presented was excessive and a motion to have a final design drawn up for
a concrete block wall was passed.
All Supervisors were present for the November 2017 meeting. During previous bulkhead
discussions,the Supervisors recognized and took into consideration the potential costs to
the Club of closing down the course for a period of time because of bulkhead
replacement. It was generally agreed that the CDD would be willing to reimburse the
Master Board for damage to the course(greens,regrassing, irrigation equipment,tee box
repair,cart path,etc.),lost revenues to the Club,and staff costs. (Subsequently the CDD
was advised by its lawyer that under State statutes it could pay for damages to the course,
but it could not reimburse for the other loses and costs.)
Mr.Read and Master Board Vice President Lawrence attended the meeting and provided
comments and input to the discussions. Mr.Read discussed that the Master Board would
be closing the Clubhouse for refurbishment from approximately June 1st through mid-
July 2019 during which time the food and beverage amenities would be shut down.
There was discussion about postponing bulkhead work to coincide with that project. Mr.
Day also expressed his opinion that information used as the basis for the motion approved
in the October meeting to reject the wood wall in favor of the concrete block wall should
be reviewed by another engineer and to get a second opinion on the two types of wall
construction,the methods of construction,cost estimates,and timeframes. He made a
motion to this affect which was passed on a three to two vote.
The next meeting was held in January 2018. Supervisor Day relayed that he had shown
the Bridging Solutions calculations and engineering data to another engineer who had no
problems with them. The other engineer did take exception to Bridging Solutions
recommendations concerning core drilling of rock,suggesting there were alternatives to
this which would keep costs down. He also suggested Mr. Day talk with another
contractor who recommended a construction process using interlocking vinyl sheeting.
Mr.Day explained that the vinyl material was more expensive than wood, but time would
be saved in installation resulting in an overall lower cost for installation. The installation
method apparently would also cause little or no damage to the course and the wall would
have a 50 year guarantee. There was further discussion about the difference of opinion
over the bedrock issue.
Supervisor Minamyer then discussed his visit with the golf course supervisor at Naples
Heritage to discuss their bulkheads. Naples Heritage is a sister US Homes development a
couple of years older than Cedar Hammock and Mr. Minamyer wanted to investigate
their experiences with bulkheads. Naples Heritage has used a firm named JTM to do
repairs to their bulkheads and spoke highly of the work done. They have fewer
bulkheads than Cedar Hammock and with the maintenance and repairs that have been
carried out they have not had significant issues with them. Following on, Mr.Minamyer
recommended delaying replacement of bulkheads until the next regrassing which is being
considered for 2028, doing what preventative maintenance can be anticipated and making
required repairs as needed in the interim. His thought being that this would allow the
CDD time to accumulate funds without having to borrow money or issue a bond and
permit and provide ample time for coordination between the CDD and the Master Board
to incorporate the bulkhead replacement into the regrassing project. In addition,since the
course would be shut down during that project, if a more invasive construction process
for bulkhead replacement would be selected,it would not present a problem. His
recommendation was concurred in by the other Supervisors.
Discussion continued concerning the need to develop an emergency spending resolution
as a contingency should something occur and it was agreed that this would be done
expeditiously. Mr. Day, expressing concern about hole 16,also suggested getting a
contractor proposal for replacement of the bulkhead to get a cost estimate. The District
Manager pointed out that this had already been done with the report provided by Bridging
Solutions. Mr.Day then suggested putting out a bid for two wall options(wood and
vinyl)to see what the price would be. Staff noted that numbers had previously been
obtained and that there were previous decisions by the Board that would need to he
rescinded or revised before such a motion could be considered.. It was then moved by
Mr. Minamyer to rescind the motion approved in the November meeting. The vote was
unanimous in favor.
In a recap of the Board's bulkhead discussions and actions,Chairman Cook summarized
that the Board will move ahead toward a bulkhead solution during the next regrassing
using the October 2017 motion of the small concrete block construction for budgeting
purposes while being alert to any needed repairs in the interim. The District Manager
added that Bridging Solutions would be informed of the Board's intentions and be asked
to identify other construction options available,such as the vinyl mentioned by Mr.Day.
This brings you up to date on Board bulkhead discussions and actions. It is hoped that
this synopsis gives you a clearer idea of what the CDD has been doing regarding
bulkheads. As can be seen,the Board of Supervisors draws upon the advice and input of
a range of professionals and experts in the engineering and construction fields and strives
to do its due diligence in addressing the issue. It also tries to look at the impact and
implications of actions it takes(or doesn't take)and factor that into its decisions. The
CDD also takes very seriously its fiduciary responsibility and duty to the owners in Cedar
Hammock. Infrastructure assets often carry a large price tag so the Board is very
sensitive to the financial implications of its actions. It also recognizes the need for and
strongly espouses a cooperative and coordinated relationship with the Master Board in
order to have a positive impact on the community and to sustain and enhance the
investment we all have in Cedar Hammock.
Hopefully it is clear that the Board of Supervisors is not ignoring the issue and is
committed to finding a solution. As can be seen from this summary, there are various
construction and material options to consider as well as differing Opinions about some of
the information and data acquired to date. It can also be seen that decisions and positions
can and do change as information is gathered and factored into the decision making
process. Catastrophic failures are largely unpredictable. Developing problems can be
detected and remedial steps taken or repairs made when needed.
Finally, as a governmental entity governed by Chapter 190 of the Florida State Statutes,
the CDD operates under Florida's Sunshine Law. Its meeting are open to all and no
business can be accomplished or discussed between the Supervisors outside of a properly
noticed meeting. Public attendance at the meetings is encouraged and there is a website
that carries important CDD information. The site is CedarHammockCDD.com. There is
also a link to that site on the Cedar Hammock website.
ExN; A
Synopsis of Discussions,Decisions,and Actions By the Board of Supervisors of the
Cedar Hammock Community Development District(CDD) on Bulkheads
The Board of Supervisors of the Cedar Hammock CDD is keenly aware of the increased
interest by the Cedar Hammock membership in what discussions,decisions,and actions
the CDD has been taking regarding the bulkheads within the community. Being
responsible for the infrastructure assets in Cedar Hammock,the CDD monitors,
maintains,and,as needed, repairs, replaces,enhances,and improves these assets. One of
the major assets is the bulkheads and in the last few years they have captured a growing
amount of the CDD's attention due to their advancing age and needed maintenance and
repairs and potential replacement.
With the turnover of Cedar Hammock from the developer to the members in 2004,the
CDD Board of Supervisors also came under community control. At that time the
infrastructure assets were relatively young and generally in good condition. Nonetheless,
issues did come up from time to time and were addressed, including a few involving the
bulkheads.
As time moved on,however, and plans by the Master Association included the golf
course regrassing project for 2014,the CDD reviewed the status of the bulkheads to
determine what action might be necessary to coincide with that event. In the Spring of
2012, the CDD commissioned an inspection of the bulkheads by James E. Hirst and
Associates, Inc., a local civil and structural engineering company. While the report given
pointed out some issues,none were considered serious,and the overall conclusion was
that the engineers "would estimate approximately ten years plus before this system will
express conditions which would prompt the consideration of complete replacement."
With that input,the CDD Board decided that the bulkheads were good for another decade
and longer and needed no replacement or major work when the course regrassing was
done in 2014.
After the golf course project was completed, some bulkhead issues occurred that caused
the CDD in early 2015 to have another inspection done,this time by the firm Artistic
Structures,a well respected bulkhead construction company that has done work at Cedar
Hammock over the years,along with the structural engineering firm Bridging Solutions
which specializes in bridge and retaining wall engineering services. The concerns were
primarily about holes 4, 5, 16,and 17 and dealt largely with problems with some whalers
(the horizontal boards on the face of the bulkhead) which were bulging. A plan for
repairs was developed and would be carried out by Artistic Structures. Since special
brackets required to accomplish the repairs needed to be manufactured,the entire repair
process proceeded over the next year. Additional maintenance was also carried out
including power washing the bulkhead surfaces and applying sealer.
During the Summer of 2015, the bulkhead along the tee box on hole 16 experienced a
failure of the tie-back cables on one of the soldier piles causing a major bulge and
concern about potential further damage. The bulkhead was inspected again by Artistic
Structures and Bridging Solutions to determine needed repairs. The normal repair to the
bulkhead would be to excavate back to where the existing pile dcadman was located
(approximately 20 feet back from the wall)and run new cable. Artistic Structures was
fully engaged in other projects and could not do the work. Plus, it would have closed
most of the tee box during the repair and necessitate regrassing the tee area. An
alternative option was to bore into the existing wall and the tee area with an auger which
creates its own deadman and does not require excavation of the tee surface. This was a
more costly procedure, but the repairs needed to be done. Adjacent bulkhead surfaces
were inspected and it was decided to do similar repairs in several areas as a preventative
measure. This work was accomplished by the N Square company.
During 2015 some$70,000 in repairs and maintenance were performed on the bulkheads
and the results were successful in the areas addressed. However, in the Summer of 2016,
there was another tie-back failure on 16. It was not as serious as the previous one and
repairs were able to be done by Cedar Hammock's own golf course maintenance crew
after having the site evaluated by Bridging Solutions.
With such issues becoming more frequent and concerning,the Board of Supervisors
focused greater attention on eventually replacing the four bulkheads. In October 2016 the
CDD contracted with Bridging Solutions to provide recommendations, replacement cost
estimates,and priority ranking for bulkhead replacement. At the November 2016
meeting,a preliminary report stated that a timber wall replacement similar to the existing
bulkheads would have a 35 year life expectancy at an estimated cost of$40 per square
foot and a concrete segmented block wall retaining system would have a 75 year life
expectancy at an estimated cost of$50 to$55 per square foot. Either of these options
would require significant encroachment into the course (excavation up to 30 feet from the
bulkhead)and take several weeks or longer to accomplish per hole. In addition, once
completed,repairs to the course would be required and possibly take up to three months
to recover.This would cause a major disruption to play on the course, impact revenue for
the Club, have a significant impact on the Club staff,and limit the availability of certain
amenities such as food and beverage services. All these consequences must be taken into
consideration, Looking at potential cost and longevity,the small concrete block
construction was viewed as a likely choice.
At the December 2016 meeting, Bridging solutions was contracted to provide engineering
services for design, bid preparation,and bid review for the bulkheads on holes 16 and 17.
