Agenda 02/24/2009 Item #10A
Agenda Item No.1 OA
February 24, 2009
Page 1 of 462
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Recommendation to deny the Alternative Impact Fee Appeal submitted by Tamiami Square of Naples,
LLC (Developer) and authorize the Chainoan to execute a notice to the Developer for the collection of
the Collier County Water-Sewer District (CCWSD) Alternative Impact Fee calculation of $120,904 for
Building 300.
OBJECTIVE: That the Board of County Commissioners, Ex-Officio, the Governing Board of the Collier
County Water-Sewer District (Board), deny the Appeal submitted by Tamiami Square of Naples, LLC and
authorize the Chainnan to execute a notice to the Developer for the collection of the Collier County Water-
Sewer District (CCWSD) Alternative Impact Fee calculation 0[$120,904 for Building 300.
CONSIDERATIONS: On December 27, 2007, the Developer's representative initiated a discussion with
staff concerning potential changes to the water, wastewater, and irrigation demand. In preparation for the
meeting, staff uncovered an underpayment of prior water and wastewater impact fees associated with
property located at 14700 Tamiami Trail North. The Developer's representative was contacted and ultimately
advised that $288,623.50 was due and payable to CCWSD. The Developer's representative disputed the
calculation, and infonned staff of its intent to pursue an alternative impact fee calculation process.
In March 2008, the Developer made a payment to the CCWSD in the amount of $43,444 for unpaid water
and wastewater impact fees. An additional amount of $15,939 was collected on permit number 2007091 1176
for water and wastewater impact fees. In total, an amount of $59,383 has been collected and applied to the
original balance of $288,623.50. The outstanding halance for the development now stands at $229,240.50.
On May 13, 2008, Agenda Item I 6C3, the Board approved the Agreement Regarding Alternative Impact Fee
Calculation (Agreement) that allowed the Developer to proceed with an Alternative Impact Fee Calculation
Process with the CCWSD.
On August 1, 2008, the County Attorney's Office received the Developer's Alternative Impact Fee
Calculation proposal for review.
On August 29, 2008, Staff notified the Developer's representative that their submission was deemed
"complete," but rejected due to use of a calculation method inconsistent with the methodology established
within the Consolidated Impact Fee Ordinance (Ordinance) and inconsistent with the discussions held in the
pre-application meeting with staff.
On October 2, 2008, the County Attorney's Office received an Appeal from the Developer's representative
requesting that the Board approve the Alternative Impact Fee Calculation proposal submitted on August 1,
2008. No facts or figures related to the Developer's representative calculations or conclusions were changed
from the submission that was rejected on August 29, 2008.
As supported by a letter from the current CCWSD rate consultant, dated August 26, 2008, by Mr. Robert 1.
Ori, President of Public Resources Management Group, Inc., the Developer's submission is based on a static
and inflexible criterion that did not account for the variance of business types and their associated flows. The
Developer's representative submission and appeal must be denied because the proposed methodology is not
consistent with the Ordinance as it does not provide an accurate reflection of water/wastewater use.
In the months of October and November 2008, Staff met with the Developer's representatives on multiple
occasions. On November 4, 2008, Staff proposed an alternative calculation of $120,904 (54.9 Equivalent
Residential Connections [ERCs] for water impact fees and 32.0 ERCs for wastewater impact fees) for
immediate resolution of the outstanding balance for Building 300. Staff used a combination of historical data
Agenda Item NO.1 OA
February 24, 2009
Page 2 of 462
and the Developer's representative submitted information as the basis for the proposed dollar amount. It is
Staff's position that this historical data is the methodology that should be relied upon during the alternative
impact fee calculation as it is fully consistent and sufficient with the Ordinance, Section 74-303 (d) 2 (g).
Building 100
$ 11,770.00
Building 200
$ 20,597.50
Building 300
$ 196,873.00
Total
$ 229,240.50
CCWSD Alternative ) $ ]20,904.00
J. During Alternative Impact Fee discussions in October, the Developer requested that Building ]00 and 200
be excJudedfrom the calculation because there are no existing tenants. This figure reflects historical data
and submitted itiformationfrom the Developer for Building 300. The collection a/water and waste-water
impactleeslor Buildings 100 and 200 will occur at a later date.
".'ry~",,, "~,..
" '\ I' ~ c;1U ~;':l':"< l
'-' .iI; l'i , ~ . ',,' \:.' .
Staff believed that a tentative agreement was reached during the meeting on November 4, 2008 and prepared
to move forward with the calculation. Subsequent communication from the Developer's representatives
altered the agreement and terminated the process. Staff placed this item on the January 13, 2009 agenda for
Board direction.
On January 9, 2009 the Developer's representative requested a continuance to the January 27, 2009 Board
meeting and requested another opportunity to meet with Staff for a resolution.
On January 13,2009 Staff met briefly with the Developer's representative to discuss terms of the Alternative
Impact Fee Calculation. Staff believed that a tentative agreement was reached at that time.
On January ]4,2009, an e-mail was sent to the Developer's representative with an outline of the terms for
the Alternative Impact Fee Calculation provided by Staff.
On January 21,2009 the Developer's representative altered the terms and conditions that were established
within the January 14th e-mail. As a result, agreement was not reached.
On Janwuy 23, 2009, Staff engaged the Developer's representative via phone conference to discuss the terms
for the Alternative Impact Fee Calcu]ation provided by Staff. The Developer's representative, once again,
refused to accept the conditions, terms and amount of this calculation.
On Janwuy 23, 2009, the Developer's representative requested another continuance until February 24, 2009.
Staff has made it clear to the Developer's Representative that this Alternative Impact Fee process is not a
negotiation, but rather, a calculation that must be supported by a sound methodology that provides
consistency with our Ordinance. The Developer's representatives have failed to provide a supportable
calculation for their development.
LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS: On or before 30 days after the hearing on the Alternative Impact Fee the
County is required to provide written notice to the Developer of the amount of any impact fees owed based
on the outcome of the alternative impact fee process. See Paragraph 22 of the attached Agreement. The
notice made part of this item has been approved for form and legal sufficiency.
The Developer has 30 days from the date of the notice to pay all such impact fees in full or to enter into a
binding agreement with the County to make installment payments to include the statutory interest rate which
shall commence upon the Board meeting date. Typical payment plans require equal monthly payments
throughout the term of the payment plan. The statutory interest rate is presently 8.0% per annum or .0002192
per day. Paragraph 22 allows the County Manager to enter into such binding agreement for a payment plan
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24, 2009
Page 3 of 462
This item is quasi-j udicial and as such requires ex parte disclosure to be made. This item requires a majority
vote, - JBW
FISCAL IMP ACT: Denial of the appeal will initiate the collection process outlined in Paragraph 22 of the
Agreement and allow the CCWSD to pursue the outstanding balance of $120,904,
GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: There is no associated Growth Management Impact.
RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of County Commissioners, Ex-Officio, the Governing Board of
the Collier County Water-Sewer District, deny the Appeal submitted by Tamiami Square of Naples, LLC and
authorize the Chairman to execute a notice to the Developer for the collection of the Collier County Water-
Sewer District Alternative Impact Fee calculation of$] 20,904 for Building 300.
PREPARED BY: Jennifer B. White, Assistant County Attorney / Thomas G. Wides, Operations Support
Director, Public Utilities Division
Page I of 1
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24,2009
Page 4 of 462
COLLIER COUNTY
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
Item Number:
Item Summary:
10A
This item was continued from the January 13, 2009 Bee Meeting and the February 10, 2008
Bee Meeting and was further continued to the February 24, 2009 Bee Meeting. This item
requires that all participants be sworn In and ex parte disclosure be provided by Commission
members. Recommendation to deny the Alternative Impact Fee Appeal submitted by
Tamiami Square of Naples, LLC (Developer) and authorize the Chairman to execute a notice
to the Developer for the collection of the Collier County Water~Sewer District (CCWSD)
Alternative Impact Fee calculation of $120.904 for Building 300 (Tom Wides, Director Fiscal
Operations, PublIc Utilities)
Meeting Date: 2/24/200990000 AM
Prepared By
Thomas Wides Operations Director Date
Public Utilities Public Utilities Operations 12/15/20082:16:35 PM
Approved By
Thomas Wides Operations Director Date
Public Utilities Public Utilities Operations 1129/20091 :40 PM
Approved By
Jennifer A. Belpedio Assistant County Attorney Date
County Attorney County Attorney Office 1129/20092:34 PM
Approved By
Jeff Klatzkow Assistant County Attorney Date
County Attorney County Attorney Office 1129/20093:46 PM
Approved By
James W. DeLany Public Utilities Administrator Date
Public Utilities Public Utilities Administration 2/21200912:42 PM
Approved By
OMS Coordinator OMS Coordinator Date
County Manager's Office Office of Management & Budget 2/31200910:32 AM
Approved By
Randy Greenwald Management/Budget Analyst Date
County Manager's Office Office of Management & Budget 2/31200911 :41 AM
Approved By
James V. Mudd County Manager Date
Board of County County Manager's Office 2/11/20095:45 PM
Commissioners
fi le:1 IC:\Agenda Test\Export\ 124-February%2024, %202009\ 10. %20COUNTY%20MANAG.,. 2/18/2009
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24,2009
Page 5 of 462
AGREEMENT REGARDING AL TERNA TIVE IMP ACT FEE CALCULATION
This Agreement is made and entered into on MaYll, 2008 into by and between Tamiami
Square of Naples, LLC, a Florida limited liability company ("Developer"), and the Collier County Board
of County Commissioners ("BCC") acting as the governing body of the Collier Coonty Water-Sewer
District ("CCWSD").
WHEREAS, CCWSD has calculated $288,623.50 in water and sewer Impact fees based on the
square footage and/or use of existing commercial development located on real property identified by the
following Collier County tax identIfication numbers: (i) 00143080000; (ii) 76422000065; and (Hi)
76422000049 ("Property"); and
WHEREAS. Developer disputes the $288.623.50 calculation. Notwithstanding, Developer has
paid $43,444.00 for water and sewer nnpact fees for the Property, subject to and conditioned upon
Developer reserving all of Its nghts under the Consolidated Impact Fee Ordinance and all other applicable
laws, ordinances, etc.; and
WHEREAS, CCWSD and Developer desire to participate in an alternative impact fee process
regarding the amount of water and sewer impact fees ("Impact Fees") due and owing for the Property and
hereby agree to withhold the filing or initiation of any claim, action or lawsuit during the pendency of the
alternative impact fee process; and
WHEREAS, CCWSD has released all current Public Utilities Division holds or any other holds
related to Impact Fees on building penmts and related certificates of occupancy pending on the Property
as of the effective date of this Agreement as a condition of payment in the amount of$43,444,00 made by
the Developer on April 3, 2007.
NOW, THEREFORE, In consideration of the foregoing premises and the following promises, the
parties agree as follows:
I. The foregoing recitals are true and correct and are hereby incorporated herein by reference.
2. Developer has tendered a check in the amount of $43,444.00 for Impact Fees and $2,500.00 for:
(i) staff to review its alternative impact fee calculation; and (ii) payment of all of Developer's fees and
costs due and owing the County for the alternative impact fee process.
3. CCWSD agrees not to withhold issuance of certificates of occupancy, issue stop work orders or
take any other adverse action on all issued or pending building permits for the Property based on or
related to the $288,623.50 in disputed Impact Fees.
4. No later than May 13, 2008, Developer shall arrange and attend a pre-application meeting with
the County Manager to discuss the requirements, procedures and methodology of the alternative fee
calculation. The pre-application meeting will normally cover the following topics: (I) proposed previous
studies; (2) credits; (3) proposed study sites; (4) study data clements; (5) proposed data collection
methodology; and (6) report format.
5. Subsequent to the pre.application meeting, Developer shall submit three (3) copies of the
proposed approach to the alternate fee calculation to the County Manager. The County Manager shall
have 30 County working days to respond in writing to the proposed approach. If the County Manager
concurs with the proposed approach. Developer will be notified to proceed with the alternative fee
calculation, If the County Manager disagrees with the proposed approach, the County Manager shall
identify the problem areas for Developer to incorporate and address in Its re-submittal to the County.
Developer shall be required to receIve approval from the County Manager prior to proceeding with the
Agenda Item NO.1 OA
February 24, 2009
Page 6 of 462
alternative fee calculation. If the County Manager has not approved Developer's proposed approach after
one re-submittal, Developer may request a decision from the County Manager whereupon the County
Manager shall either approve, approve with conditions, or deny the proposed approach.
6. The alternative fee calculation shall be undertaken through the submission of an impact analysis
for the water and sewer facilities at issue, which shall be based on data, information, methodology and
assumptions contained in Chapter 74, of the Collier County Code of Ordinances and/or the impact fee
studies incorporated herein, or an independent source, including local studies for alternative impact fee
calculations performed by others within the immediately preceding three (3) years, if applicable or
available, provided that the independent source is a local study supported by a data hase adequate for the
conclusions contained in such study performed pursuant to a methodology generally accepted by
professionals in the field of expertise for the water and sewer facilities at issue and based upon standard
sources of information relating to facihties planning, cost analysis and demographics and generally
accepted by professionals in the field of expertise for the pubhc facilities at issue.
7. The alternative fee calculation shall be submitted by the Developer for the Property and shall be
prepared and certified as accurate by persons accepted by the County as qualified professionals in the
field of expertise for the public facilities at issue, and shall be submitted to the County Manager.
8. Within thirty (30) County working days of receipt of an alternative fee calculation. the County
Manager shall determine if it is complete. If the County Manager determines the application is not
complete, he shall send a written statement specifying the deficiencies to the person submittmg the
application at the address set forth in the application. The County Manager will not be required to take
any further action on the alternative fce calculation until all specified deficiencies have been corrected.
9. After the County Manager determines that the alternative fee calculation is complete, he shall
notify Developer of its completion within ten (10) days, and he shall, within thirty (30) County working
days, complete a review of the data, analysis, and cooclusions asserted in the alternative fee calculation.
If this revIew is not completed within these time frames, and if requested by Developer, the item will be
scheduled for the next available BCC meeting.
10. If the County Manager determines that in the alternative fee calculation the County's cost to
accommodate the existing commercial square footage and use on the Property is statistically significantly
different than the impact fee estabhshed pun;uant to Section 74-201 and the applicable Sections 74-302
through 74-309, of the Collier County Code of Ordinances, the amount of the impact fee invoiced
Developer shall be reduced to a dollar amount consistent with the amount determined by the alternative
fee calculation, subject to the BCC's approval.
II. In the event Developer disagrees with a decision of the County Manager that effectively results in
a denial of the alternative fee calculation, Developer may file a written appeal petition with the BCC not
later than thirty (30) days after receipt of notice of such a decision by the County Manager. In reviewing
the decision, the BCC shall use the standards established or to be established hereunder. The appeal
petition must advise the BCC of all issues and shall explain the precise basis Developer asserts that the
decision(s) ofthe County Manager islare alleged to be incorrect.
12. Developer agrees that future permits sought for the Property seeking a net increase in size or use
and creating additional demand or impact on water or sewer public facilities will not be issued unless
Impact Fees due for the particular umt(s) (based solely on such size or use increase creating additional
demand or impact on water or sewer public facilities) are paid in full. CCWSD agrees that it will not
withhold issuance of permits or certificates of occupancy, issue stop work orders, or take any adverse
action relating to: (i) future permits sought for particular unit(s) within the Property that do not result in a
net increase in size or use and do not create additional demand or impact on water and sewer pubhc
Agenda Item NO.1 OA
February 24, 2009
Page 7 of 462
facilities; and (ii) permits for particular unites) within the Property where additional Impact Fees are due
(given a net increase in size or use and creating additional demand or impact on public facilities) and paid
in full,
13. Should an alternative impact fee be approved by the Bee, Developer agrees to provide the
eeWSD with sewer flow rates' on a monthly basis until two (2) years after the approval of the alternative
impact fee.
14. At the end of each six month period within the two (2) year cycle CCWSD will analyze the water
and/or sewer flows for sewer during those six month periods. CCWSD hereby acknowledges that dunng
the two (2) year cycle the Developer will continue to lease and develop the Property and that water and
sewer flows for the Property will likely increase. In the event that actual water and/or sewer flows for the
Property in two consecutive months exceed the sum of water and/or sewer flows used in the alternative
impact fee calculation and water and/or sewer flows accounted for in the issuance of future building
permits, CCWSD can properly claim additional water and sewer Impact Fees are due and owed. CCWSD
will recover additional water and sewer Impact Fees at the then in effect Impact Fee rate.
During. the two (2) year cycle, and after Its expiration, all additional future water and sewer Impact Fees
not yet accounted for or related to the $288,623.50 in disputed impact fees will be paid at the time of the
future building permit issuance.
15. For the pendency of the alternative impact fee process, the parties agree that all applicable statute
of limitations as to any and all claims of the County or Developer shall be tolled and suspended.
16. Developer hereby waives any defense by way of any statute of limitations which would otherwise
arise during the pendency ofthe alternative Impact fee process.
17. This waiver shall not be construed as a waiver of any statute of limitations defense that has
become estabhshed as of the effective date of this Agreement, or which would arise after the pendency of
the alternative impact fee process; it only excludes the period during which this Agreement has operated
to toll any applicable statute of limitations.
18. It is understood that by entering into this Agreement, neither party is waiving any claims, nghts
or defenses that may have accrued up to the effective date of this Agreement.
19. This Agreement shall not be offered in evidence in any action or proceeding except with respect
to any action or proceeding related to this Agreement, or to enforce the terms of the Agreement, or prove
that the statute oflimitations was tolled for the penod of time during which this Agreement was in effect.
20. The pendency of the alternative impact fee process will be deemed to have commenced upon
approval of this Agreement by the BCC and full execution of the same by the parties hereto and shall be
deemed to have expired upon a final detennination by the BCC on Developer's alternative impact fee
calculation.
21. During the pendency of the alternative impact fee process, the $288,623.50 in Impact Fees
invoiced Developer shall not be deemed delinquent under Section 74-501, of the Colher County Code of
Ordinances or otherwise and no delinquency fee, interest, or other fees shall be due and owing the County
with respect to said Impact Fees or any portion thereof which may be due and owing the County for the
Property.
22. On or before thirty (30) days after the end of the alternative impact fee process and only in the
event additional Impact Fees are due and owing the County, the County shall provide written notice to
I CCWSD will monitor the monthly water flows.
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24,2009
Page 8 of 462
Developer of the amount of any Impact Fees due based on the outcome of the alternative impact fee
process. Developer shall have thirty (30) days from the date of said notice by the County to pay all such
Impact Fees in full or enter into a binding agreement with the County to make installment payments for
said Impact Fees to include the statutory interest rate which shall only commence to accrue from and after
the date a final determination is made by the BCe on Developer's alternative impact fee calculalion. The
County Manager is hereby authorized to enter into an agreement with Developer for installment payments
with a reasonable repayment period not to exceed three (3) years. If Developer fails to either pay in full
all such Impact Fees and any statutory interest due and payable thereon on or before the expiration of said
thirty (30) day penod or enter into a binding agreement with the County regarding installment payments.
the County may only thereafter deem any such Impact Fees due and owing the County for the Property
delinquent under Section 74-501, of the Collier County Code of Ordinances and proceed with its
collection rights and remedies under Section 74.501, of the Collier County Code of Ordinances.
Notwithstanding anything contained in this Agreement to the contrary, It is expressly understood and
agreed to by the parties hereto that Developer does not hereby waive or limit in any way any existing or
future claims, rights, positions or defenses that Developer may have to seek a refund for overpayment of
impact fees pursuant to Section 74-202 or to legally challenge: (i) the alternative impact fee process. (ii)
the final determination made by the BCC on Developer's alternative impact fee calculation, (iii) the
Impact Fee calculation, andlor (iv) any future impact fee calculation for the Property.
DEVELOPER
~ESSES:
....;-., ~~O'#'.--/
PrintName: Br'''1Lt:.. //.9"--
...... "r
Tamiami Square of Naples, LLC,
a Florida limited liability company
By: Crifasi Enterprises, Inc., a Fl
as Manager
.
A TrEST:
DWIGHT E. BROCK, CLERK
,. \..;'~~,,-,{' :~
JiG! ~.. ().J.u{{:?,~tru.. P 'L .
:,:.MiiIIt."to~~ ,
~. ~~'~~~~I and legal
- ~llfficien~y:" .
, ~'; ~' ; \ .
By:
~I ~Cl ~I : 0-,
Ienmfer A. Be edio
Assistant County Attorney
(.-~b!il.k..:.~~: i,'~'
~_:~',~l:;:~':?: , .~,
~'t' f"-.?i:";:'l '
,:.,:.~r;:..:' :::;::~~~:~;1~~~,
. ,I.' ,:,.',' . "f..I"~i~}'IL~r;";;a,,~~~: f,'<\.:):':/:';;/,~~<\,<'~.':: -,,' !~I~J'~#r~~:.\'
,','I, '~."'_... '",..',., :l.I:fl~"..~. ".~,,..\,,~, ~", ' ",:'::;'1jf.~I4S"'1l,j,.
~ . . "'\""~l "'~' ~;.J;'!1'""".. ",,'M""" ','.' :"'-)~.,i:'~1~~l+\'"
. ::'~' , ,J;.~~?<-0" ,~~&.S:;,i!~~~:~~':~~:,,_,'\:;i,~~;~~,,;:'J" ':~:/j~~~:i!\;:rlj'."",
i" ';~,i~;~.,:t,:::~
~4'11'~~';;" .
850 PARK SHORE oim1Qe 9 of 462
TRIANON CENTRE - THIRD FLOOR
NAPLES, FL 34103
239.649.2712 DIRECT
239.649.6200 MAIN
239.261.3659 FAX
dalewis@ralaw.com
I_&)ANDRESS II
A LEGAL PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATION
August 1,2008
....
- ()
,',:,) 520
~''Il''
'""" ~,..,
c.= Z'T1
w') :;:'0
I
N - ITI
~O
".
:l: 8"
w :JJ:I
ZITI
'.D iJ?
VIA HAND DELIVERY
Jennifer 1. Belpedio, Esq.
Assistant County Attorney
Collier County Atlorney Office
3301 E. Tamiami Trail, 8th Floor
Naples, FL 34112
Re: Agreement Regarding Alternative Impact Fee Calculation dated May 13, 2008
between Tamiami Square of Naples, LLC and Collier County Board of County
Commissioners (the "Agreement") - Alternative Fee Calculation Study/Report
dated July 23, 2008 and prepared by GAl Consultants, Inc. (the "Study")
Dear Jennifer:
Pursuant to the terms of the Agreement and Appendix H, Alternative Fee Calculation
Methodology Water and Sewer Impact Fee from the Collier County Consolidated Impact Fee
Administrative Procedures Manual, enclosed please find five (5) originals of the above-
referenced Alternative Fee Calculation Study/Report for review by the County Manager, Collier
County Public Utilities Department Administrator and Impact Fee Coordinator. The enclosed
Study has been certified by Gerald C. Hartman with GAl Consultants, Inc., a professional
engineer registered with the State of Florida, and the Study complies with the proposed approach
and methodology that we discussed and agreed to use at the May 13, 2008 Alternative Impact
Fee Study pre-application meeting.
Based on the data, information, assumptions and methodology included in the Study and
discussed at the pre-application meeting, the proposed alternative water and sewer impact fee
calculations are as follows:
1. Water (potable service) impact fees - unit count. 4.7 additional ERCs at $3,575
per ERC for a total of $16,803 in additional impact fees and a total of32 potable water ERCs.
2. Wastewater impact fees - unit count. 4.7 additional ERCs at $3,495 per ERC for
a total of $16,427 in additional impact fees paid to the County and a total wastewater impact fee
count of32 ERCs.
Additionally, and in follow-up to the County letter dated March 31, 2008 (see
Attachment H to the Study) and our pre-application meeting, our client proposes to install the
requested two (2) inch irrigation meter and separate the potable water system from the water
CI.I--Vl-lAl"o'U TOLEDO AKRON COLUMHUS CiNCI."INA11 WASHINGTON, D.C. TAILAHA.,.;!j~'E ORlANDO FoRT MYERS NAPLES RJRT LAUDERDALE
www.ralaw.com
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24, 2009
Page 10 of 462
Jennifer L. Belpedio, Esq.
August 1,2008
Page 2
used to irrigate the property and re-hydrate the wetlands located along the eastern boundary of
the property. A meter tapping fee of $1,140.00 plus impact fees for irrigation totaling of
$22,060.59 would be paid by our client based on an ERC value of 6.1. As such and subject to
approval of the Study, the total additional amount to be paid to the County by my client would be
$56,430.59.
Should the Study be approved, our client requests that the two (2) year monitoring period
pursuant to Paragraphs 13 and 14 of the Agreement not commence until our client has sufficient
time to separate the potable water lines from the lines used to irrigate and re-hydrate the wetlands
and only upon written notification to the County from our client that such work has been
completed and that the potable water and wastewater systems are functioning correctly. Pursuant
to Paragraph 22 of the Agreement and the County letter dated March 31, 2008, our client
proposes to pay the tapping fee for the two (2) inch irrigation meter and purchase an additional
ERC value of 6.1 for irrigation for an amount totaling $22,060.59 on or before thirty (30) days
from the date of County approval of the Study and County invoice for the same. With respect to
the additional $16,803.00 in potable water impact fees and $16,427.00 in wastewater impact
fees, our client is able to pay $1,000.00 per month until such balance is paid-in-full such that the
repayment period for such additional impact fees will not exceed three (3) years.
We look forward to hearing from you and greatly appreciate your cooperation and
assistance in this matter. In the meantime should you have any questions whatsoever, please feel
free to contact me.
Very truly yours,
DAL/ksn
Enclosures as Stated
ROETZEL & A~S, LPA
/~~~---- --
Douglas A. Lewis
For the Finn
cc: Mr. Jack J. Crifasi, Jr. (w/enclosure)
Mr. Gerald C. Hartman (w/o enclosure)
563300.01.111647.0003
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24,2009
. Paqe 11 of 462
. CE: OF fHE: I~ gal consultants
c8~~~ ATIORNE'T If ,,"",f"m", ,d,,, ",co ".',ty,
m~ ~UG - 2 ~l'I 3: \ 9
July 23, 2008
GAl Proj. # A080376.00
Douglas A. Lewis, Esquire
Roetzel & Andress, P.A.
850 Park Shore Drive
Trianon Centre - 3fd Floor
Naples, FL 34103
Re: Tamiami Square - Collier County Water and Sewer Facilities Proposed
Alternative Fee Calculation Methodology
Dear Mr. Lewis:
In accordance with the "Agreement Regarding Alternative Impact Fee Calculation"
(May 2008), Appendix H 'Water and Sewer Facilities Proposed Alternate Fee
Calculation Methodology" (June 2001), and the pre-application meeting (May 2008); this
letter with its Exhibits and Attachments represents the "Study Report" certified by a
Florida Professional Engineer qualified in this area of work for consideration by Collier
County Utilities Department Impact Fee Coordinator.
Allachment A provides Appendix H.
Attachment B presents clearly the 1.) Level of Service (LOS) standards for water at 350
gallons per day annual average daily flow per Equivalent Residential Connection (ERC)
and the water peaking factor of 1.2, 2.) the LOS for wastewater at 250 gallons per day
annual average daily flow (AADF) per ERG and the wastewater peaking factor of 1.3,
the basis of determining the respective impact fee for water or the sewer system as well
as other items.
Allachment G provides the older County Ordinance Nos. 2007-52, 2007-57 and and
latest Resolution 2008-200 and Article VI. for the Water-Sewer District Uniform Billing
which establishes 1.) the level of the impact fees at $3,575 per ERG for water and
$3,495 per ERC for wastewater, 2) that the subject property is a non-residential use,
and 3.) that a unit within the subject property is at one ERG each.
Allachment D shows site photos which clearly show that 1.) there is only one lift station
on-site such that run time analysis is appropriate and includes all flows, 2.) the major
building construction was recently completed by 5/12/08 the date the photographs were
taken, 3.) the irrigation system is connected and that landscaping is still underway and
irrigation to assure plant/sod survival was practiced, and 4.) the repairs to the water
system were compieted.
Orlando OffIce
301 E. Pine Street, Suite 1020 Orlando, Florida 32801 T 407.423.8398 F 407.843.1070 www.gaiconsultunts.com
-
Agenda Item NO.1 OA
February 24, 2009
Page 12 of 462
Douglas A. Lewis, Esquire
July 23, 2008
Page 2
Attachment E documents the responsiveness of the developer to the County's request
for information,
Attachment F provides excerpts which document the practice of using units when within
the ERC LOS, which Tamiami Square is, as an Alternate Method Impact of Fee
Calculation for commercial properties,
Attachment G provides excerpts from M1 (Manual of Practice) AWWA again confirming
the methodology.
Attachment H summarizes key points in the pre-application meeting, The County's
rejection of FPSC meter equivalencies. This attachment includes the County's offer
which was accepted in May and pending approval of this StudylReport payment will be
made for the two (2) two-inch water irriqation meters at 6.1 ERCs (water only) and the
tap-in cost (3/31/08 County letter). The Developer has agreed and paid or will be paid
by time of C.O. some 27.3 ERCs for both water and wastewater. Attachment H page 2
of 3 and the attachments thereto which drawings show the buildout of the site in the
three (3) phases including some 32 units. A unit in Phase 1 was approximately an
estimated average of 1,900 ft2, in Phase 2 similarly approximately 1,950 ft2 and Phase 3
approximately 1,200 ft. These sized units are consistent with the PRMG Study of 2006
and the County Ordinance of 2007 for one (1) ERC each. Page 3 of 3 of Attachment H
provides that after the separation of the irrigation system from the potable system which
the developer has agreed to do, that the agreed audit/two (2) year study between the
County and Developer would thereafter for potable (non-irrigation) water and sewage
AADF of 11,200 gpd and 8,000 gpd, respectively. The two (2) month average peak
would be 13,440 gpd for water and 10,400 gpd for sewage.
Using the Unit Count Method (number of units in the structure) for which the unit sizing
is consistent with one ERC each results in 32 units and ERCs.
The items listed below summarize the Professional Engineer's findings following receipt
of comments from those attending the pre-application meeting:
1. Vested Flow Rates for StudY/Audit Cii1 32 ERCs (Potable Onlv) Water and
Wastewater
a.) Water LOS 350 gpd AADF
(i) Annual Average Daily Flow through potable (non irrigation meters)
= 32 x 350 gpd AADF or 11,200 gpd
(ii) 2 month peak factor (see page 29 Table 1 PRMG 40.00 + 33.33 '"
1.2
Ii gai S~!2~~L~~o~,~;,
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24, 2009
Page 13 of 462
Douglas A. Lewis, Esquire
July 23, 2008
Page 3
(iii) 2 month audit use on average day of that period limit is 11,200 gpd
x 1.2 or 13,440 gpd for test period.
b.) Wastewater LOS 250 gpd AADF
(i) Annual Average (12 month period) Daily Flow = 32 x 250 '" 8,000
gpd AADF
(ii) 2 month peak factor (see page 32 Table 2 PRMG) 40.100 + 30.846
= 1.3
(iii) 2 month audit of use on average day for that period is 8,000 gpd x
1.3 or 10,400 gpd.
2. Proposed Additional Payments
a.)
Irrigation meters 3/3/1/08
(i) Tapping fee
(ii) ERCs irrigation
$ 1,140.00
$22,060.59
b.) Water potable service) impact fees - unit count
0) 4.7 ERCs x $3,575 $16,803.00
c.)
Wastewater impact fees - unit count
(i) 4.7 ERCs x $3,495
$16,427.00
$56.430.59
Total Amount Due (following approval)
3. Consensus of Follow-up (followinQ pre-application meetinQ)
a.) Answer questions and requests for information by County. This activity is
complete.
t.) Submit alternative methodology signed and sealed by engineer. This letter
report and attachments satisfies this final item.
Typically, Alternative Methodologies, if possible, are documented by the historical
record. Table 1 presents the sewage flow records for Tamiami Square for 2007 for the
occupied 18 units on average for the year. On an annual average basis the actual flows
and the paid units and the occupied units correlate exactly. On a peaking basis the
correlation is within 6.1 % (six point one percent) which following the manual of practice
for the smaller demand center of Tamiami Square versus the entire Collier County
wastewater system is expected and appropriate (size/population peaking factor
adjustments pursuant to FDEP, 10-States Standards and WEF MOPs). I conclude and
have verified that the unit count method is valid and approximately applied.
t;
gai consultants
tran~formjn9 ideas inlD rC';1lity.,
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24,2009
Page 14 of 462
Douglas A. Lewis, Esquire
July 23, 2008
Page 4
Table 1 is supported by Exhibit A.
Table 2 documents the repairs to the integrated irrigation and potable water system in
2007. Site photographs illustrate the new landscaping needs in 2007. Site
development records illustrate that major construction of structures occurred in 2007.
Since May of 2008, the amount of irrigation and conservation practices in the
commercial establishments were emphasized.
Although both the irrigation and potable use were integrated at the customer side of the
meters (both types of flow through the meters) and therefore irrigation and repairs to
that system would skew the historical record; the same documentation analysis was
conducted.
Table 3 presents the combined water flow through the meters. AWWA guidelines state
that where major breaks have occurred that data is not re-occurring and therefore
should be excluded from the analysis. Considering the occupancy of 18 units and the
County 6.1 ERCs for irrigation a conservative weighted average of 24.1 ERCs is
obtained. The skewed data (as a result of sod establishment, construction, minor
breaks, irrigation use) results is a comparable 30.8 ERCs AADF. The correlation is
within AWWA standards to the 24.1 ERCs. Nonetheless, it is the metered data as
shown on Exhibit B supporting Table 3, which confirms the agreed two year audit and
true-up.
As a Florida Professional Engineer qualified and accepted in Civil Court mediation and
FPSC expert testimony for such cases/proceedings and due to my over 30 years
experience, training, and practice in Florida on many such impact fee matters (see
Attachment I), I do hereby certify and conclude that the Alternative Methodology as the
unit count method is appropriate for the Tamiami Square project taken in conjunction
with the reasonable assurance from an agreed two (2) year Study/Audit of the use.
Very truly yours,
GAl Consultants, Inc.
GAl Consultants, Inc,
301 E Pine St., Suite 102
Orlando, F L 3
Engineer'
r
I
GCHltevIA080376.00IReportsIR-1
Cvrltr
tj
gai consultants
traflsforminll ideas into real.ty",
Table 1
Tamiami Square 2007 Data
Run Times. Sewage Flow Actual Use
Date Flow Days ADF/Month
1/07 192825 31 6,220 gpd
2/07 164346 + 28 5,870 gpd
3/07 188906 + 31 6,094 gpd
4/07 144349 30 4,812 gpd
5/07 118168 + 31 3,812 gpd
6/07 110295 30 3,677 gpd
7/07 101769 31 3,283 gpd
8/07 93103 31 3,003 gpd
9/07 103676 + 30 3.456 gpd
10107 130074 + 31 4,196 gpd
11/07 139200 30 4,640 gpd
12/07 139833 + 31 4,511 gpd
Qmax Mo. = 6,220 gpd + (250 x 1.3) = 19.0 ERGs (1)
Q AADF 1,626,544 + 365 + 250 = 18 ERGs
o Good correlation of Qmax month@ 19.1 ERGs, Qaadf@ 18
ERGs and occupancy @ 18 units or ERGs as averaged for
period.
o Note 32 ERGs to be purchased
(1) 1.3 peak factor for sewage fior per PRMG 2007 report - impact fees
P :\ORL \HCDI Word Proc\2008\AOB03 76. OO\Report\R-1 \ Tables .xlsx
--- --
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24,2009
Page 15 of 462
Exhibit A
Actual Sewage Flows 2007
Agenda Item NO.1 OA
February 24,2009
Page 16 of 462
Agenda Item NO.1 OA
February 24,2009
Page 17 of 462
TAMIAMI SQUARE
MONTH: January 2007
Flow per Min/Hr
DA.TE TIME PUMP #1 HRS.RUN PUMP #2 HRS. RUN MAINTENANCE
31 0.7 0.6
30 0.7 0.6
29 0901 719,7 0.7 173.6 0,6
28 0.5 0.6
27 0.5 0.6
26 0,5 0.6
25 1356 717.7 0.5 171.4 0.6
24 0.6 0.6
23 0.6 0,6
22 0957 715.9 0.6 169.5 0.6
21 0,6 0.6
20 0.6 0,6
19 0,6 0,6
18 1127 713.5 0.6 167.1 0,6
17 0,5 0.4
16 0.5 0.4
15 0938 712.0 0.5 165.9 0.4
14 0,5 0,6
13 0.5 0.6
12 0.5 0.6
11 1021 709.9 0.5 163.5 0.6
10 0.4 0.5
9 0.4 0.5
8 1112 708.7 0.4 162,0 0.5
7 0.6 0,6
6 0,6 0.6
5 0,6 0.6
4 0857 706,2 0.6 159.6 0.6
3 0.5 0.5
2 1214 705.2 0.5 158.6 0.5
1 0.6 0.6
17.2
98865.6
17.4 93959.46
192825.06
total flow for month
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24,2009
Page 18 of 462
TAMIAMI SQUARE
MONTH: February 2007
Flow per Min/Hr
DATE TIME PUMP #1 HRS. RUN PUMP #2 HRS. RUN MAINTENANCE
31
30
29
28 0.6 0.6
27 0.6 0.6
26 0941 734.5 0.6 188.6 0.6
25 0.5 0.5
24 0.5 0.5
23 0.5 0.5
22 1120 732.5 0.5 186.6 0.5
21 05 0.5
20 0.5 0.5
19 0920 731.0 0.5 185.1 0.5
18 0.5 0.6
17 0.5 0.6
16 0.5 0.6
15 0938 729.0 '. 0.5 182.7 0.6
14 0.6 0.5
13 0.6 0.5
12 0938 727.2 0.6 181.2 0.5
11 0.5 0.5
10 0.5 0.5
9 0.5 0.5
8 1135 725.2 0.5 179.2 0.5
7 0.6 0.6
6 0.6 0.6
5 1134 723.4 0.6 177.4 0.6
4 0.4 0.5
3 0.4 0.5
2 0.4 0.5
1 1013 721.8 0.4 175.4 0.5
14.5 83346
total flow for month
1581000
164346
Agenda Item NO.1 OA
February 24, 2009
Page 19 of 462
TAMIAMI SQUARE
MONTH: MARCH 2007
Flow per Min/Hr
DATE TIME PUMP #1 HRS.RUN PUMP #2 HRS.RUN MAINTENANCE
31 0.4 0.5
30 0.4 0.5
29 0309 751.9 0.4 206.0 0.5
28 0.5 0.5
27 0.5 0.5
26 0922 750.4 0.5 204.5 0.5
25 0.6 0.6
24 0.6 0.6
23 0.6 0.6
22 0912 748.0 0.6 202.1 0.6
21 0.5 0.5
20 0,5 0.5
19 1248 746.5 0.5 200.6 0.5
18 0.6 0.6
17 0.6 0.6
16 0.6 0.6
15 0927 744.1 0.6 198.2 0.6
14 0.5 0.5
13 0.5 0.5
12 1043 742.6 0.5 196.7 0.5
11 0.6 0.6
10 0.6 0.6
9 0,6 0.6
8 0945 740.2 0.6 194.3 0.6
7 0.5 0.5
6 0.5 0.5
5 0938 738.7 0.5 192.8 0.5
4 0.6 0.6
3 0.6 0.6
2 0.6 0.6
1 1111 736.3 0.6 190.4 0.6
16.8 96566.4
total flow for month
17.1 92340
188906.4
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24.2009
Page 20 of 462
TAMIAMI SQUARE
MONTH: APRIL 2007
Flow per Min/Hr
DATE TIME PUMP #1 HRS. RUN PUMP #2 HRS. RUN MAINTENANCE
31
30 0909 765.S 0.2 220.4 0.1
29 0.4 0.4
28 0.4 0.4
27 0.4 0.4
26 0917 764.2 0.4 21S.8 0.4
25 0.3 0.3
24 0.3 0.3
23 1428 763.3 0.3 217.9 0.3
22 0.6 0.6
21 0.6 0.6
20 0.6 0.6
19 1030 760.9 0.6 215.5 0.6
18 0.4 0.5
17 0.4 0.5
16 1127 759.7 0.4 214.0 0.5
15 0.4 0.4
14 0.4 0.4
13 0.4 0.4
12 1021 758.2 0.4 212.4 0.4
11 0.4 0.4
10 0.4 0.4
9 1057 757.0 0.4 211.2 0.4
8 0.5 0.5
7 0.5 0.5
6 0.5 0.5
5 0920 755.0 0.5 209.2 0.5
4 0.5 0.4
3 0.5 0.4
2 1226 753.5 0.5 208.0 0.4
1 0.4 0.5
12.9 74149.2
total fiow for month
13 70200
144349.2
Agenda Item NO.1 OA
February 24, 2009
Page 21 of 462
T AMIAMI SQUARE
MONTH: MAY 2007
Flow per Min/Hr
DATE TIME PUMP #1 HRS. RUN PUMP #2 HRS.RUN MAINTENANCE
31 0936 776.8 0.4 231.7 0.4
30 0.4 0.5
29 1021 776.0 0.4 230.7 0.5
28 0.3 0.3
27 0.3 0.3
26 03 0.3
25 0.3 0.3
24 1224 774.5 0.3 229.2 0.3
23 0.3 0.3
22 0.3 0.3
21 1046 773.6 0.3 228.3 0.3
20 0.4 0.4
19 0.4 0.4
18 0.4 0.4
17 1117 772.0 0.4 226.7 0.4
16 0,3 0.3
15 0.3 0.3
14 1130 771.1 0.3 225.8 0.3
13 0.4 0.4
12 0.4 0.4
11 0.4 0.4
10 1130 769,5 0.4 224.2 0.4
9 0.4 0.3
8 0.4 0.3
7 1110 768.4 0.4 2233 0.3
6 0.3 0.4
5 03 0.4
4 0.3 0.4
3 1025 767.2 0.3 2217 0.4
2 0.3 0.1
1 0.3 0.1
10.5998 60927.6504
total flow for month
10.6 57240
118167.6504
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24, 2009
Page 22 of 462
TAMIAMI SQUARE
MONTH: JUNE 2007
Flow per Min/Hr
DATE TIME PUMP #1 HRS.RUN PUMP #2 HRS. RUN MAINTENANCE
31
30 0.3 0.4
29 0.3 0.4
28 1249 786.0 0.3 241.0 0.4
27 0.3 0.3
26 0.3 0.3
25 1313 785.1 0.3 240,1 0,3
24 0.3 0.3
23 0.3 0.3
22 0.3 0.3
21 1258 783.9 0.3 238.9 0.3
20 0.4 0.4
19 0.4 0.4
18 1057 782.7 0.4 237.7 0.4
17 0.3 0.3
16 0.3 0.3
15 0.3 0.3 .
14 1357 781.5 0.3 236.5 0.3
13 0.3 0.3
12 0.3 0.3
11 0908 780.6 0.3 235.6 0.3
10 0.4 0.4
9 0.4 0.4
8 0.4 0.4
7 1105 779.0 0.4 233.9 0.4
6 0.2 0.2
5 0,2 0.2
4 1107 778.4 0.2 233.3 0.2
3 0.4 0.4
2 0.4 0.4
1 0.4 0.4
9.7 55755.6
total fiow for month
10.1 54540
110295.6
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24, 2009
Page 23 of 462
TAMIAMI SQUARE
MONTH: JULY 2007
Flow per Min/Hr
DATE TIME PUMP #1 HRS. RUN PUMP #2 HRS. RUN MAINTENANCE
31 0.3 0.3
30 1116 795.3 0.3 250.6 0.3
29 0.4 0.4
28 0.4 0.4
27 0.4 0.4
26 1331 793.7 0.4 249.0 0.4
25 0.2 0.3
24 1030 793.3 0.2 248.4 0.3
23 0.3 0.2
22 03 0.2
21 0.3 0.2
20 0.3 0.2
19 1133 792.3 0.3 247.4 0.2
18 0.3 0.3
17 0.3 0.3
16 1254 791.4 0.3 246.5 0.3
15 0.3 0.3
14 0.3 0.3
13 0.3 0.3
12 1113 790.2 0.3 245.3 0.3
11 0.3 0.3
10 0.3 0.3
9 1126 789.3 0.3 244.4 0.3
8 0.3 0.3
7 0.3 0.3
6 0.3 0.3
5 1026 788.1 0.3 243.2 0.3
4 0.3 0.2
3 0.3 0.2
2 1154 787.2 0.3 242.6 0.2
1 0.3 0.4
9.25
53169
9 48600
101769
total flow for month
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24, 2009
Page 24 of 462
TAMIAMI SQUARE
MONTH: AUGUST 2007
Flow per Min/Hr
DATE TIME PUMP #1 HRS.RUN PUMP #2 HRS. RUN MAINTENANCE
31 0.3 0.3
30 0929 803.7 0.3 258.9 0.3
29 0.2 0.1
28 0.2 0.1
27 1051 803.1 0.2 258.6 0.1
26 0.3 0.3
25 0.3 0.3
24 0.3 0.3
23 1200 801.9 0.3 257.4 0.3
22 0.2 0.3
21 0.2 0.3
20 1045 801.3 0.2 256.5 0.3
19 0.3 0.3
18 0.3 0.3
17 0.3 0.3
16 1102 800.1 0.3 255.3 0.3
15 0.3 0.4
14 0.3 0.4
13 1414 799.2 0.3 254.1 0.4
12 0.3 0.2
11 0.3 0.2
10 0.3 0.2
9 1150 798.0 0.3 253.3 0.2
8 0.2 0.2
7 0.2 0.2
6 1039 797.4 0.2 252.7 0.2
5 0.3 0.3
4 0.3 0.3
3 0.3 0.3
2 1454 796.2 0.3 251.5 0.3
1 0.3 0.3
8.4 48283.2
total flow for month
8.3 44820
93103.2
Agenda Item NO.1 OA
February 24, 2009
Page 25 of 462
TAMIAMI SQUARE
MONTH: SEPTEMBER 2007
Flow per Min/Hr
DATE TIME PUMP #1 HRS. RUN PUMP #2 HRS. RUN MAINTENANCE
31
30 0.3 0.3
29 0.3 0.3
28 0.3 0.3
27 1028 812.4 0.3 267.6 0.3
26 0.4 0.4
25 0.4 0.4
24 0950 811.2 0.4 266.4 0.4
23 0.3 0.3
22 0.3 0.3
21 0.3 0.3
20 0820 810.0 0.3 265.2 0.3
19 0.3 0.3
18 0.3 0.3
17 1142 809.1 0.3 264.3 03
16 0.3 0.3
15 0.3 0.3
14 0.3 0.3
13 0848 8079 0.3 263.1 0.3
12 0.3 0.3
11 0.3 0.3
10 1309 807.0 0.3 262.2 0.3
9 0.3 0.3
8 0.3 0.3
7 0.3 03
6 1040 805.8 0.3 261.0 0.3
5 0.3 0.3
4 1226+ 805.2 0.3 260.4 0.3
3 0.3 0.3
2 0.3 0.3
1 0.3 0.3
total flow for month
9.3 50220
103676.4
9.3 53456.4
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24, 2009
Page 26 of 462
TAMIAMI SQUARE
MONTH: OCTOBER 2007
Flow per Min/Hr
DATE TIME PUMP #1 HRS. RUN PUMP #2 HRS. RUN MAINTENANCE
31 0.5 0.5
30 0.5 0.5
29 0832 824.2 0.5 278.5 0.5
28 0.4 0.4
27 0.4 0.4
26 0.4 0.4
25 1244 822.6 0.4 276.9 0.4
24 0.3 0.4
23 0.3 0.4
22 0902 821.7 0.3 275.7 0.4
21 0.5 0.4
20 05 0.4
19 0.5 0.4
18 0939 819.7 0.5 274.1 0.4
17 0.4 0.5
16 0.4 0.5
15 0840 818.5 0.4 272.6 0.5
14 03 0.3
13 0.3 0.3
12 0.3 0.3
11 0930 817.3 0.3 2714 0.3
10 0.4 0.3
9 0.4 0.3
8 1123 816.1 0.4 270.5 0.3
7 0.4 0.4
6 0.4 0.4
5 0.4 0.4
4 0917 814.5 0.4 268.9 0.4
3 0.3 0.0
2 0.3 0.0
1 1004 813.6 0.3 268.8 0.0
12.1
69550.8
11.208 60523.2
130074
total flow for month
Agenda Item NO.1 OA
February 24,2009
Page 27 of 462
TAMIAMI SQUARE
MONTH: NOVEMBER 2007
Flow per Min/Hr
DATE TIME PUMP #1 HRS.RUN PUMP #2 HRS, RUN MAINTENANCE
31 .
30 0.4 0.4
29 1152 8373 0.4 292.8 0.4
28 0.4 0.3
27 0.4 0.3
26 1104 836.2 0.4 291.9 0.3
25 0.3 0.4
24 0.3 0.4
23 0.3 0.4
22 0.3 0.4
21 1126 834.7 0.3 289.9 0.4
20 0.7 0.6
19 1027 833.3 0.7 288.7 0.6
18 0.5 0.5
17 0.5 0.5
16 0.5 05
15 0905 831.3 0.5 286.7 0.5
14 0.3 0.3
13 0.3 0.3
12 1408 830.4 0.3 285.8 0.3
11 0.5 0.5
10 0.5 0.5
9 0.5 0.5
8 1000 828.5 0.5 283.8 0.5
7 0.4 0.4
6 0.4 0.4
5 1003 827.3 0.4 282.6 0.4
4 0.4 0.4
3 0.4 0.4
2 0.4 0.4
1 1208 825.7 0.4 281.0 0.4
12.38 71160.24
total flow for month
12.6 68040
139200.24
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24, 2009
Page 28 of 462
TAMIAMI SQUARE
MONTH: DECEMBER 2007
Flow per Min/Hr
DATE TIME PUMP #1 HRS.RUN PUMP #2 HRS. RUN MAINTENANCE
31 0935 850.2 0.4 305.6 0.4
30 0.5 0.5
29 05 0.5
28 0.5 0.5
27 1207 848.2 0.5 303.6 0.5
26 0.2 0.3
25 0.2 0.3
24 0842 847.6 0.2 302.7 0.3
23 0.6 0,5
22 0.6 0.5
21 0.6 0.5
20 1156 845.2 0.6 300.7 0.5
19 0.3 0,3
18 0.3 0.3
17 0901 844.3 0.3 299.8 0.3
16 0.4 0.4
15 0.4 0.4
14 0.4 0.4
13 0954 842.7 0.4 298.2 0.4
12 0.3 0.4
11 0.3 0.4
10 0941 841.8 0.3 297.0 0.4
9 0.4 0.4
8 0.4 0.4
7 0.4 0.4
6 0819 840.2 0.4 295.4 0.4
5 0.4 0.4
4 0.4 0.4
3 1249 838.9 0.4 294.2 0.4
2 0.4 0.4
1 0.4 0.4
12.49 71792.52
total flow for month
12.6 68040
139832.52
Agenda Item NO.1 OA
February 24, 2009
Page 29 of 462
Table 2
Tamiami Square Irrigation Repairs
~
12/15/2004 Zone had 4 & 5 crushed valves.
2006
3/23/2006 By entrance - there was a 3" main line break.
511112006 South exit - there were 4 rotors and 6 mist heads that had been run over.
11/29/2006 Zone 2 - the valve was stuck on. Replaced solenoid.
12/28/2006 Zones 1 & 3 - crushed 2" valve.
2007
111812007 3" main line separated.
2/312007 Zone 4 - cut 1-1/4 pipe to irrigation rotors.
317/2007 Cement truck ran over 8 heads.
7/3/2007 Crack in line due to construction digging.
11113/2007 Main ine break due to electrical work.
12/1512007 Zone 1 - 2" main line break.
Also, 4" main line break (system ran for 9 hours).
2008
31512008 Repaired line and pressured it up to check for leaks.
Table 3
Tamiami Square
Irrigation and Potable Use
Combined 2007
Period Flow (1,000) Days ADFIMonth
1/05107-2/5107 652 + 31 21,030
215/07-316107 549 + 29 18,930
3/6/07.4/5107 420 + 30 14,000
4/5/07-5/4/07 423 + 30 14,100
5/4/07-6/6107 312 + 32 9,750
6/6/07-7/6/07 385 30 12,830
716/07-816107 292 + 31 9,420
8/6/07-9/6/07 249 31 8,030
9/6/07-1014/07 244 30 8,710
10/4/07-11/1/07 223 28 7,960
11/1/07-11/30/07 374 + 29 12,900
11/30107-1/4/08 781 + 34 22,970
4,904 13,440
Q AAOF = 2.922 kgal + 271 + 350 = 30.8(2) ERCs
Q AADF= 13,440 + 350 = 38(1) ERGs
Q 2 MMO =39,960 + (350 X 1.2(3) x 2) = 47.6 ERGs
Q 2 MMO = 28,100 + (350 x 1 .i') x 2) = 33.5(2) ERGs
(1)
(1)
(1)
(1)
18 ERGs Weighted Average plus
U ERGs Irrigation ERGs
24.1 ERGs Weighted Average
versus 30.8 or 33.5 ERGs in period
Nole 4 items occurring -
a.) Sod establishment
b.) Construction
c.) Minor breaks
d.) Irrigation use
Reasonable to allow 6.7 ERCs during sod, construction, damage, and
irrigation use - see SFWMD provisions and FAG.
Some correlation, these results drive the need for a 2 year audit
Final note: Total purchased ERGs at buildout Is 38.1 ERGs with 32 ERCs
as potable and 6.1 ERCs as irrigation.
(1) Includes major main breaks as shown in Table 2
(2) Excludes major breaks, still includes minor breaks
(3) 1.2 peak factor for water flow per PRMG 2006 report
P:\ORL \HCD\Word Proc\2008\A080376.00\Report\R~ 1 \ Tables.xls
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24, 2009
Page 30 of 462
Exhibit B
Metered Water Use 2007
.--.. -
Agenda Item NO.1 OA
February 24, 2009
Page 31 of 462
Agenda Item NO.1 OA
'0 E C~. U j'V UTI ITIE-S BilliNG February 24,2009
C LLlI< (j N l ~Ir.( . --G@page320f462
.420 MERCANTILE AVE' NAPLES. FLORIDA 34104. (239) 403~2380 ,h."';::^"
1GZl.-:-j~ ATE BILLED
TAMIAMI SQ OF NAPLES LLC 02/12/07
c/O CRIFASI Mr--NAGMENT INC ACCOUNT NUMBER RATE CLASS
STE 208C 04046017600 co
2375 TAMIAMI TRL N SERVICE Po.DDRESS
NAPLES FL 34103-4438 14700 TAMIAMI TR N
METER '. . . .. . . .,
METE~ NUMBER RE.ADINQ AMOUNT
SIZE DATe AE"ADING
21443635 5/811 01105 07 2335 2506
21637090 3" 01/05/07 7440 7921 WA 2,928.06
SM 2,328.00
s~
: NARNtNCl: THIS BILL BECOMES DELINQUENT IF THE TOTAL AMOUNT DUE IS NOT PAID BY 02/27/07
'AYMENTS RECEIVED A.FTEA THIS DATE SHALL BE SUBJECT TO PENALTY CHARGES AND FA/WAE TO PAY BY THIS DATE ALSO SHALL
:. iUBJECT THE PROPEATY TO SHUTOFF OF WATER SERVICE AND AVTOMATlC LIENS wrTHo""'UfF'UATHER NOTlCE_ IF YOU DISPUTE THIS
' Jill OR BELIEVE THAT IT IS INACCURATE IN ANY WAY, YOu MUST CONTACT THE COlliER COUNTY UTILITY BIlliNG AND CUSTOMER SERVICE
lEPT. AT (239) oI.0J.2380 DURING BUSINESS HOURS (7:30 A,M. . 5:30 P.M.. M-F) BEFORE THE DELINQUENT DATE
TOTAL. DUE
5,256.06 ,
SEE BACK OF BILL FOR ADDITIONAL BILL INFORMATION
. ~
MAKE CHECKS PAYABLE TO:
COLLIER COUNTY UTILITIES BILLING
(239) 403.2380
~.
DETACH HERE
~
SERVICE ADDRE:SS
14700' TAM:q\MI TR N
ACCOUNT NUMBER
04046017600
DATE BillED i''''''''"''''''''''OI
02/12/07 02/27/071
TOTAt.PUE
5.256.061
TAM:q\MI SQ OF NAPLES LLC
clo CRIFASI MANAGMENT INC
STE 208C
2375 TAMIAMI TRL N
NAPLES FL 34103-4438
11"""111I111111111'"'1'11
MAil THE LOWER PORTION WITH YOUR
PAYMENT IN U.S. FUNDS TO:
COLLIER COUNTY UTILlTtES BILLING
P.O. BOX 3389
NAPLES, FLORIDA 34106.3369
000000404601760000525606
Agenda Item NO.1 OA
~brUary 24, 2009
COLLIER COUNTY UTILITIES BilLING trS)lii.'- D Page 33 of 462
4a20 MERCANTILE AVE. NAPLES. FLORIDA 34104 . (239) 403-23Afllr\\~ ~
..- QATE BILLED
T&~IAMI SQ OF NAPLES LLC 03/08/07
c/o CRIFASI Mfl..NAGfVlENT INC f,CCOUNT NUMBER RATE CLASS
STE 208C -::-r /' /I' Yl ,~ 04046017600 CO
2375 TAM-rAMI TRL N (......J c L 17 L 5EAvICE ADDRESS
NAPLES FL 34103-4438 14700 TAMIAMI TR N
METER . . . . .. . . ..
METER NUMBER DAT~'''' "< ..:.;'"i;i9iPr!'ll3..: - . . CONSUMPTION . CODE AMOUNT
SIZE DATe READING
21443635 5/911 02/05/07 2506 03/06/07 2673 167
21637090 3" 02/05/07 7921 03/06/07 8303 382 WA 2,334.78
SM 2,005.61
IP 36,00
~'&i~
.~
WARNING: THIS BILL BECOMES DELINQUENT IF THE TOTAL AMOUNT DUE IS NOT PAID BY 03/23/07
'''MENTS RECEIVED AFTER THIS DATE SHALL BE SUBJECT TO PENALTY CHARGES AND FA' URE TO PAY BV ""S OAT /\LSD SHAL 1
iUBJECT T1-IE PFlOP!':ATY T SHUTOF'F OF WATER EAVJCE AND AUTOMATIC lENS WITH UT FURTHER NOTIC . IF VOU OISPU HIS
~1l.L QR BELIEVE THAT IT IS INACCUFlA IN ANY WAY, you MUST CONTACT THE COLLIER UNTY U IU BIl.UNG AND CUSTOMER SERVICE
}EPT, AT [2391 403-2360 DURING BUSINESS HOURS (7:30 A,M, . 5:30 P,M., M-F) BEFORE THE OEl.INQUENT DAT~.
TOTAL DUE
4.376.391
SEE BACK OF BILL FOR ADDITIONAL BILL INFORMATION
MAKE CHECKS PAYABLE TO:
COLLIER COUNTY UTILITIES BilLING
(239) 403.2380
-,
SERVICe.ADDRESS
14700'TAMIAMI TR N
~...'
PET ACH HERE
~
ACCOUNT NUM~ER,
04046017600
. . ~Al1.~i~~~_O.. r''''''''''''''''''.''.
03/08/07 .. 03123/071
4,376.391
TAMIAMI SQ OF NAPLES LLC
clo CRIFASI MANAGMENT INC
STE 208C
2375 TAMIAMI TRL N
NAPLES FL 34103-4438
1I11111111111~1I111111111111.
MAIL THE LOWER PORTION WITH YOUR
PAYMENT IN U.S. FUNDS TO:
., ~;J, :
, '- .::~,'"
CQ,UER COUNty UTiliTIES BilLING
:.: . " P ,q, ~Ol< 3369
'. 'NAPLES; FLORIDA 34106-3369
000000404601760000437639
.....J :.
COLLIER COUNTY'UTILlTIESBltIJNG
<1420 MERCANTILE AVE . NAPL~S. FLORIDA 34104 . (2~9) 403,2380
TAMIAMI SQ OF NAPLES LLC ~~;~ ._~
C/O CRIFASI MANAGMENT INC lnl~lldlJl!::V
STE 20BC'
2375 TAMIAMI TRL N
NAPLES FL. 34103- 443B
'.
Agenda Item NO.1 OA
February 24, 2009
Page 34 of 462
,. ~
DATE BILLED
04/11/07
.l\CCOUNT NUMBER
04046017600
..ATE CLASS
CO
METER NUMBER
lIcclfr
SERVICE: ADDRESS
14700 TAMIAMI TR N
.,
.. -I
21443635
21637090
SiB" 03/06/07
3" 03/06/07
READING
2673
8303
DATE'
04/05/07
04/05/07
'".:::\..:REAOING"'.\Ii-: ...'
2842
8554
CONsUMPTXlN. ~~De
169
251 WA
SM
IP:~,:I;
':~ ~:
AMOUNT
1,649,34
1,601.84
36.00
~~
WARNING: THIS BILL BECOMES DELlNaUENT IF THE TOTAL AMOUNT DUE IS NOT PAID BY 04/26/07
P,a.YMENTS RECEIVED AFi!:R THIS DATE SHALL BE SUBJECT TO PENALTY CHARGES AND FAI AE T FlAY BY nus DATE AL 0 HA
SUBJECT THE pROPE~TY TO SHUTOFF OF WATER SERVICE AND AUTOMATIC LIENS WITHOUT FURl NOTICE, I VOtJ DISPUTE
CllLl.O BELl VE TH"T I IS lNAC URA1E:1N ANYWAY. YOU MUS CONTAC TtolE COLLIER COUNTY UTILI BIl.LINGAND CUSTOMERSEAVI
OEPT. AT (2:)9) 403-2380 DUAING BUSINESS HOuRS (7:30 A.M. - 5:30 P.M.. M.Fl BEFORE THE OEUNQUENT DATE.
SEE BACK OF BILL FOR ADDITIONAL BILL 1Nf<;'RMATION
~
DeiA9~ HERE'
~
MAKE CHECKS PAYABLE TO:
COLLIER COUNTY UTILITIES BilLING
(239) 403-2380
SERVICE ADDRESS
14700 TAMIAMI TR N
04046017600
DATE BILLED .'I:j~h'l.l'r:!II.'l.tl.
04/11/071 04/26/071
fOTALDUE
ACCOUNT NUMBER
3,287,18
TAMIAMI SQ OF llAPLES LLC
CID CRIFASI MANAGMENT INC'
STE 20BC
2375 TAMIAMI TRL N
NAPLES FL 34103-4438
11111 1111 11m" 1111111111111, .
.,"(, ~ "
MAIL THE LOWER' PORTION WITH YOUR
PAYMENT IN u,s;~~t-ios TO:
;.~:j~~~,(:". '
COLLIER COUN'rYurU.JTIES BILLIN(l
P.O. BOl('33~9' .
NAPLES. FLORIDA 34106.3369
000000404601760000328718
c.
..-
LULLiEI, LUUNIY UIILlII~S BilLING
.420 MERCANTILE AVE, NAPLES. FLORIDA 34104. (239) 403-2380
TAM1AM1 SQ OF NAPLES LLC
C/O CRIFASI ~~AGMENT 1NC
STE 208C
2375 TAMIAMI TRL N
NAPLES FL 34103-4438
Agenda Item NO.1 OA
February 24,2009
Page 35 of 462
[PJ6.~ !-v1Q) ,
DATE BillED
05/10/07
ACCOUNT NUMBE R
04046017600
~ATE et....s';
co
21443635
21637090
READING
2842
8554
SERViCE A.DDRESS
14700 TAMIAMI TR N
(
I
,
MElD"' :-.:utolBER
.,
AMOUNT
DATE
04 I 05 I 07
04/05/07
READING
2994
8825
WA
SM
IF
1,663.H
1,611.23
36.00
c!lei!.1 D
--/...L8Zlt
WARNING: THIS Bill BECOMES DELlNOUENT IF THE TOTAL AMOUNT DUE IS NOT PAID BV 05/25/07
?A'iMEN1S i=I~CEtVED AFTER THIS DATE SHALL BE SUBJECT TO PENALlY CHARGES AND FAILURE TO PAY BY THIS DATE ALSO SHALL
SuBJECT Tf.lE PRO?ERTY TO SHUTOFF OF WATER SERVICE AND AuTOMATIC LIENS WITHOUT fuRTHER NOTICE. IF YOU DISPUTE THIS
BILL OR BELiEVE THAT IlISI"'CCURATE IN ^N' WAV 'Ou MUST CONT,C""' COLLIER COUN" UTILITY BILLING AND CUSTOM'R SERVICE l
DE?T AT (239\ J03.2380 OURING BUSINESS HOURS (7:30 A.M. 5:30 P M.. M.F) BEFORE THE DELINOUENT CATE.
'Ilt".ml
3,310.97
SEE BACK OF BILL FOR ADDITIONAL BILL INFORMATION
MAKE CHECKS PA V ABLE TO
COLLIER COUNTY UTILITIES BILLING
(239) ~03.2380
~ DETACH HERE
SERVICE ADDRESS
14700 TAMIAMI TR N
~
04046017600
05/10/07
ACCOUNT NUMBER QA no Bll-LEO
TAMIAMI SQ OF NAPLES LLC
CID CRIFASI MANAGMENT INC
STE 208C
2375 TAMIAMI TRL N
NAPLES FL 34103-4438
11111111111111111111111111111
MAIL THE LOWER PORTION WITH YOUR
PAYMENT IN U.S. FUNDS TO:
COLLIER COUNTY UTILITIES BilLING
P.O. BOX 3369
NAPLES. FLORIOA 34106-3369
000000404601760000331097
_..
COLLIER COUNTY UTILITIES BilLING
0~20 MERCAN11LE AvE. NAPLES. FLORIDA 3Al04 . (239) 003.2380
TAMIAMI SQ OF NAPLES LLC
C/O CRIFASI MANAGMENT INC
STE 208C
2 375 TAMIAMI TRL N
NAPLES FL 34103-4438
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24, 2009
Page 36 of 462
IU-tpIW~!
I ,--- ~.....:
[jA TE BilLED
06/12/07
ACCOUNT NUM8ER
04046017600
P.A TE CLASS
Co
TS Q c:c. PL
SERVICE ADDRESS
14700 TAMrAMI TR N
ME.TE;R NUMBER
[METER
SIZE
5/8 II
3"
, :. I .. ~
.. .,
AMOUNT
21443635
21637090
DATE FlEADING
05/04/07 2994
05/04/07 6825
DATe
06/06/07
06/06/07
REAOlN.G
3162
6969
WA
WS
SM
IP
1,138.62
122.11
1,263.80
36.00
DUE TO SEVERE DROUGHT, SFWMD PHASE II WATER RESTRICTIONS ARE IN EFFECTl
THIS BILL MAY INCLUDE A 15' SURCHARGE DEPENDING ON TOTAL USAGE.
PRACTICE WATER CONSERVATION DAILY TO PROTECT FLORIDA'S WATER RESOURCES.
FOR INFO VISIT WWW.COLLIERGOV.NET. UTILITY BILLING\CUSTOMER SERVICE.
I\~~
"'"",
VARNING: THIS BILL BECOMES OELlNOUENT IF THE TOTAL AMOUNT OUE IS NOT PAID BY 06/27/07
A,'l'MENTS RECEIVED AFTER THIS DATE SHALl. BE SUBJECT TO PENAL TV CHARGeS AND FAILUFl T PAY BY THIS DATE .ilL SHA
,uSJECT THE' PROP .ciTY T SHUTOFF OF WATER RVIC .Il.ND A TOMATIC LIENS WITHQ FUR H R N TIC. IF OU DISPUTE THI
Ill. OR BELIEVE THAT 11 I INACCURATE IN ANY W Y. YOU UST eNACT H COt I COUN UTILI BIl_UNO AND CUSTOMER SERVICE
'EPT AT (239J 40:1.23&0 DURING BUSINESS HOURS (7:30 A M.. 5:30 P,M. M.F) BEFORE THE DELINQUENT DATE.
SEE BACK OF BILL FOR ADDITIONAL BilL INFORMATION
MAKE CHECKS PAVABLE TO:
COLLIER COUNTY UTILITIES BILLING
(239) 403.2380
~ DEl ACH HERE
SERVICE ADDRESS
14700 TAMIAMI TR N
~
ACCOUNT NUMBER DATE BILLED
04046017600 06/12/07
TAMIAMI S Q OF NAPLES LLC
clo CRIFASI MANAGMENT INC
STE 208C
2375 TAMIAMI TRL N
NAPLES FL 34103-4438
IIIIII ~I 11111111 ~II 11111 III
MAIL THE LOWER PORTION WITH YOUR
PAYMENT IN U.$.FUNDS TO:
COLLIER COUNTY UTILITIES BILLING
PO. BOX 3369
NAPLES, FLORIDA 34108.3369
000000404601760000256053
-.
\~\'.JLLltI< '-VUI~ 11 U I III I It::; bilLiNG ,
,1.20 MERCANTILE AVE. NAPLES FLORIDA 3AlOA . (239) 403,2380
TAMIAMI SQ OF NAPLES LLC
C/O CRIFASI MNiAGMENT INC
STE 208C
2375 TAMIJU"lX TRL N
NAPLES FL 34103-4438
Agenda Item NO.1 OA
U ' ..., 'I~ 'of;fPluary 24, 2009
IJ. I 0 ''Ff'age 37 of 462
DA TE SILLED
07/16/07
ACCOUNT 'lUMBER
04046017600
!=lATE Cl.ASS
co
/J'@ ~r::.yq.-1-
5EJWlCE A[)(jRESS
14700 TAMIAMI TR N
_ _ ..- .~ -:"--T;'~TE-A ~Wl:fi'\1;:';;~'1~;m;I:i~"m[~-
l.kTd=! ,'.JI-,I,\~t:.R ~ ~.IZE! DATE READING
.,
3162
8969
DATE
07/06/07
07/06/07
READING
3355
9161
CONSUMPTION
CODE AMOUNT
21443635
21637090
5/8" 06/06/07
3" 06/06/07
193
192 WA
WS
SM
IP
BL
I,H1.34
173.52
1.492.29
36.00
7.93CR
DUE TO SEVERE DROUGHT. SFWMD PHkSE II WATER RESTRICTIONS ARE IN EFFECT I
THIS BILL MAY INCLUDE A 1St SURCHARGE DEPENDING ON TOTAL USAGE,
PRACTICE WATER CONSERVATION DAILY TO PROTECT FLORIDA'S WATER RESOURCES.
FOR INFO VISIT WWW.COLLIERGOV.NET. UTILITY BILLING\CUSTOMER SERVICE.
NARNINO, TI1IS BILL BECOMES DELlNOUENT IF THE TOTAL AMOUNT DUE IS NOT PAID BY 07/31/07
'AI(MENT~ RECc;l'v;';l ;..;;1E.):I. THI3 ';'ATi: SI-IAl..l BE SUBJECT 10 PENALTY CHARGES AND FAILURE TO P/>,V BY THIS DATE ALSO SHAl.L ~
;U JECi THE PROP~fnv TO SHUTOFF' OF WATEA SERVICE AND AUTOMATIC LIEN WliH UT F RTH R N01ICE. IF YOU DISPUTE THIS
,ILL OR 6ELIEVE 7HAT rr LS INACC,.;RATE IN ANY WAY, YOU MU CONTACT lHl;: COLliER OUNTV IllTY 8llUNG ANDCUSTDMEA SERVICE
lEPT AT :2'39i 40J.2'3!'lO OU=1ING BUS,tJE5S HOURS \7,30 A M. 5.:JO P M M.FI BEFORE THE OELlNQUENl DATE.
a),J 9:\
i /)"7'i7J
"/-0-4-
~ DETACH HERE
TOTAL DUE
3,17S.22
SEE BACK OF BILL FOR ADDITIONAL BILL INFORMATION
MAKE CHECKS "A Y ABLE TO:
COLLIER COUNTY UTILITIES BilLING
(239) 403-2380
~
SERV1CE A.DDRESS
14700 TAMIAMI TR N
ACCOUNT NUMBER
04046017600
DATE alLLEO i'''''''''"''''''''''.
07/16/07 07/31/071
lOTA1.DUE
3.17S,221
TAMIAMI SQ OF NAPLES LLC
C/O CRIFASI MANAGMENT INC
STE 208C
237S TAMIAMI TRL N
NAPLES FL 34103-4438
11111111111111111111111111111
MAIL THE LOWER PORTION WITH YOUR
PAYMENT IN U.s. FUNDS TO:
COLLIER COUNTY UTILITIES BILLING
PO. BOX 3369
NAPLES. FLORIDA 34106,3369
000000404601760000317522
- ~
3 'Cid~
/!~~~ iJ.
7S 6'- e~ 3:70-, L L-C
:;.t::~-v(j}~~' ~:~,~~fir
rv:;; ;-~~ 0rrwt~ SRSEAGING GATE
/ tJ-7 IU" .!' 08/06/07
~J?7' sI~ 61 08/06/07
, $I 7j 0'. . 71" .6ct'AI:
~ h-f'aJjt<1'JrV /;q~
Jti< COUN1Y UTlLlTlE:S BilLING
ITILE AVE. NAPLES. FLORIDA 3^ 104 . (239) 403-2380
Agenda Item NO.1 OA
February 24, 2009
Page 38 of 462
DATE BILLED
ACCOUNT NUMBER
04046017600
SERVICE AODRESS
08/14/07
RATE CLASS
co
14700 TAMIAMI TR N
AMOUNT
3S02
9306
147
145
WA
WS
SM
IP
1,061.82
110.59
1,201.20
36.00
.$~
DUE TO SEVERE DROUGHT, SFWMD PHASE II WATER RESTRICTIONS ARE IN EFFECT I
THIS BILL MAY INCLUDE A IS% SURCHARGE DEPENDING ON TOTAL USAGE.
PRACTICE WATER CONSERVATION DAILY TO PROTECT FLORIDA'S WATER RESOURCES.
FOR INFO VISIT WWW.COLLIERGOV.NET. UTILITY BILLING\CUSTOMER SERVICE.
IARNING, THIS BILL BECOMES DELINQUENT IF THE TOTAL AMOUNT DUE IS NOT PAID BY 08/29/07
mlENTS RECEIVED AFTER THIS Of,,, SHAle ae SUBJECT TO PENALTY CHARGeS ANG 'AlLURE TO PAY ay THIS DATE ALSO SHALL r
J6J€.CT THE PROPERTY TO SHUTOFF OF WATER SERVICE AND AUTOMATIC LIENS WITHDUT FUA'I'HER NOTICE. IF you DISPUTE TH!S
Ll OR BELIEVE THAT IT IS INACCURATE IN ANY WAY, YOu MUST CONTACT THE COLLIER COUNTY UTILITy BILLING AND CUSTOMER SERVICE
;:FT AT (239) 403.2380 DURING aUSINESS HOURS (7;30 A.M. 5:30 P M_. M.F) BEFORE THE DELINQUENT DAT€,
TOTAL DUE
2,409.61 J
SEE BACK OF BILL FOR ADDITIONAL BILL INFORMATION
ACCOUNT NlJMBER
04046017600
~ DETACH HERE
SERVICE ADORESS
14700 TAMIAMI TR N
~A;~ ~'~l;~ r~'~';~I;'~~~
~
MAKE CHECKS PAYABLE TO'
COLLIER COUNTY UTILITiES BILLING
(239) 403-2380
TOTAL DUE
2,409.611
TAMIAMI SQ OF NAPLES LLC
c/o CRIFASI MANAGMENT INC
STE 206
2375 TAMIAMI TRL N
NAPLES FL 34103-4439
11111111111I11111111111111111
MAIL THE LOWER PORTION WITH VOUR
PAYMENT IN U.S. FUNDS TO:
COLLIER COUNTY UTILITIES BILLING
P.O. BOX 3369
NAPLES. FLORIDA 34106.3369
nnnnnnunu~n'.?Lnnnn~UnqL~
.- - ._~"-"
....." .... -' ...... t L...'--" ~ '-"
Ag,e_nda Item NO.1 OA
(./'3.ifjt)/uary 24,2009
DAR'l&!l'c~9 of 462
09/12/07
11420 MERCANTilE. AVE. NAPLES. FLO~IDA 34104 . (239) A03~2380
TAMIAMI SQ OF NAPLES LLC /SO-Ct.p.I:
c/o CRIFASI MANAGMENT INC
STE 208
237S TAMIAMI TRL N
NAPLES FL 34103-4439
ACCOUNT NUi,'ElER
04046017600
HATE c~ss
co
SERVICE ADDR!::SS
14700 TAMIAMI TR N
METER NUMBER
METER
SIZE
s/a II
3"
.. ..
.,
CODE
21443635
21637090
O"TE
08/06/07
oa/06/07
REAOINIJ
3502
9306
DATI:
09/06/07
09/06/07
READING
3652
9395
CONSUMPTION
150
89 >lA
>IS
SM
IP
858.30
60.06
1,035.31
36.00
'. ,.....
DUE TO SEVERE DROUGHT, SFWMD PHASE II >lATER RESTRICTIONS ARE IN EFF:~
THIS BILL MAY INCLUDE A 15% SURCHARGE DEPENDING ON TOTAL USAGE.
PRACTICE WATER CONSERVATION DAILY TO PROTECT FLORIDA'S WATER RESOURCES.
FOR INFO VISIT WWW.COLLIERGOV.NET. UTILITY BILLING\CUSTOMER SERVICE.
!VARNING: THIS BILL BECOMES OELINOUENT IF THE TOTAL AMOUNT DUE IS NOT PAID BY 09/27/07
\.l..YMENTS RECEIVED AFTE.R THIS DATE. SHALL Be: SUBJECT TO PENALTY CHARGES AND FAILURE TO PAY BY THIS DATE ALSO SHI\LL I
V9JECT THE PROPERTY TO SHiJTOfF OF" WATER SERVICE AND AUTOMATIC LIENS WITHOUT FURTHEA N TlCE IF YOU DISPUTE THIS
I'!\,t OR 8 UEVE THAT IT 15 INACCURATE IN ANY WAY. you MUST CON ACT THE COLLIER COUNTY UTIUTY BILLING AND CUSTOMER SERV1C!: I
1 EPT AT (239) ~oJ.23eO OvR1NG BUSINESS HOURS (1"3Cl A.M.' 5:30 P,M., M.F) BEFORE THE DElINOUENT DATE. '
I
TOTAL DUE
2,009.67
SEE BACK OF BILL FOR ADDITIONAL BILL INFORMATION
MAKE CrlECKS PAYABLE TO:
COLLIER COUNTY UTILITIES BilLING
(239) 403-2380
~ f'!;HCH HE~_E
SERVICE ADDRESS
14700 TAMIAMI TR N
<>
"
ACCOUNT NUMSER
04046017600
DATE BILLED i'''''"'~''''rj
09/12/07 09 27 071
toTAL DUE
2,009.67\
TAMIAMI SQ OF NAPLES LLC
cia CRIFASI MANAGMENT INC
STE 208
2375 TAMIAMI TRL N
NAPLES FL 34103-4439
11111111111111111111111111111
MAIL THE LOWER PORTION WITH YOUR
PAYMENT IN U.S. FUNDS TO:
COLLIER COUNTY UTILITIES BILLING
PO. BOX 3369
NAPLES. FLORIDA 34106-3369
000000404601760000200967
TAMIAMI SQ OF NAPLES LLC
c/O CRIFASI MANAGMEVT INC
STE 208
2375 TAMIAMI TRL N
NAPLES FL 34103-4439
[pJtI.il'O~
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24, 2009
laiil!il,",,:llloof 462
11/16/07
-"-'; .. ;".,,~;-, "
,..t: o"""\~'L . NAFLb, rlORlOA j4104. (23Q) 403-2380
ACCOUNT NUMBE.R
04046017600
RATE CLASS
co
tl c.CJ9.7'
SERVlC!: ADDRESS
14700 TAMIAMI TR N
METER NUMBIe.R
METER
SIZE I
5/811
3"
. .
., ,
.. 'J
AMOUNT
21443635
2l6370~0
OAT!;
10/04/07
10/04/07
REAOJNQ
3795
9496
DATE
11/01/07
11/01/07
READING
3953
9561
158
65 WA
WS
SM
IP
912 . 9:1
81.18
ljOB3.08
36.00
r.'-~
'.'~J'~
The Water, Sewer" Effluent rate. will be increasing October 1, 2007. ~
The new rates are effective with your November 2007 utility bills.
A rate increase flyer is enclosed with your utility bill also.
COLLIER COUNTY UTILITIES RATE INCREASE :
WARNING: THIS BILL BECOMES DELINQUENT IF THE TOTAL AMOUNT DUE IS NOT PAID BY 12/01/07
'AVMENTS REC"V'D AHER TH" DATE SHALL BE SUBJECT TO "NALTV CHARGES AND FAILU TO PAV BV TH' DAT ALSO SHA l
:; Eel THE PFI P PiTY TO SH T FF F WATER RVI A ~ T ~ UN wr.,o F TH I. I YOU OISPUTe TMl
,fLL LI VE HATfT IS INACCURATE IN ANY WAY, Y U MUST C NTACTTHE COLLIE. C UN y UllLlTY UNCi ANC CUSTOMER SERVICE
)EPT, AT (2391 ~03.2380 DURINQ 8USINESS HouRS i7:30 A.M. . ~o P.M" M.F) 8EFORE THE DELINOUENT DATE-
"""~'~
2,113.18
SEE BACK OF BILL FOR ADDITIONAL BILL INFORMATION
MAKE CHECKS PAY ABLE TO,
COLLIER COUNTY UTILITIES BILLING
(239) 403.2380
ACCOUNT ~UMBEA"
04046017600
~_ DETACH HERE ~
.. _ . _ ' . '~EflYI9E ^DD~ESS
1'4700TA/olUK[' TR N
~:;ir:~7r'I\~;/~~;~~ 2,113.18 I
TAMIAMI SQ OF NAPLES LLC
clo CRIFASI MANAGMENT INC
STE 208
2375 TAMIAMI TRL N
NAPLES FL 34103-4439
11111 I 111111 1111.1 II IIJ '111'11..~....;.
'" ... ",'
MAIL THE LOWER PORTION WITH YOUR
PAYMENT IN U.S. FUNDS TO:
'i;:OLLlEA COUNTY UTILITIES BILLING
.. : P.O. BOX 3369
NAPLES, FLORIDA 34106.3369
DDDDD0404bD17bOOD0211318
ifi'. .
1%'
-~- ....... ,-,-' ,
Agenda Item NO.1 OA
February 24, 2009
Page 41 of 462
DATE BILLED
~A!>!IAMI SQ OF NA~~~~~E~~:"TILE AVE' NAPLES. fLORIDA 34104. (239) .03-2360
~ "r-.-
clo CRIFASI MANAGMENT INC '~Rllf),14'o"fj)
STE 208 VI
2375 TAMIAMI TRL N -;("
NAPLES FL 34103-4439 ~cJ ~C:'~ ;7L~
ACCOUNT NUMBER
04046017600
SERVICE ADDRESS
12/12/07
RATE CLASS
co
14700 TAMIAMI TR N
METE!1 NUMBER
METER . . .,
SIZE I DATE READING
5/8 'I 11/01/07 3953
3" 11101107 9561
.. .f
AMOUNT
21443635
21637090
11/30/07
11/30/07
READtNO
4107
9781
154
220 WA
WS
SM
IP
1,636.72
189.75
1,602.52
36.00
-~~.
SFWMD PHASE II WATER RESTRICTIONS ARE IN EFFECT I
This bill may include a 15% surcharge depending on total usage.
Praccice water conservation daily to protect Florida's water resources.
For info visit www.colliergov.net. Utility Billing\CUstomer Service.
NARNING: THIS 81LL BECOMES DELiNQUENT IF THE TOTAL AMOUNT DUE IS NOT PAlO BV 12/27/07
.AYMENTS RECEIVED AFTER THIS DATE SHALL" SUGJECT TO PENALTY CHARGE6 AND FAILURE TO PAY BY THIS DATE Al60 SHALL l
:UBJECT Tf-oIE P~O~ERTY TO SHUTOFF ~ w.\TER SEnVICE ANO A TOMATIC LI N WITHOUT FlJRTHER NOTICE. IF YOU DiSPUTE THIS
IILL OR EllEVE THA T iT I INACCU"A E IN A"IY WAY. '{OU MUS NTACT H COLLIER COUNTY UTILITY ILllN AND CUSTOMER SERVlCE
'EPT AT (2391 4GJ-2'JBO DU~\NG BUSINE5S HOURS (7.3'3 A M_ .,jh'30? M. M-F) BEFORE THE DEUNQUENT DATE
i,)~lihllt
3,464,99
SEE BACK OF BILL FOR ADDITIONAL BILL INFORMATION
04046017600
~ DETACH HERE
SERVICE.4.0DRESS
14700 TAMIAMJ: .TR N ..
DATE BILl~D ,.""",,,,1.1,,.,,,,,
12/12/07L 12/27/071
~
MAKE CHECKS PAY ABLE TO:
COLLIER COUNTY UTILITIES BILLING
(239) 403.2380
ACCOUNI NUMBER
TOTAL DUE
3,464.991
TAMIAMI SQ OF NAPLES LLC
clo CRIFASI MANAGMENT INC
S'!'E 208
2375 TA!>!IAMI TRL N
NAPLES FL 34103..4439
11111111111111111111111111111
MAIL THE LOWER PORTION WITH YOUR
PAYMENT IN U.S. FUNOS TO:
COLLIER COUNTY UTILITIES BILLiNG
P.O. BOX 3389
NAPLES. FLORIDA 34106.3369
000000404601760000346499
'-'''-'''LULl\. '--"JVI 'oJ I I vIJLlla:...J DIL....i!\j1...::./
4420 MEI1CI'.NTllf AvE. NAPLES. FLORIDA 34104 . (239) 403-2380
TAMIAMI SQ OF NAPLES LLC
C/O CRIFASI MANAGMENT INC
STE 206
2375 TAMIAMI TRL N
NAPLES FL 34103-4439
~~[Q)
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24, 2009
Pag.ee'!iillafc462
01/15/08
ACCOUNT NUMIJER
04046017600
,:,.\ rc: '~,-t,:..:::
co
,
~R NUMBeR
21443635
21637090
-fETER.(
~\ZE
5/B II
3"
;J;l:.1,'l[.JIJ;I',f:tI::!;I:I'-'l'!inl"
DATE J f1EADING
11/30/07 4107
11/30/07 9781
IS C;. C(! f1 r
J
SEf=1vIU: ,'l.ODPFS:,
14700 TAMIAMI TR N
:.I;1:ir;7::1,ll.",I::I'::I:.:!":t"IJI~I~ Er;ODE r-
DATE ~ READING ---1 CONSUMPTION _ __ I
01/04/08 4286 179
01/04/08 10383 602 WA
WS
SM
IP
AMfJ<JI'il
4,203.31
574.74
3,002.60
36.00
SFWMD PHASE If WATER RESTRICTIONS ME IN EFFECT !
This bill may include a 15% surcharge depending on total usage.
Practice water conservation daily to protect Florida's water resources,
For info visit www.colliergov.net. Utility Billing\CUstomer Service.
WARNING: THIS BILL BECOMES DELlNOUENT IF THE TOTAL AMOUNT DUE IS NOT PAID BY 01/30/0B
PAYMENTS RECEIVED AFTEFI 11-115 PATE. SHALL BE SUBJECT TO peNALTY CHARGES AND FAILURE TO PAY BY THIS DATE ALSO SI'iALL I
SUBJECT THE PAOP~f:lTY TO SHUTOFF OF WATER SERviCE P'ND AUTOMATIC LIENS WITHOUT FURTHER NOTICE. IF YOU DISPUTE iHIS
BILL OR 8.ELf!:ve THAT IT IS INACCuRATE IN ANY WAY, YOU MUST CON1ACT T)'iE COLLIER COUNTY UTtLllY BILLING AND CiJ$TOM[;;R SERVICE
DEPT. Ai 1239} 40$-2380 DURING BUSINESS HOUAS ("-30 A,M_. 5:30 P_M.. M.FI BEFOR"E" fHE OEllNOUENT DATE. \'.....
.,,-/..:.>: J#"'~ ,-.....
OET;:;'~~< .,.~
TOTAL DUE
7,816,65
SEE BACK OF BILL FOR ADDITIONAL BILL INFORMATION
MAKE CHECKS PAYABLE TO:
COLLIER COUNTY UTILITIES BilLING
(239) 403-2380
~
ACCOUNT NUMBER
040460H600
SERVICE ADDRESS
14700 TAMIAMI TR N
DATE BILLED ~''''''''''''''.'H1~
01/15/0BL Ol/30/0~
TOTAL DUE
7,816.65
TAMIAMI SQ OF NAPLES LLC
C/O CRIFASI MANAGMENT INC
STE 208
2375 TAMIAMI TRL N
NAPLES FL 34103-4439
111111111111111111111111111
MAIL THE LOWER PDRTIOI, WITH YOUR
PAYMENT IN U.S. FUNDS TO:
COLLIER COUNTY UTILITIES BILLING
P.O. BOX 3369
NAPLES, FLORIDA 34106-3369
000000404601760000781665
Agenda Item NO.1 OA
February 24, 2009
Page 43 of 462
ATTACHMENTS CONTENTS
Attachment
Description
A
Appendix H Water and Sewer Facilities Proposed Alternate Fee
Calculation Methodology
B PRMG - Relative Items Collier County Water and Wastewater Impact
Fee Study
C-1 County Ordinance No, 2007-53
C-2 Article VI. Water-Sewer District Uniform Billing, Operating and
Regulatory Standards
o Site Photos
E Pre-Application Meeting Follow-up
F Excerpts from System Development Charoes for Water, Wastewater,
and Stormwater Facilities by Arthur C. Nelson
G Excerpts from AWWA Principles of Water Rates. Fees. and Charaes
H Pre-Application Meeting with Tamiami Square and Collier County
Utilities
Gerald C. Hartman, PE, ASA Resume
Agenda Item NO.1 OA
February 24,2009
Page 44 of 462
Attachment A
Appendix H Water and Sewer
Facilities Proposed Alternate Fee
Calculation Methodology
Agenda Item No.1 OA
February 24, 2009
Page 45 of 462
,.
Appendix H
Water and Sewer Facilities
Proposed Alternative Fee Calculation Methodology
, '
Aoenda Item No. 10A
- February 24. 2009
Page 46 of 462
(
Appendix H
Alternative Fee Calculation Methodology
Water and Sewer Impact Fee
This section of the appendix presents a proposed methodology for conducting an Altemative
Fee Calculation for Water and Sewer Impact Fees. It contains the requirements, procedures
and methodology for preparation, performance, and submission of an Altemative Fee
Calculation Study,
1. Pre-application Meeting - Before beginning the A1temative Fee Calculation Study, the
applicant or applicant's representative shall arrange and attend a pre-application
meeting jointly with the Impact Fee Coordinator and the Public Utilities Department
Administrator to discuss the requirements, procedures, and methodology of the
Alternative Fee Calculation.
...L
Subsequent to the pre-application meeting, the applicant shall submit three copies of the
proposed approach to the study to the Collier County Public Utilities Department
Administrator. County staff has five (5) working days to respond in writing to the
proposed approach. If County Staff concurs with the proposed approech. the applicant
will be notified to proceed with the study. If County staff disagrees with the proposed
approach, County staff will identify the problem areas for the applicant. The applicant
must receive approval from County staff before proceeding with the study.
2. Methodologv - The Alternative Fee Calculation shall follow the prescribed methodologies
and formats of the Water and Sewer Impact Fee Study, prepared by Agnol', Barber, and
Brundage, Inc. (1997), as amended, the Consolidated Impact Fee Ordinance, and the
Administrative Procedures Manual. The results of the Altemative Fee Calculation shall
be submitted to both the Impact Fee Coordinator and Public Utilities Department. The
Alternative Water andlor Sewer Systems Impact Fee calculations shall be based on
data, information, or assumptions included in the Water and Sewer Impact Fee Study
(identified above) and as agreed upon at the Pre-application Meeting.
3. Guidelines - The applicant will use the information derived from the study to calculate an
altemative impact fee. The results of the Alternative Fee Calculation study shall be
submitted to both the Impact Fee Coordinator and the Public Utilities Department.
4. SubrnittinQ the Study Report - The applicant shall submit five (5) copies of the study
report to the Collier County Public Utilities Department Administrator. The study must
be certified by a Professional Engineer who is registered in the State of Florida.
Tindale-Oliver and Associates, Inc,
June 1, 2001
H-t
Collier County Consolidated Impact Fee
Administrative Procedures Manual
,-
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24, 2009
Page 47 of 462
(
5. Sufflciencv Determination - The Impact Fee Coordinator and the Public Utilities
Department Administrator will review the Alternative Fee Calculation for sufficiency
methodology, technical accuracy, and findings and will make recommendations
concerning the amount of the impact fee to the Impact Fee Coordinator.
6. Determination of Fee - The Public Utilities Department Administrator and the Impact Fee
Coordinator will make the final determination of the impact fee amount.
(.
G:I07312IdocslmBnuBIIBppendiceslBpndxh,doc
Tinda/e-Ollver and Associates, Inc.
June 1, 2001
H-2
Collier County Consolidated Impact Fee
Administrative Procedures Manual
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24, 2009
Page 48 of 462
Attachment B
PRMG - Relative Items Collier County
Water and Wastewater Impact Fee
Study
Agenda Item NO.1 OA
February 24,2009
Page 49 of 462
II
Public Resources Management Group, Inc.
Utility, Rate, Financial and Management Consultants
May 4, 2006
PRMG #1125-12
Board of County Commissioners of
Collier County
3301 Tamiami Trail East
Naples, FL 34112
Subject:
Water and Wastewater Impact Fee Study
Ladies and Gentlemen:
We have completed our update of the Water and Wastewater Impact Fee Study for the Collier
County (the "County") Water-Sewer District's (the "District") water and wastewater system (the
"System"), and have summarized the results of our analyses, assumptions, and conclusions in
this letter report, which is submitted for your consideration, The purpose of our analysis was to
review the existing impact fees and make recommendations as to the level of charges that should
reasonably be in effect consistent with the capital expenditure requirements as identified in the
District's 2005 Water and Wastewater Master Plan Updates (the "2005 Master Plan Updates").