On site visits and inspections were accomplished by Bridging Solutions, along with a
representative of Banks Engineering(the CDD's "in house"engineering consultants)
during January 2017. In an update report at the February 2017 meeting, Bridging
Solutions estimated the cost for both walls to be$280,000. General Manager Tom Read,
who had attended numerous previous CDD meetings and given valuable input to issues
under discussion,again highlighted the impact on the course and Master Board budget
considerations as well as the difficulty of booking a golf course contractor on short
notice. Advanced planning for a project of this nature is a necessity. This also holds true
for scheduling a bulkhead contractor,many of whom are booked well in advance,
especially for prime time to do such work which is at the end of Season and before the
rainy season get into full gear and the ponds start to refill. It was then decided by the
Supervisors to delay the project until April 2018.
At the March 2017 meeting,an alternative construction option was discussed. Supervisor
Day had contacted a local firm(Garland and Garland)that could construct a wood
bulkhead similar to what currently exists but do it from the water side and minimize
damage to the course. They use an auger method similar to what was used to repair 16
previously, but this one is much larger and provides greater support to the new wall. The
process would also allow for the existing wall to remain in place and the new wall erected
in front of it.
The April 2017 meeting continued the discussion of the bulkheads with Bridging
Solutions addressing a persistent concern about the possibility of having to bore into
bedrock if the soldier piles can not be driven in sufficiently. If additional boring were
required, it would significantly increase the cost. (The issue of hitting bedrock or not has
been an ongoing point of discussion between the engineers and Board members.
Historically in Cedar Hammock there has never been a problem due to a soldier pile
being dislodged from the bottom.) But looking at the estimated costs provided by
Garland and Garland of approximately$70 per square foot,the cost for the four
bulkheads would be approximately$1.3 to$1.5 million.
The next CDD meeting was not until October 2017. Four Supervisors were present; Mr.
Day could not attend. When the issue of bulkheads came up, Bridging Solutions
provided a 90%complete design package,which is all that was required at the time. It
also presented an estimate for a timber retaining wall budget. It was noted that the
previous Garland and Garland cost estimate did not include the possibility of hitting
bedrock and the subsequent need to drill into it if it were encountered. Bridging
Solutions contacted another construction company,TSI Disaster Recovery LLC,for a
budget estimate. In their calculations the estimate went from$70 to$186 per square foot;
roughly two and a half times more. This was sobering to the Supervisors present and
further discussion was undertaken on the cost and longevity of construction options,
funding options,contingency plans for a bulkhead failure and how to keep the course
open,and contractor scheduling. It was agreed by those present that the cost of a wood
replacement as presented was excessive and a motion to have a final design drawn up for
a concrete block wall was passed.
All Supervisors were present for the November 2017 meeting. During previous bulkhead
discussions,the Supervisors recognized and took into consideration the potential costs to
the Club of closing down the course for a period of time because of bulkhead
replacement. It was generally agreed that the CDD would be willing to reimburse the
Master Board for damage to the course(greens, regrassing, irrigation equipment,tee box
repair,cart path, etc.), lost revenues to the Club,and staff costs. (Subsequently the CDD
was advised by its lawyer that under State statutes it could pay for damages to the course,
but it could not reimburse for the other loses and costs.)
Mr. Read and Master Board Vice President Lawrence attended the meeting and provided
comments and input to the discussions. Mr.Read discussed that the Master Board would
be closing the Clubhouse for refurbishment from approximately June l st through mid-
July 2019 during which time the food and beverage amenities would be shut down.
There was discussion about postponing bulkhead work to coincide with that project. Mr.
Day also expressed his opinion that information used as the basis for the motion approved
in the October meeting to reject the wood wall in favor of the concrete block wall should
be reviewed by another engineer and to get a second opinion on the two types of wall
construction,the methods of construction, cost estimates, and timeframes. He made a
motion to this affect which was passed on a three to two vote.
The next meeting was held in January 2018. Supervisor Day relayed that he had shown
the Bridging Solutions calculations and engineering data to another engineer who had no
problems with them. The other engineer did take exception to Bridging Solutions
recommendations concerning core drilling of rock,suggesting there were alternatives to
this which would keep costs down. He also suggested Mr. Day talk with another
contractor who recommended a construction process using interlocking vinyl sheeting.
Mr. Day explained that the vinyl material was more expensive than wood, but time would
be saved in installation resulting in an overall lower cost for installation. The installation
method apparently would also cause little or no damage to the course and the wall would
have a 50 year guarantee. There was further discussion about the difference of opinion
over the bedrock issue.
Supervisor Minamyer then discussed his visit with the golf course supervisor at Naples
Heritage to discuss their bulkheads. Naples Heritage is a sister US Homes development a
couple of years older than Cedar Hammock and Mr. Minamyer wanted to investigate
their experiences with bulkheads. Naples Heritage has used a firm named JTM to do
repairs to their bulkheads and spoke highly of the work done. They have fewer
bulkheads than Cedar Hammock and with the maintenance and repairs that have been
carried out they have not had significant issues with them. Following on, Mr.Minamyer
recommended delaying replacement of bulkheads until the next regrassing which is being
considered for 2028, doing what preventative maintenance can be anticipated and making
required repairs as needed in the interim. His thought being that this would allow the
CDD time to accumulate funds without having to borrow money or issue a bond and
permit and provide ample time for coordination between the CDD and the Master Board
to incorporate the bulkhead replacement into the regrassing project. In addition,since the
course would be shut down during that project, if a more invasive construction process
for bulkhead replacement would be selected, it would not present a problem. His
recommendation was concurred in by the other Supervisors.
Discussion continued concerning the need to develop an emergency spending resolution
as a contingency should something occur and it was agreed that this would be done
expeditiously. Mr. Day,expressing concern about hole 16,also suggested getting a
contractor proposal for replacement of the bulkhead to get a cost estimate. The District
Manager pointed out that this had already been done with the report provided by Bridging
Solutions. Mr. Day then suggested putting out a bid for two wall options (wood and
vinyl)to see what the price would be. Staff noted that numbers had previously been
obtained and that there were previous decisions by the Board that would need to be
rescinded or revised before such a motion could be considered.. It was then moved by
Mr.Minamyer to rescind the motion approved in the November meeting. The vote was
unanimous in favor.
In a recap of the Board's bulkhead discussions and actions, Chairman Cook summarized
that the Board will move ahead toward a bulkhead solution during the next regrassing
using the October 2017 motion of the small concrete block construction for budgeting
purposes while being alert to any needed repairs in the interim. The District Manager
added that Bridging Solutions would be informed of the Board's intentions and be asked
to identify other construction options available,such as the vinyl mentioned by Mr. Day.
This brings you up to date on Board bulkhead discussions and actions. It is hoped that
this synopsis gives you a clearer idea of what the CDD has been doing regarding
bulkheads. As can be seen,the Board of Supervisors draws upon the advice and input of
a range of professionals and experts in the engineering and construction fields and strives
to do its due diligence in addressing the issue. It also tries to look at the impact and
implications of actions it takes(or doesn't take)and factor that into its decisions. The
CDD also takes very seriously its fiduciary responsibility and duty to the owners in Cedar
Hammock. Infrastructure assets often carry a large price tag so the Board is very
sensitive to the financial implications of its actions. It also recognizes the need for and
strongly espouses a cooperative and coordinated relationship with the Master Board in
order to have a positive impact on the community and to sustain and enhance the
investment we all have in Cedar Hammock.
Hopefully it is clear that the Board of Supervisors is not ignoring the issue and is
committed to finding a solution. As can be seen from this summary,there are various
construction and material options to consider as well as differing opinions about some of
the information and data acquired to date. It can also be seen that decisions and positions
can and do change as information is gathered and factored into the decision making
process. Catastrophic failures are largely unpredictable. Developing problems can be
detected and remedial steps taken or repairs made when needed.
Finally,as a governmental entity governed by Chapter 190 of the Florida State Statutes,
the CDD operates under Florida's Sunshine Law. Its meeting are open to all and no
business can be accomplished or discussed between the Supervisors outside of a properly
noticed meeting. Public attendance at the meetings is encouraged and there is a website
that carries important CDD information. The site is CedarHammockCDD.com. There is
also a link to that site on the Cedar Hammock website.
RALPH VERRASTRO, PE 1 Agenda Page#5
SBRIDGING
UTIO
iinpvS
Ralph Verrastro,PE specializes in the design,inspection,evaluation,technical supervision,and quality assurance/quality control
for new and rehabilitation bridge projects. He graduated with a BS in Civil Engineering from Cornell University in 1976. His
career includes bridge design experience throughout the United States and he is a registered Professional Engineer in 37 states.
Mr.Verrastro is a technical expert in the use of fast track repair/replacement methods using prefabricated bridge components
also known as Accelerated Bridge Construction. He has extensive experience in the evaluation and repair of bridges including
historic metal truss bridges and concrete arch bridges. He served as the Specialty Structural Engineer for over 500 bridge
structures throughout the USA working as a consultant to precast concrete manufacturers. He frequently provides technical
presentations on engineering topics at industry conferences.See a listing of presentations and publications on the 2nd page of
this resume.Mr.Verrastro is the Past President of the Florida Engineering Society(FES)Calusa Chapter and the current Zone
VI Vice President of FES.The following projects are examples of bridge engineering experience by Mr.Verrastro with Bridging
Solutions:
Charter School of Collier County Entrance Bridge,Collier County,FL—Bridging Solutions prepared the final design plans
and specifications for the entrance bridge over the Cocohatchee Canal for a new charter school off lmmokalee Road in Golden
Gate Estates.The new bridge is a 55 foot span,adjacent,prestressed slab beam bridge founded on pile supported end bents.
Babcock Ranch Entrance Bridge, Charlotte County, FL — Bridging Solutions prepared the final design plans and
specifications for the entrance"faux" bridge to the new Town of Babcock Ranch off FL Route 31. The new entrance bridge
incorporated 140 foot long by 16 feet high steel through trusses supported on shallow concrete spread footings.
Willow Run Entrance&Interior Bridges,Naples,FL—Bridging Solutions prepared the final design plans and specifications
for two bridges in the new community of Willow Run off Collier Boulevard in East Naples,FL.The entrance bridge consists of a
42 foot, single span, adjacent, prestressed slab beams supported on GRS-IBS abutments. The interior bridge consists of a
precast concrete arch supported on shallow concrete spread footings.
Cowpen Slough Bridge Replacement,Sarasota,FL—Bridging Solutions prepared preliminary and final design plans for the
replacement of a bridge over the Cowpen Slough at the Sarasota County Landfill.The new bridge consists of a 120 foot span
steel though pony truss supported on shallow concrete spread footings.