Based on the findings presented in the District's Master Plan Updates, Public Resources
Management Group, Inc, (pRMG) is recommending that the water system impact fee be
increased from $2,760 to $3,415 per Equivalent Residential Connection (ERC), For the
wastewater system, we are recommending an increase in the impact fee from $3,125 to $3,515
per ERC. The combined water and wastewater fee with the proposed rate adjustments would be
$6,930, an increase of $1,045 or ]7.8% over the existing combined fee of $5,885, The rate
schedule for the proposed impact fees is shown on Table ES-l following this letter,
At the outset of the study, it was determined that the proposed impact fees should meet a number
of goals and objectives. These goals and objectives dealt primarily with criteria related to fee
sufficiency and level. Specifically, the major objectives considered in this study included:
. Existing customers, to the extent practical, should not finance or be impacted by the cost of
fmancing and constructing water and wastewater infrastructure to serve new growth;
. The impact fees should be sufficient to fund the pro rata cost of the projected capital
requirements associated with providing water and wastewater service to new development;
. To the extent practical, the impact fees should not be used to fund deficiencies in the capital
needs of the water and wastewater utility systems (i.e" no expenditures for renewal and
replacement or upgrade offacilities serving existing customers);
. The impact fees should be based upon reasonable level of service standards that meet the
needs of the District, should be indicative of the criteria used for long-term infrastructure
planning, and should be consistent with industry standards;
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24, 2009
Page 50 of 462
Board of County Commissioners of
Collier County
May 4, 2006
Page 2
. The proposed impact fees should be based on cost of service principles;
. The proposed impact fees should take into consideration the comparable fees charged by
neighboring utility systems; and
. New development, to the extent practical, should fund the cost of financing the construction
of System infrastructure specifically allocated to expansion; the proposed carrying charge
provides a basis of recovering such costs and fulther shifts the burden of expansion-related
capital to new growth.
The proposed water and wastewater impact fees presented in this report have been structured to
meet these objectives. The impact fees we calculated during the course of our analyses were
based on the recovery of capital-related costs anticipated to be incurred by the District to expand
water and wastewater service to meet the needs of anticipated population growth within the
utility service area. As previously mentioned, the capital-related costs were identified in the
2005 Master Plan Updates prepared by the District's Consulting Engineers that documented the
capital improvement plan for the fiscal year period of 2006 to 2015, which is the capitat needs
period reflected in the Impact Fee Report.
In addition to the proposed impact fees for the System, PRMG is recommending the imposition
of a "carrying charge" to recover certain costs associated with providing capacity to new
development. The proposed carrying charges (Allowance for Funds Prudently Invested or
"AFPT Fees") reflect the cost of financing the expansion-related infrastructure until the impact
fees are received by the District and have been structured to meet the service / rate objectives
outlined above. A swnmary of the proposed AFPT Fees is shown on Table ES-2 at the end of
this letter,
Based on the information provided by the District and prepared by its Consulting Engineers and
the assunlptions and considerations outlined in this report, which should be read in its entirety,
PRMG considers the proposed Impact Fees to be cost-based, reasonabte, and representative of
the identified capital expenditure needs of the District as identified in the Master Plan Updates.
Additionally, the proposed AFPI fees are considered by PRMG to be reasonable and comparable
with similar charges imposed by other Florida utilities, Moreover, such fees provide a basis for
the recovery of the cost of capital associated with constructing expansion-related infrastructure,
1125-12\Letter
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24, 2009
Page 51 of 462
Board of County Commissioners of
Collier County
May 4, 2006
Page 3
We appreciate the opportunity to be of service to the County and would like to thank the
County's staff for their assistance and cooperation during the course of this study.
Respectfully submitted,
Public Resources Management Group, Inc.
Robert J. Ori
President
Bryan A. Mantz
Senior Consultant
1125~12\Letter
~
'll
II
.
'"
;b
..
'"
~
.
....
~
~
~ .
:sUi
.. t
"r.
, ~
~ .
J! '"
"il
~.!1
in
,j:>B
. ;
g~
u..
. .
:3 =
. .
u-.;
1;
..
..
..
.
.
.
:;;
.
..
o
W
ffi
~~
z>
w-,
0-'
-<
U)::>
~g
>
5
l!;
...
()
"
~'"
~~
iJl
...
"
<1:
!!i~
~
w
.,
...
()
~
~~
~
...
"
<1:
i~
~
~
H
u
;j
Mi
"
~
~
~
ill'"
..g
!';(j
!!!O
.,...
~;i
t:
c;
!e.
l'l
<1:
.,
~
~
:;;
::i
g
~
,
ri
M
a
~
"
z
~
"
w
'"
"
.
o
o
~
il~
m'
"'.
0"
>-w
o'
o
.
o
z
~
o
o
"
ri
w
I
u.
"-
w'.
zll
o Ii
m .i;
~~
Ii
,
~
~
~
'"
g
~
"
w
'"
:;l
w
"
w
'"
i
:i!8
~~
",'
o~
@~
.og
.
.
o
-'w
~ffi
1-1-
ZW
wiE
go:
f3~
o:~
::;;
~
t;
,
~
iJl
~
...
"
"
..
l!
~
~
II
n
o[a
!
MI
1:1
M
~
~
ill'"
..g
!';(j
!!!o
M:j
~"
t:
c;
O!!.
l'l
<1:
..
~
"
~
o
is
IE
~
~
o
o
~
'"
w
B
~
~
N"
M
B
~
~
l:i
~
:;;
ri
w
!. Ii!
fa
.,
~
IE
"
~
~
o
o
'"
N
'"
M
8
d
m
N
~
8
~
,
~.
w
u~
"-
w":
z::<
o .
c ,
w .
~ :i;;
~~
I
! I U
~
~
d
u
"
w
"
w
'"
"
z
~
"
'"
'"
o
~
~
g
c
~
.
d
u
"
w
"
w
'"
"
z
~
"
w
..
o
o
..
o
>-
.
~
~
;t:
s:.
,
~
g
o
"
'"
~
w
"
i!
o
"
o
"
it'
r
Z
~
ffi
'"
u
"
w
"
'"
'"
",'
~ :s~~
..," :::iil- 0
~ 15:i!~
~. g~~
o"~
Ill-g.
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24, 2009
Page 52 of 462
N
~
o
N
If
'"
~
'"
~
.:
~
:~ ]
.~
:; ~
"...
~ i
. ~
"I~
!! t
. ~
" :
~.
g ':
8;
t d
;3 =
. .
u.
"
Agenda Item NO.1 OA
February 24,2009
Page 53 of 462
-"
;;: .. m "
~ " "
~ ~ '" m l!l 0 "
i Ie ~ ~ ,; '"
,.: ~- oj ::i ~ ~
~. ~ '"
K ;; '" :t ",-
K K ;;
iiJ K
.. a ~
~ - ;;;
'"
w
if .. "
... N ~ ...
... m ... '" ..,
~ .. '" ~ .,. .,. :If
'" ~ "' ...- ,; ..; '"
ll' ~ N m ~ :::-
K :; W ~ .,.
.... K w w
"
i
~ ... I I ~ i 1 I
iJl i ~
~
<!l ~
~ - I
~
~ } a i a I i I
.,. m "
.. ~ : 11 "
a ~ ~ "
i " .., .,. ~ oj g
,.: ..; ,.: ,,- 11.
= ~ :;' ~
..J w w ::i
<( ~ w
;: 1 ~
ffi 0 - ;;
& '"
c w
fli if '" ~ "
... N ...
to. m II '" '"
c:: ~ ~ ~ '" ~ '"
z '" ~ '" .,. '" ..; d
.; .: '" 11
ll' :i ~ N '" .,.
0 W K W :; :t '"
z .... ..
u
if
;!i
~ I l I i i I I
~ i
<!l
'" I ~
;:: -
..
~
~ I i I a i I I
~ ~ m m
~a '" 8
~ '" ~ .. :i :j '"
" ~ '"
l)j o . ~ '"
~ ~i
~~
" .~ ~
i5 . . ~ '" ~ - '" '" ill
~~ 0 - '" .; ,; '" ~ ..,
~&
@
m~'"
"ili ~
.."~ :! ;!; ~ '" '" .. '" '"
~i5~
~!!jii\
..
.
A
.
~
~
.:!
t
'"
~
.
.
"
"'
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24, 2009
Page 54 of 462
T.bleES-Z
CoUier County W Iter-Sewer District
Water and Wastewater Impact Fee Study
Pronosed AllOW_lice (or FllDds Prudentlv Invested (AFrO Scht'dule
AFPI Stbtdule Per ERe - Water Svstem (..)
Payment Calendar Year
Month 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
January $000 $5869 $234.76 $'10.84 $586.91 $762.98 $939.05
February 0.00 73.36 249.44 425.51 601.58 777.65 953.72
Mareh 000 880' 264.11 440.18 616.25 792.33 96840
April 0.00 10271 278.78 45485 630.93 80100 983.07
May 0.00 111.38 293.45 469.53 645.60 821.61 997.74
June 000 13205 30813 484.20 660.21 836.34 1,01242
July 0.00 146.7J 322.80 498.87 674.94 851.02 1,027.09
August 0.00 161.40 337.47 513.54 689.62 865.69 1,041.76
September 0.00 176.07 352.14 528.22 704.29 88036 1,056.43
October 14.67 190.74 366.82 542.89 118.96 895.03 1,056.43
November 29.35 20542 381.49 55756 733.63 909.71 1,05643
December 4402 220 09 39616 572.23 74831 924.38 1.056.43
AFPI Scbedule Per ERe - Wastewater SV"stem {..\
Payment Calendar-Year
Month 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
January $000 $38.24 $152.94 $26765 $382.36 $49706 $611.71
February 0.00 47.79 162.50 277.21 391.92 506.62 621.33
March 0.00 5135 172.06 286.77 401.47 516.18 630.89
April 000 66.91 181.62 296.33 411.03 525.74 640.45
May 0.00 76.47 19118 305.89 420.59 535.30 650.01
June 0.00 86.03 200.74 315,44 430,15 544.86 659.57
July 0.00 9559 21030 325.00 439.71 554.42 66912
August 0.00 105.15 219.86 334.56 449.27 563.98 618.68
September 0.00 114.71 229.41 344.12 45883 573.53 688.24
October 9.56 124.27 238.97 353.68 468.39 583.09 68824
November 19.12 133.82 24853 363.24 477.95 592.65 688.24
December 2'.68 ]43.38 258.09 372.80 487_50 60221 688.24
("4') Assumes that the AFPI fee is imtiated on October], 2006
Agenda Item No. lOA
February 24, 2009
Page 55 of 462
COLLIER COUNTY WATER-SEWER DISTRICT
WATER AND WASTEWATER IMPACT FEE STUDY
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Title
Page No.
Letter of Transmittal
Table of Contents ....., .,..,. ,.,.. ,..." ...,..., ,..,..,....,...,..", ,..'"".. ,." ......"...,...,..., ,.'", ,.", ,.,." ..,....."..., ,.., ,.,.,..., i
List of Tables.."..."".",..,.,..,.,...,...,..,...",.".,.,..""".....,....",....".,....".....,..,......,.."........"",."............".. i i
List of Figures ".."..",."",...,...........,.....",..".",...,..,....,.,..,.,..."......."..,."..."...,...."...,",.,"",....,..........., ii
List of Appendices ....., ....."., .,.. ... ....." .,........" ,...,.."""" ,............,.........,."., ".." ....,..,..."...." ,.,.,.,..,... ".iii
Introduction"",,'..."...,..,.......,..,.,.."'..."'...,....,............"""'..""...,.........,....,."'..."."."......,...,....".,. .,."" I
Purpose of Water and Wastewater Impact Fees...............................................................,................... I
Existing Impact Fees ......,...." ,., ,.,..,....,...,..,.., ", ,..,...........,...,....., ,....,.,..,.....,......,., ,..'" ,..,.."" ....,...".."..3
Impact Fee Methodology ,...... .....,... ...."........,... ..,..,........."", ,.,.,.. .., ...........,.......", ,...,......,.....,.,." ,.,.." ,4
Level of Service Requirements .........,.... ................,... ........................"...., ..........................,..., ............ 5
Existing Plant in Service ..................,......,...........................................,......,.........................................6
Additional Capital Investment .".."" '" ," "..,.,.,......" ,., ,., ,., ,..., ,...',...." ,." .,.......,...",..' ,... ,..,.' ,........,.....". 9
Design of Water Impact Fee ...... ,......,.. ................'". .......... ..........,.., ........... ..... ............................. ..,...13
Design of Wastewater Impact Fee .........................,..,..........................................,..,.......................,..16
Impact Fee Comparisons ...............,.. ....................... .............."... ......... .............".. ...................,.... ......19
Sufficiency of Impact Fees."....,..."..".,..",.,.....".,....,............,.."..,..."..,..."..,.".................".......,....... 20
Allowance for Funds Prudently Invested (APPI) Fee ..........,.............................................................21
Conclusions and Recommendations""",..,..,.",..."""".."...."..,..,..",...",.,."."..."".",.,.,........."....,.,.. .25
Acknowledgements..",',.. ,.,.,..,....'".. ,.."" ,....,..,...,., "., ,...., ".. ,..'" ,.",..' ,.,..".." ", "".,. ,.,..., ,...,....,., "..., .,28
K:\DMIl125-12\ReportsIReport
Agenda Item No. lOA
February 24, 2009
Page 56 of 462
The current study employed the same methodology, and the impact fees were calculated on an ERC
basis. The capital-related costs were identified in the 2005 Master Plan Update reports prepared by
the County's Consulting Engineers, which documented the capital improvement plan for Fiscal
Years 2006 through 2015 (the "CIP Planning Period") which was relied upon in the preparation of
this report.
Level of Service Requirements
In the evaluation of the capital facility needs for providing water and wastewater utility services, it
is critical that a level of service (LOS) standard be developed. Pursuant to Chapter 9J-5, Florida
Administrative Code, the "level of service" means an indicator of the extent or degrees of service
provided by, or proposed to be provided by a facility, based on and related to the operational
characteristics of the facility. Level of service shall indicate the capacity per unit of demand for
each public facility or service, Essentially, the level of service standards are established in order to
ensure that adequate facility capacity will be provided for future development and for purposes of
issuing development orders or permits, pursuant to Section 163.3202(2)(g) of the Florida Statutes.
As further stated in the Administrative Code, each local government shall establish a LOS standard
for each public facility located within the boundary for which such local government has authority
to issue development orders or permits. Such LOS standards are set for each individual facility or
facility type or class and not on a system wide basis.
For water and wastewater service, the level of service that is commonly used in the industry is the
amount of capacity (service) allocable to an ERC expressed as the amount of usage (gallons)
allocated on an average daily basis, This allocation of capacity would generally represent the
amount of capacity allowable to an ERC, whether or not such capacity is actually used (commonly
referred to as "readiness to serve"), As previously mentioned, an ERC - sometimes known as an
Equivalent Residential Unit (ERU) - is representative of the average capacity required to service a
typical individually-metered or single-family residential account. This class of users represents the
largest amount of customers served by a public utility such as the District and generally the lowest
level of usage requirements for a specifically metered account.
For the purposes of calculating water and wastewater system Tmpact Fees, PRMG utilized LOS
standards of 350 gallons per day (gpd) expressed on an average annual daily flow basis per water
ERC, The wastewater LOS standard used in the study was 250 gpd expressed on an average annual
daily flow basis per wastewater ERC. These LOS standards were reviewed in previous studies for
the District and discussed with District staff and its Corumlting Engineers. Tn the development of
the level of service standards the following reference sources were considered:
. 2005 Water and Wastewater Master Plan Updates prepared by the District's Consulting
Engineers, Greeley and Hansen LLC;
. Collier County Growth Management Plan adopted on October 28, 1997;
. Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) general design standards;
. Florida Public Service Commission (FPSC) capacity relationships for private utilities; and
. Actual water production and wastewater flow data reported by the District over the past several
years.
5
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24, 2009
Page 57 of 462
As a result, the following level of service standards were assumed for impact fee determination
purposes:
Water System
Wastewater System
Level of Service
350 gpd per ERe
250 gpd per ERe
These level of service standards have been utilized in previous impact fee studies performed on
behalf of the District, and are consistent with those utilized by other utilities throughout the State of
Florida.
Existing Plant in Service
In the detennination of the Impact Fee associated with the servicing of future customers, any excess
capacity of the existing utility system available to serve such growth was considered. Since this
capacity is available to serve the near-term incremental growth of the utility system, it would be
appropriate to evaluate the capacity availability of such facilities, In order to evaluate the
availability of the existing utility plant-in-service to meet or provide for near-term future capacity
needs, it was necessary to functionalize the plant by specific plant requirement. The
"functionalization" of the existing plant is necessary to: i) identify those assets which should be
included in the determination of the capital facilities fees; and ii) match existing plant type to the
capital improvements to meet future service needs,
The functional cost categories are based on the purpose of the assets and the service that such assets
served, The following is a summary of the functional cost categories for the utility plant-in-service
identifLed in this report,
Water Service
Supply
Treatment
Transmission
Distribution
Fire Hydrants
Meters and Services
Functional Plant Categories
Wastewater Service
Treatment
EmuenuReclaimed
Transmission
Collection
Other Plant
General Plant
It was necessary to functionalize the utility plant into these cost categories so that a proper fee could
be developed, Generally, the costs of on-site facilities which serve a specific development or
customer such as water distribution and wastewater collection lines, meters and services, and fire
hydrants are usually: i) donated by a developer as part of the City's utility extension program (a
contribution of the plant); ii) recovered from the individual properties through an assessment
program based on those properties which receive special benefit from such facilities or from the
application of a main line extension fee to recover the specific cost of such facilities; or iii) funded
from the customer directly (e,g., by a "front-foot" charge where the on-site lines were initially
financed by the utility and then paid hy the customer or an installation charge to recover the cost of
a new service line and/or the potable water meter),
6
1\faior Proiect Costs in ClP That Primarilv Benefit Existinl! Cu~tomers
(FUnd 412 and Fund 414 Projects)
Water Treatment Proiects
NCRWTP - New HaMhorne (Zone 1) Wellileld (Well Nos.:
10],102,114,] 15,116, ]09,117,118,119,120)
NCRWTP RO Wellileld Reliability (North Hamhorn Wells 18-20)
Hawthorn Future Reliability Wells (3 wells by 2012, 3 wells by 2015, 3 wells
by 2018, 3 wells by 2021, 3 wells by 2024)
South Hawthorn Reliability/Replacement Wells (WeUNos.: 39S-42S)
NCRWTP Emergency Generator Switchgear Upgrades
Tamiami Well Replacement Program (Well Nos ,: 38-42)
Lime Softening Upgrade at SCRWTP
SCRWTP One RO Reliability Well
Wate! Trans mis s ion Prolects
Replace Water Main US 41 ftomRattlesnake Hammock Road to Barefoot
Williams Road
Wastewater Treatment Proiects
IQ Water ASR
NCWRF Bleach System
Wastewater Transmission Proiects
Future Pump/Lift Station Rehab
Design of Water Impact Fee
Agenda Item NO.1 OA
February 24,2009
Page 58 of 462
Project Cost
$14,300,000
12,547,617
12,069,800
8,500,000
5,343,514
5,] 75,000
3,885,915
2,600,000
3,900,000
t t,2oo,000
3,000,000
5,100,000
As shown on Table 7, the calculated impact fee for the water system is $3,415 per ERC, This
represents an increase in the fee of $655 or 23,7% higher than the current fee of $2,760 per ERC,
The reason for this increase is: i) an increase in the number of growth-driven (Fund 411) projects
than what was shown in the 2003 Master Plan Update which was relied upon to develop the
previously calculated impact fees; and ii) a higher cost per unit of capacity being added than what
was calculated in the last impact fee study. For example and with respect to the inflationary impact
on the cost of new construction, over the past five years, the Construction Cost Index published by
Engineering News-Record (ENR), which measures the inflation in the prices of construction labor
and materials, increased by approximately 21 % (this would not take into account any effects of
regulatory process changes associated with treatment standards),
During the impact fee analysis, several assumptions were utilized or incorporated. The major
assumptions utilized in the design of the calculated impact rees are:
1. The existing water supply and treatment facilities have an estimated available capacity
margin to serve new growth of approximately 22,51 % of the average daily capacity of the
facilities based on: i) the firm design capacity of the existing water treatment plant facilities;
ii) actual maximum month daily demand to annual average daily demand relationships
recently experienced by the water system, including a review of the actual demand
13
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24,2009
Page 59 of 462
requirements for the ten fiscal year period ended 2005; and Iii) the capacity factors reflected
in the 2005 Master Plan Updates, The analysis is included on Table I herein,
2. The capital improvement program as identified in the County's 2005 Master Plan Updates
was reviewed and the capital costs were apportioned: i) by functional category; and Ii) to
existing and future users in the determination of the water impact fee. Those facilities that
were considered to be entirely allocable to growth were included in the fee determination at
full cost (i.e., 100% of the total cost), For facilities that would provide an improvement to
existing utility plant assets that had available capacity to service future growth, a portion of
the impact fee was reflected in the fee determination since such new growth will benefit
from such improvements, For capital expenditures which were solely for the replacement of
existing assets which would directly benefit existing customers or were considered as an on-
site cost (provide service to a local area such as a development which would normally be
constructed and subsequently contributed to the District System by a developer), such
amounts were not reflected as an appropriate cost to be recovered from the application of the
water impact fees. A summary of the capital costs recognized in the impact fee analysis is
shown on Table 4 and as follows (differences due to rounding):
Expansbn / Impact Fee
E.gib1e Costs
Recognized in Current
Study
Project Costs ($ :Millions) - FY 2006 to FY 2015
Exparnbn / Impact Fee
Eligible Costs to Be
Recognized in Future
Study (e.g;, Provi:Je
Benefit Beyond Ten.
Year Wirxlow)
Total
Project
Costs
Total Expansion I
Impact Fee Eligible
Costs (Current and
Future Stu:lies)
Existi1g
Water
Treatment
Transmissbn
Total
$89.8
14.2
$104,0
$245,9
46.2
$292.0
$211.6
68.2
$279,8
$547.2
128,6
$675.8
$457.4
114.4
$571.8
3. For the capital improvements identified as transmiSSIOn system upgrades which would
benefit both existing and future users, tlle total cost of such improvements has been
recognized in the analysis. Since the transmission function capacity is difficult to ascertain
except at "build-out" conditions, the total existing (expressed at original cost and not on a
replacement or current cost basis) and anticipated ~apital costs to serve the total capacity of
the water system through 2015 was recognized, thus calculating a new users per ERe "buy-
in" cost for this functional component of the system, Therefore, the cost of certain capital
expenditures shoWll on Table 4 that was fully recognized in the fee determination will not be
fully recovered by growth since the "unit cost" of this function includes existing ERCs.
4, With respect to those capital projects which have been allocated to existing users that may
include a capacity increment associated with serving new development, an adjustment to the
reported plant-in-service balances has been made in order to not double-count plant-in-
service (recognized a retirement of plant associated with the addition of the new facilities as
identified in the 2005 Master Plan Update), Since a match of the facility upgrade to the
existing plant-in-service balances as reported on the County's Fixed Asset Records was not
possible, the adjustment was based on: i) an average in-service date based on the weighted
in-service date of all functional assets in service as reported on the Fixed Asset Records; and
14
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24, 2009
Page 60 of 462
ii) the estimated replacement cost of the asset being placed in service as identified in the
2005 Master Plan Update, based on an analysis of historical and projected inflation as
measured by the Construction Cost Index as measured by En~ineerinl!' News-Record, It was
considered that the use of the replacement cost of the assets, which would generally include
an upgrade to the facilities and probably result in a higher cost due to such factors as
restoration expenses, would be conservative in the evaluation of the capital costs recognized
in the determination of the fee, It was assumed that approximately $32,163,106 of existing
water system assets would be retired as a result of the implementation of the County's
identified capital improvement program,
5. No capital facility expansion costs associated with distribution facilities have been included
in the calculation of the water impact fees since the County generally requires the developer
to contribute such facilities or the County has adopted a separate fee (e.g" water meter
installation fee) on behalf of the District to recover the cost of such capital additions
(contribution in aid of construction),
6, The level of service for a water ERC was assumed to be 350 gallons per day (gpd) expressed
on an average daily flow basis, This level of service represents no change from the previous
impact fee study. The level of service was predicated on the level of service requirements as
contained in the County's Growth Management Plan (potable water sub-element);
discussions with the County's Consulting Engineers regarding capacity planning statistics as
reflected in the 2005 Master Plan Update; Florida Department of Environmental Protection
(FDEP) general design standards for water use analysis; Florida Public Service Commission
(FPSC) capacity relationships for private utilities (Florida Administrative Code Rule 25-
30.020); and discussions with the District.
7, No grant funds have been or are expected to be received by the District relative to the
funding of the water capital improvement program, and none of the existing water treatment
and transmission assets were assumed to have been funded from grants.
8. Based on discussions with the County and as part of the review of the monthly rates for
water service (a separate study ofthe District), it was determined that the lowest overall cost
to the existing ratepayer (in terms of rates to be charged and financial health of the District
System) was to use impact fees first for capital project funding as opposed to the payment of
debt service, Because of this benefit and the need to recover the full capital cost assigned to
growth, no rate adjustment was reflected in the determination of the fee. All impact fee
funds remain in the system and the long-term financing costs are mitigated by using the fees
for capital project financing, Although a new rate payer will potentially pay debt service on
expansion-related financing, the overall cost to the ratepayer is less by not applying impact
fees to current year debt and the additional customers to the system actnally tend to maintain
or reduce the debt service component built into the rates for service. Thus there appears to
be no justification to continue to have a debt service adjustment in the determination of the
impact fees,
The water system impact fee was calculated utilizing estimated capital costs for the water
supply/treatment/transmission system, ERC service requirements, and current fixed asset and plant
capacity data available to PRMG regarding the water system, By designing the water system
impact fee to recover costs on a prospective basis, an attempt is made to design a charge that will
15
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24,2009
Page 61 of 462
provide funds on a reasonable basis in order to meet the future needs of the water system. It should
be noted that in the event the construction costs, capacity requirements, or utility service area
materially change from what is reflected on Table 7, the water impact fee might need to be adjusted
accordingly.
As shown on Table 7, the calculated water impact fee is $3,685 per ERC, which is $925 or 33.5%
higher than the existing water impact fee of $2,760 per ERC, This fee would be applied to a
standard individually-metered residential customer, Based on the capital facilities associated with
the detennination of the fee, the functional hreakdown of the components of the rate is as follows:
Water Supply/Treatment
Water Transmission
Rounded
Cost Per ERC
$2,865
550
Total Proposed Water Impact Fee
llill
Design of Wastewater Impact Fee
As shown on Table 8, the calculated impact fee for the wastewater system is $3,515 per ERC. This
represents an increase in the fee of $390 or 12,5% above the current fee of $3,125 per ERC, The
reason for this increase is a rise in the cost per unit of additional capacity from the costs assumed in
the previous impact fee study, As previously mentioned, with respect to the inflationary impact on
the cost of new construction, over the past five years, the Construction Cost Index published hy
Engineering News-Record (ENR), which measures the inflation in the prices of construction labor
and materials, increased by approximately 21 % (this would not take into account any effects of
regulatory process changes associated with wastewater treatment standards),
In the development of the proposed wastewater impact fees, several assumptions were utilized or
incorporated in the analysis. The major assumptions utilized in the design of the proposed
wastewater impact fees are:
I, The existing wastewater treatment and effiuent disposal facilities have an estimated
available capacity margin to serve new growth of approximately 47,08% of the average
daily capacity of the facilities based on: i) the finn design capacity of the existing
wastewater treatment plant facilities; ii)' actual maximum month average daily flow to
annual average daily flow relationships recently experienced by the wastewater system,
including a review of the actual flow requirements for the ten fiscal year period ended 2005;
and iii) the capacity factors reflected in the 2005 Master Plan Update, The analysis is
included on Table 2 herein,
2, Based on discussions with the County, the cost of treatment and effiuent disposal includes
the direct system-related cost of expanding the reclaimed water system, As shown on Table
6, the following capital costs were reflected in the analysis:
(Remainder of Page Left Blank Intentionally)
16
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24, 2009
Page 62 of 462
Capital Expenditures
Reflected in Analysis
Expansion-Related Facilities (New and
Future)
$21,113,958
Facilities Allocated to Existing Capacity
17.280.000
Total Reclaimed Water Capital
Expendiuues Recognized
$18 191 9~
3. The capital improvement program as identified in the County's 2005 Master Plan Update
was reviewed and the capital costs were apportioned: i) by functional category and ii) to
existing and future users in the detennination of the wastewater impact fee. Those facilities
that were considered to be entirely allocable to growth were included in the fee
detennination at full cost (i,e., 100% of the total cost). For facilities that would provide an
improvement 10 existing utility plant assets that had available capacity to service future
growth, a portion of the capacity fee was reflected in the fee detennination since such new
growth will benefit from such improvements. For capital expenditures which were solely
for the replacement of existing assets which would directly benefit existing customers or
were considered as an on-site cost (provide service to a local area such as a development
which would normally be constructed and subsequently contributed to the District System
by a developer), such amounts were not reflected as an appropriate cost to be recovered
from tlle application of the wastewater impact fees, A summary of the capital costs
recognized in the wastewater impact fee analysis is shown on Table 6 and as follows:
P'ojcel Costs ($ Millions) - FY 2006 to IT 2015
Expansion J Impact Fce
Eligible Costs to Be
Expansion / Impact Fee Recognized in Future Total Expansion I Impact
Eligible Costs Study (e,g., Provide Fee Eligible Costs
Recognized ill CUlTCDt Benefit Beyond Ten-Year Total Project (Current and Future
Existing Study Window} Costs Studies)
Wastewatet
Treatment $20.9 $270.7 $&.9 $300.5 $279.6
Transmission 10.5 25.5 19.3 55,2 44.7
Reclaimed Water 17.3 11.3 9.8 38.4 2U
Tow $48.7 $307.5 $37.9 $394.1 $345 A
4, For the capital improvements identified as transmission system upgrades which would
benefit both existing and future users, the total cost of such improvements has been
recognized in the analysis. Since the transmission function capacity is difficult to ascertain
except at "build-out" conditions, the Iotal existing (expressed at original cost and not on a
replacement or current cost basis) and anticipated capital costs to serve the Iotal capacity of
the wastewater system through 2015 was recognized, thus calculating a new users per ERC
"buy-in" cost for this functional component of the system. Therefore, the cost of certain
capital expenditures shown on Table 6 that was fully recognized in the fee determination
will not be fully recovered by growth since the "unit cost" of this function includes existing
ERCs.
5. With respect to those capital projects which have been allocated to existing users which may
include a capacity increment associated with serving new development. an adjustment to the
17
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24, 2009
Page 63 of 462
reported plant-in-service balances has been made in order to not double-count plant-in-
service (recognized a retirement of plant associated with the addition of the new facilities as
identified in the 2005 Master Plan Update). Since a match of the facility upgrade to the
existing plant-in-service balances as reported on the District's Fixed Asset Records was not
possible, the adjustment was based on: i) an average in-service date based on the weighted
in-service date of all functional assets in service as reported on the Fixed Asset Records; and
ii) the estimated replacement cost of the asset being placed in service as identified in the
2005 Master Plan Update, based on an analysis of historical and projected inflation as
measured by the Construction Cost Index as measured by Engineering News-Record, It was
considered that the use of the replacement cost of the assets, which would generally include
an upgrade to the facilities and probably result in a higher cost due to such factors as
restoration expenses, would be conservative in the evaluation of the capital costs recognized
in the determination of the fee. It was assumed that approximately $16,415,000 of existing
wastewater and reclaimed water system assets would be retired as a result of the
implementation of the County's identified capital improvement program,
6. No capital facility costs associated with the existing collection facilities. including local lift
stations, manholes, and on-site collection facilities - have been included in the calculation of
the wastewater impact fees since the County generally requires the developer to contribute
such facilities, or the County has adopted a separate fee (e,g., wastewater tap-fee) on behalf
of the District to recover such capital additions (contributions in aid of construction). All
capital improvements to such respective facilities as recognized in the 2005 Master Plan
Update were also not recognized in the wastewater impact fee analysis.
7. The level of service for a wastewater ERC was assumed to be 250 gallons per day (gpd)
expressed on an average daily flow basis. This level of service represents no change from
the previous impact fee study. The level of service was predicated on the level of service
requirements as contained in the County's Growth Management Plan (sanitary Sewer sub-
element); information contained in the 2005 Master Plan Update regarding wastewater
capacity; FDEP flow standards as reported in F AC Rule 64E-6,008; FPSC capacity
relationships for private utilities (F AC Rule 25-30,020); and discussions with the District.
8. No grant funds have been or are expected to be received by the District relative to the
funding of the wastewater capital improvement program, and none of the existing
wastewater treatment and transmission assets were assumed to have been funded from
grants.
9, Based on discussions with the County and as part of the review of the monthly rates for
wastewater service (a separate study of the District), it was determined that the lowest
overall cost to the existing ratepayer (in terms of rates to be charged and fmancial health of
the District System) was to use impact fees first for capital project funding as opposed to the
payment of debt service, Because of this benefit and the need to recover the full capital cost
assigned to growth, no rate adjustment was reflected in the determination of the fee. All
impact fee funds remain in the system and the long-term fmancing costs are mitigated by
using the fees for capital project fmancing, Although a new rate payer will potentially pay
debt service on expansion-related financing, the overall cost to the ratepayer is less by not
applying impact fees to current year debt and the additional customers to the system actually
tend to maintain or reduce the debt service component built into the rates fOT service. Thus
18
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24, 2009
Page 64 of 462
there appears to be no justification to continue to have a debt service adjustment in the
determination of the impact fees.
The wastewater system impact fee was calculated utiljzing estimated capital costs for the
wastewater transmission/treatment/disposal system, ERC service requirements, and current fixed
asset and plant capacity data available to PRMG regarding the wastewater system. By designing
the wastewater system impact fee to recover costs on a prospective basis, an attempt is made to
design a charge that will provide funds on a reasonable basis in order to meet the future needs ofthe
wastewater system, It should be noted that in the event the construction costs, capacity
requirements, or utility service area materially change from what was reflected on Table 8, the
wastewater impact fee might need to be adjusted accordingly,
As shown on Table 8, the calculated wastewater impact fee is $3,515 per ERC, which is $390 or
12.5% higher than the existing wastewater impact fee of $3,125 per ERC, This fee would be
applied to a standard individually-metered residential customer. Based on the capital facilities
associated with the determination of the fee, the functional breakdown of the components of the rate
is as follows:
Wastewater TreatmentIDisposal
Vol astewater Transmission
Rounded
Cost Per ERC
$3,200
315
Total Proposed Wastewater Impact Fee
~
Impact Fee Comparisons
In order to provide additional information to the County regarding the existing and calculated
impact fees, a comparison of the existing and calculated fees for the District with other Florida
jurisdictions was prepared, This comparison is summarized On Table 9 and provides a comparison
of the existing and proposed District impact fees for single-family residential connections (Le., one
ERC) relative to the impact fees or comparable charges currently imposed by other
municipaVgovernmental water and wastewater systems located primarily in the southwest Florida
region, Figure 1 shows a graphical representation of the comparison. It is important to note that the
reader must view the comparison with caution as no in-depth analysis has been performed to
detennine the methods used in the development of the water and wastewater impact fees imposed
by others, nor has any analysis been made to determine whether 100% of the cost of new facilities is
recovered from system capacity charges, or some percentage less than 100% with the balance
recovered through the user charges, Additionally, no analysis was conducted as to the rate of
capital facilities currently in service or planned for the utility. For example, the costs of wastewater
effluent disposal utilizing a deep injection well system generally has a higher capital cost per unit of
capacity than percolation ponds.
(Remainder of Page Left Blank Intentionally)
19
Table 1
Collier County Water-Sewer District
Water and Wastewater Impact Fee Study
Development of Existing Water Productionffreatment Facility
Cao8citv Available to Serve Customer Growth
Line
No,
Existing Pennitted Plant Capacity of System (MMDD-MGD) (1)
Adjustment to Reflect Annual Average Daily Demand
2 of Water Treatment System (MGD) (2)
3 Adjusted Treatment Plant Capacity (AADD)
4 Annual Average Daily Demand - Existing System (3)
5 Remaining Capacity (AADD) at Existing Plant
6 Percent of Total Capacity Remaining
7 Percent of Total Capacity Recognized
Capital Costs of Existing Faciliti~s
8 Existing Facility Costs (4)
9 Additional Costs (5)
10 Less Assumed Retirements (6)
11 Less Grant Funds and Other Contributions (7)
12 Total Applicable Capital Costs of Existing Facilities
13 Estimated Amount Allocable to Future Growth
MGD = Million GaIJon5 Per Day
MMDD '" Maximum Month Daily Demand
AADD "" Annual Avcmge Daily Demand
Footnotes start on page 30.
29
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24,2009
Page 65 of 462
Water
System
40.000
(6,667)
33.333
25,830
7.503
22.51%
22.51%
$ 111,400,959
89,761,032
(25,243,690)
(969,055)
$ 174,949,246
$ 39,381,075
Table 2
Collier County Water-Sewer District
Water and Wastewater Impact Fee Study
Development of Existing Wastewater Treatment Facility
Canacity Available to Serve Customer Growth
Line
No.
Existing Piant Capacity of System (MMADF-MGD) (I)
2 Adjustment to Reflect Capacity on Annual Average Daily Flow Basis (2)
3 Adjusted Treatment Plant Capacity @AADF
4 Annual Average Daily Flow - Existing System (3)
5 Remaining Capacity (MDF) at Existing Plant
6 Percent of Total Capacity Remaining
7 Percent of Total System Capitalization Recognized
Capital Costs of Existing Facilities
8 Existing Facility Costs (4)
9 Additional Costs (5)
10 Less Assumed Retirements (6)
11 Less Grant Funds and Other Conmbutions (7)
12 Total Applicable Capital Costs of Existing Facilities
13 Estimated Amount Allocable to Future Growth
MGD = Million Gallon5 Per Day
MMADF ::; Maximum Month Average Daily Flow
AADF = Annual Average Daily Flow
Footnotes start on page 33.
32
Agenda Item No.1 OA
February 24, 2009
Page 66 of 462
Wastewater
System
40.100
(9.254)
30.846
16,323
14.523
47.08%
47.08%
$ 157,420,647
38,212,595
(11,080,708)
(1,753,Q62)
$ 182,799,472
$ 86,061,991
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24, 2009
Page 67 of 462
Attachment C-1
County Ordinance No. 2007-52
County Ordinance No. 2007-57
County Resolution 2008-202
~_:..')" ?u~:.'v "
.,:) 'T-'
1, t''' ;.:.-
. 'J> "C;~
's.\\. ~l ~\
\tm~\.~ gj ORDINANCE NO. 2007 - ..i.L
~"" AN ORD ~ CE OF !!::OLLIER CO~FLORlDA, AMENDING SUBSECJ'lON
"SO!- ~(I: SECTION 74-303 OF A.R CLE m IN ORDINANCE NO, %001-13 (THE
LIDATED IMPACT FEE ORDINANCE), TO SPECIFY THAT WATER AND
SEWEll IMPACT FEES FOR NON-lWIIDENTIAL USES AND FOR RESIDENTIAL
LIVING AREA GREATER THAN 5,000 SQUARE FEET (OR HAVING MORE THAN
FOUR TOILETS) SHALL BE DETERMINED BY PROJECTING AVERAGE DAlLY
FLOWS AND NO LONGER BY THE SIZE OF THE SERVICE METER; AMENDING
SCHEDULE TWO IN Al'PENDlX A TO THE ORDINANCE; PROVIDING FOR
CONFLICT AND SEVERABILITY; PROVIDING FOR INCLUSION IN THE CODE OF
LAWS AND ORDINANCES; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
~
~r\)
~ ~y
~I
~
x
~)
-~~
~ \
~
,46gb3 }/.,. (or'[)
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24, 2009
Page 68 of 462
WHEREAS, on March 13, 2001, the Bolltd of Coonly Commissioners of Collier County
adopted Ordinance 2001-13, the "Consolidated ImpactFee Ordinance" repealing and superseding all
of the COUl1ty's then existing impact fee regulations andcollSoIidating all aft:hc County's impact fee
regulations into that Ordioance, codified as Chapter 74 of tM Collier County Code of Laws and
Ordinances (lhe "Code"); and
WHEREAS, the Collier County Water.SewerDjslricl conlnlcted with Malcolm Pimie and
with the URS Corporation regarding tltcse impact foea, and both consulting fums have recommendt:d
to staff that water and wastewater impacl fees that apply to nOD-residential lUes, or that apply to
residential uses that have either living area of 5,000 or Inore square feet, or irrespective of~ sq~
footage will have more than four toiletS. no longer be dctennined by the size of the appli~ 8~e
meter, but shall be detcnnined by the ERC valoe that results from applicable projeclAld average drilY
t1()ws:and
WHEREAS, having reviewed the Consulllu1t's recommondationa, staff conCUl1llllld,thcrefrire
is recommending that the Board of County Commissloncn; edopt the attached Ordinance to amend
lhe current Ordinance and the 8ltlIChed Impact Fee Schedule, both of which will accomplish the
results recommended by the consultants.
~ NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED 8Y THE BOARD OF COUNTY
fv) J~ COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, that:
~ ~ECTlON ONE. Subsection (d)(2)(g) in Section 74-303 of Article IDof Chapler 74 of the Collier
~ ounty Code nf Laws and Ordinances (the Slllt1C being Ordinance No, 2001-13, as amended), is
hereby Rmended to read a& follows:
~ ~ "g. MI:iJIi fa:mil)'1lflit. ilypleK, meBile R8mB af lH":el trailer RBF6aken&l 'falliele impBst
fees shall sa paid le lfie eSl:ift" at tke JargelU dollar aIi.IaUJIl ~&&8" "P8ft'" p!~.~Ltspaee, erUle meter
) I ::~~5~.:e~::~.:~~i~=~i:~:~;::"~:~=:::~:::~"~:~ ~~; :~:t~,
'.. / ~l3hetWB8 af th. '~t(l,aes.aal8t11&lie88. l1Ht parBr sf Busk larger initial "-'t'ster andler aB\l.8T
~ "tffipllet fe~a, sh~ be, emitle.d 1e !Hlpaet iN eNelita agaiBst aadia9fl8l OBits as Intil,ding J9amUtB fer
, ,.J these aadiB8Ral anUs IIR! JBGl:lS9. 8~' 1fte S8Q1lty ..ithiR that de aleplMBt. Staff iQ IHJthsFii5es. to
\\' f:l.fJPFB III anI. gNflt SUilt ~'R! sm. ";' ater ,and wastewater (sewerHmnact fees for individuallv metered
\ , . w~ter and/or sewer SI::fV1CC to residential use of less than 5,000 SQuare refit livin2 soace and which
\. f\ wdl have less than five toilets shan have an ERe value of one, Master met:ered service to residential
~\. -..., J use {']fle~s ~an 5.000sauare fcetlivimr. SOllee andhavine: Jess than five toilets shall be determined bv
\ the SDOC:lfic Imoacr fee value assie:ned bv Aooendix A. Schedule Two, Individuallv metered service
and master metered service to non~residcntlal uses or to tesidentialllse havinl! Jivinl!' area of 5 ,000
,J
Underlined led is added: lilftl;!i IH iugh text is: deleted.
Agenda Item NO.1 OA
February 24. 2009
Page 69 of 462
scuare feet or more. or service to residential use havinelcss square footau bul havine. fiVe or more
toilets, Mall be determined bv the ERe value that results from :oroiected aveta2e dailv flows.
Proiected avcra2e daily flows for residential u.se of 5.000 sauare feet livioE" area Of more. or to bave
more than four tOilets llhaJl be dcremu.nea bv acolviDIl: a.tJolicablc movisions in the then current
edition of the Florida PlumbinS!' "'''';I''!. Proiected IVCI'1lli!C dailv flows fornon~teS;idential uses ahall be
derennincd bv calculatinD" the aDDUcable movigions in the then Cl.lI'Rlnt edition of the Florida
P1umbinlt Code comDBred with the l\Policable Drovisions in the then current editions of I.he Florida
Adminis.trative Code. The corn:ct aveI'lUle daily flows for non-residential 11&& shall be the llI"e8cer of
[he Florida Pltnnbin2 ('--Ode calculation or the Rorida Arlminilltmtive Code calculation. The Public
U,mtics Administrator or authorized dclipees shall have final armmval authority with fe2anl to
these imoact fee: calculations."
SECTION TWO, CONFLICT AND SEVERABILITY.
In the event this Ordinance conflicts with any other Ordinance of Collier County or other
. a.pplicable law, the more restrictive sruuJ appjy. If any phrase or portion of this Ordinance is held
invalid OT unconstitutional by any court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a
separate. distinct, and independent provision and such holding shall not affect the validity of the
remaining portions.
SECTION THREE. INCLUSION IN THE CODE OF LA. WS AND ORDINANCES.
The provisions of this Ordinance shall be made a part of the Code of Laws and Ordinances of
Collier County, Florida. The sections of the: Ordinance ma.y be renumbered OT J'C-Iettercd and
internal cro8s~references amended throughout to accomplis.h such, and the. word. "ordinance" may be
changed to "section,'l ..article," or any other appropriate word.
SECTION FOUR. EFFECTIVE DATE.
Til;s Ordinance shall become effective .pon filing with the Horida Deparlmenl of Slate.
PASSED AND DULY ADOI'TED by the Board of County Commissioners of
Collier County, Florida this ~ day of ,\" " , 2007.
ATTEST: .. "'..
DWIGHT. E, BR~K, CLERK
~q~;;fik,~I~l-
:~~~'1"'" ,
t~ ~~4.t\Ir'.. OcrI'.
Approved as to fann and legal sufficiency:
BO!\RD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF COI.LIER COUNTY, FLORIDA
By: ~~~~
BY:_/O\Q^ IlL--
Thomas C. Palmer, Assistant County Attorney
Page 2 of 4
Thi&. ordl....araee filii:! with th"
~:;'~rQ"tQry ofj:ltc:rtw's (. ~e
~doyoP~ ' C "*
o.Jo.ol!l"'leknawl8dgcmcr.1 ,"..7 that
~:"!m ~!:;
~~
~Jex.tllld&d: ~I'~' '"wll(tll texti, c.Icl.etcd.
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24, 2009
Page 70 of 462
APPENDIX A
SCHEDULE TWO: WATER AND W.\S1'E\\'At:ER SEWER SYSTEM IMPACf Ft.."E
RATE SCHEDULE
." - ....- . ,,,.~U !,A:.U'~~' w.;;.,.,i: ,'.: ,',"
~JtlpqpTJ.\U.Y ME'rliRBP
IlRG ~'.~.TER g~'8R
UVlNG SP~,CE 1!!>lijS 01' FllB IlEfliR CQliIlIi /lllllnl D.Wa IUP,'CT
(&(1 N.) i\LLOC'.TI<>>1 ~ ReallJe!tiAl.
CSRllaGb..BII.) I'!;B- F6S-
g tie 1.99-9
(t.NIl NQ I<<lRlil PliIl. UIoIIl' ;lW- +- &3,115.00 i3,515.00
TIY~'l1
IlATHRQQ!,Q;)
5,909 IIR HQPd! B.\~gg O~I
fQUlQ!lB PSR IlRC PIlR 6RC !(GIlM- IlRG $3,>15.00
+HAN-4 21)(.lQ] I 1 MinimuM
I!ATImOOI1S) IU.1U gg
.;,/t.,_,~~:;;",:~":",,,~' ,~ ._~..r '.lV~L :-_'....'.....!....; . .....~;r,;,.:~.'.Jt...{ '. ..
~t'\g1'EllI....,""<BP
lJ\'lNG IlRG ~7 iIo_'RiR &UMlIl
SMa; (SQ. 13;1 $I.\: IIF FBIi ~- ~Iii &I... IMP:'.cr IMP.^,cr
,-I.LbOC.'11OH Sl;i';i;- R.'Si_F~1il
1'+.1- CtIw .' n) FlO6- Ri&-
G"'7SG MR tJNJ;T PliR llRC ~ $1.12..00 U.16G,GG
7H t8 l.~OO PliR UNlT PIiR ~C G.e+- ',200 QQ 2,3.5,00
!.SlIl ro 1,999 !'lOR lJl'1Il' PSR BRG {4- 3,1U,QQ a,HS,OO
S,OOQ OR ~
- ~ HGPM- ON 6RC
(OR HORll PeR llRC QRflJl>l'ANO! .(,'2GJ I MiniJBf:lJII 3.315.00
'I'HAN4 -l-
Ilt.TlIllOOUSl 3.11.300
~l^Kr~AT . ..~:~t~;'l.~;)'~. ......:.... .
W:\~1mt
MIW>!\ s!ZI;: E&G- W,\TBR IllP.',cr I'!i.li
OR CC)-{SP Rf...\IQe g~t.8R IMPACT ~
BQUI'-'~IT
- MIN- MAA- MlN- IMAA-
JI4 /{l..- -l- $3.H5,QG tJ,nS,QQ
-l- '<+ ~ a,7S7.9Q 8,$38.99 3.&€j7,OO 8,788,Q9
+.m- :h&- ..... Il,8W,OO l',9~5.oo 9,U9.9Q 11,575
;?- M 8- 17,117.00 27,~2Q,00 17,937.00 2(i,12Q.OO
3- 3+ #.9- J7.'~2,Q9 187,18(00 2g,17a.OO 192.!K'1
4- #- ~ lS1.82S.QQ 149,191,00 19~.n3 gg 1>3,GQq.gQ
'- ~ ~ 1QQ,5J5.00 1,232,229,00 1S3,~]!j,oo 1,2!8,91?lI9
8- US eoo. l,2n,57Q.00 2.lH9,(jQQ,QQ 1.2U,~~ 00 2.199,00
~tcKL1J adQed; &~* IfMIf" U1x:tiJdeleled.
Pqc3of4
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24, 2009
Page 71 of 462
/
INDIVIDUALLY METERED SERVICE
LIVING SPACE (SO.FT.) ~ BASIS OF WATER SEWER
VALUE FeE IMPACT FEES IMPACT FEES
o TO 4.999
rAND MAXIMUM OF 4 1 PQrERC $3.415 ~
TOILETS)
5,000 OR GREATER ADF/ 350
lOR MORE THAN 4 (min vaJue of ERC VALUE x ~
TOILETSl LQl Per ERG $3,415
{fOunded to ~minlmum value ERG VALUE X
Non-Residential Ihe nearest ~ $3.515 (minimum
tenth) value $.1 5151
MASTER METERED SERVICE
LIVING SPACE rSQ,FT,) ERC BASIS OF WATER SEWER
~ as IMPACT FEES IMPACT FEES
Residential Unit - 0 TO 750 ~ Per Un" $1.125.00 $1,160,00
Aesidential Unfl-751 TO 0,67 Per Unit $2,290,00 $2.355,00
1.:il!ll
Residential Unit -, 501 TO 1 Per Untt $3,415,00 $3,515,00
~
Residential Unit - 5 000 OR ADF/350
GREATER lOR MORE THAN $3,515
4 TOllETSl fminve.IuClof ERC VALUE x
J..Q1 Per ERG $3.415 rmilimum
(rounded to ERG VALUE x
I the neares1 value SS 4151
Non-ResIdential tenth) nlli
(mlnlmum value
53515)
ADF-
E
ER -
NY" KEY'
Aver__ DailY Flow. to, DroDDUd UN .. Dl'aVIded bv EOR or Authorized
vo
n I or for
lent I 0
~lexti.added;li' .L"'..., Ih~ti~de\etcd,.
Page4of4
ORDINANCE NO, 2007--2L-
AN ORDINANCE OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, AMENDING THE IMPACT FEE
RATE SCHE:DULES OF APPENDIX A OF ORDINANCE NO, 2001-13,
AS AMENDED, KNOWN AS THE COLLIER COUNTY
CONSOLIDATED IMPACT FEE ORDINANCE; INCORPORATING
BY REFERENCE THE IMPACT FEE STUDY ENTITLED "COLLIER
COUNTY IMPACT FEE INDEXING STUDY;" DELETING TIlE
REQUIRED USE OF INCOME DERIVED FROM THE INTEREST
BEARING IMPACT FEE TRUST FUNDS; PROVIDING FOR
CHANGES TO THE PROVISIONS RELATED TO IMPACT FEE
WAIVERS AND DEFERRALS FOR SPECIFIED CflARITABLE'
ORGANIZATIONS; AMENDING THE SPECIAL REQUIREMENTS
FOR EACH OF THE INDIVIDUAL IMPACT FEES; PROVIDING
FOR CONFLICT AND SEVERABILITY; PROVIDING FOR
INCLUSION IN THE COLLIER COUNTY CODE OF LAWS AND
ORDINANCES; AND PROVIDING FOR A DELAYED EFFECTIVE
DATE OF JANUARY I, 2008.
Agenda Item No. 10A
,~ 24,2009
~/ Pa" 2 of 462
~"'i ~ 0;-
"" ~
~ L 'JUl 2011 ", ~
\ HECBVm' j,
"'.. ~"
6~ 'O,..:-.v
.e"i:?LZoo6\
WHEREAS, Collier County has used impact fees as a funding source for growth-related
capital improvements for various facilities since 1978; and
WHEREAS, on March 13, 2001, the Board of County Commissioners adopted
Ordinance No. 2001~ 13, the CoIlier County Consolidated Impact Fee Ordinance, repealing and
superseding all of the County's then ex.isting impact fee regulations, and consolidating aU oftbe
County's impact fee regulations into that one Ordinance, codified in Chapter 74 of the Collier
County Code of Laws and Ordinances (the "Code"); and
WHEREAS, in October of 2002 the Board of Counly Commissioners directed that
dwing lhe upcoming required three-year updates of the individual impact fees that methodology
also bc developed to provide for tho annual indexing of the fees in the years between the fonnal
updates; and
WHEREAS, on February 28, 2006, the Board of County Commissioners directed that
the indexing methodology for each of the impact fees be reviewed and revised, as appropriate, to
reflect localized information; and
WHEREAS, Section 163.31801, Florida Statutes, which is the Florida Impact Fee Act,
requires the most recent and localized data be used in impact fee calculations; and
WHEREAS, Collier County, retained Tindale-Oliver & Associates. Inc. (tbe
"Consultant"), to complete the study to localize the indexing methodologies; and
WHEREAS, the Consultant worked in association with Robert W. Burchell, Ph.D. from
the Center for Urban Policy Research, Blaustein School of PlanningIPublic Policy at Rutgers, to
develop a legally defensible indexing program, specific to Collier County; and
WHEREAS, the Consultant has prepared an impact fee study entitled "Collier County
Impact Fee Indexing Study" dated June 11,2007 (the "Study"); and
WHEREAS. Colher County uses impact fees to supplement the funding of necessary
capital improvl:ments Tequired to provide public facilities to serve new population and related
development that is necessitated by grDwth in Collier County; and
WHEREAS, the Study recommends four revised measures to be used, alone or in
combination, [0 calculate the annual index for each of Collier County's impact fees; and
UD.~ l~ll il added; buall lI"m~Jk IeXl i! lld,l<<!
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24, 2009
Page 73 of 462
WHEREAS, the recommended measures and cOlTCsponding percentages of increase, in
combination with the adopted indexing methodology provide the basis for tbe armual index for
each of Collier County's impact fees; and
WHEREAS, the proposed revised fees are incorporated in Schedules One through Ten
of Appendix A of Chapter 74 of the Collier County Code of Laws and Ordinance (attached); and
WHEREAS, the study methodology has been reviewed and agreed to by Collier
County's outside legal cOWlSel, Nabors. Giblin and Nickerson. P.A,; and
WHEREAS, staff has thoroughly reviewed the calculations and findings and concurs
with the results of the study, and recommends that the Board of County Commissioners adopt
this Ordinance to implement the recommended changes; and
WHEREAS, on April 10, 2007 the Board of County Commissioners directed that the
provisions related to impact fee waivers for specified charitab1e organizations be amended to
instead provide deforrals to such charitable organizations; and
WHEREAS, the adoprion of this Ordinance incorporates provisions that amend Section
74-203(i} of the Collier County Code of LaW& and Ordinances related to charitable organizations
by providing impact fee deferrals to qualifie:d entities and requiring that deferred impact fees be
paid to Collier County upon such time that the premises is no longer utilized by the qualified
o:ntity or the entity ceases to operate in the specified charitable capacity.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONEI{S OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, that:
SECTION ONE. Article: I, General, Section 74~l06, Adoption of impact fee sfUdies, of the
Collier County Code of Laws and Ordinances is hereby amc:ndoo to read as follows:
Section 74-106. Adoption of impact fee studies.
The board hereby adopts and incorporates by reference the following studies with regard
to the respective public facUities:
...
illl Indexin~: "Collier COlUltv Imo",,' Fee Indexing Studv'" dated IWle ii, 2007,
prenared bv TindaJe-Oliver and Associates. Inc. in association with Robert W.
Burchell. Ph.D" to be undated atmll1lllv.
...
SECTION TWO, Artic\, n, ImpaC! Fees. Section 74.203, Use offunds, subsection (e) and (i)
of the Collier County Code of Laws and Ordinances is hereby amended to read as follows:
Section 74-203.
Use of funds.
...
(e) All funds on deposit which are not then immediately necessary for expenditures shall
be invested by the county in compound. interest bearing trust fund(s). All inflame derived a-8m
SN-eR iR. estmeMs shall be s~Bsit8E1 iR the !llleeiiie iml!'sst fell a-uet filM FrSR1 ",vhieh. the i8'/8sterJ.
fun6s eMfle. Te th.e 81r:t&ftt He! Jlrflhi\3itd \3) lan, RIle, rsg1:lJaaen aT eaRir.Wt (iashuliHg BSRB
~lClI.lll..;ldcd:\:IIJ.Iv.i'Ol'~rte](t;ldcletcd
Pl.&" 2 of2~
Agenda Item No. lOA
February 24, 2009
Page 74 of 462
ea' ill'lMtS), m1ereat tAefi I.\SgRled iR tit, F86Jestive h=UiK fimtlsMll he l:i6l!ld tel fillly fURd 118St fer
pfElFi:" 6aaRt&l3ls ilaat')' imp-aat fees "l'ai era. .^.esrue8 ifttarest iR eRe truet itIas shIH! Ret Be
leane!! ts, a-ll:RBf!If8~ ie. SF etltep:'1S1 \!II! R'eatllEl te the eredit sf an} ether BlifIt fwut Sf any ether
aeeeUFlt. Imflset fee v:ai':B:fB grar~t8li BY the beard BRall se paid Hem &aBAted interest fFem easH
tR:1st fl:ma aJfeeted Bi ""e v"wYers. In fue a"/ent laB aelmiRilitFater sf a. reSfleetivB trust fWla is sf
the BJ'liAisR Ef..M theft &Semes. HHel'SS~ in the Fe!if:leeh'/B iRlJ'aet fee wet [wul is in6ymde:nt 16 fund
Hie then (Hlnding reql:18stea ':.'B:i::ere. tlie manager sf eaeh sask a=ust funa shaU Ratify the 8S't:IRty
manager i8 "'Piling er fr.B faetual and legal Bilses reF theso E1f'iHlEllUl. l' eemad YltereElt sha.n 98
a.eemea La "be Q' ailaele" La fW'lS these "~e: faT prefit, ehaFitasle eBB~yt! "aivefs lfRle!i.s there
lfum eltiGts an 8.8t1:laJ legal ~rehiBitieft .....iuweh)' tRat aSSFU!tl iRtenst BW".Ret legall)' Be ISBell ts
fHas tHe rsqueated : ai':eRl.
...
(i) Impact fee v;ai':ers sr deferrals available to charitable organizations nnd charitable
trusts. These impact fees ~ deferrals are available only to eligible to not-for-profit,
charitable entities as specifiod herein. The cumulative total of all not-for-profit.waWers deferrals
in each of the cowny's fiscal years shall not exceed $200,000,00. If the total amount of impact
fees weWed deferred pursuant to these provisions in a fiscal year is less than $200,000.00 (or is
less than the higher total in the funding account for that fiscal year because of prior cash
carrying-forward) some or all of the awn of money not ~ deferred can be carried forward
and thereby be added 10 lhe $200,000.00, to a maximum balance of $500,000,00 funding for the
next fiscal year. N-eftRef. tJ,mpact fees collected by the county for water, wastewater, educational
facilities 00i'in9 fire impact fees shall not be weiYe9 doferred under these provisions.
(1) Entities eligible for waWef8 deferrals:. These ~ deferrals are available only to
charitable, not-for-profit entities that provide services of substantial benefit to low
income or very low income re!;idents of the county at no charge or at reasonable, reduced
rates, and no part of the net earnings of the entity shall inure to the benefit of any private
shareholder or individual, and the entity complies with at least one of the following:
a, The entity is described in subsection 501(C)(3) of Chapter 26 of the United
States Internal Revenue Code as a corporation, a community chest, a fund, or a
foundation, organized and operated exclusively for charitable purposes, or for
prevention of cruelty to children, and is then exempt from taxes under Section
501 (a) thc:roin; or
b. The entity is described in Subsections 501 (C)(4)(A) and (B) ofChilpter 26 of
the United States Internal Revenue Code as either a Civic League or an
organization not organized for profit, is operated exclusively for the promotion of
social welfare, and is exempt from taxes under Section 501(a), therein; or
c. The entity is described in Subsection 501 (C)(20) of Chapter 26 of the United
States Internal Revenue Code as an organization or trust, the exclusive function of
which is to fonn part of a qualified group legal services plan or ptans within the
meaning of Section 120 as. referenced therein; or
~lC:o;li,added;IlI(liIfSJ&~Lcx,j,delcted
"S<:30[25
Agenda Item NO.1 OA
February 24,2009
Page 75 of 462
d. The entity is a hospital, a cooperative hospital service organization, a medical
research organization, or similar organization under any provision within (or
referenced) in Section SOl of Chapter 26 of the United States InternaJ Revenue
Code and the entity is exempt from federal income taxation; or
e. The entity is then exempt from Florida's annual and nonrecurring intangible
taxes pursuant to F.s. ! 199,185(4), asa "Charitable Trust" and at least 95 percent
of its income is paid to one or more of the above-listed federal tax exempt entities.
(2) Amount of waiwm; deferrals available to applicants. Subject to not exceeding the
amount of impact fees paid {or to be paid} by the applicant lo the county, the applicant
may request wai-Yefe deferrals of all impact fees that arc waivaele elieible for deferral
under these provisions, but no applicant shall be granted more than $100,000.00, or 50
percent of the available funding, which ever IS less. ofnot-for-profit~ deferrals,
(3) No construction that has obtained an affordable housing deferral under this article
shall be eligible for any wetY-ef deferral under these provisions. No construction that has
been granted a we:WeF deferral under these provisions shall be eligihle for any county
affordable housing deferrals,
(4) ;'ofIplieatioRs Reouests for ~ deferrals pursuant to this section 74-203,
a. Except as specified in this subparagraph B., the applicant must file a written
~ request for deferral applisatiBB to tho county manager not later than
concurrently with payment of the respective impact fees, The county shall not
accept any such Bpl'lieatieflfi ~ after the respective impact fees have been
paid to the county except in those instances when the Collier County bu.ilding
permit that autnorized the respective watwF eligible development was issued after
September 7, 2001 and before October 13, 2001 and the development paid the
applicable impact fees in full, The applicant can avoid payment of impact fees (up
to the maximum arnOW'lt of impact fees that may possibly be ~ deferred for
that applicant) only when it is possible that the board may grant the requested
~ deferral before the respective impact fees become due and payable to the
COWlt)'. The ttf'plieatien written reQueSl must prove all of the applicable above-
specified elements that render the entity eligible for the requested ~
deferrals, lncluding the required tax exemption(s), The county manager may
request additional infonnation deemed appropriate to ascenain the applicant's
eligibility for tIle requested watYefG deferrals, including criteria notod in F.S, 9~
196.195 and/or 196.196,
b, NEt f'HeFit) shall Be giveR te as}' a.p~HaatieR haeer:l en an) "RFElt eaRll!, HPSt
seR'le" BaBiB. The county manager shaH review each applieati8R written reauest
to determine eligibility for the requested ~ deferrals, Within 30 days after
receipt of the applieatisH ~, the county manager ~ ~ inform the.
applicant in writing whether the Ilt'l'lieatiefl reauest is complete, If the applisation
reauest is incomplete, the appliutisfI ffl8'j" Be reRlmea te the applicant, shall be
notified sfl8SifyiFlg in writing why the 813Iilieatiaa written reauesl faiis to prove
that the entity IS eligible for the requested ~ defenal.s. After r~ce;pt of such
~\t:lO.\illllldcd: fP1 iIIllN~,h .~llilli~cted
PBgc. 4 or2'i
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24, 2009
Page 76 of 462
notice, the applicant shall have an additional 30 days to re-submit an amended
8:f:lplieatisFI reQuest. Failure to meet this deadline shall void the applicantts
eligibility for the requested watYem deferrals unless an extension is granted for
good cause at the COWlty manager1s discretion.
c. After an /tPptieaaan a written reouest is detennined by the county manager to
meet the above~specified minimum filing requirements, the county manager shall
promptly place the at'plieat:isFl. request on the county's manager portion of the
board's agenda. The fiscal year in which the waivef ~ Ojl~li..ti.R is granted
or denied by the board shall be the fiscal year that applies to the B:pJllieatian
request. The executive summary shall specify the criteria deemed by the county
manager to render the applicant eligible (or ineligible) for the requested ~
deferrals. and shall include the county manager's recommendations whether the
board should grant the reque!;t in whole or in part, or should deny the request,
along with a proposed rese)wtie1\ alll'eement that may be adepteEi executed by (he
board that rasntMnS ereeitlt HmHaga that the ~Ii\!a:nt is (aT is Bet) eligiBle fer the
reE.l.1:I.esteel . .a.i erl5. No reselatiea aEI'eement shall apply to more than one
applicant. Wed.. ars grftflt8il sRall he HRat HHt YIi!JGtea imm.ettiat~) l:tpen aaefitieR sf
tfle FI!'Seli:ltiBft. The 82I'eemcnt shall be nreoaroo bv the:: Cowltv Attornev's Office
consistent with this chaoter.
(5) Not-for-profit ~ deferrals are discretionary and the board's decisions are final.
At the conclusion of the defenallleriod the subiett imnact fees for the then~current use
arc due and oavable.
(6) The county manager may adopt additional generally applicable procadural rules with
r:::gard to apfllieatieR requests provided those rules apply to all sjmilarly sittJated
applicants and do not impose additional mandatory eligibility requirements upon any
applicant.
(7) No construction that has applied for or obtained Fee Pa}Tl1ent Assistance Ffunding
under Cbapter 49 of the Collier County Code of Laws and Ordinances shall be eligible
for ilny waiver deferral under these: provisions. No construction that has been granted a
wetYeF deferral under these provisions shall be eligible for any county fIeo ftEayment
ii:b:ssislance funding.
SECTION THREE. Article Ill, Special Requirements for Specific Types of Impact Fees.
Section 74-302, Special requirement3for road impactfee. subsection (g) of the Collier Cou.nty
Code of La.ws and Ordinances, is hereby amonded to read as follows:
Section 74w302.
Special requirements for road Impact fee.
...
(g) Annual mid-cycle road impact fee rate indexing. Beginning November ],
2002, the county shall conunence a three-year road impact fee update cycle pursuant toasubsections 74-201(b) and 74-S02(a) of this chapter. OR er aeBl:lt ~le\emeer I, af
Durinl2 each of the two mid-years between updatcs1 the county shall implement indexed
~LeJlti$addod:r~'","r!~I~lexti5deleled
Pa~5orlS
Agenda Item No.1 OA
February 24,2009
Page 77 of 462
adjustments to the: cost componenls of design, utilities, mitigation., interchange.
canying cost. construction, engineering, inspection ~ the non-land components of
right-of-way acquisition costs BB6Bd aR the FleAda :98fJsrtmeBt sf TFa:n~BFt&t:ieR FRee
Treeds IndB'tl. based en the three rear histeFieal tread, .:eigl:l.ted aG 25 ~eroflF.lt ef t:r,e
[naSh:. The iAaen aajtii>aReBt 1a and the land value component of rights-of-way costs
~ based on ilia tea j'Bar Ri5taAeal treaa jf! telial just "aJa8S fef all f!repefty a6
I:lpsMee ar..nHB.Il;; t1j' 'l.!:! Callier CaliRI) Jlt:epl'ft)' .+"pJ.'faiaer. ';'eigRte~ as 75 J'sreeet pf
tR8 iBsen. The Ilf'RuaJ iRBFeaEleS if! the tetaI just. allies fer all prElJ'lert) shall ae 6aflped
at 25 I3sresnt fer any gi', en yeW' iRshul.ea: iH iRe R\'erage. Mid eycle iReleJ[l3a~
BH&Rge edjustfReHts shall Be as'apted B) a 1'6ss1loltisfl aflhe beefs flW"EiHlH!.t ta s1:lBseatiefl
74 21QEB) efthis ehftJ!ter. the ucrcentaees of increase set forth in the adooted "Collier
County Imnact Fee Indcxin12 Study" oreoared by TindaJc:-Oliver and Associates. me.. in
association with Robert W. Burchel1. Ph.D.. as uodated annuallv and in accordance
with the indexini!' methodolol:!v soecified in the current and adootcd road imoact fee
stud v,
SECTION FOUR. Article lIl, Special Requirr!mentsforSpeciflc Types of Impact Fees, Section
74-303, Special requirements for Water and/or sewer impact fee. subsection (8) of the Collier
County Code of Laws and Ordinances is hereby amended to read as follows:
Sectlo. 74-303.
Special requirements for Water aDd/or sewer impact fee.
**.
(g) Annual mid-cycle water and sewer impact fee rate indexing. Beginning
January 1, 2005, the county shall conunence a three-year water and sewer (wastewater)
impact fee update cycle pursuant to subsections 74-201(b) and 74-502(a) of tbis article.
In each of l!le two mid-cycle years (between the formal three-year updates) eftEi
eegiIlfliag 8A af aSBot J1:UJB 1, :;IRSS, the county shall implement indexing adjustments to
each water and sewer impact fce amount by mtflti13I)'iKg the the" 61:1.MRt ',,'ster ana !Sa.ver
iruflaal fee Fates hj a ketleR, the Rtllfl.efSter af",'kieh GRall B8 the oerce:ntae:es of increase
set forth in the arlootcd "Collier County ImDact Fee Indexing Studv" oreoared by
Tindale-Oliver and Associates. Inc.. in association with Robert W. Burchell. Ph.D.. as
uodated annuallv and in accordance with the index stated in the board resolution (or
ordinance) that implement5 that indexing ami the aSnelfl.iBatar ef taB fi:a.e.til2ffi Bhall a.lse
!:Ie (kat iaaell fer ane ) ear 13Aef 1s the psFiad. speeifiea iR the numlKatBf. Hid e.yele.
i:Adexse im.pact ref! rate ekenge 116j1:l6tmentli ma.y Be ll4e'!!ted by B. bean! resel\ltian(5~ sr
BF6.ifl&nee(s). Water and \';Qets"vater ~ impact fees shall be increased by index.ing
only to the extent that increases resulting from indoxing exceed the assumed inflation rate
used to calculate the then applicable impact fees.
SECTION FIVE. Article llI, Special RequiremenlS fur Specific Types of Impact Fees, Section
74-304, Special requirements for Parks and recreation impact fee, subsection (g) of the Collier
County Code of Laws and Ordmances is hereby amended to read as follows:
~Ulltti.addn.l;i-"~lel(i~del~
I"I~ 6 of ZS
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24, 2009
Page 78 of 462
Section 74-304.
Special requirements for Parks and recreation impact ree.
...
(g) Annual mid-cycle parks and recreational/aci/ities impacrjee rale indexing.
Collier County Resolution No. 2002-304, adopted June 25, 2002, established a parks and
recreational facilities impact fee rate schodulo three-year update program. which
commenced on June 25. 2002, pursuant to subsections 74-201(b) and 74-502(0) of this
chapter, On aT abew.t Hay 15 afDuring each of the two mid~years between updates. the
county shall implement indexing adjustments to each park impact fee amoWlt~
Eie":eleJ!ll'ft88t ea6t eempeH6Rt af tall fee, .....wan is J g ~ere!mt Br the tetal eamm1iRity 13fti'll
res ana Sf!. en parssD! aCme teta:l FegisRsI fJarl( fee aRaU Bi! aelj\:lstea 9j' the 6AB.Age if! the
flal::ianal JiRgifleeriRg 1'J8'\'5 Reesm CenstrHst-ieR Cest sfihl1l suer the mast resBRt 12
FR8RtR flanoe fer "'Risk the seta 16 a 'silael!, 'Th.B IllfKI east eempSRsnt ef tae fee, ';,meh
is 62 p8Fe8Rt aftAe telal eam.9\l:l.Rity paNe fee and 93 persent efthe lebal rsgieRad paBt "B6.
shall h l:l.tijttated b86sa 8R tRe pereeatag.e ehange in the eS\:mty \I'/iae jl:lst {ana 'tt:!l:l.es eyer
the ffiBst FeSeRt 12 MaRik ~8ri8Ei.far Riea data is B:ailable from the Cellie:r Cel:l.Hty
Pr6f1SFty '~fn'a.i&81'. lue', iaeEi t-hat the tatal iS9nas8 is Uta land asmJlanant in ariy )~ar
shall H8l 8JU.~eea 13 }Hlf'BIlBt. Mia ll~'ele iOBil1lt'!el FMS e}umge adjkiBtm.eAtS shall Sf aasflt.ea
BY a fe8elutl8R aftHe heard pm:awmt t8 sttbseetisR 71 2Gl(b) afiliis eflB:I~ler. based unon
the oc:rcental!C:s of increase set forth in the adooted "Collier County Imoact Fee !ndexina
Studv" oreoared bv Tindale-Oliver and Assoclates, me.. in association with Robert W,
Burchell. Ph.D.. as uodated annually. and in accordance with the indexine: mclbodo102V
snecified in the current llnd adooted Darks and recrea.tion imnact fee study.
SECTION SIX. Article Ill. Special Requirements for Specific Types of Impact Fees, Section
74-305, Special requirements for Library impacfjee. subsection (g) ofthc Collier County Code
of Laws and Ordinances is hereby amended to read as fonows:
Sect;on 74-305,
Special requlremenu: for Library impact fee.
...
(8) Annual mid~cyc[e library impact fee rate indexing. Beginning on May 1,
2004 the county shall commence a three-year library system impact fee update cycle
pursuant to subsections 74-201(b) and 74-502(0) of Ibe Code. O. .r oIl.Hl Mal'l of
Durine each of the two mid-years between updates, the county shall implement
adjustments t8 Bliilaieg Besta bases I:tpSR the BuilElmg aeat iaaen J3rs. icled by tM
l!agiReeRag }Ie"/E; :R Beara aRa . eightlla. 8G t;9 perella! sf the iRaon, plUG tfte lihF'll=)' items
aest!!, s8sea eH the CeR!lIlFtler PASS Index far the Miami 171. LakiaeFElale ana j3fB'/iElea by
the Btife.a1:l. sf l.aber S~ti5tis&. "eiglitea w; 27 pereeJtt Elf thIJ imten, plus the teR year
keRB fer ffiaflEet ,al\les sf e61:1ftt)~. iae land (iael1:l.eling !:ll;lUdiflga a.ml SHl:let\:l!es) pl:tblioollld
Bj tall Cellier CetlRt)' Pr91!eFty f4'praise.F1s gfflee, v eigt.teel as 13 pereant sf the inde)t,
Mid 6)'81e issenea fate 6BBflgll adjustlTieRta ..ill Be aasJ:1tea B) a J'es81\:l~e8 eft.ae l;e&fS
J3l:lF5\liH'lt te sl:lBGcebeR 71291(13) efthis eRElJ;'Iter. based uoon the oercentaees of increase
~lntisaddoll;ill'1l1hlh; W.lexliJdcle~
patt7or2S
Agenda Item NO.1 OA
February 24, 2009
Page 79 of 462
set forth in the adooted "Collier County Imoact Fee Indexim! Studv" crenated bv
Tindale.Oliver and Associates. Inc. in association with Robert W. Burchetl Ph.D. as
undated annually. and in accordance with the indexim!: methodology soecified in the
current and adonted library ironaer fee study.
SECTION SEVEN, Article III, Special Requirements for Specific Type.s of Impact Fees,
Section 74.306, Special requirements for Emergency medica! se",ices impact fee, subsection (g)
of the Collier County Code of Laws and Ordinances IS hereby amended to read as follows:
Section 74-306,
Special requirements for Emergency medical services impact fee.
...
(g) Annual Mid-Cycle Emergency Medical Services Impact Fee Rate 11ldexing.
Begirming on February 28, 2006 the county shan commence a three-year emergency
medical services impact fee update cycle pursuant to subsections 74-201(b) and 74-
502(.) of the Code. In ellCh of the two mid-cycle years (hetween the formal three-year
updates) eegiflning aH at abswt } pAll, 2gQ7, the county shall implement adjustments to
the emergency medical services impact fee rates thrSligh adj\iBbR8Fl.t3 t8 lanB, eailliiRg,
artl lJil:WipMBJl.t Beats baaed en j1:lBt prep8ft)' lah:lBS puldi6kaEl BY tht.' Celli8f Ceunt)'
Pf'apeft:,. .\ppr-aiser's Offiee, 'auilaiRg esst iaa!il I'u'91ished 'B'i lAe BAgiaeeARg News
ReesHi, anti the CSflSlilRer Pris" LHdsl' I'lil:dishBG by the U.S. Dep.artmsHt sf 1&SSF,
BlHS8\i afl.ahar S\atisties Q6 slleeisea. m the ifFt~B.st fee ~a.8te stud.). Hil:l syels iRBl!llefl
rate skange aaj1:lskReats shall Be adaptea. B) B. rssshatioA. af the beard JH:lFS\;Iant te
!ll:lBseetisR ;' ~ 291.'8. sf tRia sflllptsr. based UOO" the oercentalles of increase set forth in
the adonted "Collier County Imoact Fee Indexini! Studv" creDared bv Tindale-Oliver and
Associates. Inc.. in association with Robert W, Burchell. Ph,D.. as uodated annually. and
in accordance with the indexiol! methodololN soecified in the current and adooted
emeri!encv medical services imoBct fee studv,
SECTION EIGH1, Arncle Ill, lipecial Requlremenrs for Specific Types of Impact Fees,
Section 74-307, Special requirements for Educational faCilities impact fee, subsection (g) of the
Collier County Code of Laws and Ordinances is hereby amended to read as follows:
Section 74-307.
Special requirements for Educational facflities impact fee.
...
(g) AI111ual mid. cycle educational facilities impact fee rate indexing, Beginning
on May 9, 2006, the county shall commence a three-year educational facilities impact fee
update cycle pursuant to suhsections 74-201 (b) and 74-502(.) of this chapter. O..r ....1
May 1 sf .IlYr:i.ng each of the two mid-years between updates, the county shall implement
adjustments te bbli1ding aeeta essea Iofl'oa the euildiog eaat iaehiJi f1f6"ieea BY tr.e
~AgineeFiFlg }~e' B P..eeerd BAd "'eigHoB. ~ 79 l'eFeent Betke iRe.en, phiS 'He SliuipRteflt
ami ., ehiele eBata, 'easetl 80 the CSfl:ill:ifRef PRss .l:ndelI fer the Miami Fe b.llU.seraale aFea.
llnderlin/'/l",..tis.dded:rv JIll &41~xlildel~
P.ie6orIS
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24, 2009
Page 80 of 462
}3ra"i~el:l by the BaF68'1i ef wer EtM!!iBBS, \\'8igfiUB as RiBs J!eFeBat sf ~e iAsen, plus
me teR ) ear kisteFie&l a-SReJ in tet~ just "a!yet fer all eSl:mly::ir:fe pF8J'18FtJ' (iaeh.uhag
aHilalRgs ana &a=ustwrse) pUBlisk.Ba BY tha Callier CS\:Hl.t) PfSpeFtr }.flflfllisBf'5 Offiee,
v eightea a:5 12 flSFeeRt eftfto iRee]" Mia El)l:lle iattl!lllea rate t!JHange adjtistftt8816 skall be
a9a~teEl by a resshuisB sf the heBfti rHiFSl:laRt 1B IlHl:!aeetisFI 74 2Ql(9) ef !:his sBap:teF.
based uoon the oercentaQ"es of increase set forth in the adoDted tfColtier County Imoact
Fe~ Indexine: Study" orc:oared bv Tindale-Oliver and Associates. Inc.. in association with
Robert W. Burchell. Ph.D.. as updated annually. and in accordance with the indexing
methodology specified in the current and adot':ltc:d educational facilities impact fee study,
SECTION NINE. Article m. Special Requirf!men~' for Specific Types of Impact Fees, Section
74-308, Special requirements for Correctional impact fee, subsection (g) of the Collier County
Code of Laws and Ordinances is hereby amended to read as fonows:
Section 74-30&.
Special requlremeats {or Correctional impact fee.
...
(8) Annual Mid-Cycle Correctional Impact Fee Rate Indexing, Beginning on
November I, 2005, thCl county shall commence a three-year Correctional Impa.ct Fee
update cycle pursuant to .ubsectioDJl74-20I(b) and 74-502(a) of the Code. In eacb oflhe
two mid-cycle yean; (between the formal thrce~year updates) 'eegilmiag an el' aheut Mar
~ the county &hall implement adjustments to the correctional impact fee rates
based upon the building cost index. pra'. iE!eEl BY the EngmeeRa& tra',VG ReeaTE!. tiia 6yele
ifldeJ:eEl fll.te el'umge aelj1cl.9tmIl.n'.s 'viII be lHi~te8 hy a leaelutien sf tke BBQl'..Q fHH'!illoot tEl
G\li8saetisn 71 ::lid} fa) eftms 1ii11&f3'ter. percentane set forth in the adODted IlCollier County
Imo8ct Fee Indexinl! Studv'! Drenared bv Tindale~Oliver and Associates. Inc.. in
association with Robert W, Burchell. Ph.D.. as undated annually. and in accordance with
the indexinll methodolo~ suecified in the current and adonted correctional i1l\P8ct fee
study.
SECTION TEN. Article ill, Special Requirements for Specific Types of Impact Fees, Section
74.309, Special requirements for Fire impact fee, subsection (g) of the Collier County Code of
Laws and Ordinances is hereby amended to read As follows;
Seetion 74-309.
Special requirements for Fire lmpact fee.
...
(g) Annual Mid~Cycle Fire Impact Fee Rate Indexing. Beginning on February
28. 2006. the county shall commence a t:hree~year fire impact fee update cycle pursuant to
subsections 74-201(h) and 74-502(a) of the Code, In each of the two mid-cycle years
(between the fonnal three-year \.lpdates) beginnialS eFl aT eeQt Ha~' 13 I 2097, the county
shall implement adjustments to the fire impact fee rates 1Me1:Jgh aaja&tmtmUi ts
8E[tlil"RHIPlt S8StS Baeas eft. the CeRB~Rl.er Pr:iee In~BX pooli9hea BY tall u.s. Depar1mefl.t ef
~ lnl i..daK; I:loI.I.. lh"",,,.~ lext i~ d~lc.wl
Pace 9 or 2~
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24, 2009
Page 81 of 462
Leeer, Btlf6a:e ef LPri:ler Slatist:.es as speeilled :.8 \he ifflpaet fee apliate Btklllj. Mist eye-Ie
iRB.6J1Sa rate eh:al.ge aajY5tmeats skall Be aeB~tea 13)' a resel"1:l~ieR artful l;ellf'd lHtFEil:l6Rt t9
sl:IBseetieB 7A 291 b. ar this ehapter. based UDon the percentages of increase set forth in
the adopted "Collier County Imnact Fee lndcxine. Study" Dreoared bv Tindale-Oliver and
Associates. Inc.. in association with Robert W. Burchell. Ph.D.. as uudated llMuallv. and
in accordance with the indexiDlZ mc:thodoloev soecificd in the current and adoDted fire
imoact fee study,
SECTION ELEVEN. Article lI!, Special Requirements for Specific Types of Impact Fees,
Section 74~310, Special requirements for General government building impact fee, subsection
(g) of the Collier County Code of Laws and Ordinances is hereby amended to read as follows:
Section 74.310.
Special requirements (or General government building impact fee.
...
(g) Annual mid-cycle general government building impact fee rate indexing.
Begirming February 10, 2004, the county shall commence a threcMyear general
government building impact fee update cycle pursuant to subsections 74-201(b) and 74-
502(a) of thi, chapter, o. or '~'"l }l., ,mlr.r 1 of Durin. eac~ of the two mid-years
between updates, !.he county shall implement adjustments \8 laRd and InEildiFlg easES
bases aft jl::lst ~F~eFt=) . a-ltll:lB IHihIis.hee ill' the Callier Caue~' PrSflBFt;..' A1!l"raiBsr's
omes 81I.l'J huildiRg Bast iR~ell J1$lished il~ IRe BngmililRng ~llJn,s Reaerd. Hili ilyelil
IHge1.eri rate 8kangll 8fljltBtffleRt& sHaH be alieptetl by a resallJtieR ef~e eeard pU:fS1:laRt 18
s~h!ieetj6R 71 2g 1 (8) sf tRia shapter, based unon the oercentaees of increase set forth in
the adoDted "Collier County lmoact Fee Indexine. Stud v" orooarcd bv Tindale.Oliver and
Associates. IDC.. in association with Robert W. Burchell. Ph.D.. as undated annually. and
in accordance with tbe indexini:/: methodoloi!'v snecified in the current and adootc:d
generalllovemment buildinll irnoact fee study.
SECTION TWELVE. Article III. Special Requirements for Specific Types of Impact Fees,
Section 74~311, Specjai requirements for Law enforcement impact fee, subsection (g) of the
Collier County Code of Laws and Ordinances is hereby amended to read as follows:
SectioD 74-311.
Special requirements for Law eBforcement impact fee.
...
(g) Annual mid-cycle law enforcement impacrfee rate indexing. Beginning June
14, 2005, the county shall commence a three-year law enforcement impact fee update
cycle pllr5uant to ,ub,eetions 74-201 (b) and 74-502(.) of this article, In each of the two
mid-cycle years (between the format three~year updates) heginning 6l'1 at &bailt .\.\:l~st I..
~ tbe county shall implement adjustments tEl land, l11:HlaiBg, and 8<p:li}'3ffiI!lRt eor;ts
sasee eA jast prs~eFty alae!! f'ltt61isAed B) the Callier Cew.l) PrapMty .\:PJlTai68r'e
Onlse, 91:lihliag east laaen pHsJiaRI!l6 h~' ilia Eagi'Reefing }le\i'6 ReeaTe, aRa the
~ ~XI i~Jd"~"; rlPlul ~ AI' Il:x{udc::lctDd
PlgclOQf:zS
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24, 2009
Page 82 of 462
CSFlGl:i.fR!lF Prise Ineex j3liS1ishea \;~. Uu V.S. DopaPlmeat sf LaBar, Bu.reaH sf laser
S'tatiatisa Hid eyele iRaaned fate Garmgs aEljustmsRts saall ~e adapted oy II reselatisH of
tae Beare "l'l:l.f9t!ant 1a saBseeti88 71 2{H(a) sethi!! ahapter. based UDon the oercentae:cs of
increase set forth in the adooted "Collier County Impact Fee Indcxinp: Studv" oreoaJ"cd bv
Tindale-Oliver and Associates. Inc._ in association with Robert W. Burchell. Ph.D.. as
uodated annllaJlv. and in accordance with' the indcxinl! methodolol!V soecified in the
current and adoDted law enforcement imDact fee study.
SECTION TIlIRTEEN, CONFLICT AND SEVERABILITY,
In the event this Ordinance conflicts with any other Ordinance of Collier County Dr other
applicable law. the more restrictive shall apply. If any phrase or portion of this Ordinance is held
invalid or unconstitutional by any court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a
separate, distinct, and independent provision and such holding shall not affect the validity of the
remaining portions.
SECTION FOURTEEN. INCLUSION IN THE CODE OF LAWS AND ORDINANCES.
The provisions of this Ordinance shall be made a part of the Code of Laws and
Ordinanoes of Collier County, Florida, The sections of the Ordinance may be renumbered or re-
lettered and internal cross~rcferences amonded throughout to accomplish such, and the word
"ordinance" may be changed to "section," "article," or any other appropriate word.
SECTION FIFTEEN. EFFECTIVE DATE.
This Ordinance shall become effective on lanuary I, 2008.
PASSED AND DULY ADOPTED by the Board of County Cummissioner. of Collier
County, Florida this ~b"" day of J IAn (. ,2007.
ATTEST
Dwight E. liroe~ Cfetk
. ,:"
BOARD Of COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA
eputy Clerk
By: #~ (tU
J~S COLETTA, Chairman
~texli.lldd~;J;\f\lII.lh'I~gj,lcllt;~oclolcil
This ordincnce tiled with the
S~retory of State's Office tho
..l....dcycf~, ~~
Qnd ocknowledgome"t of ~Qt
filin:1irec&ived this ~ day
01'0 ~
1 ;'. , ~p<ct~\
-..,0.....
PagclJof25
APPENDIX A
SCHEDULE ONE: ROiUllMPACT FEE RATE SCHEDULE
Rcsidenthl1
Smgl, Family Detached House
Less than 1,500 sq, ft,
(Annual Housc:hold Income S; Poverty Level)
Less than 1,500 sq. ft.
(AlllluaJ Household Income S; 50"1a of Collier
Counly Median Annual HousI:hold Income)
Less than 1,500 sq. ft.
t ,500 to 2,499 sq, ft,
2,500 sq. ft. or larger
Multl.Family (1-2 Stories)
Multi-Family (3-9 Stories)
Multi-Family (Above 10 Stories
Assisted Living Facility (ALF)
Condominiumff ownhouse
Mobile Home
Retirement Community
High-Rise Condominium
Lodging
Hoto]
Motel
Resort Hotel
RV Park
Recreation
Golf Cou""
Moyie Theaters
Marina
Institutioolll
Hospital
Nursing Home
Church
Elementary School
Middle School
High School
Jr.ICslRJiumity Callege
Un.i"srsity
University/Jr. Collcl?:c <7.501 Students
University/Jr. COnCRe >7.500 Students
Day Care
EfFECTIVE JANUARY 1. 2008
Rate
$2,oJ7,99$3.420.19/dwclling unit
f),:S:.90$4.872,83/dwelling unit
~o,Jj9.09$8.247.621dwelling unit
$8,881.00$11.522.55/dwcllmg unit
~9,8g1.90$12.819.55IdweIling unit
$0,210.00$8,054 37 dwelling unit
~0,JJi.OO$8.220,39/ dwelling unit
1),830,00$4,954.54/ dwelling unit
~$I,032 41/ dwelling unit
$6,059.00$7858.52/ dwelling unit
~1,1J1.00S5.36l.B0/ dwelling unit
$2,216.90$2 913.06/ dwelling unit
$1,2n90$5,488.90/dwelling unit
U,9E7.00$7.76S, 14 ocr room
$3,828.00$4,964.92 per room
$5,256,00$6,817,03 per room
$3,300.00$4.280.10 site
~801,1M.00$I,043,392,40/ 18 Holes
$12.389.00$54.978.53 per screen
13,S80,00$4,643.26/ boat berth
$11,198.00$18.414,81/1,000 sq. ft,
$1,110.00$1.486,36 per bed
~8,022.oo$JO.404.53/I,OOD sq, ll,
~$1.111.53 per student
$1,188.00$ 1.540,84 per student
$],312.00$1.740,57 per student
$1,302,00 Per gta~ont
~2,710.00 PO[ gl1l~.nt
$2,926.03 per studenl
$2,153.02 per student
~$1.232.15 per student
~lCllliJaddt:(I;rinli'\}-lI"u::di,lfelClcd
hl~\2\lf'.!.S
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24, 2009
Page 83 of 462
Agenda Item No. lOA
February 24, 2009
Page 84 of 462
Office
Office 50,000Sq Ft or less
Office 50,001-1 OO,OooSq FI or less
Officc 1 00,OOI-200,OOOSq Fl orless
Office 200,001-400,000Sq Ft or less
Office Greater than 400,000Sq Ft
Medical Office
U;,47R QQ$20,074.97/1 ,000 sq, ft.
$13,122.09$17,019,23/1,000 sq. ft,
tll,113,99$14 413.56/1,000 sq. ft.
$9,111.99$12,206,0711,000 sq, ft.
$&,;)3,99$11 054.3311,000 sq. ft,
n".89,00$47 585.63/1,000 sq. ft,
Retail
Specialty Retail
Retail 50,000Sq Ft. or less
Retail50,OOI-IOo,oOOSq Fl
RetailI00,001-150,000Sq Fl
Retail I 50,001-200,000Sq Ft
RelaiI200,OOI-400,OOOSq Ft
RetaiI400,001-600,000Sq Fl
Retail 600,001- I ,000,000Sq Ft
Retail greater than I,OOO,OOOSq Ft
Pharmacy/Drug Store wlDrive.. Thru
Home Improvement Superstore
Restaurant: High Turnover
Restaurant: Low Turnover
Restaurant: Drive.in
Ga.soline/Service Station
Supermarket
Quick Lube
Convenience Store
Convenience Store w/Gas Pumps
UI,n7.oo$28.517.14/1,000 sq, ft.
$13,953.00$18.097,04/1,000 sq. ft.
tI3,198,99$17117,81/1,000sq. ft,
$12,;11 Q&$16,486,17/1.000 sq. ft,
$12,033.00$16385,00/1,000 sq. ft,
$11 ,710.QQ $1 5,195.6511,000 Sq. Ft.
$12,713.9&$16.487.46/1.000 sq, ft.
$13,;;~.00$17.608,07ll,OOO sq, ft.
$1~,;83,9&$21.508.1511,000 sq, ft,
$I3,3&8.09 $17.260.4811,000 sq. fl.
$13,21~,OO $17,141.15/1,000 sq. ft.
$;5,73;,9&$72,288301,000 sq. ft.
$11.864,9&$58.188.61/1,000 sq, ft.
$131,915.09$171.093,76/1,000 sq. ft.
$7,519.9&$9.791.05 per fuel positiop
$16,711.09$21713.08/1,000 sq. ft,
$13,110.00$17.491,34 per bay
$19,913,99$116,656.0711,000 sq. ft.
$J7,;75.0g$48.734,78 oer fuel positioo
Services
Tire Store
NewtUsed Auto Sales
Luxury Auto Sales
Bank/Savings: Walk~in
Bank/Savings: Drive-in
Car Wash
$19,958.9&$13,045,23 pcr bay
$25,93;,00$33,637,7011,000 sq, ft.
t13,8j ;.90S17 920.6511,000 sq. ft.
$12,;09,QO$55.381.90I1,OOO sq. ft,
[13,.90.99$108.545.93/1,000 sq. fl.
t33,996.9&$43.976.08 per bay
Industrial and AgrJcultunl
General Industrial
Business Park (Flex-space)
Mini-Warehouse
$7,973,Q9$9,1 76,28/1,000 sq, ft,
$U,99~,Q9$16,855.8JI1,000 sq. ft.
$I,J6S.09S1,770 41/1,000 sq, ft.
~tsKfisllddod;rllolll~!b.ttexf!.6cl~
I'JI~\3or25
Agenda Item NO.1 OA
February 24,2009
Page 85 of 462
APPENDIX A
SCHEDULE TWO: WATER AND SEWER SYSTEM IMPAIT FEE RATE SCHEDULE
EFFECTIVE JANUARY 1. 2008
INDIVIDUALLY METERED SERVICE
LIVING SPACE (SQ.FT,) ERC METER WATER SEWER
VALUE SIZE IMPACT FEES IMPACT FEES
o TO 4,999 ~ ~
(AND NO MORE THAN 4 1 3/4" $3,616.49 $3,722.39
-. BATHROOMS)
5,000 OR MORE ADFI ~
(OR MORE THAN 4 350 ERC VALUE x $3,722,39
BATHROOMS) (min
value of PER ~ ERC VALUE x
1.0) EOR $3 616.49
{rounded (minimum 11",108 ~
Non-Residential to the ~ $3,722,39
nearest (minimum vatue
lenth) ~ <3 722.39'
MASTER METERED SERVICE
LIVING SPACE (SQ. FT.) ERC FREQUENCY WATER SEWER
VALUE OF FEE IMPACT FEES IMPACT FEES
Residential Unit ~ 0 TO 750 0,33 Per Unit ~1,12..90 .1,lGO,90
$1,191,38 $1,226.44
Residential Unit - 751 TO 1,500 0.67 Per Unit $2,200 gO $V...gg
$2,425,11 $2.493.95
---- _._---"
Residential Unit. 1,501 TO 1 Per Unit $3,41000 $3,.1..g9
4,999 $3,616.49 $3,722.39
Resider'ltiel Unit - 5,000 OR ADFI ~
MORE (OR MORE THAN 4 350 ERC VALUE X $3,722.39
SA THROOMS) {mil'.
...slut) of I ~
1.0) $3,616.49 ERC VALUE x
(rounded (minimum value ~
Non.Residential 10 the $3,44l; $3 616.49) $3,722,39
nearesl (minimum value
tenth) ~ <3 722.39\
ACRONYM KEY,
ADF - Average Daily FlowlI for propo.ed un 81 provided by EOR
EOR ~ Englne.r of Record for projDct
ERe - ECjulvlilllent ResIdential Conn&ction (1 ERe = 350 gallons per day)
~1el'lis.~ll~d;Sl~!l:xli.ideleled
I'lse\4ur15
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24, 2009
Page 86 of 462
APPENDIX A
SCHEDULE THREE: PARKS AND RECREATIONAL FACILITIES IMPACT FEE
RATE SCHEDULE
EFFECTIVE JANUARY 1. 1008
COMMUNITY PARKS (Calculated on Livinll Are.):
LAND USE:
RATE
PER
SINGLE-FAMILY DETACHED:
Less than 1,500 sq. ft.
1,500 to 2,499 sq. j\,
2,500 sq. fl. or more
~ $1.075.25
$1,027,90 $1181.05
$1.l19,OO$1.286.85
~ $862.50
Dwelling Unit
Dwelling Unit
Dwelling Unit
MULTI-FAMILY
Dwelling Unit
MOBILE HOMEIRV PARK
JW;!4,OO$1.062.60
Pad
HOTELIMOTEL
~$578.45
Room
REGIONAL PARKS (Calculated on LlvlnE Area):
LAND USE:
RATE
PER
SINGLE-FAMILY DETACHED:
Less than 1,500 sq. ft.
1,500 to 2,499 sq. ft.
2,500 sq. fl.. or more
$2,008.00 $2.378.20 Dwelling Unit
S2,J,)2,9G $2,612 80 Dwelling Unit
S2,1,)',00 $2.847.40 Dwelling Unit
MULTI-FAMILV
tl,0l9,QO $1.907.85 Dwelling Unit
MOBILE HOMEIRV PARK
$1,OI;,OG$2.351.75 Pad
HOTEL/MOTEL
$1,113,00 $1.279,95 Room
Note: Community Parks Impact Fees do Dot apply lo the City of Naples, City of Marco Island
and Everglades City.
l..1n.lImUJwjWlllllad4cd;r.."..Il!trwthLllll.(lIdllllllod
hge15 of2S
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24, 2009
Page 87 of 462
APPENDIX A
SCHEDULE FOUR: CORRECTIONAL FACILITIES IMPACT FEE RATE
SCHEDULE
EFFECTIVE JANUARY 1. Z008
Land Use
Correctional Facilities Impact Fee Pcr Square Foot
Single-Family Detached
$0.1 Q.76t.lll per 'quare foot'
Other ResidcntiallNursing Home
~~er square foot'"
Non-Residential:
Lodging
Hotel! Motel
~SO.346 per square foot
Medical
Hospital
~iQ..>fl per square foot
Commercial
Office
~$O.240 per square foot
Retai VCommerciallRecreation
~$O,6 \ 1 per 'quare foot
RestaurantJBar ILoWlge
~$O,611 per square foot
Industrial IManufacturing
~~ per .quare fool
Leisure/Outdoor
~ per square foot
. l'oe Correctional f'aciliues Impact Fee is cappc;d based upon the ftt applicable to a 4,000 square foot: (living area)
Single-Fllmily Detached dwelling uort.
... TIle Correctional fl!;ilitics Impact Fee is GiLpped based upon the fee applicable Lo ill 4.000 square foot (living:
area) Other Residential dwelling unit. The cap doei not apply to the aqunc footage ofNur;ing Homes.
~lUli5Il1dm;l:~ 11:.~NlllV 19.1 rs dcltltd
".gtIOo(25
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24,2009
Page 88 of 462
APPENDIX A
SCHEDULE FIVE: FIRE IMP ACT FEE RATE SCHEDULE
E}tFF.CTrvE JANUARY 1.2008
Ocbopee Fire Control and Rescue District
Residential:
~ 1Q1iper square fOOI~
(M,mi..."", foe afU,96Q)*
Non-Residential:
~~.qlUU'efoot
Isle. of Capri Fire CODtrol aDd Rescue District
Residential:
$G,#~er .quare foot~
(MB:Jf.im\:lnt fee efSt,~49)"'*
Non-ResidenrjaJ:
$-hQ8 ~ per square foot
... The Ochopee Fire Control and Rescue District Impact Fee is capped based upon the fee
applicable to a 4,000 sqllafC foot dwelling unit
*'II The Isles of Capri Fire Cootroland Rescue District Impact Fcc is capped based upon the fee
applicable to a 4,000 square foot dwelling unit
~1~:o:tl'Added;il"1r"'r,~.IlI"llltlcletcd
hgtl70rzs
APPENDIX A
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24, 2009
Page 89 of 462
SCHEDULE SIX, EDUCATIONAL FACILITIES IMPACT FEE RAn; SCHEDULE
Housing Type
Single-Family
Less than 1,500 square feet
1,500 - 2,499 square feet
2,500 square feet or larger
Multi-Family
Mobile Home
EFFECTIVE JANUARY 1. 2008
Impact Fee Rate {per dwelling unit}
t8,228.00
$9,206.00
$10,017.00
;2,86200
tS,711.S{}
$9.026, \2
llQ,098.98
$10,988.65
$3,139.61
$6.279.23
~texli5I<1decl;!;LI]lIrlu.hll:~ti~dll\~led
f'ageISof2:S
APPENDIX A
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24, 2009
Page 90 of 462
SCHEDULE SEVEN: EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICES IMPACT FEE RATE
SCHEDULE
EFFECTI~ JANlJARY 1.1008
Impact Fee Land Use Category
Residential:
Less than 1,500 square feet
1,500 to 2,499 square fect
2,500 square feet or more
Transient, Assisted, Group:
Hotell Motel
Nursing home
Rel;reational:
Marina
Golf Course
Movie TheatCT with Matinee
lostitutions:
Hospital
Elementary School
Middle School
High School
Junior/Community College
University/College
Church
Day Care Center
O(fice and Financial:
Office 50,000 sq. ft, or less
Office 50,001 - 100,000 sq. ft.
Office 100,00\ - 200,000 sq, ft,
Office 200,001 - 400,000 sq. fl.
Office greater than 400,000 sq. ft.
Medical Office
Retall (Gross Square Feet)
Specialty Retail
Retail 501000 sq. ft. or less
RelaiI50,00\ -100,000 "I' ft,
Retail 100,001 - ] 50,000 sq. ft.
Retail 150,00 1 - 200,000 sq. ft,
Retail 200,001 - 400,000 sq, ft,
Retail 400,001 - 600,000 sq. ft,
Retail 600,001 - 1,000,000 sq. ft,
Rctail over 1,000,000 sq. f\,
Pham1acy/Drug Store w/Drive-Thru
Home Improvement Superstore
Quality Restaurant
High-Turnover Restaurant
Fast Food Rest. w/Drive-tluu
Gas/Service Station
Quick Lube
Supermarket
Convenience Store
Convenience Storo w/Gas
Impact Fee Rate
~ ll!b.42 per dwelling unit
~ ~ per dwelling unit
~ UlZJl per dwelling unit
~ ~ per room
~ ~perbed
~ ~erbertb
t1,73QS7 $5,289,22 per 18 holes
~ $786.30 per screen
W4,94
$4.9+
=
~
~
WMiJ.
$4M4+
~
~
~
$W,%
~
~
U4h4&
li2QM per LOOO sq. ft.
$5,49 per student
$6,39 per student
$7.31 per student
$5.49 per student
lllJ.6. per student
~ per 1,000 sq. It,
$5.49 per student
illW per 1,000 sq. ft.
$117.95 per ],000 'q, ft,
~pcr1,OOOsq.ft,
$85,94 per \,000 sq, ft.
$73,14 pcr 1,000 sq. ft.
illil1 per LOOO sq, ft,
~ $137.15 per 1,000 sq. ft.
~ ~per 1,000 sq. fl.
~ $240.46 per 1,000 sq. fI
~ ~ pcr 1.000 sq. ft,
~ $260.57 per 1,000 sq, ft
~ S228.58 per 1,000 sq, ft.
~ $233.J5per 1,000sq, ft,
~ mill per 1,000 sq. ft.
~ $191.09 per 1,000 sq. fl.
~ $171.89 per 1,000 sq. fl,
~ li!iWper],OOOsq.ft.
~ ~ per 1,000 sq. ft.
~ ~per ],000 sq. ft,
~ $800.D2 per 1,000 sq. ft.
~ $t81.03 per fuel position
~ $106.05 pc:r service bay
~ $185.60perl,OOOsq.f1,
~ $JB7.67perl,ODOsq,ft.
~ ~ per fuel position
~teJI.liIMlded;r'T][hlli~ptclltia:delelcd
hse19ofZ3
Auto Repair
Tire Store
New and Used Car Sales
Self Service Car Wash
BankfSavings Walk-in
Bank/Savings Drive-in
Industrial:
General Industrial
Business Park
Mtni~warehouse
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24,2009
Page 91 of 462
~ ~perl,OOOsq,ft
~ $142.63 per service bay
~ ~ per 1.000 sq. ft.
~ ll71J.!l per service bay
~ $234.97 per 1,000 sq. ft.
~ $189.26 per I,OOOsq, ft.
~ ~perl,OOOsq,ft.
W..:I3 12UJ. per 1,000 sq. ft.
~ $6.39 per 1,000 sq, ft.
~lc:ll.llladded;ip'.ll1t ,~Wl:I;sd~leled
f'~ge 20 Dns
APPENDIX A
SCHEDULE EIGHT: LIBRARY IMPACT FEE RATE SCHEDULE
EFFECTIVE JANUARY 1. 2008
Land Use Ca.tegory
Impact Fee Rate
Single-Family Detacbed:
Less than 1,500 square feet
~ $503.49 Der dwelling unit
1,500 \0 2,499 square feet
~ $553.84 'Oer dwelling unit
2,500 square feet or more
~ $600.16 per dwelling uni,
Multi-Fantlly
~ $402.79 Dcr dwelling uni,
Mobiie Home
~ $497.44 per dwelling unit
~!el(lilldded;':t..~'Lll;.tlLcK\irdeletcd
P~ge21 Df":!:5
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24, 2009
Page 92 of 462
APPENDIX A
SCHEDULE NINE;
GENERAL GOVERNMENT BUILDING IMPACT FEE SCHEDULE
EFFECTIVE JANUARY 1. 1008
LIIDd Use
Resideotial:
Single Family:
Less than 1.500 sq ft
1,500102,499 sq ft
2,500 sq ft or more
Rate
~ $796.05
~ $886.09
~ $967.34
W<l.OO $450.18
~ $640.13
Multi Family
Mobile Home
Transieot, Assisted, Group
HotelfMotel
Nursing HomelALF
m+,OO
$41-4,00
Recreational
Marina
Golf Course
Movie Theater with Matinee
t&9,OO
i8,391.99
~3,712,99
InstttutloDS
Hospital
Elementary School
Middle School
High School
Junior/Community College
University/College
Church
Day Care Center
~
~
~
~
~
WhOO
~
~
Orlice and Financial
Office 50.000 sq. fl.. or less
Office 50,001-100,000 sq, ft, or less
Office 100,001-200,000 sq, ft, or less
Office 200,001-400,000 sq, ft. or less
Office Greater than 400,000 sq. ft.
Medical Office
m.;.,oo
i#7.OO
ws.oo
~
~
~
RetaU
Spl:cialty Retail
Ret.lI 50,000 sq ft or less
Retail 50,001-100,000 sq. ft.
RelaiJI00,001.150,000 sq. ft.
Retail 150,001-200,000 sq. ft.
Ret.il 200,001-400,000 sq. ft,
Retai1400,001-600,000 sq, ft.
~
,1,209.QO
~ I, I );,09
iI,OIO.OO
iI,2J9.Q9
n ,Q79.Q9
iI,t91.QQ
~te"li$l(kfgd;iIl'Jg'I\o,IOl~8~1.l::~tlJdcleted
1'''6C22af1.5
$341.48/Room
$454.57/Bed
lliAJ,/Berth
$9,21J.32/1 8 Holes
$4.075.78/Screen
$781.78/1,000 sq, ft.
~/Student
$32,94/Student
$38,43/Student
~StudeIlt
lliA2IStudent
ill!U1J1,000 sq, ft.
$28.55/Student
U2.L2li/l,OOO sq. 1\.
$611.59/1,000 sq, ft,
illillIl ,000 sq. 1\.
~/1,000 sq. 1\.
$378.81/1,000 sq, ft,
$820,21/1,000 sq. ii.
$710.4\11,000 sq. ft.
$1.360.42/1,000 sq. 1\.
$1.246.23/1,000 sq. ii.
$1.108,98/1,000 sq, 1\,
$1.350.54/1,000 sq, ft,
$1.184.74/1,000 sq. 1\,
$1.208.90/1,000 sq, ft.
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24, 2009
Page 93 of 462
Retail 600,001.1,000,000 sq. ft,
Retail greater than 1,000,000 sq. ft.
Pharmacy/Drug Store wlDrive- Thru
lIome Improvement Superstore
Qua]ity Restaurant
High Turnover Restaurant
Fast Food Rest. wIDrive. Thru
Gas/Service Stulion
Quick Lube
Supermarket
Convenience Store
Convenience Store w/Gas
Tire Store
NewfUseu Auto Sales
Self Service Car Wash
Bank!Savings: Watk.in
Bank/Savings: Drive-in
Industrial
General Industrial
Business Park
Mini~Ware:house
:il,101.00
~
~
~
~2,922,9g
~J,Q,G,OO
$3,777.00
w.>,OO
~
~
U,8JO.09
n,S78,QG
~
~
W6,OO
$1,109.00
~
~
~
~
$1.208.90/1,000 sq, 1\,
$990.40/] ,000 sq. ft,
$891.5811,000 sq, ii,
$843.26/1,000 sq, It
$3.208.36/1,000 sq, j\,
$3,359,88/1,000 sq, fl.
$4.147.1511,000 sq, fl.
w.12/fuel position
lll!lJQlbay
$961.85/1,000 sq. fl.
$2.0093411,000 sq. ft.
$2.062,04/fuel position
~lbay
$820.2111,000 sq. fl.
$895.97/bay
$1.217.68/1,000 sq, j\,
mul/t,OOO sq, 1\.
lliUQl1,OOO sq, 1\,
$474.34/1,000 sq. fl.
$32,94/1,000 sq, j\,
~l\:xll.lKIl1C'd;[IPIIIiIII1r~~ihlo.tilideleted
1'Igel:iof15
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24, 2009
Page 94 of 462
APPENDIX A
SCHEDULE TEN: LAW ENFORCEMENT IMPACT FEE RATE SCHEDULE
Land Use
Residential:
Single-Family:
Less than 1,500 square feol
1,500 to 2,499 square feet
2,500 square feet or more
Multi-Family
M:ohi Ie Home
Transient, Assisted, Group
Hotel/Motel
Nursing HomeJALF
Recreational
Marina
Golf Course
Movie Theater with Matinee
Institutions
Hospital
Elementary School
Middle School
High School
Jr.lCommuniry College
L'niversity/College
Church
Day Care Center
Office and FiDB.DC'ial
Office 50,000 sq, ft, or less
Office 50,001-100,000 sq. ft, or less
Office 100,001-200,000 sq, ft, or less
Office 200,001-400,000 sq. ft, or less
Office Greater than 400,000 sq. ft.
Medical Office
Retail
Specialty Retail
Retail 50,000 sq. ft. or less
RetalI50,OOI-100,000 sq. ft.
Retail 100,001-150,000 sq, n.
Retail 150,001-200.000 sq, ft.
Retail 200,001-400,000 sq. n,
EFt'KCTIVEJANt.:ARY 1. Z008
Rate
~
~
~
WJ-4l.
~
~
~
$309,75ldwelling unit
$344.54Idwelling unit
$375.87IdweUing unit
$186.20/dwelling unit
$257.54Idwelling lilli,
ml2/Room
$ I 67.05/Bed
~ lli2!/Berth
$l,J7UQ $3,661.22/18 Holes
~ IDWiScreen
~
$-l44.l
.$J.M4
~
$~
~
$St...19
:>8.00
~
WhU
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
$346.2911,000 sq, ft.
$15,66/Studenl
$19.14/S1OOent
$2U8/Student
$24.36/Studcnt
$55.68/Student
$88.741\,000 sq. ft,
$8,70/StuJent
$219.2611,000 sq. ft.
~1,000 sq. ft,
~!I,OOOsq, ft,
$135.7311,000 sq. ft,
illW/I ,000 sq. ft.
$274.94/1,000 sq. ft.
$34 \.0611,000 sq. ft.
~I,OOO sq. ft,
$518.5511,000 sq. ft.
~\,OOO sq, ft.
~1I,OOOsq. ft.
$457.6511,000 sq. ft.
~IUliliaddcd;IlIl'I\;lhl~",iUir;dl:lelCd
Pagc2.4or25
Agenda Item NO.1 OA
February 24, 2009
Page 95 of 462
Ret.iI400,OOl-6oo,000 sq, II,
Retail 600,001-1,000,000 sq. fl,
Retail greater than 1,000,000 sq. II,
Pharmac)'lDrug Sto~ wfDrive- Thru
Home Improvement Superstore
Quality Restaurant
High Turnover Restaurant
Fast Food Rest. w/Drive- Thru
Gas/Service Station
Quick Lube
Supennarket
Convenience Store
Convenience Store w/Gas
Tire Store
New/Used Auto Sales
Self Service Car Wash
Bank/Savings: Walk-in
Bank/Savings: Drive-in
IndulIitrial
General Industrial
Business Park
Mini-Warehouse
WH4 ~I,OOO sq, fl.
~ $471.57/1,000 sq. fl,
~ lliili/l,OOO sq. ft.
~ HQL21/1,000 sq. ft.
~ $455.9211,000 sq. ft.
Sl,J8J.Q1 $1 392. I 011,000 sq, ft,
(1,371,16 $1.49\.2911,000 sq. ft,
$1,77,.91 $1.928,0611,000 sq. ft,
~ $426,33/Fuel Position
~ $191.42/Bay
~ lli.i.Ql/I,OOO sq. ft.
i++4M $84048/1,000 sq, ft.
~~. ~22,e6 $\.2\ B.09/Fue1 Position
~ $283.64/B.y
~ $330.62/1,000 sq. ft.
~ $339.32/B.y
~ ~l,OOOsq.ft.
~ ~I,OOOsq,ft,
&99M
~
~
~l,OOO sq. ft,
ll2Q&i/1 ,000 sq. ft,
Uill/l,OOO sq, ft,
.I..1DdctliJl:,tulif.dde~n411l r &~lex[ltdl=leled
P~IC 25 of IS
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24,2009
Page 96 of 462
Agenda Item NO.1 OA
February 24, 2009
Page 97 of 462
STATE OF FLORIDA)
COUNTY OF COLLiERi
I, DWIGHT E, BROCK, Clerk of Courts in and for the
Twentieth Judicial Circuit, Collier County, Florida, do
hereby certify that the foregoing is a true and correct
copy of:
ORDINANCE 2007-57
Which was adopted by the Board of County Commissioners
on the 26th day of June, 2007, during Regular Session.
WITNESS my hand and the official seal of the Board of
County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, this 28th
day of June, 2007,
DWIGHT E, BROCK
Clerk of Courts and Clerk
Ex-officio to Boarci~.:;i'~- I", \
County CommissionerB . '.-:
" :~ ~ '," r.. _ . .
"''] ~~~\f~~(; ~(
\~ Teresa polas'lb,;:', I <
Deputy Clerk
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24, 2009
Page 98 of 462
RESOLUTION NO. 2008- 202
A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF
COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, AMENDING THE IMPACf FEE RATES
ESTABLISHED BY ORDINANCE NO. 2007-57.
WHEREAS, on Marcb \3, 200\, tbe Board of County Commissioners adopted
Ordinance No, 2001-13, the Collier County Consolidated Impact Fee Ordinance, repealing and
superceding all of the County's then existing impact fee regulations, and consolidating all of the
County's impact fee regulations into that one Ordinance, codified in Chapter 74 of the Collier
County Code of Law and Ordinances (tbe Code), and incorporating the water and sewer impact
ree rates established by the adoption of Ordinance No. 98-69; and
WHEREAS, on December 11, 2001, the Board of County Commissioners ("Board")
adopted Resolution No. 2001-488 thereby amending Schedule Two of Appendix A of Chapter 74
ofthe Code, as amended, the same being the Collier County Consolidated Impact Fee Ordinance;
increll8ing the Water and Sewer Impact Fee rates and directed staft"to update the Impact Fee after
one year; and
WHEREAS, in accordance with tbat direction, the County bas retained Public Resources
Management Group, Inc. ("the Consultant'') to review the existing water and sewer impact fees
and to recommend changes to those fees if appropriate; and
WHEREAS, on February 12, 2002, the Board adopted Resolution No, 2002-88 to cOlTect
Scrivener's elTors, and to correct the water impact ree downward by $50 per Equivalent
Residential Unit (ERe), and to amend Schedule Two of Appendix A of Chapter 74 of the Code,
as amended, the same being the Collier County Consolidated Impact Fee Ordinance; thereby
increasing the Water and Sewer Impact Fee rates; and
WHEREAS, on June 6, 2006, the Board adopted Ordinance No. 2006-26 amending
Ordinance No. 2001-13 changing the impact fee rate; and
WHEREAS, on June 26, 2007, the Board adopted Ordinance No, 2007-57 amending
Ordinance No, 2006-26 changing the impact fee rate and to include Annual Mid-Cycle water and
sewer impact fee rate indexing; and
WHEREAS, the County uses impact fees to supplement the funding of necessary capital
improvements required to provide public facilities to serve new population and related
development that is necessitated by growth in Collier County; and
WHEREAS, the Consultant has estimated the cost to future utility system users of
approximately five-hundred and three million ($503 million) in the next ten (to) yean; and
WHEREAS, the Consultant has recommended a water impact fee rate decrease from
$3,616.49 per ERC to $3,575 per ERC, a decrease of $41.49 and a sewer impact fee rate
decrease from $3,722,39 per ERe to $3,495 per ERe, . decrease of $277,39 for all customer
classes based on their ERe's equivalents; and
Agenda Item NO.1 OA
February 24, 2009
Page 99 of 462
WHEREAS, the above recommended rate decrease for water and rate decrease for sewer
establish these rates at the maximum levels allowed in accordance with equity tests established
and e"isting pursuant to Florida law; and
WHEREAS, staff has thoroughly reviewed the Consultant's findings and
recommendations and staff concurs with the recommended decrease to water and the
recommended decrease to sewer impact fee rate changes, and staff recommends that the Board
adopt this Resolution to implement these reconunended changes; and
WHEREAS, the Board finds that it is in the health, safety and welfare to accept the
recommendations of the Consultant and from staff,
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, that:
The Board of County Commissioners hereby declares, after advertised public hearing,
that the water and sewer impact fee rates set forth in the revised Schedule Two of Appendix A of
Ordinance No. 2007-57, as amended, the Collier County Consolidated Impact Fee Ordinance, the
same being Schedule Two of Appendi" A of Chapter 74 of the Collier County Code of Law and
Ordinances, attached hereto, and incorporated be reference herein as Exhibit "An are fair and
reasonable and are to be assessed to those who receive or will receive benefits from increased
water facilities capacity, increased sewer public facilities capacity, or from both, which increased
capacity is nccessitated by increased population and related growth driven development.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that these revised water and sewer impact fees will take)
effect as of8:00 A,M. on Wednesday, October I, 2008. /
... ..-
This Resolution is adopted after motion; second and majority vote favonng adoption this
:;) '-IT" day ~, , _ . ,2008.
ATTSS1':':' (~'t:':~
DWJGHT E, BRoCK, CLERK
, ..\.0)
.~ I . j ',,'
If) =. "0
,.
iiQ1l,turf' On 1
Approval as to form and legal Sufficiency:
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA
By: ./ Ai .
~oj~~~
(}(...
Jenni A. Belpedio
Assistant County Attorn
- f .
.:.
is.!
< H "
i i Ii 'm
"$1 ~
~1
" I
'OJ
.
~ Ii
~ I ; ,.
,~ I ; ~ ! ! ~ ~ "I
I - ! . . . . ~ i
t ( . A
- i i
. tlf
u I ~
h . ! ! I i ! I ! I
!
r 2 ~
.
- E~ '-- ;~ r- !I'
.
u ~
i I .. ~ ..
a H ! l ; "I I "/
~~ H ~ ~ . II ~ ~l
l . . m
u u
- i i
j ~ i !Ii ~ I I i 1111 ~ ~
::l i i
" ~w 2 II ~ !l
~~ i ~
~~ - I-- ~o iIi f-- -r-
II i~f H I If ..
ii- ol
II sl 1'-
~l - III ~I ~ . : !P i MI !P
~!
i! ~~ 1-
- - f-- ~
L I
~ D ~ , u ~ :1
a .
~ ~ ; ~ I ! ; ,.
t1 i!
- , - ,-- .l-
~~ ~ u ~~ . ~ . , ~~ ,
~~ ~~ , ~ ~~
~ I I I ! I .
~. h h .
- I - ~ -
~ if ~ H- ~
ti g g I
e "
. i ~ HI ~
u ~i I
i ~ : ~
I !I . i
f , I ~~1 I
! ,
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24, 2009
Page 100 of 462
i
t
~ i
Hd
H'i,
t:H5
Ill" II
~_ II
~~~!I
Hilj
luh
~
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24,2009
Page 101 of 462
Attachment C-2
Article VI. Water-Sewer District
Uniform Billing, Operating and
Regulatory Standards
ARTICLE VI. WATER-SEWER DISTRICT UNIFORM BILLING, OPERATING AW/j~mel.!'M1m W ~A
February 24, 2009
Page 102 of 462
ARTICLE VI. WATER.SEWER DISTRICT UNIFORM BILLING, OPERATING AND
REGULATORY STANDARDS"
"Editor's note: Ord, No. 01-73, SS 1,1--1.4, adopted Dee, 11, 2001, did not specifically amend this
Code but is treated as superseding S9134-171--134-174 in their entirety at the discretion of the editor.
Further, said ordinance 9S 2.1--7 provided additional regulations included as SS 134-175--134-180 at
the discretion of the editor to read as herein set oul. Section 11 of said ordinance states that the revised
rates shall not go into effect until April 1, 2002, See the Code Comparative Table--Ordinance
Disposition Table,
DIVISION 1. DISTRICT RATES FEES CHARGES AND REGULATIONS
Sec, 134-171. Definitions.
Unless specifically provided otherwise these definitions shall apply to this section.
District shall refer to the/Collier County Water-Sewer District.J
Equivalent dwelling unit shall mean the equivalent usage requirements of an average single-
family residential connection. It is used as a factor to convert a given average daily water or wastewater
requirement to the equivalent number of single-family residential connections.
Equivalent residential connection shall mean 350 gallons of water per day and is 250 gallons of
sewerage treatment per day.
Goodland shall mean the Goodland Service Area is classified as a subdistrict of the Collier
County Water-Sewer District as the service is dependent on a bulk purchase with a private entity and
therefore has a rate structure that is different from the major district rate structure,
Service availability charge shall mean a monthly charge per dwelling unit or equivalent dwelling
unit for residential and non-residential users with no usage included,
"Sewer only use" shall be defined as the connection of drains for all faucets and facilities on the
property where well water or potable water from a non-district water supply or where no water
(leachate) is used,
Sewer use shall be defined as the connection of drains for all faucets and facilities on the
property, where potable water is used in connection with sanitary purposes from the potable water
system. Such usages shall include, but not be limited to, sinks, showers, bathtubs, commodes, urinals,
bidets, dishwashers, washers, and other such facilities, "Sewer use" shall specifically not include runoff
water being allowed to enter the district sanitary sewer system.
Use shall mean with respect to "water use" on the district's water system, which is a potable
water system, shall mean the sole utilization of water from the district system through all fixtures and
pipelines on the property except where a separately metered system is available solely for outside
irrigation, Any such irrigation shall require an approved backflow prevention device and a physical
separation from the remaining potable water system. ''Water use" shall specifically include, but not be
limited to, the flow of water to all sinks, dishwashers, commodes, urinals, showers, hot water heaters,
washers, drinking water coolers and drinking water machines. Such facilities shall also drain to the
district's sanitary sewer system, where available, in conformance with other applicable sections of this
hltp://library1,municode.com/defaulVDoc View/1 0578/1/305/311
4/17/2008
ARTICLE VI. WATER-SEWER DISTRICT UNIFORM BILLING, OPERA TING ANAgeng,ji~~ ffiJ2~OA
February 24, 2009
Page 103 of 462
article as well as other ordinances adopted by the county, or applicable state and federal laws,
rules or regulations.
(Ord. No. 01-73,91.1,12-11-01; Ord. No 2006-27,93)
Sec. 134-172. Monthly rates, fees and charges,
Monthly rates, fees and charges for water, sewer, or effluent irrigation, and fire meter services
provided by or made available by the district shall be sufficient to recover system operation,
maintenance, renewal enhancement, replacement and debt service costs and shall be proportionally
distributed among system users and customers receiving the benefits as follows:
(1) Monthly user fees for the Collier County Water-Sewer District. Residentl al and non-
residential properties within the boundaries of the county water-sewer district shall pay
the rates, fees and charges for service provided by the county water-sewer district in
accordance with Appendix A--Schedule 1.
(2) Monthly user fees for the Goodland Water Subdistrict. The rates for service to
residential and non-residential properties within the Goodland Water Subdistrict shall be
in accordance with Appendix A--Schedule 2.
(3) Monthly user fees for effluent irrigation usage in the district shall be in accordance
with Appendix A--Schedule 3. Except in cases where a written agreement between the
district and the property owner establishes a minimum gallonage monthly effluent rate
that cannot be changed unilaterally by the district, all golf course and other bulk sales of
effluent shall be sold and billed in accordance with this section,
(4) Accounts and bill delivery addresses.
a. Accounts shall be established in the name of the property owner.
b. Monthly bills will be sent to the address requested in the service application.
c. Changes of address for billing purposes must be approved by the property
owner, Approval can be by letter, district change of address form or bye-mail.
d, Duplicate bills may be requested by letter or district change of address
formlor e-mail.
e, A duplicate bill processing fee (Appendix A--Schedule 6) will be placed on the
account for billing purposes,
(5) Methods of payment.
a. Cash, check, direct debit and/or credit card (when available), and electronic
transfer are available methods to pay monthly bills,
b, Cash, check and credit card payments may be made at the billing office
address.
c, Check payments can be made through the U,S, mail to the lockbox facility in
the envelope provided with the bill to the P,O, box.
d. Credit card payments (when available) can be made telephonically,
e. Direct debit payments are available. Requires processing of a direct debit
approval form,
f, Non-sufficient funds (NSF) checks returned by the district bank or banks will
not be reprocessed for payment. The amount of the NSF check plus an
appropriate NSF charge (Appendix A--Schedule 6) and where applicable any
other fees and charges will be placed on the account for rebilling,
http://libraryl.mtmicode.com/defaultlDocView/10578/1/305/311
4/17/2008
ARTICLE VI, WATER-SEWER DISTRICT UNIFORM BILLING, OPERATING ~llhd4l_@cOfHI!
February 24,2009
Page 104 of 462
(Ord, No, 01.73, S 1,2, 12-11-01)
Sec. 134-173. District rates, fees and charges other than monthly user fees.
(a) Meter installation charges for meters and for backflow devices two inches or smaller in size
are to be paid to the district in accordance with Appendix A--Schedule 4.
The fees in this subsection are based upon meter installation costs for a typical single-family
residential street.
(1) All meters two inches or smaller will be installed by the district and shall remain the
property of the district.
(2) For meters larger than two inches, the materials and labor for installation of such
meters shall be furnished by the developer in accordance with district requirements and
specifications and dedicated to the district in accordance with county ordinances, at no
cost to the district.
(3) Meters must be left accessible to district employees at all times. Dangerous and/or
dense underbrush will be trimmed to a "margin of safety" by district employees,
(4) When any property owner, who has a water meter, makes application to the district
for the installation of a iarger meter to replace a smaller meter, and such installation is
approved, a tapping fee for the larger meter is required and no credit shall be given for
tapping charges paid on the smaller meter. The difference in impact fees between the
smaller meter and the larger meter must be paid before a work order will be issued for
the installation of the larger meter. There shall be no refunds or credits of tapping fees or
impact fees given to any property owner requesting a smaller meter,
(b) Temporary meters,
(1) Temporary meters may be installed and removed by the district. The fee for such
installation and removal shall be based upon the district's actual costs for time,
equipment and material, as appropriate, in accordance with Appendix A-Schedule 5.
(2) The temporary meter monthly charge for service shall be based upon the non-
residential monthly availability and volume charges.
(3) A work order for the installation of a temporary meter will be issued upon receipt of
an executed temporary meter application,
(4) A refundable temporary meter deposit (Appendix A--Schedule 6) must be paid
concurrently with the temporary meter application, The deposit may be used to offset
costs for repair and/or replacement to district assets, If damages and repair costs are
greater than the deposit, the applicant will be invoiced for the remainder,
(c) District rates, fees, and charges other than monthly user fees, meter tapping fees, time and
material fees, temporary meter fees, impact fees, industrial sewer use fees, backflow prevention
service fees and development/permitting related fees, The rates, fees and charges established
by this section include but are not limited to the services listed below. The actual charge rate for
the service is in accordance with Appendix A--Schedule 6,
(1) New accounts--Change of ownership,
(2) Tum-off/turn-on at owner's request.
(3) Meter re-read.
(4) Meter test.
(5) Meter lock,
htlp://libl'ary l,municode.comJdefaultJDoc View/! 0578/11305/311
4/17/2008
ARTICLE VI. WATER-SEWER DISTRICT UNIFORM BILLING, OPERA TING A~f1~~~ ~~A
February 24,2009
Page 105 of 462
(6) Unlock after hours,
(7) Meter removal.
(8) Illegal connection.
(9) Credit card handiing charge.
(10) Temporary meter deposit.
(11) Duplicate processing fee.
(12) Non-sufficient funds (NSF) processing charge.
(13) Late payment charge,
(d) Late payments for monthly user fees are subject to a late payment charge (Appendix A--
Schedule 6) on the unpaid balance after the due date on the bill.
(e) The rates, fees and charges as established in this section shall be reviewed on an annual
basis to ensure adequate revenues for district system operation, maintenance, renewal,
replacement, enhancement and debt service costs,
(f) Reasonable pay plan arrangements may be used at the discretion of the district for
delinquent accounts. All pay plan arrangements must provide for the full and timely payment of
future consumption.
(g) Adjustments.
(1) Any debit or credit adjustments for any district service can only be made as the
result of a documented and approved procedure, For example: The procedure for
adjusting customer accounts for unexplained loss of metered water was approved in
updated form on January 3, 2001.
(2) Debit and credit adjustments identified in documented and approved procedures
shall be approved by the public utilities division administrator or designee before
processing.
(3) Debit and/or credit adjustments for district errors and omissions should be applied
to the account or refunded, if appropriate, and are subject to appropriate review and
authorization
(h) Refund of credit balances/final bills,
(1) Refunds of credit balances for a continuing account shall be processed and
forwarded to finance for disbursement on a weekly basis,
(2) Refunds of credit balances as a result of final bills shall be processed and
forwarded to finance for disbursement on a monthly basis.
(3) In no event, shall refunds be processed for credit balances which are iess than
$5.00.
(4) In no event, shall final bills less than $5.00 be processed and mailed.
(i) Allowance for funds prudently invested (AFPI) fee,
(1) The board of county commissioners as ex-officio board of the Collier County Water-
Sewer District hereby adopts allowance for funds prudently invested (AFPI) fees, as set
forth in Schedule 7 hereby appended as part of Appendix A to this ordinance, The AFPI
charges may be changed from time-to-time by Collier County Ordinance, or by resolution
of the board of county commissioners, always acting as ex-officio board of the Collier
County Water-Sewer District, provided the board pubiishes notice of one
scheduled public hearing with regard to all such then proposed changes, The proposed
http://1ibrary1.municode,comldefauJtJDocViewIl0578/1I305/311
4/17/2008
ARTICLE VI. WATER-SEWER DISTRlCT UNIFORM BILLING. OPERATING ~e~~l\MrW4%A
February 24, 2009
Page 106 of 462
resolution or ordinance can be agendized on the board's regular agenda or on its
summary agenda.
(2) Allowance for funds prudently invested (AFPI) fees afford the district an opportunity
to earn up to a fair rate of return on the district's investment in water and/or wastewater
plant that has been constructed but is not yet used and useful. Such non-used and
useful plant is by definition held for future use by the district's future water and/or
wastewater customers. Such non-used and useful plant incurs costs such as, but not
limited to, the district's embedded costs of borrowed money, investment of the district's
money in such plant, as well as operation and maintenance expenses between the time
the plant is constructed and the time all of the respective equivalent residential
connections (ERCs) are connected to the district's respective utility system by means of
an "active connection." Calculation of the AFPI charges excludes plant paid from impact
fees, which are classified in law as "contributlons-in-aid of construction" ("CIAC").
(3) The amount of the applicable AFPI charge is controlled (determined) by the month
when the related impact fee (a) to pay for the respective ERCs is received by county
staff. Each AFPI charge is calculated for one equivalent residential connection (ERC) on
a month-to-month basis, In this context there is no distinction between an ERC for
residential use, Industrial use, commercial use or any other uses,
(4) These AFPI charges apply only to ERCs reserved by payment of the relevant water
and/or wastewater impact fees actually received by county staff subsequent to October
1, 2006 and these AFPI charges shall cease to apply to ERCS reserved by staffs receipt
of these impact fee payments subsequent to December 31,2012,
(5) All water AFPI charges shall be accounted for in a separate account for the subject
water treatment facilities. All wastewater AFPI charges shall be accounted for in a
separate account for the subject wastewater treatment facilities,
(Ord, No, 01-73,!} 1,3,12-11-01; Ord. No, 2006-27,!} 1)
Sec. 134-174. District regulation.
(a) Application for service.
(1) To obtain service, application must be made at the office(s) of the district.
Applications are accepted by the district with the understanding that there is no
obligation on the part of the district to render service other than that which is then
available from its existing facilities, The district reserves the right to refuse service from
its transmission mains or to accept service to its collection system,
(2) Utility service is furnished only upon signed application of the property owner,
accepted by the district, and the conditions of such application or agreement are binding
upon the property owner as well as the district. A copy of each application or agreement
for utility service accepted by the district will be furnished to the property owner.
(3) The applicant shall furnish to the district the correct name, street address and legal
description at which service is to be rendered at the time of the application for service.
All system development charges, impact fees, connection and installation fees, and any
other fees, rates and charges established by the district shall be paid in full at the time of
application for service,
(4) Application for service requested by firms, partnerships, associations, corporations
and others, shall be tendered only by duly authorized Individuals, When service is
rendered under agreement or agreements entered into between the district and an agent
of the property owner, the use of such service by the property owner shall constitute full
and complete ratification by the property owner of the agreement or agreements entered
http://libraryl.municode,comfdefaultJDocView/10578/1/305/31 I
4/17/2008
ARTICLE VI. WATER-SEWER DlSTRICT UN1FORM BILLING, OPERATING ~ef)~m-21llA
February 24, 2009
Page 107 of 462
into between agent and the district under which such service is rendered. A tenant of
property shall not be construed to be an agent.
(5) Where the district's water or sewer main is accessible to render service no county
building permit may be issued until such time as proper application shall have been
made for service and all fees necessary for the rendering of such service shall have
been paid to the district.
(6) The district may withhold or discontinue service rendered under appiication made
by a property owner, or the property owner's agent, uniess all prior indebtedness to the
district of such property for utility service has been settled in full, Service may be
withheld or discontinued for non-payment of bills and/or non-compliance with rules and
regulations in connection with the same or any different class of service furnished to the
same property owner at the same premises, or for non-payment of any account for
service to the property.
(b) Limitation of use, continuity of service.
(1) Unless authorized by the district, water and/or sewer service purchased from the
district shall be used by the consumer only for the purposes specified in the application
for service, and the property owner shall not sell or otherwise dispose of such service
supplied by the district. Uniess authorized by the district, service furnished to the
property owner shall be rendered directly to the property owner through the district's
connection, and under no circumstances shall be property owner or property owner's
agent or any other individual, association, or corporation install equipment for the
purpose of disposing of said service. In no case shall a property owner, except with the
written consent from the district, extend their installation across a street, alley, lane,
court, property line, avenue, or any other way, in order to furnish service for adjacent
property, even though such adjacent property is owned by them. In the event there is an
unauthorized extension, sale or disposition of service, the property owner's service will
be subject to discontinuance until such unauthorized extension, sale or disposition is
discontinued and full payment is made of bills for service, calculated on proper
classification and rate schedules and reimbursements in full are made to the district for
all extra expenses incurred for clerical work, testing and inspections.
(2) The district will at all times use reasonable diligence to provide continuous service.
and having used reasonable diligence shall not be liable to the property owner or
occupants for failure or interruption of continuous water service, The district shall not be
liable for any act or omission caused directly by strikes, iabor troubles, accident,
litigation, breakdowns, shutdowns for emergency repairs, or adjustment, acts of
sabotage, enemies of the united states, wars, state, municipal or other
governmentalinterference, acts of God or other causes beyond its control.
(3) Property owners shall maintain that portion of the water lines on their property
located beyond the district service connection, and all loss of water through breaks or
leakage to the premises will be paid by the property owner. The property owner shall
maintain that portion of the sewer line located on their property.
(c) Property owner's liability for damage to equipment, The property owner is liable to the
district for any damage done to the district's equipment used in providing service to the property
owner, except damage done by district employees.
(d) Security deposits on water account. Security deposits normally are not required on district
customer accounts for water service. However, the district may require a deposit equivalent to
two months average service when an account has been shut-off for non-payment more than two
times in any six month concurrent period, These deposits may be returned after six months of
timely payments.
(e) Security deposits on sewer accounts. Security deposits are normally not required on
http://libraryl.municode,comldefault/DocView/l0578/1/305/311
4/17/2008
ARTICLE VI. WATER-SEWER DISTRICT UNIFORM BILLING, OPERATING A}@lndli':lIgcrlNi!BIlA
February 24, 2009
Page 108 of 462
district customer accounts for sewer service. However, the district may require a deposit
equivalent to two months average service when an account has been shut off for non-payment
more than two times in any six month concurrent period. These deposits will be returned after
six months of timely payments.
(f) Property owner's responsibility for water seNiee; bad debts.
(1) The property owner is responsible for all water, andior sewer service and/or other
district services provided to the property, In the event service is discontinued for non-
payment, service will be restored only after property owner has fully complied with
provisions of section 134-174, subsection (g)(2) and (g)(3), of this article.
(2) Unpaid fees constitute a lien against the property (see section 134-174(p) of this
article). In the event water, and/or sewer service and/or other district services have been
discontinued for non-payment and any or all services are requested to be reinstated for
the property in the future, this back debt plus associated charges must be paid before
water and/or sewer service will be furnished.
(3) Bad debts as a result of bankruptcy or court actions will be written off in accordance
with applicable laws, rules and reguiations.
(g) Oates bills due and delinquent; discontinuance of seNiee for non-payment; reinstatement
following discontinued seNice,
(1) Bills for service are due by the date set forth on the bill from the district and are
delinquent thereafter. Service will be discontinued when delinquent for non-payment of
bills.
(2) When service has been discontinued for non-payment of bills, service will be
renewed upon payment of all unpaid bills, plus a shut-off lock fee and a late payment fee
(Appendix A--Schedule 6).
(3) If the lock has been tampered with and the street cock has been tumed on prior to
full payrnent of all fees the meter may be removed from the property, Should the
property owner request renewal of service for the property, service will be restored upon
full payment of: 1) all past due bills plus a late payment fee where applicable, and (2) a
meter removal fee (Appendix A--Scheduie 6).
(4) If service has been discontinued for non-payment of bilis and an Illegal water
connection is made, service will be renewed upon payment of all unpaid bills, time and
material cost to rernove the illegal connection, the cost of the estimated amount of water
consumption loss, plus the fine specified in Appendix A--Schedule 6.
(5) Billing for potable water service or effluent irrigation service shall begin upon
registration of consumption on the meter, or 90 days from date of meter installation,
whichever occurs first. Billing for sewer service shall commence upon the issuance of a
certificate of occupancy or 90 days following the issuance of a notice to connect to the
sewer system, whichever occurs first.
(6) The property owner shall immediately notify the district of any additional dwelling
units connected to the district's service lines if the dwelling units have not been included
in previous applications. For violation of this section, the district's service may be
discontinued,
(h) Billing payment when meter becomes defective; right of entry of authorized agents or
employees.
(1) Should the meter on any premises become defective, so that the amount delivered
for the current month cannot be ascertained, the property owner shall pay for that month
an amount equal to the average amount charged for the four preceding months unless
the actual amount of water can be determined.
http://libraryl,municode.com/defaultIDoc View/1 0578/1/305/311
4/17/2008
ARTICLE VI. WATER-SEWER DISTRICT UNIFORM BILLING, OPERATING A~~nPaJ~'3'JlIo;JllOA
reorD'ary :2'4,-::>1109
Page 109 of 462
(2) Duly authorized agents and employees of the district shall, during daylight hours or
if called out after dark for emergency service, have access to any property for the
purpose of examining the condition of fixture, service pipe installation and such other
purposes as may be proper to protect the interest of the district, reading or repairing the
water meters located thereon, or turning the supply of such water service to the
premises off or on.
(i) Water bill complaints. Normally, high water bill complaints will not be accepted for
inspection by the district unless all plumbing fixtures, piping and outlets have been examined by
a licensed plumber who has certified that there are no leaks, If an investigation is made by the
district and the findings reveal the initial meter reading was accurate and the meter is
functioning properly, a re-read charge (Appendix A--Schedule 6) will be assessed against the
property owner, The property owner shall be charged (Appendix A--Schedule 6) for meter tests
which show the meter is functioning properly.
0) Meters, location and charge for moving. Meters shall be placed when possible just within
the property line at the property corner at the nearest point to the tap-in main, If a meter is
moved at the request of the property owner, the property owner shall pay a fee equal to the
district's cost in accordance with Appendix A--Schedule 5.
(k) Connections with water and sewer required. The owner of each lot or parcel of land within
the district where any improvement is now situated or shall hereafter be situated, shall, if the
district operates and maintains water distribution andlor sewer collection facilities along the
frontage of their property, connect or cause such improvement to be connected with the water
andlor sewer facilities of the district. The usage of such facilities shall, at a minimum, be used
for all indoor usage and shall be connected within 90 days following notification to do so by the
district. Connection to the reuse system shall only be required if the development order and/or
property purchase agreements require such connection. All such connections shall be made in
accordance with rules and regulations which may be adopted from time to time by the district,
which rules and regulations shall provide for a charge for making any such connection in such
reasonable amount as the governing board of the district may fix and determine, No connection
or connections shall berequired where the water or sewer system or iine is more than 200 feet
from such property line.
(I) Exceptions To connections, This article shall not be construed to require or entitle any
person to cross the private property of another in order to connect to the district's water andlor
sewer service.
(m) Connections may be made by district. If any property owner of any lot or parcel of land
within the district shall fail or refuse to connect to and use the water and/or sewer facilities of the
district after notification, as provided herein, then the district shall be authorized to make such
connections, entering on or upon any such property for the purpose of making such connection.
The district shall thereupon be entitled to recover the cost (Appendix A--Schedule 5) of making
such connection, together with reasonable penalties and interest and attorney's fees, by suit in
any court of component jurisdiction, In addition and as an alternative means of collecting such
costs of making such connections, the district shall have a lien on such property for such cost;
which lien shall be equal dignity with the lien of state and county taxes, Such lien may be
foreclosed by the county in the same manner provided by the laws of Fiorida for the foreclosure
of mortgages upon real estate.
(n) Unlawful connection prohibited. No person shall be allowed to connect into any water or
sewer line owned by the district without written consent of the district. The connection with such
line shell be made only under the direction and supervision of the district. Any property owner or
piumber who shall make any connection without such consent of the county shall, upon
conviction be subject to the penalties hereinafter provided,
(0) Failure to maintain plumbing system, The property owner shall be responsible for
maintaining and keeping free from obstruction the water and sewer pipes leading to and
http://Iibraryl.mwllcode,com/defaultJDoc View/I 0578/1/305/311
4/17/2008
ARTICLE VI, WATER-SEWER DISTRICT UNIFORM BILLING, OPERATING A~endm!!erft 1oJ628:JA
February 24, 2009
Page 110 of 462
connecting from the plumbing system to the district's water and sewers mains, and failure to
keep the water and sewer pipes, free from obstructions and maintained in a proper manner.
(p) Unpaid fees to constitute a lien, In the event that the fees, rates or charges for the services
and facilities of any water or sewer system shall not be paid as and when due, any unpaid
balance thereof and all interest accruing thereon shall be an automatic lien on any parcei or
property affected thereby. Such liens shall be superior and paramount to the interest on such
parcel or property of any owner, lessee, tenant, mortgagor or other person except the lien of
county taxes and shall be on a parity with the iien of any such county taxes.ln the event that any
such fees, rates or charges shall not be paid as and when due and shall be in default for 30
days or more the unpaid balance thereof and all interest accrued thereon, together with
attorneys fees and costs, may be recovered by the district in a civil action, and any such lien
and accrued interest may be foreclosed or otherwise enforced by the district by action or suit in
equity as for the foreclosure of a mortgage on real property,
(q) No free service, No water or sewage disposal service shall be furnished or rendered free
of charge to any person, firm, corporation or governmental body, Each and every county
agency, department, or instrumentality which uses such service shall pay therefore at the rates
fixed by this article.
(r) Separate connections for each separate unit, Unless authorized by the district, each
dwelling unit whether occupying one or more lots and whether it shall occupy any lot or parcel
jointly with any other dwelling unit shall be considered a separate unit for the payment of the
water and sewage disposal rates and charges, and separate connections will be required for
each of such dwelling units,
(Ord. No. 01-73, 9 1,4, 12-11-01; Ord, No. 2006-27, 94)
Sec. 134-175. Submetering.
(a) A landlord who is a customer of the district and who provides water and/or sewer service to
rental units through a single master water meter shall, under any of the following three
circumstances, be exempt from the prohibitions contained in section 134-174, paragraph (b)(1)
against the sale or disposition of district water and/or sewer service:
(1) A landlord may apportion the monthly charge for district water and/or sewer service
through the master meter equally among all rental units provided that the total monthly
charge to all rental units shall not exceed the landlord's actual cost for district water
and/or sewer service; or
(2) A landlord may install submeters for each rental unit to track each unit's usage of
water service and then charge each unit according to its exact usage. A landlord who
installs submeters shall comply with the reqUirements of subsection (d), below and shall
not recover more than his actual cost for district water and/or sewer service through the
master meter and shall not pass on to his tenants any of the capital or administrative
cost incurred in the installation and monitoring of the submeters or the billing of tenants
for their water and/or sewer service usage; or,
(3) A landlord may also prOVide water and/or sewer service to rental units through a
single master water meter for no specific compensation provided that in no event shall
any landlord recover more than his actual cost for district water and/or sewer service
from his tenants.
(b) For any rental units which are under lease agreement as of the effective date of this article
[April 1, 2002], a landlord choosing to install submeters as provided in section 134-174,
paragraph (b) above, shall not begin monitoring a rental unit's water usage for the purposes of
charging a unit according to its actual water usage until the expiration of the then existing term
under such lease agreement. Upon renewing an expired lease, or upon entering any new lease
http://libraryl,municode,comJdefaultlDocView/l0578/1/305/311
4/17/2008
ARTICLE VI. WATER-SEWER DISTRICT UNIFORM BILLING, OPERATING ANgenlla~d{l\OfJ6A
February 24, 2009
Page 111 of 462
agreement with a tenant subsequent to theeffective date of this article, a landlord choosing to
submeter shall fully disclose to the tenant the landlord's ability to separately charge each rental
unit according to its exact water usage. Such disclosure shall be in both of the following forms:
(1) oral representations by the landlord to the tenant at the time of negotiating the lease and
before either party has signed the lease agreement, and (2) by a conspicuously printed
disclosure provision in the lease agreement specifically referencing the landlord's ability to
submeter pursuant to the terms of this article and initialed by the tenant.
(c) Upon a tenant's written request, any landlord who exercises his privilege to recover his
actual cost for county water and/or sewer service shall provide to the tenant documentation of
the landlord's actual cost for district water and/or sewer service as well as documentation and a
written explanation of the basis for any costs charged to the tenant for water and/or sewer
service. Such documentation and written explanation shall be provided within five business days
from receipt of the written request.
(d) Furthermore, upon dispute of a water bill by a tenant in person, in writing, by telephone, or
in any other manner, a landlord shall, within five business days of receiving notice of the
tenant's dispute, pursue all of the following remedies in an effort to resolve the dispute:
(1) Reread the master meter and/or any submeter to verify the accuracy of the meter
reading process and the working condition of the meter(s);
(2) If the working condition or accuracy of the master meter or any submeter is in
question after being reread, the landlord shall have the meter tested;
(3) If after being tested the master meter or any submeter is found to be inaccurate or
otherwise defective, the district or the landlord, as the case may be, shall immediately
repair or replace the meter,
(4) Provide documentation of current and past billing practices with respect to the
applicable rental unit for the period of the requesting tenant's occupancy;
(5) Arrange a meeting with the tenant and the property manager or some other
representative of the landlord to discuss the billing process; and
(6) Any tenant whose request is unsatisfactorily addressed or who has exhausted the
above options without redress may bring suit in a court of competent jurisdiction to
obtain relief under F.S. ch. 83, the Landlord Tenant Act.
(e) All submeters must achieve no less than the accuracy standards as currently met by the
district for its own water meters. In addition, any landlord installing submeters shall provide,
where applicable, the following services, at the landlord's expense, which either meet or exceed
the level of service currently provided by the district with respect to its water meters:
(1) The landlord shall promptly, upon receiving notice, repair all submeter leaks;
(2) The landlord shall promptly, upon receiving notice, repiace any failed service lines
or associated components;
(3) The landlord shall promptly, upon receiving notice, replace damaged or deteriorated
submeter boxes or lids, and shall, where applicable, lower or raise a submeter box to
grade as necessary;
(4) The landlord shall, upon receiving a water quality complaint, check applicable
connections and flush appiicable service lines;
(5) The landlord shall, upon receiving a low pressure complaint, check and test the
system to ensure proper operation:
(6) The landlord shall locate and provide the location of all submeters and service lines
upon reasonable request by a tenant;
http://libraryl.municode,comfdefault/DocView/l0578/1/305/311
4/17/2008
ARTICLE VI. WATER-SEWER DISTRICT UNIFORM BILLING, OPERATING ANl.geiRagaehllil132foA
February 24, 2009
Page 112 of 462
(7) The landlord shall turn off applicable submeters in emergency situations;
(8) The landlord shall read all submeters no less frequently than once a month;
(9) The landlord shall replace all submeters that become stuck or difficult to read; and
(10) The landlord shall notify the tenant of a potential leak upon reading a submeter
that reflects an unusually high usage.
(f) The provision of water service through a single master meter by a landlord as described in
this section is deemed not to constitute the sale or disposition of water service, The provision of
sewer service as described in this section Is deemed not to constitute the sale or disposition of
sewer service,
(g) Any condominium association that is a customer of the district and provides water and/or
sewer service to condominium units through a single master meter may allocate the cost for
such water service among its members either by equal apportionment, installation of submeters,
or otherwise provided that such allocation of cost is restricted to recovery of the condominium
association's actual cost for district water and/or sewer service and directly related
administrative or capital expenses incurred in recovering that cost. Upon a member's written
request, any condominium association that exercises its privilege under this exemption from the
prohibitions in section 134-174, paragraph (b)(1) to recover its actual cost for district water
and/or sewer service and directly related administrative and capital expenses incurred in
recovering that cost shall provide to the member documentation for the condominium
association's actual cost for district water and/or sewer service as well as documentation and a
written explanation of the basis for any costs charged to the member for water service, Such
documentation and written explanation shall be provided with five business days from receipt of
the written request. The provision of water service through a singie master water meter by a
condominium association as described in this section is deemed not to constitute the sale or
disposition of water service. The provision of sewer service as described in this section is
deemed not to constitute the sale or disposition of sewer service,
(h) Any landlord or condominium association that elects to install submeters shall not charge a
security deposit.
(Ord No. 01-73, 92,1--2.8,12-11-01)
Sec. 134-176, City of Naples service area,
(a) No extension of existing distribution water mains of the water system of the City of Naples
may be made within the county water-sewer district, without the prior, written consent and
approval of the governing board of the district, except that this article shall not apply to the lands
described in subsection (d).
(b) All applications for said distribution water main extensions shall be made in writing to
district staff who shall present said requests to the governing board of the district within 30 days
of receipt thereof,
(c) The governing board of the district may attach reasonable conditions to the issuance of
permits for distribution water main extensions which conditions rnay include, but not be limited
to, provisions for payment of system development charges or impact fees which are, or may be
enacted by the county.
(d) The City of Naples water service area boundaries are as follows:
Beginning at the intersection of the easterly shoreline of the Gulf of Mexico with the southerly
city limit line of the City of Naples; thence easterly along said southerly city along the easterly
city limit line to the northeast corner of said Section 27; thence westerly along the north line of
http://libral'yl,municode.comldefau1l1DocView/10578/1I305/311
4/17/2008
ARTICLE VI. WATER-SEWER DISTRICT UNIFORM BILLING, OPERA TING A~n8ilglBiI.2I'(lf2$JA
February 24, 2009
Page 11301462
Section 26, Township 50 south, Range 25 east to the northeast corner of said Section 26;
thence northerly along the east line of Section 23, Township 50 south, Range 25 east to its
intersection with the southerly right-of-way line of Thomasson Drive; thence easterly along said
southerly right-of-way of Thomasson Drive to Its Intersection with the range line lying between
Range 25 east and Range 26 east; thence northerly along said range line lying between Range
25 east and Range 26 east to the northeast corner of Section 13, Township 49 south, Range 25
east; thence westerly along the north line of Sections 13,14,15,16 and 17, Township 49 south,
Range 25 east to the intersection of the north line of said Section 17with the easterly shoreline
of the Gulf of Mexico; thence southerly along the meanders of the easterly shoreline of the Gulf
of Mexico to the point of beginning.
(Ord, No, 01.73, 993.1--3.4, 12-11-01)
Sec. 134-177. Appendices for rates, fees and charges.
The board of county commissioners as ex-officio board of the Collier County Water-Sewer
District hereby adopts the rates, fees, and charges as set forth in schedule 1[1J through 7; inclusive,
appended hereto as Appendix A, which as of October 1, 2006, shall be imposed upon all users of the
county water-sewer district's services within the district's boundaries and outside the district's
boundaries SUbject to appropriate mutual agreements. The AFPI charges shall apply only to the
respective ERCs reserved bypayment of the related water andlor wastewater impact fees subsequent
to October 1, 2006, and these AFPI charges shall not apply to ERCs reserved by payment for the
ERCs received by staff subsequent to December 31, 2012. These rates, fees and charges may be
changed from time to time by ordinances or by resolutions of the board of county commissioners as ex-
officio board of the Collier County Water-Sewer District, provided the board publishes, in a newspaper
of general circulation in Collier County, notice of an advertised public hearing with regard to the then
proposed schedule amendments. The proposed amendments (by county ordinances or board
resolutions) can be agendized on the board's regular agenda, or on the board's summary agenda
subject to removal to the board's regular agenda,
(Ord, No, 01-73, 94, 12-11-01; Ord. No, 2006-27, S 2)
Sec. 134-178. Penalties.
Unless another penalty is specifically provided for, any person who violates any section or
provision of this article shall be prosecuted and punished as provided by F.S. 9125,69, Each day the
violation continues shall constitute a separate offense, Additionally, the board may bring suit for
damages or to restrain, enjoin or otherwise prevent the violation of this article in the Circuit Court of
Collier County,
(Ord, No, 01-73, 95, 12-11-01)
Sec. 134-179, Confidentiality.
Confidential information.
(1) Information and data on a user obtained from reports, questionnaires, applications,
and other material provided shall be available to the public or other governmental
agency without restriction unless the user specifically requests and is able to
demonstrate to the satisfaction of the district and county that the information is not
"public record" under then applicable law, and is clearly within an exemption outiined in
the Florida Public Record Law of the State of Florida, F.S. ch. 119, or its successor
infunction.
http://Iibraryl,municode,com/default/Doc Viewll 0578/1/305/311
4/17/2008
ARTICLE VI. WATER-SEWER DISTRICT UNIFORM BILLING, OPERA TING AN\ge~1J m.2fuA
February 24, 2009
lol!ie.r CovV\+y Page 114of462
(2) Notwithstanding any of the provisions of this article, nothing shall be construed or
interpreted to require the county or the district to violate any of the applicable public
records law(s). Any release of information or disciosure made by the county or district in
order to comply with such law should not give rise to a claim whatsoever.
(Ord. No. 01-73, S 6, 12-11-01)
Sec. 134-180. Declaration of exclusion from the Administrator Procedures Act.
The county water-sewer district board shall exercise jurisdiction over the provision of water and
sewer services within the boundaries as hereinafter provided for, and shall be exempt from the
provisions of F.S. ch. 120. No privately owned water or sewer utility shall be abandoned without
adequate provision for continuance of service and the prior approval of the board,
(Ord. No. 01-73, !P, 12-11-01)
Sees. 134-181--134-185. Reserved,
PUBLIC UTILITIES DIVISION
COLLIER COUNTY WATER-SEWER DISTRICT
UNIFORM BILLING, OPERATING AND REGULATORY STANDARDS ORDINANCE
APPENDIX A--FEES, RATES AND CHARGES
SCHEDULE 1--DISTRICT-WIDE WATER and WASTEWATER RATES
Effective October 1, 2006
Water, Wastewater, Fire Meter Rates and Water Surcharges
1. Water:
(a) Service availability charge for individually metered residential, non-residential and
irrigation:
TABLE INSET:
Size Effective Oct. Effective Oct. Size Effective Oct. Effective Oct.
1, 2006 1,2007 1, 2006 1,2007
5/8" inch $14.00 per $16.03 per 3" inch $170.94 per $195,72 per
meter month month meter month month
3/4" Inch 14.00 per 16.03 per 4" inch 282,98 per 324,00 per
meter month month meter month month
1" inch 30.90 per 35.38 per 6" inch 563,08 per 644,70 per
meter month month meter month month
1- 1/4" inch 39.12 per 44.79 per 8" inch 899,20 per 1,029.53 per
meter month month meter month month
1-1/2"inch 58.91 per 67.45 per 1 0" inch 1 ,627.44 per 1 ,863,33 per
meter month month meter month month
2" inch 92.47 per 105,88 per 12" inch 2,198.07 per 2,516,69 per
meter month month meter month month
(b) Volume charge per 1,000 gallons:
(i) Individually metered residential, non-residential and multi-family residential:
http://libraryl.municode,com/defaul1JDocView/10578/11305/311
4/17/2008
ARTICLE VI. WATER-SEWER DISTRICT UNIFORM BILLING, OPERATING M9an~~ofil1l\
February 24, 2009
Page 115 of 462
TABLE INSET:
Effective Oct. 1, 2006 Effective Oct. 1, 2007
Block 1 $1,92 $2.20
Block 2 2,88 3,30
Block 3 384 4.40
Block 4 4.80 5,50
Block 5 5,76 6.59
Block 6 7.68 8.79
(c) Block rate structure.
Consumption Blocks In Gallons--Up To Or Next
TABLE INSET:
Meter Block 1 Block 2 Block 3 Block 4 Block 5 Block 6
Size
5/8" Over 50,000
and 5,000 10,000 20,000 30,000 50,000
3/4"
1" 12,000 25,000 50,000 75,000 120,000 Over
120,000
1- 1/4" 20,000 40,000 80,000 120,000 200,000 Over
200,000
1- 1/2" 25,000 50,000 100,000 150,000 250,000 Over
250,000
2" 40,000 80,000 160,000 240,000 400,000 Over
400,000
3" 80,000 160,000 320,000 480,000 800,000 Over
800,000
4" 120,000 250,000 500,000 800,000 1,200,000 Over
1,200,000
6" 250,000 500,000 1,000,000 1,500,000 2,500,000 Over
2,500,000
8" 450,000 900,000 1,800,000 2,700,000 4,500,000 Over
4,500,000
10" 700,000 1,450,000 2,900,000 4,300,000 7,000,000 Over
7,000,000
12" 1,075,000 2,150,000 4,300,000 6,450,000 11,000,000 Over
11,000,000
2. Wastewater:
(a) Wastewater service availability charge for individually metered residential, non-
residential, and multi-family:
TABLE INSET:
Size Effective Oct. Effective Oct. Size Effective Oct. Effective Oct.
1,2006 1,2007 1,2006 1,2007
htlp:/llibraryl,municode,comldefauItlDocView/l0578/1/305/311 4/17/2008
ARTICLE VI. WATER-SEWER DISTRICT UNIFORM BILLING, OPERATING ~endR~f6!m!r:l&~~jl,
February 24, 2009
Page 116 of 462
5/8 inch $22.26 per $24.49 per 3 inch $287.24 per $315.96 per
meter month month meter month month
3/4 inch 22,26 per 24.49 per 4 inch 476,32 per 523,93 per
meter month month meter month month
1 inch 50.61 per 55,67 per 6 inch 949.23 per 1,044.12 per
meter month month meter month month
1 1/4 inch 64.90 per 71.38 per 8 inch 1,516.92 per 1,668.55 per
meter month month meter month month
1 1/2 inch 97,93 per 107.72 per 10 inch 2,719.65 per 2,991.50 per
meter month month meter month month
2 inch 154.75 per 170,22 per 12 inch 4,030,95 per 4,433,89 per
meter month month meter month month
(b) Volume charge per 1,000 gallons:
TABLE INSET:
Effective Oct. 1, 2006 Effective Oct. 1, 2007
(i) All Metered Usage $3,13 $3.44
(il) Individually Metered The maximum volumetric charge for individually metered
Residential Maximum: residential property shall be 15,000 gallons per month,
3. Fire systems (dedicated and compound):
(a) Fire meter,
(i) Fire service meter size will refer to the largest diameter meter register
installed for fire protection,
(ii) Fire service meter connections that have consumption registered for three
consecutive billing periods are deemed to have provided domestic or other water
usage shall be billed according to regular water monthly availability and usage
charges as described herein,
(b) Volume charge:
(i) Per 1,000 gallons,
4. Water restriction surcharge:
TABU: INSET:
Water Shortage Percent Reduction In Overall Flow Charge Rate Adjustment
Phase" Demand Percentage
Phase 1--Moderate Less Than 15% 15%
Phase 2--Severe Less Than 30% 30%
Phase 3--Extreme Less Than 40% 40%
Phase 4--Critical Less Than 60% 60%
PUBLIC UTILITIES DIVISION
COLLIER COUNTY WATER-SEWER DISTRICT
UNIFORM BILLING, OPERATING AND RE;GULATORY STANDARDS ORDINANCE
http://libraryl.municode,comldefau!t/Doc View/1 0578/1 /305/311
4/17/2008
ARTICLE VI. WATER-SEWER DISTRICT UNIFORM BILLING, OPERA TING ~ndllaglmllilc5)t1~~
February 24,2009
Page 117 of462
APPENDIX A--FEES, RATES AND CHARGES
SCHEDULE 2-GOODLAND SUB-DISTRICT WATER
Effective October 1, 2006
Providing monthly user fees for residential, non-residential and multi-family properties in the Goodland
Water Sub-district as follows:
1, Water.
(a) Service availability charge:
(i) Individual metered residential, non-residential and multi-family
properties:
TABLE INSET:
Meter Size Effective Oct. 1, 2006
314 inch $25.00 per month
1 inch 58,00 per month
1 1/2 inch 113.00 per month
2 inch 178.00 per month
3 Inch 353.00 per month
4 inch 548,00 per month
6 inch 1,095,00 per month
8 inch 1,967,00 per month
(b) Volume charge per one thousand gallons ($/Mgal) of usage:
(i) Individual metered residential, non-residential and multi-family properties:
TABLE INSET:
Block Proposed Oct. 1, 2006
Biock 1 (1) $4,30
Block 1 (1) $5.30
Biock 1 (1) $6.40
Block 1 (1) $7.40
Block 1 (1) $8.50
Block 1 (1) $10,60
(1) Same Block Rate Structure as that of Collier County Water-Sewer
District.
(c) Block rate structure:
Consumption biocks in gallons--Up to or next
TABLE iNSET:
Meter Block 1 Block 2 Block 3 Block 4 Block 5 Block 6
Size
5/8" and 5,000 10,000 20,000 30,000 50,000 Over 50,000
3/4"
http://libraryl,municode.comldefault/DocView/10578/1/305/311
4/17/2008
-
ARTICLE VI. WATER-SEWER DISTRlCT UNIFORM BILLING, OPERATING ANgancEa~ 1.Jof@l
February 24, 2009
Page 118 of 462
1" 12,000 25,000 50,000 75,000 120,000 Over 120,000
1- 1/4" 20,000 40,000 80,000 120,000 200,000 Over 200,000
1-1/2" 25,000 50,000 100,000 150,000 250,000 Over 250,000
2" 40,000 80,000 160,000 240,000 400,000 Over 400,000
3" 80,000 160,000 320,000 480,000 800,000 Over 800,000
4" 120,000 250,000 500,000 800,000 1,200,000 Over
1,200,000
6" 250,000 500,000 1,000,000 1,500,000 2,500,000 Over
2,500,000
8" 450,000 900,000 1,800,000 2,700,000 4,500,000 Over
4,500,000
(2) The usage charge shall be adjusted based on the following formula:
Purchased Water Adjustment Clause (PWAC) - Existing Rates
(New City of Marco Island Volume Charge - Old City of Marco Island Volume Charge)1
$0.75 = Adder
Existing Goodland $/Mgal + Adder = New Goodland $/Mgal
The purpose of the 0,75 factor is needed to adjust for unaccounted for water and the
change in the monthly fixed charges from the City of Marco Island,
For Each Rate Block:
Existing Rate Block $lMgal + Adder = New Rate $/Mgal
PUBLC UTILITIES DIVISION
COLLIER COUNTY WATER-SEWER DISTRICT
UNIFORM BILLING, OPERATING AND REGULATORY STANDARDS ORDINANCE
APPENDIX A--FEES, RATES AND CHARGES
SCHEDULE 3--IRRIGATlON QUALITY WATER RATES
Effective October 1 , 2006
Irrigation Quality (Reuse) Rates
1. Irrigation quality water usage in the district shall be at the following schedule:
(a) Service availability charge:
Individually metered irrigation:
TABLE INSET:
Meter Size Effective October 1, 2006
5/8 and 3/4 inch $5.00
1 inch 11,00
1.5 inch 23.00
http://libraryl,municode,comldefaultIDocViewll 0578/1/305/311
4/17/2008
ARTICLE VI. WATER-SEWER DISTRICT UNIFORM BILLING, OPERATING A~dllagllTHl(j)f1~&
February 24,2009
Page 119 of 462
2 inch 46,00
3 inch 91.00
4 inch 182,00
6 inch 346.00
8 inch 628.00
10 inch 1,005,00
12 inch 1,497.00
(b) Volume charge per 1,000 gallons:
TABLE INSET:
Type of Service Effective October 1 , 2006
(i) Pressurized and distributed $0.75
(ii) Pressurized 0,39
(iii) Bulk 0.30
PUBLIC UTILITIES DIVISION
COLLIER COUNTY WATER-SEWER DISTRICT
UNIFORM BILLING, OPERATING AND REGULATORY STANDARDS ORDINANCE
APPENDIX A--FEES, RATES AND CHARGES
SCHEDULE 4--METER TAPPING CHARGES AND BACKFLOW DEVICE CHARGES
Effective October 1, 2006
Meter Installation CharQes (TapoinQ Fees}
1. Meter Installation charges to be paid to the District shall be as follows:
Meter size meter tapping charges:
TABLE iNSET:
Meter Meter Tapping Charges With Meter Meter Tapping Charges Without
Size Service Line Installation Charge Size Service Line I nstallation Charge
Effective Oct. 1, 2006 Effective Oct. 1, 2006
3/4 inch $676.00 3/4 inch $248.00
1 inch 738,00 1 inch 282,00
1,5 inch 1,012.00 1,5 inch 493,00
2 inch 1,140.00 2 inch 618,00
The fees are based upon meter installation for a typical single-family residence, In all
other circumstances, the meter installation fee shall be based upon the district's actual
cost for time, equipment and materials.
Backfiow device charRes
(1) Backflow device charges to be paid to the District shall be as follows:
TABLE INSET:
http://library1,municode.com/defau1t/DocView/10578/1/305/311
4/1 712008
ARTICLE VI. WATER-SEWER DISTRICT UNlFORM BILLING, OPERATING ANgenhgertiNl1f18A
February 24,2009
Page 120 of 462
Meter Reduced Pressure Backflow Meter Double Check Valve Backflow
Size Prevention Assembly Charge Size Prevention Assembly Charge
Effective Oct. 1, 2006 Effective Oct. 1, 2006
3f4 inch $214,00 3f4 inch $108,00
1 inch 237.00 1 inch 116,00
1,5 inch 345.00 1.5 inch 294,00
2 inch 412,00 2 inch 342.00
PUBLIC UTILITIES DIVISION
COLLIER COUNTY WATER-SEWER DISTRICT
UNIFORM BILLING, OPERATING AND REGULATORY STANDARDS ORDINANCE
APPENDIX A-FEES, RATES AND CHARGES
SCHEDULE 5--EQUIPMENT, LABOR AND ADMINISTRATION CHARGES
Effective October 1, 2006
TABLE INSET:
DESCRIPTION I EFFECTIVE OCT. 1, 2006
(1) Equipment (Per Hour Rates):
Rehab & Electrician's Truck $75,00
Crew Trucks 50,00
Vactor Truck 200.00
Camera Truck 150.00
Boom Truck 100.00
20 Yard Dump Truck 70.00
10 Yard Dump Truck 40.00
Pumper Truck 200,00
Track Hoe (Big or Small) 50,00
Back Hoe 65,00
Olympian Generators 60.00
Dewatering System 40.00
4" Trash Pump 10,00
Mud Hog 15,00
Trailer 45,00
Signs, Barricades andfor Traffic Board 100.00
Road Saw andfor Compactor 15.00
Miscellaneous Small Equipment 5.00
(2) Labor (Per Hour Rates):
Tech 1 & 2 30.00
Supervisors 40,00
(3) Administration (per incident): 15% or $300.00; Whichever is smaller,
http://libraryl.municode,com/defauItfDocView/l0578/1I305/311
4/17/2008
ARTICLE VI. WATER-SEWER DISTRICT UNIFORM BILLING, OPERATING Alll!gen<Tht!l\l~(Nof~
February 24, 2009
Page 121 of 462
(4) Parts and Sub-contractors
Actual Cost
PUBLIC UTILITIES DIVISION
COLLIER COUNTY WATER. SEWER DISTRICT
UNIFORM BilLING, OPERATING AND REGULATORY STANDARDS ORDINANCE
APPENDIX A--FEES, RATES AND CHARGES
SCHEDULE 6-MISCElLANEOUS CHARGES
Effective October 1, 2006
TABLE INSET:
DESCRIPTION EFFECTIVE OCT, 1, 2006
New Accounts-Change of Ownership $25,00
Tum OfflTurn On at Owner's Request 38,00
Meter Re-Read (If Different--Charge is 38.00
0,00)
Meter Test:
Onsite Test (More than 3% Error-- 80.00
Charge is 0.00)
Offsite Bench Test (More than 3% 215.00
Error-Charge is 0.00)
Meter lock 55,00
Meter Unlock, 2nd and Subsequent 55,00
Events
Unlock After Hours 100,00
Meter Removal 160.00
Illegal Connection Actual Time And Material Cost, Plus Average
Consumption, Plus a $300,00 Fine
Convenience Fee-Credit Card 5,00
Temporary Meter Deposit 1,000,00
Duplicate Bill Processing Fee 2,00
Non-Sufficient Funds (NSF) 15% of the Amount or $100,00, Whichever is
Processing Charge Smaller
late Payment Charge 5% of Unpaid Balance
Vehicle Over Meter Charge 55,00
Removal of landscaping to Access 75.00
Meter
Septage Processing Charge/1 ,000 31,00
Gallons
Grease Trap Waste Charge/1 ,000 42.00
Gallons
PUBLIC UTILITIES DIVISION
COLLIER COUNTY WATER-SEWER DISTRICT
htlp://libraryl,municode,comldefault/DocView/1 0578/1/305/311
4/17/2008
ARTICLE VI. WATER-SEWER DISTRICT UNIFORM BILLING, OPERATING A~eiPd\g!l9h\ lilS2fuA
February 24,2009
Page 122 of 462
UNIFORM BilLING, OPERATING AND REGULATORY STANDARDS ORDINANCE
APPENDIX A--FEES, RATES AND CHARGES
SCHEDULE 7--AlLOWANCE FOR FUNDS PRUDENTLY INVESTED (AFPI)
Effective October 1, 2006
AFPI Schedule Per ~RC~\Nater System (0)
TABLE INSET:
Payment Calendar Year
Month
2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
January $0,00 $58,69 $234.76 $41084 $586,91 $762,98 $939.05
February 0.00 73,36 249.44 425,51 601.58 777.65 953,72
March 0.00 88.04 264.11 440.18 616.25 79233 968,40
April 0,00 102.71 278.78 454,85 630.93 807.00 983.07
May 0.00 117,38 293.45 469.53 645,60 821.67 997,74
June 0.00 132.05 308,13 484.20 660,27 836.34 1,012.42
July 0,00 146,73 322.80 498.87 674,94 851.02 1,027.09
August 0.00 161.40 337.47 513.54 689,62 865.69 1,041,76
September 0.00 176.07 352,14 528.22 704,29 880.36 1,056.43
October 14.67 190,74 366.82 542,89 718,96 895.03 1,056.43
November 29,35 205.42 381.49 557.56 73363 90971 1,056.43
. .
December 44.02 220,09 396.16 572,23 748.31 924.38 1,056.43
AFPI Schedule Per ERC--Wastewater System (~l
TABLE INSET:
2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
January $000 $38.24 $152,94 $267,65 $382.36 $497,06 $611.77
February 0.00 47,79 162,50 277.21 391.92 506,62 621,33
March 0.00 57,35 172.06 286.77 401.47 516,18 630,89
April 0.00 66,91 181.62 296.33 411.03 525,74 640.45
May 0,00 76.47 191.18 305,89 420,59 535.30 650,01
June 0.00 86.03 200.74 315.44 430,15 544,86 659.57
July 0.00 95,59 210.30 325.00 439.71 554.42 669.12
http://Iibrary l.municode.comJdefault/Doc View/l 0578/1/305/311
4/17/2008
ARTICLE VI. WATER-SEWER DISTRICT UNIFORM BILLING, OPERATING Al\{)an~:&wf~
February 24, 2009
Page 123 of 462
August 0,00 105.15 219.86 334.56 449.27 563.98 678.68
September 0,00 114,71 229.41 344,12 458.83 573,53 688.24
October 9.56 124.27 238.97 353,68 468,39 583.09 688.24
November 19.12 133.87 248.53 363.24 477.95 592,65 688,24
December 28,68 143.38 258.09 372.80 487.50 602,21 688.24
(*) AFPI fee is initiated on October 1, 2006.
DIVISION 2. COLLIER COUNTY WATER-SEWER DISTRICT"
"Editor's note: Ord. No. 04-55, 92,8., provided for the relocation of LDC section 1,5,7. to be
included as 9134-186,
Sec. 134-186. Provision of water, sewer, and reuse irrigation water within the Collier
County Water-Sewer District; applicability to special purpose independent
governments.
(a) The Collier County Water-Sewer District is a dependent special district created by the
Florida legislature, Its governing body is ex officio the board of county commissioners. The
Collier County Water-Sewer District has been charged by the legislature with the overall
responsibilliy for the' provision of water and sewer services within the boundaries of the Collier
County Water-Sewer District, which are more particularly described in chapter 88-499, Laws of
Florida,
(b) This legislative charge is consistent with the goalS and policies of the state comprehensive
plan and the Collier County Growth Management Plan in that a regional utility system like that
operated by the Collier County Water-Sewer District (1) fulfills the goal of assuring the ability of
an adequate supply of water among competing uses by requiring development to be compatible
with existing local and regional water supplies, (2) fulfills the goals of protecting the county's
substantial investments in regional pubiic utility facilities by maximizing the use of such existing
public facilities, (3) fulfills the goal of economic and efficient provision of quality public services
which eliminates needless duplication of public facilities and instead employs the use of regional
facilities as opposed to multiple or smaller scale and less efficient local, public or private utility
facilities.
(c) The provision and treatment of water, sewer and reuse irrigation water within the Collier
County Water-Sewer District as a matter of local land development policy and regulation shall
be provided by Collier County Water-Sewer District facilities in conformance with this Code and
all other applicable county ordinances, regulations and policies relative to the provision of such
utility facilities and services.
(d) The provisions of this Code and all other applicable ordinances, regulations and policies of
the county shall be construed as applicable planning and permilling laws, rules, regulations, and
policies which control development of lands within the Collier County Water-Sewer District to be
http://libraryl.municode.comldefau!tlDoc View/! 0578111305/311
411712008
ARTICLE VI. WATER-SEWER DISTRICT UNIFORM BILLING, OPERATING AN'lge~~1'M.2I8lA
February 24, 2009
Page 124 of 462
serviced by a special-purpose government such as a community development district.
(Ord, No. 04-55, S 2.B.)
Sees. 134-187-134-200. Reserved.
DIVISION 3. RESERVED"
"Editor's note: Ord. No. 01-73, S 8, adopted Dee, 11,2001, repealed SS 134-201-134-204, in their
entirety, Formerly, said sections pertained to extension of existing distribution water mains, applications
for distribution water main extensions, permits for distribution water main extensions, conditions, water
service area boundaries as related to the City of Naples Service Area, See the Code Comparative
Table,
Sees. 134-201--134-215. Reserved.
DIVISION 4. RESERVED"
"Editor's note: Ord. No. 01-73, S 8, adopted Dec. 11,2001, repealed SS 134-216--134-219, in their
entirety, Formerly, said sections pertained to general regulations, definitions, abbreviations, and
supplemental service charge as related to sewer use restrictions. See the Code Comparative Table.
Sees. 134-216--134-225. Reserved.
DIVISION 5. RESERVED*
"Editor's note: Ord. No. 01-73, S 8, adopted Dec. 11, 2001, repealed SS 134-226--134-250, in their
entirety. Formerly, said sections pertained to general provisions, discharge of industrial waste, effluent
quality bond, use of public wastewater system, general discharge prohibitions, maximum
concentrations allowed, approval of pretreatment facilities, maintenance of pretreatment facilities, use
of interceptors (traps), use of control manhole, measurements, tests, special arrangements, special
arrangements; determination of acceptability, national categorical pretreatment standards, alternative
discharge limits, state requirements, county's and district's right of revision, excessive discharge,
pretreatment standards, slug discharges, reasonable service conditions, baseline report, compliance
schedule, compliance date report, and periodic compliance reports as related to rules and regulations
of the uniform utility operating and regUlatory standards and procedures. See the Code Comparative
Table,
http://Iibrary1,municode,comJdefaultlDocViewIl0578/1/305/31 1
4/17/2008
ARTICLE VI. WATER-SEWER DISTRICT UNIFORM BILLING, OPERATING AN.genBl\!lteUK1f28JA
February 24, 2009
Page 125 of 462
Sees. 134-226--134-255, Reserved.
DIVISION 6. RESERVED"
"Editor's note: Ord. No. 01-73, S 8, adopted Dee, 11,2001, repealed SS 134-256--134-258, in their
entirety. Formerly, said sections pertained to monitoring facilities, inspection and sampling and powers
and authority of inspectors as related to monitoring and inspections See the Code Comparative Table,
Sees. 134-256-134-258, Reserved.
DIVISION 7. RESERVED"
"Editor's note: Ord. No, 01-73, S 8, adopted Dec, 11, 2001, repealed !is 134-261--134-265, in their
entirety. Formerly, said sections pertained to penalties, authority to disconnect service, suspension of
service, revocation of permit, and notice of disconnection, suspension, revocation as related to
confidential information. See the Code Comparative Table.
Secs. 134-261-134-270, Reserved,
DIVISION 8. RESERVED"
"Editor's note: Ord. No, 01-73, S 8, adopted Dec. 11,2001, repealed SS 134-271,134.272, in their
entirety, Formerly, said sections pertained to confidential information and disclosure laws as related to
confidential information. See the Code Comparative Table,
Sees, 134-271-134-275, Reserved,
DIVISION 9. RESERVED"
"Editor's note: Ord, No. 01-73, S 8, adopted Dec. 11, 2001, repealed !is 134-276--134-278 in their
entirety, Formerly, said sections pertained to purpose, service charges and charges and fees as related
to service charges and fees, See the Code Comparative Table.
http://libraryl.municode,com/default/DocView/l0578/1/305/311
4/17/2008
ARTICLE VI, WATER-SEWER DISTRICT UNIFORM BILLING, OPERATING ANgenBagllJiZ6NnJ8A
February 24, 2009
Page 126 of 462
Secs, 134-276--134-285. Reserved.
DIVISION 10. WATER IRRIGATION"
"Editor's note: Ord. No, 00-61, !HI1--8, adopted Sept. 26, 2000, did not specifically amend this
Code, Hence its inclusion as ~~ 134-286--134-293 was at the discretion of the editor. See the Code
Comparative Table,
Sec. 134-286. Title and applicability.
This division is entitled "The Collier County Water Irrigation Ordinance." This division shall apply
only within unincorporated Collier County,
(Ord, No. 00-61, ~ 1, 9-26-00)
Sec. 134-287. Findings.
The board of county commissioners hereby makes the following findings:
(1) That irrigation by water during the hours of 9:00 a.m, and 5:00 p.m, increases water
loss to evaporation and reduces the beneficial use of water resources;
(2) That adopting an ordinance to limit irrigation between 5:00 p.m. and 9:00 a,m. will
raise public awareness and promote conservation; and
(3) That restricting irrigation during the hours of 9:00 a,m, and 5:00 p,m, will not create
a hardship on residents of the county.
(Ord, No, 00-61, ~ 2,9-26-00)
Sec. 134-288. Purpose.
The primary purpose of this division is to provide a regulatory framework to assist in
conservation of water resources through consistent and uniform use for landscape irrigation in specified
geographic areas,
(Ord. No. 00-61, ~ 3, 9-26-00)
Sec. 134-289. Definitions.
The following definitions shall apply throughout this division:
Agriculture means the growing of farm products including, but not limited to, sugar cane,
vegetables, citrus and other fruits, pasture lands, sod or nursery stock, including, but not limited to,
ornamental foliage and greenhouse plants,
County means Collier County, a politicai subdivision of the State of Florida, by and through its
http://Iibrary1.mllnicode,comldefallltIDoc View/1 0578/1/305/311
4/17/2008
ARTICLE VI, WATER-SEWER DISTRICT UNIFORM BILLING. OPERATING ANmn~~61!)fmf\
February 24, 2009
Page 127 of 462
board of county commissioners and as Ex-Officio the Governing Board of the Collier County
Water-Sewer District and Goodland Water District.
Code enforcement officer means any authorized agent or employee of the county whose duty it
is to enforce most of the county's codes.
County water/sewer district means the service boundaries as established in Collier County
Water-Sewer District, Special Act Chapter 88-499, Laws of Florida, as now or hereafter amended,
Goodland Water District means the service boundaries as established in Goodland Water
District, Ordinance No. 80-43, or its successor ordinance,
Impervious means land surfaces that do not allow penetration of water, including paved roads,
paved sidewalks, paved driveways, paved parking lots, or highly compacted areas, including with shell
or with clay.
Irrigation means the application of water from surface water or ground water sources or
aquifers.
Irrigation systems means equipment and/or devices which deliver water to landscaping being
irrigated including, but not limited to, pipelines, control structures, pipes, ditches, pumping stations,
emitters, valves and fittings, but excluding the transfer of water through water management systems
from one location to another.
Person means natural person, public or private corporation, firm, association, joint venture,
partnership, municipality, government or governmental agency, political subdivision, and any other
entity whatsoever, or any combination of same, jointly or severally.
Water resources means surface and groundwater sources and aquifers,
Water utility service means water service provided by a public or private utility,
(Ord No. 00-61, ~ 4, 9-26-00)
Sec. 134-290. Irrigation hours; operational prohibitions.
(a) All water irrigation activities within those areas and boundaries as designated in section
134-291, and which are not exempted by section 134-292, shall be restricted to the hours
between 5:00 p,m. and 9:00 a.m., seven days each week. Subject to the exceptions specified in
this division, irrigation by water in those areas is prohibited between the hours of 9:00 a,m" and
5:00 p.m., seven days each week.
(b) All water irrigation activities within those areas and boundaries as designated in section
134-291, and which are not exempted by section 134-292, shall be operated in an effective
manner so as to not allow water to be applied continuously or primarily to any impervious
surface.
(c) All water irrigation activities prohibited or restricted from time-to-time by emergency orders
declared by the South Florida Water Management District and published in a newspaper of
general circulation in Collier County pursuant to F,S, ~ 373,175, Each such order shall apply to
such geographic areas in the county as are specified in the respective order or, if not specified,
as otherwise provided by law. Each such order shall be subject only to such exceptions as
specified in the respective order, and if not specified therein, as otherwise provided by law,
(Ord, No. 00-61, ~ 5, 9-26-00; Ord. No, 00-86, ~ 1,12-12-00)
Sec. 134-291. Irrigation restriction affected areas.
(a) The provisions of this division shall apply immediately on its effective date to landscape
http://libraryl,municode,com/default/DocView/l 0578/1/305/311
4/17/2008
ARTICLE VI. WATER-SEWER DISTRICT UNIFORM BILLING, OPERATING A~~~~rr~~~
Page 128 of 462
irrigation within the boundaries of the Collier County Water/Sewer District and within the
boundaries of the Goodland Water District.
(b) This division shall hereafter be applicable to other geographic areas of unincorporated
Collier County if and when the respective geographic area Is classified, by resolution(s) adopted
by the board of county commissioners after pubiic hearing, as a water irrigation restricted area,
which may include areas served by private utility water service.
(Ord. No, 00-61, S 6, 9-26-00)
Sec. 134-292. Exemptions; variances.
(a) The following activities are exempt from all provisions of this division:
(1) Landscape irrigation by hand watering using only a self-canceling nozzle.
(2) Landscape irrigation from which the water source is only treated wastewater
effluent.
(3) The short-term operation of irrigation systems only for system repair and
maintenance, which shall be limited to a maximum of ten minutes per zone per week
and there must be a person present and working on the system during each such
operation.
(4) Landscape irrigation for purposes of watering in fungicides, insecticides and
herbicides as required by the manufacturer of the product, or by federal or Florida law,
This exemption, however, applies only to then licensed pest control operators and is
limited to the amounts of "watering in" water specified by the manufacturer's
recommendations.
(5) For the first 90 days after initial installation, iandscape irrigation for the purpose of
"watering in" newly planted grass and foliage that constitutes a major portion of the
landscaping.
(6) Agricultural irrigation to the extent permitted by a consumptive or water use permit
issued by the South Florida Water Management District.