Lee County Complete Streets Project,Lee County,FL—Bridging Solutions was hired by Thomas Marine Construction, Inc.
to perform the design of 2 pedestrian bridges that provided access for a new multi-use path over wetland sloughs on this design-
build project for the Lee County MPO. Both bridges consisted of welded steel trusses with CIP concrete decks supported on
CIP concrete abutments founded on spread footings.
Rock Ridge Road Bridge Load Rating, Polk County, FL—Bridging Solutions was hired by Wright Construction Group to
perform the final load rating for this bridge based on the as-built conditions upon substantial completion for the replacement of
this bridge under a design build contract with FDOT District 1.The new bridge is a single,42 foot span structure,constructed
using 18"deep,prestressed,adjacent,concrete slab units with transverse post tensioning.The load rating update was required
because 1.5"of additional asphalt were placed on the bridge to make up an unforeseen grade differential on the roadway
approaches.
Bridge Program Study Report— Phase 4, Collier County, FL•This project involved the inspection and evaluation of 20
bridges for Collier County, Florida. The bridge types included box culverts, prestressed concrete slab, prestressed AASHTO
beam, and prestressed tee beam type bridges. We prepared a report that summarized the inspection findings and provided
recommendations for repair and/or replacement of the bridges.The recommendations also included a proposed sequence and
prioritization of the bridge repairs and replacements. Collier County is currently using the recommendations included in the
report as a tool for planning their future bridge repair and replacement program.
We design bridges to fit your site and budget.
Agenda Pae#B
,,„0BRIDGING
mor SOLUTIONS
Ralph Verrastro,PE
Presentations
A Bridge by Others?Florida Engineering Society Annual Conference,August,2017
A Bridge by Others?Peace River Engineering Society&ASCE West Palm Beach Chapter, March,2017
Bridge Structure Flood Emergency Training,APWA Southwest Branch,January,2017
Phased Accelerated Bridge Construction with GRS/IBS Abutments, National Accelerated Bridge Construction Conference,
December,2015
Accelerated Bridge Construction Case Study:Design Build Replacement of Rock Ridge Rd.Bridge, FDOT Design Expo,2014
Melbourne Street Bridge Replacement,APWA Florida Statewide Conference,2013
Accelerated Bridge Construction 101,ASCE Florida Section Annual Meeting,2012
Bridge Structure Flood Emergency Training,APWA Florida Statewide Conference,2010
Bridge Structure Flood Emergency Training,Collier County Bridge Department,2010
Bridge Structure Flood Emergency Training,Sarasota County Public Works Department,2010
Bridge Structure Flood Emergency Training.Citrus County Public Works Department,2010
Accelerated Bridge Construction Using Prefabricated Products.ASCE Florida Section Annual Meeting,2009
Accelerated Bridge Construction Using Prefabricated Products,APWA Florida Statewide Conference,2009
Bridge Structure Flood Emergency Training,Lee County Transportation Department,2009
Accelerated Bridge Construction Using Prefabricated Products,Florida Engineering Society Annual Conference,2008
Precast Concrete 101,Professional Engineers Continuing Education Symposium,2007
Bridge Design and Construction, Professional Engineers Continuing Education Symposium,2007
Innovative Tools and Techniques—Prefabricated Bridge Components,Land Development National Conference,2007
Bridge Design Coordination for Land Development Projects,American Society of Civil Engineers,Tampa Chapter,2007
Prefabricated Bridge Components,American Society of Civil Engineers Florida Section Annual Conference,2006
Bridge Design Coordination for Land Development Projects,Land Development West Conference,2006.
Land Development Bridges,Central New York Engineering Expo,2005
Rehabilitation of the McKinley Avenue Bridge over the Norfolk-Southern Railroad,NYSDOT Local Bridge Conference,2005
Structure Selection—Small Bridges,Cornell University—Local Roads Program,2005
Bridge Design Workshop,Association of Bridge Construction and Design,2005
Bridge Design Workshop,Precast Concrete Association of New York,2005.
Precast Box Culverts.National Engineers Week,2003
Rehabilitation of the Bridge Street Bridge over Chemung River,New York State Association of Transportation Engineers Annual
Conference,2000
Truss Bridge Floor Beam Replacement During Stage Construction.International Bridge Conference, 1998
Repairing Metal Truss Bridges,National Association of County Engineers—Annual Conference,Buffalo, 1997
Publications
Bridging Responsibilities,Florida Engineering Society Journal,May 2016
PRECASTSLAB+(GRS+IBS)=ABC, Florida Engineering Society Journal,June 2015
Bridging Responsibilities,Land Development Today,August 2005
Proper Management Improves Process,Land Development Today,August 2005
Land Development Bridges, Revitalization(Supplement to CE News),May 2005
Truss Bridge Floor Beam Replacement During Stage Construction,Proceedings of the International Bridge Conference,June
1998
2
We design bridges to fit your site and budget.
From: Ralph Verrastro [mailto:ralph(abridging-solutions.com] Agenda Page#7
Sent: Thursday, January 18, 2018 12:14 PM
To: Faircloth, Justin <Justin.Fairc1oth(inframark,com>
Cc: Rolando Corsa <rolando(abridging-solutions.com>; Gina Verrastro
<gina@bridging-solutions.com>
Subject: Re: Cedar Hammock CDD - Meting summary 1/8/18
Justin,
I just talked to Paul and he let me know he was terminated from his postion
and he gave me the number for his replacement Todd Legan. I put a call into
Todd regarding setting a date for next week to inspect the bridges. Here are
some comments and questions related to your meeting minutes:
1. I am available to attend the February 12th CDD meeting at 3 PM. Should
I arrive at 3 PM? Given the short time between now and then, we will
attempt to get you a draft report related to the bridges on Friday the 9th.
2. I noticed the comment about the golf cart bridges at Naples Heritage.
Can you provide more information about the bridges at Naples Heritage?
Are they the same age as the ones at Cedar Hammock? Supervisor
Minamyer apparently visited the course. Can you have him give me a call
to discuss? The minutes mention JTM doing the repairs. Do you know of
them?
3. Supervisor Day wanted to know what weight load the additional 20%
would provide. We designed golf cart bridges at Quail West last year for
a 10 ton vehicle. The engineering designation for this loading is H10. It
is a truck with a front axle weighing 2 tons and the rear axle is 8 tons.
The rear axle wheel loads are 4 tons each or 8,000 pounds. The estimated
additional cost we mentioned is a guesstimate - we didn't request hard
numbers for that upgrade. They needed the upgrade because they use the
bridges to deliver sand for maintenance purposes. We are also aware that
Mediterra is considering upgrading their golf cart bridges to an H10
loading to allow emergency vehicle access in the event of a brush fire or
hurricane.
4. Seek all available options for bulkhead replacements with the plan to
wait until 2028 when the regressing of the golf course occurs. The
small concrete blocks reinforced with geogrids is the lowest cost option
($45 to $50/SF) if a 75 year life expectancy is desired. If a 35 year life
is acceptable, replacing in kind using pressure treated timber would be
less expensive ($40/SF). The large concrete blocks suggested by Mr. Day
would be in the $60/SF range. We have provide this information in the
past. There are numerous other types of walls but they would be more
expensive.
5. If bedrock was hit they would drive a really large rod through the rock
before the concrete would be poured. The cost of such a method would
be about $500/ft. Supervisor Day rejected this idea because of the large
cement trucks that would need to be driven all over the golf course. The
$500/ft cost would work out to be $63/SF assuming a 8 foot high average
wall height so it is higher than the small block wall system.
6. If the Board decides they want to proceed with the small block wall
system, we could proceed to prepare the 90% plans in accordance with
the contract they already approved. We could then request hard bids from
a competent wall contractor that the Board could use to budget for 2028.
7. As you are aware, we have not performed soil borings for the 4 tall walls
(4,5,16 and 17). However, based on experience gained by Travis
Pritchard with Artistic Structures, probes performed by us at hole #16,
and comments provided by Sam Marshall, we understand that these lakes
were established by blasting rock using dynamite. Therefore, rock
outcrops and boulders will very likely be encountered if any type of pile
or sheet pile wall system is used.
Please provide responses to the question embedded above and fe@4e1ti1fF 9e
forward this e-mail to the Board. We look forward to meeting with them again
next month.
Regards, Ralph
Ralph Verrastro, PE
Principal
'Ispr BO UTO G
Bridging Solutions, LLC
15863 Secoya Reserve Circle
Naples, FL 34110
Phone: 239-216-1370
ralph@bridging-solutions.com
www.bridging-so1utions.com
0000
February 5, 2018
Prepared for:
Cedar
[ el Hammock
GOLF&COUNTRY CLUB
Prepared by:
BRIDGING
SOLUTIONS
c .� ¢ s a ,, .� aro s a, ti
:::(,,k,...„,,,, �A x , GOLD � � n R . Y
•
Golf Cart Bridge inspection and Evaluation Report
NAPLES, FLORIDA
RALPH VERRASTRO, PE
BRIDGING SOLUTIONS, LLC
15863 SECOYA RESERVE CIRCLE
NAPLES,FLORIDA 34110
THIS ITEM HAS BEEN ELECTRONICALLY SIGNED AND SEALED BY RALPH VERRASTRO,PE.ON FEBRUARY 5,2018 USING A DIGITAL SIGNATURE,PRINTED COPIES OF THIS
DOCUMENT ARE NOT CONSIDERED SIGNED AND SEALED AND THE SIGNATURE MUST BE VERIFIED ON ANY ELECTRONIC COPIES.
,,,2gormellnspogrio**0114#441***iiiii*:
.e•' 's
Golf Cart Bridge Inspection and Evaluation Report
Appendix
Site Map—Tab 1
Field Notes—Tab 2
Inspection Photographs—Tab 3
Example Composite Deck Runners—Tab 4
Bridge Repair and Replacement Cost Estimate—Tab 5
•;:a0 BRIDGING
ispr SOLUTIONS
Ern BRIDGING
Cedar Hammock Golf&Country Club
SOLUTIONS
This report summarizes the findings of our inspection of the 8 golf cart bridges located in the
Cedar Hammock Golf&Country Club in Naples, Florida. It also provides recommendations for
replacement of the bridges. The bridges are approximately 19 years old except for the bridge
near the tees for hole#17 which we believe is approximately 10 years old.
The structural condition of the bridge elements vary from poor to satisfactory. We observed
intermittent structural damage on some of the bridge elements on all of the bridges due to
moderate to heavy checking and rot. There is also evidence of structural damage due to
overloads on some of the bridges.