(b) Any person whose irrigation is affected by this division may make application to the county
water director for a variance if strict compliance with this division will impose a unique,
unnecessary and inequitable hardship on such service. Relief may be granted only upon
submitted proof that such hardship is peculiar to that person or that affected property, the
problem is not self-imposed, and that the granting of the variance would be consistent with the
general Intent and purpose of this division and the variance is the minimum variance necessary
to eliminate the hardship.
(1) The county water director is the only person authorized to grant or deny variances
for irrigation activities that utilize water provided by the county water/sewer district or the
Goodland Water District. The water director shouid render a decision on the variance
request within ten working days after actual receipt of a complete application, Denial of a
variance request may be appealed to the public works administrator within ten days of
actual receipt by the applicant of the water director's decision on the initial request.
(2) An application for variance, and/or the granting of a variance, shall operate
prospectively and shall not affect any then pending enforcement action against the
property owner pursuant to the provisions of this division or otherwise.
(c) Shouid the board of county commissioners extend the provisions of this division to any
other areas (only in unincorporated Collier County), the county manager shall designate a
county employee who will be responsible to act on behalf of the county to approve, in whole or
http://libraryl.municode,comldefaultlDoc View/l 0578/1/3 05/311
4/17/2008
ARTICLE VI. WATER-SEWER DISTRICT UNIFORM BILLING, OPERA TING AA9'~~~!!ri~t~~
Page 129 of 462
in part, or to disapprove, variance requests within any such designated area(s). This person
may also be the county's water director.
(Ord No, 00-61, S 7, 9-26-00)
Sec. 134-293. Penalties.
(a) Violators of this division shall be issued a $25.00 citation pursuant to the county's citation
ordinance, Persons who commit repeat violations may also be punished pursuant to F.S. S
162,21, as a civil infraction with a maximum civil penalty not to exceed $500.00. Any person
who violates any provision of this division shall also be subject to the county's remedies as
authorized in F.S, S 125.69, and/or section 1-6 of the county's Code of Ordinances.
(1) Each day (or part thereof) that there is a violation of this division by the same
person or entity shall constitute a separate offense,
(2) All rnonies collected pursuant to this division shall be used by the code enforcement
department to fund continued and enhanced enforcement of this division andfor other
county ordinances under its jurisdiction.
(Ord, No, 00-61, S 8,9-26-00)
Secs. 134-294--134-310. Reserved.
I/Collier County, Florida/CODE OF LAWS AND ORDINANCES County of COLLIER.
FLORIDA Codified through Ord. No. 07-45, enacted May 22, 2007. (Supplement No.
22)/Chapter 134 UTILITIES"/ARTICLE VI. WATER-SEWER DISTRICT UNIFORM BILLING,
OPERATING AND REGULATORY STANDARDS"
http://library1,municode.comldefaultJDoc View/] 0578/11305/311
4/17/2008
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24, 2009
Page 130 of 462
Jean E. Valadez
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Attachments:
Lewis, Doug [dalewis@ralaw,com]
Tuesday, May 13, 2008 9:48 AM
Jean e, Valadez
FW: Tamiami Square of Naples
Tamiami Square 020.jpg; Tamiami Square 021.jpg; Tamlaml Square 022.jpg; Tamiami
Square 023.jpg; Tamiami Square 024,jpg; Tamiami Square 025.jpg; Tamiami Square 026.jpg
Fyi -- for your file.
From: LewiS, Doug
Sent: Tuesday, May 13, 2008 9:48 AM
To: 'wides_tom'; 'GlIbertMondvalz@colllergov.net'
Cc: 'belpediojennlfer'; 'CrifasirealtyCo@aol.com'
Subject: Tamiaml Square of Naples
<<Tamiami Square 020,jpg>> <<Tamiami Square 021 ,jpg>> <<Tamiaml Square 022,jpg>> <<Tamiami Square 023.jpg>>
<<Tamiami Square 024.jpg>> <<Tamiami Square 025,jpg>> <<Tamiaml Square 026,jpg>>
Tom & GiI,
In follow-up to our meeting yesterday, Jerry Hartman and I went to the site and walked the property after our meeting. For
your review and file. attached are photographs of the only lift station located on the very north end of the property. Let me
know If you have any further questions related to the lift station. Also, in the right-of-way median just north of the site, we
noticed that the median is being irrigated by reclaimed water, Does the site have access to reclaimed water for irrigation
purposes? Let us know, Thanks!!
Douglas A, Lewis
'__&)ANDRESS II
A LEGAL PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATiON
www.ralaw.com
850 Park Shore Drive
Trianon Centre - 3 rd Floor
Naples, Flortda 34103
Phone: (239) 649-2712
Fax: (239) 261-3659
B-rnad; dalew;st1l!ralaw,com
Prof1le: Douglas A. Lewis
BOll1 DClugJil1'i i\. Lr.:wis iUld Rot'lzel & Andn:ss illlt.:ncl lhillltJlS mess;,lge he used e,"\clwdvL'lf ll'y rIlL' ilddrt'ss~l:(st. Thi0 messagl'
rni\~i t'lllJlain inforl11ation lhat' is privikgl'd, coutidcmi::t1 and t'xcmpl from disc!murc under arplicabk l:1w. lJn:nHhorizcd disc.losure'
or Ll~t urlhis infonmltion i~ strklly prol1ihitcd. rr you have n:L:dVl'O this comll1unkatinn in error, ple~lse pl::muml::lltl~i Ulsjlos(, of
111\-' origirul I1H.'SsagL' and notify Dl)UgliJS A. Lt'wi~ immediately at 1(239) 649~27 J 2. Thank you.
Any federal tax advice contained herein or in any attachment
hereto is not intended to be used, and cannot be used, to (1)
avoid penalties imposed under the Internal Revenue Code or
(2) support the promotion or marketing of any transaction or
matter. This legend has been affixed to comply with U.S.
Treasury Regulations governing tax practice.
C<'1
;J
,..,)
l{)
v'\
:e.
,:j
-C
.c.....
6
-f,
'"
CJ-
1(\
~
j.
J
'~
'v
,
.,:~1;:i~~;~;.;;
I~' ,(.I'j\ '" I . , .
t'lif;~tl'~:',""d'
~_ ,J.J1'" i,f.:, I ,~ ' ,
"I"'r"!;.. ;,.:
;':'1":"'1
''';'.
Agenda Item NO.1 OA
-----"...__._.,-~----
Agenda Item No. 10A
,~
Agenda Item No. 10A
Agenda Item No. 10A
Ag<:.nda Item No. 10A
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24, 2009
Page 138 of 462
Attachment E
Pre-Application Meeting Follow-up
FW: Tamiami Square.. Pre-Application Meeting with the County on W&S Impact Fep(~enda RiHWtJoO~&A
February 24, 2009
Page 139 of 462
FW: Tamiami Square -- Pre-Application Meeting with the County on W&S
Impact Fees
Jean E. Valadez
sent: Thursday, May 22, 20082:35 PM
To: Geny Hartman
Attachments: Document.pdf (10 K8)
~..-_._,----,.....-~--"~,~"......~-------------".'"
FYI.
Jean E, Valadez
Senior Office Coordinator
GAl Orlando has movedl Please note our new address below:
GAl Consultants, Inc,
301 East Pine Street, Suite 1020
Orlando, Florida 32801
T 407.423.8398 ext. 3126
F 407,843.1070
www.ga!f9nSU Ita nts&o rn
GAl CON'SUl T"HTS
r..
~
..._---......
j-tm..II:Ql1'i,g l(le~..; 111:'-' r"'-:31.l'l !ur GI".,;! :.i>,..e.:m. S,::.I I~' a t.l'(\-~~t~"'. ~~l,pj'~.ee~JW1'~, \
w ui [jGi'iJ:.t:_~IL"f'U ~n9:.::'f"'::' j,'l,:!- "I !"Ill I.:II"'~I ('\In1I':--I,t,~ I ':')Il,u Il,'lg Ilr rrl, y~'t'\"rrQ [ll I r (.l...;I1~1; ':t':ill~h'''I[k:
1l1.r"~ '2U':':Hfy", lr.;.n~~('t'Jlj('I1, :(;,'1' '~~t3t.e, 111.jlJ';~~id: CIlia 9;;,..~tllr1i':::n~31 ~~r:'~eG '1'~':1' e'~,[e:::.
;h...,..:/" ',:~ l t 1-\(' ~Jr:'-l. !,':~{1';'l, ,:/1Il:1W'~$1. ,v~l 'JL'uL,e,,:,le:-1'1 Unll'.;J ::-,l,i'lt(.~~.
.J
CtltluunNG ~tm-
nus 01" SE__vtCE
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE
The documents and materials transmitted herewith contain confidential and proprietary information belonging to the sender and are legally privileged.
They <lfe solely for the use of thE-ir intended recipient. If you <Ire not the intended recipient or the person responsible for delivering e-mail to the
intended recipient, you nave received this e-mail in error. Inform the sender 01 the error and remove this e-mail from your system. Ifthis transmission
indudE's design data and recommendations, they are providE'd only <is a matter of convenience and should not be used for final design and/or
construction.
From: Lewis, Doug [mailto:dalewis@ralaw.com]
Sent: Thursday, May 22, 2008 2:2S PM
To: CrifasirealtyCo@aol.com
Cc: Jean E, Valadez; Nelson, Karen
Subject: RE: Tamiami Square -- Pre-Application Meeting with the County on W&S Impact Fees
<<Document.pdf>>
Jack,
In follow-up to the below, I will follow-up on items 1 & 2 below. You are handling #3 below directly with the
consultant, correct? Also, the County asked who is Sunwest plumbing and if they work for you? They work for
you correct?
The County said that the irrigation meter information provided to the County seemed incorrect. Jerry is going to
review this Information and provide fOllOW-UP to you and the County on this.
https://webmail.gaiconsultants.comlOW A/?ae=! tem&a=Print&t=IPM.Note&id=RgAAAA... 5/27/2008
~
'~
FW: Tamiami Square -- Pre-Application Meeting with the County on W&S Impact Fe'1i'gendlilWr\\ ~8ftbA
February 24, 2009
Page 140 of 462
Finally, please review the attached and confirm with Jerry and I whether it is correct and that the ERC calculation
reflects what you are showing based on issued permits for the project. Thanks!!
Douglas A, Lewis
1_~ANn~Ess..11
A LEGAL PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATION
WWF...ralaw.C.Q.lTI
850 Park Shore Drive
Trianon Centre - 3rd Floor
Naples, Florida 34103
Phone: (239) 649-2712
Fax: (239) 261-3659
E-mail: dalewis_@]:a.l~.com
Profile: DQuglas ,'", Lewis
Botb Douglas A. Lewis and Roetzel & Andres!) intend tJ,al {his message be used exclusively by the addressee(s). This
message may contain information that is privileged, confidential and exempt from disclosure under applicable law,
Unauthorized disclosure- or use ofthis infl..lrmation is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error,
pl~ase pen1KlI1ently dispose ofrhe original 111essage and notify Douglas A. Lewis immediately at 1(239) 649-2712. Thank
you.
From: Lewis, Doug
Sent: Monday, May 12, 2008 6:03 PM
To: 'CrifasirealtyCo@aol.com'
Cc: Nelson, Karen
Subject: Tamiaml Square - Pre-Application Meeting with the County on W&S Impact Fees
Importance: High
Jack,
In follow-up to the pre-appilcation meeting today, the County is asking for the following Items:
1, Sewer flows for February, March and April '08 (Shall I follow-up with J&N on this or can someone in your office
track this down?);
2, The number of sewer pumps on the property, where located and how are they configured - e.g. will these
pumps or single pump service all of the sewer flows for the entire project (Shall I follow-up with J&N on this or
can someone in your office track this down?);
3. Copy of the utility plan showing location of potable water and irrigation lines (if you go with a separate
irrigation meter, you'll need to have a separate irrigation line and the county will want controllers on the irrigation
lines to limit to 80 gpm at peak);
Also, the County asked who is Sunwest piumbing and if they work for you? They said that the irrigation meter
information provided to the County seemed incorrect. Jerry Is going to review this information and provide follow-
https:/ /webmai1. gaiconsultants, comlOW A/?ae=Item&a=Print&FIPM.Note&id=RgAAAA,.. 5/27/2008
FW: Tamiami Square -- Pre-Application Meeting with the County on W&S Impact Fe'l\benda~lll*i ~&t;~A
February 24, 2009
Page 141 of 462
up to the County on this. Finally, please review the attached and confirm whether it is correct and that the ERC
calculation reflects what you are showing based on issued permits for the project Thanks!!
<< File: Documentpdf>>
Douglas A. Lewis
<< OLE Object: Picture (Metafile) >>
wwv;.ralaw.colT1 <http://www.ralaw,coroL>
850 Park Shore Drive
Trianon Centre - 3rd Floor
Naples, Florida 34103
Phone: (239) 649-2712
Fax: (239) 261-3659
E-mail: dalewis@ralaw.com
Profile: Douglas A. Lewis <http://www.ral.a..\l.comlattorney.cfrn?id=45.12>
Both Douglas A. Lewis and Roetzel & Andress intend that this message be used exclusively by the addressee
(s). This message may contain information that is privileged, confidential and exempt from disclosure under
applicable law. Unauthorized disclosure or use of this information is strictly prohibited. If you have received this
communication in error, please permanently dispose of the original message and notify Douglas A. Lewis
immediately at 1(239) 649-2712, Thank you.
Any federal tax advice contained herein or lTI any attachment
hereto ~s not intended to be used, and cannot be used, to (1)
avoid penalties imposed under the Internal Revenue Code or
(2) support the promotion or marketing of any transaction or
matter. Tnls legend has been affixed to 80mply with O.S.
Treasu:::-y Regulations governlng tax practice.
https:llwebmai1.gaiconsultants.com/OW A/?ae=Item&a=Print&t=IPM.Note&id=RgAAAA.., 5/27/2008
FW: Tamiami Square of Naples
Agenda R~~ofolA
February 24, 2009
Page 142 of 462
FW: Tamiami Square of Naples
Jean E. Valadez
Sent: Thursday, May 22, 2008 2:34 PM
To: Gerry Hartman
..._---'--_.__..._..-..,._,~-~......._~-_."--""~y---------.._~..,.,...--,,"_...--_.........,.......~_._,,-~---_.""-
FYI.
Jean E. Valadez
Senior Office Coordinator
GAl Orlando has moved! Please note our new address below:
GAl Consultants, Inc.
301 East Pine Street, Suite 1020
Orlando, Florida 32801
T 407.423.8398 ext. 3126
F 407.843.1070
www.gaiconsultants.com
iO;A! COH5ULTAH'TS
~
- ,
fr,Hlsll)""fl'krly jd~~s ,n'I,,) f(~~I'.l'r' !'r..>r l'rVe:( 51~ y(;o!t-.:.,. G.Al i.; d 6L:O-J.-"'t/9.)lt ~m-DI~~r:.'<l'II~'C"(j. J
'~,u't1(':I:;.ri;lII':"'.1 -:nqi"'!.::l::III,? aM ~~nv:r(lllln, ent~1 ['.In:;l.li!mg tifm, $(:Ivmg -JI!f c:!.err.~ '''4vrIJ'.\,~;j(:
n :lltc '.:-n,~.rg'~, lr~16~'.LI:~)t:t:,II. :e~" ~~!li;tr:, IiKlu:;t.13i ;:'IKJ Q(....{'on)rl'~I'I:31 r.~,Ii(,~t1; (Iu.,}, C~~\~l~~
th,';;u'Q,",8'..l Lilt: ~Jc"'lr,:.::a::;',. Mld,\'(:sl, a r;d SOutH:a';te1Il Unllco <;;,tatc.!..
etu'.....".., rtm
nAJlCi OF' SER\tlCE
CONFIDENTIAliTY NOTICE
Th@documents and mat@rialstransmitted herewith contain confidential and proprietary information b@longingtothe sender and are legal IV privileged.
They are solely for the use of their intended recipient. Jfyou are not the Intended recipient or the person responsible for delivering e-mail to the
intended recipient, you have received this e-maiJ in error, Inform the sender of the errOr and remove this e-mail from your system. If this transmission
includes design data and recommendations, they are provided only as a matter of convenience and should not be used for final design and/or
construction.
From: Lewis, Doug [maillo:dalewis@ralaw.comj
Sent: Thursday, May 22, 2008 2:14 PM
To: Lewis, Doug; CrlfaslrealtyCo@aol.com
Cc: Jean E. Valadez; Nelson, Karen
Subject: RE: Tamiami Square of Naples
Jack,
Have you provided a copy of the utility plan showing location of potable water and irrigation lines to the
consultant? If not, can you follow-up with Jean on this. See her contact information below.
-Doug
From: Lewis, Doug
Sent: Tuesday, May 13, 2008 10: 17 AM
To: 'Jean E. Valadez'
Cc: 'CrifaslrealtyCo@aol.com'
Subject: RE: Tamiami Square of Naples
https://webmail.gaiconsultants.com/OW A/?ae=Item&a=Print&t=IPM.Note&id=RgAAAA... 5/27/2008
FW: Tamiami Square of Naples
Agendall~ ~<9f1~A
February 24, 2009
Page 143 of 462
Yes, Thank you. I have an inquiry into the client requesting thiS,
- Doug
_ ~."___._. ____~._._..._. ._ __.___.__,,_._______..._. ..~U_"__,_______._.__,__._
From: Jean E. Valadez [mailto:j.valadez@gaiconsultants.com]
Sent: Tuesday, May 13, 2008 10:09 AM
To: Lewis, Doug
Subject: RE: Tamiami Square of Naples
Thanksl
Gerry asked me to remind you that you were going to send us the plans and drawings for Tamiami Square.
Jean E. Valadez
Senior Office Coordinator
GAl Orlando has moved! Please note our new address below:
GAl Consultants, Inc.
301 East Pine Street, Suite 1020
Orlando, Florida 32801
T 407.423.8398 ext. 3126
F 407.843.1070
w"'{w.gaicor}~l} [!~ nts. com
GAl Cl:)NSUl TAHTS
~
'\
T,i1Il'"It;'Jr'll":"q i,1'~~s 111,(II"~~:Ji-,'-V II)! CNl::/:it) ',~':.1!<:', GAl :~.ll 6t.:(i'I~t:!;J':,. tmpl(rI"~0~::I'.';'retl,
"'~IJ.lIGI:;,tj;1lr'''''O '~II';Il,:,~~edll';' ,1M ejh",(.'(,m~lltil,1 U':II'')ull'fIY Hfll'l ~""'..:r..."rtg ('~jl ,:Itr.:lltii '.'I'.:rlljw,:I.:
ill :ljO~ ':':11,,::rgV. Ir,1I\Sp.:,!lt..:;llr:"L "I'.;-,j: ~St.Jh::J 1J1':1U';'I_'id~ :.:Ij g')I.'I':(1"lIlI~lIr~:d '1'~1".c1$ j\~l"l ')-~~':_':-S
Ul ",,~;",J':.:.l U',() :'J,::.'t~'~"s.t, "li:j,'.'L:,:.t, ~;,;1 S('wt\I'~1'~l~m Uflll'!'-:.J ::t,1'"'='.:.
e:etn...n,,"lm
lEUS OJl SEItVrCe
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE
The dDcument5 and materia!5 triln5mitted herewith contain confidential and proprietary information belonging to the sender and are legally privileged_
They are solely for the use of their intended recipient. If yOLl are not the intended recipient or the person responsible for delivering e-mail to the
Intended recipient, you have received thiS e-mail m eorror. Inform the sender of the error and remove this e-mail from your system. If this transmission
includes design data and rl:;'wmmendation!;, they are provided only as a rnattf'or of convenience and should not be used for final design and/or
construction.
From: Lewis, Doug [mailto:dalewis@ralaw.com]
Sent: Tuesday, May 13, 2008 9:48 AM
To: Jean E. Valadez
Subject: FW: Tamiami Square of Naples
Fyi -- for your file.
from: Lewis, Doug
sent: Tuesday. May 13, 2008 9:48 AM
To~ 'wides_tom'; 'GilbertMonciviliz@colliergov.net'
Cc: 'belpediojennifer'; 'CrifasirealtyCo@aol.com'
Subject: Tamiami Square of Naples
https://webmail.gaiconsultants.comlOW A/?ae=Item&a=Print&t=IPM.Note&id=RgAAAA... 5/27/2008
FW: Tamiami Square of Naples
Agenda~m ~oo~ 8A
February 24, 2009
Page 144 of 462
<<Tamiami Square 020.jpg>> <<Tamiami Square 021.jpg>> <<Tamiami Square 022.jpg>> <<Tamiami Square
023.jpg>> <<Tamiami Square 024.jpg>> <<Tamiami Square 025.jpg>> <<Tamiami Square 026.jpg>>
Tom & GiI,
In follow-up to our meeting yesterday, Jeny Hartman and I went to the site and walked the property after our
meeting. For your review and file. attached are photographs of the only lift station located on the very north end
of the property. Let me know if you have any further questions related to the 'if! station. Also, i",the right-of-way
median just north of the site, we noticed that the median is being irrigated by reclaimed water. Does the site have
access to reclaimed water for irrigation purposes? Let us know. Thanks!!
Douglas A. Lewis
l_____syANDRESS II
A LEGAL PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATION
~w..\Y..:.@Ja_w.com
850 Park Shore Drive
Trianon Centre - 3rd Floor
Naples, Florida 34J03
Phone: (239) 649-2712
Fax: (239) 261-3659
E-mail: daleJVisliVralaw.com
Profile: DouglM.A. Lewis
Both Douglas A. Lewis and Roerzel & Andr~ss intend that this message be used exclusively by the addressee(s). This
mess3g~ may contain information that is privileged, confidential and exempt from disclosure under applicable law.
Unauthorized disclosure or use of this infom1ation is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error,
please pcnnanently dispose of the original message and nOli(y D(,uglas A. Lewls immediately at 1(239) 649-2712. Thank
YOll.
Any federal tax advice contained herein or in any attachment
hereto is not intended to be used, and cannot be used, to (1)
avoid penalties imposed under the Internal Revenue Code or
(2) support the promotion or marketing of any transaction or
matter. This legend has been affixed to comply with U.S.
Treasury Regulations governing tax practice.
Any federal tax advice contained herein or i~ any attachment
hereto is not intended to be used, and cannot be used, to (1)
avoid penalties imposed under the Ir.ternal Revenue Code or
(2) support the promotion or marketing of any transaction or
https:/lwebmail.gaiconsultants.comlOW A/?ae=I tem&a=Print&t=IPM.Note&id=RgAAAA... 5/27/2008
Agenda Item No.1 OA
February 24, 2009
Page 145 of 462
Attachment F
Excerpts from ~stem Development
CharQes for Water, Wastewater, and
Stormwater Facilities
by Arthur C. Nelson
Agenda Item NO.1 OA
February 24, 2009
Page 146 of 462
~
1-1 ~ ~
OJ rt; OJ ~ rt;
SSOJ ~~ ~.~
~~~~~f]~a
~~ ~ t;>...- ~ u
C/j~U ~~ O~
OJ t;>...-~
Q ~ C/j
=
o
J
Q,/
Z
.
u
~
l
~
~ ~
\.iJ ....
:c c:
V'l ~
~:J.s
~ a:l~
'0 :::J ~
P...~
Z
V'l!
_ c:
3 ~
\.iJ~
.....l ~
B~p
[[~ ~ ~
o _. 0 p, s
= :. ...., g -
Dol =" 0 e;. 0
% ~~ 111 8
::;. i:. ~ 5 ra.
~[el~~
"g IJ'l n 0.. C
~a8..lXlV:l
"aZ~~
.a.aZ~
~~~~
g. {i ~ g
r; t;t ~;-
_""'O"\Q
N~~~
I'
~ 0
~
... ~
~ ~
'"
~
~
~
o
h@
.-
0':8
:!'~
~
;;"n
[~
;;;.~
S.~
h<
0,'
a
S,
n
~
i
~ ~"Cli i~~ ~ga]
wo'" =..=z@"-g-o-l
~ ~.~. . Q ;. g,.''' g. i g' ~ B. ~
!l;r"~nl!.8!!.g-"'-~3cr
'"' if! g ... G; g; '" 0
~~~:l' .,H8'~H~
..0"0;;: ?:l e.""'" cia.g
s.(jfZ"c ~~8!f~8..~'a
~. i ~.:. ~ ~ i i 8. ~1 ~:
nS"8 gg~~lt~Q.@.
?:l::E~ (J?r<<g I}~.s
nl:~!; 3e."t:Ili]n:;~.
~ g. s::;:;. 0"..!1 <.0 !i!: n (;I
~ s.; tr ~ < 5 0'" l;Ij i .
,., -0 - 0 e. Q. a ...... 2- Sl 0
;''$.!:l~ ~s:~g.~a.l:
.o_.=6'~ ",Scr=rn::rtl.;
"-. "":--: 0' oq CD = e:: ~ 0 ('\I
~ a'l:l"'<Il5~==-
8 Ii B . tT CD fI 0 I:J'" i=i'
o ~~ ~g-g ~"'~o
...... ro I:l M.' !2 8. e; g Q. S
~. . ~ ~.g~ ~a"'l~
-g ~ 6' S 'g. 0.. ~ ~ g
'iil i)n "O~o it c
t=i' Ei,s ::I..... ;; g C'
OJ .;;~, g~, g .g -g ~ o'
.. .'" IlQ. 0"" 8-
p." a.~ ",""S.
Z .1l' Si[e ~5-e,2:
~,' ., '" ., 0' ~ -<! i1, ~ '2:
g g g ~ s' 8' ~ ~ ~
e ~ $' ~ f; : (i ~
~ ~ ~ 0.-...: 0" e- > a.
~ ~ ::I. R 0' : e; ~. a
og, g'oas ~e;lf",
0" C'" (;q. ~ ~ < 0
.... $. =r S Q ;;' 1=:' '" g
S.6' 0 g':t 0- '<: r;,::!. R
~ I:l 3 0 '< 0 0 "~ !"
~. '. ~,,~'"
::;" ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ if ~ ~
OJ
~
.
'"
il
p
::l
.
o.
j.'
Agenda Item No, 10A
February 24, 2009
Page 147 Df 462
~:tl~
w d t:"':- v.:;-~
~ t:l t;a U.
'" ",'ji ~ Z 8. 0
~;;g~';""ll?
sA;;,,;eg:,g:
-.l VI n Q a\ C"
'f i i< ~ if
~ ~ ~ b ~~
~ Ul a r:!. >< e:
~[ ~
~ Vl a
'" ~
~ g ~
!""'. ?i:
-l JV a
~~ g:
. ~ ~
; ~
" "
t
e,
~
~
'"
~
~
...
i->
~
n~
'il~
z
~",i>\-
S'ti g
. -'
d?;
Q~~
'i>1' ~ Si
n !!.'
g',g "
ff ~
- ,
~ ~
- ~
5~
;1!
a-Q'
" .
,,~
z.
;".
. .
o .
. ~
, .
.
.~
,.
6'
"
.
.'.l
.
~
n
.
.
"
"
.
.
.
~
~
I"l
~
.
..
'.9.
.
'1
S'
'"
o
!!:
;.
~
o'
.
'"
!:
.
~o ~
~c...
~Om
--;.c
-<<So
ca-
r:::~c
Q-
:::ctIQ)
~OE
cn~ .2
C - Q)
.- 0 >
>-- Q)
-
CoU)O
CoQ)e
<t:e.Q)
0-
l: U)
ai: (/)
Q.
I
M I
......11'. .1Iil~ I" . _.., "" ,. ,
"" I I o..'U..o~ ~
~ ~e 0'5 13 ~ ~
(U'iiO~~t:dO
":~~8:;:~~'€
t'j 'O".;:j 0 .9 ~ 0.0 8.-
5 aJ g -5 1:: ~.s 0
'-=-5v.lr,llC~~~
\:::l .......... ~.- 0
"E~!:: ~ '5 ....:::l't;
..... tl..o:: ] 0 0
~8 ~...._~o
Ll C C':I ::s i:rI ""l Il) 'ti
~ co "d ~ !Xl ""..c:l co
"'d..... 0. ~ "0 5 ~-
--l 0... i-d t:: II.) ... .?"
:::J 1lJ _ Cl r::: ':: ~
o u'"O \:S r..;::: ~ ..... Cl:l
...c:l gEE:: C,.l ;:;.. ~ u
'" ua'Of:?~Q)
---~~'~Q)C"l.fS-;:o
U'J,.o 11) E..o E -.. 1:':1
U '" _ ,,'~""
~~~.sB5~~
- '" ""'''' - "
Q) c 0 U ".l ~ \-;
"-l1-o I-< .... ~ 'U
1;\, Fi ~ ~", '"' " ~
F.I a 0 0,) ~ ~ "t;:., ;:s
,.Q 8 ~...c : ~ a <:J :g
:: .~ ~.fj ~ -i; ~ ~
Z ""0_,,,,",,-
o "Q-~"'''~-''
~ 8 0 ~ . Il) ~ ~ ~
~ go S ,~ f: ~ c.o "ti ~
U ""::: rJ'J ;::::; =' !::Io .S '<.l 1:11
::J ~~~o'L"li:j"S"""rJi
~" "u" .~ i3 u
O "OBb>o&ti.9""Q
Ei",8;o'Q>",il",
==:: 0) 'c..... .. ~ ~.~ Q)
E- -dJ~~~ ....~a~
Z ~'E Q).~ ~ ~ t.J Q) ..c:
~lZlUSUOVk......oo
Agenda Item No, 10A
February 24, 2009
Page 148 of 462
~ 4) -g IS g :: ~ g .s B .~ b 2;
.-'l -5 "''' ",," _ "" b ia " '-..
~ ;;:: 00 tn 0 ~ ~ III ~ '0 .0 .Q "B
uO~c:l VJH~~O 1:0" ";;00
21S~at ~EVJ,r;~ g.~blJ~
, . "Q ~...... ~,>O ~ 1l.):::I U 0 cr::! OJ
;; " " .~ -.D ".D
;:j(1)Ii:l...c ,.cOOl) g ~~~
S ~ ~ .~ t) ~ ,3 :s ';:i g _0.. ~ ~
I;I:l tU ::I ~ '::I ttI a':l :l w U c::
Q) Q) U ~ S U '>< O.c. gp cd --I j:;;;;
OJ:),D ~ "'" ..9 Q) -5J E3 .~ ~ [JJ
@' t) U .::: <:I) Q) Q) 1-; t s 'S
"5 g ~ t'j g -B .9 .8 ~ E 'd .~ ::l
~ ~ ~ ~ (/') .S ~ ~ 'S ~ ~ 'a -;
o\.lU(\;)1lJ u...."'d~tfj"o 8"El~~
S Cl ~ u 0 E .~ ~ Q) ~ u ~ >
~ CZl IlJ 'S: S g. 0.. ~ :a 0 --;; .s ~
"0 v.i .s ~ '.0 '0 g. ~ 0.. ~ () ~ I..i
> ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ v ~ 8 -~ B E
~ ~ _~ ~ "5 ~ ~ - (!) _.... ro ~
tI:l..o~ U"'CciQ),D BE~a:
a 8 ~ ~ B ~ t:l ~ "d os. E3 S ::=
d) .ro1..... .." t'd t::: cj "'" VJ C
- :> ~ -5 '. -5 - ..; '" ,,(; '" 8
~ b -a ..... ~ a) 0. ~ V _ ~ cr.
<n tI.I ~ '_ U It) IV bO ....c::::I q) ...
'. " b " ,- > S B ., > '" 0
'" o::l '0 i;; 1:'~ ""',, i'l' ;.;.g " \J;.,
~ ..... (\;) ~ Q) 00 0 0 ~ ttI
\U"'dut) l/;I~o:)i:d1-;Q~l-.<
a~~~ "&~..d....o.,ttlu:u~E:
1:1l1;lj~- 000 IlJtjc::callJ
W .LI 0 8 'ci...'j Vol ;;:::. "0 '"0 .W :';::.t ~ a: 8
'- "t:I <1) ",,....; d:> 0 >: ~ >- ......
C lU &"'0 .... ;:;. ~ !:l. ..... ::; 1-0 l:';j I- ::5 ~
'=lJ............=g~lUO~OQ)r'Q)r,- D
lJ':)...:::l .:::;~ tI:l...... -...J........ U .... trJ c/J '-...J rJ'J '"'"'
'"
N
.
.
.
_ "_.." .__M~_ .. '_~_~"""_"''''.''.'
._. , ,u~... '.... ' .'.
'" ~'''' """~~
....
<'l
Q) _ tf.l I ~ b()
.0 -:a Ei il 1J "
..... C,);;.- ..... .c
;g-fo~~.8::3
S::l;>' .(,)"0
o U':I d tr.I 1=:
i3,s ~.g 0 .g
'a:;;: " "',...l "
~ Ei '~ ".:1' .
'S". 0 to -cl
o "" ".-"
'a .15 B a '0 to
2 O-r'ij..g 0 t:a ~
..gE~l/')Q>.e
Q,l en ~ P-o '" ~ "-
Ol: Q 4- U'). ~ !::
r:u 0 0 O.-J'-: QJ
... ..Ju~I-<~-E4::
~ 1l)>.;:3~0);:j~
< ~~~ ~ g'::.~
"d rG Cd ',cj t CF.l t:
=B ~.~ g. :; ~ ~
i:':I ;:::; e ~ ~'\j ~ ~
~ ~ It) il) ...... iU 0
= 4--< i> u c3 1-< r.n \-;
~ \-; d C\1 "t3 :::l ~ 0
~ QJ \-; \-; u ~ ~ 5
Q ~ 10 ~ ~ ~ ~s
~.8 (\);> UJ '':j E.
Q,l rn ~ td ro ~
~" "" " '0 -'" ~
_ ~ 1-< 'Ci) J:l c:::.-;::
cu "0 ~ I1.l ~ ~ ::: 8.-
~ ~ "0 d) C
@ ,- " ~ " ~ "
" :a ::l'd " 5
tQrnB.b~....-
~ 0 ~ .,....; Q)
'" [j .g ~ " "
.g ........... ..... ~
l-.o ca W U -:J ..... t:
~E~.g~]a
E~~~~ca~.sa)
~ ~ ~ C'd d ,::: ~ a
~ ...... ~ .9 a3 ~ t) 8
:: g,.J:l ol.Io..u o.~ 0
~ 't ~ .@ s 'E ] ~ ~
~ ~ ~ 0 ~ QJ '~ 0 V
rn _ -5J ~ I.f.l W ;'J..9
".c 0 0" ~ "
u d ~ QJ U > C 1-< It)
~ 'E......, 0 ~ u ';;j 'jja ....-:3
Q,l 11.l.......... ..c:l..... Q -
... tJ') A o.a ts: -;; Q.) rn g S
-< ,-""'0 ~""dr.IJ'
o ~ :5 .n ~ .9 8 rn]
~ ~ QJ'~ ~ "0 ~ Q) Cl:t 0
.~ > ~ v ~ 8 S ~ ~ M
~.2bD~a~OJJ~ a
00 -=,....., >'..D ...... c;:: ..c ,8
u tQ c::I l.-< '::l ..... ..... a I\)
~ ~ g E ::I c::::-sa I-; 1::,.Q
.c ~Q.)....... ...co>o~"O
..... ;:J.... 0 -
Q,l , Q);::: rn ~ .... do'='
~ 5 lU c.o 0... 0... 0
.... QJ;;s E ,S 'j:: \-;',ej -5j
;: ~ ern.::: 2 .~ ~ QJ
Q,l ...c::l a.J ~ ~"O c::: '"CI ';:l u
tZl: o.f3 0 0::1 ~ 0 .~ :3 ':>
_ .......c:::t>.Ot>--~:::lUb
Q I1.l ';::I ~ q e '~,$S CI'l
;9'::lc;a""in'0 ~~Ci
Q:l ~.~ g \-; t) 5 ::; .~ en
.... 0 ,-.... ~ ...........~-
~ o.~lS~sgf~~~
..~ b ~ _ ~ ~ - 0.. "" ~
..... a:.:tl ~ 1..l-o.,D co::I ~ :a-'.....
c:: <l.) $! 0 ;s Y;l -...... i=l
_ <l.) 0.. ~....,::s ""=' v
;;.-. uu....~'Oll)u=~
; ,~.~ @ ~'.8 ~ .~ ~ ~
> .:;~~~-;;-5o..~~
(\J~.....1IJ"O ~iU~>.~
::s...... ..s=~~~'"d-
~~~oi~~~5~~"
~,.olU~VlO"5~\-;ooo
c:3 ~>..- c:3 ODO.....;.) g'B
oo8~g~~~~'Ocn~
cd 0 cn...... iU U Vol
~ "d ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ tr.l :g 0 '3
25 g .9 (flE .g .;3 611 (fl. .~
(,I) E ~ 0 ~.~ ~ ~ ""0 ~ ~
,,1;'~~," t:\:2~] "'''0
<:1) 0 <tJ .:d ::l 0 3: ::l U ~
ElOD- -o',;:l V'J~';:a
0. Cd 0...l:S .s; _~ 00'''''; .-S:' (U
15 15 ~ g. 'i3 iil .~ .~ 15 .s :a
OJ ~ ,,"g s'!3 " OJ ;;;-cl::;j
e; rd lLl "0 'Il.) .......,~ ~ u ~ 'd
..... ~ t5 a a <l.) ,~ e ~;::J .9
o OJ r.L.l .a 't) OJ.
c....c:: ~ t:: ""d V) u ;a ell
...., ?: ;G OJ :a ;:: C) ~ ~ ~ 0
:-::l C'u ~ -"::: .Q ~ ~ f.:3 a ~
:9 .g 5 0) ~ J5 ..c:: <:1) .~ 8 ~
~ .:tl......,~ (\) I-< '"d <:1) ::: 'C' 8
8. B Jj t ,~ 0 ;:; .;3 ~ (:;:a
" ':;; ~ ~ t " 5::::l e ~ "
....c:: (,-:l ., ~ E; ?" C ~ ....
..... bS.)~"" V'J'" Il.) dol 0
~B c Cl.;,-{i!,'lj-' u~ 0
;>-.. ro'.lj'.:::l 0 OJ,':-' 0 l=i'
""5b ~ .00"'3 ~ 0 ~ :c i::: ....
g.g u ~ S ] ~ 8 .~ ~.~ ro
o.:{j ~ >-. ~ ~ <:1) '~ o..S 1IJ '5
OJ ~ S] ~ ~ 15 a) B "E .~ ~
.~ d OJ S ~.:::. ;>. V'J ~ t .....
..., .;;l 8 iU ....... ~ .- <:1) 0 (\J 'C) OD
C ::l I-< .s '~ ] E ~ =: I.C .~
.,g ~9~l1)~~<:1)8.g.o
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24. 2009
Page 149 of 462
'" " ~
] g ~
",-cl ~
~ " "
~..o ~
il ;J ;:
o u 8
o...~ aJ
>.,e "-
.Dr!'.)
~ .~ E
'" " "
" OJ '"
':;; -5 ~
B ~.~
>. 2 1<1
" "'"
S ~ ~
U ~ 0
O"(fl
tr.l l:l.o
" ",...l
.,s S "
"-< 0 ~
o '" ""
_ -a,~ gf
= 5 ~ 'r:: ,
a.I ..... iU Il) 8
E @,s '" ::l
~ OJ '"D .Q S
~ ,s ;J in .~
-< ~..r:;>.....
01,) bl.l ro t:::
~ .~~ ~ ~
a3 II) 0 ~ ':l
,. Ei S ;: ::J
~ a ~ ,5.-s
rJJ
I'ol
,...l
I'-<
"'"
U
Z
"'"
~
I'-<
'"
:;;:,
""
~
"-l
~
c
f::
""
">::
"
Z
"'"
?<
,...l
I'-<
I'-<
<
'0
=
"
E
..
'"
;.
.;
'"
OIl
=
-;;;
o
o
.c
U
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24, 2009
Page 150 of 462
rJ:J
'"
"
;;:
~
U
E-<
Z
'"
;;
Co.
o
...
'"
:;-
~
Q
;;;:
'"
E-<
rJ:J
><
rJ:J
S~~"'OOOIl)
8:3,,~.,g~$
~ ~ '3 d :-;:l 0
-d''''g<1l0,,~
.~ u ~ E-'; "0 tl
f3-o . ~~-fi
uCl)g8BlUO
OuO) ~ -5,~
~ v:l V)
~::;j0)>,~~]
"'O~.g~~.s;:l
,," .'" c;; 0
..... ~ ...... <:J...... b.Cl~
aJ .;::l ~ ~ Q rJ'}
...... -B!:i ~ -.... '-.0(
E" .~ '0..0 -g ~
0"'0 iU "'l::l :::: i:d ...,
U ~ ~ ~ It) t:i ::l
,..,0 .d1-<4-l
:u u ~ rJ'} ~ 0
o ~ 0 I).) l,., d ell
..o~v~~=]
o..d ~r.I'l'"d15 0
Cl E-- Cd ~ ll) ~ I1.l
II) ....t:l ~ 1.I:l....c:l ~
~qsuurs~E
...0 ~ ~ .S ~ ~ ',;j
~.s~~~~]
............ d '~
::1 0 0 E 0 aJ
..0 -".::1..c - lU S
-d'iJu " ",-S'D
" " ".~~ " - "
::l ~:::::l ~ rn...c .
lZl >.. 0 (l.) .......-..
." '" u " ,. '" OJ <<l
""-'0"-0'" B
iU t:l!l .... CD....... "t.1 '1:1 rI)
" " Oil ~ 'i3 " ~ ::l
.0.... , "0;;> -0
dJ:Ec= OdlUS
] ~ 5 ] ,; .~ .~ .~
GO
.".
, E; ~ ~ dS tl gf.,!., 0) 0) r.b ~ ~ S ,~
] eel :E QJ ~.... g ~ -5 is -S 0;1) 0 _~
>,,1=;:>1+-0 ="'0'1::;1 o4-.t..... d ~~'P
"'0 ....;:.-, 0 c 0 - i=; VJ
\'dO~ "c'o:EO-S UoC'd~B
v.l.c~~:tlo..;:" 6.g~~e'"d
~ bCl..9 6 ~ 0 ~'.g ~ "D co 0.0 ~ 0) 0
~ .S ~ ~ ~ d 0::) E: =' tQ u t:l....... tI:: I-l
:g a ~ c: "0 ~ ~ .;:.: o.~ ~:E ~:a ~
cd 0"0 C"J g"o~].....~ o..B;~;>..:.:l
o >- -'" .... .e .... . I:l1) V) ctI lU ;> ~ U'l
.....o.....~o;>oo.ll 1""'.(\3 ~1-o'.!:"'J....."
en bO . 11) 1-1 I-l 0 .;:J.....-I "'0 "'0.... 11)
o,j"J rJ'} 11) B 8 ~ Cl..r \~ ~ lZl U d U S _~ ~
~ o~ -E d 8: 1@ ;>. _~ tl g ~ 8 Cl :..:, ,g 0
8 Cd ~ :s!";:J ....c:: ',:j <1} 1ZI ;:::: a::: ;...
(1 .9 .9 ~ .8!:j en u ~ U') ~ ~ ;:j C':l
~ <Zl --oQ.).....Q)~]~l;j....J-S(,f.lrn..l:l
c1.> - !J) IS "l:I ..c () .... ~ ~ '8 g ~ Ci1 s .8
~ [: u ,~ .~ ~ goY 's '0' & &,~ :0
< 0. rn Q -' ~ ~ ~ ~ ~"O ~ ~ ;r 8 '~
~ Cl3Stn.g<:Jl--lf; -cd'}t Il)o...a
c1.> fa o"d O. ~ ~ 11) ~ ~~...... l--l
'" "il1J-;c~.g"'..r-5o"'.,,-<i'1:::i
~ll)~~CI3t--'<=JO;; Q.,~O-.:::lO:
"'i ]1 e:,~ B ~ . L.o aJ fT. -B 8 C 9;! ~ 0
::l - ,'-' 0 ll) ""d d) ~ .... 'r-< ~ n.) 0 :3
't:l g 'd""-,,;>"'.....;~,,E:"-"'il
..... .......] ~ ~ 0-1...... 0 rn ...d Vol ...... C
~ ...... L... rn \-; CI3 ~ ..:s Cd"' ~ &S +::l <Zl :::I ll) ""(j <Zl
;a ~r'l::l~O:::lu\-;o..~o~Q.,oQ)u
= S ~ ,~ ::: ~ 8 i5 g ~ ro ~ ~ ~ .... -s _g
i"""'4 t:l :j ..c:: c il.'I ;J; :0 Q ,~ ,E cd
"'" o.g ~ 0.0:5'0 bOB~ td'";l..c:....4-I ~
't:l u'~ -'1'1 oj u u ::l l< ~ " s
c:l ='rj >. ~ 11) OJ) !.I...< .s t) ~:.=l :-g Q.) ,9 Q.) :::I
i:':% ~ Il) el 11) -fi Il) 0 . 11) s ~;;. ..c:.~ Ci3 C)
~ "d ..o.s S c S B 0:1 ~ ~ b R ,13
"'0 ~ '-' ~ ~ "d .,5 '.:;j ~ ~ ~.s ~ \-; c:
'::1 (1,) p<'a ll) ;:::s c:s .g:j m (,f.l c:.. 0 ea
u ~ -:g O'~ 5"O'~ ~ ] "0 ~ 0 ~ '0
Q ~ = ~ ~ 0) ~ -e .Q C) a ~ g g ~ ~
c/)..... ro t";I \-; "0 l-< :<:l <II CI'l............... _ ~ ';:J "'.
'"
-;
OJ
Co
Co
<
il.).... I "-l "0 .. >. ;:.-.. 0 .
.~ f3 a :H -:;jQ) ~.o""" .... C
\-; 0.. U 4=i 0 =.........
fr <Zl ~, ~, ..... '.::1 ....r 0 if: ED
IJ.) 'OJ..... - U ::: "O'-l 0)
_~t;;9..c~(l)(\):::-'
ill Oil l< ""u ~ ~ ~ 15 >,8
"' " ou - ~
1-0 !J) >-";:::l ;> (/.l ,'-' 11)
o!J)<1}-cUo8ES5
:l G.) l.H..s ~..o ;:::s o..;:j CI'l [IJ
= ::las.dl-,"'O:::aoCl~
e ~ ~ .~ ~"3 ~ :- g ~ B
:1l ~ ..c:::t)]~-ol.sG..ld;J;
~ "d ~ .g, CIl ;>,'a I\) J::< ""t:j
"::: ca I~ HO ~ !-'!:t:l ro ~ ~ :::
Co ~~~B..gEu-;::!o"z
~ Q.,g.....o Q.)u~O'Ot::
~ Ren~-S8:Q~Std
--.....d .:,) :.Jo.l..,)~
OJJ.gVJo>i:lUcid.8O)oO
.5 ..... B ~ ~ ...... 5f"'Z ..... l3
-= ~~8~~"E>>~5rn
::I ] ca s-.s ~ ~ .0 '0 0 ~
o ...... ~ tj c... V) "2 Vl ;:5
I;,) OJ)......::l ~ ~ -:::: c:: ;:::::l ......, 0
I;,) d~SO) ....O""d::::lU
.~ ';:j _ ~. .~ ''':::: '-l -0 I'.)
"'0;,(" t:l.t:: B "0 U :;;I;;" ~ ~
~ 0 u VJ 8 ~ lC .~ ~ ~ ~
_ U '"':I ~'-l cid 4-i...... ...., ::: :=
1o?i iU:= rn ~ U ;:s ...0 .~ V cd
r:a ..D ;..: I.+-l Il.) .Q v.l 0 >-. S ...0
Q,) .... '>I.l 0 r;J:j ",.s "c .!:) \1) C)
> 0:::: R iU..... P." bJ:>(;j
'-= Q~o-B"tj13t'j~g@
e :g 5 ffJ.5 ~ g ~ ~ ~ fr
~ o'~ ~ "C ~ ~ ~ iU ro en
.~ .Q ~ " " "0 .5 ~ E<l t!..o:
c-r/J-Q)~U~~iU.&~
.s U 4 >:S 11 Il) ~ 5.~ v ..0
"'=' Cldl-;t)~'"09'C::;E
-< tn~~~~a~~..o~
lI)
00
...l
-<
'"'
,..,
I'.
-<
U
I'll
'-'
-<
'"'
z
,..,
;;..
z
o
Q
W
IZl
-<
:::<
'-'
z
,..,
'"'
-<
...l
~
U
...l
-<
U
'"
Z
o
,..,
"""
U
I:!,
o
c::
~
~
<
W
U
....
;;..
c::
WQ
~~
...lW
WQ
;;..
W""
...:10
\O..<r.IJ I C"'CI'~,',~ t:~!l<~~"""'O~;j:Jd '''0
O""~El"'CO"i<lO ,,~~.... ..<5. C",
~= u~~b~~ ~~'E~v~~oo~~~
;> 0.. t >> ~ a c ~ lU ;;.. ~ v a; S :s Cl..tl'"l ~ if.l i;;l
~ ~ 0.. d) ~"l ..... Cd CJ 7tl ':i ro .,m c...~ ~ ~ _ ~ OJ :t::
c~-5 ~U~"";::I (;:r< - _..... MOl-<ro
Q) .~ ......._ ~ B G ';j 0 rn , (\,.l \/J ..... "0
~~~~-~~~~ ~~~g~~~~I]]
~~......s~op..Su O"d;>::::H-g~:::r~U~
o <1) ::l "0 I:';j 0 F! ~ ~ ~ .~ ~ ~ (1) u '.::1 ':;;' I-< B "8
!::-~"odC;~~o.Q t::_r.lJMp..,:::li:::....,.f:.g.;j
t: . ~ d .... rh OJ V'l V CJ. ~;:..-., f""'l ~ 13 :::t '"'CI Q) 1-0 ~
.-<~'"'CIsr.IJ~I-<~~ ~.e,--~H~~U,p.~
~ ~ @ 11) ~ 0 0 ...... ~ _~ "" '0 r<') - Q) ..0 "0 ...... ....... '~
oJ3s"'O~>.4....::IV) Q)_\U4-.0;..-.;.~~t"'Or.n
S~~_.:~~o-i~: .g;~~~~~rn~~~
I:::: I;';J ~ 0 Gu ~;;."'O.",.....lU~OO
~gUb~~U'J~~_ d).~ooQ)S~uo~o
~ '-1 0........ -- u ~ r.n 0.. 0 r;:::: O!) <:I'J"> ...... N
" '" S ..... "::::'...... !..l...l >-,';:l i:';j iU I-; i1.l ~ Wo
-nro"OOJ.) ~S:~~El o-o..caw:loo:>o,-
00 ro:::tc~~ r.IJ~S:::l~~aU'J~
;g.t;j~ t' o....::3'B >,0 "0 c:;:3 i::: ~u:: e'- OJo-d'
~ ...... iU > t.o.... 0.. cd .:oJ "0 >- 0 VJ .c ...... O,..c: _?, 6li
'~~o..roC R'''O_ u =~-1,~~-"""'_
.... .t:I <1) t:: .5 I-< ~l ...... "'0 0 ;; ..... 0 'tl
~=~~b~ &"; ]~~~g55tu2~
~8~~'GS~ ~ ~~Uw ~a-~~~
E o~~~~wu ~~~~~~u~~~~
",o.)~Ohl..ro::':l~b.O :.::l_~>w~;>-,:::..o ~
~~ ~~~~ro ~~~~~~8~8~o
ol,).-:l "tjU ro~k) ~et:::o~..c-c..."'dwr/J
~ .~ e ~ ] ~ ~ ~ f; ~ ~ ~ ~ .~ ~ .s 6 ~ .-? ~~
~u~..c~~~.~~~~~~u~O"'d ~~~
~ 0 VJ . ~ _ ..::: ro . ...:..::: ~ 0 CIl ::l c.. C ,~ B ""'
~ 0 ...... '. III U :::l ~ ~ '~ ~ '2 'n ~ !:..O \I; ('J -==: >.. C':l ,~
("d g-. 'd ;>, i'ii -5 u S ro ...o.E ~ ~..o t.C ....;: ,... 0 .<;; ::: .. I
~u~~o "'d ~CIl~"""O~UU~
~OC"GQ ~~u~E]Q'~~-~~o~~~
~u.~C':lS.;~~~~~i8~~d("d,~~~"'d~
:::8~~E- \O~:::::o ro ~C o~
..~uo~~owoU~~~~~&Ill~& ~
~~~]~]~i~~ '~~~~.s~~ffi~]'~
Agenda Item No, 10A
February 24,2009
Page 151 of 462
~~~~~~~ca~~
o 0.. ..d ~ Q ~ ,~ ~ "d
~~"'Oiilc~1:l..o.0::lQ
~ ~ '" 1-< U "t:; ~ 00
._~ -il.!lil;;:l'Ov
.~5S,," "'i3'''''''t!
",. III ..... B; ~ <=I r-'
"'d c..> "0 ~ U ?' ~ . u
C S "0 g - BOO .~....;
~::Iu.tjo;.lj\l;DooQJ
~CI)0~~;~~o..:g
"C iU,~.::l .... Q N N "'d ~
'Oi;8l-<fi..d~~ac
,.J::l 0.. Q "':j [-I. ~ '- ..
aJ~r.Il-;~ -or-fc
!3~"'''''Q5;>,0>''';
~"':""-u "O..c.....O\:;)-;=::
So.) "'" -" Q "" '" .~ - .0 -
~~~~u~tla8~~
~gr.ll~:;~~~~~~
~.g C':l,,:::;t-:'Ci$:l"r;l0\ VJ VJ
aJU"'C N -Q........~:.a
.:= -t:l ~ ~ ~ b ;;.... ~ .9 13 .....
~ l-< C ~ '- '0 'ro a ~ C,) 'S
~~~........OC':l'"dt::V)-o:2
"'0 ~"C~--g ~u &~NOh
b1J..oCdu?fCll5bt<::l
~ ] "0 ~ 8 "C k) :::\ c to 5
(\)C':l.;:::lr-'<lJB>,- ~~
~ B'R ~ "C "~ :a 0 .a.s B
........ C':l ~~>.e ~~ o..~
~ ~ O!l ~ ~ & '"O.~ ~.2 'E
.s * 'E ~ "0 VJ ~ -B "0 ~ ,~
bO ~ 8 >>-. ~.~ ~ 0 ~ a 15
,S ~ S ~ e b .-< ~ "0 2 \-(
::35B~~r.Il~.....a~E
....., d'E=5S-o:::1
.B .q ~ ; :s S ~.g ~.~
g .5
'g ~
1.) .5
0:;
"" "
2.g
'"
W
-
E-<
....
d
u
...:
""
"'
c.-' OJ C
Z :g '"
~ 'u a
Eo- ~ g.
~ bDa:)
>< .S ~
~ ~"O
"" .;:: ~
o 0.) '"
4.< C
;;.... 0.0
~ c.~
O o..c
E-< " ~
z ~.9
~~~ .S '"
C) '"
..c ';<
'"' '"
~~
Vol ''':;:
"' .~
",...
u 0.)
0.) "
'" "
.0
,~ .~
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24, 2009
Page 152 of 462
Attachment G
Excerpts from AWWA Principles of
Water Rates, Fees, and Chara~
----- - --- .
\
Agenda Item NO.1 OA
February 24,2009
Page 153 of 462
Principles of Water Rates,
Fees, and Charges
AWWA MANUAL M1
Fifth Edifion
FOUNDED ~
1881
'"
American Water Works Association
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24. 2009
Page 154 of 462
LOW-INCOME AFFORDABILITY RATES 131
government provides assistance to less affluent countries to make water service
available at more affordable prices. Within North America, an increasing number of
water utilities have adopted affordability programs. It is not uncommon to find some
ele;"'ents of affordability rates in many major cities.
POLICY ISSUES
Low-income affordability alternatives are intended to address social issues, and
utility involvement in such issues may be controversial. Although each utility needs
to decide whether or not it will participate in such programs, an increasing number
of utilities are addressing water affordability in their rates.
These types of rate alternatives should be considered when a utility's cost of
water is high and some customers have problems paying their bill. Indications of this
scenario can include rising arrearages, higher collection costs, and more frequent
shutoffs for nonpayment. In making this determination, the cost-of-service analysis
should be done first without any affordability considerations. During the rate design
portion of the analysis, affordability considerations can be taken into account. The
rate analyst then can measure the effects of affordability alternatives and better
quantify any discounts and subsidies involved.
Low-income rates typically require some degree of subsidy. The question of
which customer groups should provide the subsidy needs to be addressed. Utilities
should recognize that adopting more affordable rates can reduce the utility's costs if
the low-income rates result in increased collections and reduced collection costs.
The first issue to consider is at what point a water bill becomes unaffordable.
While there is no clear answer to this question, the following guidelines can help
utilities make such a determination:
. The Safe Drinking Water Act (S. 1547) established special assistance in
communities where the average residential water bill exceeds 2 percent of
median income.
,
\
,
. The US Department of Agriculture has a program to provide funds for water
and wastewater systems. Loans are made for projects where the residential
water bills are 1.5 percent of the community's median income. Grants are
awarded for costs in excess of 1.5 percent.
. The AWWAItF report, Water Affordability Programs, suggests that programs
should not be based on median income but on rates that cause water bills to
exceed 2 percent of income for impoverished households. Because of the
focus on impoverished households, a measure of 2 percent was selected to
determine if water service costs were burdensome.
I
1,
"
;
!
~
I
Different measures of poverty can be used to determine eligibility. These include
Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC), Supplemental Social Security
Income (SSI), minimum wage incomes, and US poverty level. Many of these
measures vary with family size.
Based on the results of national water and wastewater rate surveys, bills have
become unaffordable for low-income households in some of our major cities. For those
living on S8I, water and wastewater bills exceeded 5 percent of income for these
households in a number of cities.
Perhaps the biggest issue involved with affordable rate programs is how to
determine eligibility. Utilities are often uneasy about gathering, administering, and
verifying income data. Fortunately, a number of existing programs can help.
I
J
I
{
!
f
I
I
,
I
Agenda Item No, 10A
February 24. 2009
Page 155 of 462
SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT CHARGES 205
amount of available capacity and investment of these existing facilities should be
documented to substantiate the actual cost and value of the facilities.
Determining development units. To calculate the SDC, the projected system
growth in demand must be converted into common units. Units used to establish the
SDC will vary with available information, timing of the SDC assessment and
collection, and the billing practices used by the utility. Units may be derived from the
system growth analysis and capital improvements planning.
Most SDC-related facilities are, designed on the basis of annual average day
use, maximum day demand, or maximum hour demand. After the SDC-related
capital investment is determined, it must be divided by the applicable design
capacity to obtain a cost per unit of capacity. Each type of customer (i.e., residential,
commercial, or industrial) has s particular demand or capacity requirement that,
when applied to the unit cost of SDC facilities, provides a measure of the investment
in SDC facilities applicable to that type of customer. It is common to develop an SDC
for a residential customer, or equivalent residential unit, using this unit cost
approach, then develop a schedule of SDCs using common billing determinants that
relate potential demands of other types of customers to that of the base, or
residential, demand. Among the more frequently used units for thiB purpose are
meter size, fixture units, and land area with associated land~use characteristics.
Meter size is the most common determinant for assessing SDCs, and the capacity
factors developed in Table 28-2 often are used to establish charges for customers
with meters greater than %-in.
When charges are collected at the time of service initiation, meter size is often
used as a basis for computing SDCs although many utilities use alternative
approaches in defining the base service unit, including equivalent residential units
(ERUs) or fixture units. Usually, equivalent service units are developed for customers
with more intense uses or potential demand. For example, charges for larger meters
may be based on AWWA-rated meter capacity using a %-in. meter as the base service
unit. Total overall premise use, facility size, capacity requirement, and number of
fixtures also are used with ERU-based charges,
The meter size approach may be easiest to explain to customers. It is based on
the potential maximum demand that the customer may put on the system, but it does
not consider patterns or intensities of customer usage. Meter sizes are expressed in
terms of equivalent meters, generally based on the relative capacity of various meter
sizes, The ERU approach different.iat.es among customer classes, but it can be difficult.
to explain and, in some situations, difficult to determine and apply consistently. The
ERU approach is often directly related to the number of fixture units and is based on
the potential loading of various fixtures. As a result, the charge for each new
customer must be computed individually, which is a disadvantage to thiB approach.
If collection of the SDC is made at the time of platting, the service unit usually
is based on an equivalent dwelling unit. The equivalent dwelling unit is based on the
estimated demand of a single-family residential unit in the service area. The charge
is then based on the size of the dwelling, the types and number of fixtures, or both.
Utility billing records are a data source related to system utilization. Water demand
characteristics are normally expressed in terms of equivalent units to quantify the
capacities of system expansion projects.
An example of the cslculation of an SDC on an incremental cost basis is shown
in Table 28-4. For purposes of the example in Table 28-4, it is assumed that all local,
on-site facilities, such as distribution mains, meter, services, and hydrants, are
contributed by the developer through charges and assessments other than the SDC.
f
i
,
".11
j"'1
~ Ii .
~! l
,
I
: ",II!"'
'11
II'.
:.,'1
11:1:
:11'1
il
I
I
11'1.'
1.lil;..;
~II.
liilll
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24,2009
Page 156 of 462
Attachment H
Pre-Application Meeting with
Tamiami Square and
Collier County Utilities
Agenda Item NO.1 OA
February 24,2009
Page 157 of 462
Attachment H
Pre-Application Meeting with Tamiami Square and Collier County Utilities
A pre-application meeting was held in accordance with the agreement between Collier
County and Tamiami Square developers.
1. Tamiami Sauare Initial Suaaestion
Numerous cities, counties and FPSC regulated entities utilize FPSC/AWWAlFAC/F.S.
section 25-30.055 and related similar sections for larger service areas which involve the
methodology of meter equivalency factors.
Since Tamiami Square is served by one 5/8" x %" meter and one 3" meter, as approved
by the County and installed and in operation and form the basis of the monthly billing
Mr. Hartman initially suggested the consideration of that method.
Using the meter equivalency factor methodology the resulting ERCs for the non-
residential customer would be:
5/8" x 3/4"
= 1 ERC
= 16 ERCs
17 ERCs
3"
Total
See pg. 3-2 and Section 25-30.055
2. Public Utilities Response
a.) Rejected due to ERClunit approach pursuant to Ordinances 2007-52 and
2007-57 and water and wastewater impact fee study by PRMG.
b.) Provided 3/31/087 letter from Gilbert Monciviaz of the County suggesting
two @ 2-inch potable irrigation meters for the irrigation meters for the
irrigation water demand @ 6.1 ERCs, meter tapping fee of $1,140 and
water impact fee of $22.060.59. See letter attached.
In the future, if and when non-potable water is available then reuse water could be
substituted. It was pointed out that reuse mains and service to the landscaped medians
adjacent and north of the project are served by reclaimed water.
GCH/jev/A080376.00/corresp/Attach H
Page 1 of 3
072308
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24, 2009
Page 158 of 462
customer billing data for 12 consecutive months and accumulates by customer clas
number of ERCs and flows at incremental usage levels, in this case 1,0 gallon
increments.
The City provided detailed customer and monthly billing infor on for the fiscal year
2005/06. The data received was sorted first by customer s then by meter size into
subclasses of users pursuant to meter size and servic eceived in order to determine
the number of ERCs and fiow for each of the cus er classes. To verify the results,
the existing rates were applied to the calcula ERG and flow data and the resulting
revenues reconciled to the reported reven during the same time period.
The details of the Billing Frequen nalysis and Revenue Reconciliation are provided
in Appendix A, B, and C for r, wastewater, and reclaimed water respectively.
3.4
Cs, AND FLOWS
An account, a sed herein, consists of a single connection regardless of customer
class, met ize, metered flow, or location. An ERC for water represents a level of
service ased on the connection's water meter size as compared to the standard water
size of 5/8" x 3/4" for a single family connection. The factors associated with the
ater ERCs are provided in Table 3-1, as developed from the AWlNA standards.
Table 3-1
AWWA Meter Equivalency Factors
Meter Size
5/8" x 3/4"
1.0"
1.5"
2.0"
3.0"
4.0"
6.0"
8.0"
10.0"
ERC Factor
1.00
2.50
5.00
8.00
16.00
25.00
50.00
80.00
115.00
TLH/jev/Reports/R-1/Sec 3
HCD # A070299.00
3-2
112907
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24. 2009
Page 159 of 462
25-30.055 Systems with a Capacity or Proposed Capacity to Serve 100 or Fewer Persons.
(I) A water or wastewater system is exempt under Section 367.022(6), F.S., if its current or proposed water or wastewater
treatment facilities and distribution or collection system have and will have a capacity, excluding fIre flow capacity, of no greater
than 10,000 gallons per day or if the entire system is designed to serve no greater than 40 equivalent residential connections (ERCs).
For purposes of this rule only, one ERC equals 250 gallons per day.
(a) Unless the Commission determines that valid local statistical data should be used, ERCs for residential use are as follows:
Single family detached dwellings I ERC per unit
Multiple family dwellings .8 ERC per unit
Mobile homes .8 ERC per unit
(b) ERCs for nonresidential use shall be based on meter size and type as follows:
I. For Water Systems
Meter Size Meter Type ERCs
518" Displacement 1.0
3/4" Displacement 1.5
I" Displacement 2.5
11/2" Displacement or Turbine 5,0
2" Displacement, Compound or Turbine 8.0
3" Displacement 15.0
3" Compound ]6.0
3" Turbine 17.5
4v Displacement or Compound 25.0
4" Turbine 30.0
6" Displacement or Compound 50,0
6v Turbine 62.5
8" Compound 80,0
8" Turbine 90.0
10" Compound 115.0
lO" Turbine 145.0
12" Turbine 215.0
2. For Wastewater SystelIlB
Meter Size Meter Type ERCs
S/Slt Displacement 1.0
314" Displacement 1.5
I" Displacement 2.5
1112" Displacement or Turbine 5.0
2" Displacement, Compound or Turbine 8.0
3" Displacement 15.0
3" Compound 16.0
3" Turbine ]7.5
4" Displacement or Compound 25.0
4" Turbine 30.0
6" Displacement or Compound 50,0
6" Turbine 62.5
8" Compound 80.0
8" Turbine 90.0
10" Compound 115.0
10" Turbine 145.0
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24, 2009
Page 160 of 462
12"
Turbine
215.0
(c) Where undeveloped land is adjacent to a system or proposed system the Commission may, where appropriate, estimate
ERCs for service to future development on the adjacent undeveloped land. Unless the Commission determines that valid local
statistical data should be used, ERCs for residential acreage should be estimated as follows:
Residential Use ERCs/ Acre
Mobile home 4.8
Detached single family 4.0
Estimates for other types of residential acreage and for commercial and industrial uses shall be made on a case by case basis.
Specific Authority 350,127(2), 367.121(l)(f) FS Law 1mplemented 367.022(6) FS History-New 1-5-84, Formerly 25-10.10,25-10,010, Amended
11-10-86.
03/31/2008 07:15
9417322585
CC E"G PLA" ROOM
Agenda llWPf'No@~~
February 24, 2009
Page 161 of 462
COLLIER COlNTY PUBLIC UTILITIES DIVISION
330! ElU:l "hmbn1i Tr:111 . NlIples. Fl:urid!! :34112. . (230) 731:..2.575 . P8:( (139') 7:n-1.'~2fl
March 31, 2008
Ms. Stacey Morales
Sunwest Plumbing, LLC
4376 I" Ave NW
Naples, FL 34119
Subject:
Potable Irrigation Meter
14700 Tami=i Trail North - Ta:niami Square
Dear Ms. Morales:
Our office has reviewed the preliminary water-o.11y meter sizing information for the above-
referenced address. 8ased on the information that you supplied to our office, the requested two
inch (2") meter meets our minimum requiremen::s and is therefore acceptable with certain
conditions placed on the meter.
This does not consider any continuous load demmd. Since our review is for the minimum size
requirement. the engineer should consider all rel:.want factors before approving the final meter
size.
You should apply for the meter with the Public Utilities Customer Service Department located at
4420 Mercantile Avenue. A meter ta1J1Jing fee cf$I,J40 and a water impact fee of $22,060.59
will be charged based on an ERe value of 6.1. ,'lease bring this letter with you at time of
payment. The fees quoted in this letter are valid for 90 days from the date of this letter.
If you have any further questions or concerns refarding tho information contained in this letter or
in the attachments, please feel free to contact me at (239) 252-4215.
Sincerely,
(]~~
Gilbert Moncivaiz
Operations Analyst
co: Pam Libby, Water Distribution
lieather Sweet, Customer Service Supervisor
Craig Callis, Engineering Services
Diane Deoss, Utility Billing Supervisor
G;r~r"'B TaclIlMc-I;:' lilJiIli"roJUWlrrl-.ttn de. !~~
May-16-07 08:26
Cri~as1 Raal Estate
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24. 2009
239 261 5775 Page 162 of#?:t11
FACIMILE
~.AJ~ IDAJJ\\UlmIlJf III!!
\ ~ 1 <p {v<-.
TO:
PAM - Collier Conn
Phone: 239-53()-6727
Fax: 239-530-6237
FROM:
Diane Hall. Administrative Assistant. Property Mnet.
Phone: 239-594-7000
Fax: 239-261-5775
DATE:
Mav 16.2007
Pages (with cover ~heet):
3
SUB.JI<:CT: Potable 'rrieation Meter Applications Piper's Crossine:
and Tamiami Square
o IJrgent
~()r Review
o Please Comment 0 Please Reply
Pam:
PI~us~ tind al1ach~t.llhe complclllU information with regard to the applications for potabk
irrigation for Pip~'T's Crossing and Twnillmi Squw-e.
Thank you. again. for your h.lp in this mull~r.
If you should have any quel<tions, please givc me u t:all.
Diane Hall
Property Managcmcnt A"Hi~tlUlT
Off: 239-594-7000
Cell: 239-~77-1556
"*,N'~_ A...... -'~ A'........,e'<.~
<i(.... yA.....,f a~.;--- /c; 7';
~-u......,,~
Idh
All"chment
"C'ummcntl: .rhr i"rurmlLrlnw C'ontfllDt'd het'tln II tlitl" pn\'ilt'J,tl:d :III~ f'()dnd~hlUillnfl'lrt''''H'ulI ."Ientlttl fHlly ruro till" 1151'; flr
ttlr. inlfi",lduK' ur mrlt)' 11111..<<1 ablJ\'e" .r tttt rt.dc:r lit thi" "~t . nut Ihe i.1('lIIdtiJ r~ipjc.t. )'0" ut bcn~"'}' ntllirtl'd 11a,..
I.r)' Ilnuthnrt7,t1f d;IK'lnj..ricm~ dillribllliu...., C'Up)' Or lb. c"mmuatMlrion hi titri!:ll)' f'nlhibifnL rr )OU h.,-,. rttt'i,,~ Ibl5l
tnmmunir'..'....ll i. t'rTur. plela5C' .n1irr u..IDlmt'dl.rtl)l b,. Itl~pbClnr~ Thin'" ,ruu.
Crifasl Maliagemant, In\:.
2375 Tamiaml Tnail North. Suite 208 C . Nap'''. Florida 34103
PH: 239-U4-1ooo . Fax: 2Sg.261.517Sl!mlil: Crlfaalreallyco@aol.com
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24,2009
Page 163 of 462
COLLIER COUNTY PUBLIC UTILITIES DmSION
3301 ~ Taminmi TnM . Napl... Florida 341]2 ' (239) 732'2515 . Fax (239) 732-25'26
Mary 17,2007
Ms. Diane Hall
Crifasi Management, Inc.
2375 Tamiami Trail North, Suite 208 C
Naples, Florida 34103
Subject:
14700 Tamiami Trail North I Tamiami Square
Potable Irrigation Meter Sizing
Dear Ms. Hall:
Our office has reviewed the preliminary irrigation meter sizing information for the above-
referenced address. Based on the information that you supplied to our office, a
irrigation meter meets our minimum requirement and is therefore acceptable with certain
conditions placed on the meter.
This does not consider any continuous load demand. Since our review is for the minimum size
requirement, the engineer should consider all relevant factors before approving the fmal meter
size.
You should apply for the meter with the Public Utilities Customer Service Department located at
4420 Mercantile Avenue. A meter tapping fee of $ and a water impact fee
of $ wiU be charged, based upon an ERC value of . These fees
are in addition to the fees paid on the domestic meter.
If you have any further questions or concerns regarding the information contained in this letter or
in the attachments, please feel free to contact me at (239) 732-2575.
Sincerely,
C1d,n\OL:t, CCk..-
Pamela Eck
Engineering Technician
cc: Pam Libby, Water Distribution
Heather Sweet, Utility Billing and Customer Service
Wes Hill, Engineering Services
Jacquelyn DeSear, Impact Fee Coordinator
",ay-16-07 OS:26
cr;-Pas; Real
Estate
239 261 5775
Agenda Item NO.1 OA
February 24, 2009
Page 164p'~ 'i:I'2
~(i)
~OT" BLE fRRlOA T)PN Mll.TER AP1'LlCA TIOt!
~,.-.. ~ '1- AM.~_
SIlU4drw: 00,dH/""'" I ( "U ,'J
Appl",...;'.Namc: '. ~U uU0
~PI!U'"""f~~1f, "'H-~~ -:70()O F'd;~!.f-;J.~/~.:.-?f7.:s-
o/~~'~"""/M:una dd~ 3?$ ~t/tt..- f&tiL..WrFNi I(/,t/U:J /Pc,+- 5Ciid
I>.c-n>llNu",", ("""ucua):
3,.
R.q~osttd Motor She
stJMMAR\' 0.. nauc.~nON SYSTEM CALCtJt.AnON's:
ToW I! or ........., / I'.)
.
'to1.al GlUIo...l>.. Mi."'" (c:t''M)
P..1" :tobV
Z()J'<l; 1: qo 2:QNJ?: .,
ZOr;E 1: 'to ZONE 1:
rom; 3: f5(:J wm i,
.....-
ZON~ ': I~v ZONII~
100
lto
'jc"
9(;
ZONE 5: 'Ie
'Ifma,. tIw\ tell (10) l,Dnes. plW. ~\llcb IlddlllalUll5llcet .
Ma:.anttl.tD NUDabcr ",rZo.Qt5 RunlUne- at Onee:: (jJ
ZO.!'tltI~,
z."..,f. 1/
2..0 f'J~ ,.,.
90
Nil'^" E..
-1/(J,A) F -
,pU"-SE $Ul!Mf'("COMPUTED FOJUl .!.VI> u.){ JJ' DllAJVtr.:r;;:;1fPIWNGl..cx:..rroi'lOF n.Ol'E1<TI""'-ro
/fZ(lI/=D LOCA1'10/J or PROPOSEDIlI.lUG.<t10N UETE/t. 1'0:
E:""'.'.criJlJT,,~.lti..
r-",uc VII.t1t1cs o,.uJeoliJ
>>..T....... t_ E.. Ill". K
1<.11I'" F!. 34l1t
Ph.., (%3'1 m-wll r..: (13') S11l.6'1l1
""'Iml);II~ rC't::d win ~tll)t'" to Au.. t)btabl( mctt.....
~ 'r-OD"" r""
.15" S~UO
~. S7J'.OV
d:'
W~... Imp><! Foe . SJ.41S1ERC: m~l+((pclll< GPM...24Y:Oj
Mlrl"""'" Imp.ct 11... . I Ell.C
)@C lh~!.
1
1.~.1.5
~
L5"
TN)Jpill~ Fe,
Sl,Ol~.OO
S1.14D.OO
ERe Ran.'
7.6-5
5.1-'
PUSJ.)(.; U"ltL1TlES USE ONLY
feak Cf'M ror P,np...d sl"to.~
MJnI"".,", Mow $Iu!Uqulrtll:
ilppro..d:
D_
Wller loop," F..,
T'ppln, CnOl'll"
Toud:
Inlli... at ...........
n ,
ilt~IH(
<1.911?!"!
I:, l;' . II: 1'1 ...,..~I ,.. ,- ,.
_.
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24, 2009
Page 165 of 462
3. Developer Comments on Payments
Doug Lewis summarized the payments and water and wastewater ERCs vested for the
project as:
Permit #
2003092564
2007080564
2003092564
2005121723
Cafe Italia
2005121721
2005072983
Total
. Before C.O,
ERCs Paid
7.5
4.5
1.9
5.6
2.3
2.0'
3.5'
27.3
4. Consensus on Irrigation Meters
Developer agreed with the County 3/31/08 letter and committed to install the two (2)
irrigation two (2) inch meters as stated. The above plus the agreement between the
parties for the 2-year audit/study following County acceptance provides for reasonable
assurance on the irrigation portion of the service.
5. General Discussion Proposed Alternate Methodoloav bv Developer
Mr. Hartman proposed the M-1 AWWA, Impact fee book, and consistent with PRMG
and County ordinance unit county approach per ERC.
Phase 1
Phase 2
Phase 3
Total
17 units
10 units
5 units
32 units
(Bldg 100)
See units and tenant information attached dated 5/6/08.
6. Meeting Result Alternate Methodoloav
A.) Water and Wastewater
Total Units
Paid Units
Payment Due
32
27,3
4.7
ERGs
ERGs
ERGs
B,) Irrigation Meters (2) @ 2" (3/31/08)
Total ERCs 6.1 Water Only
GCHljevlA080376,OOlcorresplAtlach H
Page 2 of J
072308
"
::l
'"
'"
-
"
"
r....
u
'"
]'
....
"
:;:
"
'"
~
.,
1$
.::
o
'';:;
~
'E
-
-g
5
E-
-
-
~
-
"
'"
~
"'-
~
CJ
'"
-
;:;s
~
E-
00
o
o
t:!
~
""
'"
....-
o l:l
'Il:oo
"0
"
-
5~~
Q:!1;~
o!lQN
~ .,;.
_ 'D
= 0
.. " '
,,--
....N
>Q";'
" !:\
... ;;
"-0
,. 0 ""
O'O'i'
00,,",""
~
'="0
= "
,,-
... =
... " '"
= ~ "
u >-
-
.a
;;;I'll:
".g
"d ._
.~ '"
:9:;
.~ 0
O~~~~ 000000000('.1
~NNNOO NNNNNNNNN~
~~~~~o--~~~~~~~~~v
~___M~ ---------~
.S
"
[;0
;:;S~
....
o
,
.-<
,
....
o
'8
"d
Ci
....
o
,
.-<
,
-
'i'
o
,
00
N
,
00
-g
IZl IZl IZl U U'l
Cl) ll) Cl) ~ Q.)
>->->->>-
N N
~~
('I")Mo::tV'l
- -
~
=
"
a
~~ ~
IU ~ l.f"'l lr) V) r---- ' V"'l
a~ 0009000,
8 I I I ~.-
o ~r-;''"""";"~oo,
U __\..Or--..o~
~ ~ Q)
~ ~.~ gj gr 8
o ~ ~.8:a.~
_" '" - " = D:l
;rO&1!il&o
P=:gf"dI$OJ8
~ i .~ jP=: ~ r~ ~
(oj -= g ,g.~.S a
...:0. :o."'-r....'"
"
8
..
Z
'"
o
,
or>
o
N
.-<
'"
o
,
or>
o
,
N
-
o
or>
......
o
""
00
o
,
-
N
....
o
,
or>
......
,
N
-
'D
....0
o '
, -
or> '
, -
N-
....
o
,
.-<
,
N
-
00
o
,
0-,
-
,
.-<
I
I
0-,0-,
........
C') C')
- -
U'l IZl ~ ~ IZl IZl IZl U'l IZl 00 U'l 00
Cl) u ~ ro Cl) Q.) ll) Cl) ll) ll) Cl) ll)
>->->>>->->-><><>->->-
....
-
,
OO-NM("1')-=t"
\O\Or;-...ooo,\----~--
'i' 'D
00
, .
.... or>
-0
, .
NN
- -
-=::r o::t "d'" r:----v
o 0 OlrlltiCO
1t(j\OIQO'OOII
r---.oot""-or- I I l.nt"---
-11......1-----
I ...-I _ I ...... I I I , I
NI1NINNONN
.......oo-.......N--.......--
o
o
......
o
or>
'i'N
,""-
00 '"
--
'" '"
" "
>->-
00 '"
...... -
.... ....
00
, ,
00
NN
, ,
NN
- ......
:<g
'" '"
.S g .... ~
E- oJSq"-<(Il
~;:;S!ilOJo1;l
::l-D:lBO::l
,0 a:l "'" '" 0
Cl)?",oou~...t:l
~ "' ~ D:l "".~
f--~UUOO~
~.<:: Co
E- al'~ 0
~~~gB 0"
a:l '" " ..= OJ ~ ~ .g
~'fJ-5al"'8 8"'-
,,;2; l:l~] OE-:::p....." '"
l::::l C'3 0 ~ Vol ~ rn l::::l t
~ 'e, ~ -5 :e. ~ '" ~ 0 ~
:sl B '" is :& It': It ~ ~
",::Ji<i"'fI1Z:o.Z>U
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24. 2009
Page 166 of 462
NNNNO
----('.I
0\ 0'\ 0\ O\N
--......-N
-g-g -g-g
al al a:l al al
>>>->>
O-NM"l::t
NNNNN
....
o
,
o
N
,
N
-
~
'"
i:i5
'"
.~
......
'"
~
~
U
g
ill
-
"
"
po.
~
g
c..
.9
il
~
"
en
~
"
eo
;:;
6
o
.~
~
~
.....
~
<::
"
f-<
.....
.....
o<l
.....
"
'"
'"
t:
~
;:J
QI
en
~
-
~
00
o
o
<'1
~
'-0
~
V)
'"
...-
o :i
'll:CIl
."
"
-
=
"
Q:i "
Q) 1;
Q:i0
-
=
" "
,,-
" "
:>0
" i!.
... ;;
"-0
::lOV)
0'0",
CIl~"'"
""0
N V)
'" '"
..... .....
,.,
<::
= "1:1 ....... ....... .......
~ ..e &l &l a
Io..oi = U {) U
::I ~ cd ~ ~
UQ:i>>>
'II:
-
'a
;:J
-
li
a
l~
8
13.!l
o "
UQ
"
8
"
z
-
=
"
=
"
f-<
1.(') .\.D t-
NN<'1
I
I
....
"
'"
..
...-=
o=-
~ ~r
..=....
""=-
~!;. ,
... = t-
1::~~
" " '
uo::l
I
I
I
....
....
"
~
"Of I
.s ~
" = t-
",,-
= c.c'i"
~ = = I
_I;J~
" ".....
uo... i
Agenda Item NO.1 OA
February 24. 2009
Page 167 of 462
I I i
I !
I
I
>
I I
tl '* I'
i 5 I is I
I I
i
-~ ., r. ,
l.~..........l ~~.
...c.=-Q;o................ u,...-~...-"""=cr
t
:'l
::
N
Iftm lAN\ l &U.A R:E..
1 14"100 ThmlArrH ThL. f\.Jo.
/ .N-AR.E5, A-.. ~O
/:;;:.:~_.' r-'-'-)
t _. il l
Y1..J'~Ih
f;~
Unlt6 ' ':...~: i
m\:CL
-.,
3,17..q. n. :a~ I J
.'--'-"-'--'-'--"'-'b.:t
U I _.ii;'
1'1. t1..". , :
... " : ~
4(i20aq.rt. :. :~l\
.-.-.----.-- .:'i++!
=~'j
~d
.-;;~;-._. ~j
<!
t
~ ~
.. Q
. ~.
" '"
BUILDING KEY
J
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24, 2009
Page 168 of 462
l
PHASE I
Utllt8
l,6U.q.n.
UBit'
1.6l0.q. n.
Ul0oq.r..
Unit 11
1,nOsq. n.
1.1,,1111
1,620iq. ft.
Vnllll
1,6]O.q.l't.
Uhl! JoC
1.620Iq. h.
UnltlS
l,GI0sq. ft.
U,dtl~
1.620rq. n.
---- If 1V""-iI>---
UAlII'
l,6Q1III. n.
Agenda Item No, 10A
February 24, 2009
Page 169 of 462
-,... - r- -,- -. - -..-, "-_-'~"-_-'~l:':.",.-.:.~,_-~."',;;.;':f,::.",::."",;"":.' .::."",::....,;',;;....,=.....,::....,.:.."......,
~.::.J't.-.I._.I...I._.I.-., I
"". I I I Itzz. 11l%. I I I 1 I I ,Clt: :tu::. I , I r 1-.
I I I I I I . : I I ~ I I I I I . I f I I t I I I
; 1 ; ~ ~ l , : : : ~ ~ ; : : , , l : l t ~ I 'l
, , , . , '-' , , . , , , , , '_I , . , , . . ~.._-~U
- -_:~~:;=----- ifdl:::::j!
/1~~::~ ti~ \~ii~a'===J
l:~::~ It:~~~: ~ ~~ !~il!~----i{
[L~~~: ! ~ -------;~----- ~a~ie~:~~~~~i
"Iii ::1- lSlll~ -----.!.
~Lu-. 8 -----~;----- :;:}r"'; Iii
~~~---. - ~l I ~Jg~5g C~~
t'-----,-------- ;,- II ~~i;~ ---}ii
I ~ ~i~~WI:~~~~jJ
l ~lfig~.----~~
~ ~!~i~.----~j
I ~i~~I'---!11
I r----;J
,
I
,
I
,
I
,
,
,
I
I ...
, H
,
I
,
I
,
,
,
,
f
I
I
,
,
,
I
I
I
I
r
,
I
!
-------.i
,
I
I
,
I
.
,
I
f
I
I
I
,
I
I
,-
,
I
f
.____J I I I
-,-'l.. 5,- ~ 1 ~ I
.f__ ~:~I~~Q
I ~~Q
O~:a 210 ~ ~~I~
u<
I !~;~
... I ~:9telz~
- Q./tc", I:::J
~ I 1 - I
::I I I !il:;j : I
I I
I I 1::.. I I
z~ I
I ::I_ I
.E8'~t
I
I
I
,
I
I
(
I
I
I
: <'i::i
I 1:8
IS:.l
~
Q
~
o
Z
'~ ~
o
~~
~ti
~~~-
~~~
pt~~
El iE3: :
----, rT' -T' ~ .11'---
1-. L J I r 1.-_.,-
, I
t I I I .EU'9S\J 1 I ...,'"
--~--~---------------~--~------~------~-_._------------'"
..-",
=
..-",
=
U._~
. ..
~ _t.:1....J
,--------...
I ..
[-----,..----)
a~I'O
,-
(
.,_""t__~
I ~
l____~ ....,
.... "
I ,
I
I
.
z
-
--
~
F
~ --
E
-I ro
--
(!)': E
2ro
......F
co 0
~ 0
::> I'
-' ~
a.. ,....,
,
i I- w
, cn 0:::
w <(
. ~ :::>
OJ
z
, en
;, ::>.,
, cn........
t '~
"
'"
<(
......
~. :E
...", ~
f
i
E0 39\1d
~
o
Ii
(,
Q
~
..I
<
ii!
...
:Ii
c
:'I
<
I-
...
....
en
:::l
M10P05W RfCY(ll':'
T!l.o\SIIJN<.lOSURi'
,~
,U
I
I
I
I
I
I
. ""t.",
'.":, ',:.\
I
""""".'lb.lJ'IJ'
~ I
E ' I .
c: f1 l6' ""0~ I
tV 0 os: LON!.. WALl:. -
u- L.
.-..... &l
2: ~ ,
cu'E l..i
UI Cl1
Qj-oIJ,
I;;. '1J ru
~ CU 3::
... 01e '
. O(\")'
CO Q,. ,
><e~
0..'-
2~,,,.,,,~tl~J... ,_.~
6lW,Sf,1'llOl'o, XQJ" '"--" I',
.j~. '1.,
I
I
><
'.',: ,"
.I:"~~~
a_,
';.
SNH1WITldlS3MNffi
'F;
, I
..
. I ~I'
.--,~
i i
1,.
",.,
I
.
14 ~ 1'1 : Jj, : D : it! ; ~II : JU ! 11
t'XlsrlNY ?Al(ING
"4,\\I,'"I!)(
(lI\L\V,j_
.f
'. ",
',,'".',PR6t.'~:;.:n"<<'.:.
.. . 'i:t,J~~.:J:tr.l .
';~'!ir"J~j'9' ii. ; ;;j ,;,
. ,A.t~ 'jr(~~..";(:::~,:,..l ~..:.~:l.~.~;~.
~~ t7,~"~~:,:: <oj:'"" ,:,~\-",;:~~~' ."T:'l":'~": .-
"6'~:' ,;i"j'::iq'- . ~,I::.: ":JL;(l:f.l .1 ({ ! l.t .
~!l:t~' d41:',: "'",' ' "
"SI:I'i\H"f1(lf~' ,"
.....~.:\I'~,~k~J.:q~.~...::......<,...'r,':WIl,l~.~;~N~"..~:- " .
""...tl,l18-ItYI'J':" ,,' .: WAUi.Vv'A'l" :
~j~t,\ \,:1, I '. " ,
~~'.,~::~.:h' :'.~).~! .'~ ~
co '.. " ,I
. ,.. : . ~(.iN. ',I''f'', "J":' '.
i "-.~.~.~'.~\Y~~._ ~
; .'.. '. :,. . :. ~' . ,.... . ~
, mc.. IUNlT1, ',: >"p
:' ~~~1 ~~OP~~;~ JT ~
.....~,;~~~: 1 O~. !.;f I
. :'. 1#1JS.F, ~
," ,: TYl'!VCQNST. '
",NIT]': UHI'lIOTIC11iD
" " : l LJNSPItOO.!O
". ,: ON!5T0Il1'
- -I ~",""f-'iiJXi.-iii:kii''''. ','
i F.F.!IPI, ..'4.fN.(i.V.O !
I UNlTot
i
~" ~"""'---
'i
UNIT\
,
. ~ I
I'
:....:..:}<I
~,..j',
_7.-.....t;:.:.....::rir
. . ". ~
'~~? :~. ... ~
, .,f"..
", .~.. ~
I,
j. ~~:
n. ...._... _ ....,. .._. "-_, ....... ~,
1
---
,
,
1;'"
ST668PE6EGT
-
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24, 2009
Page 170 of 462
IXI~llNC;"AUJ"!'
. I~ , 'IIi
.
,.
iI,'I', ,,'.1":,'1
" ~ ; :. ",
'11. 11 'k ,l: '.;
H \\'IW.v.rill'
~,~ll'~H:I"l.'I.\IDI
~>.I"'nNr. fli,
.. Ill' ~i\, '.
~ i 1
"
'l>! '''1 I'" w'
"
II: !:'."
~~'WIl'L ,'.'0[;"
'llll'Hi,F nkr, 'IIt
I.:nr~r 1\
i;r,\.~ .
1I1",I./',(i
~l'\l r
)' : l~
'1', '."
I" Ii'. Ii.'
";1'):.1' :.\\11
'. (l~\~1 .,,1 ~rr ; '.}.' ~
j i nr."l: I J ',.t ~ I
LXI"'T\Nl;P.
,.,.
h]
ill ~\;ll'.
.;'(JNt. v...I~
1IIIIIIltRJ ..
, :.1
.,-,',,;:'....,1..,
,I"'\lAl! 'j.'.
."
I.,
',i I',
ml'I'i.I 1',,1.
(O~",. ~li.\jJ:I.1 \1,'1'.
It ifl :~( .11 ~: I'
!:)\I~T1t",{, 1
l.. I"
.~ ".1 . .'.1 .
0T:9T 8B0~/9~/E0
Agenda Item NO.1 OA
February 24. 2009
Page 171 of 462
7. Vested Flow Rates for Study/Audit @ 32 ERCs (Potable Only) Water and
Wastewater
a.) Water LOS 350 gpd AADF
(i) Annual Average Daily Flow through potable (non irrigation meters)
= 32 x 350 gpd AADF or 11,200 gpd
(ii) 2 month peak factor (see page 29 Table 1 PRMG 40.00 + 33.33 =
1.2
(iii) 2 month audit use on average day of that period limit is 11,200 gpd
x 1.2 or 13,440 gpd for test period.
b.) Wastewater LOS 250 gpd AADF
(i) Annual Average (12 month period) Daily Flow = 32 x 250 = 8,000
gpd AADF
(ii) 2 month peak factor (see page 32 Table 2 PRMG) 40.100 + 30.846
= 1.3
(iii) 2 month audit of use on average day for that period is 8,000 gpd x
1.3 or 10,400 gpd.
B. Proposed Additional Payments
a.)
Irrigation meters 3/3/1/08
(i) Tapping fee
(ii) ERCs irrigation
$ 1,140.00
$22,060.59
b.) Water potable service) impact fees - unit count
(i) 4.7 ERCs x $3,575 $16,803.00
c.)
Wastewater impact fees - unit count
(i) 4.7 ERCs x $3,495
$16,427.00
$56,430.59
Total Amount Due
9. Consensus of Follow-up
a.) Answer questions and requests for information by County. This activity is
complete.
b.) Submit alternative methodology signed and sealed by engineer. This letter
report and attachments satisfies this final item.
GCHfjevfA080376.00fcorresp/Attach H
Page 3 of 3
072308
Agenda Item NO.1 OA
February 24, 2009
Page 172 of 462
Attachment I
Gerald C. Hartman, PE, ASA
Resume
GERALD C. HARTMAN, PE, BCEE, ASA
Vice President
Agenda Item No< lOA
February 24,2009
Page 173 of 462
Pege 1
EDUCATION
8.S" Duke University, 1975
M.S., Duke University, 1976
PROFESSIONAl AFFILIATIONS
Diplomate - American Academy of
Environmental Engineers
American Society of Civil Engineers
Nationai Society of Professional Engineers
Florida Engineering Society
American Water Works Association
Florida Pollution Control Association
American Water Resources Association
Water Environment Federation
Fiorida Water and Pollution Control Operators
Association
Florida Waterworks Association
American Concrete Institute (ACI)
Water Management Institute
American Society of Appraisers
PROFESSIONAL REGISTRATION
Aiabama No. 19422
Arizona No. 28939
Colorado No. 31200
Florida No. 27703
Illinois No< 062-053100
Indiana No. 10100292
Kentucky No< 22463
Louisiana No. 30816
Maine No. 10395
Maryland No< 12410
Mississippi No. 12717
New Hampshire No < 10820
New Mexico No. 15990
North Carolina No. 15264
Ohio No. 70152
Pennsylvania No. 38216
South Carolina No, 15389
Tennessee No. 105550
Virginia No. 131184
Wisconsin No< 32971
NCEES National P.E. No. 20481
Am erican Society of
Appraisers CM No< 7542
QUALIFICATIONS SUMMARY
Mr. Hartman is highly qualified in environmental
engineering with special expertise in utility
management; facility planning; rate charge and
fee studies; and funding and grants. Mr.
Hartman is a qualified expert witness in the
areas of water supply and treatment, wastewater
treatment and effluent disposal, rate making,
service areas, utility system appraisals, landfill
siting, and utility creation/management!
acquisition projects.
EXPERIENCE
Utllitv Finance, Rates. Fees and Charaes
Mr. Hartman has been involved In hundreds of capital charge, impact fee, and installation charge studies
involving water, wastewater, stormwater and solid waste service for various Florida entities. He also has
participated In hundreds of user rate adjustment reports. Since 1976, Mr. Hartman assisted in the
development of over 50 revenue bond issues, 20 short-term bank loan systems, 2 general obligetion
bonds, 26 grant!loan programs, 10 capacity sale programs, and 20 privatization programs. He has been
involved in over hundreds of utility acquisition/utility evaluations for acquisition, and is a qualified expert
witness with regard to utility rates and charges, and utility negotiation, arbitration and condemnation cases.
A few of his water, wastewater, reuse and/or solid waste rata and charge projacts include:
. Flagler County - Impact Fee Analysis, 2005
. Flagler County - Base Facility Charge Analysis, 2005
. Marion County - Silver Springs Regional - Water and Wastewater Revenue Sufficiency, 2004
. Beverly Beach - Water and Wastewater System, 2004
. Village of Bald Head Isiand - Water and Wastewater Rate Sufficiency, 2004
. Farmton Water Resources, Inc. - FPSC, 2004
. B&W Water Resources. Inc. - FPSC, 2004
. Marion County - Stonecrest, Marion Oaks, Spruce Creek, Salt Springs, South Forty, Smyrel Villas -
Rate Integration/Phasing Program, 2003
. City of North Miami Beach - Water and Wastewater Adjustment, 2003
. City of Fernandina Beach - Water and Wastewatar Rate Study, 2002
. St. Johns County - St. Johns Water Co. Rates, 2003
Ii
gai consultants
tr~r'lsfotmlng ideu Into rcallt~
GERALD C. HARTMAN, PE, BCEE, ASA
Vice President
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24, 2009
Page 174 of 462
Page 2
. St. Johns County - Intercoastal Rates, 2001
. Nashua, NH - Pennichuck Water Co., 2002
. City of Deltona - Water and Wastewater, 2002
. Town of Lauderdale By-The-Sea, 2001
. FICURA - Palm Coast Rates,Certification, 2000
. Marion County - Pine Run, Oak Run, AP. Utilities - Rate Integration, 2000
. City of North Miami Beach - Revenue Sufficiency Analysis, 2000
. North Key Largo Utility Authority, 2000
. Port SI. Lucie - SI, Lucie West - COD, 1999
. Hanover County- Water and Wastewater, 1999
. UCCNSB/Sugarmill,1999
. Town of Hope Mills, 1998
. Town of Palm Beach, 1998
. City of Winter Haven, 1998
. Palmetto Resources, Inc. - Raw Water, Reuse, Water. and Wastewater, 1997
. City of Miami Springs - Analysis. 1997
. Widefield - Water and Wasteweter, 1997
. Bullhead City - Wastewater, 1996
. Marion County, 1996
. Utilities Commission. City of New Smyrna Beach - Water and wastewater Rate Study, 1995
. Okeechobee Utility Authority - Rate and charge study, 1995
. Southern States - Statewide rate case, 1995
. Englewood - AFPI and capital charges, 1995
. Lee County - Rates and charges, 1995
. Venice - Reuse rate study, 1994
. Utilities Commission, City of New Smyrna Beach - Capital charge study, 1996
. Port SI. Lucie - Water, gas and wastewater rates, 1994
. Port SI. Lucie - Capital charge study, 1995
. Bullhead City - Assessment study, 1996
. Englewood - Assessment study, 1996
. Sanibel - Capacity sale study, 1995
. City of New Port Richey - Rate and charge study. 1995
. Acme Improvements District, Wellington, Florida - Water/wastewater studies, 1994
. Charlotte County, Florida - Water/wastewater studies; Rotunda West rate case, 1993
. Clay County, Florida - Water/wastewater studies, 1992
. City of DeerfJeld Beach, Florida - Water/wastewater studies, 1992
. City of Dunedin, Florida - Water/wastewater studies, 1991
. Englewood Water District, Florida - Water/wastewater studies, 1993
. City of Green Cove Springs, Florida - Water/wastewater studies, 1991
. Hernando County, Florida - Water/wastawater studies, 1992
. City of Lakeland, Florida - Water studies, 1976-89
. Martin County, Florida - Water/wastewater studies, 1993
. City of Naples, Florida - Water/wastewater and solid waste studies, 1992/94
. City of New Port Richey, Florida - Water/wastewater studies, 1994
. City of North Port, Florida - Water/wastewater studies, 1992
. City of Orange City, Florida - Water/wastewater studies, 1985-94
. City of Palm Bay, Florida - Water/wastewater studies, 1985-94
. City of Panama City Beach, Florida - Water/wastewater studies, 1993
. City of Sanibel, Florida - Water and reuse studies, 1988-94
. Southern States Utilities inc., Florida - Water/wastewater studies and statewide rate cases, 1991/93
. City of Tamarac, Florida - Water/wastewater studies, 1993
Ii
gai consultants
trlnsfotmln!lldcu Into r~all~....
GERALD C. HARTMAN, PE, BCEE, ASA
Vice President
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24, 2009
Page 175 of 462
PagB 3
. Utilities Commission, City of New Smyrna Beach, Florida - Waterlwastewater and reuse studies,
1992i94
. Voiusia County, Florida - Solid waste studies. 1989
. City of West Palm Beach, Fiorida - Wateriwastewater and reuse studies, 1993/94
. City of Sebastian, Florida - Water/wastewater studies. 1993
. City of Tarpon Springs, Florida - Water/wastewater studies, 1994
. City of Miami Springs, Florida - Water/wastewater and solid waste studies, 1994
. City of Edgewater, Florida - Water/wastewater and solid waste studies, 1987-90
. City of Venice, Florida - Reuse studies, 1994
. City of Port St. Lucie - Water/wastewater studies, 1994
. Ocean Reef Club, Monroe County, Florida - Wastewater studies, 1994
. Placid Lakes Utilities Inc" Fiorida - Water/wastewater studies, 1994
. Old Overtown-Liberty Park, Birmingham, Alabama - Wastewater studies, 1994
. Bullhead City, Arizona - Wastewater studies, 1994
. Lehigh Utilities Inc" Lee County, Florida - Florida Public Service Commission rate cases for water,
wastewater and reuse, 1993
. Marco Island and Marco Shores Utilities Inc., Collier County, Florida - Florida Public Service
Commission rate cases for water, wastewater and reuse, 1993
. Venice Gardens Utilities Inc., Sarasota County, Florida - Rate cases for water, wastewater and reuse,
1989/91/93
. Mid-Clay and Clay Utilities Inc" Clay County, Florida - Water/wastewater studies, 1993
. Several expert witness assignments including Palm Bay vs. Melbourne; Tequesta vs. Jupiter; Town of
Palm Beach vs. City of West Palm Beach; City of Sunrise vs. Davie; Kissimmee vs. Complete
Interiors; and others.
Facility PlanninQ
Mr. Hartman has been involved in over 50 water, wastewater and/or solid waste master plans, several
interlocal negotiations and agreements, over 100 capital improvement programs, and numarous capital
construction fund plans. He represented the American Society of Civil Engineers in the State
Comprehensive Plan as a Policy Advisory Committee Member on the Utility Element, and participated in
the preparation of Comprehensive Plans, Chapter 9J5, for more than 20 communities. Mr. Hartman was
involved in the implementation of several stormwater utilities in Florida.
Economic Evaluations/Credit Worthiness Analvses
. Credit Worthiness Analysis for Drinking Water State Revolving Fund (1999) - Florida Department of
Environmental Regulation
. Credit Rating Reviews (1980-2000) - for numerous investor-owned utilities; many city-owned utilities
(Winter Haven. Port SI. Lucie, Miramar, Tamarac, Palm Bay. North Port, etc.); many county-owned
utilities; several not-for-profit utilities; and utility authorities (OUA, etc.)
. Financial Feasibility and Engineer's Revenue Bond Reports (1980-2000) - for over $2 billion of water
and/or wastewater bonds for some fifty (50) entities in the Southeast United States including Clay,
Lee, Hernando, Martin, and other counties; Lakeland, West Palm Beach, Miramar, Tamarac, Panama
City Beach, Winter Haven, Naples, North Port, Palm Bay, Port SI. Lucie, New Port Richey, Clermont,
Orange City, Deerfield Beach, Sanibel, City of Peachtree City, Widefield, and many other cities; Lee
County Industrial Development Authority. Engiewood Water District, and other utilities.
. Privatization Procurement and Analysis for many water and wastewater systems including Sanibel,
Town of Palm Beach, Temple Terrace, Palm Bay, Widefield, Bullhead City and sever others.
NeQotiations/Service Area
Mr. Hartman has participated in over thirty-five (35) service area formations. Chepter 25 F,S. certifications,
Chapter 180.02 reserve areas. authority creations, and interlocal service area agreements including
Lakeland, Haines City, Bartow, Winter Haven, Sanibel, SI. Cloud, Paim Bay, SBWA, ECFS, MWUC,
Edgewater, Orange City, UCCNSB, Port SI. Lucie, Martin County, OUA, NKLUA, DDUA, and many others
Ii
gai consultants
t'8~9(urmlnl1ldu5IntG reallly~
GERALD C. HARTMAN, PE, BCEE, ASA
Vice President
Agenda Item No, 10A
February 24, 2009
Page 176 of 462
Page 4
Mr. Hartman has been a primary negotiator for interlocal service agreements regarding capacity, joint-use,
bulk service, retail service, contract operations and many others for entities such as the Town of Palm
Beach, Miramar, Lauderdale-By-The-Sea, North Miami Beach, Coilier County, Marion County, St. Johns
County, JEA and many others.
PUBLICA TIONS/PRESENT ATIONS
Mr. Hartman has presented several training sessions and seminars throughout the State of Florida for the
American Water Works Association, the American Society of Civii Engineers, the Water Pollution
Association, and the Florida Water and Pollution Control Operators Association. He has presented and/or
published more than 30 papers on water, wastewater and solid waste utility systems including:
Hartman, G.C.; "Determining The Effectiveness of Solid Waste Collection;" M.S. thesis, Duke University,
Durham, North Carolina, 1976,
Dajani, J.S., Vesilind, P.A., Hartman, G.C.; "Measuring the Effectiveness of Solid Waste Coliection,"
Urban Analvsis, 1977, Vol. 4; Gordon and Breach Science Publishers Ltd.; Great Britain.
Vesilind, PA, Hartman, G.C" Skene, E.T.; Sludqe Manaqement and Disposal for the Practicinq Enqineer;
Lewis Publishers Inc,; Chelsea. Michigan; 1986.
Rimer, A., Vesilind, P.A., et. aI., (Hartman contributing author) Resource Recoverv Unit Operations,
Prentice Hall, 1981,
Hartman, G.C., Utility Management and Finance, (presently under contractual preparation with Lewis
Publishing Company/CRC Press),
Hartman, G.C., and R. J. Ori, "Water and Wastewater Utility Acquisition," AWWA Specialty Conference,
1994,
Hartman, G.C. and R.C. Copeland, "Utility Acquisitions - Practices, Pitfells and Management:' AWWA
Annual Conference, 1995.
Hartman, G.C" "Safe Drinking Water Act" and "Stormwater Utilities" FLC Annual Meeting, 1995.
Hartman, G,C" M.A. Rynning, and R.A. Terrero, "5-Year Reserve Capacity - Can Customers Afford the
Cost?" FSASCE Annual Meeting, t996.
Hartman, G.C., TA Cloud, and M.B. Alvarez, "Innovations in Water and Wastewater Technology" Florida
Quality Cities, August 1996.
Hartman, G.C" Seth Lehman, "Financing Utility AcquiSitions" AWWANVEF Joint Management
Conference, February 1997.
Hartman. G.C., M.B. Alvarez, and J.R. Voorhees, "Softening for Color Removal" FWRC Conference, April
1997.
Hartman, G.C" BV. Breedlove, "Water: Where It Comes From and Where It Goes" FRT & G/FDEP
Conference, September 1997.
Hartman, G.C., W.D. Wagner, TA Cloud, and R,C. Copeland, 'Outsourcing Programs in Seminole
County" AWWANVEF/FPCOA Conference, November 1997.
Ii
gai consultants
tran~formlng idl!a' IntI! ;~alltY$
GERALD C. HARTMAN, PE, BCEE, ASA
Vioo President
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24, 2009
Page 177 of 462
Page 5
Hartman, G,C" M.B, Alvarez, J.R. Voorhees, and G.L. Basham. "Using Color as an Indicator to Comply
with the Proposed D/DBP Rule" AWWA, Water Quality Technology Conference, November 1997.
Hartman, G.C., "In-House, Outsourcing and the Non-for-Profit Utilities Option", Florida Government
Finance Officers Association (FGFOA) Conference, March 27,1998.
Hartman, G,C, and D.P. Dufresne, "Understanding Groundwater Mounds. A Key to Successful Design,
Operation and Maintenance of Rapid Infiltration Basins" April 4-7, 1998, FWWANJET/FPCOA Joint
Meeting.
Hartman, G.C. and Seth Lehman, "Financing Water Utilities - Acquisition and Privatization Projects"
AWWA Annual Conference. June 24,1998,
Hartman, G.C" "Utility Valuation," Wake Forest University Law School Seminars Series, February 7.2003.
Hartman, G.C., HE Schmidt, Jr" and Michael S. Davis, "Biosolids Application in Rural DeSoto County.
Florida," WEF/AWWAlCWEA JOint Residuals & Biosolids Management conference, February 19-22,
2003.
Hartman. G.C, contributing author, Chapter 14B, Nichols on Eminent Domain, RCNLD Valuation of Public
Utilities. March 1999 Edition, Release No. 48.
Hartman, G.C., M.A. Rynning, and V, Hargray, "Assessment of Commercial Customer Water Impacts,"
AWW A 2000
Hartman, G.C.,' M. Sloan, N.J. Gassman, and D.M, Lee, "Developing a Framework to Balance Needs for
Consumptive Use and Natural Systems with Water Resources Availability," WEF Watershed 2002
Specialty Conference, February 23-27, 2002.
Hartman, G,C. and Dr. M. Wanielista, "Irrigation Quality Water - Examples and Design Considerations,"
ASCE Conference, April 4, 2003,
Hartman, G,C., M.A, Rynnlng and V. Hargray, "Assessing the Water Demands of Commercial Customer,"
WEF Volume 6, No.4, July/August 2003 - Utility Executive,
Hartman, G.C,. D. Cooper, N. Eckioff and R. Anderson. "Water," The Bond Buyer's Sixth Southeast Public
Finance Conference. February 23, 2004.
Wanielista, Marty and G.C, Hartman. "Regional Stormwater Facilities", Stormwater Management for
Highways Transportation Research Board TRB AFB60, July 12, 2005.
Ii
gai consultants
lr~ns(arm("g Ideas into re"lItYIl
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24,2009
Page 178 of 462
COLLIER COUNTY PUBLIC UTILITIES DIVISION
3301 E. Tamiami Trail' Naples, Florida 34112 . (239) 732-2575 . FAX (239) 732-2526
August 29, 2008
Mr. Douglas A. Lewis, Esquire
Roetzel & Andress, P.A.
850 Park Shore Drive
Trianon Centre - 3'd Floor
Naples, Florida 34103
Subject:
Alternative Water and Wastewater Impact Fee Calculation-
Tamiami Square
Dear Mr. Lewis:
In accordance with the Agreement Regarding Alternative Impact Fee Calculation dated
May 13, 2008 (the "Agreement") between the Collier County Water-Sewer District (the
"District") and Tamiami Square of Naples, LLC (the "Developer" and collectively with
the District, the "Parties"), District staff is providing a response to the alternative impact
fee calculation submitted by the Developer for water and wastewater capacity for the
Property as defined in the Agreement. In accordance with item 8 of the Agreement, the
County Manager must respond in writing within thirty (30) days after the receipt of the
alternative impact fee calculation to express that such calculation is considered as being
complete. The alternative impact fee calculation was received by the County on August
1,2008. The District staff, acting as the County Manager's designee, has prepared this
letter to. provide notification that the District staff does consider such submittal of the
alternative impact fee calculation by the Developer as being complete.
In accordance with item 9 of the Agreement, the County (through the District) must
review the data, analysis, and conclusions asserted in the alternative impact fee
calculation and provide the results of such review, analyses, and conclusions to the
Developer within thirty (30) days after the determination that the application is complete.
The remainder of this letter provides a discussion of our review and analyses of the
alternative impact fce calculation submitted by the Developer and our conclusions.
Developer Request
Based on information contained in the alternative impact fee calculation and meetings
and discussions held with the Developer, the Developer is requesting the following:
1. The Developer per the alternative impact fee calculation states that the total
equivalent residential connections (ERe) [for that component of the Property which
is identified in the alternative impact fee calculation as Phase I] is 17 ERCs and is
based on the meter equivalency approach that is represented by the Developer as
c::
o
(~
"
'I
c::
o
u
n
t
"
Agenda Item NO.1 OA
February 24, 2009
Page 179 of 462
being used by numerous cities, counties, and private utilities regulated by the Florida
Public Service Commission (FPSC).
2. The total amount of ERCs paid as of the date of this letter by the Developer for
construction projects upon the Property to the District is 27.3 ERCs.
3. The total amount ofERCs to be assigned to the Property for all phases (I through 3)
of dcvelopment is 32 units and was also based on the meter equivalency approach.
Based on the assumed prepaid amount by the Developer of 27.3 ERCs, this would
result in a remaining balance due for the development of all phases of the Property to
be 4.7 ERCs (32 ERCs minus 27.3 ERCs).
4. The Developer plans to install a two-inch irrigation meter to receive water-only
service and identified this service requirement to equal 6.1 ERCs; the determination
of this level of ERCs was based on the County's "Water-only Meter Application
(Potable)" calculation worksheet as prepared and submitted by the Developcr to the
District.
5. The total remaining amount due to the District for the Impact Fees attributable to all
development phases (1 through 3) of the Property is as follows:
Impact Fee Impact Fee
Der ERe Amount
Potable Water at 4.7 ERCs $3,575.00 $16,803.00
Wastewater at 4.7 ERes $3,495.00 $16,427.00
POlable 1rri2ation at 6.1 ERCs $3.616.49 $22.060.59
Total [moact Fees Due Per Develooer <<< ~90.i2
District Review. Analvsis. and Conclusions
Based on the information contained in the alternative impact fee calculation provided by
the Developer, a review of the District Uniform Billing, Operating and Regulatory
Standards and Ordinances as applicable to the dctcrmination of impact fees, and our
undcrstanding of the Developer request as contained in the alternative impact fee
calculation, we have performed the following analysis and are of the following opinions:
I. The use of the meter equivalent basis as the method to dctermine the amount of ERCs
allocable to the Property is considered incorrect and is not being relied upon by the
District. Although numerous cities and counties may use this method, many cities
and counties do not use this method due to the fact that this approach can understate
the allocated capacity to a specific property. In many instances, the methodology for
the determination of ERCs for a commercial classification such the Developer's
Property is determined based on flow and a unit of measure that links to flow (e.g.,
average daily flow or fixture units). This approach is used to recognize the diversity
in demand of the commercial class (customers with the same meter can have
2
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24,2009
Page 180 of 462
materially different service demands and therefore a different number of ERCs
associated with servicing the customer) which is not reflected in the meter based
approach. This is further supported by findings and opinion of Public Resources
Management Group, Inc. (pRMG), the District's rate consultant, which is attached
hereto and made a part of our response. As PRMG states in their letter to the District,
the FPSC has allowed private utilities in numerous instances to use a flow based
approach in the determination of the plant capacity charges (impact fees) to be paid
for general service (commercial) customers for the reservation or allocation of
capacity.
2. The approach reflected in the altemative impact fee calculation is not consistent the
method reflected in the District's rulcs and ignores the diversity of the commercial
class as it relates to meter size. The impact fee for commercial service recognized by
the District is based on a level of service whereby one (1) ERC is equal to 350 gallons
per day (gpd) for potable water and 250 gpd for wastewater which is "flow based";
such calculation is not dependant on the size of the meter(s) needed to measure flow
to the Property. The County's detcrmination of the impact fee due by an applicant
such as thc Developer is based on an estimated capacity (flow) approach which is
used by many utilities across the state. Just because numy utilities use a meter
equivalency-based approach does not mean it is the correct approach to use for the
Property; just as many utilities do not use this approach. As such, the basis for the
Developer's alternative impact fee calculation is not accepted by the District staff.
3. During the meetings between the Developer and the District staff, it was discussed
among the Parties that the Impact Fee calculation should be based on actual flow
characteristics of the Property. The alternative impact fee calculation as submitted
did not reflect the use of this discussed methodology. Predicated on the above, the
basis for the Developer's alternative impact fee calculation is not considered as being
correct and therefore alternative impact fee calculation is not accepted by the District.
4. The District initially prepared an Impact Fee calculation that identified the water and
wastewater ERCs for the Property and it was determined that the total ERCs were
61.4, a copy which is attached as Exhibit 1. The District does not agree with the
Developer's alternative impact fee calculation that concludes that there are 32.0 ERCs
for the property (absent irrigation demands).
5. The total amount ofERCs paid by the Developer for which the County has received
payment was for 21.8 water and wastewater ERCs, not the 27.3 ERCs as stated in thc
Developer's alternative impact fee calculation. A review of our records indicate that
5.5 ERCs were represented on the building permits as being subject to an impact fee
credit due to the Developer; however no payment was actually received (either
prepaid or at time of permit issuance) by the District and therefore payment is still
outstanding. Included on Exhibit 2 are copies of the respective building permits that
indicate the amount duc and the status of the respective permit. The permit numbers
and corresponding ERCs are summarized below:
3
Agenda Item NO.1 OA
February 24. 2009
Page 181 of 462
ERe.
Permit Number Represented
2005121721 2.0
200S072983 3.5
6. Based on the above, the total ERCs for the Property due by the Developer is as
follows:
Water Wastewater Total
Total ERCs per County 61.4 61.4
Average lmpactFee oer ERC III $2,695.10 $3,016.96
Total Amount Due to County $165.419~ JiJ.JI5 "', <n $350,720.50
Amount Paid bv Developer
Total ERCs 21.8 21.8
Amount Paid $57.953.00 $6' <ry7,00 $121480.00
Net Amount Due County SI07,526.00 $121,714.50
[11 Amounts shown reflect average impact fee calculated for the determination of the
Developer liability by the County since the impact fee rate was based on time of
pennlt application and the rates were adjusted by the County over time.
This table does not assume that the Developer may install a water-only irrigation
meter in the future which will have the affect of reducing the amount of wastewater
ERCs and respective impact fees due. As of the date of this letter, it is our
understanding that the Developer has not installed the irrigation meter. To the extent
that the water-only meter is installed in the future, the County will give the Dcvelopcr
consideration as to the change in wastewater ERCs for the overall development of the
total wastewater impact fccs due.
District Historical Flow-based Impact Fee Analvsis
During the preparation of the Agreement, the Parties discussed that the impact fees
should be based 011 actual flows (predicated on actual meter readings) to the Property
which was not addressed in the alternative impact fee calculation. Additionally,
documentation submitted in support of the alternative impact fee calculation included a
summary of irrigation system repairs performed at the Property that may have resulted in
water being lost due to leaks. It should bc noted that the irrigation repairs are recurrent
through the years and the Property did use the water; such water loss is the responsibility
of the customer and not the District. As such, the County does not consider the possible
water loss due to t1le irrigation repairs to be extraordinary. Furthermore, when
establishing the level of service by the County, all water use is considered in t1le
determination of the level of service.
4
Agenda Item NO.1 OA
February 24, 2009
Page 182 of 462
As part of the review process by the District, an evaluation of the actual metered water
use at the Property for the eighteen (18) month period ended August 2008 (billing period
for July 2008 usage) was conducted. This analysis is shown on Exhibit 3 to this letter.
As can be seen on Exhibit 3, the average monthly metered water use is actually
approximating the ERC estimate developed in the District's impact fee calculation as
shown on Exhibit I. For the past four most recent months, the implied ERCs based on i)
the metered water use at the property; ii) an assumed level of service equal to 350 gallons
per day per ERC, and iii) the billing days reflected in the usage cycle result in a ERC
value of 61.3 ERCs on a peak monthly use basis and 54.9 ERCs on an average monthly
usage period. Furthermore, the ERC value based on the peak month use during the
review period as shown on Exhibit 3 was 63.8 ERCs which essentially equates to the
amount reflected on the District's initial impact fee calculation as shown on Exhibit 1.
As evidenced by the most recent actual water sales as registered by metering at the
premise, the Property is requiring the capacity (demand) that the District calculated for
the Property as part of the impact fee calculation. This further supports that the
Developer's alternative impact fee calculation as received by the District is not accurate
and therefore is not being considered by the District.
District Conclusion and Recommendation
Based on the information submitted in the altemative impact fee calculation, the District
review and analysis as presented herein, the actual demands being experienced by the
Property, and the estimated use of the Property as reflected on the permits for which the
fees were initially based, the District has identified three alternatives for consideration by
the Developer. These three altcrnatives include:
1. Recognize that the demand and the associated impact fee liability of the Developer
are based on 64.1 ERCs as initially calculated by the District as shown on Exhibit I.
2. Recognize that the initial demand and the associated impact fee liability of the
developer are 54.9 ERCs which will be subject to adjustment in accordance with the
terms of item 14 of the Agreement.
3. The Developer does not agree ",ith the District staff and shall exercise it rights under
item 11 of the Agreement by filing a written appeal petition with the Board of County
Commissioners not less than thirty (30) days after documented receipt of this letter.
Recognizing the above and in order to close this issue relative to the impact fee liability
of the Developer, the District staff offers the following as it pertains to alternative 2
(listed above):
1. The initial ERCs established for the property is 54.9 ERCs which will be reviewed
every 6 months for a two ycar period beginning with bills rendered in October 2008
which is consistent with the terms of item 14 of the Agreement. To the extent that the
actual demand for the Property in two consecutive months (calculated as follows:
[((metered water use divided by number of days in billing cycle) divided by 350 gpd
5
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24, 2009
Page 183 of 462
per ERC) = Implied ERCs for Property] exceeds 54.9 ERCs, the Developer will be
responsible to pay impact fees on the number of ERCs above such amount. The new
ERC value will then serve as the established ERCs during the remainder of the two
year review period.
2. The Dcveloper shall have an immediate remaining liability due to the County for
unpaid impact fees of$I92,] 12.09 which is calculated as follows:
Water Wastewater Totals
Totallnitial ERCs Der County 54.9 54,9
A veral!e ImDact Fee Der ERC r1] $2,695.10 $3,016.96
Total Amount Due to County $147.' '.99 ~,~,~.,'w $313 ,592. 09
Amount Paid by DeveloDer
Total ERCs 21.8 21.8
Amount Paid ." 0<< on $121.480,00
Net Amount Due County ~90007 ,29 $102104.1Q $192 11?O9
[1] Amounts shown reflect average imp""! fee calculated for the determination of the
Dcveloper liability by the County as shown on Exhibit 1 and was used since under
the actual flow based approach, no assignment to the ERCs per a building permit
can be made (reference Exhibit I).
The District will allow the Developer to pay the net amount due to the County in
equal installments over a 24 month period or $8,004.67 per month (with the last
month adjusted for any rounding issues in collection). The District will not charge an
interest cost to carry the liability but to the extent the monthly payment is overdue,
the County may charge latc payment fccs (amount equivalent to the rate charged to its
water and wastewater customers as set by policy) and may advance the full payment
of the liability. Any impact fees due as a result of increased demands experienced by
the Property (i.e., in excess of the 54.9 ERCs) will be due and payable within 30 days
of notification by the County to the Developer.
3. To the extent that the Developer installs the irrigation meter which has been agreed
by the Parties to equate to 6.1 ERCs, the District will credit the Developer $18,403,46
(6.1 ERCs multiplied by $3,016.96) for thc change in service and adjust the
remaining amount of the wastewater impact fee installment payments to recognize
such credit. If the Developer installs the water-only meter after the two year
evaluation period, no credit will be recognized by the District.
4. The Developer will acknowledge in writing to the County Manager of acceptance of
the liability and terms of payment within thirty (30) days of receipt of this letter or it
may petition to the Board of CotUlty Commissioners as provided in the Agreement.
6
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24, 2009
Page 184 of 462
Swnmarv
In summary, District staff does not accept the calculation as provided in the Developer's
alternative impact fee calculation and finds that $107,526 in water impact fees and
$121,714.50 in wastewater impact are immediately due and payable to the District.
District staff also will accept an installment based impact fee payment approach to assist
the Developer with the payment of the outstanding impact fee liability. Finally, District
staff agrees that the Agreement between the Parties will remain in effect for the next two
(2) years in order to validate flows and the overall impact fee liability.
District Staff appreciates all the efforls of the Developer with respect to the development
and submittal of the alternative impact fee calculation and trust that you wiII agree with
District staff assessment. Of course, selection and enactment of any of the three
alternative courses of resolution will require Board of County Commissioner approval. If
you need any additional information from us or have any questions with regard to our
review, analyses, or conclusions, please do not hesitate to give me a call.
Very truly yours,
Collier County Water-Sewer District
1?~
Thomas G. Wides
Operations Director, Public Utilities
Cc:
JeffKlatzkow, County Attorney
Jennifer Belpedio, Assistant County Attorney
Jim Delony, Public Utilities Administrator
Jim Mudd, County Manager
Gilbert Moncivaiz, Operations Analyst
Amia Curry, Interim Manager Operations Support
Attachments:
Exhibit I - Tamiami Square Development Spreadsheet
Exhibit 2 - Unpaid Water and Wastewater Impact Fees
Exhibil3 - Historical Data
Letter from Public Resources Management Group, Inc. (PRMG)
7
<l:Q)N
DOlO
~O'"
,N_
O .0
Z"'",
Nro
E >.~
.$(uQ)
-:}O)
CO ~ CO
'0.00..
c"
,,"-
en
<l:
'"
e
H:!~
",.sILOS
.
W
-
$g81~1
:J: ~afOJ:
"'_ U
.
W
Un
(/),Su..a..
l1i=~
"g.Cll 10
~su.A.
iltfd
~!1I.l.G:"
H:!l
;::.Ii"'&!
~
-
:is
:E
><
w
.
>
- .
." "
"5~E:
EILI.!!
e .
, '"
u
""
0:.
we.
."
zill
,,'"
g(e
"
8
"
88888
ci";:OM..a
~ O~
M 0
N ~
~ ~
~rs
~ ~,.
Olg
000
000
cic::iQ
~
~
..;
o
o
"
00000
000000-
"::i"gig
" ~~
,;
..
llii:,
lilia
.lt~.
g8
~~
~~
riM
"''''
00
00
~~
....
M'M
"''''
:il22:il
a.iaiOlO>
(0)(":1(0)('1)
ll)f'? ~
VN N
~~oo::
"
~
,,0
O~
"0
8g8g~
ci ooc).ot
;:;
N
I'"
888g8
cicicidw
N
~
~
~
00
~~
~~
";0
tnio'l"""W~
00
~~
r..:~
:!I 0
':!it--
l;o<t~~~"'"
.
,
00
~-
fl
~....
"']1
gje
"
8 g 0
M N ~
~' .<i ~
" Ii!
'" OJ
0 . g~
~5 0 ,
Il'lO
M_ ~- 0-
~-g oj] '=ll
ill.... 6~ ..:......
-" N" ...'C'
,~ " ~
e
'" '" '"
~ ~ ~
z z z
. " .
~~=
~UJ::
"0
.0
~~
z!g
H~
I-~o
'E
.
E
{:.
8
~
~
0"
." -
'" 0
'" '
~~
8
'"
~
0;
N
'"
:;
r;B=
00
ON
~
... je
888
ci~o
M
..;
. ..
"'~
, :'!
~;
:~'i ~
o
o
.;
~
N
'"
ii,
"'''''''''w''"'fi'''''''' ............
'~~ 8
'II ;.~~i. gi
~ ... ~,
~l .illi;
6 '"
~""fi"'''''.. {,') tnl1'J14"" tn
'"
o
o
o
~
o
N
..
88888
cicicio.,;
..-.............(',1
0000_
w-l1in(')t')
tIJoUltlJotB""
.8.~ ggg
"'")1,1'> 10 lri If)
S~:, NN~
,-, ,-,.. f')"M"t')
"w...""....M
88
,- gg
~ ~
NO;
""'''''lilt
000
000
dd...;
"'0_
"f'- r-- v
NN~
"'''''''
~'"
N
ON
_N
00
00
~~
~~
88
~;a
~a;
..'"
~~
00
00
~ ~
00
~~
8
~
N
~
g
o
o
M
~
"
'"
~
u
~
~
N
.o
^
"
!I
~
o
'0
a.
.
S
"
*
o
o
o
o
~
~
N
..
0000.0,
00000
ciodcio
lE$$~:e
NNNNN
tn""""oIfltl'l
"J
o
o
o
0000 00
g ~ "t" "'". "'".... <"! ~
o r--r-- ~Pl" ~~
:~!'
.~'"
:;;1
~
8
N
~
ill
N
~
o
~
o
o
N
r')Of")(OOl
eSUZffl fXi
('\/0(\1..........
O.........Nr-.
aHH
00000
NNNN(\j
000
....o",
o:iaia'
MM M
~ '!iJ'ili
00000 c. 0 0 ~:".::Z 0 0
re H' .""
~ :i~~ll~
\F ~.
o~o~~
..
'"
:ii'
o~~(Ol"!o
O~Lt'l
o
~5:
CO: ~olt:!.,..... OIO!l 0
o a S} oli!
l~'
'"
,.;
.o
i\.~
..
oj
<<1(") (Ow
'00 00:.....
.~ odi~~o
.J" ~
'"
"
=>
1- ~~, :;'
~ IliJ co ~~. ~": i:O
_ (II cri;\ ~ ~ ~ '''-: r--. ~ f!rn "'" ~ Ild
~-~;;;""",,Cf.lLt'l. C\I~'.il'NiIlr--.
-~I!'~~' , ,~,..
1;0 I.!__j::-~ ,!g~:t ~
, lco .... Q) jt ("';l
.... II:) ....Lt'l,ill! .....(0
.... 1R,_
"
8888888 ggg
(V) I") L") f\? L") t1 L") t"') ~~, I;":> (') (l')
.~ O')[;Se~_:~ .~
w... ~r-;. 1;; ;;:/ :.:'.\ ci~
S ....~O/.Iaig=~~;;:H .9 -2 .~
.5~O')Slll~8".3m. =~ (\:l0')(ij
'05'8"'.'- . "'0: $1 _5'O~
~~~~5~g~~u~~~~~~~
c:lfl) F~.!!!c:l" ~~_' a1~m ~
! 1f~~m!'I-:'" O)Ia.
~ :5;g,~ ~ ~
6: gLt'110 11')' Lt'l(g'- :t5:gr-
~~@~~ ~~:.~~~
~;::~?ii:::: ~~-~~<:::
.............. r--.~/'-.....,;,u... lC
1m
N 1O~~ C':> 0 1.0
0..,. N('I')..,.
(I'}/'-. /'-.C\lN
!':lr'> ....M...
1'-... NN8
~:;; ::og r--.
~~ ~~~
~
g 0
il g
j
"
~
~
o
o
".!l
~~
...
-
'E
8:
j;:.
1'1
~
<CO>N
OOCD
-0""
....-
,,0
C=;;CD
a:J
E 2:'~
2ctl<ll
-::>OJ
"'~'"
"0"'0..
cQ)
Q)ll..
OJ
<C
N
~
...a
:2
)(
LU
....
OJ
~
<ll
~
tlO.
1::-0
.~ 'n;
o 0..
..c: c:
<II OJ
m OJ
00-0
C"l ~
~ g.
o OJ
Ll1 >
o <ll
O..c:
N
~ <II
,- Q)
EJl:'
....
OJ .....
o..~
.... 0..
o E
..... .-
o ....
..c Q)
<II ~
c: OJ
OJ <II
e-o
u c:
<n <ll
itiJ D
l!illun t:li -, .'
f i! i!!i!Oi! il '
VI. :t If'ltr~ I!l:l' l
n~
R'"iO~'''8'''
~~"
!
1:1
Hl!'
I
....
OJ
.....
<ll
::
tlO.
1::-0
.~ 'n;
o 0..
..c c
<II OJ
~ OJ
N-O
r-. ~
;::jg.
,..., OJ
l.I"l >
o <ll
O..c:
N <II
:~ OJ
EJl:'
.... .....
OJ u
o..ro
.... 0..
o E
~ .-
o ....
..c Q)
<II ;:
C Q)
OJ <II
~-o
u C
V) <ll
.
.
+
.
.
.
I
oJ
z:]
Ii
!
~!
.h~
i@@ilUil!i! ~I
",~und
~~~~!!~ ~88
r ,
n~ I
I
I
~hnn 1"1 ,
15ii!"~'" .
Co... .,.fjj~::~ !h ,
~ p~8~~U :1.
.
.
..
"
. ,
I
i !-!',:
ii' i::~
~ Ii ~
... ..FL._,j
Exhibit 3
Tamiami Square of Naples, LLC
Account # 04046017600
Payable
Period Month Of: Year
94 Aug us! 2008
93 July 2008
92 June 2008
91 May 2008
90 April 2008
89 March 2008
88 February 2008
87 January 2008
86 December 2007
85 November 2007
84 October 2007
83 September 2007
82 August 2007
81 July 2007
80 June 2007
79 May 2007
78 April 2007
77 March 2007
Water Usaae (thousandsl
549
541
674
601
560
382
413
781
374
223
244
239
292
385
312
423
420
549
Number of Periods
Monthly Average (All)
Average ERCs (All)
Last Four Month Average
Four Month Average ERCs
Peak Volume
181
4421
41.61
5911
54.91
781 I
:t;;:t~'~;.'i~~~i!~~~f@l~~i~F .,,"'~ i!g~~-#~i!M\~ll~~
Meter
Read
Date
81512008
7/7/2008
614/2008
51212008
4/4/2008
3/612008
2/512008
1/4/2008
11130/2007
11/1/2007
10/4/2007
9/6/2007
8/6/2007
716/2007
61612007
514/2007
4/5/2007
31612007
2/5/2007
Days
In
Cvcle
Agenda Item NO.1 OA
February 24, 2009
Page 187 of 462
ERCs
based on
Actual Davs
29
33
33
28
29
30
32
35
29
28
28
31
31
30
33
29
30
29
54.1
46.8
58.4
61.3
55.2
36.4
36.9
63.8
36.8
22,8
24,9
22,0
26.9
36.7
27.0
41.7
40.0
54.1
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24, 2009
Page 188 of 462
19
Public Resources Management Group, Inc.
Utility, Rate, Financial and .''l"j'anagemcnt Consultant.v
August 26,2008
Mr. Thomas G. Wides
Operations Support Director, Public Utilities
Collier County Govcrnmcnt
3301 E. Tamiami Trail, Suite H3
Naples, FL 34112
Subject:
Alternative Impact Fee Application
Dear Tom:
As we discussed, the Collier County Water-Sewer District (the "District") has received an
alternative impact fee calculation from Tamiami Square of Naples, LLC (the "Developer") which
is requesting a reduction in the water and wastewater impact fees that were imposed by the
District on the property referred to as Tamiami Square. It is my understanding that Tamiami
Square is a commercial customer serviced by one master meter at the property and will be
receiving both potable water and wastewater service.
As you know, the District's Impact Fees are applied to a commercial customer based on the
estimated equivalent residential connections (ERe) that a specific property may be determined to
include. An ERC is a unit of measure which links capacity to a given property (with individually
metered residential service being equal to I ERe and is generally the smallest customer from a
capacity allocation standpoint) which is based on a level of service equal to 350 gallons per day
for water capacity and 250 gallons per day for wastewater capacity. It should be noted that this
is a daily capacity allocation and not one based on an average use experienced over a period of
time such as a year. Furthermore, this capacity allocation is based on the allocation of finished
water produced and wastewater treated at the respective plant facilities and therefore is not based
on retail use metered at the customer premise (there is an allowance for water loss as part of the
normal delivery of water and normal inflow and infiltration for the collection of wastewater).
The District's allocation of capacity to all commercial customers is an ERC based approach
predicated on the flow (capacity) required of the property (essentially a "flow-based" allocation)
which we believe to be proper in the reservation of capacity by a specific property or customer.
By using this fee dctenllination methodology, the District does recognize customer diversity in
the establishment of the level of impact fees to be charged to a property to promote the fairness
provisions (rational nexus) in the application of the impact fees.
K:\DM\L 12S.16\Meter Equiv Ltr HnaI.doc
341 NORTH MAITLAND AVENUE - SUITE 300 -. MAITLAND, FL 32751
TELl,PHONE: (4()7) 628-2600. fAX: (407) 6:!8.2610. ElvlAIL: I'RMG@PRMGinc.com
Agenda Item NO.1 OA
February 24,2009
Page 189 of 462
Mr. Thomas G. Wides
Collier County Government
August 26, 2008
Page 2
In the alternative impact fee calculation as submitted by the Developer, a primary assumption as
to why a lower impact fee should be charged to the property is that it should have been based on
the "meter equivalent" approach as opposed to a flow-based approach currently used by the
District. The meter equivalent approach is a method that wcights the meter capacity by the
maximum flow that the meter is capable of measuring to a 518-inch meter (i.e., the maximum
capacity for a 518-inch meter is 20 gallons per minute as referenced in A WW A Manual M6 and
considered as a factor of 1.0; the other meters are expressed as a multiple of this usage value
based on meter size). The alternativc impact fee calculation recognized this mcthod of fee
determination under the premise that "numerous cities, counties and FPSC regulated entities
utilize FPSCIAWWAIFAC/F.S. Section 25-30.055 and related sections for large service areas
..." in the determination of impact fees to be charged to a property. Although many cities and
counties use meter equivalent factors [or the determination of commercial propcrty impact fees,
the assertion that this is the correct method and therefore the only method to use is simply not
true.
With respect to the application of impact fees based on the flow or service attributes of a
commercial customer, many cities, counties and other public utilities use a flow or attribute-
based approach in the determination of the impact fee (attribute would be a specific component
of the development such as seats in a restaurant that has a daily capacity based on flow assigned
to it). The rcason that these utilities use this approach is to accurately recover the cost of
providing service based on the capacity requirements specific to the customer. The meter is
simply uscd to measure daily flow and must be sized to accurately measure the flow from the
property; however to say that all commercial customers have the same capacity requirement
because of the meter size being the same between such customers is not correct. Simply put, a
restaurant served by a 518-inch meter generally would have a significantly higher demand than a
real estate office served by the same meter size. Additionally, it is rare that a customer would
use 100% of the maximum meter capacity and that a customer's load factor is generally less than
this. The District has recognized this; for a maximum flow rate of a 5/8-inch meter at 20 gallons
per minute, the daily flow would be 28,800 gallons per day yct the approved ERC value of the
District is 350 gallons per day which is my understanding is a common level of service used by
the industry in Florida.
There are several public utilities that use an ERC-based or flow-based approach in the
determination of the impact fees and based on my cxperience, more are moving towards this
direction due to the diversity in use experienced by the commercial class and the need to
accurately recover cost. Although it is administratively easier to calculate an impact fec using
meter equivalents, public utilities realize the financial benefits of calculating the commercial
impact fees based on flow (or similar attribute) in order to fully recover capital costs allocable to
new growth. A survey of public utilities that use a flow based approach is shown on Attachment
I to this letter (this docs not imply that these are the only utilities using the flow-based approach,
K:I,DM\[ li$-16\Meltr l'luiv Ltt F~la1.d(J~
Agenda Item NO.1 OA
February 24, 2009
Page 190 of 462
Mr. Thomas G. Wides
Collier County Government
August 26, 2008
Page 3
it is simply a survey). As can be seen, there are many utilities that use the ERC-based or flow-
based approach in the dcternlination of the impact fees due from a commercial property.
Additionally, the reference in the Developer's alternative impact fee calculation with respect to
the FPSC using the meter based approach in our opinion is not entirely accurate. Our experience
is that for general service (commercial) use, the plant capacity fees (term used by private
utilities; equivalent to an impact fee) imposed by private utilities is expressed in the rate tariff on
a cost per gallon basis which implies a flow based application. Based on a review of private
utility rate tariffs regulated by the FPSC that are available to us and discussions with others in
the industry, the following private utilities imposed a plant capacity fee based on a "per gallon of
demand" basis for the general service class:
. North Fort Myers Utility, Inc.
. Aloha Utilities, Inc.
. North Sumter Utility Company, Tnc.
. Little Sumter Utility Company, Inc. (prior to acquisition)
. Florida Water Services Corporation, Inc. (approximately 150 systems; prior to acquisition)
. Utilities, Inc.(approximately 40 systems)
In the alternative impact fee calculation submitted by the Developer, reference was also made to
Florida Statutes, Section 25-30.055 with respect to private utilities. This reference provided a
summary of the determination of ERCs for non-residential use and listed the meter equivalent
factors assumed in the alternative fee calculation. It should be noted that this rule is associated
with a capacity or proposed capacity, to serve 100 or fewer persons, which clearly does not relate
to the County. Notwithstanding this service provision, the rule provides that unless the FPSC
determines that valid local statistical data should be used, then the meter equivalent factors
should be used. Based on my knowledge of the industry, the private utilities generally use local
statistical data ill the development of the plant capacity fees and for the general service class such
fees apply to new customers on a flow basis. This is further evidcnced by the flow-based fees
being reflected in thc respective company's rate tariff which have becn approved by the FPSC.
Finally, the alternative impact fee calculation submitted by the Developer also includes a
reference to Public Resources Management Group, Tnc. (pRMG) that the alternative method is
consistent with the findings reflected in a recent PRMG report regarding the development of
impact fees (I assume that this links to the recommendations for the use of the meter equivalency
based impact fee since the PRMG report was appended to the calculation). There is no reference
to the use of meter equivalents as the basis for fee determination in the report. In fact the fee was
based on the total applicable capital costs and the total available flow (and the corresponding
ERCs) allocable to growth based on the District's adopted level of service (i.e., flow) allocable to
K:\DM\1125-16\!.-{etcr Equiv Ltr Fingl.doe
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24, 2009
Page 191 of 462
Mr. Thomas G. Wides
Collier County Government
August 26, 2008
Page 4
growth. The only reference to meters in the report deals with the fact that an ERC is equivalent
to the daily use of a typical individually mctered residential customer which is generally the
lowest level of use in the detennination of the flow requirements included in the definition of an
ERC; it has absolutely nothing to do with the application of an impact fee based on meter
equ iv alents.
In summary, we believe the District's approach to calculating an impact fee for a commercial
customer based on flow which links to the District's adopted level of service is prudent, is
reflective of the practices in the industry, and provides for the full recovery of expansion-related
costs of the District. We do not agree with the use of meter equivalents as the basis for the
determination of the impact fee to be applied to the Developer's property since it is not
consistent with the County's ordinances and is not consistent with the demand requirements
being imposed by the Developers property.
If you have any questions or comments relative to our opinion or need further clarification,
please do not hesitate to give me a call.
Very truly yours,
Public Resources Management Group, Inc,
?~J" ~ cD~.
Robert J. Or!
President
RJ 0/ skc
Attachments
K:\DM\1125-]6\Meter Equiv Ltr FlnDLdo~
Agenda Item No, 10A
February 24,2009
Page 192 of 462
Attachment 1
Collier County, Florida
Sample of Florida Utilities - Commercial Imoact Fee witb Flow Based Application Metbodolol!V
Line
No.
Utility
Impact Fee Application Methodology [1] [2]
Fixture Unit Based
Attributes Based / Flow Based Dependent on Property Use
Attributes Based
Attributes Based
Flow Based
Fixture Unit Based
Attributes Based
Flow Based
Flow Based
Flow Based
Flow Based
2" or Greater, Flow Based
Attributes Based
Flow Based
Fixture Unit Based
Attributes Based
2" or Greater, Flow Based
Attributes Based
Fixture Unit Based
Attributes Based
Fi xture Unit Based
Fixture Unit Based
Attributes Based
Attributes Based
Attributes Based
Attributes Based
Attributes Based
Attributes Based
Attributes Based
Attributes Based
Attributes Based
Attributes Based
Footnotes:
fl] Attributes Based - Impact fee based on particular attributes of customer (e.g., seats in restaurant)
which an ERC or flow factor per attribute is applied.
[2] Flow Based - Impact fee based on flow calculated for property as generally identified during the
permitting process.
I
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
City of Bartow
Brevard County
Broward County
Charlotte County
JEA
Florida Keys Aqueduct Authority
Fort Pierce Utilities Authority
City of Haines City
Hernando County
Hillsborough County
Indian River County
Town of Jupiter
City of Lake Worth
City of Lakeland
Marion County
Martin County
City of Melbourne
Miami-Dade County
City of North port
City of Ocala
City of Oldsmar
City of Panama City Beach
Polk County
City of Port St. Lucie
Sarasota County
Seminole County
Sl. Lucie County
Sl. Lucie West Services District
City of Stuart
City of Surnise
Tohopekoliga Water Authority
City of Winter Springs
~
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24, 2009
Page 193 of 462
Public Resources Management Group, Inc.
Clili(l', No/e,Fiflollcia! (jru! JI{{l!Or;Cl/!('111 COIISUlhl!llS
August 26, 2008
Mr. Thomas G. Wi des
Operations Support Director, Public Utilities
Collier County Government
3301 E, Tamiami Trail, Suite H3
Naples, FL 34112
Subject:
Alternative Impact Fee Application
Dear Tom:
As we discussed, the Collier County Water-Sewer District (the "District") has received an
alternative impact fee calculation from Tamiami Square of Naples, LLC (the "Developer") which
is requesting a reduction in the water and wastewater impact fees that wcre imposed by the
District on the property referred to as T amiami Square. It is my understanding that Tamiami
Square is a commercial customer serviced by one master meter at the property and will be
receiving both potable water and wastewater service.
As you know, the District's Impact Fees are applied to a commercial customer based on the
estimated equivalent residential connections (ERe) that a specific property may be determined to
include. An ERC is a unit of measure which links capacity to a given property (with individually
metered residential service being equal to I ERC and is generally the smallest customer from a
capacity allocation standpoint) which is based on a level of service equal to 350 gallons per day
for water capacity and 250 gallons per day for wastewater capacity. It should be noted that this
is a daily capacity allocation and not one based on an average use experienced over a period of
time such as a year. Furlhennore, this capacity allocation is based on the allocation of finished
water produced and wastewater treated at the respective plant facilities and therefore is not based
on retail use metered at the customer premise (there is an allowance for water loss as part of the
normal delivery of water and norn1al inflow and infiltration for the collection of wastewater).
The District's allocation of capacity to all commercial customers is an ERC based approach
predicated on the flow (capacity) required of the property (essentially a "flow-based" allocation)
which we believe to be proper in the reservation of capacity by a specific property or customer.
By using this fee detelmination methodology, the District does recognize customer diversity in
the establishment of the level of impact fees to be charged to a property to promote the fairness
provisions (rational nexus) in the application of the impact fees.
K:\D.\1\J 125-16\Meler Equiv LtrFinaLdoc
341 NORTH tvhITI AND\VIM![c SUTE JOO MAITLAND. fL 32751
TELEI'IIONE: 14(7) 61S-1WO' 1,\:\ (4IJ7i61S-2610' I.MAIL: PRMGiid'RMGillc.c0111
Mr. Thomas G. Wides
Collier County Government
August 26, 2008
Page 2
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24. 2009
Page 194 of 462
In the alternative impact fee calculation as submitted by the Developer, a primary assumption as
to why a lower impact fee should be charged to the property is that it should have been based on
the "meter equivalent" approach as opposed to a flow-based approach cWTently used by the
District. The meter equivalent approach is a method that weights the meter capacity by the
maximum flow that the meter is capable of measuring to a 5/8-inch meter (i.e., the maximum
capacity for a 5/8-inch meter is 20 gallons per minute as referenced in A WW A Manual M6 and
considered as a factor of 1.0; the other meters are expressed as a multiple of this usage value
based on meter size). The alternative impact fee calculation recognized this method of fee
determination under the premise that "numerous cities, counties and FPSC regulated entities
utilize FPSC/AWWAlFAC/F.S. Section 25-30.055 and related sections for large service areas
..." in the determination of impact fees to be charged to a property. Although many cities and
counties use meter equivalent factors for the determination of commercial property impact fees,
the assertion that this is the correct method and therefore the only method to use is simply not
true.
With respect to the application of impact fees based on the flow or service attributes of a
commercial customer, many cities, counties and other public utilities use a flow or attribute-
based approach in the determination of the impact fee (attribute would be a specific component
of the development such as seats in a restaurant that has a daily capacity based on flow assigned
to it). The reason that these utilities use this approach is to accurately recover the cost of
providing service based on the capacity requirements specific to the customer. The meter is
simply used to measure daily flow and must be sized to accurately measure the flow from the
property; however to say that all commercial customers have the same capacity requirement
because of the meter size being the san1e between such customers is not correct. Simply put, a
restaurant served by a 5/8-inch meter generally would have a significantly higher demand than a
real estate office served by the same meter size. Additionally, it is rare that a customer would
use 100% of the maximum meter capacity and that a customer's load factor is generally less than
this. The District has recognized this; for a maximum flow rate of a 5/8-inch meter at 20 gallons
per minute, the daily How would be 28,800 gallons per day yet the approved ERC value of the
District is 350 gallons per day which is my understanding is a common level of service used by
the industry in Florida.
There are several public utilities that use an ERC-based or flow-based approach in the
determination of the impact fees and based on my experience, more are moving towards this
direction due to the diversity in use experienced by the commercial class and the need to
accurately recover cost. Although it is administratively easier to calculate an impact fee using
meter equivalents, public utilities realize the financial benefits of calculating the commercial
impact fees based on How (or similar attribute) in order to fully recover capital costs allocable to
new growth. A survey of public utilities that use a flow based approach is shown on Attachment
I to this letter (this does not imply that these are the only utilities using the flow-based approach,
K:\DM\I 125-16\Meler Equiv Ltr FinaLdoc
Mr. Thomas G. Wides
Collier County Government
August 26, 2008
Page 3
Agenda Item NO.1 OA
February 24, 2009
Page 195 of 462
it is simply a survey). As can be seen, there are many utilities that use the ERC-based or flow-
based approach in the determination of the impact fees due from a commercial property.
Additionally, the reference in the Developer's alternative impact fee calculation with respect to
the FPSC using the meter based approach in our opinion is not entirely accurate. Our experience
is that for general service (commercial) use, the plant capacity fees (term used by private
utilities; equivalent to an impact fee) imposed by private utilities is expressed in the rate tariff on
a cost per gallon basis which implies a flow based application. Based on a review of private
utility rate tariffs regulated by the FPSC that are available to us and discussions with others in
the industry, the following private utilities imposed a plant capacity fee based on a "per gallon of
demand" basis for the general service class:
. North Fort Myers Utility, Inc.
. Aloha Utilities, Inc.
. North Sumter Utility Company, Inc.
. Little Sumter Utility Company, Inc. (prior to acquisition)
. Florida Water Services Corporation, Inc. (approximately 150 systems; prior to acquisition)
. Utilities, Inc.(approximately 40 systems)
In the alternative impact fee calculation submitted by the Developer, reference was also made to
Florida Statutes, Section 25-30.055 with respect to private utilities. This reference provided a
summary of the determination of ERCs for non-residential use and listed the meter equivalent
factors assumed in the alternative fee calculation. It should be noted that this rule is associated
with a capacity or proposed capacity, to serve 100 or fewer persons, which clearly does not relate
to the County. Notwithstanding this service provision, the rule provides that unless the FPSC
determines that valid local statistical data should be used, then the meter equivalent factors
should be uscd. Based on my knowlcdgc of the industlY, the privatc utilities generally use local
statistical data in the development of the plant capacity fees and for the general service class such
fees apply to new customers on a flow basis. This is further evidenced by the flow-based fees
being reflected in the respective company's rate tariff which have been approved by the FPSC.
Finally, the alternative impact fee calculation submitted by the Developer also includes a
reference to Public Resources Management Group, Inc. (PRMG) that the alternative method is
consistent with the findings reflected in a recent PRMG report regarding the development of
impact fees (I assume that this links to the recommendations for the use of the meter equivalency
based impact fee since the PRM G report was appended to the calculation). There is no reference
to the use of meter equivalents as the basis for fee determination in the report. In fact the fee was
based on the total applicable capital costs and the total available flow (and the corresponding
ERCs) allocable to growth based on the District's adopted level of service (i.e., flow) allocable to
K:\DW,j 125-16J\1eter Equiv Ltrf'inal.doc
Mr. Thomas G. Wides
Collier County Government
August 26, 2008
Page 4
Agenda Item No, 10A
February 24,2009
Page 196 of 462
growth. The only reference to meters in the report deals with the fact that an ERC is equivalent
to the daily use of a typical individually metered residential customer which is generally the
lowest level of use in the determination of the flow requirements included in the definition of an
ERC; it has absolutely nothing to do with the application of an impact fee based on meter
equivalents.
In summary, we believe the District's approach to calculating an impact fee for a commercial
customer based on flow which links to the District's adopted level of service is prudent, is
reflective of the practices in the industry, and provides for the full recovery of expansion-related
costs of the District. We do not agree with the use of meter equivalents as the basis for the
determination of the impact fee to be applied to the Developer's property since it is not
consistent with the County's ordinances and is not consistent with the demand requirements
being imposed by the Developer's property.
If you have any questions or comments relative to our opinion or need further clarification,
please do not hesitate to give me a call.
Very truly yours,
Public Resources Management Group, Inc.
?~.c~ dJ~'
Robert J. Ori
President
RJO/skc
Attachments
K:\DM\1125-16\Meter Equiv LtrFinal.doc
Attachment I
Collier County, Florida
Agenda Item NO.1 OA
February 24, 2009
Page 197 of 462
Sample of Florida Utilities - Commercial Impact Fee with Flow Based Application Methodolo!!V
Line
No.
Utility
I
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
City of Bartow
Brevard County
Broward County
Charlotte County
JEA
Florida Keys Aqueduct Authority
Fort Pierce Utilities Authority
City of Haines City
Hernando County
Hillsborough County
Indian River County
Town of Jupiter
City of Lake Worth
City of Lakeland
Marion County
Martin County
City of Melbourne
Miami-Dade County
City of North port
City ofOcala
City of Oldsmar
City of Panama City Beach
Polk County
City of Port St. Lucie
Sarasota County
Seminole County
St. Lucie County
St. Lucie West Services District
City of Stuart
City of Sunrise
Tohopekoliga Water Authority
City of Winter Springs
Impact Fee Application Methodology [1] [2]
Fixture Unit Based
Attributes Based I Flow Based Dependent on Property Use
Attributes Based
A ttributes Based
Flow Based
Fixture Unit Based
Attributes Based
Flow Based
Flow Based
Flow Based
Flow Based
2" or Greater, Flow Based
Attributes Based
Flow Based
Fixture Unit Based
A ttributes Based
2" or Greater, Flow Based
Attributes Based
Fixture Unit Based
Attributes Based
Fixture Unit Based
Fixture Unit Based
Attributes Based
Attributes Based
A ttributes Based
Attributes Based
A ttributes Based
A ttributes Based
Attributes Based
Attributes Based
Attributes Based
Attributes Based
Footnotes:
[I] Attributes Based - Impact fee based on particular attributes of customer (e.g., seats in restaurant)
which an ERC or flow factor per attribute is applied.
[2] Flow Based - Impact fee based on flow calculated for property as generally identified during the
permitting process.
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24,2009
Page 198 of 462
APPEAL TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA
Tamiami Square of Naples, LLC, a Florida limited liability company
PETITIONER,
vs.
....
:!
o
n
.......
I
N
Mr. Jim Mudd,
County Manager, Collier County, Florida
RESPONDENT.
".
::z:
is
N
-.0
/
APPEAL OF LETTER DATED AUGUST 29, 2008 FROM MR. THOMAS G. WillES,
OPERATIONS DIRECTOR, PUBLIC UTILITIES, COLLIER COUNTY W ATER-
SEWER DISTRICT AND
REQUEST FOR ALTERNATIVE IMPACT FEE CALCULATION BASED ON
PETITIONERS ALTERNATIVE IMPACT FEE STUDY
Petitioner, Tamiami Square of Naples, LLC, a Florida limited liability company, by and
through their undersigned counsel, file this appeal of the above referenced letter (the "Letter")
pursuant to the terms of that certain Agreement Regarding Alterative Impact Fee Calculation
dated May 13. 2008 by and between Petitioner and the Collier County Board of County
Commissioners acting as the governing body of the Collier County Water-Sewer District (the
"Agreement") and state in support thereof as follows:
Appeal
1. Petitioner, Tamiami Square of Naples, LLC, attended a pre-application meeting
with County staff on Monday, May 12, 2008 to discuss the requirements, procedures and
methodology of the alternative fee calculation for the Tamiami Square development, the location
of which development is more particularly described in the Agreement. A copy of the
568418 \ 111647.0003
o
00
c:,..,
~~
m
)>0
g-r;
:tJ:2
2m
r::?
Agenda Item NO.1 OA
February 24, 2009
Page 199 of 462
Agreement is attached as Exhibit "A". Subsequent to this pre-application meeting, Petitioner by
and through its attorney proposed to County staff in writing to approach the alternative fee
calculation by using a Unit Count Method. A copy of the e-mail to County staff dated May 14,
2008 containing the proposed Unit Count Method approach to the alternative fee calculation is
attached as Exhibit "B". Further, County staff received written notice from Petitioner that the
alternative impact fee calculation prepared by Gerald C. Hartman, PE, BCEE, ASA of GAl
Consultants Inc. would be based on the Unit Count Method and that Petitioner was proceeding
to prepare the alternative impact fee calculation/report for submission to County staff. See,
Exhibit "B". At no time prior to the delivery of Petitioner's alternative impact fee
calculation/report to County staff, pursuant to a letter dated August I, 2008 and attached hereto
as Exhibit "C", did County staff object to the use of the Unit Count Method. Additionally,
County staff has deemed the alternative impact fee calculation/report prepared by the Petitioner
to be complete. See, Page I of the Letter. The Agreement does not allow for or contemplate
that County staff would object to the proposed approach (e.g. the Unit Count Method) afier
preparation and submission of the alternative fee calculation/report based on the Unit Count
Method.
At this stage in the process, County staffs review of the data, analysis, and
conclusions asserted in the alternative impact fee calculation/report is proper, but a wholesale
rejection of the Unit Count Method methodology is not.
2. Further, the Letter (a copy of which Letter is attached as Exhibit "D") rejects the
"Meter Equivalency" approach as a methodology approach and does not specifically address,
reject or challenge the Unit Count Method approach that was used by the Petitioner. See, the
Letter. The Petitioner is not using a "Meter Equivalency" approach, and the Petitioner has no
idea how to respond to County staffs rejection of an approach/methodology not taken by
Petitioner. Additionally, the Letter provides no basis or authoritative support for rejecting the
568418 \ 111647.0003
2
~
Agenda Item NO.1 OA
February 24, 2009
Page 200 of 462
Unit Count Method. To the contrary, Petitioner's alternative fee calculation/report dated July 23,
2008 and prepared by Gerald C. Hartman, PE, BCEE, ASA of GAl Consultants Inc. (a copy of
which is attached as Exhibit "E" and is hereinafter referred to as the "Report") provides clear
support for the Unit Count Method as an accepted alternative method of impact fee calculation
for commercial properties. See, Attachments F and G to the Report. In fact, Petitioner
challenges the Letter as triggering the need to file a written appeal petition to the Board and
respectfully requests that County staff meet with Petitioner to discuss Petitioner's alternative fee
calculation/report based on the Meter Equivalency approach.
3. Petitioner's alternative fee calculation/report dated July 23, 2008 and prepared by
Gerald C. Hartman, PE, BCEE, ASA of GAl Consultants Inc. (a copy of which is attached as
Exhibit "E" and is hereinafter referred to as the "Report") states that 27.3 ERCs for both water
and wastewater have been paid by Petitioner or will be paid prior to the issuance of Certificates
of Occupancy. See, Page 2 and attachment H of the Report. Pages 2 and 3 of the Letter simply
misstate representations made by Petitioner as to the number of existing ERCs. Further,
Petitioner continues to request that these additional 5.5 ERCs be paid prior to the issuance of
Certificate of Occupancics as no watcr and/or wastewater demand/use ",ill occur until after
Certificate of Occupancies have been issued by the County (hence, no impact will occur until
such time) and given that County staff improperly issued the building permits without first
collecting the correct amount of impact fees from such outparcel owners/tenants, it is simply
unfair to punish the Petitioner for County staff's mistake, especially when no demand for water
and wastewater services has occurred. If Certificate of Occupancies are not issued or if the
permits expire, no demand for water and wastewater services is created and no additional impact
fees for the same should be paid.
568418 \ J 11647.0003
3
Agenda Item No, 10A
February 24. 2009
Page 201 of 462
4. The Unit Count Method is documented and supported by the historical flow as
demonstrated in the Report. The Report documents the correlation between the Unit Count
methodology and historical record by looking at 2007 annual averages for water and wastewater
flows. The only full calendar year with complete data. The Report concludes that the Unit
Count Method is valid and approximately applied. See, Tables 1,2 and 3 of the Report.
5. At no time has Petitioner agreed to or accepted "peak flow" as the approach or
methodology for the alternative fee calculation/report. To the contrary, attachments B and C to
the Report support Petitioner's claim that County staff must look at "annual average daily flow,"
not peak flows. The Letter is silent on this issue and to date, County staff has filed to provide
legal support for calculating impact fees based on peak flows. Exhibit 3 of the Letter shows 41.6
ERCs when looking at historical "monthly" average flows for water. County staff, however, is
asserting that 61.4 ECRs are due for water. This is simply not supported by their own findings in
the Letter when looking at annual average daily flows. With respect to wastewater, County staff
provided no wastewater flow information in the Letter, and County staff failed to challenge
Petitioner's wastewater flow information supporting 32 ERCs due for wastewater. AI; such,
County staff has no basis whatsoever to support a claim that 61.4 ECRs are due for wastewater.
According to the Report, on an annual average basis for wastewater, the actual flows and the
paid units and the occupied units correlate exactly to 32 ERCs. See, Page 3 of the Report.
6. Further, with respect to County staff s water calculations, Table 3 of the Report
and Exhibit 3 of the Letterl show combined (irrigation and water for the buildings) water flow
through the meters. However, Table 2 of the Report documents the repairs to the integrated
irrigation and potable water system in 2007. Petitioner further provided site photographs in the
Report showing sod and landscaping needs in 2007 and 2008. Site development records show
568418\ 1116470003
4
Agenda Item No.1 OA
February 24. 2009
Page 202 of 462
that major development occurred in 2007 and that development continues in 2008. In 2008,
installation of sod and landscaping created additional non-reoccurring water demand. The
American Water Works Association guidelines state that non re-occurring data should be
excluded from the fee calculation analysis. As such, major waterline beaks and water usage for
new sod and landscaping should be excluded.
Wherefore, Petitioner respectfully requests that the Board of County Commissioners
reject the Letter and approve the alternative impact fee calculation/report provided by the
Petitioner pursuant to the terms of the August l, 2008 letter attached hereto as Exhibit "c" .
Respectfully submitted,
<C~~
Douglas A. Lewis, Esq.
Attorney for Petitioner
Florida Bar No. 0177260
Roetzel & Andress
850 Park Shore Drive,
Trianon Centre, Third Floor
Naples,FL 34103
(239)649-6200
1 Such numbers have been provided by County staff and are subject to contest by Petitioner.
568418\ \11647.0003
5
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24, 2009
Page 203 of 462
Certificate of Service
I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true and correct copy of the foregoing was furnished via e-
mail to the following persons this 1st day of October, 2008.
Jeffrey A. Klatzkow, Esq.
Jennifer Belpedio, Esq.
Collier County Attorney's Office
3301 E. Tamiami Trail, 8th Floor
Naples, FL 34112
Mr. Jim Mudd,
Collier County Manager
3301 E. Tamiami Trail, 2nd Floor
Naples, FL 34112
Mr. Joseph K. Schmitt, Administrator
Community Development & Environmental Services
2800 N. Horseshoe Drive
Naples, FL 34104
~
Douglas A. Lewis, Esq.
Attorney for Petitioner
Florida Bar No. 0177260
Roetzel & Andress
850 Park Shore Drive,
Trianon Centre, Third Floor
Naples, FL 34103
(239)649-6200
568418 \ 111647.0003
6
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24, 2009
Page 204 of 462
EXHIBIT "A"
~-~ -~--------
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24. 2009
Page 205 of 462
AGREEMENT REGARDING ALTERNATIVE IMPACT FEE CALCULA nON
This Agreement is made and entered into on May 12-, 2008 into by and between Tarniami
Square of Naples, LLC, a Florida limited liability company ("Developer"), and the Collier County Board
of County Commissioners ("BCC") acting as the governing body of the Collier County Water-Sewer
District ("CCWSD").
WHEREAS, CCWSD has calculated $288,623.50 in water and sewer Impact fees based on the
square footage and/or use of existing commercial development located on real property identified by the
following Collier County tax identification munbers: (i) 00143080000; (ii) 76422000065; and (Hi)
76422000049 ("Property"); and
WHEREAS, Developer disputes the $288.623.50 calculati~n. Notwithstanding, Developer has
paid $43,444.00 for water and sewer impact fees for the Property, subject to and conditioned upon
Developer reserving all of its rights under the Consolidated Impact Fee Ordinance and all other applicable
laws, ordinances, etc.; and
WHEREAS, CCWSD and Developer desire to participate in an alternative impact fee process
regarding the amount of water and sewer impact fees ("Impact Fees") due and owing for the Property and
hereby agree to withhold the filing or initiation of any claim, action or lawsuit during the pendency of the
alternative impact fee process; and
WHEREAS, CCWSD has released all current Public Utilities Division holds or any other holds
relatcd to Impact Fees on building permits and related certificates of occupancy pending on the Property
as of the effective date of this Agreement as a condition of payment in the amount of $43,444.00 made by
the Developer on April 3, 2007.
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing premises and the following promises, the
parties agree as follows:
1. The foregoing recitals are true and correct and are hereby incorporated herein by reference.
2. Developer has tendered a check in the amount of $43,444.00 for Impact Fees and $2,SOO.00 for:
(i) staff to review its alternative impact fee calculation; and (ii) payment of all of Developer's fees and
costs due and owing the County for the alternative impact fee process.
3. CCWSD agrees not to withhold issuance of certificates of occupancy, issue stop work orders or
take any other adverse action on all issued or pending building permits for the Property based on or
related to the $288.623.50 In disputed Impact Fees.
4. No later than May 13, 2008, Developer shall arrange and attend a pre-application meeting with
the County Manager to discuss the requirements, procedures and methodology of the alternative fee
calculation. The pre-application meeting will normally cover the following topics: (I) proposed previous
studies; (2) credits; (3) proposed study sites; (4) study data elements; (5) proposed data collection
methodology; and (6) report format.
5. Subsequent to the pre-application meeting, Developer shall submit three (3) copies of the
proposed approach to the alternate fee calculation to the County Manager. The County Manager shall
have 30 County working days to respond in writing to the proposed approach. If the County Manager
concurs with the proposed approach, Developer will be notified to proceed with the alternative fee
calculation. If the County Manager disagrees with the proposed approach. the County Manager shall
identify the problem areas for Developer to incorporate and address in its re-submittal to the County.
Developer shall be required to recei ve approval from the County Manager prior to proceeding with the
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24, 2009
Page 206 of 462
alternative fee calculation. If the County Manager has not approved Developer's proposed approach after
one re-submittal, Developer may request a decision from the County Manager whereupon the County
Manager shall either approve, approve with conditions, or deny the proposed approach.
6. The alternative fee calculation shall be undertaken through the submission of an impact analysis
for the water and sewer facilities at issue, which shall be based on data, information, methodology and
assumptions contained in Chapter 74, of the Collier County Code of Ordinances and/or the impact fee
studies incorporated herein, or an independent source, including local studies for alternative impact fee
calculations performed by others within the immediately preceding three (3) years, if applicable or
available, provided that the independent source is a local study supported by a data base adequate for the
conclusions contained in such study performed pursuant to a methodology generally accepted by
professionals in the field of expertise for the water and sewer facilities at issue and based upon standard
sources of information relating to facilities planning, cost analysis and demographics and generally
accepted by professionals in the field of expertise for the public facilities at issue.
7. The alternative fee calculation shall be submitted by the Developer for the Property and shall be
prepared and certified as accurate by persons accepted by the County as qualified professionals in tbe
field of expertise for tbe public facilities at issue, and shall be submitted to tbe County Manager.
8. Within thirty (30) County working days of receipt of an alternative fee calculation, the County
Manager sball determine if it is complete. If the County Manager determines the application is not
complete, he shall send a written statement specifYing the deficiencies to the person submitting the
application at the address set forth in the application. The County Manager will not be required to take
any further action on the alternative fee calculation until all specified deficiencies have been corrected.
9. After the County Manager determines that the alternative fee calculation is complete, he shall
notifY Developer of its completion within ten (10) days, and he shall, within thirty (30) County working
days, complete a review ofthe data, analysis, and conclusions asserted in the alternative fee calculation.
If this review is not completed within tbese time frames, and if requested by Developer, the item will be
scheduled for the next available BCC meeting.
10. If the County Manager determines that in the alternative fee calculation the County's cost to
accommodate the existing commercial square footage and use on the Property is statistically significantly
different than the impact fee established pursuant to Section 74-20 I and the applicable Sections 74-302
through 74-309, of the Collier County Code of Ordinances, tbe amount of the impact fee invoiced
Developer shall be reduced to a dollar amount consistent with the amount determined by the alternative
fee calculation, subject to the BCe's approval.
11. In the event Developer disagrees with a decision of the County Manager that effectively results in
a denial of the alternative fee calculation, Developer may file a written appeal petition with the BCC not
later than thirty (30) days after receipt of notice of such a decision by the County Manager. In reviewing
the decision, the BCC shall use the standards established or to be established hereunder. The appeal
petition must advise the BCC of all issues and shall explain the precise basis Developer asserts that the
decision(s) of the County Manager is/are alleged to be incorrect.
12. Developer agrees that future permits sought for the Property seeking a net increase in size or use
and creating additional demand or impact on water or sewer public facilities will not be issued unless
Impact Fees due for the particular unites) (based solely on such size or use increase creating additional
demand or impact on water or sewer public facilities) are paid in full. CCWSD agrees that it will not
withbold issuance of permits or certificates of occupancy, issue stop work orders, or take any adverse
action relating to: (i) future permits sought for particular unit(s) within the Property that do not result in a
net increase in size or use and do not create additional demand or impact on water and sewer public
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24,2009
Page 207 of 462
facilities; and (ii) permits for particular unit(s) within the Property where additional Impact Fees are due
(given a net increase in size or use and creating additional demand or impact on public facilities) and paid
in full.
13. Should an alternative impact fee be approved by the Bee, Developer agrees to provide the
eeWSD with sewer flow rates' on a monthly basis until two (2) years after the approval of the alternative
impact fee.
14. At the end of each six month period within the two (2) year cycle eeWSD will analyze the water
and/or sewer flows for sewer during those six month periods. eeWSD hereby acknowledges that during
the two (2) year cycle the Developer will continue to lease and develop the Property and that water and
sewer flows for the Property will likely increase. 10 the event that actual water and/or sewer flows for the
Property in two consecutive months exceed the sum of water and/or sewer flows used in the alternative
impact fee calculation and water and/or sewer flows accounted for in the issuance of future building
permits, eeWSD can properly claim additional water and sewer Impact Fees are due and owed. CeWSD
will recover additional water and sewer Impact Fees at the then in effect Impact Fee rate.
During, the two (2) year cycle, and after its expiration, all additional furore water and sewer Impact Fees
not yet accounted for or related to the $288,623.50 in disputed impact fees will be paid at the time ofthe
future building permit issuance.
IS. For the pendency of the alternative impact fee process, the parties agree that all applicable statute
of limitations as to any and all claims of the County or Developer shall be tolled and suspended.
] 6. Developer hereby waives any defense by way of any statute of limitations which would otherwise
arise during the pendency of the alternative impact fee process.
17. This waiver shan not be construed as a waiver of any statute of limitations defense that has
become established as of the effective date of this Agreement. or which would arise after the pendency of
the alternative impact fee process; it only excludes the period during which this Agreement has operated
to toll any applicable statute of I imitations.
18. It is understood that by entering into this Agreement, neither party is waiving any claims, rights
or defenses that may have accrued up to the effective date of this Agreement.
19. This Agreement shall not be offered in evidence in any action or proceeding except with respect
to any action or proceeding related to this Agreement, or to enforce the terms of the Agreement, or prove
that the statute oflimitations was tolled for the period of time during which this Agreement was in effect.
20. The pendency of the alternative impact fee process will be deemed to have commenced upon
approval of this Agreement by the Bee and full execution of the same by the parties hereto and shall be
deemed to have expired upon a final determination by the BCe on Developer's alternative impact fee
calculation.
21. During the pendency of the alternative impact fee process, the $288,623.50 in bupact Fees
invoiced Developer shall not be deemed delinquent under Section 74-501, of the Collier County Code of
Ordinances or otherwise and no delinquency fee, interest, or other rees shall be due and owing the County
with respect to said Impact Fees or any portion thereof which may be due and owing the County for the
Property.
22. On or before thirty (30) days after the end of the alternative impact fee process and only in the
event additional Impact Fees are due and owing the COWlty, the County shall provide written notice to
I CCWSD will monitor the monthly water flows.
Agenda Item No. 10A .
February 24, 2009
Page 208 of 462
Developer of the amount of any Impact Fees due based on the outcome of the alternative impact fee
process. Developer shall have thirty (30) days from the date of said notice by the County to pay all such
hopact Fees in full or enter into a binding agreement with the County to make installment payments for
said hopact Fees to include the statutory interest rate which shall only connnence to accrue from and after
the date a final determination is made by the BCC on Developer's alternative impact fee calculation. The
County Manager is hereby authorized to enter into an agreement with Developer for installment payments
with a reasonable repayment period not to exceed three (3) years. rfDeveloper fails to either pay in full
all such Impact Fees and any statutory interest due and payable thereon on or before the expiration of said
thirty (30) day period or enter into a binding agreement with the County regarding installment payments,
the County may only thereafter deem any such Impact Fees due and owing the County for the Property
delinquent under Section 74-501, of the Collier County Code of Ordinances and proceed with its
collection rights and remedies under Section 74-501, of the Collier County Code of Ordinances.
Notwithstanding anything contained in this Agreement to the contrary, it is expressly understood and
agreed to by the parties hereto that Developer does not hereby waive or limit in any way any existing or
future claims, rights, positions or defenses that Developer may have to seek a refund for overpayment of
impact fees oursuant to Section 74-202 or to legally challenge: (i) the alternative impact fee process, (ii)
the final determination made by the BCC on Developer's alternative impact fee calculation, (iii) the
Impact Fee calculation, andlor (iv) any future impact fee calculation for the Property.
DEVELOPER
(d:;.SSES:
..~', ~.c;7p1.-/
Print Name: B-"LI:.. .Jl9LL-
~ ,.. n-.
-~~
Tamiami Square of Naples, LLC,
a Florida limited liability company
By: Crifas; Enterprises, Inc., a Fl
as Manager
By:
A TrEST:
DWIGHT E. BROCK, CLERK
. . ;:;:f\;i{: "('-
. jL~'~auP'(.
:':at:,to- I ,
: '~.I~~~fr.,~ and legal
"~,+fficienci::' ~..'
-'<:.:,: .~l':'.':'.'
.
By:
~Ct ?.. {J t:;<1 : "'"'
JennIfer A. Be edic
Assistant County Attorney
Agenda Item NO.1 OA
February 24,2009
Page 209 of 462
EXHIBIT "B"
Lewis. Doug
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24, 2009
Page 210 of 462
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Lewis, Doug
Wednesday, May 14, 20D8 2:44 PM
'wides tom'; MoncivaizGilbert
belpediojennifer; GrifasirealtyCo@aol.com; 'Jean E. Valadez'
RE: Tamiami Square of Naples
Thanks for the follow-up Tom. We are following-up with J&N on your sewer flow questions and will get back to you with an
answer on these items. It would be good to be done on the wastewater side. On the potable water side, we disagree with
your preliminary conclusions. Based on our consultant's site inspection, the irrigation system was improperly expanded
into areas not developed and is (together with other factors) a reason for the high usage. Our consultant believes that with
the improvements, the irrigation meter, and correction of other factors, potable water consumption on the site will be much
less. Based on what was stated at our pre-application meeting, we are proceeding with the Unit Gount Method and the 2-
year study to commence in July 20D8, if possible. Jerry Hartman is putting together the alternative fee calculation. We
look forward to meeting with you after this has been submitted to discuss the findings. Thanks for your continued
assistance on thisi!
- Doug
From: wides_tom [mailto:TomWides@collierQov,net]
Sent: Tuesday, May 13, 20082:00 PM
To: Lewis, Doug; MoncivaizGilbert
Gc: belpediojennifer; GrifasirealtyGo@aol.com
Subject: RE: Tamiami Square of Naples
Doug, thanks for the photos. I good with one lift station; I'm interested at what point the sewer flows are being measured;
the documentation that has been provided shows two pumps and their run times. I'm trying to determine the configuration
into the lift station. If we can determine the configuration and confirm that there are only two pumps for the entire
development (all buildings, no matter who owns them), I will be good with the Wastewater ERG's.
Also, although the 10 (reclaimed) Water is available for the medians, we are not taking on additionallQ customers due to
limited availability of 10 capacity at this time. The fall off in growth has not helped this situation; the Wastewater plants are
running at low inflows for the last six-nine months.
Finally, after we met yesterday, I was reviewing recent usage of potable water at the development I see 55.4 ERG's of
use in May, 2008 and 53.3 ERG's of use in April, 2008. At a simple average, that's 554 ERG's. Even if the development
installs the irrigation meter, that may take off 6 ERG's maximum; still leaving a peak of 50-ish ERG's for water. I see no
indication of diminished use at the development; I will be very hard pressed to accept a proposal that is below these
numbers. I see no basis to accept a lower number for water.
Looking forward to our next session. Tom Wides
From: Lewis, Doug fmailto:dalewis@ralaw.com]
Sent: Tuesday, May 13, 2008 9:48 AM
To: wides tom; MoncivaizGilbert
Gc: belpediojennifer; GrifasirealtyGo@aol.com
Subject: Tamiami Square of Naples
<<Tamiami Square 020.jpg>> <<Tamiami Square 021 ,jpg>> <<Tamiami Square 022.jpg>> <<Tamiami Square 023.jpg>>
<<Tamiami Square 024.jp9>> <<Tamiami Square 025.jpg>> <<Tamiami Square 026.jpg>>
Tom & Gil.
Exhibit "A"
Page 1 of 2
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24. 2009
In follow-up to our meeting yesterday, Jerry Hartman and I went to the site and walked the property afteP~etfn\filj::gr
your review and file, attached are photographs of the only lift station located on the very north end of the property. Let me
know if you have any further questions related to the lift station. Also, in the right-of-way median just north of the site, we
noticed that the median is being irrigated by reclaimed water. Does the site have access to reclaimed water for irrigation
purposes? Let us know. Thanks!!
Douglas A. Lewis
Picture (Metafile)
WWW.ralaw.com <http://www.ralaw.com/>
850 Park Shore Drive
Trianon Centre - 3rd Floor
Naples, Florida 34103
Phone: (239) 649-2712
Fax: (239) 261-3659
E-mail: dalewis@ralaw.com<mailto:dalewis<1i1ralaw.com>
Profile: Douglas A. Lewis <http://www.ralaw.comlattomev.cfm?id;4512>
Both Douglas A. Lewis and Roetzel & Andress intend that this message be used exclusively by the addressee(s). This
message may contain information that is privileged, confidential and exempt from disclosure under applicable law.
Unauthorized disclosure or use of this information is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error,
please permanently dispose of the original message and notify Douglas A. Lewis immediately at 1(239) 649-2712. Thank
you.
Any federal tax advice contained herein or in any attachment
hereto is not intended to be used, and cannot be used, to (1)
avoid penalties imposed under the Internal Revenue Code or
(2) support the promotion or marketing of any transaction or
matter. This legend has been affixed to comply with U,S.
Treasury Regulations governing tax practice.
Exhibit HAlf
Page 2 of 2
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24, 2009
Page 212 of 462
EXHffiIT "C"
A LEGAL PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATION
~50 PARK 3 of 462
TRIANON CENTll.E - THIRD FLOOR
NAPLES, FL34103
239.649.2712 DIRECT
239.649.6200 MAIN
239.261.3659 FAX
dalewis@ralaw.com
I_&)ANDRESS II
August 1,2008
VIA HAND DELIVERY
Jennifer L. Belpedio, Esq.
Assistant County Attorney
Collier County Attorney Office
3301 E. Tarniami Trail, 8th Floor
Naples, FL 34112
Re: Agreement Regarding Alternative Impact Fee Calculation dated May 13, 2008
between Tamiami Square of Naples, LLC and Collier County Board of County
Commissioners (the "Agreement") - Alternative Fee Calculation Study/Report
dated July 23, 2008 and prepared by GAl Consultants, Inc. (the "Study")
Dear Jennifer:
Pursuant to the terms of the Agreement and Appendix H, Alternative Fee Calculation
Methodology Water and Sewer Impact Fee from the Collier County Consolidated Impact Fee
Administrative Procedures Manual, enclosed please find five (5) originals of the above-
referenced Alternative Fee Calculation Study/Report for review by the County Manager, Collier
County Public Utilities Department Administrator and Impact Fee Coordinator. The enclosed
Study has been certified by Gerald C. Hartman with GAl Consultants, Inc., a professional
engineer registered with the State of Florida, and the Study complies with the proposed approach
and methodology that we discussed and agreed to use at the May 13, 2008 Alternative Impact
Fee Study pre-application meeting.
Based on the data, information, assumptions and methodology included in the Study and
discussed at the pre-application meeting, the proposed alternative water and sewer impact fee
calculations are as follows:
1. Water (potable service) impact fees - unit count. 4.7 additional ERCs at $3,575
per ERC for a total of$16,803 in additional impact fees and a total of32 potable water ERCs.
2. Wastewater impact fees - unit count. 4.7 additional ERCs at $3,495 per ERC for
a total of $16,427 in additional impact fees paid to the County and a total wastewater impact fee
count of32 ERCs.
Additionally, and in follow-up to the County letter dated March 31, 2008 (see
Attachment H to the Study) and our pre-application meeting, our client proposes to install the
requested two (2) inch irrigation meter and separate the potable water system from the water
CLEVElAND TOLEDO AKRON COLUMBUS CIJ\lCINNAll WASHINGTON, D.C. TAllAHASSEE ORLANDO FoRTMYERS NAPLES FORT LAUDERDALE
www.ralaw.com
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24, 2009
Page 214 of 462
Jennifer L. Belpedio, Esq.
August 1,2008
Page 2
used to irrigate the property and re-hydrate the wetlands located along the eastern boundary of
the property. A meter tapping fee of $1,140.00 plus impact fees for irrigation totaling of
$22,060.59 would be paid by our client based on an ERC value of 6.1. As such and subject to
approval of the Study, the total additional amount to be paid to the County by my client would be
$56,430.59.
Should the Study be approved, our client requests that the two (2) year monitoring period
pursuant to Paragraphs 13 and 14 of the Agreement not commence until our client has sufficient
time to separate the potable water lines from the lines used to irrigate and re-hydrate the wetlands
and only upon written notification to the County from our client that such work has been
completed and that the potable water and wastewater systems are functioning correctly. Pursuant
to Paragraph 22 of the Agreement and the County letter dated March 31, 2008, our client
proposes to pay the tapping fee for the two (2) inch irrigation meter and purchase an additional
ERC value of 6.1 for irrigation for an amount totaling $22,060.59 on or before thirty (30) days
from the date of County approval of the Study and County invoice for the same. With respect to
the additional $16,803.00 in potable water impact fees and $16,427.00 in wastewater impact
fees, our client is able to pay $1,000.00 per month until such balance is paid-in-full such that the
repayment period for such additional impact fees will not exceed three (3) years.
We look forward to hearing from you and greatly appreciate your cooperation and
assistance in this matter. In the meantime should you have any questions whatsoever, please feel
free to contact me.
Very truly yours,
DALlksn
Enclosures as Stated
_ ROET~E~S,LPA
~e
~
Douglas A. Lewis
For the Firm
cc: Mr. Jack J. Crifasi, Jr. (w/enclosure)
Mr. Gerald C. Hartman (w/o enclosure)
563300,0\.111647.0003
Agenda Item NO.1 OA
February 24, 2009
Page 215 of 462
EXHmIT "D"
L
Agenda Item I~u. lOA
February 24, 2009
Page 216 of 462
COLLIER COUNTY PUBLIC UTILITIES DIVISION
3301 E. Tamiami Trail' Naples, Florida 34112 . (239) 732-2575 . FAX (239) 732-2526
August 29, 2008
Mr. Douglas A. Lewis, Esquire
Roetzel & Andress, P.A.
850 Parle Shore Drive
Trianon Centre - 3rd Floor
Naples, Florida 34103
Subject:
Alternative Water and Wastewater Impact Fee Calculation-
Tamiami Square
Dear Mr. Lewis:
In accordance with the Agreement Regarding Alternative Impact Fee Calculation dated
May 13, 2008 (the "Agreement") between the Collier County Water-Sewer District (the
"District") and Tamiami Square of Naples, LLC (the "Developer" and collectively with
the District, the "Parties"), District staff is providing a response to the alternative impact
fee calculation submitted by the Developer for water and wastewater capacity for the
Property as defined in the Agreement. In accordance with item 8 of the Agreement, the
County Manager must respond in writing within thirty (30) days after the receipt of the
alternative impact fee calculation to express that such calculation is considered as being
complete. The alternative impact fee calculation was received by the County on August
1, 2008. The District staff, acting as the County Manager's designee, has prepared this
letter to. provide notification that the District staff does consider such submittal of the
alternative impact fee calculation by the Developer as being complete.
In accordance with item 9 of the Agreement, the County (through the District) must
review the data, analysis, and conclusions asserted in the alternative impact fee
calculation and provide the results of such review, analyses, and conclusions to the
Developer within thirty (30) days after the determination that the application is complete.
The remainder of this letter provides a discussion of our review and analyses of the
alternative impact fee calculation submitted by the Developer and our conclusions.
Developer Reauest
Based on information contained in the alternative impact fee calculation and meetings
and discussions held with the Developer, the Developer is requesting the following:
I. The Developer per the alternative impact fee calculation states that the total
equivalent residential connections (ERe) [for that component of the Property which
is identified in the alternative impact fee calculation as Phase 1] is 17 ERCs and is
based on the meter equivalency approach that is represented by the Developer as
c
o
,~
.
'1
c
o
M
M
t
y
Agenda Item No. 1~
February 24,2009
Page 217 of 462
being used by numerous cities, counties, and private utilities regulated by the Florida
Public Service Commission (FPSC).
2. The total amount of ERCs paid as of the date of this letter by the Developer for
construction projects upon the Property to the District is 27.3 ERCs.
3. The total amount ofERCs to be assigned to the Property for all phases (I through 3)
of development is 32 units and was also based on the meter equivalency approach.
Based on the assumed prepaid amount by the Developer of 27.3 ERCs, this would
result in a remaining balance due for the development of all phases of the Property to
be 4.7 ERCs (32 ERCs minus 27.3 ERCs).
4. The Developer plans to install a two-inch irrigation meter to receive water-only
service and identified this service requirement to equal 6.1 ERCs; the determination
of this level of ERCs was based on the County's "Water-only Meter Application
(Potable)" calculation worksheet as prepared and submitted by the Developer to the
District.
5. The total remaining amount due to the District for the Impact Fees attributable to all
development phases (I through 3) of the Property is as follows:
Impact Fee Impact Fee
ner ERe Amount
Potable Water at 4.7 ERe. $3,575.00 $16.803.00
Wastewater at 4.7 ERCs $3,495.00 $16,427.00
Potable Imeation at 6.1 ERCs $36]6.49 e2? 060.59
Total Iron.ct Fees Due Per DeveloDCT
District Review. Analysis. and Conclusions
Based on the information contained in the alternative impact fee calculation provided by
the Developer, a review of the District Uniform Billing, Operating and Regulatory
Standards and Ordinances as applicable to the determination of impact fees, and our
understanding of the Developer request as contained in the alternative impact fee
calculation, we have performed the following analysis and are of the following opinions:
1. The use of the meter equivalent basis as the method to determine the amount ofERCs
allocable to the Property is considered incorrect and is not being relied upon by the
District. Although numerous cities and counties may use this method, many cities
and counties do not use this method due to the fact that this approach can understate
the allocated capacity to a specific property. In many instances, the methodology for
the determination of ERCs for a commercial classification such the Developer's
Property is determined based on flow and a unit of measure that links to flow (e.g.,
average daily flow or fixture units). This approach is used to recognize the diversity
in demand of the commercial class (customers with the same meter can have
2
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24, 2009
Page 218 of 462
materially different service demands and therefore a different number of ERCs
associated with servicing the customer) which is not reflected in the meter based
approach. This is further supported by findings and opinion of Public Resources
Management Group, Inc. (pRMG), the District's rate consultant, which is attached
hereto and made a part of our response. As PRMG states in their letter to the District,
the FPSC has allowed private utilities in numerous instances to use a flow based
approach in the determination of the plant capacity charges (impact fees) to be paid
for general service (commercial) customers for the reservation or allocation of
capacity.