The structural deck boards are in very poor condition and should be replaced with the next 1
or 2 years. We estimate that 40%of the stringers and 10%of the pile cap boards may need to
be replaced during the deck board replacement.See Tab 5 in the Appendix for a summary cost
estimate for the bridge repairs and replacement. The estimated cost for the bridge repairs is
$190,000. The report also provides recommendations for short term repairs that should be
performed as soon as possible. No loads heavier than a golf cart should cross any of the
bridges until these repairs are performed.
The eight bridges are all 10 feet wide out to out and have a total length of 1,376 feet.The total
deck area is approximately 13,760 square feet. The estimated replacement cost is $550,400
for a basic timber golf cart bridge and $756,800 with the upgrades that will increase the life
span of the bridges, including a 10 ton design live load, composite deck runners, textured
polymer deck coatings,polymer/acrylic coatings on the curbs and bridge fascia and a 6 month
maintenance check.
2.0 INTRODUCTION;
The Cedar Hammock Golf & Country Club is responsible for the maintenance of the eight (8)
golf cart bridges.The bridges were constructed in the year 1999 using treated timber materials
that consist of structural deck boards, stringers and pile bents for the piers and abutments.
Partial width composite wear deck boards were added within the past 9 years.The total linear
footage for the eight bridges is approximately 1,376 feet. Five (5)of the bridges span lakes (at
golf holes 4, 5A,5B,7 and 10) and the other three (3)are wetland or preserve crossings(at golf
holes 9, 17 and 18). Most of the bridges have PVC utility pipes supported on the underside of
the bridges.The total bridge widths curb to curb are 10 feet. See Tab 1 in the Appendix for a
location map that shows where each of the bridges are located.
We refer to the beginning ends of the bridges in the direction
of play on the course and refer to the right and left side of the '' ,
bridges based on this orientation.
Bridge No. 4 — This golf cart bridge is approximately 10 feet
wide and 108 feet long and it is located near the island green ,,
•
We design bridges to fit your site and budget. 2
011 BRIDGING
Cedar Hammock Golf&Country Club ' SOLUTIONS
at hole#4.The superstructure consists of 10 feet (+/-) spans, 3X10 structural deck boards, 5—
3X10 stringers and 4x6 curbs.The substructure consists of 2—8"diameter butt piles and a pair
of 3X10 split cap beams. The piles extend on average 8 feet above the ground line. The total
area is approximately 1080 square feet.
Bridge No. 5A—This golf cart bridge is approximately 10 foot
wide and 123 feet long. It is located near the tees at hole #5.
The superstructure consists of 10 feet (+/-) sans with 2X6 - 1 "„.
wear deck boards, 3X8 structural deck boards, 5 — 3X10 ” `
stringers and 4x6 curbs. The substructure consists of 2 — 8"
diameter butt piles and a pair of 3X10 split cap beams.The piles
extend on average 8 feet above the ground line. The total area
is approximately 1,230 square feet.
Bridge No. 5B—This golf cart bridge is approximately 10 feet �a , 1
wide and 125 feet long. The superstructure consists of 10 feet '` ryM '
(+/-) spans, with 2X6 wear deck boards, 3X8 structural deck
boards, 5 — 3X10 stringers and 4x6 curbs. The substructure
consists of 2—8"diameter butt piles and a pair of 3X10 split cap „,,,.3,
beams. The piles extend on average 8 feet above the ground 1
line.The total area is approximately 1,250 square feet, ',
Bridge No. 7 — This golf cart bridge is approximately 10 feet !IIIIIIIIIIMIIpIIIIIMIIII
wide and 70 feet long and it is located near the tees at hole#7.
The superstructure consists of 10 feet (+/-) spans, with 2X6
wear deck boards, 3X8 structural deck boards, 5 — 3X10 ,
stringers and 4x6 curbs. The substructure consists of 2 — 8” 4,
diameter butt piles and a pair of 3X10 split cap beams.The pilesa i f , ';
extend 8 feet above the ground line. The total area is %,-.1-31,-;.,,,
approximately 700 square feet.
Bridge No.9-This golf cart bridge is approximately 10 feet wide
and 560 feet long and it is located near the tees at hole#9.The
superstructure consists of 10 feet (+/-) spans, with 2X6 wear
deck boards,3X8 structural deck boards,5—3X10 stringers andA1441
4x6 curbs. The substructure consists of 2 — 8" diameter butt07- ., ..
piles and a pair of 3X10 split cap beams. The piles extend 4 feet . * 1
above the ground line. The total area is approximately 5,600
square feet.
We design bridges to fit your site and budget. 3
..., BRIDGING
Cedar Hammock Golf&Country Club mar
SOLUTIONS
Bridge No. 10 - This golf cart bridge is approximately 10 feet
wide and 120 feet long and it is located near the tees on hole di
#10. The superstructure consists of varied span lengths
maximum 10 feet(+/-),with 3x8 deck planks, 5-3x10 stringers
and 8x6 curbs.The substructure consists of 2—8"diameter butt
piles and a pair of 3X10 split cap beams. The piles extend 8 feet
above the ground line on average. The total area is
approximately 1,200 square feet.
Bridge No. 17 - This golf cart bridge is approximately 10 feet
wide and 45 feet long and it is located near the tees on hole _ .. �
7,4
#17. The superstructure consists of varied span lengths
maximum 10 feet(+/-),with 3x8 deck planks, 6-3x12 stringers
and 8x6 curbs.The substructure consists of 2—8"diameter butt
piles and 8X8 cap beams. The piles extend 2 feet above the
ground line.The total area is approximately 450 square feet. -'
Bridge No. 18 - This golf cart bridge is approximately 10 feet
wide and 225 feet long and it is located near the green on hole
#18. The superstructure consists of 3x8 deck planks with 2X6
wear deck boards, 6 - 3x12 stringers and 4x6 curbs. The
substructure consists of 2—8" diameter butt piles and a pair of
3X10 split cap beams. The total square footage is -
approximately 2,250 square feet.
The following notes summarize the common deficiencies observed on the bridges. See Tab 2 in
the Appendix for a copy of our field notes and see Tab 3 for a copy of some typical inspection
photographs.
1. The deck boards are in very poor condition due to splitting, checking, and rot.
2. The stringers are in poor to satisfactory condition due to splitting, checking and
loosening of the fasteners to the deck.Some of the stringers are permanently deflected
between pile bents. We estimate that 40%of the stringers may need to be replaced if
the deck boards are replaced if a maintenance approach is desired.
3. The split cap boards are in fair condition due to moderate splitting and checking. We
estimate that 10% of the cap boards may need to be replaced if the deck boards are
replaced if a maintenance approach is desired.
4. The through bolts on some of the bridges are bent downward due to overloading.
5. The curbs are in very poor condition due to heavy splitting and checking.
6. The piles are in satisfactory condition due to moderate checking and rot especially near
the ground line.
We design bridges to fit your site and budget. 4
e,i1 BRIDGING
Cedar Hammock Golf&Country Club ' SOLUTIONS
icO 5$R R-REPAIR:RtECcMM SNDA' ION ,
The following deficiencies should be repaired as soon as possible due to safety concerns related
to the structural damage that has occurred. We painted white spots near the locations on the
bridges where the repairs are located. The repairs could include replacing the subject member
or adding additional stringers beside or under the failed member. We recommend hiring Artistic
Structures to perform these repairs on a time and material basis. No loads heavier than a golf
cart should cross any of the bridges until these repairs are performed.
1. The first deck board on Bridge No. 5A deflects excessively.
2. There is a failed deck board in the 3rd span of Bridge No. 7.
3. On Bridge No. 9,the right fascia beams in the first 2 spans have full depth cracks.
4. On Bridge No. 10,there is excessive rot damage near the top of the right fascia stringer in
span 2 and on right and left fascia stringers in the last span.
5. There is a failed deck board in the middle half of the bridge on Bridge No. 18.
6. There are 2 failed stringers (left fascia stringer and 3rd stringer from the left) in a span
near the center of Bridge No. 18.
7. There is a failed stringer in span 1 of Bridge No. 18.The repairs performed last year after
Hurricane Irma in span 1 should be redone because the new stringers that were added
don't have full bearing on the cap beams and they rely on the old rotted stringers to
transfer loads to the new stringers.See the photograph below.
..,„. : ' `s-• VC*7''''-#' ' - r 'Ilk ' 11 - ‘,,,,' „,01:
;i1,0*:,'
' N2
It
P 6L
N� & gyp. x
',*,..;k:''; 'Y ''''i
s
3
kt, .. , .,
mss. 4%. 4
- * ._
We design bridges to fit your site and budget. 5
,„sl BRIDGING
Cedar Hammock Golf&Country Club SOLUTIONS
50 LONG' . .REPAIR RECO IM DATIOl `r .,
To allow the bridges to remain in service for another ten (10)years,the deck boards and curbs
should be replaced within the next 1 or 2 years with the exception of Bridge No.17. In addition,
we estimate that approximately 40%of the stringers(2 out of 5 in each span) may need to be
replaced.The best time to decide which stringers to replace will be after the deck boards have
been removed. We recommend using longer deck screws than normally specified due to the
rotting of the tops of the stringers. We estimate that 10%of the pile cap boards may need to
be replaced during the deck replacement project. No loads heavier than a golf cart should
cross any of the bridges until these repairs are performed.
We recommend full replacement of all the bridges in ten (10) years when the course is
scheduled for reconstruction. The utilities mounted on the underside of the bridges will need
to be temporarily supported or replaced during construction and the concrete approach slabs
at each abutment should be replaced. We evaluated the possibility of trying to salvage the
existing bridge piles. However, we have concluded that we do not recommend that approach
for reasons that include:
• The exposed portions of the piles appear to be good but there could be deterioration
below the ground line.
• We have concerns about fit up with the new cap due to the bridge curvatures.
• The new timber bridge components would have a design life of 35 to 40 years and the
remaining older piles would deteriorate sooner which would require full replacement
prematu rely.
The minimum design live load for golf cart bridges is typically a 5 ton vehicle.If the maintenance
staff plans to cross the bridges using vehicles heavier than 5 tons,we recommend designing the
bridges for a 10 ton (H10) design live load. The community also gains the advantage of the
ability for emergency vehicles to use the bridges in the event of a brush fire or hurricane event.
We recommend installing full or partial width composite longitudinal wear deck boards (or
composite runners) over the pressure treated timber deck boards to protect the deck boards
from UV damage from the sun and the abrasion caused by golf cart traffic.We also recommend
applying a textured polymer overlay over the deck boards and the wear deck. This approach
removes the cart traffic from damaging the structural deck and allows for a much longer life
span of the structural decking. Also, replacing the wear deck and reapplication of the polymer
coatings are simpler and cheaper over time than replacing the structural decking. See Tab 4 in
the Appendix for some pictures of composite runners with a textured polymer overlay that
were provided by York Bridge Concepts, Inc. We also recommend applying a polymer/acrylic
sealant on the side of the bridges and curbing which provides additional protection from the
elements.
We design bridges to fit your site and budget. 6
aLill SOLUTIONSBRIDGING
Cedar Hammock Golf&Country Club
N
6! cosrcoNYIDEoNi
Based on recent bids at other local golf courses, the estimated cost to remove the existing
bridges and construct new timber golf cart bridges will be approximately$40 per square foot.
To incorporate the installation of some of the recommended upgrades including a 10 ton design
live load,composite deck runners,textured polymer deck coatings,polymer/acrylic coatings on
the curbs and bridge fascia and a 6 month maintenance check, the cost would increase to
approximately$55 per square foot.
The eight bridges are all 10 feet wide out to out and have a total length of 1,376 feet.The total
deck area is approximately 13,760 square feet.The estimated replacement cost is$550,400 for
a basic timber golf cart bridge and $756,800 with the upgrades mentioned above that would
increase the life span of the bridges.
The estimated cost for the design and engineering services related to the repairs for the 7
bridges are summarized below:
Final Design Drawings and Specifications $10,000
Bidding Services $3,000
Construction Engineering Inspections $5,000
The estimated cost for the design and engineering services related to the replacement of the
8 bridges are summarized below:
Final Design Drawings and Specifications $25,000
Bidding Services $5,000
Construction Engineering Inspections $10,000
We design bridges to fit your site and budget. 7
BRIDGING Cedar Hammock Golf Country Club
'SOLUTIONS
SEGMENTAL BLOCK WALL REPLACEMENT COST SUMMARY
` fa.`� Yk -. C c, �,^�_ `2 ter '- f, a '* x r : a -c.;. ,-iz.
te. dpi 1 ,,' ."'s r ? ,� h 1
Tci�
Putting Green 110 3 330 $16,500
Hole#2 142 4 568 $28,400
Hole#4 903 9 8,127 $406,350
Hole#5 985 10 9,850 $492,500
Hole#8 92 4 368 $18,400
Hole#13 111 4 444 $22,200
Hole#16 375 8 3,000 $150,000
Hole#17 275 10 2,750 $137,500
Driving Range 301 4 1,204 $60,200
Entrance Road 20 4 80 $4,000
TOTAL WALL AREA
$50/SF used for wall replacment costs (SF) o 1 � ' .,
* Wall height includes embedment 26,721 $1,336,050
I
}
E
O
� e8 2; gg t 5 lits Eg , 8 I
w' g 6 iii5 ..,',3 .c
IL
gg 421 i gR m111111
% Lb
� 111k
I if Visi it a: nllk ' is
: x"
9 E m
3 D i a ,1 1 g 11 : 1 i g ' i
EE ***1$81$83$8 �d E E - E ' dF 3 C
8 8 7.7, a o n , s S e S o X § =1
bb F. n
$m W m J
• • •i • • • , • •..•' • • • • •::; • • • '• • .•, •
0 8 C S S S S n 8 S 8R S n S d
n �
O p 8 O g- 8 8 8 R p p p NO pp 8 8 C
N
zto 1
a
1:•L' '''2
v} � in N m b g ''''6 '''' .1.
p ' tEi : n to hg
o 8
m U
z e E" ," a 1 _ T a tl I
•
Z W IQ u SL g..`"
a ' p$ p. '.
W . !. tit 9 a€ N m % I. . 1 Ili SI A agp "C
05 a et Digo d U 9 9 t5 ce o V o-$ d� 'm F
CEDAR HAMMOCK
Community Development District
Annual Operating and Debt Service Budget
Fiscal Year 2019
Version 1 - Proposed Budget:
(Printed on 111812018 4pm)
Prepared by:
6INFRAMARK
i4FRAstRucr,... MANAGEMEt41 Str+7,/ii ES
CEDAR HAMMOCK
Community Development District
Budget Overview
Fiscal Year 2019
CEDAR HAMMOCK
Community Development District
Table of Contents
Page#
OPERATING BUDGET
General Fund
Summary of Revenues,Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balances .. 1-2
Budget Narrative 3-6
Exhibit A-Allocation of Fund Balances 7
SUPPORTING BUDGET SCHEDULES
2018-2019 Non-Ad Valorem Assessment Summary 8
CEDAR HAMMOCK
Community Development District
Operating Budget
Fiscal Year 2019
•
CEDAR HAMMOCK
Community Development District General Fund
Summary of Revenues,Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balances
Fiscal Year 2019 Proposed Budget
ADOPTED ACTUAL PROJECTED TOTAL ANNUAL
ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET THRU JAN- PROJECTED BUDGET
ACCOUNT DESCRIPTION FY 2016 FY 2017 FY 2018 DEC-2017 SEP-2018 FY 2018 FY 2019
REVENUES
Interest-Investments $ 3,494 $ 3,150 $ 2 017 $ 778 1,239 2,017 $ 2,017
Special Assmnts-Tax Collector 279,650 279,650 379,523 347,750 31,773 379,523 379,523
Special Assmnts-Discounts (10,201) (10,283) (15,181) (13,749) (1,432) (15,181) (15,181)
Other Miscellaneous Revenus $ 5,988 $ 5,988
Total $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ $ -
TOTAL REVENUES 272,943 272,517 366,359 340,767 31,580 372,347366,359 I
EXPENDITURES
Administrative
ProfServ-Engineering 7,544 22,806 30,000 528 29,472 30,000 30,000
ProfServ-Legal Services 1,363 1,413 2,000 355 1,645 2,000 2,000
ProfServ-Mgmt Consulting Sery 35,146 32,130 37,286 9,322 27,966 37,288 38,407
ProfServ-Property Appraiser 4,195 4,195 5,693 4,195 - 4,195 5,693
ProfSery-Special Assessment 2,855 2,855 2,855 2,855 • 2,855 2,941
ProfServ-Web Ste Maintenance - 617 637 - 637 637 656
Auditing Services 5,000 5,000 5,000 - 5,000 5,000 5,000
Postage and Freight 407 1,050 765 161 604 765 765
Insurance•General Liability 7,135 7,235 7,500 7,235 - 7,235 7,959
Printing and Binding 738 933 1,000 318 954 1,272 1,272
Legal Advertising 1,839 2,090 2,394 589 1,805 2,394 2,394
Misc-Bank Charges 690 656 700 167 501 668 700
Misc-Assessmnt Collection Cost 3,291 3,618 7,590 6,680 910 7,590 7,590
Misc-Web Hosting 682 115 232 159 73 232 239
Office Supplies 121 - 400 33 99 132 400
Annual District Filing Fee 175 175 175 175 - 175 175
Total Administrative 71,181 84,888 104,227 32,772 69,666 102,438 106,190
Annual Operating Budget
Fiscal Year 2019 Page 1
CEDAR HAMMOCK
Community Development District General Fund
Summary of Revenues,Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balances
Fiscal Year 2019 Proposed Budget
ADOPTED ACTUAL PROJECTED TOTAL ANNUAL
ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET THRU JAN- PROJECTED BUDGET
ACCOUNT DESCRIPTION FY 2016 FY 2017 FY 2018 DEC-2017 SEP-2018 FY 2018 FY 2019
Field
ProfServ-Field Management 700 1,450 1,494 - 1,494 1,494 1,539
Contracts-Water Mg mt Services - 7,200 7,200 2,400 4.800 7,200 7,200
Utility-Cameras 2,305 1,288 1,320 317 951 1,268 1,268
Electricity-Wells 1,271 2,885 3,000 476 1,428 1,904 3,000
Electricity-Aerator 139 1,648 2,000 97 291 388 2,000
R&M-Lake 5,822 3,000 - 3,000 3,000 3,000
R&M Bridges 8,000
R&M-Bulkheads 8,000
R&M-Plant Replacement - 1,593 3,C15 - 3,015 3,015 3,015
Misc-Contingency - 17,699 15,868 - - 21,312
Capital Outlay - 22,875 9,945 - - 9,945
•
Capital Outlay-Bulkheads 28,290 - 1,500,000 - - - -
Reserve-Bridges 100,465 - 20,910 - - - 20,910
Reserve-Bulkheads - 45,332 83,980 - - - 83,980
Reserve-Lakes - 442 15,000 - - - 15,000
Reserve-Roadways - 195,200 72,000 5,457 5,457 72,000
Total Field 149,512 297,612 1,738,732 8,747 14,979 23,726 280,169
Debt Service 238,732
Interest Expense - 23,400 - - - -
Total Debt Service - 23,400 - - -
TOTAL EXPENDITURES 220,693 382,500 1,866,359 41,519 84,645 126,164 366,359
Excess(deficiency)of revenues
Over(under)expenditures 52,250 (109,983) (1,500,000) 299,248 (53,065) 246,183 -
OTHER FINANCING SOURCES(USES)
Loan Proceeds - - 1,500,000 - - -
TOTAL OTHER SOURCES(USES) - - 1,500,000 - - - -
Net change in fund balance 52,250 (109,983) - 299,248 (53,065) 246,183 -
Fund balance-audit adjustments - - - - - - ..
FUND BALANCE,BEGINNING - 717,404 607,421 607,421 - 607,421 853,604
FUND BALANCE,ENDING $ 717,404 $ 607,421 $ 607,421 $ 906,669 $ (53,065) $ 853,604 $ 853,604
Annual Operating Budget
Fiscal Year 2019 Page 2
Cedar Hammock
Community Development District General Fund
Budget Narrative
Fiscal Year 2019
REVENUES:
Interest Income
The District earns interest on the monthly average collected balance for their operating
accounts, money market accounts and certificates of deposits.
Special Assessments-Tax Collector
The District will levy a Non-Ad Valorem assessment on all sold and platted parcels within the
District in order to pay for the operating expenditures during the Fiscal Year.
Special Assessments-Discounts
Per Section 197.162, Florida Statutes, discounts are allowed for early payment of assessments.
The budgeted amount for the fiscal year is calculated at 4% of the anticipated Non-Ad Valorem
assessments.
EXPENDITURES:
Administrative:
Prof Service-Engineering
The District's engineer will be providing general engineering services to the District, i.e.,
attendance and preparation for monthly board meetings, review invoices,etc.