2. The approach reflected in the alternative impact fee calculation is not consistent the
method reflected in the District's rules and ignores the diversity of the commercial
class as it relates to meter size. The impact fee for commercial service recognized by
the District is based on a level of service whereby one (1) ERC is equaI to 350 gallons
per day (gpd) for potable water and 250 gpd for wastewater which is "flow based";
such calculation is not dependant on the size of the meter(s) needed to measure flow
to the Property. The County's determination of the impact fee due by an applicant
such as the Developer is based on an estimated capacity (flow) approach which is
used by many utilities across the state. Just because many utilities use a meler
equivalency-based approach does not mean it is the correct approach to use for 1he
Property; just as many utilities do not use this approach. As such, 1he basis for 1he
Developer's alternative impact fee calculation is not accepted by the District staff.
3. During the meetings between the Developer and the District staff, it was discussed
among the Parties that the Impact Fee calculation should be based on actual flow
characteristics of the Property. The alternative impact fee calculation as submitted
did not reflect the use of this discussed methodology. Predicated on the above, the
basis for the Developer's alternative impact fee calculation is not considered as being
correct and therefore alternative impact fee calculation is not accepted by the District.
4. The District initially prepared an Impact Fee calculation that identified the water and
wastewater ERCs for the Property and it was determined that the total ERCs were
61.4, a copy which is attached as Exhibit 1. The District does not agree with the
Developer's alternative impact fee calculation that concludes that there are 32.0 ERCs
for the property (absent irrigation demands).
5. The total amount of ERCs paid by the Developer for which the County has received
payment was for 21.8 water and wastewater ERCs, not the 27.3 ERCs as stated in the
Developer's alternative impact fee calculation. A review of our records indicate that
5.5 ERCs were represented on the building permits as being subj ect to an impact fee
credit due to the Developer; however no payment was actually received (either
prepaid or at time of permit issuance) by the District and therefore payment is still
outstanding. Included on Exhibit 2 are copies of the respective building permits that
indicate the amount due and the status of the respective permit. The permit numbers
and corresponding ERCs are summarized below:
3
Agenda Item No. 10A I
February 24, 2009
Page 219 of 462
ERCs
Permit Number ReDresented
2005121721 2.0
2005072983 3.5
6. Based on the above, the total ERCs for the Property due by the Developer is as
follows:
Total ERCs or CODn
Avem e 1m act Fee r ERC
Total Amount Due to Conn
Water
61.4
$2,695.10
TDla1
$350,720.50
Amount Paid b Develo er
Total ERes
Amount Paid
21.8
21.8
121480.00
Net Amount Due CODn
SI07 526.00
$121 714.50
[11 Amounts shoWII reflect average impaot fee calculated for the detennination of the
Developer liability by the County since the impact fee mte was based on time of
ennit a lieation and the mtes were "rusted b the Couu over time.
This table does not assume that the Developer may install a water-only irrigation
meter in the future which will have the affect of reducing the amount of wastewater
ERCs and respective impact fees due. As of the date of this letter, it is our
understaoding that the Developer has not installed the irrigation meter. To the extent
that the water-only meter is installed in the future, the County will give the Developer
consideration as to the change in wastewater ERCs for the overall development of the
total wastewater impact fees due.
District Historical Flow-based Impact Fee Analvsis
During the preparation of the Agreement, the Parties discussed that the impact fees
should be based on actual flows (predicated on actual meter readings) to the Property
which was not addressed in the alternative impact fee calculation. Additionally,
documentation submitted in support of the alternative impact fee calculation included a
sununary of irrigation system repairs performed at the Property that may have resulted in
water being lost due to leaks. It should be noted that the irrigation repairs are recurrent
through the years and the Property did use the water; such water loss is the responsibility
of the customer and not the District. As such, the County does not consider the possible
water loss due to the irrigation repairs to be extraordinary. Furthermore, when
establishing the level of service by the County, all water use is considered in the
determination of the level of service.
4
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24. 2009
Page 220 of 462
A$ part of the review process by the District, an evaluation of the actual metered water
use at the Property for the eighteen (18) month period ended August 2008 (billing period
for July 2008 usage) was conducted. This analysis is shown on Exhibit 3 to this letter.
As can be seen on ExhIbit 3, the average monthly metered water use is actually
approximating the ERC estimate developed in the District's impact fee calculation as
shown on Exhibit 1. For the past four most recent months, the implied ERCs based on i)
the metered water use at the property; ii) an assumed level of service equal to 350 gallons
per day per ERC, and iii) the billing days reflected in the usage cycle result in a ERe
value of 61.3 ERCs on a peak monthly use basis and 54.9 ERCs on an average monthly
usage period. Furthermore, the ERC value based on the peak month use during the
review period as shown on Exhibit 3 was 63.8 ERCs which essentially equates to the
amount reflected on the District's initial impact fee calculation as shown on Exhibit 1.
As evidenced by the most recent actual water sales as registered by metering at the
premise, the Property is requiring the capacity (demand) that the District calculated for.
the Property as part of the impact fee calculation. This further supports that the
Developer's alternative impact fee calculation as received by the District is not accurate
and therefore is not being considered by the District.
District Conclusion and Recommendation
Based on the information submitted in the alternative impact fee calculation, the District
review and analysis as presented herein, the actual demands being experienced by the
Property, and the estimated use of the Property as reflected on the permits for which the
fees were initially based, the District has identified three alternatives for consideration by
the Developer. These three alternatives include:
1. Recognize that the demand and the associated impact fee liability of the Developer
are based on 64.1 ERCs as initially calculated by the District as shown on Exhibit 1.
2. Recognize that the initial demand and the associated impact fee liability of the
developer are 54.9 ERCs which will be subject to adjustment in accordance with the
terms ofitem 14 of the Agreement.
3. The Developer does not agree with the District staff and shall exercise it rights under
item 11 of the Agreement by filing a written appeal petition with the Board of County
Commissioners not less than thirty (30) days after documented receipt of this letter.
Recognizing the above and in order to close this issue relative to the impact fee liability
of the Developer, the District staff offers the following as it pertains to alternative 2
(listed above):
l. The initial ERCs established for the property is 54.9 ERCs which will be reviewed
every 6 months for a two year period beginning with bills rendered in October 2008
which is consistent with the terms of item 14 of the Agreement. To the extent that the
actual demand for the Property in two consecutive months (calculated as follows:
[((metered water use divided by number of days in billing cycle) divided by 350 gpd
5
- Agenda Item No, 10A
February 24. 2009
Page 221 of 462
per ERC) = Implied ERCs for Property] exceeds 54.9 ERCs, the Developer will be
responsible to pay impact fees on the number ofERCs above such amount. The new
ERC value will then serve as the established ERCs during the remainder of the two
year review period.
2. The Developer shall have an immediate remaining liability due to the County for
unpaid impact fees of$192,112.09 which is calculated as follows:
Total Initial ERCs r Coun
Avera elm actFee rERC
Total Amount Due to Coun
Water Wastewater Totals
54.9 54.9
$2695.10 $3,016.96
$313,592.09
21.8 21.8
8 .00
Amount Pafd Deveio er
Total ERC.
Amount Paid
Net Amount Due Count
[1] Amounts shown reflect average impact fee calculated for the determination of Ibe
Developer liability by the County as shown on Exhibit 1 and was used since under
the actual flow based approach, DO assignment to the ERe. per a building pennit
can be made reference Exhibit] .
The District will allow the Developer to pay the net amount due to the COWlty in
equal installments over a 24 month period or $8,004.67 per month (with the last
month adjusted for any roWlding issues in collection). The District will not charge an
interest cost to carry the liability but to the extent the monthly payment is overdue,
the County may charge late payment fees (amount equivalent to the rate charged to its
water and wastewater customers as set by policy) and may advance the full payment
of the liability. Any impact fees due as a result of increased demands experienced by
the Property (i.e., in excess of the 54.9 ERCs) will be due and payable within 30 days
of notification by the County to the Developer.
3. To the extent tha! the Developer installs the irrigation meter which has been agreed
by the Parties to equate to 6.1 ERCs, the District will credit the Developer $18,403.46
(6.1 ERCs multiplied by $3,016.96) for the change in service and adjust the
remaining amount of the wastewater impact fee installment payments to recognize
such credit. If the Developer installs the water-only meter after the two year
evaluation period, no credit will be recognized by the District.
4. The Developer will acknowledge in writing to the County Manager of acceptance of
the liability and terms of payment within thirty (30) days of receipt of this letter or it
may petition to the Board of County Commissioners as provided in the Agreement.
6
Agenda Item No, 10A
February 24. 2009
Page 222 of 462
Swnmarv
In summary, District staff does not accept the calculation as provided in the Developer's
alternative impact fee calculation and frods that $107,526 in water impact fees and
$121,714.50 in wastewater impact are immediately due and payable to the District.
District staff also will accept an installment based impact fee payment approach to assist
the Developer with the payment of the outstanding impact fee liability. Finally, District
staff agrees that the Agreement between the Parties will remain in effect for the next two
(2) years in order to validate flows and the overall impact fee liability.
District Staff appreciates all the efforts of the Developer with respect to the development
and submittal of the alternlltive impact fee calculation and trust that you will agree with
District staff assessment. Of course, selection and enactment of any of the three
alternative courses of resolution will require Board of County Commissioner approval. If
you need any additional information from us or have any questions with regard to our
review, analyses, or conclusions, please do not hesitate to give me a call.
Very truly yours,
Collier County Water-Sewer District
1?~
Thomas G. Wides
Operations Director, Public Utilities
Cc:
JeffKlatzkow, County Attorney
Jennifer Belpedio, Assistant County Attorney
Jim Delony, Public Utilities Administrator
Jim Mudd, County Manager
Gilbert Moncivaiz, Operations Analyst
Amia Curry, Interim Manager Operations Support
Attachments:
Exhibit 1 - Tamiami Square Development Spreadsheet
Exhibit 2 - Unpaid Water and Wastewater Impact Fees
Exhibit 3 - Hi.storical Data
Letter from Public Resources Management Group, Inc. (pRMG)
/."'~.
7
88ggS
OOQO..r
;::
~
~
.~
nH~
- 01
8
ci
8 88888 88 8g8 88 8g8
ci "~"18 ON ci~o tic ""~
~.. :il "
~ ;; " ~
..
'-
g ~ 00 8
, , ~~
nf~ ~ g~ '\:i
~ "l.
.ll.s .. ~ ~ ~~ I:l
'" ......""..... "'''' ",,,, '" "'''..
8 g 00 8
, ~~
~llp! I~ m ~~ '"
~
-;;l!. "' ~ ~
3:.sIl.G. ~ ~ ~t-: ,.:
~
'" -"".,.,.......,. " '" ",,,,.. ..'" ....
-
8 ggggg 88 goo gg
Hu . ~~
" ggggJi ~~ :q~~ ~~
~ N_
~ 0000... --~ ~~
C'i~rinfTJ " nriri "'"
'" ............ 0... _...... ....
-liIl\-
0 88888 88 800 00
-I !l 0 00 00
~.s~.l! ~ "~"gci gg gg:'! ~~
~ $W:e I~~ ~~.. ....
N NN " ""
.. ..............,. .. ....'" "'..
"
E
j i~ ~ ~
olI
.
,
:;:!:
~~
~~
"
Agenda Item NO.1 OA
February 24. 2009
Page 223 of 462
.--
N
....
:c
:c
><
w
...
2:l
<0
;:
tlO
,
1
,
I .
I..'
.! ,1
J i"
Ifl. ~.
. ~'. I,
_. l: ..'
I I"
"'. "'
.' -
!
j
I
~,.I
..j
i
,
i
,
Ii
....',.1'
'. .'~ ~ .' .
.\.i
."
T i.:J
r '-,', i
. ..:i
....j
'. I
1
i
!
i
"
,
<
." .1
.1
....
QJ
....
'"
;:
b.O.
C-c
.~ ';C
o a.
..c C
Vl QJ
~hnn
!mm
~i!'Un
,,~;~.. .
II~.'.. .
G~ . .
~
.. ..1 i\.
, ,,~. . .
HI;
. ..-.,11.....
;--
. '''.,,',
!
. ,
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24, 2009
Page 224 of 462
. '~-..,
I
!
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24, 2009
Page 225 of 462
Exhibit 3
Tamiami Square of Naples, LLC
Account # 04046017600
Meter Days ERCs
Payable Read In based on
Period Month Of: Year Water Usaae (thousands) Date Cvcle Actual Davs
94 August 2008 549 8/5/2008 29 54.1
93 July 2008 541 7f712008 33 46.8
92 June 2008 674 61412008 33 58.4
91 May 2008 601 5/212008 28 61.3
90 April 2008 560 4/412008 29 55.2
89 March 2008 382 3/612008 30 36.4
88 February 2008 413 2/512006 32 36.9
87 January 2008 7<11 1/412006 35' ~.l!l
88 December 2007 374 1113012007 29 36.8
85 November 2007 223 111112007 26 22.6
84 October 2007 244 10/4/2007 28 24.9
83 September 2007 239 9/6/2007 31 22.0
82 August 2007 292 8/6/2007 31 26.9
81 July 2007 365 7/612007 30 36.7
80 June 2007 312 616/2007 33 27.0
79 May 2007 423 5/4/2007 29 41.7
78 April 2007 420 4/5/2007 30 40.0
n March 2007 549 3/6/2007 29 54.1
2/5/2007
Number of Periods 18 I
Monthly Average (All) 442 I
Average ERCs (All) 41.6 I
Last Four Month Average 591 I
Four Month Average ERCs 54.9 I
Peak Volume I 781 I
~JI..~.I!.Jl~
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24, 2009
Page 226 of 462
m
Public Resources Management Group, Inc.
Utilil)', Rate, F;nancia/ and Management Consu/tant..
August 26, 2008
Mr. Thomas G. Wides
Operations Support Director, Public Utilities
Collier County Government
3301 E. Tamiami Trail, Suite H3
Naples, FL 341\ 2
Subject:
Alternative Impact Fee Application
Dear Torn:
As we discussed, the Collier County Water-Sewer District (the "District") has received an
alternative impact fee calculation from Tamiami Square of Naples, LLC (the "Developer") which
is requesting a reduction in the water and wastewater impact fees that were imposed by the
District on the property referred to as Tamiami Square. It is my understanding that Tamiami
Square is a commercial customer serviced by one master meter at the property and will be
receiving both potable water and wastewater service.
As you know, the District's Impact Fees are applied to a commercial customer based on the
estimated equivalent residential connections (ERC) that a specific property may be determined to
include. An ERC is a unit of measure which links capacity to a given property (with individually
metered residential service being equal to I ERC and is generally the smallest customer from a
capacity allocation standpoint) which is based on a level of service equal to 350 gallons per day
for water capacity and 250 gallons per day for wastewater capacity. It should be noted that this
is a daily capacity allocation and not one based on an average use experienced over a period of
time such as a year. Furthermore, this capacity allocation is based on the allocation of finished
water produced and wastewater treated at the respective plant facilities and therefore is not based
on retail use metered at the customer premise (there is an allowance for water loss as part of the
normal delivery of water and normal inflow and infiltration for the collection of wastewater).
The District's allocation of capacity to all commercial customers is an ERC based approach
predicated on the flow (capacity) required of the property (essentially a "flow-based" allocation)
which we believe to be proper in the reservation of capacity by a specific property or customer.
By using this fee detennination methodology, the District does recognize customer diversity in
the establishment of the level of impact fees to be charged to a property to promote the fairness
provisions (rational nexus) in the application of the impact fees.
K:\DM\1125.l6\Melcr Eq.uiv La Final.doc
341 NORTH MAITLAND AVc'NUE- SUITE 300 -. MAITLAND, FL 32751
TELEPHONE: (407) 628-2600. FAX: (407)628-2610. EMid!..: PRMG@PRMGinc.com
Agenda Item NO.1 OA
February 24, 2009
Page 227 of 462
Mr. Thomas G. Wides
Collier County Government
August 26, 2008
Page 2
In the alternative impact fee calculation as submitted by the Developer, a primary assumption as
to why a lower impact fee should be charged to the property is that it should have heen based on
the "meter equivalent" approach as opposed to a flow-based approach currently used by the
District. The meter equivalent approach is a method that weights the meter capacity by the
maximum flow that the meter is capable of measuring to a 5/8-inch meter (i.e., the maximum
capacity for a 5/8-inch meter is 20 gallons per minute as referenced in A WW A Manual M6 and
considered as a factor of 1.0; the other meters are expressed as a multiple of this usage value
based on meter size). The alternative impact fee calculation recognized this method of fee
determination under the premise that "numerous cities, counties and FPSC regulated entities
utilize FPSC/AWWNFAC/F.S. Section 25-30.055 and related sections for large service areas
..." in the detennination of impact fees to be charged to a property. Although many cities and
counties use meter equivalent factors for the detennination of commercial property impact fees,
the assertion that this is the correct method and therefore the only method to use is simply not
true.
With respect to the application of impact fees based on the flow or service attributes of a
commercial customer, many cities, counties and other public utilities use a flow or attribute-
based approach in the determination of the impact fee (attribute would be a specific component
of the development such as seats in a restaurant that has a daily capacity based on flow assigned
to it). The reason that these utilities use this approach is to accurately recover the cost of
providing service based on the capacity requirements specific to the customer. The meter is
simply used to measure daily flow and must be sized to accurately measure the flow from the
property; however to say that all commercial customers have the same capacity requirement
because of the meter size being the same between such customers is not correct. Simply put, a
restaurant served by a 5/8-inch meter generally would have a significantly higher demand than a
real estate office served by the same meter size. Additionally, it is rare that a customer would
use 100% of the maximum meter capacity and that a customer's load factor is generally less than
this. The District has recognized this; for a maximum flow rate of a 5/8-inch meter at 20 gallons
per minute, the daily flow would be 28,800 gallons per day yet the approved ERC value of the
District is 350 gallons per day which is my understanding is a common level of service used by
the industry in Florida.
There are several public utilities that use an ERe-based or flow-based approach in the
determination of the impact fees and based on my experience, more are moving towards this
direction due to the diversity in use experienced by the commercial class and the need to
accurately recover cost. Although it is administratively easier to calculate an impact fee using
meter equivalents, public utilities realize the financial benefits of calculating the commercial
impact fees based on flow (or similar attribute) in order to fully recover capital costs allocable to
new growth. A survey of public utilities that use a flow based approach is shown on Attachment
I to this letter (this does not imply that these are the only utilities using the flow-based approach,
K:\DM\I 125-16\Meter :E.quiv Ltr Final.dllc
I
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24, 2009
Page 228 of 462
Mr. Thomas G. Wides
Collier County Government
August 26, 2008
Page 3
it is simply a survey). As can be seen, there are many utilities that use the ERC-based or flow-
based approach in the determination of the impact fees due from a commercial property.
Additionally, the reference in the Developer's alternative impact fee calculation with respect to
the FPSC using the meter based approach in our opinion is not entirely accurate. Our experience
is that for general service (commercial) use, the plant capacity fees (term used by private
utilities; equivalent to an impact fee) imposed by private utilities is expressed in the rate tariff on
a cost per gallon basis which implies a flow based application. Based on a review of private
utility rate tariffs regulated by the FPSC that are available to us and discussions with others in
the industry, the following private utilities imposed a plant capacity fee based on a "per gallon of
demand" basis for the general service class:
.
North Fort Myers Utility, Inc.
Aloha Utilities, Inc.
North Sumter Utility Company, Inc.
Little Sumter Utility Company, Inc. (prior to acquisition)
Florida Water Services Corporation, Inc. (approximately 150 systems; prior to acquisition)
Utilities, lnc.(approximately 40 systems)
.
.
.
~
In the alternative impact fee calculation submitted by the Developer, reference was also made to
Florida Statutes, Section 25-30.055 with respect to private utilities. This reference provided a
summary of the determination of ERCs for non-residential use and listed the meter equivalent
factors assumed in the alternative fee calculation. It should be noted that this rule is associated
with a capacity or proposed capacity, to serve 100 or fewer persons, which clearly does not relate
to the County. Notwithstanding this service provision, the rule provides that unless the FPSC
determines that valid local statistical data should be used, then the meter equivalent filctors
should be used. Based on my knowledge of the industry, the private utilities generally use local
statistical data in the development of the plant capacity fees and for the general service class such
fees apply to new customers on a flow basis. This is further evidenced by the flow-based fees
being reflected in the respective company's rate tariff which have been approved by the FPSC.
Finally, the alternative impact fee calculation submitted by the Developer also includes a
reference to Public Resources Management Group, Inc. (pRMG) that the alternative method is
consistent with the findings reflected in a recent PRMG report regarding the development of
impact fees (I assume that this links to the recommendations for the use of the meter equivalency
based impact fee since the PRMG report was appended to the calculation). There is no reference
to the use of meter equivalents as the basis for fee determination in the report. In fact the fee was
based on the total applicable capital costs and the total available flow (and the corresponding
ERCs) allocable to growth based on the District's adopted level of service (i.e., flow) allocable to
,..-
K:\DM\112S-J6\Mfller EqllivLtr Find.doe
Agenda Item NO.1 OA
February 24, 2009
Page 229 of 462
Mr. Thomas G. Wides
Collier County Government
August 26, 2008
Page 4
growth. The only reference to meters in the report deals with the fact that an ERC is equivalent
to the daily use of a typical individually metered residential customer which is generally the
lowest level of use in the determ ination of the flow requirements included in the definition of an
ERC; it has absolutely nothing to do with the application of an impact fee based on meter
equivalents.
In summary, we believe the District's approach to calculating an impact fee for a commercial
customer based on flow which links to the District's adopted level of service. is prudent, is
reflective of the practices in the industry, and provides for the full recovery of expansion-related
costs of the District. We do not agree with the use of meter equivalents as the basis for the
determination of the impact fee to be applied to the Developer's property since it is not
consistent with the County's ordinances and is not consistent with the demand requirements
being imposed by the Developer's property.
If you have any questions or comments relative to our opinion or need further clarification,
please do not hesitate to give me a call.
Very truly yours,
Public Resources Management Groap, Inc.
;f~-1 cO~,
Robert J. Ori
President
RJOI skc
Attachments
K:\DM\112S.16\Meter Equiv Ltr FinaLdoe
I
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24, 2009
Page 230 of 462
Attachment 1
Collier County, Florida
Sample of Florida Utilities - Commercial Impact Fee with Flow Based APplication Methodolol!V
Line
No.
Utility
Impact Fee Application Methodology [1] [2J
Fixture Unit Based
Attributes Based I Flow Based Dependent on Property Use
Attributes Based
Attributes Based
Flow Based
Fixture Unit Based
Attributes Based
Flow Based
Flow Based
Flow Based
Flow Based
2" or Greater, Flow Based
Attributes Based
Fiow Based
Fixture Unit Based
Attributes Based
2" or Greater, Flow Based
Attributes Based
Fixture Unit Based
Attributes Based
Fixture Unit Based
Fixture Unit Based
Attributes Based
Attributes Based
Attributes Based
Attributes Based
Attributes Based
Attributes Based
Attributes Based
Attributes Based
Attributes Based
Attributes Based
Footnotes:
[I] Attributes Based - Impact fee based on particular attributes of customer (e.g., seats in restaurant)
which an ERC or flow factor per attribute is applied.
[2] Flow Based - Impact fee based on flow calculated for property as generally identified during the
permitting process.
I
2
3
4
S
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
IS
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
City of Bartow
Brevard County
Broward County
Charlotte County
JEA
Florida Keys Aqueduct Authority
Fort Pierce Utilities Authority
City of Haines City
Hernando County
Hillsborough County
Indian River County
Town of Jupiter
City of Lake Worth
City of Lakeland
Marion County
Martin County
City of Melbourne
Miami-Dade County
City of North port
City of Oca1a
City of Oldsmar
City of Panama City Beach
Polk County
City of Port St. Lucie
Sarasota County
Seminole County
St Lucie County
Sf. Lucie West Services District
City of Stuart
City of Sunrise
Tohopekoliga Water Authority
City of Winter Springs
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24. 2009
Page 231 of 462
EXHIBIT "E"
Ii
Agenda Item No. 10A
gaiS~~~~.
July 23, 2008
GAl Proj. # A080376.00
Douglas A. Lewis, Esquire
Roetzel & Andress, P.A.
850 Park Shore Drive
Trianon Centre - 3rd Floor
Naples, FL 34103
Re: Tamiami Square - Collier County Water and Sewer Facilities Proposed
Alternative Fee Calculation Methodology
Dear Mr. Lewis:
In accordance with the "Agreement Regarding Alternative Impact Fee Calculation"
(May 2008), Appendix H ''Water and Sewer Facilities Proposed Alternate Fee
Calculation Methodology" (June 2001), and the pre-application meeting (May 2008); this
letter with its Exhibits and Attachments represents the "Study Report" certified by a
Florida Professional Engineer qualified in this area of work for consideration by Collier
County Utilities Department Impact Fee Coordinator.
Attachment A provides Appendix H.
Attachment B presents clearly the 1.) Level of Service (LOS) standards for water at 350
gallons per day annual average daily flow per Equivalent Residential Connection (ERC)
and the water peaking factor of 1.2, 2.) the LOS for wastewater at 250 gallons per day
annual average daily flow (AADF) per ERC and the wastewater peaking factor of 1.3,
the basis of determining the respective impact fee for water or the sewer system as well
as other items.
Attachment C provides the older County Ordinance Nos. 2007-52, 2007-57 and and
latest Resolution 2008-200 and Article VI. for the Water-Sewer District Uniform Billing
which establishes 1.) the level of the impact fees at $3,575 per ERC for water and
$3,495 per ERG for wastewater, 2.) that the subject property is a non-residential use,
and 3.) that a unit within the subject property is at one ERC each.
Attachment D shows site photos which clearly show that 1.) there is only one lift station
on-site such that run time analysis is appropriate and includes all flows, 2.) the major
building construction was recently completed by 5/12/08 the date the photographs were
taken, 3.) the irrigation system is connected and that landscaping is still underway and
irrigation to assure plant/sod survival was practiced, and 4.) the repairs to the water
system were completed.
Orlando Office
301 E. Pine Street, Suite 1020 Orlando, Florida 32801 T 407.423.8398 F 407.843.1070 www.gaiconsultants.com
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24,2009
Page 233 of 462
Douglas A. Lewis, Esquire
July 23, 2008
Page 2
Attachment E documents the responsiveness of the developer to the County's request
for information.
Attachment F provides excerpts which document the practice of using units when within
the ERC LOS, which Tamiami Square is, as an Alternate Method Impact of Fee
Calculation for commercial properties.
Attachment G provides excerpts from M1 (Manual of Practice) AWWA again confirming
the methodology.
Attachment H summarizes key points in the pre-application meeting. The County's
rejection of FPSC meter equivalencies. This attachment includes the County's offer
which was accepted in May and pending approval of this Study/Report payment will be
made for the two (2) two-inch water irriqation meters at 6.1 ERCs (water only) and the
tap-in cost (3/31/08 County ietter). The Developer has agreed and paid or will be paid
by time of C.O. some 27.3 ERCs for both water and wastewater. Attachment H page 2
of 3 and the attachments thereto which drawings show the buildout of the site in the
three (3) phases including some 32 units. A unit in Phase 1 was approximately an
estimated average of 1,900 ff, in Phase 2 similarly approximately 1,950 ft2 and Phase 3
approximately 1,200 W. These sized units are consistent with the PRMG Study of 2006
and the County Ordinance of 2007 for one (1) ERC each. Page 3 of 3 of Attachment H
provides that after the separation of the irrigation system from the potable system which
the developer has agreed to do, that the agreed audit/two (2) year study between the
County and Developer wouid thereafter for potable (non-irrigation) water and sewage
AADF of 11,200 gpd and 8,000 gpd, respectively. The two (2) month average peak
would be 13,440 gpd for water and 10,400 gpd for sewage.
Using the Unit Count Method (number of units in the structure) for which the unit sizing
is consistent with one ERC each results in 32 units and ERCs.
The items listed below summarize the Professional Engineer's findings following receipt
of comments from those attending the pre-application meeting:
1. Vested Flow Rates for Study/Audit @ 32 ERCs (Potable Only) Water and
Wastewater
a.) Water LOS 350 gpd AADF
(i) Annual Average Daily Flow through potable (non irrigation meters)
= 32 x 350 gpd AADF or 11,200 gpd
(ii) 2 month peak factor (see page 29 Table 1 PRMG 40.00 + 33.33 =
1.2
gai consultants
tr~nsforming ideas into reality@
Ii
Agenda Item No, 10A
February 24, 2009
Page 234 of 462
Douglas A. Lewis, Esquire
July 23, 2008
Page 3
(iii) 2 month audit use on average day of that period limit is 11,200 gpd
x 1.2 or 13,440 gpd for test period.
b.) Wastewater LOS 250 gpd MDF
(i) Annual Average (12 month period) Daily Flow = 32 x 250 = 8,000
gpd MDF
(Ii) 2 month peak factor (see page 32 Table 2 PRMG) 40.100 + 30.846
= 1.3
(iii) 2 month audit of use on average day for that period is 8,000 gpd x
1.3 or 10,400 gpd.
2. Proposed Additional Payments
a.)
Irrigation meters 3/3/1/08
(i) Tapping fee
(Ii) ERCs irrigation
$ 1,140.00
$22,060.59
b.) Water potable service) impact fees - unit count
(i) 4.7 ERCs x $3,575 $16,803.00
c.)
Wastewater impact fees - unit count
(i) 4.7 ERCs x $3,495
$16,427.00
$56.430.59
Total Amount Due (following approvai)
3. Consensus of Follow-up (followinQ pre-application meetinQ)
a.) Answer questions and requests for information by County. This activity is
complete.
b.) Submit alternative methodology signed and sealed by engineer. This letter
report and attachments satisfies this final item.
Typically, Alternative Methodologies, if possible, are documented by the historical
record. Table 1 presents the sewage flow records for Tamiami Square for 2007 for the
occupied 18 units on average for the year. On an annual average basis the actual flows
and the paid units and the occupied units correlate exactly. On a peaking basis the
correlation is within 6.1 % (six point one percent) which following the manual of practice
for the smaller demand center of Tamiami Square versus the entire Collier County
wastewater system is expected and appropriate (size/population peaking factor
adjustments pursuant to FDEP, 10-States Standards and WEF MOPs). I conclude and
have verified that the unit count method is valid and approximately applied.
tj
gai consultants
tri:lnsformli"\g ideas into realitYID
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24,2009
Page 235 of 462
Douglas A. Lewis, Esquire
July 23, 2008
Page 4
Table 1 is supported by Exhibit A.
Table 2 documents the repairs to the integrated irrigation and potable water system in
2007. Site photographs illustrate the new landscaping needs in 2007. Site
development records illustrate that major construction of structures occurred in 2007.
Since May of 2008, the amount of irrigation and conservation practices in the
commercial establishments were emphasized.
Although both the irrigation and potable use were integrated at the customer side of the
meters (both types of flow through the meters) and therefore irrigation and repairs to
that system would skew the historical record; the same documentation analysis was
conducted.
Table 3 presents the combined water flow through the meters. AWWA guideiines state
that where major breaks have occurred that data is not re-occurring and therefore
shouid be excluded from the analysis. Considering the occupancy of 18 units and the
County 6.1 ERCs for irrigation a conservative weighted average of 24.1 ERCs is
obtained. The skewed data (as a result of sod establishment, construction, minor
breaks, irrigation use) results is a comparable 30.8 ERCs AADF. The correlation is
within AWWA standards to the 24.1 ERCs. Nonetheless, it is the metered data as
shown on Exhibit B supporting Table 3, which confirms the agreed two year audit and
true-up.
As a Florida Professional Engineer qualified and accepted in Civil Court mediation and
FPSC expert testimony for such cases/proceedings and due to my over 30 years
experience, training, and practice in Florida on many such impact fee matters (see
Attachment I), I do hereby certify and conclude that the Alternative Methodology as the
unit count method is appropriate for the Tamiami Square project taken in conjunction
with the reasonable assurance from an agreed two (2) year Study/Audit of the use.
Very truly yours,
GAl Consultants, Inc.
301 E Pine St., Suite 102
Orlando, FL 3
Engineer'
r
GCH/jevl AOB0376 ,OO/Reports/R.1
Cvr ttr
gai consultants
tran$forming ideas Into reality!!>
Ii
---.-- ---.. .--.__. .-.- .--.-- -~-- - . -.- --
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24, 2009
Page 236 of 462
Table 1
Tamiami Square 2007 Data
Run Times. Sewage Flow Actual Use
Date Flow Days ADF/Month
1/07 192825 31 6,220 gpd
2/07 164346 28 5,870 gpd
3/07 188906 ~ 31 6,094 gpd
4/07 144349 + 30 4,812 gpd
5/07 118168 + 31 3,812 gpd
6/07 110295 30 3,677 gpd
7/07 101769 31 3,283 gpd
8/07 93103 ~ 31 3,003 gpd
9/07 103676 30 3,456 gpd
10/07 130074 31 4,196 gpd
11/07 139200 + 30 4,640 gpd
12/07 139833 + 31 4,511 gpd
Omax Mo. = 6,220 gpd + (250 x 1.3) = 19.0 ERGs (1)
o AADF 1,626,544 + 365 + 250 = 18 ERGs
o Good correlation of omax month @ 19.1 ERGs, oaadf @ 18
ERGs and occupancy @ 18 units or ERGs as averaged for
period.
o Note 32 ERGs to be purchased
(1) 1.3 peak factor for sewage fior per PRMG 2007 report - impact fees
P:IORL IHCDlW ord Proc\2008IA080376.00IReportIR-1 I Tables.xlsx
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24, 2009
Page 237 of 462
Exhibit A
Actual Sewage Flows 2007
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24, 2009
Page 238 of 462
TAMIAMI SQUARE
MONTH: January 2007
Flow per Min/Hr
DATE TIME PUMP #1 HRS. RUN PUMP #2 HRS. RUN MAINTENANCE
31 0.7 0,6
30 0.7 0.6
29 0901 719.7 0.7 173.6 0.6
28 0.5 0.6
27 0.5 0.6
26 0.5 0.6
25 1356 717.7 0.5 171.4 0.6
24 0.6 0.6
23 0.6 0.6
22 0957 715.9 0.6 169.5 0.6
21 0.6 0.6
20 0.6 0.6
19 0.6 0.6
18 1127 713.5 0.6 167.1 0.6
17 0.5 0.4
16 0.5 0.4
15 0938 712.0 0.5 165.9 0.4
14 0.5 0.6
13 0.5 0.6
12 0.5 0.6
11 1021 709.9 0.5 163.5 0.6
10 0.4 0.5
9 0.4 0.5
8 1112 708.7 0.4 162.0 0.5
7 0.6 0.6
6 0.6 0.6
5 0.6 0.6
4 0857 706.2 0.6 159.6 0.6
3 0.5 0.5
2 1214 705.2 0.5 158.6 0.5
1 0.6 0.6
total flow for month
17.4 93959.46
192825.06
17.2 98865.6
Agenda Item NO.1 OA
February 24, 2009
Page 239 of 462
TAMIAMI SQUARE
MONTH: February 2007
Flow per Min/Hr
DATE TIME PUMP #1 HRS. RUN PUMP #2 HRS. RUN MAINTENANCE
31
30
29
28 0.6 0.6
27 0.6 0.6
26 0941 734.5 0.6 188.6 0.6
25 0.5 0.5
24 0.5 0.5
23 0.5 0.5
22 1120 732.5 0.5 186.6 0.5
21 0,5 0.5
20 0,5 0.5
19 0920 731,0 0.5 185.1 0.5
18 0,5 0.6
17 0,5 0.6
16 0.5 0.6
15 0938 729.0 0,5 182.7 0.6
14 0.6 0.5
13 0,6 0.5
12 0938 727.2 0.6 181.2 0.5
11 0,5 0,5
10 0.5 0.5
9 0.5 0,5
8 1135 725,2 0.5 179.2 0.5
7 0,6 0,6
6 0.6 0.6
5 1134 723.4 0.6 177.4 0,6
4 04 0,5
3 04 0.5
2 0.4 0,5
1 1013 721.8 04 1754 0,5
14.5
83346
15 81000
164346
total flow for month
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24,2009
Page 240 of 462
TAMIAMI SQUARE
MONTH: MARCH 2007
Flow per Min/Hr
DATE TIME PUMP #1 HRS.RUN PUMP #2 HRS.RUN MAINTENANCE
31 0.4 0.5
30 0.4 0.5
29 0309 751.9 0.4 206.0 0.5
28 0.5 0.5
27 0.5 0.5
26 0922 750.4 0.5 204.5 0.5
25 0.6 0.6
24 0,6 0.6
23 0.6 0.6
22 0912 748.0 0.6 202.1 0.6
21 0.5 0.5
20 0.5 0.5
19 1248 746.5 0.5 200.6 0.5
18 0.6 0.6
17 0.6 0.6
16 0.6 0.6
15 0927 744.1 0,6 198.2 0,6
14 0,5 0,5
13 0.5 0.5
12 1043 742.6 0,5 196.7 0.5
11 0,6 0.6
10 0.6 0.6
9 0.6 0.6
8 0945 740.2 0,6 194.3 0.6
7 0.5 0.5
6 0.5 0.5
5 0938 738.7 0.5 192.8 0.5
4 0.6 0.6
3 0.6 0.6
2 0.6 0,6
1 1111 736.3 0,6 190.4 0.6
16.8
96566.4
17.1 92340
188906.4
total flow for month
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24, 2009
Page 241 of 462
TAMIAMI SQUARE
MONTH: APRIL 2007
Flow per Min/Hr
DATE TIME PUMP #1 HRS. RUN PUMP #2 HRS.RUN MAINTENANCE
31
3D 0909 765.8 0.2 220.4 0.1
29 0.4 0.4
28 0.4 0.4
27 0.4 0.4
26 0917 764.2 0.4 218.8 0.4
25 0.3 0.3
24 . 0.3 0.3
23 1428 763.3 0.3 217.9 0.3
22 0.6 0.6
21 0.6 06
20 0.6 0.6
19 1030 760.9 0.6 215.5 0.6
18 0.4 0.5
17 0.4 0.5
16 1127 759.7 0.4 214.0 0.5
15 0.4 0.4
14 0.4 0.4
13 04 0.4
12 1021 758.2 0.4 212.4 0.4
11 0.4 0.4
10 0.4 0.4
9 1057 757.0 0.4 211.2 0.4
8 0.5 0.5
7 0.5 0.5
6 0.5 0.5
5 0920 755.0 0.5 209.2 0.5
4 0.5 0.4
3 0.5 0.4
2 1226 753.5 0.5 208.0 0.4
1 0.4 05
12.9 74149.2
total flow for month
13 70200
144349.2
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24, 2009
Page 242 of 462
TAMIAMI SQUARE
MONTH: MAY 2007
Flow per Min/Hr
DATE TIME PUMP #1 HRS. RUN PUMP #2 HRS.RUN MAINTENANCE
31 0936 776.8 0.4 231.7 0.4
30 0.4 0.5
29 1021 776.0 0.4 230.7 0.5
28 0.3 0.3
27 0.3 0.3
26 0.3 0.3
25 0.3 0.3
24 1224 774.5 0.3 229.2 0.3
23 0.3 0.3
22 0.3 0.3
21 1046 773.6 0.3 228.3 0.3
20 0.4 0.4
19 0.4 0.4
18 0.4 0.4
17 1117 772.0 0.4 226.7 0.4
16 0.3 0.3
15 0.3 0.3
14 1130 771.1 0.3 225.8 0.3
13 0.4 0.4
12 0.4 0.4
11 0.4 0.4
10 1130 769.5 0.4 224.2 0.4
9 0.4 0.3
8 0.4 0.3
7 1110 768.4 0.4 223.3 0.3
6 0.3 0.4
5 0.3 0.4
4 0.3 0.4
3 1025 767.2 0.3 221.7 0.4
2 0.3 0.1
1 0.3 0.1
10.5998 60927.6504
total flow for month
10.6 57240
118167.6504
Agenda Item NO.1 OA
February 24. 2009
Page 243 of 462
TAMIAMI SQUARE
MONTH: JUNE 2007
Flow per Min/Hr
DATE TIME PUMP #1 HRS.RUN PUMP #2 HRS.RUN MAINTENANCE
31
30 0.3 0.4
29 0.3 0.4
28 1249 786.0 0.3 241.0 0.4
27 0.3 0.3
26 0.3 0.3
25 1313 785.1 0.3 240.1 0.3
24 0.3 0.3
23 0.3 0.3
22 0.3 0.3
21 1258 783.9 0.3 238.9 0.3
20 0.4 0.4
19 0.4 0.4
18 1057 782.7 0.4 237.7 0.4
17 0.3 0.3
16 0.3 0.3
15 0.3 0.3
14 1357 781.5 0.3 236.5 0.3
13 0.3 0.3
12 0.3 0.3
11 0908 780.6 0.3 235.6 0.3
10 0.4 0.4
9 0.4 0.4
8 0.4 0.4
7 1105 779.0 0.4 233.9 0.4
6 0.2 0.2
5 0.2 0.2
4 1107 778.4 0.2 233.3 0.2
3 0.4 0.4
2 0.4 0.4
1 0.4 0.4
9.7
55755.6
10.1 54540
110295.6
total flow for month
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24, 2009
Page 244 of 462
T AMIAMI SQUARE
MONTH: JULY 2007
Flow per Min/Hr
DATE TIME PUMP #1 HRS. RUN PUMP #2 HRS. RUN MAINTENANCE
31 0.3 0.3
30 1116 795.3 0.3 250.6 0.3
29 0.4 0.4
28 0.4 0.4
27 0.4 0.4
26 1331 793.7 0.4 249.0 0.4
25 0.2 0.3
24 1030 793.3 0.2 248.4 0.3
23 0.3 0.2
22 0.3 0.2
21 0.3 0.2
20 0.3 0.2
19 1133 792.3 0.3 247.4 0.2
18 0.3 0.3
17 0.3 0.3
16 1254 791.4 0.3 246.5 0.3
15 0.3 0.3
14 0.3 0.3
13 0.3 0.3
12 1113 790.2 0.3 245.3 0.3
11 0.3 0.3
10 0.3 0.3
9 1126 789.3 0.3 244.4 0.3
8 0.3 0.3
7 0.3 0.3
6 0.3 0.3
5 1026 788.1 0.3 243.2 0.3
4 0.3 0.2
3 0.3 0.2
2 1154 787.2 0.3 242.6 0.2
1 0.3 0.4
9.25
53169
9 48600
101769
total flow for month
Agenda Item No.1 OA
February 24, 2009
Page 245 of 462
TAMIAMI SQUARE
MONTH: AUGUST 2007
Flow per Min/Hr
DATE TIME PUMP #1 HRS.RUN PUMP #2 HRS.RUN MAINTENANCE
31 0.3 0.3
30 0929 803.7 0.3 258.9 0.3
29 0.2 0.1
28 0.2 0.1
27 1051 803.1 0.2 258.6 0.1
26 0.3 0.3
25 0.3 0.3
24 0.3 0.3
23 1200 801.9 0.3 257.4 0.3
22 0.2 0.3
21 0.2 0.3
20 1045 801.3 0.2 256.5 0.3
19 0.3 0.3
18 0.3 0.3
17 0.3 0.3
16 1102 800.1 0.3 255.3 0.3
15 0.3 0.4
14 0.3 0.4
13 1414 799.2 0.3 254.1 0.4
12 0.3 0.2
11 0.3 0.2
10 0.3 0.2
9 1150 798.0 0.3 253.3 0.2
8 0.2 0.2
7 0.2 0.2
6 1039 797.4 0.2 252.7 0.2
5 0.3 0.3
4 0.3 0.3
3 0.3 0.3
2 1454 796.2 0.3 251.5 0.3
1 0.3 0.3
total flow for month
8.3 44820
93103.2
8.4 48283.2
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24, 2009
Page 246 of 462
TAMIAMI SQUARE
MONTH: SEPTEMBER 2007
Flow per Min/Hr
DATE TIME PUMP #1 HRS. RUN PUMP #2 HRS. RUN MAINTENANCE
31
30 0.3 0.3
29 0.3 0.3
28 0.3 0.3
27 1028 812.4 0.3 267.6 0.3
26 0.4 0.4
25 0.4 0.4
24 0950 811.2 0.4 266.4 0.4
23 0.3 0.3
22 0.3 0.3
21 0.3 0.3
20 0820 810.0 0.3 265.2 0.3
19 0.3 0.3
18 0.3 0.3
17 1142 809.1 0.3 264.3 0.3
16 0.3 0.3
15 0.3 0.3
14 0.3 0.3
13 0848 807.9 0.3 263.1 0.3
12 0.3 0.3
11 0.3 0.3
10 1309 807.0 0.3 262.2 0.3
9 0.3 0.3
8 0.3 0.3
7 0.3 0.3
6 1040 805.8 0.3 261.0 0.3
5 0.3 0.3
4 1226+ 805.2 0.3 260.4 0.3
3 0.3 0.3
2 0.3 0.3
1 0.3 0.3
9.3 53456.4
total flow for month
9.3 50220
103676.4
Agenda Item NO.1 OA
February 24, 2009
Page 247 of 462
__.n _,~_.'
TAMIAMI SQUARE
MONTH: OCTOBER 2007
Flow per Min/Hr
DATE TIME PUMP #1 HRS. RUN PUMP #2 HRS. RUN MAINTENANCE
31 0.5 0.5
30 0.5 0.5
29 0832 824.2 0.5 278.5 0.5
28 0.4 OA
27 0.4 0.4
26 . OA
0.4
25 1244 822.6 0.4 276.9 0.4
24 0.3 OA
23 0.3 OA
22 0902 821.7 0.3 275.7 0.4
21 0.5 OA
20 0.5 0.4
19 0.5 0.4
18 0939 819.7 0.5 274.1 0.4
17 OA 0.5
16 0.4 0.5
15 0840 818.5 0.4 272.6 0.5
14 0.3 0.3
13 0.3 0.3
12 0.3 0.3
11 0930 817.3 0.3 271.4 0.3
10 0.4 0.3
9 0.4 0.3
8 1123 816.1 0.4 270.5 0.3
7 0.4 0.4
6 0.4 OA
5 0.4 0.4
4 0917 814.5 0.4 268.9 0.4
3 0.3 0.0
2 0.3 0.0
1 1004 813.6 0.3 268.8 0.0
12.1 69550.8 11.208 60523.2
total flow for month 130074
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24,2009
Page 248 of 462
TAMIAMI SQUARE
MONTH: NOVEMBER 2007
Flow per Min/Hr
DATE TIME PUMP #1 HRS. RUN PUMP #2 HRS.RUN MAINTENANCE
31
30 0.4 0.4
29 1152 837.3 0.4 292.8 0.4
28 0.4 0.3
27 0.4 0.3
26 1104 836.2 0.4 291.9 0.3
25 0.3 0.4
24 0.3 0.4
23 0.3 0.4
22 0.3 0.4
21 1126 834.7 0.3 289.9 0.4
20 0.7 0.6
19 1027 833.3 0.7 288.7 0.6
18 0.5 0.5
17 0.5 0.5
16 0.5 0.5
15 0905 831.3 0.5 286.7 0.5
14 0.3 0.3
13 0.3 0.3
12 1408 830.4 0.3 285.8 0.3
11 0.5 0.5
10 0.5 0.5
9 0.5 0.5
8 1000 828.5 0.5 283.8 0.5
7 0.4 0.4
6 0.4 0.4
5 1003 827.3 0.4 282.6 0.4
4 0.4 0.4
3 0.4 0.4
2 0.4 0.4
1 1208 825.7 0.4 281.0 0.4
12.38 71160.24
total flow for month
12.6 68040
139200.24
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24, 2009
Page 249 of 462
TAMIAMI SQUARE
MONTH: DECEMBER 2007
Flow per Min/Hr
DATE TIME PUMP #1 HRS. RUN PUMP #2 HRS.RUN MAINTENANCE
31 0935 850.2 0.4 305.6 0.4
30 0.5 0.5
29 0.5 0.5
28 0.5 0.5
27 1207 . 848.2 0.5 303.6 0.5 .
26 0.2 0.3
25 0.2 0.3
24 0842 847.6 0.2 302.7 0.3
23 0.6 0.5
22 0.6 0.5
21 0.6 0.5
20 1156 845.2 0.6 300.7 0.5
19 0.3 0.3
18 0.3 0.3
17 0901 844.3 0.3 299.8 0.3
16 0.4 0.4
15 0.4 0.4
14 0.4 0.4
13 0954 842.7 0.4 298.2 0.4
12 0.3 0.4
11 0.3 0.4
10 0941 841.8 0.3 297.0 0.4
9 0.4 0.4
8 0.4 0.4
7 0.4 0.4
6 0819 840.2 0.4 295.4 0.4
5 0.4 0.4
4 0.4 0.4
3 1249 838.9 0.4 294.2 0.4
2 0.4 0.4
1 0.4 0.4
12.49 71792.52
total flow for month
12.6 68040
139832.52
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24, 2009
Page 250 of 462
Table 2
Tamiami Square Irrigation Repairs
2005
12/15/2004 Zone had 4 & 5 crushed valves.
2006
3/23/2006 By entrance - there was a 3" main line break.
5/11/2006 South exit - there were 4 rotors and 6 mist heads that had been run over,
11/29/2006 Zone 2 - the valve was stuck on. Replaced solenoid.
12/28/2006 Zones 1 & 3 - crushed 2" valve.
2007
1/18/20073" main line separated.
2/3/2007 Zone 4 - cut 1-1/4 pipe to irrigation rotors.
317/2007 Cement truck ran over 8 heads.
7/3/2007 Crack in line due to construction digging.
11/13/2007 Main ine break due to electrical work.
12/15/2007 Zone 1 - 2" main line break.
Also, 4" main line break (system ran for 9 hours).
200B
3/5/2008 Repaired line and pressured it up to check for leaks.
Agenda Item NO.1 OA
February 24, 2009
Page 251 of 462
Table 3
Tamiami Square
Irrigation and Potable Use
Combined 2007
Period Flow (1 ,OOO) Days ADF/Month
1/05/07 -2/5/07 652 + . 31 21,030
2/5/07-3/6/07 549 + 29 18,930
3/6/07 -4/5/07 420 + 30 14,000
4/5/07-5/4/07 423 + 30 14,100
5/4/07-6/6/07 312 32 9.750
6/6/07-7/6/07 385 + 30 12,830
7/6/07-8/6/07 292 + 31 9,420
8/6/07-9/6/07 249 + 31 8,030
9/6/07-10/4/07 244 + 30 8,710
10/4/07-11/1/07 223 + 28 7,960
11/1/07-11/30/07 374 29 12,900
11/30/07-1/4/08 781 + 34 22,970
4,904 13,440
Q MDF = 2,922 kgal + 271 + 350 = 30.8(2) ERCs
Q MDF = 13,440 + 350 = 38(1) ERCs
Q 2 MMO=39,960 + (350 x 1.2(3) X 2) = 47.6 ERCs
Q 2 MMO = 28,100 + (350 X 1.2(3) x 2) = 33.5(2) ERCs
(1)
(1)
(1)
(1)
18 ERCs Weighted Average plus
.Q.J. ERCs Irrigation ERCs
24.1 ERCs Weighted Average
versus 30.8 or 33.5 ERCs in period
Note 4 items occurring -
a.) Sod establishment
b.) Construction
c.) Minor breaks
d.) Irrigation use
Reasonable to allow 6.7 ERCs during sod, construction, damage, and
irrigation use - see SFWMD provisions and FAC.
Some correlation, these results drive the need for a 2 year audit
Final note: Total purchased ERCs at buildout is 38.1 ERCs with 32 ERCs
as potable and 6.1 ERCs as irrigation.
(1) Includes major main breaks as shown in Table 2
(2) Excludes major breaks, still includes minor breaks
(3) 1.2 peak factor for water flow per PRMG 2006 report
P:\ORL \HCD\Word Proc\2008\AOB0376.00\Report\R-1 \ Ta bles .xls
Exhibit B
Metered Water Use 2007
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24, 2009
Page 252 of 462
Agenda Item No. 10A
COL, < COUNTY UTILITIES BilLING ,I?F~_..,F bruary 24,2009
.0.020 MERCANTILE AvE. NAPLES. FLORIDA 3410.0 . (239) 403_2380'=-) r<l.; D' ge 253 of 462
Ul..h::Zl----J ATE BILLED
T~~IAMI SQ OF N~2LES LLC 02/12/07
c/o CRIFASI MANAGt"lENT INC ACCOUNT NUMBER RATE CLASS
STE 208C 04046017600 CO
2375 TAMIAMI TRL N SERVICE ADDRESS
NAPLES FL 34103-4438 14700 TAMIAMI TR N
., . . .,
METER NUI.r\BER CODE AMOUt~T
READING DATE READING CONSUMPTION
21443635 2335 02 05/07 2506 171
21637090 74.40 02/05/07 7921 481 WA 2,928.06
SM 2,328,00
s~
: NARNING: THIS BILL BECOMES DELINQUENT IF THE TOTAL AMOUNT DUE IS NOT PAID BY 02/27/07
"AYMENTS RECEIVED AFTER THIS DATE SHALL BE SUBJECT TO PE"ALTY CHARGES AND FAILURE TO PAY BY THIS DATE ALSO SHALL l
! ,UBJECT THE PAQPE-AT'( TO SHUro;:F OF WATER SERVICE AND AUTOMATIC LIENS WITHOUT FURTHER NOTlCE. IF YOU DISPUTE THIS.
: IllL O'R BELIEVE THAT IT IS INACCURATE IN ANY WAY, YOU MUST CONTACT THE COLLIER COUNTY UTILITY BILLING AND CUSTOMER SERVICE
lEFT. AT (239) ~03.2JaO DURING BUSINESS HOURS (7:30 A.M. - 5:30 P.M" M-F) BEFORE THE DELINQUENT DATE.
, TOTAL DUE . '.
5,256.06
SEE BACK OF BILL FOR AODITIONAL BILL INFORMATION
MAKE CHECKS PAYABLE TO:
COLLIER COUNTY UTILITIES BilLING
(239) 403-2380
~
DETACH HERE'
~
ACCOUNT NUlvlBER
04046017600
. ,SERVICE.ADDRESS
14700'TAMIAMI.:.TR N
DATE S. IlLED t;;"II'III'III'Hiol";"
02/12/07 _ 02/27/07!
. WALDUE
5,256.061
TAMIAMI SQ OF NAPLES LLC
C/O CRIFASI ~~AG;mNT INC
STE 208C
2375 T~j1I~~I TRL N
NAPLES FL 34103-4438
11111111111111111111111111111
MAIL THE LOWER PORTION WITH YOUR
PAYMENT IN U.S. FUNDS TO:
COLLIER COUNTY UTILITIES BILLING
P.O, ~OX 3369
NAPLES, FLORIDA 34106-3369
000000404601760000525606
Agenda Item No. 10A
COL _R COUNTY UTILITIES BILLING 3liii.C ~ary 24,2009
4420 MERCANTILE AVE. NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104' (239) 403-23BO llU~(-i~e 254 of 462
OJ DATE BillED
TAML'JMI SQ OF NAPLES LLC 03/0S/07
c/O CRIFASI MANAGI1E..1>JT INC ACCOUNT NUMBER RATE CLASS
STE 208C -::-r /' flI /J ~ 04046n 7600 co
2375 T.ll-MIAMI TRL N (__J C L 17...L- SERVICE ADDRESS
NAPLES FL 34103-4438 14700 TAMIAMI TR N
METER . 0 ., ..
METER NUMBER SIZE DATE READING .. ciAT~,"i' . ''':::.',';Beli1~i!olG.'',:.,'. '.
21443635 5/8" 02/05/07 2506 03/06/07 2673
21637090 3" 02/05/07 7921 03/06/07 8303
AMOUNT
'WA 2,334.78
SM 2,005.61
IP 36.00
$~
WARNING: THIS BILL BECOMES DELINQUENT IF THE TOTAL AMOUNT DUE IS NOT PAID BY 03/23/07
'AYMENTS RECEIVED AFTER THIS DATe SHAll BE SUBJECT TO P'NAlTY CHARGES P.ND FAILURE TO PAY 6Y THIS DATE ALSO SHALL ['
iUBJECT THE PROPERTY TO SHUTOFF OF WArE!=! SERVICE AND AUTOMATIC lIE:NS WITHOUT FURTHER NOTICE. IF YOU DISPUTE THIS
JILL OR BELIEVE THAT IT IS INACCURATE IN ANY WAY, YOU MUSl CONTACT THE COLLIER COUNT'!' UTILITY BILUNG AND CUSTOMER SERVICE
)EPT. AT (239) 0403-2380 DURING BUSINESS HOURS (7:30 A.M.. 5:30 P.M., M-F) BEFORE THE DELINQUENT DATE.
. . TOTAL DUE
4,376.39
SEE BACK OF BILL FOR ADDITIONAL BILL INFORMATION
MAKE CHECKS PAYABLE TOi;',;f;f~;1g~tidi~citiR~~~:,.DFJA<<H HERE
COLLIER COUNTY UTILITIES BILLlNG14700"TAMIAMITR"N
(239) 403-2380
.~
ACCOUNT Nl,JM~FR~: ',"
0404601.7600'
'. "P~T~.~i"",~O:r 'J'~I^""'''''''"''
i ,~~<~8.vq~ ',~',m;7xQ71
TDTAL'DUE .
4,3760391
TAMIAMI SQ OF NAPLES LLC
C/O CRIFASI !1hNAGMENT INC
STE 208C
2375 TAMIAl>lI TRL N
NAPLES FL 34103-4438
MAIL THE LOWER PORTION WITH YOUR
111111111111 I 11111 1II11111111':'i:r~YMENT IN us; FUNDS TO:
. ...... .."-. :~i.i,",:'/O.Q~.LIER'COUN:r.r".0TILlTIES BilLING
. .: _.' '.;~( .~:' -X~,:4~;..~~*~~.:ti<;:i)\~:fgLa.,q~ '~369
. '.. . i<""'''';i:'~"W''(''~NAPlES/FtbRIDA'34106-3369
" <.', -;' ,t<~~';i:~:~~:1~~:~j;~::'-{~ ;~.: . .'
000000404601760000437639
..,<. ~ ~
COLLIER COUNTY UTILITIES -SittiNG '.
4420 MERCAI,TllE AVE' NAPl7S. FLORIDA 34104 . (2~9) 403,2380
TAMD.MI SQ OF NAPLES LLC fi5)IF.P' ~
C/O CRIFASI MANAGMENT INC, 1IIl1!81k~l.!::?!
STE 208C
2375 TAMIAMI TRL N
NAPLES FL- 34103-4438
'.
Agenda Item NO.1 OA
February 24,2009
Page 255 of 462
;:
..
DATE BILLED
04/11/07
ACCOUNT NUMBER
04046017600
RATE CLASS
CO
"~"
SERVICE ADDRESS
14700 TAMIAMI TR N
.. ., ..
METER NUMBER DATE READING DATE "" . .1'i~S:;:~.READjNG-;1:':~".'
21443635 03/06/07 2673 04/05/07 2842
21637090 03/06/07 8303 04/05/07 8554
7I (!.c It- r
/WoololT
"
WA
SM
Il?,.'"ti:'.
";>:i;~ ~~~J~-
1,60.34
1,601.84
36.00
~~
WARNING: THIS BILL BECOMES DELINQUENT IF THE TOTAL AMOUNT DUE IS NOT PAID BY 04/26/07
PAYMENTS RECEIVED AFTER THIS OATE SHALL BE SUBJECT TO PENALTY CHARGES AND FAILURE TO PAY BY THI OAT AL 0 SHA
SUBJECT THE PROPERTY TO SHUTOFF OF WATER SERVICE AND AUTOMATIC LIENS WITHOUT FURTHER NOTICE. IF YO DISPUTE T S
allL OR BELIEVE THAT iT IS INACCURATE IN ANY WAY, YOU MUST CONTACT THE cowEA COUNTY UTILITY BILLING AND CUSTOMER SERVI
DEPT. AT (239) 40H3BO DURING BUSINESS HOURS (7;30 A.M.' 5:30 P.M., M.Fl BEFORE THE DELINQUENT DATE.
SEE BACK OF BILL FOR ADDITIONAL BILL INFORMATION
,-,:..,.
MAKE CHECKS PAYABLE TO:
COLLIER COUNTY UTILITIES BilLING
. (239) .<103-2380
~'. ,
~
DEi~9~ HERE'.
~
SERVICE ADDRESS
14700 TAM~~I TR N
04046017600
DATE BillED r"'"''''''''''''"'''
04/11/07 04/26/0~ I
. .1'OTALDUE ~ .
ACCOUNT NUMBER
3,287.18
T~~~~ SQ OF NAPLES LLC
C/O CRIFASI MANAGMENT INC
STE 208C
2375 TAMIAMI TRL N
NAPLES FL 34103-4438
11111111111111111111111111111:"
" ':Jt,~.,:,:;.:..:.
MAIL THE LOWER'BPf.\TjQN WITH YOUR
PAYMENT IN U.S>FUN~S. TO:
".:~!dr.~:g,;:l:"~'~'" -:".,'
COLLIER COUNT(tJJI~lrIEs.BICCiNG
R.O, BOX"~~fi9"":" ':".
NAPLES, FLORIDA 34106-3369
I
1-.
I
000000404601760000325715
c'
CC E" CUUN IY UrILl11~S BilLING
4420 MERCAfJTILE AVE. NAPLES. FLORIDA 34104 . (239) 403-238U
TP.MIAMI SQ OF NAPLES LLC
C/O CRIFASI ~~.NAGMENT INC
STE 208C
2375 TAMIAMI TRL N
NAPLES FL 34103-4438
[R]tj 'v1 /-V-])) ,
IS (t{!C/! ,L-
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24, 2009
Pace 256 of 462
'ljA TE BILLED
05/10/07
ACCOUNT NUMBER
04046017600
RATE CLASS
CO
SERVICE ADDRESS
14700 TAMIAMI TR N
METER '" - . .,
METER NUMBER CODE AMOUNT
SIZE DATE READJNG CONSUMPTION
2144 3 635 5/8 " 04/05/07 2842 2994 152
21637090 3 " 04/05/07 8554 8825 271 WA 1,663.74
SM 1,611.23
IP 36.00
s~
-
WARNING: THIS BILL BECOMES DELlNOUENT IF THE TOTAL AMOUNT DUE IS NOT PAID BY OS/25/07
PAYMENTS RECEIvED AFTER THIS DATE SHALL 9E SUBJECT ro PENALTY CHARGES AND FAILURE TO PAY BY THIS DATE ALSO SHALL
SUaJi:.CT THE PROPERTY TO SHUTOFF OF WATER SERVICE AND AUTOMATIC LIENS WITHOUT FURTHER NOTICE. IF YOU DISPUTE THIS
BILL OR BELIEVE THAT IT IS INACCURATE IN ANY WAY. YOu MUST CONTACT THE COLLIER COUNTY UTILITY BItJ..tNG AND CUSTOMER SERVICE (
OEPT AT [239) "03.23&0 DURING BUSINESS HOURS {7:30 A.M.. 5:30 P.M" M.Fj ~ THE DELINQUENT DATE.
ftH'll1'lll
3,310.97
SEE BACK OF BILL FOR AODITIONAL Bill INFORMATION
MAKE CHECKS PAYABLE TO:
COLLIER COUNTY UTILITIES BilLING
(239) ~03. 2380
~ DETACH HERE
SERVICE ADDRESS
14700 TAMIAMI TR N
~
ACCOUNT NUMBER
04046017600
DATE BILL.ED
~:t I'
05/10/07 OS/25/07
T~.MIAMI SQ OF NAPLES LLC
C/O CRIFASI MANAGMENT INC
STE 208C
2375 TAMIAMI TRL N
NAPLES FL 34103-4438
11111111111111111111111111111
MAil THE lOWER PORTION WITH YOUR
PAYMENT IN U.S. FUNDS TO:
COLLIER COUNTY UTILITIES BilLING
P.O. BOX 3369
NAPLES, FLORIDA 34106.3369
000000404601760000331097
~"",,""
COL_~R COUNTY UTILITIES BILLING
~A20 MERCANTILE AVE. NAPLES. FLORIDA 34104 . (239) 403.2380
T~~IAMI SQ OF N~2LES LLC
C/O CRIFASI MANAGMENT INC
STE 208C
2375 TAMIAMI TRL N
N~2LES FL 34103-4438
(Q'"/P' Wofb!
! ~. _.... I...:::::...J
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24, 2009
Page 257 of 462
DATE BILLED
06/12/07
ACCOUNT NUMBER
04046017600
RA.TE CLASS
CO
TS G2 Cc. r+..L
SERVICE ADDRESS
14700 TAMIAMI TR N
METER. .., . - .,~ ; ; . . ~.c-
METER NUM3EA SIZE DATE READING
21443635 5/B" 05/04/07 2994
21637090 3 " 05/04/07 8825
DATE
06/06/07
06/06/07
AMOUNT
WA
WS
SM
I?
1,13B.62
122. 11
1,263.80
36.00
,;f ".
1,:,/, .... (f
DOE TO SEVERE DROUGHT, SFWMO PHASE II WATER RESTRICTIONS ARE IN EFFEC~~
THIS BILL MAY INCLUDE A 15~ SURCHARGE DEPENDING ON TOTAL USAGE.
PRACTICE WATER CONSERVATION DAILY TO PROTECT FLORIDA'S WATER RESOURCES.
FOR INFO VISIT WWW.COLLIERGOV.NET. UTILITY BILLING\CUSTOMER SERVICE.
VARNING: THIS BILL BECOMES DELINQUENT IF THE TOTAL AMOUNT DUE IS NOT PAID BV 06/27/07
AYMENT$ RECEIVED AFTER THIS DATE SHALL Be SUBJECT TO PENALTY CHARGES AND FAILURE TO PAY BY THIS DATE ALSO SHAll
,UBJECT THi: PROPERTY TO SHU10FF OF WATER SERVICE AND AUTOMATIC liENS WITHOVT FURTHER NOTICE. IF YOU DISPUTE THIS
ILL OR BELIEVE THAT IT 1$ INACCURATE IN ANY WAY. YOU MUST CONTACT THE COlliER COUNTY UTILITY BIl.LING AND CUSTOMER SERVICE
'EPT AT (239) 403.2380 DURING SUSINESS HOURS (7:30 A.M. . 5:30 P.M., M.FI BEFORE THE DELINQUENT DATE.
SEE BACK OF BILL FOR ADOITIONAL BILL INFORMATION
MAKE CHECKS PAYABLE TO:
COLLIER COUNTY UTILITIES BILLING
(239) 403-2380
~
DETACH HERE
~
SERVICE ADDRESS
14700 TAMIAMI TR N
ACCOUNT NUMBER
04046017600
DATE BILLED .11:llh'l.lIl::t\'II""II:i
06/12/07[ 06/27/071
1Dl,j)1 CUE
2,560.53 \
T~~IAMI SQ OF NAPLES LLC
c/O CRIFASI MANAGMENT INC
STE 20BC
2375 TAMIAMI TRL N
NAPLES FL 34103-4438
11111111111111111111111111111
MAIL THE LOWER PORTION WITH YOUR
PAYMENT IN U.S,'FUNDS TO'
COLLIER COUNTY UTILITIES BILLING
P.O. BOX 3369
NAPLES, FLORIOA 34106-3369
000000404601760000256053
on.......
\..-\..A i< \..-UUI\J I Y \.J IILlIII:S ClILLlNG
4420 MERCAI,TllE AVE. NAPLES. FlORIDA 34104. (239) 403-2380
T_~I~~I SQ OF N~PLES LLC
C/O CRIF~SI V"'_'1.li.GMENT INC
STE 208C
2375 T.~IAMI TRL N
N~_PLES FL 34103-4438
-\l7 1~9~tem No. lOA
.. . -0 ary 24, 2009
~~~!l,8f 462
07/16/07
ACCOUNT NUMBER
04046017600
RATE CLASS
CO
TSrSl r!..C>4I"
SERVICE ADDRESS
14700 TAMIAMI TR N
I METEA '-':.'~i.aib..- 1"0 . ,. . .,
MEjER NUM8E..=t ! SlZE DATE READING DATE
21443635 5/8" 06/06/07 3162 07/06/07 3355
21637090 3" 06/06/07 8969 07/06/07 9161
AMOUNT
193
192 WA
WS
SM
IP
BL
1,481.34
173.52
1,492.29
36.00
7.93CR
DUE TO SEVERE DROOGHT, SFWMD PHASE II WATER RESTRICTIONS ARE IN EFFECT!
THIS BILL MAY INCLUDE A 15% SURCHARGE DEPENDING ON TOTAL USAGE.
P~.CTICE WATER CONSERVATION DAILY TO PROTECT FLORIDA'S WATER RESOURCES,
FOR INFO VISIT WWW.COLLIERGOV.NET. UTILITY BILLING\CUSTOMER SERVICE.
NARNING: THIS BILL BECOMES DELlNOUENT IF THE TOTAL AMOUNT DUE IS NOT PAID BY 07/31/07 f"'L
l rl"l~JI)
'AVt.lErvTS RECt:rV!:D A;:TER THIS GATE SHALL BE SUBJECT TO PENALTY CHARGES AND FAILURE TO PAY BY THIS DATE ALSO SHAll" . ..._.U
iUBJECT THE PAOPEMTY TO 5HIJTOFF OF WATER SERVICE AND AUTOMATIC LIENS WITHOUT FURTHER NOTICE. IF YOU DISPUTE THIS 3 175 22
}ILL OR aELIEVE THAT IT IS U~ACCURATE IN ANY WAY. YOU MUST CONTACT THE COlLIER COUNTY UTILITY BILLING A/>lD CUSTOMER SERVICE ..
lEPT ,;,T :2391 .:.C3.2360 DURING 8USII~ESS HOURS [7:30 A.M. . 5:30 P.M.. M.F) BEFORE THE DELINQUENT OAT~ .
. - 'P.l J[)
~'"J3E~
8 DETACH HERE ~
SEE BACK OF BILL FOR ADD!TIONAL BILL INFORMATION
MAKE CHECKS PAYABLE TO:
COLLIER COUNTY UTIlITIES BilLING
(239) 403..2380
SERVICE ADDRESS
14700 TAMIAMI TR N
04046017600
DATE BILLED l'I'\h"'I''''''''''II'''-''lf'\~'1''0
07/16/071 07/31/071 3,175.22
ACCOUNT NUMBER
TAMI~~I SQ OF NAPLES LLC
C/O CRIFASI ~~AGMENT INC
STE 208C
2375 TAMIM~I TRL N
NAPLES FL 34103-4438
11111111111111111111111111111
MAIL THE LOWER PORTION WITH YOUR
PAYMENT IN U.S. FUNDS TO:
COLliER COUNTY UTILITIES BilliNG
P.O. BOX 3369
NAPLES. FlORIOA 34106.3369
000000404601760000317522
/,
cO' ~
~f#
7;5; (J.. g~ 3&'0-, L LC
~(j}~.r ~ ~~,q-.r
.- + /J ~<ft:J REAOINO DATE
7M M 7' 55 OS/06/07
$I ;?f"l '-I~ 61 OS/06/07
J~~f7aJl<u~~~
JE:k COUNTY UTILlTIE:S BilliNG
ITIlE AVE. NAPLES. FLORIDA 3A 1 OA . (239) 403.2380
Agenda Item NO.1 OA
February 24,2009
Page 259 of 462
DATE B!LLED
ACCOUNT t.slJMSER
04046017600
SERVICE ADDRESS
08/14/07
RATE CLASS
co
14700 TAMIAMI TR N
.,
AMOUNT
READING
3502
9306
147
145
WA
WS
SM
IP
1,061.82
110.59
1,201.20
36.00
$~
DUE TO SEVERE DROUGHT, SFWMD PHASE II WATER RESTRICTIONS ARE IN EFFECT I
THIS BILL l".AY INCLUDE A 15 % SURCHARGE DEPENDING ON TOTAL USAGE.
PRACTICE WATER CONSERVATION DAILY TO PROTECT FLORIDA'S WATER RESOURCES.
FOR INFO VISIT WWW.COLLIERGOV.NET. UTILITY BILLING\CUSTOMER SERVICE.
IARNING: THIS BILL BECOMES OELiNOUENT IF THE TOTAL AMOUNT OUE IS NOT PAID BY 08/29/07 .
wMENTS RECEIVED AFTER THIS DATE SHALL BE SUBJECT TO PENALTY CHARGES AND FAILURE TO PAY BY THIS DATE ALSO SHALL l
J5JECT THE PROPERTY TO SHUTOFF OF WATER SERVICE AND AUTOMATIC LIENS WITHOUT FURTHER NOTICE. IF YOU DISPUTE THIS
LL OR BeLIEVE THAT IT IS INACCURATE IN A.NY WAY, YOU MUST CQNTACTTHE COLUER COUNTY UTILITY BILLING AND CUSTOMER SERVICE
::PT AT [239) 403-2380 DURING BUSINESS HOURS (7:30 A.M.' 5:30 P.I,(., M"F] BEFORE THE DELINQUENT DATE.
"""~'"1 l
2,409.61
SEE BACK OF BILL FOR ADDITIONAL BILL INFORMATION
MAKE CHECKS PAYABLE TO:
COLLIER COUNTY UTILITIES BIlliNG
(239) 403-2380
~
DETACH HERE
~
SERVICE ADDRESS
14700 TAMIAMI TR N
ACCOUNT NUMBER
04046017600
~A;~ ~'~";~ r~';'~~';'7~;
TOTAL Due,
.2,409.611
TAMIJ'-MI SQ OF NAPLES LLC
C/O CRIFASI ~.ANAGMENT INC
STE 2 os
2375 TAMI."_MI TRL N
NAPLES FL 34103-4439
I1I11111111111111111111111111
MAIL THE LOWER PORTION WITH YOUR
PAYMENT IN U,S. FUNDS TO:
COLLIER COUNTY UTILITIES BILLING
P.O. BOX 3369
NAPLES. FLORIDA 34106.3369
nnnnnnunULnl.?Lnnnn~~nqLl.
, _ ,_ .~,.. '-' .......,''-v !.JILLII ~"-"
7'i3'lEl1T99 Item No. 10A
~eorua~4, 2009
/?fiI!'t8' -
'0':l7'1 ff 462
4420 MERCAN,
TAMIAMI SQ OF NAPLES LLC
c/o CRIFASI MANAGMENT INC
STE 208
2375 TAMIAMI TRL N
NAPLES FL 34103-4439
AVE. NAPLES. FLORIDA 34104 . (239) 403-2380
/-:50- r'. t-pJ:;
ACCOUNT NUMBER
04046017600
RA 7E CLASS
CO
SERVICE ADDRE.SS
14700 TAMIAMI TR N
MET5.R . . ., . - ., cODel
METER NUMBER READING I CONSUMPTION AMOUNT
size DATe READING DATe
21443635 5/8 II 08/06/07 3502 09/06/07 3652 150
21637090 3" 08/06/07 9306 09/06/07 9395 89 WA 858.30
WS 80.05
SM 1,035.31
IP 36.00
DUE TO SEVERE DROUGHT, SFWMD PHASE II WATER RESTRICTIONS ARE IN
THIS BILL M1l.Y INCLUDE A 15% SURCHARGE DEPENDING ON TOTAL USAGE.
PRACTICE WATER CONSERVATION DAILY TO PROTECT FLORIDA'S WATER RESOURCES.
FOR INFO VISIT WWW.COLLIERGOV.lffiT, UTILITY BILLING\CUSTOMER SERVICE.
. ,"4.
EFF~
VARNING: THIS BILL BECOMES OELINOUENT IF THE TOTAL AMOUNT DUE IS NOT PAID BY 09/27/07
,a.YMENTS RECEIVED AFTER THIS DATE SHALL BE SUBJECT TO PENALTY CHARGES AND FAilURE TO PAY BY THIS DATE ALSO SHALL l
VSJECT THE PROPERTY TO SHUTOFF OF WATER SERVICE AND AUTOMATIC LIeNS WITHOUT FURTHER NOTICE. IF YOU DISPUTE THIS
1.'Ll OR BELIEVE THAT n IS INACCURATE IN ANY WAY. YOU MUST CONTACT THE COLLIER COUNTY UTILITY BILLING AND CUSTOMER SERVICE
EPT. AT 1239} <103.2380 DURING BUSINESS HOURS (7:30 A M, - 5:30 PM.. !\,i.F) BEFORE THE DELINQUENT DATE. '_
I -
I SEE BACK OF BILL FOR AODITIONAL BILL INFORMATION
M;',KE CHECKS PAYABLE TO:
COLLIER COUNTY UTILITIES BilLING
(239) 403-2380
I''''''''''~
2,009.57
1iI
DETACH HEAE
~
SERVICE ADDRESS
14700 TAMIAMI TR N
ACCOUNT NUMBER
04046017600
DATE BILLED r'''"/1'7""",\,,,_,,,,,''';Ij~
09/12/07 09 27/071 2,009.67
TAMIAMI SQ OF NAPLES LLC
C/O CRIFASI MANAGMENT INC
STE 208
2375 TAMIAMI TRL N
NAPLES FL 34103-4439
11111111111111111111111111111
MAIL THE LOWER PORTION WITH YOUR
PAYMENT IN U.S. FUNDS TO.
COLLIER COUNTY UTILITIES BilLING
P.O. BOX 3369
NAPLES, FLORIDA 34106-3369
000000404601760000200967
Tl'.MIAMI SQ OF Nl'.PLES LLC
C/O CRIFASI ~~AGMENT INC
STE 208
2375 Tl'.MIl'YIT TRL N
NAPLES FL 34103-4439
'cY' T
lr-li {I Jj, 0*
Agenda Item NO.1 OA
FebruaDi 24/>,2009
PaWiWil)~462
-----' .' ;,:.(...
,..c "':"Vc . f-,jAF'Lt:::i. i-lORIDA 34104. (239) A03.2:
ACCOUNT NUMBER
04046017600
RATE CLASS
CO
tlf!c$
SERVICE ADDRESS
14700 TAMIAMI TR N
METER NUMBER
METER
SIZE
5/811
3"
.,
.. .,
CODE
CONSUMPTION
158
65 WA
WS
SM
IP
AMOUNT
21443635
21637090
DATE.
10/04/07
10/04/07
READING
3795
9496
DATE
11/01/07
11/01/07
READIN(!-
3953
9561
912.92
81.18
1,083.08
36.00
r.'-p;
"~,~
COLLIER COUNTY UTILITIES RATE INCREASE :
The Water, Sewer & Effluent rates will be inc~easing October 1, 2007.
The new.rates are effective with your November 2007 utility bills.
A rate increase flyer is enclosed with your utility bill also.
WARNING: THIS elLL BECOMES DELINQUENT IF THE TOTAL AMOUNT DUE IS NOT PAID BY . 12/n/07
"AYtJ.ENTS RECEIVED AFTER THIS DATE SHALL BE SUBJECT TO PENALTY CHARGES AND FAILURE TO PAY BY THIS DATE ALSO SHALL (
SUBJECT THE PROPERTY TO SHUTOFf OF WATER SERVICE AND AUTOMATIC LIENS WITHOUT FURTHER NOTICE. IF YOU DISPUTE THIS
l\LL OR BELIEVE THAT IT 15 INACCURATE IN ANY WAY, YOU MUST CONTACT THE COLLlERCDUNTY UTILITY BILUNG AND CUSTOMER SERVICE
)EPT. AT (239) ~03.2J80 DURING BUSINESS I-lOURS {7:30 A,M. . ~GO P.M.. M.FI BEFORE THE DELINQUENT DATE. '
IJJf"..lII
2,113.18
SEE BACK OF BILL FOR ADDITIONAL BILL INFORMATION
MAKE CHECKS PAYABLE TO:
COLLIER COUNTY UTILITIES BilLING
(239) 403-2380
~, DETACH HERE
~
04046017600
" _ ", . --G,ERVICE APDRl?:SS
'. i~7 od:'fi\.MtAMi. "'R N
'. . ............
i~; ~~~~ +r'I'~~~~~7~~
. 'TOTAL DUE
2,113.16 J
ACCOUNT NUMBER-.'
TAMTAMI SQ OF NAPLES LLC
C/O CRIFASI MANAGI~NT INC
STE 206
2375 TAM!AMI TRL N
NAPLES FL 34103-4439
1111111111~ 1111 I Imlll IllI,j>_ . '.,
. . '-:" '-<:::'~:.';,:,:::-:~;":~',:~,'''.;> :':'~'; .
MAIL THE lOWER PORTION WITH YOUR
PAYMENT IN U.S. FUNDS TO:
.. .,'."
'QQ,lLlER9QI.1NTY UTILITIES BilLING
'" ...., ;.p,o. BOX 3369
NAPLES,FLoRIDA 34108-3369
000000404601760000211318
r<<0
I W;(
!
~"~,, .~v ,-",,-,-,, .'--"
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24, 2009
Paae 262 of 462
DATE 81llED
12/~2/ 07
ACCOUNT NUMBER RA. TE ClASS
040460~7600 CO
SERVICE ADDRESS
/. 4"20 MERCANTILE AVE. NAPLES. FLORIDA 34104. (239) 403-2380
TAMDU~I SQ OF NAPLES LLC
C/O CRIFASI ~~~AGMENT INC
STE 20B
237S TP~IAMI TRL N
NAPLES FL 34~03-4439
~- 'F~'"
i?~ 18.. /4 .o"TJ!)
7S {.l('( ft-r
~4700 TAMIAMI TR N
METER' :. "I ,I ,"
Me-TEA NUMSER SIZE I DATE READING
21443635 5/8 II 11/01/07 3953
21637090 3" 11/01/07 9561
.,
AMOUNT
n/30/07
1~/30/07
4107
978~
~54
220 WA
WS
SM
IP
~,636.72
~B9.7S
~,602.52
36.00
....'- r:-;;: .<s'
: ,'t._L~tl, f.-~.",:
r4-. ,
- .
--=-=- -.
SFWMD PHASE II WATER RESTRICTIONS ARE IN EFFECT I
This bill may include a 15% surcharge depending on total usage.
Practice water conservation daily to protect Florida'S water resources.
For info visit vMW.colliergov.net, Utility Billing\Customer Service.
NARNING: HIlS BILL BECOMES DELINQUENT IF THE TOTAL AMOUNT DUE IS NOT PAID BY ~2/27 /07
'AV~ENTS RECEiVED AFTER THIS DATE SHALL BE SUBJECT TO PENALTY CHARGES AND FAILURE TO PAY BY THIS DATE ALSO SHALL l
:ueJECT THE PROPERTY TO SHUTOFF OF WATER SERVICE AND AUTOMATIC LIENS WITHOUT FURTHER NOTICE. IF YOU DISPUTE THIS
JILL OR BELIEVE IHAT IT IS INACCURATE IN ANY ~"IAY. YOU MUST CONTACT THE COLLIER COUNTY UTlLlT'( BIl.L1NG AND CUSTOMER SERVICE
lEPT AT (2391 <:03.2360 DUr:lING BUSINESS HOURS 17:30 A.M. }i30 P.M.. M-F) ~ THE DELlNOUENT DATE.
TOTAL DUE
3,464.99 J
SEE BACK OF BILL FOR ADDITIONAL BILL INFORMATION
040460~7600
~-. DETACH HERE
SERVice ADOF\E;.SS
14700 TAMrAM:t.TR 1"
::T; :~~E~i;:'~;;';~j'~;~ .
~
MAKE CHECKS PAYABLE TO:
COLLIER COUNTY UTILITIES BILLING
(239) 403-2380
ACCOUNT NUMBER
TOTAL. DUE
3,464.99
TAMIAMI SQ OF NAPLES LLC
C/O CRIFASI ~~~AGMENT INC
STE 20B
2375 TP~I~~I TRL N
NAPLES FL 34103-4439
11111111111I1111111111111111
MAIL THE LOWER PORTION WITH YOUR
PAYMENT IN U.S. FUNDS TO:
COLLIER COUNTY UTILITIES BILLING
P.O. BOX 3369
NAPLES, FLORIDA 34106-3369
000000404601760000346499
--..' L1LI\ "--'\..Jul'Ji 1 UIILlJiC,) ClILLij"\l\.:7
4420 MEr, ,TILE AVE' NAPLES. FLORIDA 34104 . (239) ~03.
TAMIAMI SQ OF NAPLES LLC
C/O CRIFASI MANAGMENT INC
STE 208
2375 TAMIAMI TRL N
NAPLES.FL 34103-4439
)
Agenda Item NO.1 OA
February 24, 2009
PageD!1f.J'1'lr~62
01/15/08
~-[Q)
ACCOUNT NuMBER
04046017600
,"AT; Ci...ASS
CO
/:5 a. ce fi z::-
SERVICE ADDP.ESS
14700 TAMIAMI TR N
21443635
21637090
DATE
11/30/07
11/30/07
READING
4107
9781
DATE
01/04/08
01/04/08
AEADING
4286
10383
CONSUMPTION
CODE i At.AO'JI.n
;
METER NUMBER
METER
SIZE
5/8"
3"
. .
'. .
.. _r
179
602 WA
WS
SM
IP
4,203.31
574.74
3,002.60
36.00
SFWMD PHASE II WATER RESTRICTIONS ARE IN EFFECT !
This bill may include a 15% surcharge depending on total usage.
Practice water conservation daily to protect Florida's water resources.
For info visit www.colliergov.net. Utility Billing\Customer Service.
WARNING: THIS BILL BECOMES DELlNOUENT IF THE TOTAL AMOUNT DUE IS NOT PAID BY 01/30/08
PAYMENTS RECEIVED AFTER THIS DATE SHALL BE SUBJECT TO PENALTY CHARGES AND FAILURE TO PAY BY THIS DATE ALSO SHALL
SUBJECT THE PROPERTY TO SHUTOFF OF WATER SERVICE AND AUTOMATIC LIENS WITHOUT FURTHER NOTICE. IF YOU DISPUTE THIS
BILL OR BElIEVE THAT IT IS INACCURATE IN ANY WAY, YOU MUST CONTACT THE COLLIER COUNTY UTILITY BILLING AND CUSTOMER SERVICE
DEPT. AT [239) 403.2380 DURING BUSINESS HOURS (7:30 A.M.. 5:30 P.M.. M-F) BEFORE THE DELINQUENT DATE. .--.. ;--.....,
> ~,::TOTALDUe'-, "r~
7,816.65
r
MAKE CHECKS PAVABlE TO:
COLLIER COUNTY UTILITIES BilLING
(239) 403-2380
~
<>:'~'~.i /0
DETA~:~.('_"~
SEE BACK OF BILL FOR ADDITIONAL BILL INFORMATION
04046017600
SERVICE ADDRESS
14700 TAMIAMI TR N
DATE BILLED r'O'""''''''.''''''''
01/15/08 01/30/081
TOTAL DUE'" , ...;
ACCOUNT NUMBER
7,816.651
TAMIAMI SQ OF NAPLES LLC
c/O CRIFASI MANAGMENT INC
STE 208
2375 TAMIAMI TRL N
NAPLES FL 34103-4439
11111111111111111111111111111
MAIL THE lOWER PORTION WITH YOUR
PAYMENT IN U.S. FUNDS TO:
COLLIER COUNTY UTILITIES BilLING
P.O. BOX 3369
NAPLES, FLORIDA 34106.3369
000000404601760000781665
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24, 2009
Page 264 of 462
ATTACHMENTS CONTENTS
Attachment
Description
A
Appendix H Water and Sewer Facilities Proposed Alternate Fee
Calculation Methodology
B PRMG - Relative items Collier County Water and Wastewater Impact
Fee Study .
C-1 County Ordinance No. 2007-53
C-2 Article VI. Water-Sewer District Unifonn Billing, Operating and
Regulatory Standards
D Site Photos
E Pre-Application Meeting Follow-up
F Excerpts from Svstem Deve/ooment Charqes for Water, Wastewater,
and Storm water Facilities by Arthur C. Nelson
G Excerpts from AWWA Princio/es of Water Rates, Fees. and Charqes
H Pre-Application Meeting with Tamiami Square and Collier County
Utilities
Gerald C. Hartman, PE, ASA Resume
Agenda Item NO.1 OA
February 24, 2009
Page 265 of 462
Attachment A
Appendix H Water and Sewer
Facilities Proposed Alternate Fee
Calculation Methodology
Agenda Item No. 10A.
February 24, 2009
Page 266 of 462
i_ (
Appendix H
Water and Sewer Facilities
Proposed Alternative Fee Calculation Methodology
Agenda Item NO.1 OA
February 24, 2009
Page 267 of 462
i
(
Appendix H
Alternative Fee Calculation Methodology
Water and Sewer Impact Fee
this section of the appendix presents a proposed methodology for conducting an Alternative
Fee Calculation for Water and Sewer Impact Fees. It contains the requirements, procedures
and methodology for preparation, performance, and submission of an Altemative Fee
Calculation Study.
1. Pre-aoplication Meetinq - Before beginning the A1temative Fee Calculation Study, the
applicant or applicant's representative shall arrange and attend a pre-application
meeting jointly with the Impact Fee Coordinator' and the Public Utilities Department
Administrator to discuss the requirements. procedures, and methodology of the
Alternative Fee Calculation.
Subsequent to the pre-application meeting, the applicant shall submit three copies ofthe
proposed approach to the study to the Collier County Public Utilities Department
Administrator. County staff has five (5) working days to respond in writing to the
proposed approach. If County Staff concurs with the proposed approach, the applicant
will be notified to proceed with the study. If County staff disagrees with the proposed
approach, County staff will identify the problem areas for the applicant. The applicant
must receive approval from County staff before proceeding with the study.
2. Methodoloqy - The Altemative Fee Calculation shall follow the prescribed methodologies
and formats of the Water and Sewer Impact Fee Study, prepared by Agnoli, Barber, and
Brundage, Inc. (1997), as amended, the Consolidated Impact Fee Ordinance, and the
Administrative Procedures Manual. The results of the Altemative Fee Calculation shall
be submitted to both the Impact Fee Coordinator and Public Utilities Department. The
Altemative Water andlor Sewer Systems Impact Fee calculations shall be based on
data, information, or assumptions included in the Water and Sewer Impact Fee Study
(identified above) and as agreed upon at the Pre-application Meeting.
3. Guidelines - The applicant will use the information derived from the study to calculate an
alternative impact fee. The results of the Alternative Fee Calculation study shall be
submitted to both the Impact Fee Coordinator and the Public Utilities Department.
4. SubmittinQ the Studv Report - The applicant shall submit five (5) copies of the study
report to the Collier County Public Utilities Department Administrator. The study must
be certified by a Professional Engineer who is registered in the State of Florida.
Tindale-Oliver and Associafes, Inc.
June 1,2001
H-1
Collier County Consolidated Impact Fee
Administrative Procedures Manual
,..
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24, 2009
Page 268 of 462
(
5. Sufficiency Determination - The Impact Fee Coordinator and the Public Utilities
Department Administrator will review the Alternative Fee Calculation for sufficiency
methodology. technical. accuracy, and findings and will make recommendations
conceming the amount of the impact fee to the Impact Fee Coordinator.
6. Determination of Fee - The Public Utilities Department Administrator and the Impact Fee
Coordinator will make the final determination ofthe impact fee amount.
('
G:\07312\docslmanua/\appendiceslapndxh. doc
Tindale-Oliver and Associates, Inc.
June 1, 2001
H-2
Collier County Consolidated Impact Fee
Administrative Procedures Manual
Agenda Item No.1 OA
February 24, 2009
Page 269 of 462
Attachment B
PRMG - Relative Items Collier County
Water and Wastewater Impact Fee
Study
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24, 2009
Page 270 of 462
II
Public Resources Management Group, Inc.
Utility. Rate. Financial and Management Consultants
May 4, 2006
PRMG #1125-12
Board of County Commissioners of
Collier County
3301 Tamiami Trail East
Naples, FL 34112
Subject:
Water and Wastewater Impact Fee Study
Ladies and Gentlemen:
We have completed our update of the Water and Wastewater Impact Fee Study for the Collier
County (the "County") Water-Sewer District's (the "District") water and wastewater system (the
"System"), and have summarized the results of our analyses, assumptions, and conclusions in
this letter report, which is submitted for your consideration. The purpose of our analysis was to
review the existing impact fees and make recommendations as to the level of charges that should
reasonably be in effect consistent with the capital expenditure requirements as identified in the
District's 2005 Water and Wastewater Master Plan Updates (the "2005 Master Plan Updates").
Based on the findings presented in the District's Master Plan Updates, Public Resources
Management Group, Inc. (pRMG) is recommending that the water system impact fee be
increased from $2,760 to $3,415 per Equivalent Residential Connection (ERC). For the
wastewater system, we are recommending an increase in the impact fee from $3,125 to $3,515
per ERC. The combined water and wastewater fee with the proposed rate adjustments would be
$6,930, an increase of $1,045 or 17.8% over the existing combined fee of $5,885. The rate
schedule for the proposed impact fees is shown on Table ES-l following this letter.
At the outset of the study, it was determined that the proposed impact fees should meet a number
of goals and objectives. These goals and objectives dealt primarily with criteria related to fee
sufficiency and level. Specifically, tbe major objectives considered in this study included:
. Existing customers, to the extent practical, should not finance or be impacted by the cost of
financing and constructing water and wastewater infrastructure to serve new growth;
. The impact fees should be sufficient to fund the pro rata cost of the projected capital
requirements associated with providing water and wastewater service to new development;
. To the extent practical, the impact fees should not be used to fund deficiencies in the capital
needs of the water and wastewater utility systems (i.e., no expenditures for renewal and
replacement or upgrade of facilities serving existing customers);
. The impact fees should be based upon reasonable level of service standards that meet the
needs of the District, should be indicative of the criteria used for long-term infrastructure
planning, and should be consistent with industry standards;
Agenda Item NO.1 OA
February 24, 2009
Page 271 of 462
Board of County Commissioners of
Collier County
May 4, 2006
Page 2
. The proposed impact fees should be based on cost of service principles;
. The proposed impact fees should take into consideration the comparable fees charged by
neighboring utility systems; and
. New development, to the extent practical, should fund the cost of financing the construction
of System infrastructure specifically allocated to expansion; the proposed carrying charge
provides a basis of recovering such costs and further shifts the burden of expansion-related
capital to new growth.
The proposed water and wastewater impact fees presented in this report have been structured to
meet these objectives. The impact fees we calculated during the course of our analyses were
based on the recovery of capital-related costs anticipated to be incurred by the District to expand
water and wastewater service to meet the needs of anticipated population growth within the
utility service area. As previously mentioned, the capital-related costs were identified in the
2005 Master Plan Updates prepared by the District's Consulting Engineers that documented the
capital improvement plan for the fiscal year period of 2006 to 2015, which is the capital needs
period reflected in the Impact Fee Report.