Prof Service-Legal Services
The District's legal counsel will be providing general legal services to the District, i.e.,
attendance&preparation for monthly meetings,review operating&maintenance contracts,etc.
Prof Service-Management Consulting Sery
The District receives Management, Accounting and Administrative services as part of a
Management Agreement with Inframark Infrastructure Management Services. These services are
further outlined in Exhibit"A"of the Management Agreement. A 3%increase is proposed.
Prof Service-Property Appraiser
The Property Appraiser provides the District with a listing of the legal description of each
property parcel within the District boundaries,and the names and addresses of the owners of such
property. The District reimburses the Property Appraiser for necessary administrative costs
incurred to provide this service. Per the Florida Statutes,administrative costs shall include,but
not be limited to,those costs associated with personnel, forms, supplies,data processing,
computer equipment,postage,and programming. The budget for property appraiser costs was
based on 1.5%of gross assessments.
Annual Operating Budget
Fiscal Year 2019
Page 3
Cedar Hammock
Community Development District General Fund
Budget Narrative
Fiscal Year 2019
Prof Service-Special Assessment
The District's Collection Agent will be providing financials services which include the
collection of prepaid assessments, maintenance of District's assessment roll and levying
the annual operating and maintenance assessments.
Prof Service—Web Site Maintenance
Inframark Infrastructure Management Services maintains the District's email accounts & updates
the web site information. A 3% increase is proposed.
Auditing Services
The District is required annually to conduct an audit of its financial records by an Independent
Certified Public Accounting Firm.
Postage and Freight
Mailing of agenda packages,overnight deliveries, correspondence,etc.
Insurance-General Liability
The District's General Liability & Public Officials Liability Insurance policy is with The Florida
League of Cities, Inc. The Florida League of Cities, Inc. specializes in providing insurance
coverage to governmental agencies.
Printing& Binding
Printing and Binding agenda packages for board meetings, printing of computerized checks,
stationary,envelopes etc.
Legal Advertising
The District is required to advertise various notices for monthly Board meetings, public hearings,
etc. in a newspaper of general circulation.
Misc-Bank Charges
Bank analysis fees that are incurred during the year.
Misc-Assessment Collection Costs
The District reimburses the Tax Collector for necessary administrative costs. Per the
Florida Statutes, administrative costs shall include, but not be limited to, those costs
associated with personnel, forms, supplies, data processing, computer equipment,
postage, and programming. The District also compensates the Tax Collector for the
actual cost of collection or 2% on the amount of special assessments collected and
remitted, whichever is greater. The budget for collection costs was based on a maximum
of 2%of the anticipated assessment collections.
Misc—Web Hosting
The District incurs expenses to maintain and renew their website domain and email accounts.
Annual Operating Budget
Fiscal Year 2019
Page 4
Cedar Hammock
Community Development District General Fund
Budget Narrative
Fiscal Year 2019
Office Supplies
Miscellaneous office supplies required for the preparation of agenda packages.
Annual District Filing Fee
The District is required to pay an annual fee of$175 to the Dept of Economic Opportunity Div.
Field Services:
Prof Service—Field Management
Inframark Infrastructure Management Services inspects the field and provides an annual
report.
Contracts—Water Mgmt Services
Professional services for environmental permit compliance. Currently all fees associated with the
renewal of the Water Use Permit.
Contracts-Water Quality
Professional services in monitoring water quality for reporting to regulatory agencies.
Utility—Cameras
Comcast provides monitoring services for the District's gate cameras.
Electricity-Wells
FPL provides electrical services for the District's pumps at the following addresses:
• 8684 Cedar Hammock Circle- Well#4 Meter KL35128
• 3639 Cedar Hammock Court—Well#6 Meter ACD4996
Electricity-Aerators
FPL provides electrical services for the District's pumps at the following addresses:
• 3826 Wax Myrtle Run—Meter ACD4234
• 8892 Cedar Hammock Blvd—Meter ACD4976
• 3766 Buttonwood Way—Meter ACD8387
R&M-Lake
Repair and maintenance expenses related to lakes including washout repairs and erosion.
R&M—Plant Replacement
Replace landscape plantings at pumps.
Misc-Contingency
Any current year Field expenditure that may not have been provided for in the budget.
Annual Operating Budget
Fiscal Year 2019
Page 5
Cedar Hammock
Community Development District General Fund
Budget Narrative
Fiscal Year 2019
Capital Outlay
Capital expenditures for items such as irrigation equipment or other items meeting capital
expenditure requirements.
Reserve-Bridges
Funds to be set aside for future bridge expenditures as determined by the BOS.
Reserve-Bulkheads
Funds to be set aside for future bulkhead expenditures as determined by the BOS.
Reserve-Lakes
Funds to be set aside for future lake expenditures as determined by the BOS.
Reserve-Roadways
Funds to be set aside for future roadway expenditures as determined by the BOS.
Annual Operating Budget
Fiscal Year 2019
Page 6
CEDAR HAMMOCK
Community Development District General Fund
Exhibit"A"
Allocation of Fund Balances
AVAILABLE FUNDS
Amount
Beginning Fund Balance-Fiscal Year 2019 $ 853,604
Net Change in Fund Balance-Fiscal Year 2019 -
Reserves-Fiscal Year 2019 Additions 191,890
Total Funds Available(Estimated)-9/30/2019 1,045,494
ALLOCATION OF AVAILABLE FUNDS
Assigned Fund Balance
Operating Reserve-First Quarter Operating Capital 43,617 tit
Reserves-Bridges
Prior Year's Reserve Funding 118,180
FY 2018 Reserve Funding 20,910
FY 2019 Reserve Funding 20,910 160,000
Reserves-Bulkheads
Prior Year's Reserve Funding 67,360
FY 2018 Reserve Funding 83,980
FY 2019 Reserve Funding 83,980 235,320
Reserves-Lakes
Prior Year's Reserve Funding 29,553
FY 2018 Reserve Funding 15,000
FY 2019 Reserve Funding 15,000 59,553
Reserves-Roadways
Prior Year's Reserve Funding 117,866
FY 2018 Reserve Funding 72,000
Use of Reserves in FY18 (5,457)
FY 2019 Reserve Funding 72,000 256,409
Subtotal 754,899
Total Allocation of Available Funds 754,899
Total Unassigned(undesignated)Cash $ 290,595
Notes
(1)Represents approximately 3 months of operating expenditures
Annual Operating Budget
Fiscal Year 2019 Page 7
CEDAR HAMMOCK
Community Development District
Supporting Budget Schedules
Fiscal Year 2019
CEDAR HAMMOCK
Community Development District
2018-2019 Assessment Chart
O&M Assessment
Percent
Product Total Units FY 2019 FY 2018 Change
Single Family 65 $ 475.00 $ 475.00 0.0%
2-Story 228 $ 475.00 $ 475.00 0.0%
4-Story 330 $ 475.00 $ 475.00 0.0%
Duplex 176 $ 475.00 $ 475.00 0.0%
799
Annual Operating Budget
Fiscal Year 2019
Page 8
I
6 I N FRAMARK
INFRASTRUCTURE MANAGEMENT SERVICES
Cedar Hammock CDD
October 30, 2017 — Field Management Report
www.inframarkims.com
1. Lake Management
The water levels in the lakes were beginning to recede after the heavy summer rains. The lakes
looked good overall with minimal algae and weed issues. Additional lake maintenance
information is found below; all lake issues are low density unless otherwise noted.
a. Aeration: All systems appeared to be working normal on the three lakes. Minimal algae was
present on all three lakes.A reduction in undesirable plants and algae was noticeably visible
from the previous year.
i, L.ake 8:
10/30/17 10/17/16
.". ;,-. f " 5,^ '4' e.' 1,7,1',.': l y. �{y,. ,- a e
04,
tk :;-.,-,-.--if--
F �' F - "�+l'.&. ::.-02+ t
,vw
°,..1,,,,;...,-4,4.14-:...„-:,yE�y : j" .., }c ,`v .€ as
ii, Lake 12:
10/30/17 10/17/16
x 1 3 4 "��'i' y xw u
,� h' .4_ 1.,,.Y+' y ..., f
Al ; g ^
A .` 5-"
Severn Trent Yearly Management Report 1
iii. Lake 13:
10/30/17 10/17/16
itlirPirrill
as
•
b. Fountains: The fountain on lake 2 was down during the time of the inspection.
c. Algae on Lakes: 3,5,&8.
d. Littorals: No issues observed.
e. Weeds:
I. Alligatorweed in Lakes: No issues observed.
ii. Cattails in Lakes: No issues observed.
Climbing Hemp Vine in Lakes: No issues observed.
iv. Dollar Weed in Lakes: No issues observed.
v. Hydrilla in Lakes: No issues observed.
Severn Trent Yearly Management Report 2
is Pond
vi. IllinoWeed in Lakes: No issues observed.
vii, Muskgrass(Chars) in Lakes: No issues observed.
viii, Palms on Lake Banks: No issues observed.
ix. Sedges in Lakes: No issues observed.
x. Spatterdock/Lily Pads in Lakes: No issues observed.
xi. Torpedo Grass in Lakes: 1,7,&11(lakes 1&11 shown below).
''ate 'e^ ''' na-'az4_ �`'
w..: ,- .wa •. way.n '� ''�
� � 9 Y� f b S �
h ' I d-i
f Ir
:P.'"''''''',
.x TM _ '-).(..-'-',1.§..,,,
t1 �§ �� 'y. F ex #.
f. Erosion on Lakes: 5.Damage was s .
FEMA has been notified of this damageob.erved on the southwest corner due to Hurricane Irma
x , -. ?sir. ,,, r:: Y
1.
4' r-2 s ':ate
Severn Trent Yearly Management Report 3
g. Bulkheads/Bridges:
I. All vegetation on the bulkheads should be sprayed out to prevent any possible damage,
helping to ensure the longest life possible of the walls.All top boards along the wall edge
should be secured or replaced if necessary as a safety precaution.Various boards were
broken or unsecured at the time of the inspection.
:": `,‘,,,,,Vis, ,,,,,,
lilt
s1 ,,--,..,,,,,' ,gra
-- ,fix-.;. G. ,' ,' , '�„,. xh `
w+ im p''
f
ii. The bridge just after hole 16 would likely benefit from the addition of runner boards so the
carts do not ride directly on the wooden planks.Additionally,a small area of erosion was
observed on the north west corner that should be stabilized.
to a .
1
1
h. Grass Clippings in Lakes: No issues observed.
Severn Trent Yearly Management Report 4
i. Trash in Lakes:A small tree was observed at the bank of lake 14 that should be removed.
j. Dissolved Oxygen (D.O.)Tests: Lakes that were tested are doing well with their dissolved
oxygen levels.Environmental factors such as temperature,wind,sun or clouds can cause
changes to the D.O. level to occur.
Cedar Hammock CDD
Water Testing Results
10/30/2017
Lakes Dissolved
Oxygen
Lake 3 5.08
Lake 5 5.78
Lake 11 5.52
Lake 12 6.76
Lake 14 5.75
2. Guard House:
i. The guard noted that the large windows are leaking.This information has been reported
to onsite staff to investigate further.
-1-e;121111 1111111111 1,4tt
111■ ■'
Severn Trent Yearly Management Report 5
ii. A window within one of the French doors is loose held in place with tape and should be
repaired.
1pirligisis sums
Ill
iiirii
— ,3. Lighting
No issues observed.
4. Pier
The invasive exotic Earleaf Acacia previously located on the northeast of the pier boardwalk has
been removed.A large hole under the sidewalk just before the boardwalk decking was observed,fill
should be added and the area observed for future movement. No other issues were observed with
the pier.
k � �� V ' -
4* Sf
4. t
.-,, $ -'-,‘ � i�,gym -fie
9 a-
sY V 1 ``v y� y`
A. 4 :sVtt ,4,r„„".,..‘
5. Preserves
The issues pointed out in the last report appear to have been addressed.No issues were observed.
Severn Trent Yearly Management Report 6
6. Roadways
Minimal roadway damage was observed on Cedar Hammock Circle likely due from the clean up of
hurricane Irma storm debris.
x� ,sem
*„ �
1,$ . ar -44,y4tkxa;' sS`
-,., s 2 Y "W,:k,„
TV 4.!.:„„.- �,..-,---,,t- ---„,,,,,,,,,, ,,-.‘,1::,',4,,,4`4'4- vN"'
it, xt z
7. Security Cameras
No issues observed.
8. Sidewalks
No issues observed.
9. Stormwater System
a. Canals:The canals are being maintained well on Cedar Hammock's side of the canals.
Melaleuca is present on the other side of the canal that is not Cedar Hammock responsibility.
v
Sa 51g' i l r. T /
'�V 'if."-r-,:. .afi {�, v � ..
k III
t A It
Severn Trent Yearly Management Report 7
b. Drains:The drain adjacent to the golf cart path south of Cedar Hammock Blvd.as you approach
lake 2 was filled with debris and should be cleaned out to ensure proper flow of the stormwater
system.
"! t t::amp .rr
Cf § X
c. Gutter Pans: No issues observed.
d. Interconnect Pipes:All pipes remained underwater at the time of the inspection.
i. Preserve C-1/C-2: Large rocks remain blocking a few of the pipes under Cedar Hammock
Boulevard and should be removed in order to maintain proper water flow between the two
preserve sections.
,IIM
,,-- „y 1 '�`� `W, .- `,.?` , . .E51
d r. �'� 4 ` - :4„,tet+ ,' ;t
•
*e..4c`. - Si' _...- 3.1 a f
e. Lake Drainage Pipes: No issues observed.
Severn Trent Yearly Management Report 8
f. Overflow Weirs: No issues observed.
S,i
s :t
xae n.+'*' 4
3�M+k'C`e�'a� � '
g. Catch Basins: No issues observed.
10. Wells
No issues observed.
Well#1 Well#4
y
- e I *r *
OE A
.-.
f YYd' 9, ,
Well#6
I
b
h'"m
1 C ,
Severn Trent Yearly Management Report 9
11. Residential Complaints/Concerns
No issues reported.
12. Fish/Wildlife Observations
: z
0,,t,....!,,,,„;1,1;1.=e 4 '�t.� t a
•
Pn
M;,' 4- sP`r" ''3.,.
❑Bass ❑Bream ❑Catfish El Gambusia
®Egrets ❑Herons ❑Coots ❑Gallinules
®Anhinga ❑Cormorant ❑Osprey ►1 Ibis
❑Woodstork ❑Otter ®Alligator El Snakes
❑Turtles ElOther Species:
13. Non CDD Items
No issues observed.
Severn Trent Yearly Management Report 10
RESOLUTION 2018-02
A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CEDAR HAMMOCK
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT AUTHORIZING THE DISBURSEMENT OF
FUNDS FOR PAYMENT OF CERTAIN EXPENSES WITHOUT FURTHER APPROVAL OF
THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS; PROVIDING FOR A MONETARY THRESHOLD; AND
PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE
WHEREAS,Cedar Hammock Community Development District(hereinafter the"District)is a
local unit of special-purpose government created and existing pursuant to Chapter 190,Florida Statutes,
being situated entirely within Charlotte County,Florida;and
WHEREAS,Section 190.011 (5),Florida Statutes,authorizes the District to adopt resolutions
which may be necessary for the conduct of District business;and
WHEREAS,the Board of Supervisors of the District(hereinafter the"Board")typically meets
regularly to conduct the business of the District,including authorizing the payment of District operating
and maintenance expenses;and
WHEREAS,the Board recognizes that it may be necessary or convenient in many instances to
make expenditures prior to the next regular meeting of the Board;and
WHEREAS,the Board determines this Resolution is in the best interest of the District and is
necessary for the efficient conduct of District business; the health,safety and welfare of the residents
within the District;and the preservation of District assets or facilities.
NOW,THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF
CEDAR HAMMOCK COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT:
Section 1. General Maintenance Expenses: The Board hereb authorizes the District Manager, in
consultation with the Chairman,to disburse funds not to exceed 4S"Dt9V _per item for expenses
which are reasonably necessary to 1)provide for the health,safety add welfare of the residents within the
District; or 2)repair, control or maintain a District facility or asset. These expenditures must not exceed
budgeted amounts for maintenance expenses.
Section 2.Emergency Expenditures: The Board hereby authorizes the District Manager,in consultation
with the Chairman,to expend no more than_ D a‘70 , for a single incident to make
emergency repairs for incidents related o eneral District activities and facilities. Emergency
expenditures are classified as those expenses that are required due to an emergency situation in which a
delay in addressing these issues may result in further damage to district facilities and/or be more
expensive to repair if repairs are delayed.
Section 3. Any disbursements made pursuant to this Resolution shall be consistent with applicable
procurement law and submitted to the Board at the next scheduled meeting for acceptance.
Section 4. District management staff will take direction for these types of expenses from the
Chairman of the Board. Staff will move forward with the implementation and/or expenditures
approved by the Chairman as long as the expenditures and/or activities are in accordance with
this resolution.
Section 5.This Resolution shall become effective on this 126 day of February, 2018.
Cedar Hammock
Community Development District
By -- -1A„A\v`0- �'�
0.--4- t.....,
homas Cook,Chairman
Attest:
By: . `e--i g.
it,
ecretary
C,!1 * o 0 O 0 S o O}+,1/ sn
' � in, v a .1 h 06 o n LkN
0
O ' N O N N in N , iR 4 i 'N
0 rt N I ij as. o 0 iii ;';;vi 0 0 i�i
.{ ' Z. m
4v 4�,- V N .4: O^ m N m W
}P ' O N Vl N Vi N
"4'4F
w i
,-41:', � O N co In O d Q
p, V �v N N N N N H
Z O
0
'FSS C+r m
d �'a�.1"'' u Y
'J. O V n ON O O W r
' .. W Di O V W rl
0 j'4e SI c 1R In N Vi V/ U Z U' E
O
vy � d
4eP' i #
o ,y�r on ',-:10 8 r y
m n o o
s> on N
4e,,,,-, i y N N N N N N
t
o� Y �*lie NoQ o o v u
c
'OL
13
y4 ,-„,,,,,,A
i
.
—,1'', 4bt' O
T
O o o O o o O O ro
mJ
y
U
m
3y Fy- c_
m t?k -J t N m
Liar` Y ,' C c w
iN '�3 6 .moi N On N 0 V N 9 -00 W
z
0.
P...1._4 .4-'-'Y.+J V,, W sr a It'
n O 00
Cd 0 s' s a a a a x a x
Synopsis of Discussions,Decisions,and Actions By the Board of Supervisors of the
Cedar Hammock Community Development District(CDD)on Bulkheads
The Board of Supervisors of the Cedar Hammock CDD is keenly aware of the increased
interest by the Cedar Hammock membership in what discussions, decisions,and actions
the CDD has been taking regarding the bulkheads within the community. Being
responsible for the infrastructure assets in Cedar Hammock,the CDD monitors,
maintains,and, as needed,repairs,replaces, enhances,and improves these assets. One of
the major assets is the bulkheads and in the last few years they have captured a growing
amount of the CDD's attention due to their advancing age and needed maintenance and
repairs and potential replacement.
With the turnover of Cedar Hammock from the developer to the members in 2004,the
CDD Board of Supervisors also came under community control. At that time the
infrastructure assets were relatively young and generally in good condition. Nonetheless,
issues did come up from time to time and were addressed,including a few involving the
bulkheads.
As time moved on,however,and plans by the Master Association included the golf
course regrassing project for 2014,the CDD reviewed the status of the bulkheads to
determine what action might be necessary to coincide with that event. In the Spring of
2012,the CDD commissioned an inspection of the bulkheads by James E.Hirst and
Associates,Inc.,a local civil and structural engineering company. While the report given
pointed out some issues,none were considered serious,and the overall conclusion was
that the engineers "would estimate approximately ten years plus before this system will
express conditions which would prompt the consideration of complete replacement."
With that input,the CDD Board decided that the bulkheads were good for another decade
and longer and needed no replacement or major work when the course regrassing was
done in 2014.
After the golf course project was completed, some bulkhead issues occurred that caused
the CDD in early 2015 to have another inspection done,this time by the firm Artistic
Structures,a well respected bulkhead construction company that has done work at Cedar
Hammock over the years,along with the structural engineering firm Bridging Solutions
which specializes in bridge and retaining wall engineering services. The concerns were
primarily about holes 4, 5, 16,and 17 and dealt largely with problems with some whalers
(the horizontal boards on the face of the bulkhead)which were bulging. A plan for
repairs was developed and would be carried out by Artistic Structures. Since special
brackets required to accomplish the repairs needed to be manufactured,the entire repair
process proceeded over the next year. Additional maintenance was also carried out
including power washing the bulkhead surfaces and applying sealer.