In addition to the proposed impact fees for the System, PRMG is recommending the imposition
of a "carrying charge" to recover certain costs associated with providing capacity to new
development. The proposed carrying charges (Allowance for Funds Prudently Invested or
"AFPI Fees") reflect the cost of financing the expansion-related infrastructure until the impact
fees are received by the District and have been structured to meet the service I rate objectives
outlined above. A summary of the proposed AFPI Fees is shown on Table ES-2 at the end of
this Jetter.
Based on the information provided by the District and prepared by its Consulting Engineers and
the assumptions and considerations outlined in this report, which should be read in its entirety,
PRMG considers the proposed Impact Fees to be cost-based, reasonable, and representative of
the identified capital expenditure needs of the District as identified in the Master Plan Updates.
Additionally, the proposed AFPI fees are considered by PRMG to be reasonable and comparable
with similar charges imposed by other Florida utilities. Moreover, such fees provide a basis for
the recovery of the cost of capital associated with constructing expansion-related infrastructure.
1125.12\Letter
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24, 2009
Page 272 of 462
Board of County Commissioners of
Collier County
May 4, 2006
Page 3
We appreciate the opportunity to be of service to the County and would like to thank the
County's staff for their assistance and cooperation during the course of this study.
Respectfully submitted,
Public Resources Management Group, Inc.
Robert 1. Ori
President
Bryan A. Mantz
Senior Consultant
1125-12\Letter
N
~
o
~
".
~
.
:;;
.
'"
~
ij;
';: ~
.i II
"'"
- -
. .
. .
. ..
'2!
~ b
~Oi
t'~
~ ;
8~
- .
~ "
Q~
u .
~
.
,
'iI
~
.
00
~
I-
" iil
i1: ~ 0 8 ~ 8
~ ~ 0
:~ ~ ~ ~. ~ ~ ,,;
Ii ~ ~ ~ M ~ ~
ri ;0 '" Ii ri
,. ~ w w
l-
ll! u
i1:
I- 11
" ~
::: ! " I I I !
""' ~ ll! ~
-~ ..
~ ~
"'
..
.... , u~ u~
" ~~ iil ~~
i1: w ~. ~ 8 8 w~.
1!illl ~ z::l ~ ~ ~ ,,; z::l
:; o E ~ ~. :; gs
ffi"- ri o 0
w ~ .~ ;0 Ii Ii ~.E;
\.. if
~ ;ii:i .... <.Ii
u ~~
~
I-
U Ii ~ n
::: ~ i I I
Cl 1l~ ! ~
w ..
a: ~ Cl ~
w ~ W
..J f- ..J a:
<( w :$ w
i= :;; f- lu
z ::; -f Z -f
w h -;: w :;; 1~ -;:
Cl ..J H s Cl a: s
u; <( ~ u; w '~ ,;,
<!:8 <!: ::l ~
ll! ::J ~ ~ W f- w " ~
Cl ~ , a: '" ~ 0 d ~
,
:; "I . ~ u~ .
is ". ~ ffi~ ~
;!: "'
w
~ ~ u
u 0 u u z
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
" ~ w ~ w w w ~
~ ~ ~ ffi ~
w w w 0
"' . ~ .. .. . ~
" w
..
"''' ~g
~o " u " " " u
,,-I=: z ~ 15;'j z z z ffi
o;'j ~ w ~ ~ ~
ffi ~ ~ ~ ~ ffi
"10 w '20 w w w
"j . . ...... .. .. . ..
~" "....
",,,
..
i:? > .. ~
~ >
"- 0 ~i-
d WO d
!!l. g:~ "'~ !!l. ~ 8 o w
~~ 8 w " 15
l'j w' l'j '" ..
~~ ",' ~ 0 ",wO
::: g~ i1: 0 g ~ o~~
~
'" f-w .. 0 ~ 15 DOC:
D~ Ow ~. O~<
'" > ~~ " ~ :}~tQ
~ 0 ~
z [
:; 0 :;
~
~
n
.
.!l
~
-
.
;
~
~
..
.
.
-
.
;
~
~
~
.
.
.:;
..
.
.
.3
..
w
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24, 2009
Page 2730f 462
N
'a
N
if
..
.
~
.
~
U
'"
.
~
.
.
..
.. -0
-0" .
.: v.:
:; II ~
"..
U _
~ [ '"
U
~ ':;:.!1 .
..
" " .
U . - "
:;; ~ ~ .
~ b" ~
. .
g~ ~
.
u~ .
u ~ "
.. ..
" u
. . ~
u.. ~
~ ~
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24, 2009
Page 274 of 462
'" "
~ ~ " ;!: ~ ;; i3:
~ ~ :! '" ,,; i1i
~ of .;
,.: re ~
~ '" ~ "!. ~
;; '" ;; ~ N
iil .. ..
1 ~
'" ;;
0 -
~ ,.;
..
if ~ "
"- N '" "-
"- .. .. ~ ::: '" ...
"
~ .. ~ .. " .; ",' ~
~ .. ..: ,;
::i ..' ~ N ~ ~
.. '" .. .. ;l; ~'
.... ..
u
0':
1:i
~ ~ ~ i I I i i I
III
'"
" ! ~
~ -
~
~ a ~ i i t i I
.. "
~ " :; .. >J "
.. .. "
'" ~ ... ", ~ ~ ~'
~ " ...
'" ;: ..: ~ 1
..' ::: ..
..J .. .. ;; ;; N
~ iil ..
'" i ~
z 0 - ;,
"' ~ '"
c ..
;;; if "- N '" ~ ~
"' "- .. ... '" '"
~ <0 '"
" '" ~ .. '" .. r!
z III ~ ~ .. ..: I::i ..: ci
.... ,; .. " ...
~ .. .. ~ ~ " ~'
0 .. .. .. ..
z .... ..
" I
0':
1:i
~ I i I I i I I
~ i
" I ~
~ c-
'"
~
~ I ~ I ~ I I I
~~ .. .. '" "
io ~ '" '" .. ;i ~ ...: "
'" '" ..
lU ~ . ~ '"
" 'i~
~ ~<t
U .5 ~
ili P ~ <0 ~ ~ '" .. :g
Q~ 0 ,.: N on on '" ~ ...
!1
~~....
""~ ~
"''' ::l '" ~ '" '" .. '" ..
~o::s '"
os
~[!jg
'"
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24, 2009
Page 275 of 462
Table ESp2
Collier County Water~Sewer District
Water and W utewater Impact Fee Study
ProDosed Allowance for Funds Prudentlv Invested (AFPn Schedule
AFPI Schedule Per ERe ~ Water Svstem (*
Payment Calendar Year
Month 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
January $0.00 $58.69 $234.76 $410.84 $586.91 $762.98 $939.05
February 0.00 73.36 249.44 425.51 601.58 777.65 953.72
Msreh 0.00 88.04 264.11 440.18 616.25 792.33 968.40
April 0.00 102.71 278.78 454.85 630.93 807.00 983.07
May 0.00 117.38 293.45 469.53 645.60 821.67 997.74
June 0.00 132,05 308.13 484.20 660.27 836.34 1,012.42
July 0.00 146.73 322.80 498.87 674.94 851.02 1,027.09
A"gust 0,00 161.40 337.47 513.54 689.62 865.69 1,041.76
September 0,00 176.07 352.14 528.22 704.29 880.36 1,056.43
October 14.67 190.74 366.82 542.89 718.96 895.03 1,056.43
November 29.35 205.42 381.49 557.56 733.63 909.71 1,056.43
December 44.02 220.09 396.16 572.23 748.31 924.38 1,056.43
AFPI Scbedule Per ERe - Wastewater Svstem ('
Paymen1 Calendar Year
Month 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
January $0.00 $38.24 $152.94 $267.65 $382.36 $497.06 $611.77
February 0.00 47.79 162.50 277.21 391.92 506.62 621.33
March 0.00 57.35 172.06 286.77 401.47 516.18 630.89
April 0.00 66.91 181.62 296.33 411.03 525.74 640.45
May 0.00 76.47 191.l8 305.89 420.59 535.30 650.01
Juno 0.00 86.03 200.74 315.44 430.15 544.86 659.57
July 0,00 95.59 2lO.30 325.00 439.71 554.42 669.12
August 0.00 105.15 219.86 334.56 449.27 563.98 678.68
September 0.00 114.71 229.41 344.12 458.83 573.53 688.24
October 9.56 124.27 238.97 353.68 468.39 583.09 688.24
November 19,12 133.82 248.53 363.24 477.95 592.65 688.24
December 28.68 143.38 258,09 372.80 487.50 602.21 688.24
("') Assumes that the AFPI fee is initiated on October 1,2006.
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24, 2009
Page 276 of 462
COLLIER COUNTY WATER-SEWER DISTRICT
WATER AND WASTEWATER IMPACT FEE STUDY
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Title
Page No.
Letter of Transmittal
Table of Contents................................,........................................................................................... ...... i
List of Tables......... ..........,..............,..,...,.............................................................................................. ii
List of Figures ............................,.......................................... .....................................,......,........ .......... ii
List of Appendices .................................... .......,.................................................................................. iii
Introduction............................... ..:........................................................................................... ............. 1
Purpose of Water and Wastewater Impact Fees................................................................................... I
Existing Impact Fees............................................................................................................................ 3
Impact Fee Methodology ,...., ..................... .......... .......,................ ........................................................4
Level of Service Requirements ...... ..............,............ ..,......................... ..... ....... ................................... 5
Existing Plant in Service, .......... .............. ........... .........,.......,..... .... ............ ..... ......................................6
Additional Capital Investment .............,...................................,........................................................... 9
Design of Water Impact Fee...............................................................................................................13
Design of Wastewater Impact Fee .....................................................................................................16
Impact Fee Comparisons .... ........ ............ ...................................................... ......................................19
Sufficiency of Impact Fees.................................................................................,...................,........... 20
Allowance for Funds Prudently Invested (AFPI) Fee ........................................................................21
Conclusions and Recommendations........................................... ..................,........ ..........,... ............ ...25
Acknowledgements ................ .................... ......................................... ........................... ........... .........28
K:\DM\112S-12IReportslReport
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24, 2009
Page 277 of 462
The current study employed the same methodology, and the impact fees were calculated on an ERC
basis. The capital-related costs were identified in the 2005 Master Plan Update reports prepared by
the County's Consulting Engineers, which documented the capital improvement plan for Fiscal
Years 2006 through 2015 (the "CIP Planning Period") which was relied upon in the preparation of
this report.
Level of Service Requirements
In the evaluation of the capital facility needs for providing water and wastewater utility services, it
is critical that a level of service (LOS) standard be developed. Pursuant to Chapter 9J-5, Florida
Administrative Code, the "level of service" means an indicator of the extent or degrees of service
provided by, or proposed to be provided by a facility, based on and related to the operational
characteristics of the facility. Level of service shall indicate the capacity per unit of demand for
each public facility or service. Essentially, the level of service standards are established in order to
ensure that adequate facility capacity will be provided for future development and for purposes or
issuing development orders or permits, pursuant to Section 163.3202(2)(g) of the Florida Statutes.
As further stated in the Administrative Code, each local government shall establish a LOS standard
for each public facility located within the boundary for which such local government has authority
to issue development orders or permits. Such LOS standards are set for each individual facility or
facility type or class and not on a system wide basis.
For water and wastewater service, the level of service that is commonly used in the industry is the
amount of capacity (service) allocable to an ERC expressed as the amount of usage (gallons)
allocated on an average daily basis. This allocation of capacity would generally represent the
amount of capacity allowable to an ERC, whether or not such capacity is actually used (commonly
referred to as "readiness to serve"). As previously mentioned, an ERC - sometimes known as an
Equivalent Residential Unit (ERU) - is representative of the average capacity required to service a
typical individually-metered or single-family residential account. This class of users represents the
largest amount of customers served by a public utility such as the District and generally the lowest
level of usage requirements for a specifically metered account.
For the purposes of calculating water and wastewater system Impact Fees, PRMG utilized LOS
standards of 350 gallons per day (gpd) expressed on an average annual daily flow basis per water
ERC, The wastewater LO';; standard used in the study was 250 gpd expressed on an average annual
daily flow basis per wastewater ERC. These LOS standards were reviewed in previous studies for
the District and discussed with District staff and its Consulting Engineers. In the development of
the level of service standards the following reference sources were considered:
. 2005 Water and Wastewater Master Plan Updates prepared by the District's Consulting
Engineers, Greeley and Hansen LLC;
. Collier County Growth Management Plan adopted on October 28, 1997;
. Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) general design standards;
. Florida Public Service Commission (FPSC) capacity relationships for private utilities; and
. Actual water production and wastewater flow data reported by the District over the past several
years.
5
Agenda Item No. 10A
. February 24, 2009
Page 278 of 462
As a result, the following level of service standards were assumed for impact fee determination
purposes:
Water System
Wastewater System
Level of Service
350 gpd per ERC
250 gpd per ERC
These level of service standards have been utilized in previous impact fee studies performed on
behalf of the District, and are consistent with those utilized by other utilities throughout the State of
Florida.
Existing Plant in Service
In the determination of the Impact Fee associated with the servicing of future customers, any excess
capacity of the existing utility system available to serve such growth was considered. Since this
capacity is available to serve the near-term incremental growth of the utility system, it would be
appropriate to evaluate the capacity availability of such facilities. In order to evaluate the
availability of the existing utility plant-in-service to meet or provide for near-term future capacity
needs, it was necessary to functionalize the plant by specific plant requirement. The
"functionalization" of the existing plant is necessary to: i) identify those assets which should be
included in the determination of the capital facilities fees; and Ii) match existing plant type to the
capital improvements to meet future service needs.
The functional cost categories are based on the purpose of the assets and the service that such assets
served. The following is a summary of the functional cost categories for the utility plant-in-service
identified in this report.
Water Service
Supply
Treatment
Transmission
Distribution
Fire Hydrants
Meters and Services
Fuuctional Plant Categories
Wastewater Service
Treatment
EffluentIReclairn ed
Transmission
Collection
Other Plant
General Plant
It was necessary to functionalize the utility plant into these cost categories so that a proper fee could
be developed. Generally, the costs of on-site facilities which serve a specific development or
customer such as water distribution and wastewater collection lines, meters and services, and fire
hydrants are usually: i) donated by a developer as part of the City's utility extension program (a
contribution of the plant); ii) recovered from the individual properties through an assessment
program based on those properties which receive special benefit from such facilities or from the
application of a main line extension fee to recover the specific cost of such facilities; or iii) funded
from the customer directly (e.g., by a "front-foot" charge where the on-site lines were initially
financed by the utility and then paid by the customer or an installation charge to recover the cost of
a new service line and/or the potable water meter).
6
l\1aior Proiect Cas ts in CIP That Primarilv Benefit Exis tin!! Customers
(Flmd412 and Fund 414 Projects)
Water Treatment Proiects
NCRWTP - New Hawthorne (Zone I) Wellfield (Well Nos.:
101,102,114,115,116,109,117,118,] ]9,120)
NCRWTP RO Wellfield Reliability (North Hawthorn Wells ]8-20)
Hawthorn Future Reliability Wells (3 wells by 2012, 3 wells by 2015, 3 wells
by 2018, 3 wells by 2021,3 wells by 2024)
South Hawthorn Reliability/Replacernent Wells (Well Nos.: 39S-42S)
NCRWTP Emergency Gonerator Switchgear Upgrades
Tamiaml Well Replacement Program (Well Nos.: 38-42)
Lime Softening Upgrade at SCRWTP
SCRWTP One RO Reliability Well
Water Transmission Pro;ects
Replace Water Main US 41 from Rattlesnake Hammock Road to Barefoot
Williams Road
Wastewater Treatment Proiects
IQ Water ASR
NCWRF Bleach System
Wastewater Transmission Proiects
Future Pump/Lift Station Rehab
Design of Water Impact Fee
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24, 2009
Page 279 of 462
Project Cost
$14,300,000
12,547,617
12,069,800
8,500,000
5,343,514
5,175,000
3,885,915
2,600,000
3,900,000
11,200,000
3,000,000
5,100,000
As shown on Table 7, the calculated impact fee for the water system is $3,415 per ERC. This
represents an increase in the fee of $655 or 23.7% higher than the current fee of $2,760 per ERC,
The reason for this increase is: i) an increase in the number of growth-driven (Fund 411) projects
than what was shown in the 2003 Master Plan Update which was relied upon to develop the
previously calculated impact fees; and ii) a higher cost per illlit of capacity being added than what
was calculated in the last impact fee study. For example and with respect to the inflationary impact
on tile cost of new construction, over the past five years, the Construction Cost Index published by
Engineering News-Record (ENR), which measures the inflation in the prices of construction labor
and materials, increased by approximately 2 I % (this would not take into account any effects of
regulatory process changes associated with treatment standards),
During the impact fee analysis, several assumptions were utilized or incorporated. The major
assumptions utilized in the design of the calculated impact fees are:
1. The existing water supply and treatment facilities have an estimated available capacity
margin to serve new growth of approximately 22.5 I % of the average daily capacity of tlle
facilities based on: i) the firm design capacity of the existing water treatment plant facilities;
ii) actual maximum month daily demand to annual average daily demand relationships
recently experienced by the water system, including a review of the actual demand
13
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24, 2009
Page 280 of 462
requirements for the ten fiscal year period ended 2005; and iii) the capacity factors reflected
in the 2005 Master Plan Updates. The analysis is included on Table I herein.
2. The capital improvement program as identified in the County's 2005 Master Plan Updates
was reviewed and the capital costs were apportioned: i) by functional category; and ii) to
existing and future users in the detennination of the water impact fee. Those facilities that
were considered to be entirely allocable to growth were included in the fee determination at
full cost (i.e., 100% of the total cost). For facilities that would provide an improvement to
existing utility plant assets that had available capacity to service future growth, a portion of
the impact fee was reflected in the fee determination since such new growth will benefit
from such improvements. For capital expenditures which were solely for the replacement of
existing assets which would directly benefit existing customers or were considered as an on-
site cost (provide service to a local area such as a development which would normally be
constructed and subsequently contributed to the District System by a developer), such
amounts were not reflected as an appropriate cost to be recovered from the application of the
water impact fees. A summary of the capital costs recognized in the impact fee analysis is
shown on Table 4 and as follows (differences due to rounding):
Expansion Ilmpact Fee
Eligible Costs
Recognized in CLlITe1lt
Study
Project Costs ($ Millions) - FY 2006 to FY 2015
Expansion I Impact Fl::e
Eligible Costs to Be
Recognized in Future
Study (e.g., Prome
Bene1it. Beyond Ten-
Year Window)
Total
Project
Costs
Total Expansion I
Impact Fee Eli~1e
Costs (Current and
Future Studies)
Existing
Water
Treatment
Transmissbn
Total
$89.8
14.2
S104.0
$245.9
46.2
$292.0
$211.6
68.2
$279.8
$547.2
128.6
$675.8
$457.4
114.4
$571.8
3. For the capital improvements identified as transmission system upgrades which would
benefit both existing and future users, the total cost of such improvements has been
recognized in the analysis. Since the transmission function capacity is difficult to ascertain
except at "build-out" conditions, the total existing, (expressed at original cost and not on a
replacement or current cost basis) and anticipated capital costs to serve the total capacity of
the water system through 2015 was recognized, thus calculating a new users per ERC "buy-
in" cost for this functional component of the system. Therefore, the cost of certain capital
expenditures shown on Table 4 that was fully recognized in the fee determination will not be
fully recovered by growth since the "unit cost" of this function includes existing ERCs.
4, With respect to those capital projects which have been allocated to existing users that may
include a capacity increment associated with serving new development, an adjustment to the
reported plant-in-service balances has been made in order to not double-count plant-in-
service (recognized a retirement of plant associated with the addition of the new facilities as
identified in the 2005 Master Plan Update), Since a match of the facility upgrade to the
existing plant-in-service balances as reported on the County's Fixed Asset Records was not
possible, the adjustment was based on: i) an average in-service date based on the weighted
in-service date of all functional assets in service as reported on the Fixed Asset Records; and
14
Agenda Item NO.1 OA
February 24, 2009
Page 281 of 462
ii) the estimated replacement cost of the asset being placed in service as identified in the
2005 Master Plan Update, based on an analysis of historical and projected inflation as
measured by the Construction Cost Index as measured by Ene:ineerine: News-Record. It was
considered that the use of the replacement cost of the assets, which would generally include
an upgrade to the facilities and probably result in a higher cost due to such factors as
restoration expenses, would be conservative in the evaluation of the capital costs recognized
in the determination of the fee. It was assumed that approximately $32,163,106 of existing
water system assets would be retired as a result of the implementation of the County's
identified capital improvement program.
5. No capital facility expansion costs associated with distribution facilities have been included
in the calculation of the water impact fees since the County generally requires the developer
to contribute such facilities or the County has adopted a separate fee (e.g., water'meter
installation fee) on behalf of the District to recover the cost of such capital additions
(contribution in aid of construction).
6. The level of service for a water ERC was assumed to be 350 gallons per day (gpd) expressed
on an average daily flow basis. This level of service represents no change from the previous
impact fee study. The level of service was predicated on the level of service requirements as
contained in the County's Growth Management Plan (potable water sub-element);
discussions with the County's Consulting Engineers regarding capacity planning statistics as
reflected in the 2005 Master Plan Update; Florida Department of Environmental Protection
(FDEP) general design standards for water use analysis; Florida Public Service Commission
(FPSC) capacity relationships for private utilities (Florida Administrative Code Rule 25-
30,020); and discussions with the District.
7, No grant funds have been or are expected to be received by the District relative to the
funding of the water capital improvement program, and none of the existing water treatment
and transmission assets were assumed to have been funded from grants.
8. Based on discussions with the County and as part of the review of the monthly rates for
water service (a separate study of the District), it was determined that the lowest overall cost
to the existing ratepayer (in tenns of rates to be charged and financial health of the District
System) was to use impact fees first for capital project funding as opposed to the payment of
debt service. Because of this benefit and the need to recover the full capital cost assigned to
growth, no rate adjustment was reflected in the determination of the fee. All impact fee
funds remain in the system and the long-term financing costs are mitigated by using the fees
for capital project fmancing. Although a new rate payer will potentially pay debt service on
expansion-related financing, the overall cost to the ratepayer is less by not applying impact
fees to current year debt and the additional customers to the system actually tend to maintain
or reduce the debt service component built into the rates for service. Thus there appears to
be no justification to continue to have a debt service adjustment in the determination of the
impact fees.
The water system impact fee was calculated utilizing estimated capital costs for the water
supply/treatment/transmission system, ERC service requirements, and current fixed asset and plant
capacity data available to PRMG regarding the water system. By designing the water system
impact fee to recover costs on a prospective basis, an attempt is made to design a charge that will
15
Agenda Item NO.1 OA
February 24,2009
Page 282 of 462
provide funds on a reasonable basis in order to meet the future needs of the water system. It should
be noted that in the event the construction costs, capacity requirements, or utility service area
materially change from what is reflected on Table 7, the water impact fee might need to be adjusted
accordingly.
As shown on Table 7, the calculated water impact fee is $3,685 per ERC, which is $925 or 33.5%
higher than the existing water impact fee of $2,760 per ERC. This fee would be applied to a
standard individually-metered residential customer. Based on the capital facilities associated with
the detem1ination of the fee, the functional breakdown of the components of the rate is as follows:.
Water SupplyfTreatment
Water Transmission
Rounded
Cost Per ERC
$2,865
550
Total Proposed Water Impact Fee
,Ulli.
Design of Wastewater Impact Fee
As shown on Table 8, the calculated impact fee for the wastewater system is $3,515 per ERC. This
represents an increase in the fee of $390 or 12.5% above the current fee of $3,125 per ERC. The
reason for this increase is a rise in the cost per unit of additional capacity from the costs assumed in
the previous impact fee study. As previously mentioned, with respect to the inflationary impact on
the cost of new construction, over the past five years, the Construction Cost Index published by
Engineering News-Record. (ENR), which measures the inflation in the prices of construction labor
and materials, increased by approximately 21 % (this would not take into account any effects of
regulatory process changes associated with wastewater treatment standards).
In the development of the proposed wastewater impact fees, several assumptions were utilized or
incorporated in the analysis. The major assumptions utilized in the design of the proposed
wastewater impact fees are:
1. The existing wastewater treatment and effluent disposal facilities have an estimated
available capacity margin to serve new growth of approximately 47.08% of the average
daily capacity of the facilities based or: i) the finn design capacity of the existing
wastewater treatment plant facilities; i1) actual maximum month average daily flow to
annual average daily flow relationships recently experienced by the wastewater system,
including a review of the actual flow requirements for the ten fiscal year period ended 2005;
and iii) the capacity factors reflected in the 2005 Master Plan Update. The analysis is
included on Table 2 herein.
2. Based on discussions with the County, the cost of treatment and effluent disposal includes
the direct system-related cost of expanding the reclaimed water system. As shown on Table
6, the following capital costs were reflected in the analysis:
(Remainder of Page Left Blank Intentionally)
16
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24, 2009
Page 283 of 462
Capital Expenditures
Reflected in Analysis
Expansion-Related Facilities (New and
Future)
$21,113,958
Facilities Allocated to Existing Capacity
17.280.000
Total Reclaimed Water Capital
Expenditures Recognized
~;t8 393 958
3. The capital improvement program as identified in the County's 2005 Master Plan Update
was reviewed and the capital costs were apportioned: i) by functional category and ii) to
existing and future users in the detennination of the wastewater impact fee, Those facilities
that were considered to be entirely allocable to growth were included in the fee
determination at full cost (Le., 100% of the total cost). For facilities that would provide an
improvement to existing utility plant assets that had available capacity to service future
growth, a portion of the capacity fee was reflected in the fee determination since such new
growth will benefit from such improvements. For capital expenditures which were solely
for the replacement of existing assets which would directly benefit existing customers or
were considered as an on-site cost (provide service to a local area such as a development
which would normally be constructed and subsequently contributed to the District System
by a developer), such amounts were not reflected as an appropriate cost to be recovered
from the application of the wastewater impact fees. A summary of the capital costs
recognized in the wastewater impact fee analysis is shown on Table 6 and as follows:
Project Costs ($ Millions). FY 2006 to FY 2015
Expansion / Impact Fee
Eligible Costs to Be
Expansion I Impact Fee Recognized in Future Total Expansion I Impact
Eligible Costs Study (e.g., Provide Fee Eligible Costs
Recognized in Current BenefitBeyond"Ten-Year Total Project (Current and Future
Existing Study Window) Costs Studies)
Wastewater
Treatment $20.9 $270.7 $8.9 $300.5 $279.6
Transmission 10.5 25.5 19.3 55.2 44.7
Reclaimed Water 17.3 11.3 9.8 38.4 21.1
Total $48.7 $307.5 $37.9 $394.1 $345.4
4. For the capital improvements identified as transmission system upgrades which would
benefit both existing and future users, the total cost of such improvements has been
recognized in the analysis, Since the transmission function capacity is difficult to ascertain
except at "build-out" conditions, the total existing (expressed at original cost and not on a
replacement or current cost basis) and anticipated capital costs to serve the total capacity of
the wastewater system through 2015 was recognized, thus calculating a new users per ERC
"buy-in" cost for this functional component of the system. Therefore, the cost of certain
capital expenditures shown on Table 6 that was fully recognized in the fee determination
will not be fully recovered by growth since the "unit cost" oftms function includes existing
ERCs.
5. With respect to those capital projects which have been allocated to existing users which may
include a capacity increment associated with serving new development, an adjustment to the
17
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24, 2009
Page 284 of 462
reported plant-in-service balances has been made in order to not double-count plant-in-
service (recognized a retirement of plant associated with the addition of the new facilities as
identified in the 2005 Master Plan Update). Since a match of the facility upgrade to the
existing plant-in-service balances as reported on the District's Fixed Asset Records was not
possible, the adjustment was based on: i) an average in-service date based on the weighted
in-service date of all functional assets in service as reported on the Fixed Asset Records; and
ii) the estimated replacement cost of the asset being placed in service as identified in the
2005 Master Plan Update, based on an analysis of historical and projected inflation as
measured by the Construction Cost Index as measured by Engineering News-Record. It was
considered that the use of the replacement cost of the assets, which would generally include
an upgrade to the facilities and probably result in a higher cost due to such factors as
restoration expenses, would be conservative in the evaluation of the capital costs recognized
in the determination of the fee. It was assumed that approximately $16,415,000 of existing
wastewater and reclaimed water system assets would be retired as a result of the
implementation of the County's identified capital improvement program.
6. No capital facility costs associated with the existing collection facilities - including local lift
stations, manholes, and on-site collection facilities - have been included in the calculation of
the wastewater impact fees since the County generally requires the developer to contribute
such facilities, or the County has adopted a separate fee (e.g., wastewater tap-fee) on behalf
of the District to recover such capital additions (contributions in aid of construction). All
capital improvements to such respective facilities as recognized in the 2005 Master Plan
Update were also not recognized in the wastewater impact fee analysis.
7. The level of service for a wastewater ERC was assumed to be 250 gallons per day (gpd)
expressed on an average daily flow basis. This level of service represents no change from
the previous impact fee study. The level of service was predicated on the level of service
requirements as contained in the County's Growth Management Plan (sanitary sewer sub-
element); information contained in the 2005 Master Plan Update regarding wastewater
capacity; FDEP flow standards as reported in F AC Rule 64E-6.008; FPSC capacity
relationships for private utilities (F AC Rule 25-30.020); and discussions with the District.
8. No grant funds have been or are expected to be received by the District relative to the
funding of the wastewater capital improvement program, and none of the existing
wastewater treatment and transmission assets were assumed to have been funded from
grants.
9. Based on discussions with the County and as part of the review of the monthly rates for
. wastewater service (a separate study of the District), it was determined that the lowest
overall cost to the existing ratepayer (in terms of rates to be charged and fmancial health of
the District System) was to use impact fees first for capital project funding as opposed to the
payment of debt service. Because of this benefit and the need to recover the full capital cost
assigned to growth, no rate adjustment was reflected in the determination of the fee. All
impact fee funds remain in the system and the long-term fmancing costs are mitigated by
using the fees for capital project fmancing. Although a new rate payer will potentially pay
debt service on expansion-related financing, the overall cost to the ratepayer is less by not
applying impact fees to current year debt and the additional customers to the system actually
tend to maintain or reduce the debt service component built into the rates for service. Thus
18
Agenda Item No.1 OA
February 24,2009
Page 285 of 462
there appears to be no justification to continue to have a debt service adjustment in the
determination of the impact fees. .
The wastewater system impact fee was calculated utilizing estimated capital costs for the
wastewater transmission/treatment/disposal system, ERC service requirements, and current fixed
asset and plant capacity data available to PRMG regarding the wastewater system. By designing
the wastewater system impact fee to recover costs on a prospective basis, an attempt is made to
design a charge that will provide funds on a reasonable basis in order to meet the future needs of the
wastewater system. It should be noted that in the event the construction costs, capacity
requirements, or utility service area materially change from wbat was reflected on Table 8, the
wastewater impact fee might need to be adjusted accordingly.
As shown on Table 8, the calculated wastewater impact fee is $3,515 per ERC, which is $390 or
12.5% higher than the existing wastewater impact fee of $3,125 per ERC. This fee would be
applied to a standard individually-metered residential customer. Based on the capital facilities
associated with the determination of the fee, the functional breakdown of the components of the rate
is as follows:
Wastewater TreatmentIDisposaJ
Wastewater Transmission
Rounded
Cost Per ERC
$3,200
315
Total Proposed Wastewater Impact Fee
t1lli
Impact Fee Comparisons
In order to provide additional infonnation to the County regarding the existing and calculated
impact fees, a comparison of the existing and calculated fees for the District with other Florida
jurisdictions was prepared. This comparison is summarized on Table 9 and provides a comparison
of the existing and proposed District impact fees for single-family residential connections (i.e., one
ERC) relative to the impact fees or comparable charges currently imposed by other
municipallgovenunental water and wastewater systems located primarily in the southwest Florida
region. Figure I shows a graphical representation of the comparison. It is important to note tllat the
reader must view the comparison witll caution as no in-depth analysis has been perfonned to
determine the methods used in the development of the water and wastewater impact fees imposed
by others, nor has any analysis been made to determine whether 100% of the cost of new facilities is
recovered from system capacity charges, or some percentage less than 100% with the balance
recovered through the user charges. Additionally, no analysis was conducted as to the rate of
capital facilities currently in service or planned for the utility. For example, the costs of wastewater
effiuent disposal utilizing a deep injection well system generally has a higher capital cost per unit of
capacity than percolation ponds.
(Remainder of Page Left Blank Intentionally)
19
Table 1
Collier County Water-Sewer District
Water and Wastewater Impact Fee Study
Development of Existing Water ProdnctionfIreatment Facility
Canacitv Available to Serve Customer Growth
Line
No.
Existing Pennitted Plant Capacity of System (MMDD-MGD) (1)
Adjustment to Reflect Annual Average Daily Demand
2 of Water Treatment System (MGD) (2)
3 Adjusted Treatment Plant Capacity (AADD)
4 Annual Average Daily Demand - Existing System (3)
5 Remaining Capacity (AADD) at Existing Plant
6 Percent of Total Capacity Remaining
7 Percent of Total Capacity Recognized
Capital Costs of Existing Facilities
8 Existing Facility Costs (4)
9 Additional Costs (5)
10 Less Assumed Retirements (6)
11 Less Grant Funds and Other Contributions (7)
12 Total Applicable Capital Costs of Existing Facilities
13 Estimated Amount Allocable to Future Growth
MGD "'" MHlion GaIlons Per Day
MMDD = Maximum Month Daily Demand
AADD"'" ArulUa! Average Daily Demand
Footuotes start on page 30.
29
Agenda Item NO.1 OA -
February 24, 2009
Page 286 of 462
Table 2
Collier County Water-Sewer District
Water and Wastewater Impact Fee Study
Development of Existing Wastewater Treatment Facility
Caoacitv Available to Serve Customer Growth
Line
No.
Existing Plant Capacity of System (MMADF-MGD) (I)
2 Adjustment to Reflect Capacity on Annual Average Daily Flow Basis (2)
3 Adjusted Treatment Plant Capacity @ AADF
4 Annual Average Daily Flow - Existing System (3)
5 Remaining Capacity (AADF) at Existing Plant
6 Percent of Total Capacity Remaining
7 PercentofTota! System Capitalization Recognized
Capital Costs of Existing Facilities
8 Existing Facility Costs (4)
9 Additional Costs (5)
10 Less Assumed Retirements (6)
II Less Grant Funds and Other Contributions (7)
12 Total Applicable Capital Costs of Existing Facilities
13 Estimated Amount Allocable to Future Growth
MGD "" Million GaUOtul Per Day
M:MADF = Maximum Month Average Daily Flow
AADF = Annual Average Daily Flow
Footnotes start on page 33.
32
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24,2009
Page 287 of 462
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24, 2009
Page 288 of 462
Attachment C-1
County Ordinance No. 2007-52
County Ordinance No. 2007-57
County Resolution 2008-202
.~
~(\)
J \;
\ j
~
fJ-6/?6:s7
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24, 2009
Page 289 of 462
It)
. ~ ..
,_ ;.'pJ ~..,:,.;v "-
,'1...:> ~7);.
". ,-..;:,
~~\
"',
<;;; ORDINANCE NO. 2007 - ~
;;;
~ CE OF /cOLLIER CO~FLORIDA, AMENDING SUBSECTION
(To SECI'lON 74-303 OF AR ICLE III IN ORDINANCE NO, 2001-13 (THE
LIDATED IMPACT FEE ORDINANCE), TO SPECIFY THAT WATER AND
SEWER IMPACT FEES FOR NON.RESIDENTIAL USES AND FOR RESIDENTIAL
LIVING AREA GREATER THAN 5,000 SQUARE FEET (OR HAVING MORE THAN
FOUR TOILETS) SHALL BE DETERMINED BY PROJECTING AVERAGE DAILY
FLOWS AND NO LONGER BY THE SIZE OF THE SERVICE METER; AMENDING
SCHEDULE TWO IN APPENDIX A TO THE ORDINANCE; PROVIDING FOR
CONFLICT AND SEVERABILITY; PROVIDING FOR INCLUSION IN THE CODE OF
LAWS AND ORDINANCES; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
y
)
\4")
'X
l~~
~~
.~ \
~
WHEREAS, on March 13. ZOOl, the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County
adopted Ordinance 2001-13, the "Consolidated Impact Fee Ordinance" repealing and superseding all
of the County's then existing impact fee regulations and consolidating aU of the County's impacl feo
regulations into that Ordioanco, codified as Chapter 74 of the Collier County Code of I...aws and
Ordinances (the "Code"); and
'VHEREAS, the Collier County W ater.Sewer District contracted with Malcolm Pimie and
with the URS Corporation regarding these impact fees. and both consulting firm. have recouunended
to staff that water and wastewater impact fees that apply to noo~residentjaJ uses, or that apply to
residential uses that havc eithcr living arca of 5,000 or more square feet. or irrespective of~~ sq~
footage will ha.ve more than four toilets, no longer be determined by the size of the applica~ s~e
meter, but shall be detennined by the BRC value that ",suits from applicable projected average djlijy
flows: and
WHEREAS, having reviewed the Con,oltant'. recommendations, staff con= and,tberefute
is recommending that the Board of County Commissioners adopt the attached Ordinance: to amend
the current Ordinance and the attached Impact Fee Schedule, both of which will accomplish the
results recommended by Lbc consultants.
~ NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY
tV) J~ COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, that:
R ~ECTlON ONE. Sub.ection (d)(2)(g) in Section 74-303 of Article ill of Chapter 74 of the Collier
~\J ounry Code of Laws and Ordinances (the same being Ordinance No. 200l~13, as amended), is
hereby amended to read as follows:
~ ~ "g. }{HHi famHYlmit, 61::lfl16K, mabile ksme aT ~a':el trailer Rl6f8aaenal yehiele UBl3aet
~e!l ehall13e l3'ald te tI-.1!! saaat)' Elt tite largest Elellal' affle1il1t basset tI~8R me peBBit/apaee, arthe meter
si~ as aeteflBiaea ey BpI'J)iFl&, OrBiR&BS8 N 8. 97 17 as meR amended eraapeE6eaea. In Mia e":ent ~e
) meter SIi5e sale~lmiBB Fe6ult5 in a larger initial ~ajlll..t Bf 61:l6B impast faea ~an "eule! r!sl:ilt by
} afl'flieBtisn Elf the pe:r.=mit;lQpEles eB:1.sl:IlatisBs. t:B8 p~'rH' af sasR IBFger init:isi ,,:alar sneller 8&'::er
. ~ ffapa.et fM.& sl\aU 8e eBti~a. te impaet fee epeEJita agaiBlil ael.eliB.sfl6l Uflits as 9ailemg peFBlita fur
!tsse aElelitien'ialllRir;s He issues by tft8 681:Hl.~' "." iddR tfiat as -elepmeat. Staff is atifheR2iea 18
\\: B:flprs':e aael gr:ant &ugH epeEiit9. Water 8I1d wastewater (sewer) imnact fees forindividuallv metered
\ water and/or sewer service to residential use of less tltan 5.000 SQuare feet livlnl! soaco and which
\. ^ will have less than five toilcts shall have an ERe value of one. Master metered service to Iesidential
~'\ 'J J use of less than 5.000 SQuare feet liviD!:!: soace and havine: less than five toilets shtill be determined bv
'\ the soecific imoact fee value assie:ned bv Aooendix A. Schedule Two. Individuallv metered service
_ and master metered service to non-residential uses. or to residential use havine: livinll area of 5 000
>(J
Underlined text is added; Illl"l.wl: ~M:all;h text is deleted.
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24, 2009
Page 290 of 462
square feet or more or service to residential use having less souare footage but having fiVe or more
t~ilets. shall be detMmined bv the ERe value that results from nroiected avera~ daily flows.
~;ected averae dailv flows for residential use of 5.000 sauare feet livimr area or more. or to have
more than four toilets. shall be determined bv &'DDlviDll Rnnlicable nrovisiDlUl in the then CllI'I'Cnt
ew don of the Florida Plumbimr Code. Proiected averB.2e daily flows farnan-residential uses shall be
determined bv calculatin2' the anolicable nrovisions in the then cwrent edition of the Florida
Plumbintl Code comoarcd with the 8Dolleable orovisions in the then current editions of the Florida
Administrati vo Code. The correct avcnl2e daily flows for non-residential uses shan be !he !!rester of
the Florida Plumb;nQ',Code calculation or the Florida Administrative Code calculation. .The Public
Utilities Administrator or authorized dcsimees shall have final BDnmval authority with reEard to
these imoact fee calculations."
SECTION TWO. CONFLICT AND SEVERABILITY.
In the event this Ordinance conflicts with any other Ordinance of Collier County or other
-applicable law, the more reslrictive shall apply. If any phrase or portion of this Ordinance is held
invalid or unconstitutional by any court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a
separate, distinct, and independent provision and such holding sball not affect the validity of the
remaining portions.
SECTION THREE. INCLUSION IN THE CODE OF LAWS AND ORDINANCES.
The provisions of thilil Ordinance shall be made a part of the Code of Laws and Ordinances of
Collier County. Florida. The sections of the Ordinance may be :renumbered or re-Iettered and
internal cross-references amended throughout to accomplish liuch. and the word "ordinance" may be
changed to "section," ..article," or any other appropriate word.
SECTION FOUR. EFFECTIVE DATE.
This Ordinance shall become effective upon filing with the Florida Department of State.
PASSED AND DULY ADOPTED by the Board of County Commissioners of
Collier County. Florida this~dayof s.o<", ,2007.
ATTEST: ......
DWIGHT. E. BR~,".. CLERK
~~ti~O-~'~L
::'t~"~~.ltl1all I
'~~n4tvr. cia}".
',"., "
Approved as 'to "form and legal sufficiency:
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF COlLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA
By: :i!::ti~tan
By:---..nv,^ (lI~
Thomas C. Palmer, Assistant County Attorney
PIlge20f4
ihis orcUnonee fllei! wl"h the
C'l~toryo~(.~lS
~_doyo , ..;d.
~""JCknow\edgeml.!f.1 ;:..;. that'
f,"~<~^'l-' j. ,(,1'1.. day
~'" "'"
c.l>"tr~
~telttliadde:d; ~N~i IoFfljI~gltlel[.ti,delc[Cd.
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24, 2009
Page 291 of 462
APPENDIX A
SCHEDULE TWO: WATER AND 1~~\bTEW} 'I'ER SEWER SYSTEM IMl'ACT FEE
RATE SCHEDULE
-', >.... 'VR~.l~"
.. :;\:. t. ..~ Jt. ,:,_., ',' ,
II'IDP'I!;)UAilX Ml!lloRBD
!lRG W:\.lhl{ SE~tgR
U'r~lC &:P,A.C8 B AglE gp FEE MlotllR lJiiJ&ialent IMP.A.cr' IMP,',cr
(SQ.l'T ) ."ll..Q(, A TI(>>T =- RalllMftl:i&:l l"I>&- FEE-
CBBIl.!.St.iSR)
Q to 1,999
(MID NQ MORE PER UNIT ;;w..-- .j- $3,H..QQ $3,.15.\lG
:rIL'_'l 4
B ATIIR{)()HS)
5.GQQ OR HOF.E 1l.'\&1l9 ON
(OR I IDlH3 PBRllRC PBR llRG ftQPM- !lRG $3,>15.00
TK.'.N4 21)!;3\l] 11 }.1iRimum
BATHllOOM.) $3, 11S.OO
..:.If.:.u..~~:u....;...,......~.~.'ft~t~ ~"u'- "'Voo.'lo~"rl:oJ.;";", '...."~.~...;;l~ .. ..
MA8TeR IY!lgp~
J..P.'I!>lC gaG W}~'I'RR SBWBR
lL\SIO: OF PIlS MEIllR
sp,.\CE (.0.. fIi.lItl:hahult IMPf,CT IMR',Gl'
.\LL.QCf.TION =- ~Uid!l!ti&l.
H.j-- Go.....a..t- flSE-- JiBS-
Qte 7SG PoBRUNIT PllR llRC ~ $l,12..QG $J,I6Q.QQ
751 Ie 1,509 PBR LJNlT PllR llR C M+- 2,209.9Q 2.3SS.9Q
1..91 'I'D 1,909 PIlR lJIolIT I'IlR llRC W- 3.11j.OO 3,.l15.99
5,900 OR ~
MGllB l'FlFo f\GPM- ON IORC
(OR 1,IOP.E I'IlR llRC ORDINJ _"lCE 21)!JG] I } {iniHntm 3,SU'.Qg
TH.\N 4 <- 3,ll;,QQ
IJf.THRQOIIE)
1~~~i\oL .....f.'t:~,~~:;.. "~.; ..
1..tT.....TER
Mi<lJ<,K .Im ERG- W:\TeR R1P.~cr SllVI'BR lMPACT VI>E
OR CCJ\'J.'SD Ri\NGE FBB
BQUI'V:\UlNT
f- l.HN- I MAX- MIN- ~
Y4- ~ .j- $3, HS.QO t3.SlS,oo ,
.j- H- ~ 3,7;7.00 8,!i38.QQ 3,8€7.99 8,788.00
.J.--lI2- ;;,e. 3- 8,879.00 17,On.oo 9,129.90 17,575
~ ~ g.. 17,11').00 27,320.QO 17,927.QO 2.,IJQ.09
;;- 8+ ,54,9- 27,..2.00 187,181.00 28,172.00 192,971
4- ~ ~ I n,SJ5 .00 11Q.191.oo ]93,32S.9Q 153,091.00
e- ~ ~ 410,535.00 1 ,2:!2,229 ,GO 453,05,00 1.~5g,QI9.00
8- ;W; &00- 1.322,579.00 2,Q19,000.00 1.2>8,379.00 3.IQ9.0G
Underltned !.ext1S added; ~S1lak l1'r g}, text is deleted.
Page 3 of 4
Agenda Item NO.1 OA
February 24, 2009
Page 292 of 462
/
INDIVIDUALL. V METERED SERVICE
E.BQ BASIS OF WATER SEWER
LIVING SPACe (SO.FT.) VALUE FEE IMPACT FCES IMPACT FEES
o TO 4.999 $3.415 ~.
(AND MAXIMUM OF 4 1, Per ERG
TOILETS)
5.000 OR GREATER ADFI350 $3,515
(OR MORE THAN 4 ERG VALUE x
TOILETS) Imln value of
.LQJ. Per ERG $3.415
(rounded to (minimum value ERG VALUE x
Non-Residential the nearest ailli $3.515 (minimum
~ value $3.5151
MASTER METERED SERVICE
LIVING SPACE (SO.FT.) ERC BASIS OF WATER SEWER
VALUE FEE IMPACT FeES IMPACT FEes
Residential UnIt - 0 TO 150 0.33 Per Un" $1,125.00 $1,160.00
Residential UnIt -751 TO 0.67 Per Un" $2.290.00 $2.355.00
.1&lQ
Residential Unit - 1 501 TO 1 Per Unit $3.415.00 $3,515.00
4.999
Residential Unit - 5.000 OR ADFI350
GAEA TER (OR MORE THAN $3,515
4 TOILETS1 lmm valu& 01 ERG VALUE x
:LQl Per ERG $3.415 (minimum
(rounded to value S3.415l ERG V AWE X
the nearest ~
Non~Resldential tenth) (minimum value
$35151
ADF-
OR-
eRe-
ONY K .
Averaae DaIIV Flows for DroDOSed use as Drovlded bv EOR or Authorized
Re resentatlve
En Inee 01 Record for ect
E ulvalent Residential Connection
Underlined text is added; r~ah. tb-a ll.!:k text i~ cIeleted.
Page 4 of4
ORDINANCE NO. 2007- 57
AN ORDINANCE OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, AMENDING THE IMPACT FEE
RATE SCHEDULES OF APPENDIX A OF ORDINANCE NO. 2001-13,
AS AMENDED, KNOWN AS THE COLLIER COUNTY
CONSOLIDATED IMPACT FEE ORDINANCE; INCORPORATING
BY REFERENCE THE IMPACT FEE STUDY ENTITLED "COLLIER
COUNTY IMPACT FEE INDEXING STUDY;" DELETING THE
REQUIRED USE OF INCOME DERIVED FROM THE INTEREST
BEARING IMPACT FEE TRUST FUNDS; PROVIDING FOR
CHANGES TO THE PROVISIONS RELATED TO IMPACT FEE.
WAIVERS AND DEFERRALS FOR SPECIFIED CHARITABLE:
ORGANIZATIONS; AMENDING THE SPECIAL REQUIREMENTS _
FOR EACH OF THE INDIVIDUAL IMPACT FEES; PROVIDING
FOR CONFLICT AND SEVERABILITY; PROVIDING FOR
INCLUSION IN THE COLLIER COUNTY CODE OF LAWS AND
ORDINANCES; AND PROVIDING FOR A DELAYED EFFECTIVE
DATE OF JANUARY I, 2008.
. ,
WHEREAS, Collier County has used impact fees as a funding source for growth-rela.ted
capital improvements for various facilities since 1978; and
'WHEREAS, on March 13. 2001, the Board of County Commissioners adopted
Ordinance No. 2001-13, the Collier County Consolidated Impact Fee Ordinance, repealing and
superseding all of the County's then existing impact fee regulations, and consolidating all of the
County's impact fee regulations into that one Ordinance, codified in Chapter 74 of the Collier
County Code of Laws and Ordinances (the "Code"); and
WHEREAS. in October of 2002 the Board of County Commissioners directed that
during the upcoming required three-year updates of the individual impact fees that methodology
also be developed. to provide for the annual indexing of the fees in the years between the formal
updates; and
WHEREAS, 011 February 28, 2006, the Board of County Commissioners directed. that
the indexing methodology for each of the impact fees be reviewed and revised, as appropriate, to
reflect localized information; and
WHEREAS, Section 163.31801, Florida Statutes, which is the Florida Impact Fee Act,
requires the most recent and localized data be used in impact fee calculations; and
WHEREAS, Collier County, retained Tindale.Oliver & Associates, Inc. (the
"Consultant"), to complete the study to localize the indexing methodologies; and
WHEREAS, the Consultant worked in association with Robert W. Burchell, Ph.D. from
the Center for Urban Policy Research, Bloustein School ofPlanningIPublic Policy at Rutgers, to
develop a legally defensible indexing program, specific to Collier County; and
WHEREAS, the Consultant has prepared an impact fee study entitled "Collier County
Impact Fee Indexing Study" dated June 11, 2007 (the "Study"); and
WHEREAS, Collier County uses lmpacl fees to supplement the funding of necessary
capital improvements required to provide public facilities to serve new population and related
development that is necessitated hy growth in Collier County; and
WHEREAS, the Study recommends four revised measures to be used. alone. or in
combination. to calculate the annuallndex for each of Collier County's impact fees; and
~le~\i$adoed:!;BUil\JlTBll~ICXlisd~lcled
Agenda Item NO.1 OA
February 24,2009
Page 294 of 462
WHEREAS, the recommended measures and corresponding percentages of increase, in
combination with the adopted indexing methodology provide the basis for the annual index for
each ofeaIlier County's impact fees; and
WHEREAS, the proposed revised fees are incorporated in Schedules One through Ten
of Appendix A of Chapter 74 of the Collier County Code of Laws and Ordinance (attached); and
WHEREAS, the study methodology has been reviewed and agreed to by Collier
County's outside legal cOlU1se~ Nabors, Giblin and Nickerson, P.A.; and
WHEREAS. staff has thoroughly reviewed the calculations and fmdings and concurs
with the results of the study, and recommends that the Board of County Commissioners adopt
this Ordinance to implement the recommended changes; and
WHEREAS, on April 10, 2007 the Board of County Commissioners directed that the
provisions related to impact fee waivers for specified charitable organizations be amended to
instead provide deferrals to such charitable. organizations; and
WHEREAS, the adoption of this Ordinance incoTporates provisions that amend Section
74.203(i) of the Collier County Code of Laws and Ordinances related to charitable organizations
by providing impact fee deferrals to qualified entities and requiring that deferred impact fees be
pald to Collier County upon such time that the premises is no longer utilized by the qualified
entity or the entity ceases to operate in the specified charitable capacity.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, that:
SECTION ONE. Article 1, General, Section 74-t06, Adoption of impact fee srudies, of the
Collier County Code of Laws and Ordinances is hereby amended to rcad as follows:
Section 74-106. Adoption of impact ree studies,
The board hereby adopts and incorporates by reference the following studies with regard
to the respective public facilities:
...
.Ll.ll lndexinf!: "Collier COlUltv Impact Fee lndexine Studv" ~ated June 11. 2007.
prenared bv TindaJe-Oliver and Associates. Inc.. in association with Robert W.
Burchell. Ph.D.. to be uodated annuallv.
...
SECTION TWO. Article II, Impact Fees, Section 74-203, Use offunds, subsection (e) and (i)
ofthe Collier County Code of Laws and Ordinances is hereby amended to read as follows:
Sectiou 74-203.
Use of fuods.
...
(e) All funds on deposit which are not then immediately necessary for expenditures shall
be invested by the county in compound-interest bearing trust fund(s). AU iBs8mIaJ derived ErElR'l
SUEA ifl\'6SBTlt'lffie shall BE! llepesiteEl ia tae ape-siRS iHlf3aet fee tRiS! ruR8. frElm ',yaieh the if1'\'sstea
fliREl.S eame. T8 the 8l(.teat flat flF8meite!:l BY lll'.,,', role. regulati8R sr 68Htfaet (iaellidmg BSBEl
~leJ;liladded;gIrBllilfUllgflte~li5d~1<:t<:d
PllgC2 of25
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24, 2009
Page 295 of 462
8SY6RSfl.E5), iBt6nst taaa &aeroad in tr.e Fespeea\'6 trust lima shall 138 W9SQ te :fuJl)' [\azul "Rst fer
fJl"sthU 8haatahle salify impaet [<ess \\'Sj':SFS. :'-eemel! interest in efte tnist funli shall Bat 'Be
lElaRsa te, tml1Bfilrrea. te, aT etheF"is8 Be tnate8. t6 the sleEth Bf any ether Ems! funs aT B:fi)' atHer
8eSel:iflt. l.m1saet fee ';:aiyefS grarJ;ed BY the seare. shaH Be paid frsm aeeruea. interest Rsm 13W3R
l:n:1st fuaa arrestee 1;))' the "'a:i\'SfS. I8 the e','6Rt ~e saminiaeter sf a Fe8fleea':e !ru:st fuRd 13 sf
tr.e spinieR tf.at theft B.S6Riea iaterest in 1:ke rSS}:lBSa':e ifR13aet fee tfaat fuRd is inStitlieieRt t6 :fuRS
tfle thEIR flsssiag rl3eglBBtea '''ai'lSFS, the mBiuger sf eae-l3. slisR lErust fu:aa shall Ratify the SSlir.t)'
ffJa:B.ager iB '\'FitiFJg Elf the [ae1l1al ami legal B&561i fer theBe epialsRS. .~.eeFliea mtersat shan Be
aesmsa t8 use Bvailals161l 1a fWl8 t-R8ge "Ret fer pFeRt, ehw=itaele sahtj'" ?'ai':ef6 1:ln~eIiB there
tflefl enLists an aeRial legal premaitian whereby tRat assroBl:t iRtsFest saronet legall~' ae asea fa
funEl ilia raefliss'.:es. ':;ai\'ers.
...
(i) Impact fee ";ai"sFS aF deferrals available to charitable organizations llDd charitable
trusts, These impact fees waWef'5 deferrals are available only to eligible to not-for.profit,
charitable entities as specifi:ed herein, The cumulative total of all nDt-for-profit waWefe deferrals
in each of the county's fiscal years shan not exceed S200,000.OQ, If the total amount of impact
fees ~ deferred pursuant to these provisions in a fiscal year is less than $200,000,00 (or is
Jess than the higher total in the funding account for that fiscal year because of prior cash
carrying~forv.rard) some or all of the sum of money not wei-Ye4 deferred can be carried forward
and thereby be .dded to the $200,000.00, to . m.ximum b.lance of $500,000.00 funding for the
next fiscal year. ~ iImpact fees collected by the county for water, wastewater, educational
facilities fi6F and fire impact fees shall not be waWed deferred under these provisions.
(1) Entities eligible for waWer& deferrals. These ~ deferrals are available onJy to
charitable, not-for-profit entities that provide services of substantial benefit to low
income or very low income residents of the county at no charge or at reasonable, reduced
rates, and no part of the net earnings of the entity shall inure to the benefit of any private
shareholder Dr individual, and the entity complies with at least one of the following:
a. TIlt:. entity is descnbed in subseclion 501 (C)(3) of Chapler 26 of the United
States Internal Revenue Code as a corporation, a community chest, a fund, or a
foundation, organized and operated exclusively for charitable purposes, or for
prevention of cruelty to children, and is then exempt from taxes under Section
501(a) therein; or
b. The entity is described in Subsections 501 (C)(4)(A) and (B) ofCh.pter 26 of
the United States Internal Revenue Code as either a Civic League or an
organization not organized for profit, is operated exclusively for the promotion of
social welfare, and is exempt from taxes under Section 501(a), therein; or
c. The entity is described in Subsection 501(C)(20) ofCb.pter 26 of the United
States Internal Revenue Code as an organization or trust, the exclusive function of
which is to form part of a qualified group legal services plan or plans within the
meaning of Section 120 as referenced therein; or
~tell:liSldder.l;J:IfUI'il~glltcxtirdeleled
Pace3or2S
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24, 2009
Page 296 of 462
d. The entity is a bospital, a cooperative hospital service organization, a medical
research organization, or similar organization under any provision within (or
referenced) in Section 501 of Chapter 26 of the United States Internal Revenue
Code and the entity is exempt from federal income taxation; or
e. The entity is then exempt from Floridals annual and nonrecuning intangible
taxe, pursuant to F.S. i 199.185(4), as a "Charitable Trust" and at least 95 percent
of its income is paid to one or more oftbe above-listed. fedora! tax exempt entities.
(2) Amount of waWePs deferrals available to applicants. Subject to not exceeding the
amount of impact fees paid (or to be paid) by the applicant to the county. the applicant
may request W<lWef& deferral, of all impact fees that are wID"..l. elilribte for deferral
under these provision" but no applicant shall be granted more than $100,000.00, or 50
percent of the available funding, which ever is less, ofnot-for-profitwaWefs deferrals.
(3) No construction that has obtained an affordable housing deferral under this article
shall be eligible for any waWeF deferral Wlder these provi~ions. No construction that has
been granted a weWer deferral under these provisions shall be eligible for any county
affordable housing deferrals.
(4) .'\PJ31ieati6a~ Reauests for ~ deferrals pursuant to this section 74.203.
a. Except as specified in this subparagraph a., the applicant must file a written
waWef request for deferral BfI131ie&tisR to the county manager not later than
concurrently with payment of the respective impact fees. The county shall not
accept any such applieatieB8 reauests after the respective impact fees have been
paid to the county except in those instances when the Collier County building
permit that authorized. the respective wei-Yer eligible development was issued after
September 7, 2001 and before October 13, 2001 and the development paid the
applicable impact fees in full, The applicant can avoid payment of impact fees (up
to the maximum amount of impact fees that may possibly be waWed deferred for
that appl~cant) only when it is possible that the board may grant the requested
watvef deferral before the respective impact fees become due and payable to the
county. The Itj3fllieatitln written reouest must prove all of the applicable aboveM
specified elements that render the entity eligible for the requested ~
deferrals, including the required tax exemption(s). The county manager may
request additional infonnation deemed appropriate to ascertain the applicant's
eligibility fOT the requested ~ deferrals, including criteria noted in F.S. 99
196.195 and/or 196.196.
b. }Ie prieFitj' shaY ee gi~'ea te B:B)' ~pl:i6atieR eases. ea EW)' "lirat seme, }i.ps-t
sen'ea" basis. The COlmty manager shall review each IlfI13Iieaasa written reauest
to determine eligibility for the requested waWeFa deferrals. Within 30 days after
receipt of the:: fl:l3~lieation reouest, the county manager ef\etH:el shall inform theiapplicant in writing whether the af3f1lieatiea reauest 15 complete. If the al?f1lieatieR
reauest is incomplete, tRB Bfl13lieatisR ma)' 13e retliffiBa ta the applicant, shall be
notified 9}3eeifYIRg in writing why the Ell3F11ieatisR VIlI'itten reauest fails to prove
that the entity is eligible for the requested ~ deferrals. After receipt of such
~it.>:tl~~dd~;& illhn g~ll:"ti~delel.::d
Puge4 oC25
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24,2009
Page 297 of 462
notice, the applicant shall have an additional 30 days to re-submit an amended
af'f1lieatiElR reauest. Failure to meet this deadline shall. void the appHcantls
eligibility for the requested ~ deferrals unless an extension is granted for
good cause at the county manager's discretion.
c. After lH1 apfllisi?J:isa a written reauest is determined by the county manager to
meet the above.specified minimwn filing requirements, the county manager shall
promptly place the ap13lieetisa. request on the county's manager portion of the
board's agenda, The fiscal year in which the waWep deferral &j3flliaatisB is granted
or denied by the board shall be the fiscal year that applies to the a"lieation
request. The executive sununary shall specify the criteria deemed by the county
manager to render the applicant eligible (or ineligible) for the requested waWers
deferrals, and shall include the county managers recommendations whether the
board should grant the request in whole or in part, or should deny the request,
along with a proposed resslHtisR alITeement that may be ~ executed by the
board that Bantams speeifie HHamgs that the Bfl'flliaar.t is (aF is Ret) eligible fer Aie
FSflHests8 wai','8fs. No reselatisFl al!feement shall apply to more than one
applicant. Wai. 8F5 gI"aated sfla:Il BE! aHa! !mE!.. sarea immEleiately liJ38R assl3tisE ef
tHe FssslLitisA. The agreement shall be Dreoared bv the County Attornev's Office
consistent with this chanter.
(5) Not-for~profit waWer..s deferrals are discretionary and the board's decisions are final.
At the conclusion of the deferral oeriod the subject imnact fees for the then-current use
are due and uavable.
(6) The county manager may adopt additional generally applicable procedural rules with
regard to applieatiea requests provided 'those rules apply to all similarly situated
applicants and do not impose additional mandatory eligibility requirements upon any
applicant.
(7) No construction that has applied for or obtained Fee Pa.yment Assistance Ffunding
under Chapter 49 of the Collier County Code of Laws and Ordinance, ,hall be eligible
for any wak<ef deferral under these provisions. No construction that has been granted a
~ deferral under these provisions shall be eligible for any county tEee ~r.aymen1
aftssistance funding.
SEcrION THREE. Article Ill, Special Requirements for Specific IYpes of Impact Fees,
Section 74-302, Special requirements for road impact fee, subsection (g) of the Collier County
Code of Laws and Ordinances, is hereby amended to read as follows:
Section 74-302.
Special requirements for road impact fee.
...
(g) Annual mid-cycle road impact fee rate indexing. Beginning November 1,
2002, the county shall commence a three-year road impact fee update cycle pursuant to
subsections 74-201(b) and 74-502(.) of thi, chapter. On or ..oat t18','.mber 1, .f
Durin!! each of the two mid-years betvv'een updates, the county shall implement indexed
~tcxll~ad(jed; !:\Jylll;1J"uOIgt ~lC\i5dekl~
Page:;oflS
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24, 2009
Page 298 of 462
adjustments to the cost components of design, utilities, mlbgation. interchange,
carrying cost, construction. engineering, inspection ~ the Don-land components of
right-of-way acquisition costs eased an tae Fleriaa DeflaflfRsFtt ef TFa:F.lFi]3l3rtatiea PAss
Tren::J.as IRB61t. B.B:geEl BE the three year \::1.isteFieal tnBEl., ';'sighteEl B:B 25 f1BF6ElFlt sf the
ms-en. The iaaslt adjustment fa and the land value component of rights.of-way costs
~ based on tRe tea yeer Ris\:aFieal BeREI iA tet;a.~ jl::lst "8.1985 fSF all f1F9f1srty as
uflaateEllll'lBl.iallj' By!a:lC? Cellier Ce~' Pl'spenty .(-p~raiBer, .veigktse as '?S 136rsent of
the iaasTc The ar..Bbls1 mereasee; ia the tetEki just ".wlles fur aJ.ll'ra~efty sAwl se BB:!3flsa
at JS ]3ereeffi fer as)' given year iRehu!eel iR tRB a\'srage. Hid syele iBa51:es Fate
ehange aajusftBeB!S shall ee aElsfltea BY a reSShiaSft aftBe BaarS. 131i:FStiaflt t8 s\;lBseetisR
71219(13) efthis ekBf!ter. the Dercentae:es of increase set forth in the adooted "Collier
County Impact Fee Indexine Studv" nreoared by Tindale-OliYer and Associates. me.. in
association with Robert W. Burchell. Ph.D.. as undated annually and in accordance
with the indexinlZ methodoJo2'v soecified in the current and adooted road imoact fee
study.
SECTION FOUR Article Ill, Special Requirements for Specific Types of Impact Fees, Section
74-303, Special requirements for Water and/or sewer impact fee, subsection (g) of the Collier
County Code of Laws and Ordinances is hereby amended to read as follows:
SectioD 74-303.
Special requirements for Water aDdior sewer impact fee.
...
(g) Annual mid-cycle water and sewer impact fee rate indexing. Beginning
January 1, 2005, the county shall commence a three-year water and sewer (wastewater)
impact fee update cycle pursuant to subsections 74-201 (b) and 74-502(.) of this article.
In each of the two mid-cycle years (between the formal three-year updates) eHG
eegiBfli~ SR af a1:le\lt J1U1El 1,2995, the county shall implement indexing adjustments to
each water and sewer impact fee amount by ffil:l.ltiplying the tftee 6affl:!Rt .. ster ami 136\'1, er
imJ3aet f~e rates by a fFaetien, tae IHHRerater sf',vhiek sRaIl Be the oercentae:es of increase
set forth in the adooted "Collier Countv fmDact Fee Indeximz Studv" orenared by
Tindale-Oliyer and Associates. !ne.. in association with Robert W. Burchell. Ph.D.. as
uDdated annually. and in accordance with the index stated in the board resolution (or
ordinance) that implements that indexing SiRe taB densmiRatar sf the ftasaell. shall aJse
138 that inEle1t fer BBe ) ear pFier te tAI3 peFiea. 5j3eaitieQ in tAe RWB.erater. MiS. e~ SIB
tnse7rsa ifflJ3aBt fee rate ElRange aajustmsAts may Be aeeptea by a beara rssetatieR(s) sr
ardhuiHGe(s). Water and ',vastewater sewer impact fees shall be increased by indexing
only to the extent that increases resulting from indexing exceed the assumed inflation rate
used to calculate the then applicable impact fees.
SECfION FlVE. Article Ill, Special Requirements for Specific Types of Impact Fees, Section
74-304. Special requirements for Parks and recreation impact fee, subsection (g) of the Collier
County Code of Laws and Ordinances is hereby amended to read as follows:
~lelll;i.dded;G~lel(l(ide\e\ed
Page6or25
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24, 2009
Page 299 of 462
Section 74-304.
Special requirements for Parks and recreation impact fee.
...
(g) Annual mid-cycle parks and recreational facilieies impact fee rale indexing.
Coltier County Resolution No. 2002-304, adopted June 25, 2002, established a parks and
recreational facilities impact fee rate schedule three-year update program, which
commenced on June 25, 2002, pursuant to subsections 74-201(b) and 74-502(a) of this
chapter. Qa aT aeeut Ha~' 15 sf During each of the two mid-years between updates., the
county shall implement indexing adjustments to each park impact fee amount~
Be' elepmeat eest 6sR'lflBaeat Elf the fea, "::B:iek is Jg per-eBm af the lata! esmmanity flaFk
fee e:a.el. SeyeR {3efBeBt afthe teta1 regienal paR: fee sRall Be aajaatea. Bj' the BAar.ge iT. the
na.tieBal EBgiRseRRg }Je';:a R-eSBFEl CeerikueSBR CBst Inelsn S"ler tEe mest TeseRt 1~
Efl8REB flBRed fef 'l:bieR tHB asta is 8\'aila'ele. The lane east eSffiflBaeBt sfthl! fee, '.-.flieh
is 82 pereeRt setke tettH eet'TI:Bumity par.J.( fee aAa s.'J parseRt setae t8tal regisRad p8:fl( fee,
sABII \3e arijuGlte8. basee SB tAe l'ersBfltage ehange iR tfl8 eSl:lIlt~' "'ie!s just laBa "alaas eYer
the mest raeset 12 memth flefis9 fer "'Aisk data is &\'aiIa:l3le Hem the Callier CSl:ffit)
PrepeR)' AJlflra.iser, prs"ie8e t:Aat the tatal issreas8 ia the lane eSRlflBB8Rt iB any ~'ear
sAall flat en.eeeEl 13' peFaeat. Hid ej'ele iaaenea Fate eamga adjl:lGtm.snt5 6fta~J ee 8a.aptea
hy-a--feselutisFlsftI:t6 eaBf8 pursuant ts suassStisR 71291(8) efmis aDapter. based unon
the percentages of increase set forth in the adoDted "Collier Countv !moact Fee lndexine
Studv" Drenared by Tindale-Oliver and Associates. IDe.. in association with Robert W.
Burchell. Ph,D.. as undated annually. and in accordance with the lndexine methodololZv
snecified in the current and adooted Darks and recreation irnoact fee study,
SECTION SIX. Article III, Special Requirements for Specific Types of Impact Fees. Section
74-305, Special requirements for Library impact fee, subsection (g) of the Collier County Code
of Laws and Ordinances is hereby amended to read as follows:
Section 74-305.
Special requirements for Library impact fee.
...
(g) Annual mid-cycle library impact fee rate indexing. Beginning on May I,
2004 the county shall commence a three-year library system impact fee update cycle
pursuant to subsections 74-20 1 (b) and 74-502(a) of the Code. OR aT aflsat Haj 1 sf
Durin!! each of the two mid-years between updates, the county shall implement
adjustments t6 61:l.i1aiag e8sts bases Bf:lOR tl:te sailaiBg east iaaeJt flre',>{B.S8 by the
Engineering News ~e6Elra &ad n, eighted as 6Q perseat eftb.e m.aelE, plus the library items
s65tS, sases 6fl the ':sRsHmer PRee lna:u far tae Miami Ft. Lauelerdale area pre'Adea Bj'
the Bureal:l. ef Laber Statisties, weigated B:5 27 flsfeeRt Elf the masn, flh:ls tlie taB year
tr6,FlEl fer ffiBf"-l:et , alH6s efeeunty",;iele la1'lB (iBehaeliRg B1::lilsiRgs B:llS stroetW'8s) pahlilSDsa
B) tHe Callier Ceanty Prepert)' .\t3:f)FMSerS Omee, weisl-.-tea as 13 f1eraent sf ilia iRG811l.
Mia e)ele iaBe:l(aa rate ehange aaj\i5tffleats ..ill Be aaeptea. ej a reseh::ltisB eftRe Be~a
f)blFSliaflt tEl saesBetieR 71 291EB) eftftis 6AEll3ter. based uoon the oercentaees of increase
~l">:;lis.ddw;Sl"l~ ,,1\c>:;lu.dclellX!
PaEe11)r25
Agenda Item No. lOA
February 24, 2009
Page 300 of 462
set forth in the adonted "Collier County Imnact Fee Indexine: Studv" oreoared bv
Tindale-OJiver and Associates. Ine.. in association with Robert W. Burchell. Ph.D.. as
uodated armuallv. and in accordance with the indexinlZ methodolo2v soecified in the
current and adooted library imoact fee study.
SECTION SEVEN, Article Ill, Special Requirements for Specific Types of Impact Fees,
Section 74-306, Special requirements for Emergency medical services impactfee. subsection (g)
of the Collier Counly Code ofLaws and Ordinances is herehy amended to read as follows:
Section 74.306.
Special requirements for Emergency medical services impact fee.
...
(g) Annual Mid-Cycle Emergency Medical Services Impact Fee Rate Indexing.
Beginning on February 28, 2006 the county shall commence a three-year emergency
medical services impact fee update cycle pursuant to subsections 74-201(b) and 74-
502(a) of the Code. In each of the two mid-cycle years (between the formal tlrree-year
updates) eegiRRiftg OR sr a68~t .~flFill, 2907, the county shall implement adjustments to
the emergency medical services impact fee rates throllga aajli:Btm613t5 te lens, lnl:ilel:iRg,
afI8 e~uiJ3ment 813.6tS sasea 8ft jllBt preflerty '..ahies pualisReel 1:1)' the CsIlietr Callat)'
Prsperty Appraiser's Omes, Bl::lileiflg ElBst maEm published by the EBgiaeering He"","B
Resers, ana tAe CeRswner PriGS me.eK pUBHshed by the U.S. Department sf LaBer,
Bureau efLa.eer S:tatilStiss as speciaeEl. in the impaet Fee liflBate. sma)', Mid By~Je H1ElsJ:eEl
r-ate 6Rliflge afijustfReRts shall he aelaptea. 8:" a reselutieR ef tHe Beard pij.FStloot te
sl:H3SeetieR 71 201.9. sf this SHaflter. based uuoo the nercentalles of increase set forth in
the adooted "Collier County lmuael Fee Indexin2 ~tudv" nreoared bv Tindale-Oliver and
Associates Inc.. in association with Robert W. Burchell. Ph.D. as undated annuallv. and
in accordance with the indexinQ' methodolollv soecified. in the current and adoDted
emereencv medical services imoact fee studv.
SECTION EIGHT. Article l!1, Special Requirements for Specific Types of Impact Fees,
Section 74-307, Special requirements for EducationalfacUities impactfee, subsection (g) of the
Collier County Code of Laws and Ordinances is hereby amended to read as follows:
Section 74-307.
Special requirements for Educational facilities impact fee.
...
(g) Annual mid-cycle educational facilities impact fee rate indexing. Beginning
on May 9, 2006t the county shall commence a three-year educational facilities impact fee
update cycle pursuant to subsections 74-201 (b) and 74-502(a) ofthis chapter. Oa Sf aae1:l-t
1\1a) 1 af During each of the two mid-years between updates, the county shall implement
adjustments ta l3ij.ilaing 88St~ easeS t:lfH3Fl the 13uilEli1'lg 88Bt iA.Bel! flMnielea 13:.' the
Engineering Ne'\,s Resent ElfIe 'waightea as 79 flereeat sf the iaae)(, ]31N8 the BquiI3mef\t
B:I.a ., ehiele 566t5, eases SF! the CSR.51::lffier PnselRaen for the Miarn.i yet. LBBderdale B:rSR
~\c~ti.addcd:rlrlh1hrQ\lgAlCxti5dell:1n1
PagcBonj
Agenda Item NO.1 OA
February 24, 2009
Page 301 of 462
flTEI\'idea 13)' ~he Buroou sf Lassr Statls1:ies, '.vsightet! as ninE! )'lsreeBt sf the iRes);, pl1ti3
the tell ~'ear mstsRsaJ keRB. i:R tetal juat \'aJaes t"er aU ss1:IDfJ'\, iae f1r8FH:~ft~,. (i13.s1uaiag
'etHlaH.gs afla eB<u.et1.Hes) fH.mhaAEl8 BY ilie Callier CSBBt)' PreflSFtj' Ai3fll'aiser's Ofiise,
v'sightea as 12 f3srssRt erthe ituleJl. Mia srels iH8.l!lH!8. Fate shang!! aajlistmel'lH; saall tJe
adeptes 'e~' 11 [6B811::1.t108 sf tHe aaB.:fG pur:ma~b5eeti8n 71201(8) sf this 6flapter.
based "DOn the oercentaees of increase set forth in the adooted 'tealIier County Imoact
Fee Indexinp Studv" oreo<lred bv Tin~Hle-Oliver Rnd ASRnciates. Inc, in aJ:socianon with
Robert W. Burchell. Pb.D.. as undated annually. and in accordance with the indexing
methodology specified in the current and adooted educational facilities impact fee study.
SECTION NINE. Article ill, Special Requirement:!> for Specific Types aflmpact Fees, Section
74-308, Special requirements far Correctional impact lee, subsection (g) of the Collier County
Code of Laws and Ordinances is hereby amended to read as follows:
Section 74-308_
Special requirements for CurrectioDal impact fee.
*H
(g) Annual Mid-Cycle Correctional Impact Fee Rate Indexing. Beginning on
NDvember 1, 2005, the county shall commence a three-year Correctional Impact Fee
update cycle pursuant [0 subsections 74-201 (b) and 74-502(a) of the Code. In each of the
two mid-cycle years (between the fonnalthree-year updates) Beginai::Jg en af about Ha)'
~ the county shall implement adjustments to the correctional impact fee rates
based upon the building cost index rre':ided 8)' the EngiNeering tle":s H.eeere. t iia Sj'eJe
iflde1foo--Ht.f:e-Bhar.ge a8justrneRts ":ill EEl adopted BY a fesohnien sf tbe beard fl~
~tj9n 71 201(13) ef~his sB&j3ter. percentage set forth in the adooted "Collier County
Imoact Fee IndexID2: Study" Dreoared bv Tindale-Oliver and Associates. Inc. in
association with Robert W. Burchell. Ph.D.. as uodated annually. and in accordance with
ihe indexing methodology soecified in the current and adooted correctional imoact fee
study,
SECTION TEN. Article III, Special Requ.irements for Specific Types of Impact Fees, Section
14-JUY, Special requirements for Fire impact jee, subsectlOn (g) of the CollIer County Code ot
Laws and Ordinances is hereby amended to read as follows:
Section 74-309.
Special requirements for Fire impact fee.
H*
(g) Annual Mid-Cycle Fire Impact Fee Rate Indexing. Beginning on February
28,2006, the county shall conunence a three-year fire impact fee update cycle pmsuant to
subsections 74-201 (b) and 74H502(a) of the Code, In each of the two mid-cycle years
(between the fonnal three-year updates) beginning eN Elf eheut Me.~ J S, 20C:, the county
shall implement adjustments to the fire impact fee rates thr8b1gh aajustmsn<:s t8
equiflrnel'l.t~-Cons1:nl'ler Priee laae]: fll:l.131ish2el E~.the e.s. J.;)epartrnSRt ef
1!llil-.rJinrRle...li,added;~_~textj,d"l"led
Page9ofZ5
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24, 2009
Page 302 of 462
LeBel', Bl:H'saa sf 1.aser Statisties as spealiisa in the im.paet fee apaRta atHBY. ~,fiel eyeIe
inaSHe8. fate sRBflge aajaseents shall Be a6.8J!.tea '8;;' a resah::ltiea ef~e aears f1umuaBt 19
saesa&tisB 71 291.'13. sf this ehaflt6f. based UDen the oercentaees of increase set forth in
the oo.o'Oted "CoUier Countv Imo8ct Fee Indeximz Study" oreoared bv Tindale-Oliver and
Associates. !ne.. in association with Robert W. Burcbell. Ph.D.. as uudated annuallv, and
in accordance with the indexioe methorloloev soecified in the current and adonted fire
imoBct fee study.
SECTION ELEVEN. Article ill, Special Requirements for Specific Types of Impact Fees,
Section 74.310, Special requirements for General government building impact fee. subsection
(g) of the Collier County Code of Laws and Ordinances is hereby amended to read as follows:
Section 74-310.
Special requirements for General government building impact fee.
*.*
(g) Annual mid-cycle general government building impact fee rate indexing,
Beginning February 10, 2004, the cOWlty shall commence a three~ycar general
government building impact fee update cycle pursuant to. subsections 74-201(b) and 74-
502(a) of this chapter. OH or ..eat No, ambor 1 ef Durin. each of the two mid-years
between updates, the county shall implement adjustments is land end lnH:lEling eeets
basea ell jl::Lst j3F8f'eft;)' i'afttBS pHblisaea BY the Callier Ce'W'3~' PrafleFty J.;flJlraiaer'a
om" lIRa bail.iHg eaGt iHO'" p..liG.ea bj' the Bngineefing Ne'"e Roeere. Mia ej',lo
inael;ea Fate 6hange aeljl:lstmeflts shaH Be aasflteel Bj' a reselatisfl. sCthe 9800'8. pW'S1:W1t ts
s-Hbseerien 71 201(6) sf tRiG shapteT. based uoon the oercentaees of increase set forth in
the adooted. "Collier Countv Imoact Fee Indexing Studv" prenared by Tindale-Oliver and
Associates. Inc.. in association with Robert W. Burchell. Ph.D.. as undated apnuallv. and
in accordance with the indexine methodoloEV soecified in the current and adoDted
Eeneral government buildinlz imoact fee study,
SECTION TWELVE. Article III, Special Requirements for Specific Types of Impact Fees.
Section 74~311, Special requirements Jor Law enforcemenJ impact fee, subsection (g) of the
Collier County Code of Laws and Ordinances is hereby amended to read as follows:
Section 74-311.
Special requirements for Law enforcement impact fee.
***
(g) Annual mid~cycle law enforcemelll impact fee rate indexing. Beginning June
14, 2005, the COUl1ty shall commence a three.year law enforcement impact fee update
cycle pursuant to subsections 74-201(b) and 74-502(a) of this article. In each of the two
mid-cycle years (between the formal three-year updates) eegianing sa aT [beut .A.Ugu5t I,
~ the county shall implement adjustments t8 lana, BI:;1i1eliBg, ana Ell:luiflmel'lt ees(,:s
basse! an jaet f!lfSlflart)' values j3li'Bliehed 13) tRe Callier CelHR./ Prepert) }.;~flF8.iaer'B
0[51018. lnildiag east iBaSl( flooliehea BY the Engiaeenng }Jews Reeera. B:Il8. tae
~1<:Xli..dded;i:LJlll'~~~ll:xtildeleted
PogelOof25
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24, 2009
Page 303 of 462
CaflSl:U'Ber PRss Ie.EieK l1ahliaaea 8Y lae u.s. DeJlartm9l1t sf Laber, Bl::l.reau. sf 1.aher
Smt49tieG. :Hid e~'ale Huisnel! Fate shange aajastmeats sAa.l~ Be aaaptea BY a resehHisa ef
tBe beard. parsuaat ts 61:iBSeetien 71 2G1EJ;l) efthis shapler. based unen theoercentae:esof
increase set forth in the ado'Oted I1Collier County Imoact Fee Indexine Studvll crenaTed bv
Tindale-Oliver and Associates. !ne.. in association with Robert W. Burchell. Ph.D.. as
uodated annually. and in accordance with' the index!"!! methodology soecified in the
current and adoDted law enforcement imoacl fee study.
SECTION THIRTEEN. CONFLICT AND SEVERABlLITY.
In the event this Ordinance conflicts with any other Ordinance of Callier County or other
applicable law, the more restrictive shall apply. If any phrase or portion of this Ordinance is held
invalid or Wlconstitutional by any court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a
separate, distinct, and independent provision and such holding shall not affect the validity of the
remaining portions.
SECTION FOURTEEN. lNCLUSION IN THE CODE OF LAWS AND ORDINANCES.
The provisions of this Ordinance shall be made a part of the Code of Laws and
Ordinances cfeallier County, Florida. The sections of the Ordinance may be renumbered or re~
lettered and internal cross-references amended throughout to accomplish such, and the word
'''ordinance'' may be changed to "section," "article," or any other appropriate word.
SECTION FIFTEEN. EFFECTIVE DATE.
This Ordinance shall become effective on January I, 2008.
PASSED AND DULY ADOPTED by lhe BOlll'd of Counly Commissioners of Collier
County, Florida this ~~11< day of J \.In ~ ,2007.
ATTEST ..
Dwight E. llrOck; cfetk
. . ,<t>
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSlONERS
OF COLLlER COUNTY. FLORIDA
A~roved as t
an leg
!
form
~textisadded;CIR..lllJ1l'Qgk~xt;!deleled
This ordinance filed wlth the
Sec~tory of State's Office the
~doyof~, ~S!::>-"\-
and ocknowledgement of that
filin.s...received Itlis ~ day
of ':J~:tJ! ~
l'Ojo...Pc:~\
Oo?"'YCie.....
PagellofZS
APPENDIX A
SCHEDULE ONE: ROAD IMPACT FEE RATE SCHEDULE
EFFECTIVE JANUARY I. 2008
Residential
Single Family Detached House
Less than 1,500 sq. ft.
(Annual Household Income ~ Poverty Level)
Less than 1,500 sq. ft.
(Annual Household Income S 5001c of Collier
County Median Armual Household Income)
Rate
$~,.37.09$3.420.19/dwelling unit
$3,7S7.99$4.872.83/dwelling unit
Less than 1,500 sq. ft.
1,500 to 2,499 sq. ft.
2,500 sq. ft. or larger
Multi-Family (1-2 Stories)
Multi-Family (3-9 Stories)
Multi-Family (Above]O Stories
Assisted Living Facility (ALF)
CondominiumlTownhouse
Mobile Home
Retirement Community
High~Rise Condominium
$.,3;~.99$8.247.62/dwelling unit
$8,g81.99$11.522.55/dwelling unit
$9,g81.oo$12.819.55/dwelling unit
$.,2] 9.99$8.054.37 dwelling unit
[.,n8.09$8 220.39/ dwelling unit
$3,820.09$4954.54/ dwelling unit
~$I.032.4l1 dwelling unit
$..9;9.QO$7.858.52/ dwelling unit
$1,131.00$5.361.80/ dwelling unit
$3,21..90$2,913.06/ dwelling unit
$1.232.90$5.488.90/dwelling unit
Lodging
Hotel
Motel
Resort Hotel
RVP,rk
$5,987.00$7.765.] 4 per room
$3,838.99$4.964.92 per room
$;,25..09$6.8] 7.03 per room
$3,300.90$4.280.10 site
Recreation
Golf Course
Movie Theaters
Marina
[801,1...00$1.043.392.40/18 Holes
$11,389.99$54,978.53 PCT screen
$J.S&9.90$4.643.26/boat berth
Institutional
Hospital
Nursing Home
Church
Elementary School
Middle School
High School
Jr..'Cemnnmitj' CeIlege
URi' BFeit;"
University/Jr. Colleee <7.501 Students
Universitv/Jr. CollelZe >7.500 Students
Day Care
$11,198.99$18,4]4.81/1,000 sq. ft.
U,11..99$1.486.36 per bed
$8,922.00$10.404.53/1,000 sq. ft.
~$1.11 1.53 per student
$1,188.99$1.540.84 per student'
$],312.99$1.740.57 per student
~ 1,3 92. 99 Per Elu<lBHt
$2,719.99 PDr Etud,.'
$2.926.03 per student
$2.153.02 De! student
~$1.232.15 per student
~1~lisadded;l:Inl~kthRlught~xll,deleled
Pagel2of2S
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24,2009
Page 304 of 462
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24, 2009
Page 305 of 462
Office
Office 50.000Sq Ft or less
Office 50.001.1 OO.OOOSq Ft or less
Office 100.001.200,000Sq Ft or less
Office 200.001 .400,000Sq Ft or less
Office Greater than 400,000Sq Ft
Medical Office
0.,1?8.90$20.074.97/1.000 sq, ft.
U3,122.0Q$17.019.23/1.000 sq. ft.
$ll.113.QO$14.413.56/I,OOO sq. ft.
$9.11 1.09$12.206.0711,000 sq. ft.
$8,;:lJ.09$1 1.054.33/1,000 sq. ft.
$J€,,89.00$47.585.63/1,000 sq. ft.
Retail
Specialty Retail
Retail 50,OOOSq Ft. or less
Retail 50,OOI.100,000Sq Ft
RetaiII00.001.]50,OOOSq Ft
RetailI50,OOI.200,000Sq Ft
Ret,it 200,001.400,000Sq Ft
Ret,iI400,001.600,000Sq Ft
Retail 600,001.I,OOO,000Sq Ft
Retail greater than l,OOO,OOOSq Ft
PharmacylDrug Store wfDrive- TI1ru
Home Improvement Superstore
Restaurant: High Turnover
Restaurant: Low Turnover
Restaurant: Drive-in
Gasoline/Service Station
Supermarket
Quick Lube
Convenience Store
Convenience Store w/Gas Pumps
f:lI,98?OQ$28.517.14/I,OOO sq. ft.
$I3,9;3.Q9$18.097.04/1 ,000 sq. ft.
t D.] 98.00$] 7.117.81/1,000 sq. ft.
$12.?1 1.00$16.486.17/1 ,000 sq. ft.
$12.03J.00$16.385.00Il,OOO sq. ft.
$II,?lo.OO $15,195.65/],000 Sq. Ft.
$12,?l:l.00$]6.487.46/1.000 sq. ft.
$IJ,07..00$17.608.07l1,OOO sq. ft.
$10.,&3.00$21.508.15/].000 sq. ft.
_ [I3.J08.QQ $17.260.48/t,OOO sq. ft.
tlJ,21..0Q $17141.15/1,000 sq. ft.
$55,73;.00$72.288.301,000 sq. ft.
$11,801.00$58.188.61/1,000 sq. ft.
tl J 1,91 ;.QO$I7I.093.76/1,OOO sq. ft.
$:,519.99$9.791.05 oer fuel position
;10,711.00$21.713.08/ ].000 sq. ft.
$D.1io.OQ$17.491.34 per bay
$19,913.Q9$1] 6.656.07/1,000 sq. ft.
$J?,;7;.00$48.734.78 per fuel position
ServIces
Tire Store
New/Used Auto Sales
Luxury Auto Sales
Bank/Savings: Walk-in
Bank/Savings: Drive-in
Car Wash
$19,958.00$13 045.23 per bay
$:I;,9J;.90$33 637.70/1,000 sq. ft.
tl J,817.00$17 920.65/] ,000 sq. ft.
$12,700.00$55.381.90/1,000 sq. ft.
$83,.9Q.0Q$108.545.93/t,OOO sq. ft.
~J J ,906.00$43.976.08 per bay
Industrial and Agricultural
General Industrial
Business Park (Flex-space)
Mini- Warehouse
$?,975.QQ$9.176.28/1,000 sq. ft.
n2,996.gQ$16,855.81/1,000 sq. ft.
$1,l~;,gQ$1 770.4t/ 1,000 sq. ft.
~texli..ddcd;l>\J'u.811~r"Usrl~xti.delelcll
?D&enoC25
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24, 2009
Page 306 of 462
APPENDIX A
SCHEDULE TWO: WATER AND SEWER SYSTEM IMPACT FEE RATE SCHEDULE
EFFECTIVE JANUARY 1. Z008
INDIVIDUALLY METERED SERVICE
LIVING SPACE (SQ.FT,) ERC METER WATER SEWER
VALUE SIZE IMPACT FEES IMPACT FEES
o TO 4,999 $3;#& ~
(AND NO MORE THAN 4 1 3/4" $3.616.49 $3,722.39
BATHROOMS)
5,000 OR MORE ADFI ~
(OR MORE THAN 4 350 ERC VALUE x $3.722.39
BATHROOMS) (mln
value of PER $M4&
1.0) EaR $3.615.49 ERG VALUE x
(rounded {minimum value ~
Non-Residential to the ~ $3.722.39
nearest (mlnlmum value
lenth) ~ <3 722.39'
MASTER METERED SERVICE
UVING SPACE (SQ. FT.) ERC FREQUENCY WATER SEWER
VALUE OF FEE IMPACT FEES IMPACT FEES
Residential Unit. 0 TO 750 0.33 Per Unit $1,128.00 $1,1.0.00
$1,191.38 $1,226.44
Residential Unit. 751 TO 1,500 0.67 Per Un~ $2,290.00 $2,Jaa.OQ
$2.425.11 $2.493.95
Residential Unit - 1.501 TO 1 Per Unit ~~,11O.99 $J,a15.QQ
4,999 $3.616.49 $3.722.39
Residential Unit - 5,000 OR ADFI ~
MORE (OR MORE THAN 4 350
BATHROOMS) (mln ERG VALUE x $3.722.39
value of $J.M&
1.0) $3,516.49 ERG VALUE x
{rounded (minimum value ~
Non-Residential 10 the $3A4i $3 616.49) $3,722.39
nearest (mlnl~~3m vaIU~)
tenth) ~ 3722.39
ACRONYM KEY:
ADF . Average Dally Flows for proposed use as provided by EOR
eOR _ Engineer of R.ecord for project
ERe ~ EquIvalent Residential Connection (1 ERe = 3$0 gallons per day)
~lllxli~ldded;l>I"'i11,",rlllilhICl:tisdelcled
Plge\4lJf2S
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24,2009
Page 307 of 462
APPENDIX A
SCHEDULE THREE: PARKS AND RECREATIONAL FACIUTIES IMPACT FEE
RATE SCHEDULE
EFFECTIVE JANUARY 1. Z008
COMMUNITY PARKS (Calculated on Living Area):
LAND USE:
RATE
PER
SINGLE-FAMlL Y DETACHED:
Less than 1,500 sq. ft.
1,500 to 2,499 sq. ft.
2,500 sq. ft. or more
~ $1.075.25
$l,0;li.90 S1.181 05
II,1I9.00$1.286.85
Dwelling Unit
Dwelling Unit
Dwelling Unit
MULTI. FAMILY
~ $862.50
~$1.062.60
Dwelling Unit
MOBILE HOMEfRV PARK
Pad
HOTELlMOTEL
~S578.45
Room
REGIONAL PARKS (Calculated on Living Area):
LAND USE:
RATE
PER
SINGLE-FAMILY DETACHED:
Less than 1,500 sq. ft.
] ,500 to 2,499 sq. 1\,
2,500 sq. ft. or more
I2.G.8.00 $2.378.20 Dwelling Unit
$2,27J.OO $2.612.80 Dwelling Unit
$2,~?.OO $2.847.40 Dwelling Unit
~1ULTI-FAMILY
$l,.39.0Q $1.907.85 Dwelling Unit
MOBILE HOMEfRV PARK
.2,g~3.GQ$2.351.75 Pad
HOTELlMOTEL
$1,113.00 $1.279.95 Room
Note: Community Parks lmpact Fees do not apply to the City of Naples, City of Marco Island
and Everglades City.