During the Summer of 2015,the bulkhead along the tee box on hole 16 experienced a
failure of the tie-back cables on one of the soldier piles causing a major bulge and
concern about potential further damage. The bulkhead was inspected again by Artistic
Structures and Bridging Solutions to determine needed repairs. The normal repair to the
bulkhead would be to excavate back to where the existing pile deadman was located
(approximately 20 feet back from the wall)and run new cable. Artistic Structures was
fully engaged in other projects and could not do the work. Plus,it would have closed
most of the tee box during the repair and necessitate regrassing the tee area. An
alternative option was to bore into the existing wall and the tee area with an auger which
creates its own deadman and does not require excavation of the tee surface. This was a
more costly procedure,but the repairs needed to be done. Adjacent bulkhead surfaces
were inspected and it was decided to do similar repairs in several areas as a preventative
measure. This work was accomplished by the N Square company.
During 2015 some$70,000 in repairs and maintenance were performed on the bulkheads
and the results were successful in the areas addressed. However,in the Summer of 2016,
there was another tie-back failure on 16. It was not as serious as the previous one and
repairs were able to be done by Cedar Hammock's own golf course maintenance crew
after having the site evaluated by Bridging Solutions.
With such issues becoming more frequent and concerning,the Board of Supervisors
focused greater attention on eventually replacing the four bulkheads. In October 2016 the
CDD contracted with Bridging Solutions to provide recommendations,replacement cost
estimates,and priority ranking for bulkhead replacement. At the November 2016
meeting,a preliminary report stated that a timber wall replacement similar to the existing
bulkheads would have a 35 year life expectancy at an estimated cost of$40 per square
foot and a concrete segmented block wall retaining system would have a 75 year life
expectancy at an estimated cost of$50 to$55 per square foot. Either of these options
would require significant encroachment into the course(excavation up to 30 feet from the
bulkhead)and take several weeks or longer to accomplish per hole. In addition,once
completed,repairs to the course would be required and possibly take up to three months
to recover.This would cause a major disruption to play on the course,impact revenue for
the Club,have a significant impact on the Club staff,and limit the availability of certain
amenities such as food and beverage services. All these consequences must be taken into
consideration. Looking at potential cost and longevity,the small concrete block
construction was viewed as a likely choice.
At the December 2016 meeting,Bridging solutions was contracted to provide engineering
services for design,bid preparation, and bid review for the bulkheads on holes 16 and 17.
On site visits and inspections were accomplished by Bridging Solutions, along with a
representative of Banks Engineering(the CDD's "in house" engineering consultants)
during January 2017. In an update report at the February 2017 meeting,Bridging
Solutions estimated the cost for both walls to be$280,000. General Manager Tom Read,
who had attended numerous previous CDD meetings and given valuable input to issues
under discussion, again highlighted the impact on the course and Master Board budget
considerations as well as the difficulty of booking a golf course contractor on short
notice. Advanced planning for a project of this nature is a necessity. This also holds true
for scheduling a bulkhead contractor,many of whom are booked well in advance,
especially for prime time to do such work which is at the end of Season and before the
rainy season get into full gear and the ponds start to refill. It was then decided by the
Supervisors to delay the project until April 2018.
At the March 2017 meeting,an alternative construction option was discussed. Supervisor
Day had contacted a local firm(Garland and Garland)that could construct a wood
bulkhead similar to what currently exists but do it from the water side and minimize
damage to the course. They use an auger method similar to what was used to repair 16
previously,but this one is much larger and provides greater support to the new wall. The
process would also allow for the existing wall to remain in place and the new wall erected
in front of it.
The April 2017 meeting continued the discussion of the bulkheads with Bridging
Solutions addressing a persistent concern about the possibility of having to bore into
bedrock if the soldier piles can not be driven in sufficiently. If additional boring were
required,it would significantly increase the cost. (The issue of hitting bedrock or not has
been an ongoing point of discussion between the engineers and Board members.
Historically in Cedar Hammock there has never been a problem due to a soldier pile
being dislodged from the bottom.) But looking at the estimated costs provided by
Garland and Garland of approximately$70 per square foot,the cost for the four
bulkheads would be approximately$1.3 to$1.5 million.
The next CDD meeting was not until October 2017. Four Supervisors were present;Mr.
Day could not attend. When the issue of bulkheads came up,Bridging Solutions
provided a 90%complete design package,which is all that was required at the time. It
also presented an estimate for a timber retaining wall budget. It was noted that the
previous Garland and Garland cost estimate did not include the possibility of hitting
bedrock and the subsequent need to drill into it if it were encountered. Bridging
Solutions contacted another construction company,TSI Disaster Recovery LLC,for a
budget estimate. In their calculations the estimate went from$70 to$186 per square foot;
roughly two and a half times more. This was sobering to the Supervisors present and
further discussion was undertaken on the cost and longevity of construction options,
funding options,contingency plans for a bulkhead failure and how to keep the course
open,and contractor scheduling. It was agreed by those present that the cost of a wood
replacement as presented was excessive and a motion to have a fmal design drawn up for
a concrete block wall was passed.
All Supervisors were present for the November 2017 meeting. During previous bulkhead
discussions,the Supervisors recognized and took into consideration the potential costs to
the Club of closing down the course for a period of time because of bulkhead
replacement. It was generally agreed that the CDD would be willing to reimburse the
Master Board for damage to the course(greens,regrassing,irrigation equipment,tee box
repair, cart path, etc.),lost revenues to the Club,and staff costs. (Subsequently the CDD
was advised by its lawyer that under State statutes it could pay for damages to the course,
but it could not reimburse for the other loses and costs.)
Mr.Read and Master Board Vice President Lawrence attended the meeting and provided
comments and input to the discussions. Mr. Read discussed that the Master Board would
be closing the Clubhouse for refurbishment from approximately June 1st through mid-
July 2019 during which time the food and beverage amenities would be shut down.
There was discussion about postponing bulkhead work to coincide with that project. Mr.
Day also expressed his opinion that information used as the basis for the motion approved
in the October meeting to reject the wood wall in favor of the concrete block wall should
be reviewed by another engineer and to get a second opinion on the two types of wall
construction,the methods of construction,cost estimates, and timeframes. He made a
motion to this affect which was passed on a three to two vote.
The next meeting was held in January 2018. Supervisor Day relayed that he had shown
the Bridging Solutions calculations and engineering data to another engineer who had no
problems with them. The other engineer did take exception to Bridging Solutions
recommendations concerning core drilling of rock, suggesting there were alternatives to
this which would keep costs down. He also suggested Mr. Day talk with another
contractor who recommended a construction process using interlocking vinyl sheeting.
Mr.Day explained that the vinyl material was more expensive than wood,but time would
be saved in installation resulting in an overall lower cost for installation. The installation
method apparently would also cause little or no damage to the course and the wall would
have a 50 year guarantee. There was further discussion about the difference of opinion
over the bedrock issue.
Supervisor Minamyer then discussed his visit with the golf course supervisor at Naples
Heritage to discuss their bulkheads. Naples Heritage is a sister US Homes development a
couple of years older than Cedar Hammock and Mr. Minamyer wanted to investigate
their experiences with bulkheads. Naples Heritage has used a firm named JTM to do
repairs to their bulkheads and spoke highly of the work done. They have fewer
bulkheads than Cedar Hammock and with the maintenance and repairs that have been
carried out they have not had significant issues with them. Following on,Mr.Minamyer
recommended delaying replacement of bulkheads until the next regrassing which is being
considered for 2028,doing what preventative maintenance can be anticipated and making
required repairs as needed in the interim. His thought being that this would allow the
CDD time to accumulate funds without having to borrow money or issue a bond and
permit and provide ample time for coordination between the CDD and the Master Board
to incorporate the bulkhead replacement into the regrassing project. In addition, since the
course would be shut down during that project,if a more invasive construction process
for bulkhead replacement would be selected,it would not present a problem. His
recommendation was concurred in by the other Supervisors.
Discussion continued concerning the need to develop an emergency spending resolution
as a contingency should something occur and it was agreed that this would be done
expeditiously. Mr. Day, expressing concern about hole 16, also suggested getting a
contractor proposal for replacement of the bulkhead to get a cost estimate. The District
Manager pointed out that this had already been done with the report provided by Bridging
Solutions. Mr. Day then suggested putting out a bid for two wall options(wood and
vinyl)to see what the price would be. Staff noted that numbers had previously been
obtained and that there were previous decisions by the Board that would need to be
rescinded or revised before such a motion could be considered.. It was then moved by
Mr.Minamyer to rescind the motion approved in the November meeting. The vote was
unanimous in favor.
In a recap of the Board's bulkhead discussions and actions,Chairman Cook summarized
that the Board will move ahead toward a bulkhead solution during the next regrassing
using the October 2017 motion of the small concrete block construction for budgeting
purposes while being alert to any needed repairs in the interim. The District Manager
added that Bridging Solutions would be informed of the Board's intentions and be asked
to identify other construction options available,such as the vinyl mentioned by Mr.Day.
This brings you up to date on Board bulkhead discussions and actions. It is hoped that
this synopsis gives you a clearer idea of what the CDD has been doing regarding
bulkheads. As can be seen,the Board of Supervisors draws upon the advice and input of
a range of professionals and experts in the engineering and construction fields and strives
to do its due diligence in addressing the issue. It also tries to look at the impact and
implications of actions it takes(or doesn't take)and factor that into its decisions. The
CDD also takes very seriously its fiduciary responsibility and duty to the owners in Cedar
Hammock. Infrastructure assets often carry a large price tag so the Board is very
sensitive to the financial implications of its actions. It also recognizes the need for and
strongly espouses a cooperative and coordinated relationship with the Master Board in
order to have a positive impact on the community and to sustain and enhance the
investment we all have in Cedar Hammock.
Hopefully it is clear that the Board of Supervisors is not ignoring the issue and is
committed to finding a solution. As can be seen from this summary,there are various
construction and material options to consider as well as differing opinions about some of
the information and data acquired to date. It can also be seen that decisions and positions
can and do change as information is gathered and factored into the decision making
process. Catastrophic failures are largely unpredictable. Developing problems can be
detected and remedial steps taken or repairs made when needed.
Finally,as a governmental entity governed by Chapter 190 of the Florida State Statutes,
the CDD operates under Florida's Sunshine Law. Its meeting are open to all and no
business can be accomplished or discussed between the Supervisors outside of a properly
noticed meeting. Public attendance at the meetings is encouraged and there is a website
that carries important CDD information. The site is CedarHammockCDD.com. There is
also a link to that site on the Cedar Hammock website.