.l.1nmliIw1 text il added: l:1r rf V, a III lextbde\el..:!
hgel5of2S
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24, 2009
Page 308 of 462
APPENDIX A
SCHEDULE FOUR: CORRECTIONAL FAClLITlES IMPACT FEE RATE
SCHEDULE
EFFECTIVE JANUARY 1. 2008
Land Use
Correctional Facilities Impact Fee Per Square Foot
Single-Family Detached
t9.1 9B7BliU per square foot'
Other ResidentiallNursing Home
~~er square foot.......
Non-Residential:
Lodging
HoteV Motel
~$0.346 per square foot
Medical
Hospital
~$O.367 per square foot
Commercial
Office
~$O.240 per square foot
RetaiUCommercial/Recreation
~m2ll per square foot
RestaurantIBar ILounge
~$O.611 per square foot
Industrial/Manufacturing
~$O.033 Fer square foot
Leisure/Outdoor
~$O.61J persquare foot
. The Correctional Facilities Impact Fee is capped based upon the fee applicable to a 4,000 square foot (HYing area)
Single-Family Detached dwelling unn.
.. The Correctional Facilities Impact Fee is capped based upon the fee applicable to a 4,000 square foot (living
area) Other Reiidential dwelling unit. The cap does Dot apply to the Jqullre footage of Nursing Homes.
l!nll;rlio.;lIlCXtl,add~d;r""nl,llm' g~te:o;LI$deleled
Pag~ 16 of2S
Agenda Item NO.1 OA
February 24, 2009
Page 309 of 462
APPENDIX A
SCHEDULE FIVE: FIRE IMPACT FEE RATE SCHEDULE
EFFECTrvE JANUARY 1. 2008
Ocbopee Fire Control and Rescue District
Residential:
~ 1Q1i.per square foot~
fH...iHlUffi fe. efi2,9GG)*
Non-Residential:
~~er square foot
Isles of Capri Fire Control and Rescne District
Residential:
~~er square foot~
(Hanimlli1:l fee af[I,819)"'.
Non-Residential:
~ -illi per square foot
'" The Ochopee Fire Control and Rescue District Impact Fee is capped based upon the fee
applicable to a 4,000 square foot dwelling unit
U T.he Isles of Capri Fire Control and Resoue District Impact Fee is capped based upon the fee
applicable to a 4,000 square foot dwelling unit
Un&rlinerltcllll,.ddt::rl;[;1r vI I~r g'q'."tlldcletcd
PIgcl70nS
APPENDIX A
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24, 2009
Page 310 of 462
SCHEDULE SIX: EDUCATIONAL FACILITIES IMPACT FEE RATE SCHEDULE
Housing Type
Single-Family
Less than 1,500 square feet
1,500 - 2,499 square feet
2,500 square feet or larger
Multi.Farnily
Mobile Home
EFFECTIVE JANUARY 1. 2008
Impact Fee Rate (per dwelling unit)
~g,22g.9G
~?,2D6.0Q
SIQ,017.99
S2,862.90
S5,731.09
$9.026.12
$10,On.98
$10,988.65
$3.139.61
$6.279.23
~ieXli,llldtd;!;Io..g]URUil~lel[li,delet~d
J>alltllloOS
APPENDIX A
Agenda Item NO.1 OA
February 24, 2009
Page 311 of 462
SCHEDULE SEVEN: EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICES IMPACT FEE RATE
SCHEDULE
EFFECTIVE JANUARY 1. 2008
Impact Fee Land Use Category
Residential:
Less than 1,500 square feet
I ,500 to 2,499 square feet
2,500 square feet or more
Transient, Assisted, Group:
Hotell Motol
Nursing home
RecreatioDsl:
Marina
Golf Course
Movie Theater with Matinee
Institutions:
Hospital
Elementary School
Middle School
High School
Junior/Community College
University/College
Church
Day Care Center
Office and Financial:
Office 50,000 sq. ft. or less
Officc 50,001 -100,000 sq. ft.
Office 100,001 - 200,000 sq. ft,
Officc 200,001 - 400,000 sq. ft.
Office greater than 400,000 sq. ft.
Medical Office
Retail (Gross Square Feet)
Specialty Retail
Retail 50,000 sq, ft. oIless
Retail 50,001 -100,000 sq. ft.
Retail 100,001 -150,000 sq. ft.
Retail 150,00 I - 200,000 sq. ft.
Retail 200,001 - 400,000 sq. ft.
Retail 400,001 - 600,000 sq. fl.
Retail 600.001 - 1,000,000 sq. ft.
Retail over 1,000,000 sq. ft.
PhannacylDrug Store wlDrive-Thru
Home Improvement Superstore
Quality Restaurant
High~Turnover Restaurant
Fast Food Rest. wlDrive.thru
Gas/Service Station
Quick Lube
Supermarket
Convenience Store
Convenience Store w/Gas
Impact Fee Rate
~ $112.46 per dwelling unit
~ ~ per dwelling unit
~ llill2 per dwelling unit
~ illJl per room
&+8M- $87.77 per bed
~ ~erbertb
$1,739.97 $5,289.22 per 18 holes
~ $786.30 per screen
~
$4,9.!.
~
~
$4,9.!.
~
~
~
~
WlHQ
~
~
~
$HMS
illQM. per 1,000 sq. ft.
$5.49 per student
$6.39 per student
tUl per student
~ per student
i.1..1M per student
illJl per 1,000 sq. fl.
$5.49 per student
$152.69 per 1,000 sq. ft.
$117.95 per 1,000 sq. ft,
$100.58 per 1,000 sq. ft.
$85.94 per 1,000 sq. ft.
$73.14 per 1,000 sq. ft.
$158.17 per 1,000 sq. ft.
~ $137.15 per 1,000 sq. ft.
$u+.I+ $262.41 per l,eOO sq. ft.
~ $240.46 per 1,000 sq. ft
~ $213.95 per 1,000 sq. ft.
~ $260.57 per 1,000 sq. ft
~ $228.58 per t,OOO sq. ft.
~ $233.15 per 1,000 sq. ft.
~ $233.15 per 1,000 sq. ft.
~ $191.09 per 1,000 sq. ft.
~ $171.89 per 1,000 sq. ft.
$+4H+ $162.75 per 1,000 sq. ft.
~ $618.98 per 1,000 sq. ft.
~ S648.24 per 1,000 sq. ft.
~ $800.02 per 1,000 sq. ft.
~ SI81.03 per ruel position
~ S106.o5 per service bay
~ S185.60 per 1,000 sq. ft.
~ $387.67 per 1,000 sq. ft.
~ $397.72 per fuel position
~\~tisadd~d;!:1f1.1tl"JEi'U:);llid~ltlcd
Plg~ 19 or2S
Auto Repair
Tire Store
New and Used Car Sales
Self Service Car Wash
Bank/Savings Walk-in
Bank/Savings Drive-in
Industrial:
General Industrial
Business Park
Mini-warehouse
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24, 2009
Page 312 of 462
~ $Z9I.66 per 1,000 sq. ft
~ $14Z.63 per service bay
~ lliillper t,OOOsq. ft.
$M4M $1 n.80 per service bay
~ $Z34,97 per 1,000 sq. ft.
~ $189.26 per t,OOOsq. ft.
~ $63.09 per 1,000 sq. fI.
~ $91.43 per 1,000 sq. ft.
~ $6.39 per 1,000 sq. ft.
~lexlislllded;Cwui)~i~tel:tisdell:ted
PIge2Clof25
APPENDIX A
SCHEDULE EIGHT: LIBRARY IMPACJ FEE RATE SCHEDULE
EFFECTIVE JANUARY 1. Z008
Land Use Category
Impact Fee Rate
Single-Family Detached:
Less than 1,500 square reet
~ $503.49 oer dwelling unit
1,500 to 2,499 'quare feet
~ $553.84 'Per dwelling unit
2,500 square feet or more
~ $600.16 oer dwelling unit
Muhi.Family
~ $402.79 oer dwelling unit
Mobile Home
~ $497.44 oer dwelling unit
~leK';I.d<kll;&'~lli'ig,.~~lcxt;.del"led
Fage2lof25
Agenda Item No.1 OA
February 24, 2009
Page 313 of 462
APPENDIX A
SCHEDULE NINE:
GENERAL GOVERNMENT BUILDING IMPACT FEE SCHEDULE
EFFECTIVE JANUARY 1. 2008
Land Use
Residential:
Singte Family:
Less than 1,500 sq ft
1,500 to 2,499 sq ft
2,500 sq ft or more
Rate
m>.oo $796.05
~ $886.09
mJ..OO $967.34
$4-lM(l $450.18
~ $640.13
Multi Family
Mobile Home
Transient, Assisted, Group
HotellMotel
Nursing Homo.' ALF
~
$4-1+.00
Recreational
Marina
Golf Course
Movie Theater with Matinee
m.oo
~8,l91.0g
$~
Institutions
Hospital
Elementary School
Middle School
High School
Junior/Community College
University/College
Church
Day Care Center
~
rn..oo
~
~
rn..oo
~
~
rn..oo
Office and Financial
Office 50,000 sq. ft. OT less
Office 50,001-100,000 sq. ft. or less
Office 100,001-200,000 sq. ft. orless
Office 200,001-400,000 sq. ft. or less
Office Greater than 400,000 sq. ft.
Medical Office
~
~
~
~
~
~
Retail
Specialty Retail
Retail 50,000 sq ft or less
Retail 50,001-100,000 sq. ft.
Retail 100,001-150,000 sq. ft.
Retail 150,001-200,000 sq. ft.
Retail 200,001-400,000 sq. ft.
Retail 400,001-600,000 sq. ft.
$04+.00
tl,239.00
$1,135.00
$1,010.00
$1,230.00
$I ,079.00
$1,101.00
!.1nlkr.I.itwtlexl i; .dded: tmnh '~r9~aJ. lexl i~ deleted
Page 22 of25
$341,48/Room
$454.57/Bed
$94.43/Berth
$9.213.32118 Holes
$4075.78/Screoo
$781.78/1,000 sq. ft.
~Studoot
$32.941Studoot
$38.43/Student
$28.55/Student
$61.49/Studoot
$270.11/1,000 sq. ft.
$28.55/Studoot
$791.66/1,000 sq. ft.
$611.59/1,000 sq. ft.
$521.55/1,000 sq. ft.
$445.7911,000 sq. ft.
$378.81/1,000 sq. ft.
$820.21/1,000 sq. ft.
$710.41/1,000 sq. ft.
$1.360.42/1,000 sq. ft.
$1.246.2311,000 sq. ft.
$1.l08.98/1,000 sq. ft.
$1.350.54/1,000 sq. ft.
$1.184.74/1,000 sq. ft.
$1.208.90/t,000 sq. ft.
Agenda Item NO.1 OA
February 24, 2009
Page 314 of 462
Retail 600,001-1,000,000 sq. ft.
Retail greater tlum 1,000,000 sq. ft.
PharmacyIDrug Store wIDrive- Thru
Horne Improvement Superstore
Quality Restaurant
High Turnover Restaurant
Fast Food Rest wlDrive-Thru
Gas/Service Station
Quick Lube
Supermarket
Convenience Store
Convenience Store w/Gas
Tire Store
New/Used Auto Sales
Self Service Car Wash
Bank/Savings: Walk-in
Bank/Savings: Drive-in
Industrial
General Industrial
Business Park
Mini-Warehouse
Sl,IOJ.OO
~
~
~
$2,922.00
13,000,00
$3,777.00
~
~
$&+6,00
>1,830.00
Xt,S;8.00
w;,oo
~
~
X1,109.00
$S94,OO
;;wg,oo
~
~
$1.208.90/1,000 sq. ft,
5990.40/1 ,000 sq. ft.
$891.58/1,000 sq. ft.
5843.26/1,000 sq. ft.
$3 208.36/1,000 sq. ft.
$3.359.88/1,000 sq. ft.
$4.147.15/1,000 sq. ft.
$938.79/fuel position
$550.1O/bay
$961.85/1,000 sq. ft.
$2,009.34/1,000 sq. ft.
$2.062,04/fuel position
$738.95/bay
5820.21/1,000 sq. ft.
$895.97/bay
$1.217.68/1,000 sq. ft.
$981.61/1,000 sq. ft.
5327.2011,000 sq. ft.
$474.34/1,000 sq. ft.
$32.94/1,000 sq. ft.
~ Ie", is added; ~lI\nlt l~n~llh tat is d~leled
hge23or25
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24,2009
Page 315 of 462
APPENDIX A
SCHEDULE TEN: LAW ENFORCEMENT IMPACT FEE RATE SCHEDULE
Land Use
Residential:
Single-Family:
Less than 1,500 square feet
1,500 to 2,499 square feet
2,500 square feet or more
Multi.Family
Mobile Home
TransieDt, Assisted, Group
Hotel/Motel
Nursing Home!ALF
Recreational
Marina
Golf Course
Movie Theater with Matinee
Institutions
Hospital
Elementary School
Middle School
High School
Jr.lCommunity College
University/College
Church
Day Care Center
Office a.nd Financlal
Office 50,000 sq. ft. or less
Office 50,001-100,000 sq. ft. or less
Office 100,001-200,000 sq. ft. ortess
Office 200,001-400,000 sq. ft. or less
Office Greater than 400,000 sq. ft.
Medical Office
Retail
Specialty Retail
Retail 50,000 sq. ft. or less
Retilil 50,001-100,000 sq. ft.
Retail 100,001-150,000 sq. ft.
Retail 150,001-200,000 sq. ft.
Retail 200,001-400,000 sq. fl.
EFFECTIVEJANVARY 1. 200S
Rate
~ $309.75/dwelling unit
~ $344.54/dwelling unit
~ ,UZiiZldweUing unit
~ $ I 86.20/dwelIing unit
~ $257.54/dwelling unit
_ $99.19fRoom
~ lliL.Q2/Bed
~ $29.58/Berth
~1,J71.19 $3.661.22/18 Holes
~ $941.41/Screen
~
~
$l+.64
~
~
~
~
$&,00
$346.29/1,000 sq. fl.
lli,QQ/Student
$19.14/Student
$21.18/Student
$24.36/Student
$55.68/Student
$88.74/1,000 sq. ft.
$8.70/Student
~ $219.26/1,000 sq. ft.
m;,u $187.93/1,000 sq. ft.
~ $160.09/1,000 sq. ft..
~ $135.73/1,000 sq. ft.
~ llilliIl.Ooo sq. ft.
~ $274.94/1,000 sq. ft.
~ $341.06/1,000 sq. ft.
~ $551.61/1,000 sq. ft..
~ .~/I,OOOsq. ft.
~ $562.06/1,000 sq. ft.
~ $527.26/1,000 sq. ft.
Wh8ll $457.65/1,000 sq. ft.
~lc~liJDdded;(:WUil[thrBghte:o:lsdtleted
hge24 of2S
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24, 2009
Page 316 of 462
Relai14oo,001-600,OOO sq. ft.
Retail 600,001-t,000,000 sq. ft.
Retail greater than 1,000,000 sq. ft.
Phannacy/Drog Store w/Drive- Thru
Home Improvement Superstore
Quality Restaurant
High Turnover Restaurant
Fast Food Rest. w/Drive- Thru
Gas/Service Station
Quick Lube
Supermarket
Convenience Store
Convenience Store w/Gas
Tire Store
New/Used Auto Sales
Self Service Car Wash
BankJSavings: Wa1k~in
Bank/Savings: Drive-in
Industrial
General Industrial
Business Park
Mini-Warehouse
w+,s4 $475.06/1,000 sq. ft.
~ $471.57/1,000 sq. ft.
mJ-rl(l $414.14/1,000 sq. ft.
~ $401.97/1,000 sq. ft.
~ Will/1,OOO sq. ft.
~1,2gJ.g4 51.392.10/1.000 sq. ft.
~1,J74.1. $1.491.29/1,000 sq. ft.
~1.777.gl 51,928.06/1,000 sq. ft.
~ $426.33/Fuel Pusition
~ $191.42/Bay
~ $395.01/1,000 sq. ft.
m4M $840.48/1,000 sq. ft.
~1,122.€€ $1.218.09/FueJ Position
~ $283.64/Bay
~ $330.62/1,000 sq. It
~ $339.32/Bay
~ $382.83/1,000 sq. ft.
= ~t,OOOsq.f\.
-
~
~
$107.89/1.000 sq. ft.
$156.61/1,000 sq. ft.
$12.18/1,000 sq. ft.
~ttll:liiaddtd:E\f~alllfrsughlexl'sdclcled
Page 2S ofZS
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24, 2009
Page 317 of 462
Agenda Item No. lOA
February 24, 2009
Page 318 of 462
STATE OF FLORIDA)
COUNTY OF COLLIER)
I, DWIGHT E. BROCK, Clerk of Courts in and for the
Twentieth Judicial Circuit, Collier County, Florida, do
hereby certify that the foregoing is a true and correct
copy of:
ORDINANCE 2007-57
Which was adopted by the Board of County Commissioners
on the 26th day of June, 2007, during Regular Session.
WITNESS my hand and the official seal of the Board of
County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, this 28th
day of June, 2007.
DWIGHT E. BROCK
Clerk of Courts and. clerk
'1,.1,.
Ex-officio to Board..of: ", \
County CommissioneJ;B '. ". .'.,
. ~ '.," I... .:. .
~~ \ (, b~~~;~d~~::
\~;:;esa pola~'J{:i;;J<' ..'
Deputy Clerk'
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24,2009
Page 319 of 462
RESOLUTION NO. 2008- 202
A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF
COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, AMENDING THE IMPACf FEE RATES
ESTABLISHED BY ORDINANCE NO. 2007-57.
WHEREAS, on March 13, 2001, the Board of County Commissioners adopted
Ordinance No. 2001-13, the Collier County Consolidated Impact Fee Ordinance, repealing and
superceding all oilhe County's then existing impact fee regulations, and consolidating all of the
County's impact fee regulations into that one Ordinance, codified in Chapter 74 of the CoIlier
County Code of Law and Ordinances (the Code), and incorporating the water and sewer impact
fee rates established by the adoption of Ordinance No. 98-69; and
WHEREAS, on December 11, 2001, the Board of County Commissioners ("Board'')
adopted Resolution No. 2001-488 thereby amending Schedule Two of Appendix A of Chapter 74
of the Code, as amended, the same being the Collier County Consolidated Impact Fee Ordinance;
increasing the Water and Sewer Impact Fee rates and directed staff to update the Impact Fee after
one year; and
WHEREAS, in accordance with that direction, the County has retained Public Resources
Management Group, Inc. ("the Consultant") to review the existing water and sewer impact fees
and to recommend changes to those fees if appropriate; and
WHEREAS, on February 12, 2002, the Board adopted Resolution No. 2002-88 to correct
Scrivener's errors, and to correct the water impact fee downward by $50 per Equivalent
Residential Unit (ERC), and to amend Schedule Two of Appendix A of Chapter 74 of the Code,
as amended, the same being the Collier County Consolidated Impact Fee Ordinance; thereby
increasing the Water and Sewer Impact Fee rates; and
WHEREAS, on June 6, 2006, the Board adopted Ordinance No. 2006-26 amending
Ordinance No. 2001-13 changing the impact fee rate; and
WHEREAS, on June 26, 2007, the Board adopted Ordinance No. 2007-57 amending
Ordinance No. 2006-26 changing the impact fee rate and to include Annual Mid-Cycle water and
sewer impact fee rate indexing; and
WHEREAS, the County uses impact fees to supplement the funding of necessary capital
improvements required to provide public facilities to serve new population and related
development that is necessitated by growth in Collier County; and
WHEREAS, the Consultant has estimated the cost to future utility system users of
approximately five-hundred and three million ($503 million) in the next ten (10) years; and
WHEREAS, the Consultant has recommended a water impact fee rate decrease from
$3,616.49 per ERC to $3,575 per ERC, a decrease of $41.49 and a sewer impact fee rate
decrease from $3,722.39 per ERC to $3,495 per ERC, a decrease of $277.39 for all customer
classes based on their ERe's equivalents; and
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24, 2009
Page 320 of 462
WHEREAS, the above recommended rate decrease for water and rate decrease for sewer
establish these rates at the maximum levels allowed in accordance with equity tests established
and existing pursuant to Florida law; and
WHEREAS, staff has thoroughly reviewed the Consultant's findings and
recommendations and staff concurs with the recommended decrease to water and the
recommended decrease to sewer impact ree rate changes, and staff recommends that the Board
adopt this Resolution to implement these recommended changes; and
WHEREAS, the Board finds that it is in the health, safety and welfare to accept the
recommendations of the Consultant and from staff.
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, that:
The Board of County Commissioners hereby declares, after advertised public hearing,
that the water and sewer impact fee rates set forth in the revised Schedule Two of Appendix A of
Ordinance No. 2007-57. as amended, the Collier County Consolidated Impact Fee Ordinance, the
same being Schedule Two of Appendix A of Chapter 74 of the Collier County Code of Law and
Ordinances, attached hereto. and incorporated be reference herein as Exhibit "A" are fair and
reasonable and are to be assessed to those who receive or will receive benefits from increased
water facilities capacity, increased sewer public facilities capacity, Dr from both, which increased
capacity is necessitated by increased population and related growth driven development.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that these revised water and sewer impact fees will take)
effect as of8:00 A.M, on Wednesday, October I, 2008. /
This Resolution is adopted after motion; second and majority vote favoring adoption this
;),-\""" day ~" _ . ,2008.
ATTES"f.!' f,~~f.\;
DwiGHT E. BROOK, CLERK
~. . - ". ~<}
.f.~ , , . , .\ ,..;.
VJ '::: '.
,. '.
il\l1lltUl"i'Onl
Approval as to form and legal Sufficiency:
OCr
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA
By: 4AJ '
TbJ~NNlN~
J enni A. Belpedio
Assistant County Attorn
~
"
.j !
f.
.s.!!
p.
< ! .
= II,
~ H 'I
"
., -
"1
~
u$ :J
~
. :u
. ~ ~ .
h ~ '"
i ~ ~ ~ ~ a ; ~ '1
r . . ; . i
t f . f A
- i i
. i ! tll
l~ ~ i i ! ! ! ! I ~
r ~ a 2
~ !~ f-- .i f-- ..
.
. :G
~ ~ .: ~ ,; ~
.~ ~ a ~i ! ! 0' .,
~' " ~ ; ; 3 h ~ e i
a ~ 0 0
f . f l d
~ . .
I-- ~ m i c---"-
. m ~ ~ III
< ~ ! ~ I i ! ~
s ~~ ~ ~
" ~ 8 0 8 -' a
"~ ~ w ~
ig - ~m - . ffi- ...-
II ,. "s !l -. e H ".
':i !l" ~L I:l 'I
m~ '0 . d. ~~ , "I ~ Hi
,,0 MI .., Ml . . . r ~ MI H
~ H ~ 11 If
~ - - - ~
~ 11 ~ g I
I ~ ~ !i
~ ~ t. ; , , , ; !~
.- 0-
- I - - f-!-
~~ ; I ~~ ; ~ ~ ~ ~~ I
~" ~" ,0
etl , , ~g , , , ! o~ ,
~;j ~~ h
..
I-- - - I--
2 f I 2 o. W
g 0 w I
. ~
~ i , . 5~~ ij
I . ,
I ~ ~ 1
0 I ~ h' ~ I
~ ,
! ,
Agenda Item No. lOA
February 24, 2009
Page 321 of 462
,
1
;
K !
I ~ !
fl~H
:!l~
'j i ZI
! jq
H-I'
HIll
iP"ll
Ii!.l
~
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24, 2009
Page 322 of 462
Attachment C-2
Article VI. Water-Sewer District
Uniform Billing, Operating and
Regulatory Standards
ARTICLE VI. WATER-SEWER DTqTRlCT UNIFORM BILLING, OPERA TING A~.Qi'PItltllI}l'bfll'l&
Februal'Y 24, 2009
Page 323 of 462
ARTICLE VI. WATER-SEWER DISTRICT UNIFORM BILLING, OPERATING AND
REGULATORY STANDARDS*
*Editor's note: Ord. No. 01-73, ss 1.1--1.4, adopted Dec. 11, 2001, did not specifically amend this
Code but is treated as superseding !is134-171--134-174 in their entirety at the discretion of the editor.
Further, said ordinance !is 2.1--7 provided additional regulations included as ss 134-175-134-180 at
the discretion of the editor to read as herein set out. Section 11 of said ordinance states that the revised
rates shall not go into effect until April 1 , 2002. See the Code Comparative Table--Ordinance
Disposition Table.
DIVISION 1. DISTRICT RATES FEES CHARGES AND REGULATIONS
Sec. 134-171. Definitions.
Unless specifically provided otherwise these definitions shall apply to this section.
District shall refer to thejCollier County Water-Sewer District.J
Equivalent dweliing unit shall mean the equivalent usage requirements of an average single-
family residential connection. It is used as a factor to convert a given average daily water or wastewater
requirement to the equivalent number of single-family residential connections.
Equivalent residential connection shall mean 350 gallons of water per day and is 250 gallons of
sewerage treatment per day. .
Good/and shall mean the Goodland Service Area is classified as a subdistrict of the Collier
County Water-Sewer District as the service is dependent on a bulk purchase with a private entity and
therefore has a rate structure that is different from the major district rate structure.
SeNice availability charge shail mean a monthly charge per dwelling unit or equivalent dwelling
unit for residential and non-residential users with no usage included.
"Sewer only use" shall be defined as the connection of drains for all faucets and facilities on the
property where well water or potable water from a non-district water supply or where no water
(leachate) is used.
Sewer use shall be defined as thE! connection of drains for all faucets and facilities on the
property, where potable water is used in connection with sanitary purposes from the potable watE!r
system. Such usages shall include, but not be limited to, sinks, showers, bathtubs, commodes, urinals,
bidets, dishwashers, washers, and other such facilities. "Sewer use" shall specifically not include runoff
water being al10wed to E!nter the district sanitary sewer system.
Use shall mean with respect to "water use" on the district's water system, which is a potable
water system, shall mean the sole utilization of water from the district system through all fixtures and
pipelines on the property except where a separately metered system is available solely for outside
irrigation. Any such irrigation shall require an approved backflow prevention device and a physical
separation from the remaining potable water system. 'Water use" shall specifically Include, but not be
limited to, the flow of water to all sinks, dishwashers, commodes, urinals, showers, hot water heaters,
washers, drinking water coolers and drinking water machines. Such facilities shall also drain to the
district's sanitary sewer system, where available, in conformance with other applicable sections of this
htto:111ibrarv1.munlcode.com/default/Doc View/1 0578/1/305/311
4117/2008
ARTICLE VI. WATER-SEWER DJ"TRICT UNIFORM BILLING, OPERATING ANlil30Dli'~~2SA
February 24, 2009
Page 324 of 462
article as well as other ordinances adopted by the county, or applicable state and federal laws,
rules or regulations.
(Ord. No. 01-73, ~ 1.1,12-11-01; Ord. No. 2006-27, ~ 3)
Sec. 134-172. Monthly rates, fees and charges.
Monthly rates, fees and charges for water, sewer, or effluent irrigation, and fire meter services
provided by or made available by the district shall be sufficient to recover system operation,
maintenance, renewal enhancement, replacement and debt service costs and shall be proportionally
distributed among system users and customers receiving the benefits as follows:
(1) Monthly user fees for the Collier County Water-Sewer District. Residential and non-
residential properties within the boundaries of the county water-sewer district shall pay
the rates, fees and charges for service provided by the county water-sewer district in
accordance with Appendix A--Schedule 1.
(2) Monthly user fees for the Goodland Water Subdistrict. The rates for service to
residential and non-residential properties within the Goodland Water Subdistrict shall be
in accordance with Appendix A--Schedule 2.
(3) Monthly user fees for effluent irrigation usage In the district shall be in accordance
. with Appendix A--Schedule 3. Except in cases where a written agreement between the
district and the property owner establishes a minimum gallonage monthly effluent rate
that cannot be changed unilaterally by the district, all golf course and other bulk sales of
effiuent shall be sold and billed in accordance with this section.
(4) Accounts and bill delivery addresses.
a. Accounts shall be established in the name of the property owner.
b. Monthly bills will be sent to the address requested in the service application.
c. Changes of address for billing purposes must be approved by the property
owner. Approval can be by letter, district change of address form or bye-mail.
d. Duplicate bills may be requested by letter or district change of address
form/or e-mail.
e. A duplicate bill processing fee (Appendix A--Schedule 6) will be placed on the
account for billing purposes.
(5) Methods of payment.
a. Cash, check, direct debit andlor credit card (when available), and electronic
transfer are available methods to pay monthly bills.
b. Cash, check and credit card payments may be made at the billing office
address.
c. Check payments can be made through the U.S. mail to the lockbox facility in
the envelope provided with the bill to the P.O. box.
d. Credit card payments (when available) can be made telephonically.
e. Direct debit payments are available. Requires processing of a direct debit
approval form.
f. Non-sufficient funds (NSF) checks returned by the district bank or banks will
not be reprocessed for payment. The amount of the NSF check plus an
appropriate NSF charge (Appendix A--Schedule 6) and where applicable any
other fees and charges will be placed on the account for rebilling.
httD://librarv 1.municode.com/defaultlDoc View/10578/1/305/311
4/17/2008
ARTICLE VI. WATER-SEWER PTSTRICT UNIFORM BILLING, OPERA TING hND'l.9i'Pltlre I3cof12&
February 24, 2009
Page 325 of 462
(Ord. No. 01-73, S 1.2,12-11-01)
Sec. 134-173. District rates, fees and charges other than monthly user fees.
(a) Meter installation charges for meters and for backflow devices two inches or smaller in size
are to be paid to the district in accordance with Appendix A--Schedule 4.
The fees in this subsection are based upon meter installation costs for a typical single-family
residential street.
(1) All meters two inches or smaller will be installed by the district and shall remain the
property of the district.
(2) For meters larger than two inches, the materials and labor for installation of such
meters shall be furnished by the developer in accordance with district requirements and
specifications and dedicated to the district in accordance with county ordinances, at no
cost to the district.
(3) Meters must be left accessible to district employees at all times. Dangerous andlor
dense underbrush will be trimmed to a "margin of safety" by district employees.
(4) When any property owner, who has a water meter, makes application to the district
for the installation of a larger meter to replace a smaller meter, and such installation is
approved, a tapping fee for the larger meter is required and no credit shall be given for
tapping charges paid on the smaller meter. The difference in impact fees between the
smaller meter and the larger meter must be paid before a work order will be issued for
the installation of the larger meter. There shall be no refunds or credits of tapping fees or
impact fees given to any property owner requesting a smaller meter.
(b) Temporary meters.
(1) Temporary meters may be installed and removed by the district. The fee for such
Installation and removal shall be based upon the district's actual costs for time,
equipment and material, as appropriate, in accordance with Appendix A--Schedule 5.
(2) The temporary meter monthly charge for service shall be based upon the non-
residential monthly availability and volume charges.
(3) A work order for the installation of a temporary meter will be issued upon receipt of
an executed temporary meter application.
(4) A refundable temporary meter deposit (Appendix A--Schedule 6) must be paid
concurrently with the temporary meter application. The deposit may be used to offset
costs for repair andlor replacement to district assets. If damages and repair costs are
greater than the deposit, the applicant will be invoiced for the remainder.
(c) District rates, fees, and charges other than monthiy user fees, meter tapping fees, time and
material fees, temporary meter fees, impact fees, industrial sewer use fees, backflow prevention
service fees and development/permitting related fees. The rates, fees and charges established
by this section include but are not limited to the services listed below. The actual charge rate for
the service is in accordance with Appendix A--Schedule 6.
(1) New accounts--Change of ownership.
(2) Turn-off/turn-on at owner's request.
(3) Meter re-read.
(4) Meter test.
(5) Meter lock.
htln://lihrarv l.mnnicode.com/default/Doc View/1 0578/1/305/311
4/1712008
ARTICLE VI. WATER-SEWER DTSTRlCT UNIFORM BILLING, OPERA TING M\4D1!:iilPage 14'bflQS
February 24, 2009
Page 326 of 462
(6) Unlock after hours.
(7) Meter removal.
(8) Illegal connection.
(9) Credit card handling charge.
(10) Temporary meter deposit.
(11) Duplicate processing fee.
(12) Non-sufficient funds (NSF) processing charge.
(13) Late payment charge.
(d) Late payments for monthly user fees are subject to a late payment charge (Appendix A-
Schedule 6) on the unpaid balance after the due date on the bill.
(e) The rates, fees and charges as established in this section shall be reviewed on an annual
basis to ensure adequate revenues for district system operation, maintenance, renewal,
replacement, enhancement and debt service costs.
(f) Reasonable pay plan arrangements may be used at the discretion of the district for
delinquent accounts. All pay plan arrangements must provide for the full and timely payment of
future consumption.
(g) Adjustments.
(1) Any debit or credit adjustments for any district service can only be made as the
result of a documented and approved procedure. For example: The procedure for
adjusting customer accounts for unexplained loss of metered water was approved in
updated form on January 3, 2001.
(2) Debit and credit adjustments identified in documented and approved procedures
shall be approved by the public utilities division administrator or designee before
processing.
(3) Debit andlor credit adjustments for district errors and omissions should be applied
to the account or refunded, if appropriate, and are subject to appropriate review and
authorization.
(h) Refund of credit balanceslfinal bills,
(1) Refunds of credit balances for a continuing account shall be processed and
forwarded to finance for disbursement on a weekly basis.
(2) Refunds of credit balances as a result of final bills shall be processed and
forwarded to finance for disbursement on a monthly basis.
(3) In no event, shall refunds be processed for credit balances which are less than
$5.00.
(4) In no event, shall final bills less than $5.00 be processed and mailed.
(i) Allowance for funds prudently invested (AFPI) fee.
(1) The board of county commissioners as ex-officio board of the Collier County Water-
Sewer District hereby adopts allowance for funds prudently invested (AFPI) fees, as set
forth in Schedule 7 hereby appended as part of Appendix A to this ordinance. The AFPI
charges may be changed from time-to-time by Collier County Ordinance, or by resolution
of the board of county commissioners, always acting as ex-officio board of the Collier
County Water-Sewer District, provided the board publishes notice of one
scheduledpublic hearing with regard to all such then proposed changes. The proposed
http://libraryl.murucode.comJdefault/DocView/l0578/1/305/311
4/17/2008
ARTICLE VI. WATER-SEWER DT"iTRlCT UNIFORM BILLING, OPERA TING A~~t~ ~8~~
Page 327 of 462
resolution or ordinance can be agendized on the board's regular agenda or on its
summary agenda.
(2) Allowance for funds prudently invested (AFPI) fees afford the district an opportunity
to earn up to a fair rate of return on the district's investment in water andlor wastewater
plant that has been constructed but is not yet used and useful. Such non-used and
useful plant is by definition held for future use by the district's future water and/or
wastewater customers. Such non-used and useful plant incurs costs such as, but not
limited to, the district's embedded costs of borrowed money, investment of the district's
money in such plant, as well as operation and maintenance expenses between the time
the plant is constructed and the time all of the respective equivalent residential
connections (ERCs) are connected to the district's respective utility system by means of
an "active connection." Calculation of the AFPI charges excludes piant paid from impact
fees, which are classified in law as "contributions-in-aid of construction" ("CIAC").
(3) The amount of the applicable AFPI charge is controlled (determined) by the month
when the related impact fee (a) to pay for the respective ERCs is received by county
staff. Each AFPI charge is calculated for one equivalent residential connection (ERC) on
a month-to-month basis. In this context there is no distinction between an ERC for
residential use, industriai use, commercial use or any other uses.
(4) These AFPI charges apply only to ERCs reseNed by payment of the relevant water
andlor wastewater Impact fees actually received by county staff subsequent to October
1, 2006 and these AFPI charges shall cease to apply to ERCS reseNed by staff's receipt
of these impact fee payments subsequent to December 31, 2012.
(5) All water AFPI charges shall be accounted for in a separate account for the subject
water treatment facilities. All wastewater AFPI charges shall be accounted for in a
separate account for the subject wastewater treatment facilities.
(Ord. No. 01-73, S 1.3, 12-11-01; Ord. No. 2006-27, S 1)
Sec. 134-174. District regulation.
(a) Application for selVice.
(1) To obtain selVice, application must be made at the office(s) of the district.
Applications are accepted by the district with the understanding that there is no
obligation on the part of the district to render seNice other than that which is then
available from its existing facilities. The district reseNes the right to refuse service from
its transmission mains or to accept service to its collection system.
(2) Utility service is furnished only upon signed application of the property owner,
accepted by the district, and the conditions of such application or agreement are binding
upon the property owner as well as the district. A copy of each application or agreement
for utility service accepted by the district will be furnished to the property owner.
(3) The applicant shall furnish to the district the correct name, street address and legai
description at which seNice is to be rendered at the time of the application for service.
All system development charges, impact fees, connection and installation fees, and any
other fees, rates and charges established by the district shall be paid in full at the time of
application for service.
(4) Application for service requested by firms, partnerships, associations, corporations
and others, shall be tendered only by duly authorized individuals. When service is
rendered under agreement or agreements entered into between the district and an agent
of the property owner, the use of such service by the property owner shall constitute full
. and complete ratification by the property owner of the agreement Dr agreements entered
htt".I!linrHrv1 mlmic.nrhcnm/r1efelllt/f)ncView!1 057R/l/305/311
.4/17/2008
ARTICLE VI. WATER-SEWERDISTRlCT UNIFORM BILLING, OPERATING ANjjlmd"':Iitge1&m'~
February 24, 2009
Page 328 of 462
into between agent and the district under which such service is rendered. A tenant of
property shall not be construed to be an agent.
(5) Where the district's water or sewer main is accessible to render service no county
building permit may be issued until such time as proper application shall have been
made for service and all fees necessary for the rendering of such service shall have
been paid to the district.
(6) The district may withhold or discontinue service rendered under application made
by a property owner, or the property owner's agent, unless all prior indebtedness to the
district of such property for utility service has been settled in full. Service may be
withheld or discontinued for non-payment of bills andlor non-compliance with rules and
regulations in connection with the same or any different class of service furnished to the
same property owner at the same premises, or for non-payment of any account for
service to the property.
(b) Umltation of use, continuity of service.
(1) Unless authorized by the district, water andlor sewer service purchased from the
district shall be used by the consumer only for the purposes specified in the application
for service, and the property owner shall not sell or otherwise dispose of such service
supplied by the district. Unless authorized by the district, service furnished to the
property owner shall be rendered directly to the property owner through the district's
connection, and under no circumstances shall be property owner or property owner's
agent or any other individual, association, or corporation install equipment for the
purpose of disposing of said service. In no case shall a property owner, except with the
written consent from the district, extend their installation across a street, alley, lane,
court, property line, avenue, or any other way, in order to furnish service for adjacent
property, even though such adjacent property is owned by them. In the event there is an
unauthorized extension, sale or disposition of service, the property owner's service will
be subject to discontinuance until such unauthorized extension, sale or disposition is
discontinued and full payment is made of bills for service, calculated on proper
classification and rate schedules and reimbursements in full are made to the district for
all extra expenses incurred for clerical work, testing and inspections.
(2) The district will at all times use reasonable diligence to provide continuous service,
and having used reasonable diligence shall not be liable to the property owner or
occupants for failure or interruption of continuous water service. The district shall not be
liable for any act or omission caused directly by strikes, labor troubles, accident,
litigation, breakdowns, shutdowns for emergency repairs, or adjustment, acts of
sabotage, enemies of the united states, wars, state, municipal or other
governmentalinterference, acts of God or other causes beyond its control.
(3) Property owners shall maintain that portion of the water lines on their property
located beyond the district service connection, and all loss of water through breaks or
leakage to the premises will be paid by the property owner. The property owner shall
maintain that portion of the sewer line located on their property.
(c) Property owners liability for damage to equipment. The property owner is liable to the
district for any damage done to the district's equipment used in providing service to the property
owner, except damage done by district employees.
(d) Security deposits on water account. Security deposits normally are not required on district
customer accounts for water service. However, the district may require a deposit equivalent to
two months average service when an account has been shut-off for non-payment more than two
times in any six month concurrent period. These deposits may be returned after six months of
timely payments. .
(e) Security deposits on sewer accounts. Security deposits are normally not required on
http://library1.murucode.comldefau1t1DcicView/10578/1/3.05/311
. 4/17/2008
ARTICLE VI. WATER-SEWER DTSTRlCT UNIFORM BILLING, OPERA TING ~nd~ ~of118\
February 24, 2009
Page 329 of 462
district customer accounts for sewer service. However, the district may require a deposit
equivalent to two months average service when an account has been shut off for non-payment
more than two times in any six month concurrent period. These deposits will be returned after
six months of timely payments.
(I) Property owner's responsibility for water service; bad debts.
(1) The property owner is responsible for all water, andlor sewer service andlor other
district services provided to the property. In the event service is discontinued for non-
payment, service will be restored only after property owner has fully complied with
provisions of section 134-174, subsection (g)(2) and (g)(3), of this article.
(2) Unpaid fees constitute a lien against the property (see section 134-174(p) of this
article). In the event water, andlor sewer service andlor other district services have been
discontinued for non-payment and any or all services are requested to be reinstated for
the property in the future, this back debt plus associated charges must be paid before
water and/or sewer service will be furnished.
(3) Bad debts as a result of bankruptcy or court actions will be written off in accordance
with applicable laws, rules and regulations.
(g) Dates bills due and delinquent; discontinuance of service for non-payment; reinstatement
following discontinued service.
(1) Bills for service are due by the date set forth on the bill from the district and are
delinquent thereafter. Service will be discontinued when delinquent for non-payment of
bills.
(2) When service has been discontinued for non-payment of bills, service will be
renewed upon payment of all unpaid bills, plus a shut-off iock fee and a late payment fee
(Appendix A--Schedule 6).
(3) If the lock has been tampered with and the street cock has been turned on prior to
full payment of all fees the meter may be removed from the property. Should the
property owner request renewal of service for the property, service will be restored upon
full payment of: 1) all past due bills plus a late payment fee where applicable, and (2) a
meter removal fee (Appendix A--Schedule 6).
(4) If service has been discontinued for non-payment of bills and an illegal water
connection is made, service will be renewed upon payment of all unpaid bills, time and
material cost to remove the illegal connection, the cost of the estimated amount of water
consumption loss, plus the fine specified in Appendix A-Schedule 6.
(5) Billing for potable water service or effluent irrigation service shall begin upon
registration of consumption on the meter, or 90 days from date of meter installation,
whichever occurs first. Billing for sewer service shall commence upon the issuance of a
certificate of occupancy or 90 days following the issuance of a notice to connect to the
sewer system, whichever occurs first.
(6) The property owner shall immediately notify the district of any additional dwelling
units connected to the district's service lines if the dwelling units have not been included
in previous applications. For violation of this section, the district's service may be
discontinued.
(h) Billing payment when meter becomes defective; right of entry of authorized agents or
employees.
(1) Should the meter on any premises become defective, so that the amount delivered
for the current month cannot be ascertained, the property owner shall pay for that month
an amount equal to the average amount charged for the four preceding months unless
the actual amount of water can be determined.
http://libraryl.municode.comJdefault/DocView/l0578/1/305/311
4/1712008
ARTICLE VI. WATER-SEWER DISTRICT UNIFORM BILLING, OPERATING AM'9;D>iPa~ 2QA
rebru1rry ~4;'20i)9
Page 330 of 462
(2) Duly authorized agents and employees of the district shall, during daylight hours or
if called out after dark for emergency service, have access to any property for the
purpose of examining the condition of fixture, service pipe installation and such other
purposes as may be proper to protect the Interest of the district, reading or repairing the
water meters located thereon, or turning the supply of such water service to the
premises off or on.
(i) Water bill complaints. Normally, high water bill complaints will not be accepted for
inspection by the district unless all plumbing fixtures, piping and outlets have been examined by
a licensed piumber who has certified that there are no leaks. If an investigation is made by the
district and the findings reveal the initial meter reading was accurate and the meter is
functioning properly, a re-read charge (Appendix A--Schedule 6) will be assessed against the
property owner. The property owner shall be charged (Appendix A--Schedule 6) for meter tests
which show the meter is functioning properly.
CD Meters, location and charge for moving. Meters shall be placed when possible just within
the property line at the property corner at the nearest point to the tap-in main. If a meter is
moved at the request of the property owner, the property owner shall pay a fee equal to the
district's cost in accordance with Appendix A--Schedule 5.
(k) Connections with water and sewer required. The owner of each iot or parcel of land within
the district where any improvement is now situated or shall hereafter be situated, shall, if the
district operates and maintains water distribution andlor sewer collection facilities along the
frontage of their property, connect or cause such improvement to be connected with the water
and/or sewer facilities of the district. The usage of such facilities shall, at a minimum, be used
for ail indoor usage and shail be connected within 90 days foilowing notification to do so by the
district. Connection to the reuse system shall only be required if the development order andlor
property purchase agreements require such connection. Ail such connections shall be made in
accordance with rules and regulations which may be adopted from time to time by the district,
which rules and regulations shall provide for a charge for making any such connection in such
reasonable amount as the governing board of the district may fix and determine. No connection
or connections shail berequired where the water or sewer system or line is more than 200 feet
from such property line.
(I) Exceptions To connections. This articie shall not be construed to require or entitle any
person to cross the private property of another in order to connect to the district's water andlor
sewer service.
(m) Connections may be made by district. If any property owner of any lot or parcel of land
within the district shail fail or refuse to connect to and use the water and/or sewer facilities of the
district after notification, as provided herein, then the district shall be authorized to make such
connections, entering on or upon any such property for the purpose of making such connection.
The district shail thereupon be entitled to recover the cost (Appendix A--Schedule 5) of making
such connection, together with reasonable penalties and interest and attorney's fees, by suit in
any court of component jurisdiction. In addition and as an alternative means of collecting such
costs of making such connections, the district shall have a lien on such property for such cost;
which lien shail be equal dignity with the lien of state and county taxes. Such lien may be
foreclosed by the county in the same manner provided by the laws of Florida for the foreclosure
of mortgages upon real estate.
(n) Unlawful connection prohibited. No person shall be ailowed to connect into any water or
sewer line owned by the district without written consent of the district. The connection with such
line shall be made only under the direction and supervision of the district. Any property owner or
plumber who shall make any connection without such consent of the county shail, upon
conviction be subject to the penalties hereinafter provided.
(0) Failure to maintain plumbing system. The property owner shall be responsible for
maintaining and keeping free from obstruction the water and sewer pipes leading to and
httn:l/librarv 1.municode.com/default/Doc View/1 0578/1/305/311
4/17/2008
-"--.----- ------------------ -...-.-. .- -"
ARTICLE VI. WATER-SEWER DISTRICT UNIFORM BILLING, OPERATING AN.fjIendl?~J!lA
February 24, 2009
Page 331 of 462
connecting from the plumbing system to the district's water and sewers mains, and failure to
keep the water and sewer pipes, free from obstructions and maintained in a proper manner.
(p) Unpaid fees to constitute a lien. In the event that the fees, rates or charges for the services
and facilities of any water or sewer system shall not be paid as and when due, any unpaid
balance thereof and all interest accruing thereon shall be an automatic lien on any parcel or
property affected thereby. Such liens shall be superior and paramount to the interest on such
parcel or property of any owner, lessee, tenant, mortgagor or other person except the lien of
county taxes and shall be on a parity with the lien of any such county taxes.ln the event that any
such fees, rates or charges Shall not be paid as and when due and shall be in default for 30
days or more the unpaid balance thereof and all interest accrued thereon, together with
attorneys fees and costs, may be recovered by the district in a civil action, and any such lien
and accrued interest may be foreclosed or otherwise enforced by the district by action or suit in
equity as for the foreclosure of a mortgage on real property.
(q) No free service. No water or sewage disposal service shall be furnished or rendered free
of charge to any person, firm, corporation or governmental body. Each and every county
agency, department, or instrumentality which uses such service shall pay therefore at the rates
fixed by this article.
(r) Separate connections for each separate unit. Unless authorized by the district, each
dwelling unit whether occupying one Dr more lots and whether it shall occupy any lot Dr parcel
jointly with any other dwelling unit shall be considered a separate unit for the payment of the
water and sewage disposal rates and charges, and separate connections will be required for
each of such dwelling units.
(Ord. No. 01-73, S 1.4, 12-11-01; Ord. No. 2006-27, S 4)
Sec. 134-175. submetering.
(a) A landlord who is a customer of the district and who provides water and/or sewer service to
rental units through a single master water meter shall, under any of the following three
circumstances, be exempt from the prohibitions contained in section 134-174, paragraph (b)(1)
against the sale Dr disposition of district water and/or sewer service:
(1) A landlord may apportion the monthly charge for district water andlor sewer service
through the master meter equally among all rental units provided that the total monthly
charge to all rental units shall not exceed the landlord's actual cost for district water
andlor sewer service; or
(2) A landlord may install submeters for each rental unit to track each unit's usage of
water service and then charge each unit according to its exact usage. A iandlord who
installs submeters shall comply with the requirements of subsection (d), below and shall
not recover more than his actual cost for district water andlor sewer service through the
master meter and shall not pass on to his tenants any of the capital or administrative
cost incurred in the installation and monitoring of the submeters Dr the billing of tenants
for their water andlor sewer service usage; or,
(3) A landlord may also provide water andlor sewer service to rental units through a
single master water meter for no specific compensation provided that in no event shall
any landlord recover more than his actual cost for district water and/or sewer service
from his tenants.
(b) For any rental units which are under lease agreement as of the effective date of this article
[April 1, 2002], a landlord choosing to install submeters as provided in section 134-174,
paragraph (b) above, shall not begin monitoring a rental unit's water usage for the purposes of
charging a unit according to its actual water usage until the expiration of the then existing term
under such lease agreement. Upon renewing an expired lease, or upon entering any new lease
http://libraryl.municode.comldefaultIDocView/l0578/11305/311
411712008
ARTICLE VI. WATER-SEWER DISTRICT UNIFORM BILLING, OPERATING A1'4llenRageriiNmflM
February 24, 2009
Page 332 of 462
agreement with a tenant subsequent to theeffective date of this article, a landlord choosing to
submeter shall fully disclose to the tenant the landlord's ability to separately charge each rental
unit according to its exact water usage. Such disclosure shall be in both of the following forms:
(1) oral representations by the landlord to the tenant at the time of negotiating the iease and
before either party has signed the lease agreement, and (2) by a conspicuously printed
disclosure provision in the lease agreement specifically referencing the landlord's ability to
submeter pursuant to the terms of this article and initialed by the tenant.
(c) Upon a tenant's written request, any landlord who exercises his privilege to recover his
actual cost for county water and/or sewer service shall provide to the tenant documentation of
the landlord's actual cost for district water andlor sewer service as well as documentation and a
written explanation of the basis for any costs charged to the tenant for water andlor sewer
service. Such documentation and written explanation shall be provided within five business days
from receipt of the written request.
(d) Furthermore, upon dispute of a water bill by a tenant in person, in writing, by telephone, or
in any other manner, a landlord shall, within five business days of receiving notice of the
tenant's dispute, pursue all of the following remedies in an effort to resolve the dispute:
(1) Reread the master meter and/or any submeter to verify the accuracy of the meter
reading process and the working condition of the meter(s);
(2) If the working condition or accuracy of the master meter or any submeter is in
question after being reread, the landlord shall have the meter tested;
(3) If after being tested the master meter or any submeter is found to be inaccurate or
otherwise defective, the district or the landlord, as the case may be, shall immediately
repair or replace the meter.
(4) Provide documentation of current and past billing practices with respect to the
applicable rental unit for the period of the requesting tenant's occupancy;
(5) Arrange a meeting with the tenant and the property manager or some other
representative of the landlord to discuss the billing process; and
(6) Any tenant whose request is unsatisfactorily addressed or who has exhausted the
above options without redress may bring suit in a court of competent jurisdiction to
obtain relief under F.S. ch. 83, the Landlord Tenant Act.
(e) All submeters must achieve no less than the accuracy standards as currently met by the
district for its own water meters. In addition, any landlord installing submeters shall provide,
where applicable, the following services, at the landlord's expense, which either meet or exceed
the level of service currently provided by the district with respect to its water meters:
(1) The landlord shall promptly, upon receiving notice, repair all submeter leaks;
(2) The landlord shall promptly, upon receiving notice, replace any failed service lines
or associated components;
(3) The landlord shall promptly, upon receiving notice, replace damaged or deteriorated
submeter boxes or lids, and shall, where applicable, lower or raise a submeter box to
grade as necessary;
(4) The landlord shall, upon receiving a water quality complaint, check applicable
connections and flush applicable service lines;
(5) The landlord shall, upon receiving a low pressure complaint, check and test the
system to ensure proper operation:
(6) The landlord shall locate and provide the location of all submeters and service lines
upon reasonable request by a tenant;
http://library1.municode.com/default/Doc View/1 0578/1/305/311
4/17/2008
ARTICLE VI. WATER-SEWER DJSTRICT UNIFORM BILLING, OPERA TING AN.g.enElage,mHm 2M
February 24, 2009
Page 333 of 462
(7) The landlord shall tum off applicable submeters in emergency situations;
(8) The landlord shall read all submeters no less frequently than once a month;
(9) The landlord shall replace all submeters that become stuck or difficult to read; and
(10) The landlord shall notify the tenant of a potential leak upon reading a submeter
that reflects an unusually high usage.
(I) The provision of water service through a single master meter by a landlord as described in
this section is deemed not to constitute the sale or disposition of water service. The provision of
sewer service as described in this section is deemed not to constitute the sale or disposition of
sewer service.
(g) Any condominium association that is a customer of the district and provides water andlor
sewer service to condominium units through a single master meter may allocate the cost for
such water service among its members either by equal apportionment, installation of submeters,
or otherwise provided that such allocation of cost is restricted to recovery of the condominium
association's actual cost for district water and/or sewer service and directly. related
administrative or capital expenses incurred in recovering that cost. Upon a member's written
request, any condominium association that exercises its privilege under this exemption from the
prohibitions in section 134-174, paragraph (b)(1) to recover its actual cost for district water
and/or sewer service and directly related administrative and capital expenses incurred in
recovering that cost shall provide to the member documentation for the condominium
association's actual cost for district water and/or sewer service as well as documentation and a
written explanation of the basis for any costs charged to the member for water service. Such
documentation and written explanation shall be provided with five business days from receipt of
the written request. The provision of water service through a single master water meter by a
condominium association as described in this section is deemed not to constitute the sale or
disposition of water service. The provision of sewer service as described in this section is
deemed not to constitute the sale or disposition of sewer service.
(h) Any landlord or condominium association that elects to install submeters shall not charge a
security deposit.
(Ord. No. 01-73, S 2.1--2.8,12-11-01)
Sec. 134-176. City of Naples service area.
(a) No extension of existing distribution water mains of the water system of the City of Naples
may be made within the county water-sewer district, without the prior, written consent and
approval of the governing board of the district, except that this article shall not apply to the lands
described in subsection (d).
(b) All applications for said distribution water main extensions shall be made in writing to
district staff who shall present said requests to the governing board of the district within 30 days
of receipt thereof.
(c) The governing board of the district may attach reasonable conditions to the issuance of
permits for distribution water main extensions which conditions may inciude, but not be limited
to, provisions for payment of system development charges or impact fees which are, or may be
enacted by the county.
(d) The City of Naples water service area boundaries are as follows:
Beginning at the intersection of the easterly shoreline of the Gulf of Mexico with the southerly
city limit line of the City of Naples; thence easterly along said southerly city along the easterly
city limit line to the northeast corner of said Section 27; thence westerly along the north line of
http://libraryl.municode.comldefault/DocView/10578/1/305/311
4/17/2008
ARTICLE VI. WATER-SEWER DJSTRICT UNIFORM BILLING, OPERATING Mgen<llllgenUJofll1l".
February 24, 2009
Page 334 of 462
Section 26, Township 50 south, Range 25 east to the northeast corner of said Section 26;
thence northerly along the east line of Section 23, Township 50 south, Range 25 east to its
intersection with the southerly right-of-way line of Thomasson Drive; thence easterly along said
southerly right-of-way of Thomasson Drive to its intersection with the range line lying between
Range 25 east and Range 26 east; thence northerly along said range line lying between Range
25 east and Range 26 east to the northeast corner of Section 13, Township 49 south, Range 25
east; thence westerly along the north line of Sections 13, 14, 15, 16 and 17, Township 49 south,
Range 25 east to the intersection of the north line of said Section 17with the easterly shoreline
of the Gulf of Mexico; thence southerly along the meanders of the easterly shoreline of the Gulf
of Mexico to the point of beginning.
(Ord. No. 01-73, 99 3.1--3.4,12-11-01)
Sec. 134-177. Appendices for rates, fees and charges.
The board of county commissioners as ex-officio board of the Collier County Water-Sewer
District hereby adopts the rates, fees, and charges as set forth in schedule 1[1] through 7; inclusive,
appended hereto as Appendix A, which as of October 1, 2006, shall be imposed upon all users of the
county water-sewer district's services within the district's boundaries and outside the district's
boundaries subject to appropriate mutual agreements. The AFPI charges shall apply only to the
respective ERCs reserved bypayment of the related water andlor wastewater impact fees subsequent
to October 1, 2006, and these AFPI charges shall not apply to ERCs reserved by payment for the
ERCs received by staff subsequent to December 31, 2012. These rates, fees and charges may be
changed from time to time by ordinances or by resolutions of the board of county commissioners as ex-
officio board of the Collier County Water-Sewer District, provided the board publishes, in a newspaper
of general circulation in Collier County, notice of an advertised public hearing with regard to the then
proposed schedule amendments. The proposed amendments (by county ordinances or board
resolutions) can be agendized on the board's regular agenda, or on the board's summary agenda
subject to removal to the board's regular agenda.
(Ord. No. 01-73, 94, 12-11-01: Ord. No. 2006-27, 92)
Sec. 134-178. Penalties.
Unless another penalty is specifically prOVided for, any person who violates any section or
provision of this article shall be prosecuted and punished as provided by F.S. 9 125.69. Each day the
violation continues shall constitute a separate offense. Additionally, the board may bring suit for
damages or to restrain, enjoin or otherwise prevent the violation of this article in the Circuit Court of
Collier County.
(Ord. No. 01-73, 95,12-11-01)
Sec. 134-179. Confidentiality.
Confidential information.
(1) Information and data on a user obtained from reports, questionnaires, applications,
and other material provided shall be available to the public or other governmental
agency without restriction unless the user specifically requests and is able to
demonstrate to the satisfaction of the district and county that the information is not
"public record" under then applicable law, and is clearly within an exemption outlined in
the Florida Public Record Law of the State of Florida, F.S. ch. 119, or its successor
infunction.
hl1p:/llibrary l.murucode.com/defaul1JDoc View/l 0578/1/305/311
4/17/2008
ARTICLE VI. WATER-SEWER mSTRlCT UNIFORM BILLING, OPERATING ~<1"1-n<l>l.fi@llJltJM~
rebi'illiry .:14~";?1J()9
C \ I. C + Page 335 of 462
o ter Dun 1
(2) Notwithstanding any of the provisions of this article, nothing shall be construed or
interpreted to require the county or the district to violate any of the applicable public
records law(s). Any release of information or disclosure made by the county or district in
order to comply with such law should not give rise to a claim whatsoever.
(Ord, No. 01-73, 36,12-11-01)
Sec. 134-180. Declaration of exclusion from the Administrator Procedures Act.
The county water-sewer district board shall exercise jurisdiction over the provision of water and
sewer services within the boundaries as hereinafter provided for, and shall be exempt from the
provisions of F.S. ch. 120. No privately owned water or sewer utility shall be abandoned without
adequate provision for continuance of service and the prior approval of the board.
(Ord. No. 01-73,37,12-11-01)
Secs. 134-181-134-185. Reserved.
PUBLIC UTILITIES DIVISION
COLLIER COUNTY WATER-SEWER DiSTRICT
UNIFORM BILLING, OPERATING AND REGULATORY STANDARDS ORDINANCE
APPENDIX A--FEES, RATES AND CHARGES
SCHEDULE i-DiSTRICT-WIDE WATER and WASTEWATER RATES
Effective October 1 , 2006
Water, Wastewater, Fire Meter Rates and Water Surcharqes
1 . Water:
(a) Service availability charge for individually metered residential, non-residential and
irrigation:
TABLE INSET:
Size Effective Oct. Effective Oct. Size Effective Oct. Effective Oct.
1,2006 1,2007 1,2006 1, 2007
5/8" inch $14.00 per $16.03 per 3" inch $170.94 per $195.72 per
meter month month meter month month
3/4" inch 14.00 per 16.03 per 4" inch 282.98 per 324.00 per
meter month month meter month month
1" inch 30.90 per 35.38 per 6" inch 563.08 per 644.70 per
meter month month meter month month
1- 1/4" inch 39.12 per 44.79 per 8" inch 899.20 per 1,029.53 per
meter month month meter month month
1- 1/2" inch 58.91 per 67.45 per 10" inch 1,627.44 per 1,863.33 per
meter month month meter month month
2" inch 92.47 per 105.88 per 12" inch 2,198.07 per 2,516.69 per
meter month month meter month month
(b) Volume charge per 1,000 gallons:
(i) Individually metered residential, non-residential and multi-family residential:
httn:/l1ibrarv1.municode.comJdefault/Doc View/1 0578/1/305/311
4/1712008
ARTICLE VI. WATER-SEWER DISTRICT UNIFORM BILLING, OPERATING ~d,ptlgm M>of~
February 24, 2009
Page 336 of 462
TABLE INSET:
Effective Oct. 1, 2006 Effective Oct. 1, 2007
Block 1 $1.92 $2.20
Block 2 2.88 3.30
Block 3 3.84 4.40
Block 4 4.80 , 5.50
Block 5 5.76 6.59
Block 6 7.68 8.79
(c) Block rate structure.
Consumption Blocks in Gallons--Up To Or Next
TABLE INSET:
Meter Block 1 Biock 2 Block 3 Biock 4 Block 5 Block 6
Size
5/8" , Over 50,000
and 5,000 10,000 20,000 30,000 50,000
3/4"
1" 12,000 25,000 50,000 75,000 120,000 Over
120,000
1- 1/4" 20,000 40,000 80,000 120,000 200,000 Over
200,000
1- 1/2" 25,000 50,000 100,000 150,000 250,000 Over
250,000
2" 40,000 80,000 160,000 240,000 400,000 Over
400,000
3" 80,000 160,000 320,000 480,000 800,000 Over
800,000
4" 120,000 250,000 500,000 800,000 1,200,000 Over
1,200,000
6" 250,000 500,000 1,000,000 1,500,000 2,500,000 Over
2,500,000
8" 450,000 900,000 1,800,000 2,700,000 4,500,000 Over
4,500,000
1011 700,000 1,450,000 2,900,000 4,300,000 7,000,000 Over
7,000,000
12" 1,075,000 2,150,000 4,300,000 6,450,000 11,000,000 Over
11,000,000
2. Wastewater:
(a) Wastewater service availability charge for individually metered residential, non-
residential, and multi-family:
TABLE INSET:
Size Effective Oct. Effective Oct. Size Effective Oct. Effective Oct.
1,2006 1,2007 1, 2006 1, 2007
http://library1.municode.comJdefault/DocViewIl0578/1I305/311
4/17/2008
ARTICLE VI. WATER-SEWER DISTRlCT UNIFORM BILLING, OPERATING 1>fl!!".od;Pjj!!Il1Moof~
February 24, 2009
Page 337 of 462
5/8 inch $22.26 per $24.49 per 3 inch $287.24 per $315.96 per
meter month month meter month month
3/4 inch 22.26 per 24.49 per 4 inch 476.32 per 523.93 per
meter month month meter month month
1 inch 50.61 per 55.67 per 6 inch 949.23 per 1,044.12 per
meter month month meter month month
11/4 inch 64.90 per 71.38 per 8 inch 1,516.92 per 1,668.55 per
meter month month meter month month
1 1/2 inch 97.93 per 107.72 per 10 inch 2,719.65 per 2,991.50 per
meter month month meter month month
2 inch 154.75 per 170.22 per 12 inch 4,030.95 per 4,433.89 per
meter month month meter month month
(b) Volume charge per 1,000 gallons:
TABLE INSET:
Effective Oct. 1, 2006 Effective Oct. 1, 2007
(i) All Metered Usage $3.13 $3.44
(iI) Individually Metered The maximum volumetric charge for individually metered
Residential Maximum: residential property shall be 15,000 gallons per month.
3. Fire systems (dedicated and compound):
(a) Fire meter.
(i) Fire service meter size will refer to the largest diameter meter register
installed for fire protection.
(ii) Fire service meter connections that have consumption registered for three
consecutive billing periods are deemed to have provided domestic or other water
usage shall be billed according to regular water monthly availability and usage
charges as described herein.
(b) Volume charge:
(i) Per 1,000 gallons.
4. Water restriction surcharge:
TABLE INSET:
Water Shortage Percent Reduction In Overall Flow Charge Rate Adjustment
Phase- Demand Percentage
Phase 1--Moderate Less Than 15% 15%
Phase 2--Severe Less Than 30% 30%
Phase 3--Extreme Less Than 40% 40%
Phase 4--Critical Less Than 60% 60%
PUBLIC UTILITIES DIVISION
COLLIER COUNTY WATER-SEWER DISTRICT
UNIFORM BILLING, OPERATiNG AND REiGULATORY STANDARDS ORDINANCE
htto://librarv1.municode.com/default/DocView/10578/11305/311
4/1712008
ARTICLE VI. W A'rER-SEWER DISTRICT UNIFORM BILLING, OPERATING Mben~a!!lhl.lll~f1:Dll,
February 24, 2009
Page 338 of 462
APPENDIX A--FEES, RATES AND CHARGES
SCHEDULE 2--GOODLAND SUB-DISTRICT WATER
Effective October 1, 2006
Providing monthly user fees for residential, non-residential and multi-family properties in the Goodland
Water Sub-district as follows:
1. Water.
(a) Service availability charge:
(i) Individual metered residential, non-residential and multi-family
properties:
TABLE INSET:
Meter Size Effective Oct. 1, 2006
3/4 inch $25.00 per month
1 inch 58.00 per month
1 1/2 inch 113.00 per month
2 inch 178.00 per month
3 inch 353.00 per month
4 inch 548.00 per month
6 inch 1,095.00 per month
8 inch 1,967.00 per month
(b) Volume charge per one thousand gallons ($/Mgal) of usage:
(i) Individual metered residential, non-residential and multi-family properties:
TABLE INSET:
Block Proposed Oct. 1, 2006 ,
Block 1 (1) $4.30
Block 1 (1) $5.30
Block 1 (1) $6.40
Block 1 (1) , $7.40
Block 1 (1) $8.50
Block 1 (1) $10.60
(1) Same Block Rate Structure as that of Collier County Water-Sewer
District.
(c) Block rate structure:
Consumption blocks in gallons-Up to or next
TABLE INSET:
Meter Block 1 Block 2 Block 3 Block 4 Biock 5 Block 6
Size
5/8" and 5,000 10,000 20,000 30,000 50,000 Over 50,000
3/4"
http://1ibraryl.municode.comldefaultIDoc Viewll 0578/1/305/311
4/17/2008
ARTICLE VI. WATER-SEWER DTSTRICT UNIFORM BILLING, OPERA TING A1Ia~n~~ f7lre,f!1)!!\
ce5ru~iy -24, 2009
Page 339 of 462
1" 12,000 25,000 50,000 75,000 120,000 Over 120,000
1- 1/4" 20,000 40,000 80,000 120,000 200,000 Over 200,000
1- 1/2" 25,000 50,000 100,000 150,000 250,000 Over 250,000
2" 40,000 80,000 160,000 240,000 400,000 Over 400,000
3" 80,000 160,000 320,000 480,000 800,000 Over 800,000
4" 120,000 250,000 500,000 800,000 1,200,000 Over
1,200,000
6" 250,000 500,000 1,000,000 1,500,000 2,500,000 Over
2,500,000
8" 450,000 900,000 1,800,000 2,700,000 4,500,000 Over
4,500,000
(2) The usage charge shall be adjusted based on the following formula:
Purchased Water Adjustment Clause (PWAC) - Existing Rates
(New City of Marco Island Volume Charge - Old City of Marco Island Volume Charge)1
$0.75 = Adder
Existing Goodland $/Mgal + Adder = New Goodland $/Mgal
The purpose of the 0.75 factor is needed to adjust for unaccounted for water and the
change in the monthly fixed charges from the City of Marco Island.
For Each Rate Block:
Existing Rate Block $/Mgal + Adder = New Rate $/Mgal
PUBLC UTILITIES DIVISION
COLLIER COUNTY WATER-SEWER DISTRICT
UNIFORM BILLING, OPERATING AND REGULATORY STANDARDS ORDINANCE
APPENDIX A--FEES, RATES AND CHARGES
SCHEDULE 3-IRRIGATION QUALITY WATER RATES
Effective October 1, 2006
Irrigation Quality (Reuse) Rates
1. Irrigation quality water usage in the district shall be at the following schedule:
(a) Service availability charge:
Individually metered irrigation:
TABLE INSET:
Meter Size Effective October 1, 2006
5/8 and 3/4 inch $5.00
1 inch 11.00
1.5 inch 23.00
httn.I/,;]->T"rv 1 TTIllnir.nrJp',mrn/default!Doc View/1 0578/11305/311
4/17/2008
ARTICLE VI. WATER-SEWER DTSTRICT UNIFORM BILLING, OPERATING ANli\n~fl6liIlq)f'l11~
February 24, 2009
Page 340 of 462
2 inch 46.00
3 inch 91.00
4 inch 182.00
6 inch 346.00
8 inch 628.00
10 inch 1,005.00
12 inch 1,497.00
(b) Volume charge per 1,000 gal/ons;
TABLE INSET:
Type of Service Effective October 1, 2006
(i) Pressurized and distributed $0.75
(ii) Pressurized 0.39
(iii) Bulk 0,30
PUBLIC UTILITIES DIVISION
COLLIER COUNTY WATER-SEWER DISTRICT
UNIFORM BILLING, OPERATING AND REGULATORY STANDARDS ORDINANCE
APPENDIX A--FEES, RATES AND CHARGES
SCHEDULE 4--METER TAPPING CHARGES AND BACKFLOW DEVICE CHARGES
Effective October 1, 2006
Meter Installation CharQes (Tappinq Fees)
1. Meter Installation charges to be paid to the District shall be as follows:
Meter size meter tapping charges:
TABLE INSET:
Meter Meter Tapping Charges With Meter Meter Tapping Charges Without
Size Service Line Installation Charge Size Service Line Installation Charge
Effective Oct. 1, 2006 Effective Oct. 1, 2006
3/4 inch $676.00 :3/4 inch $248.00
1 inch 738.00 1 inch 282.00
1.5 inch 1,012.00 1.5 inch 493.00
2 inch 1,140.00 2 inch 618.00
The fees are based upon meter installation for a typical single-family residence. In all
other circumstances, the meter installation fee shall be based upon the district's actual
cost for time, equipment and materials.
Backflow device charQes
(1) Backflow device charges to be paid to the District shall be as follows:
TABLE INSET:
nttn)/lihrarvl.municode.comldefaultiDoc View/l 0578/1/305/311
4/17/2008
ARTICLE VI. WATER-SEWER DTSTRICT UNIFORM BILLING, OPERA TING ANlI'ln~9l@.f128\
February 24, 2009
Page 341 of 462
Meter Reduced Pressure Backflow Meter Double Check Valve Backflow
Size Prevention Assembly Charge Size Prevention Assembly Charge
Effective Oct. 1, 2006 Effective Oct. 1, 2006
3/4 inch $214.00 3/4 inch $108.00
1 inch 237.00 1 inch 116.00
1.5 inch 345.00 1.5 inch 294.00
2 inch 412.00 2 inch 342.00
PUBLIC UTILITIES DIVISION
COLLIER COUNTY WA TER-SEWiER DISTRICT
UNIFORM BILLING, OPERATING AND REGULATORY STANDARDS ORDINANCE
APPENDIX A--FEES, RATES AND CHARGES
SCHEDULE 5-EQUIPMENT, LABOR AND ADMINISTRATION CHARGES
Effective October 1 , 2006
TABLE INSET:
DESCRIPTION EFFECTIVE OCT. 1, 2006
(1) Equipment (Per Hour Rates):
Rehab & Electrician's Truck $75.00
Crew Trucks . 50.00
Vactor Truck 200.00
Camera Truck 150.00
Boom Truck 100.00
20 Yard Dump Truck 70.00
10 Yarcj Dump Truck 40.00
Pumper Truck 200.00
Track Hoe (Big or Small) 50.00
Back Hoe 65.00
Olympian Generators 60.00
Dewatering System 40.00
4" Trash Pump 10.00
Mud Hog 15.00
Trailer 45.00
Signs, Barricades and/or Traffic Board 100.00
Road Saw andlor Compactor 15.00
Miscellaneous Small Equipment 5.00
(2) Labor (Per Hour Rates):
Tech 1 & 2 30.00
Supervisors 40.00
(3) Administration (per incident): 15% or $300.00; Whichever is smaller.
htto://librarv1.municode.comldefault/Doc View/1 0578/1/305/311
4/17/2008
ARTICLE VI. WATER-SEWER DISTRICT UNIFORM BILLING, OPERA.TING Jdg!Wd~IU!6'1WQ,t~
~ebruMy 24, 2lJOfl
. Page 342 of 462
I (4) Parts and Sub-contractors
I Actual Cost
PUBLIC UTILITIES DIVISION
COLLIER COUNTY WATER-SEWER DISTRICT
UNIFORM BILLING, OPERATING AND REGULATORY STANDARDS ORDINANCE
APPENDIX A--FEES, RATES AND CHARGES
SCHEDULE 6-MISCELLANEOUS CHARGES
Effective October 1, 2006
TABLE INSET:
DESCRIPTION EFFECTIVE OCT. 1, 2006
New Accounts-Change of Ownership $25.00
Turn Off/Turn On at Owner's Request 38.00
Meter Re-Read (If Different--Charge is 38.00
0.00)
Meter Test:
Onsite Test (More than 3% Error-- 80.00
Charge is 0.00)
Offsite Bench Test (More than 3% 215.00
Error-Charge is 0.00)
Meter Lock 55,00
Meter Unlock, 2nd and Subsequent 55.00
Events
Unlock After Hollrs - 100.00
Meter Removal 160,00
Illegal Connection . Actual Time And Material Cost, Plus Average
. Consumption, Plus a $300,00 Fine
Convenience Fee-Credit Card 5,00
Temporary Meter Deposit 1,000.00
Duplicate Bill Processing Fee 2.00
Non-Sufficient Funds (NSF) 15% of the Amount or $100,00, Whichever is
Processing Charge Smaller
Late Payment Charge 5% of Unpaid Balance
Vehicle Over Meter Charge 55.00
Removal of Landscaping to Access 75.00
Meter
Septage Processing Charge/1 ,000 31.00
Gallons
Grease Trap Waste Charge/1 ,000 42.00
Gallons
PUBLIC UTILITIES DIVISION
COLLIER COUNTY WATERcSEWER DISTRICT
htto://librarv 1.municode.comldefault/Doc View/10578/1/305/311
4/17/2008
ARTICLE VI. WATER-SEWER DISTRICT UNIFORM BILLING, OPERA TING AN-g~n~~~1~2W.
February 24,2009
Page 343 of 462
UNIFORM BILLING, OPERATING AND REGULATORY STANDARDS ORDINANCE
APPENDIX A-FEES, RATES AND CHARGES
SCHEDULE 7--ALLOWANCE FOR FUNDS PRUDENTLY INVESTED (AFPI)
Effective October 1, 2006
AFPI Schedule Per ERC--Water Svstem (*)
TABLE INSET:
Payment Caiendar Year
Month
2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
January $0.00 $58,69 $234.76 $41084 $586.91 $762.98 $939,05
February 0.00 73.36 249.44 425.51 601.58 777.65 953,72
March 0.00 88.04 264.11 440.18 616.25 792,33 968.40
April 0,00 102,71 278.78 454,85 630,93 807,00 983,07
May 0.00 117,38 293.45 469.53 645.60 821.67 997,74
June 0,00 132.05 308.13 484.20 660.27 836,34 1,012.42
July 0,00 146.73 322,80 498,87 674.94 851,02 1,027.09
August 0,00 161.40 337.47 513,54 689,62 865.69 1,041,76
September 0,00 176,07 352.14 528.22 704,29 880.36 1,056.43
. October 14:67 190.74 366.82 542.89 718,96 895.03 1,056.43
November 29,35 205.42 . 381.49 557,56 733.63 909,71 1,056.43
December 44.02 220,09 396.16 572.23 748,31 924.38 1,056.43
AFPI Schedule Per ERC--Wastewater Svstem (*)
TABLE INSET:
2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
January $0.00 $38,24 $152.94 $267,65 $382.36 $497,06 $611,77
February 0.00 47,79 162,50 277.21 391,92 506.62 621,33
March 0,00 57.35 172.06 286.77 401.47 516.18 630,89
April 0.00 66.91 181,62 296,33 411.03 525,74 640.45
May 0,00 76.47 191.18 305,89 420.59 535.30 650.01
June 0.00 86.03 200.74 315.44 430.15 544,86 659,57
July 0,00 95.59 210.30 325,00 439.71 554.42 669.12
http://libraryl.murucode.comldefault/Doc View/1 057 8/1/305/311
4/17/2008
ARTICLE VI. WATER-SEWER DISTRICT UNIFORM BILLING, OPERA TING ~encl1n~!Jof11ll\
February 24, 2009
Page 344 of 462
August 0.00 105,15 219.86 334.56 449.27 563.98 678,6B
September 0,00 114.71 229.41 344,12 458.83 573.53 688,24
October 9.56 124.27 238.97 353.68 468.39 583.09 688.24
November 19.12 133,87 248.53 363,24 477.95 592,65 688.24
December 28,68 143,38 258.09 372.80 487,50 602.21 688.24
(*) AFPI fee is initiated on October 1, 2006.
DIVISION 2. COLLIER COUNTY WATER-SEWER DISTRICT*
*Editor's note: Ord. No, 04-55, S 2,B" provided for the relocation of LDC section 1,5.7. to be
included as S 134-186.
Sec. 134-186. Provision of water, sewer, and reuse irrigation water within the Collier
County Water-Sewer District; applicability to special purpose independent
governments:
(a). The Collier County Water-Sewer District is a dependent special district created by the
Florida legislature, Its governing body is ex officio the board of county commissioners. The
Collier County Water-Sewer District has been charged by the legislature with the overall
responsibility for thel proviSion of water and sewer services within the boundaries of the Collier
County Water-Sewer Dtstrict, which are more particularly described in chapter 88-499, Laws of
Florida.
(b) This legislative charge is consistent with the goals and policies of the state comprehensive
plan and the Collier County Growth Management Plan in that a regional utility system like that
operated by the Collier County Water-Sewer District (1) fulfills the goal of assuring the ability of
an adequate supply of water among competing uses by requiring development to be compatible
with existing local and regional water supplies, (2) fulfills the goals of protecting the county's
substantial investments in regional pubiic utility facilities by maximizing the use of such existing
public facilities, (3) fulfills the goal of economic and efficient provision of quality public services
which eliminates needless duplication of public facilities and instead employs the use of regional
facilities as opposed to multiple or smaller scale and less efficient local, public or private utility
facilities.
(c) The provision and treatment of water, sewer and reuse irrigation water within the Collier
County Water-Sewer District as a matter of local land development policy and regulation shall
be provided by Collier County Water-Sewer District facilities in conformance with this Code and
all other applicabie county ordinances, regulations and policies relative to the provision of such
utility facilities and services,
(d) The provisions of this Code and all other applicable ordinances, regulations and policies of
the county shall be construed as applicable planning and permitting laws, rules,. regulations, and
policies which control development of lands within the Collier County Water-Sewer District to be
htto://librarv1.rnunicode.comldefault/Doc Viewll 0578/1/305/311
4/17/2008
ARTICLE VI. WATER-SEWER DI"TRICT UNIFORM BILLING, OPERA TING AN:\ge~llE2B \:jf12WA
F'eEifuary 24, 2009
Page 345 of 462
serviced by a special-purpose government such as a community development district.
(Ord, No. 04-55, S 2.B,)
Secs. 134-187--134-200. Reserved.
DIVISION 3. RESERVED"
"Editor's note: Ord. No. 01-73, S 8, adopted Dec, 11,2001, repealed SS 134-201--134-204, in their
entirety. Formerly, said sections pertained to extension of existing distribution water mains, applications
for distribution water main extensions, permits for distribution water main extensions, conditions, water
service area boundaries as related to the City of Naples Service Area, See the Code Comparative
Table,
Secs, 134-201--134-215, Reserved,
DIVISION 4. RESERVED"
"Editor's note: Ord, No, 01-73, S 8, adopted Dec. 11, 2001, repealed SS 134-216--134-219, in their
entirety, Formerly, said sections pertained to general regulations, definitions, abbreviations, and
supplemental service charge as related to sewer use restrictions, See the Code Comparative Table.
Secs, .134-216--134-225.' Reserved,
DIVISION 5. RESERVED"
"Editor's note: Ord. No. 01-73, S 8, adopted Dec. 11,2001, repealed SS 134-226--134-250, in their
entirety. Formerly, said sections pertained to general provisions, discharge of industrial waste, effluent
quality bond, use of public wastewater system, general discharge prohibitions, maximum
concentrations allowed, approval of pretreatment facilities, maintenance of pretreatment facilities, use
of interceptors (traps), use of control manhole, measurements, tests, special arrangements, special
arrangements; determination of acceptability, national categorical pretreatment standards, alternative
discharge limits, state requirements, county's and district's right of revision, excessive discharge,
pretreatment standards, slug discharges, reasonable service conditions, baseline report, compliance
schedule, compliance date report, and periodic compliance reports as related to rules and regulations
of the uniform utility operating and regulatory standards and procedures, See the Code Comparative
Table.
httn.//1inr"rvl .mnnicode.comldefault/Doc Viewll 0578/1/305/311
4/17/2008
ARTICLE VI. WATER-SEWER DT<:;TRICT UNIFORM BILLING, OPERA TING AAgsnilP.m.!ltl&4.Jof2~
February 24,2009
Page 346 of 462
Secs. 134-226--134-255. Reserved.
DIVISION 6. RESERVED'
'Editor's note: Ord, No, 01-73, 3 8, adopted Dec, 11,2001, repealed 33 134-256--134-258, in their
entirety, Formerly, said sections pertained to monitoring facilities, inspection and sampling and powers
ancj authority of inspectors as related to monitoring and inspections. See the Code Comparative Table.
Secs. 134-256--134-258. Reserved.
DIVISION 7. RESERVED'
'Editor's note: Ord. No, 01-73, 38, adopted Dec, 11, 2001, repealed 33 134-261--134-265, in their
entirety. Formerly, said sections pertained to penalties, authority to disconnect service, suspension of
service, revocation of permit, and notice of disconnection, suspension, revocation as related to
confidential information. See the Code Comparative Tabie,
Secs. 134-261--134-270. Reserved.
DIVISION 8. RESERVED'
'Editor's note: Ord. No, 01-73, 38, adopted Dec, 11,2001, repealed 33 134-271, 134-272, in their
entirety, Formerly, said sections pertained to confidential information and disclosure laws as related to
confidential information. See the Code Comparative Table.
Sees. 134-271-134-275. Reserved.
DIVISION 9. RESERVED'
'Editor's note: Ord. No, 01-73,38, adopted Dec. 11,2001, repealed 33 134-276--134-278 in their
entirety. Formerly, said sections pertained to purpose, service charges and charges and fees as related
to service charges and fees. See the Code Comparative Table.
http://libraryl.municode.comldefault/Doc View/1 0578/1/3 05/311
4/17/2008
ARTICLE VI. WATER-SEWER DTSTRICT UNIFORM BILLING, OPERA TING ANli\ncW~I9q)f11l~
February 24, 2009
Page 347 of 462
Secs. 134-276--134-285, Reserved.
DIVISION 10. WATER IRRIGATION"
.Editor's note: Ord, No. 00-61, SS 1-8, adopted Sept. 26, 2000, did not specifically amend this
Code. Hence its inclusion as SS 134-286--134-293 was at the discretion of the editor. See the Code
Comparative Table.
Sec. 134-286. Title and applicability.
This division is entitled "The CoJiier County Water Irrigation Ordinance," This division shall apply
only within unincorporated Collier County,
(Ord. No, 00-61, S 1, 9-26-00)
Sec. 134-287. Findings.
The board of county commissioners hereby makes the following findings:
(1) That irrigation by water during the hours of 9:00 a.m, and 5:00 p,m, increases water
loss to evaporation and reduces the beneficial use of water resources;
(2) That adopting an ordinance to limit irrigation between 5:00 p,m, and 9:00 a,m. will
raise public awareness and promote conservation; and
(3) That restricting irrigation during the hours of 9:00 a.m, and 5:00 p.m, will not create
a hardship on residents of the county.
(Ord. No. 00-61, S 2, 9-26-00)
Sec. 134-288. Purpose.
The primary purpose of this division is to provide a regulatory framework to assist in
conservation of water resources through consistent and uniform use for landscape irrigation in specified
geographic areas.
(Ord. No. 00-61, S 3, 9-26-00)
Sec. 134-289. Definitions.
The following definitions shall apply throughout this division:
Agriculture means the growing of farm products including, but not limited to, sugar cane,
vegetables, citrus and other fruits, pasture lands, sod or nursery stock, including, but not limited to,
ornamental foliage and greenhouse plants.
County means Collier County, a political subdivision of the State of Florida, by and through its
http://library1.municode.comldefault/Doc View/10578/1/305/311
4/17/2008
ARTICLE VI. WATER-SEWER DTSTRICT UNIFORM BILLING, OPERA TING JtIg!lrdf:li66't/}lof'~
Februifry 24, 2009
Page 348 of 462
board of county commissioners and as Ex-Officio the Governing Board of the Collier County
Water-Sewer District and Goodland Water District.
Code enforcement officer means any authorized agent or employee of the county whose duty it
is to enforce most of the county's codes,
County water/sewer district means the service boundaries as established in Collier County
Water-Sewer District, Special Act Chapter 88-499, Laws of Florida, as now or hereafter amended,
Goodland Water District means the service boundaries as established in Goodland Water
District, Ordinance No. 80-43, or Its successor ordinance.
Impervious means land surfaces that do not allow penetration of water, including paved roads,
paved sidewalks, paved driveways, paved parking lots, or highly compacted areas, including with shell
or with clay,
Irrigation means the application of water from surface water or ground water sources or
aquifers.
Irrigation systems means equipment andlor devices which deliver water to landscaping being
irrigated including, but not limited to, pipelines, control structures, pipes, ditches, pumping stations,
emitters, valves and fittings, but excluding the transfer of water through water management systems
from one location to another.
Person means natural person, public or private corporation, firm, association, joint venture,
partnership, municipality, government or governmental agency, political subdivision, and any other
entity whatsoever, or any combination of same, jointly or severally,
Water resources means surface and groundwater sources and aquifers,
Water utility service means water service provided by a public or private utility.
(Ord. No, 00-61, 9 4, 9-26-00)
Sec. 134-290. Irrigation hours; operational prohibitions.
(a) All water irrigation activities within .those areas and boundaries as designated in section
134-291, and which are not exempted by section 134-292, shall be restricted to the hours
between 5:00 p,m. and 9:00 a.m" seven days each week, Subject to the exceptions specified in
this division, irrigation by water in those areas Is prohibited between the hours of 9:00 a.m., and
5:00 p.m., seven days each week.
(b) All water irrigation activities within those areas and boundaries as designated in section
134-291, 'and which are not exempted by section 134-292, shall be operated in an effective
manner so as to not allow water to be applied continuousiy or primarily to any impervious
surface.
(c) All water irrigation activities prohibited or restricted from time-to-time by emergency orders
declared by the South Florida Water Management District and published in a newspaper of
general circulation In Collier County pursuant to F,S. 9373.175, Each such order shall apply to
such geographic areas in the county as are specified in the respective order or, If not specified,
as otherwise provided by law. Each such order shall be subject only to such exceptions as
specified in the respective order, and if not specified therein, as otherwise provided by law.
(Ord. No, 00-61, 95,9-26-00; Ord, No. 00-86, 91,12-12-00)
Sec. 134-291. Irrigation restriction affected areas.
(a) The provisions of this division shall apply immediately on its effective date to landscape
htto://librarv1.municode.comldefau1t/Doc View/l 0578/1/305/311
4/17/2008
ARTICLE VI. WATER-SEWER DTSTRICT UNIFORM BILLING, OPERA TING N:9oo&la~c})ft~8,
February 24, 2009
Page 349 of 462
Irrigation within the boundaries of the Collier County Water/Sewer District and within the
boundaries of the Goodland Water District.
(b) This division shall hereafter be applicable to other geographic areas of unincorporated
Collier County if and when the respective geographic area is classified, by resolution(s) adopted
by the board of county commissioners after public hearing, as a water irrigation restricted area,
which may include areas served by private utility water service,
(Ord, No, 00-61, 36, 9-26-00)
Sec. 134-292. Exemptions; variances.
(a) The foilowing activities are exempt from ail provisions of this division:
(1) Landscape irrigation by hand watering using only a self-canceling nozzle.
(2) Landscape irrigation from which the water source is only treated wastewater
effluent.
(3) The short-term operation of irrigation systems only for system repair and
maintenance, which shall be IimiteQ to a maximum of ten minutes per zone per week
and there must be a person present and working on the system during each such
operation.
(4) Landscape irrigation for purposes of watering in fungicides, insecticides and
herbicides as required by the manufacturer of the product, or by federal or Florida iaw.
This exemption, however, applies only to then licensed pest control operators and is
limited to the amounts of "watering in" water specified by the manufacturer's
recommendations,
(5) For the first 90 days after initial installation, landscape irrigation for the purpose of
"watering in" newly planted grass and foliage that constitutes a major portion of the
landscaping.
(6) Agricultural irrigation to the extent permitted by a consumptive or water use permit
issued by the South Florida Water Management District.
(b) Any person whose irrigation is affected by this division may make application to the county
water director for a variance if strict compliance with this division will impose a unique,
unnecessary and inequitable hardship on such service, Relief may be granted only upon
submitted proof that such hardship is peculiar to that person or that affected property, the
problem is not self-imposed, and that the granting of the variance would be consistent with the
general intent and purpose of this division and the variance is the minimum variance necessary
to eliminate the hardship.
(1) The county water director is the only person authorized to grant or deny variances
far irrigation activities that utilize water provided by the county water/sewer district or the
Goodland Water District. The water director should render a decision on the variance
request within ten working days after actual receipt of a complete application, Denial of a
variance request may be appealed to the public works administrator within ten days of
actual receipt by the applicant of the water director's decision on the initial request.
(2) An application for variance, and/or the granting of a variance, shail operate
prospectively and shall not affect any then pending enforcement action against the
property owner pursuant to the provisions of this division or otherwise,
(c) Should the board of county commissioners extend the provisions of this division to any
other areas (only in unincorporated Coilier County), the county manager shall designate a
county employee who wiil be responsible to act on behalf of the county to approve,in whole or
http://library1.municode.com/default/DocView/l0578/1/305/311
4/17/2008
ARTICLE VI. WATER-SEWER DISTRICT UNIFORM BILLING, OPERA TING ~en~~€If14m
February 24, 2009
Page 350 of 462
in part, or to disapprove, variance requests within any such designated area(s). This person
may also be the county's water director,
(Ord. No, 00-61, 97,9-26-00)
Sec. 134-293. Penalties.
(a) Violators of this division shall be issued a $25.00 citation pursuant to the county's citation
ordinance. Persons who commii repeat violations may also be punished pursuant to F.S. 9
162.21, as a civil infraction with a maximum civil penalty not to exceed $500,00. Any person
who violates any provision of this division shall also be subject to the county's remedies as
authorized in F,S. 9125,69, and/or section 1-6 of the county's Code of Ordinances.
(1) Each day (or part thereof) that there is a violation of this division by the same
person or entity shall constitute a separate offense,
(2) All monies collected pursuant to this division shall be used by the code enforcement
department to fund continued and enhanced enforcement of this division andlor other
county ordinances under its jurisdiction,
(Ord. No. 00-61, 9 8, 9-26-00)
Secs. 134-294--134-310, Reserved.
IICollier County, Florida/CODE OF LAWS AND ORDINANCES County of COLLIER,
FLORIDA Codified through Ord. No. 07-45, enacted May 22, 2007. (Supplement No.
22)/Chapter 134 UTILlTIES*/ARTICLE VI. WATER-SEWER DISTRICT UNIFORM BILLING,
OPERATING AND REGULATORY STANDARDS*
http://libraryl.municode.comldefault/DocView/!0578/1/305/311
4/17/2008
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24, 2009
Page 351 of 462
Attachment 0
Site Photos
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24, 2009
Page 352 of 462
Jean E. Valadez
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Attachments:
Lewis, Doug [dalewis@ralaw,com]
Tuesday, May 13, 2008 9:48 AM
Jean E, Valadez
FW: Tamiaml Square of Naples
Tamiami Square 020,jpg; Tamiaml Square 021 ,jpg; Tamiami Square 022.jpg; Tamiami
Square 023.jpg; Tamiami Square 024.jpg; Tamiami Square 025.jpg; Tamiami Square 026.jpg
Fyi -- for your fiie.
From: Lewis, Doug
Sent: Tuesday, May 13, 2008 9:48 AM
To: 'wides_tom'j 'GllbertMoncivaiz@coUiergov.net'
ee: 'belpediojennifer'; 'CrlfasJrealtyCo@aol.com'
Subject: Tamlami Square of Naples
<<Tamiaml Square 020.jpg>> <<Tamiami Square 021 ,jpg>> <<Tamiami Square 022.jpg>> <<Tamiami Square 023.jpg>>
<<Tamiami Square 024.jpg>> <<Tamiami Square 025,jpg>> <<Tamiami Square 026,jpg>>
Tom & Gii,
In follow-up to our meeting yesterday, Jerry Hartman and I went to the site and waiked the property after our meeting. For
your review and file. attached are photographs of the only lift station located on the very north end of the property, Let me
know if you have any further questions related to the lift station. Also, in the right-of-way median just north of the site, we
noticed that the median is being irrigated by reclaimed water. Does the site have access to reclaimed water for irrigation
purposes? Let us know, Thanks!!
Douglas A, Lewis
I_&)ANDRESS tl
A LEGAL l"ROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATION
www.ralaw.com
850 Park Shore Drive
Trianon Centre - 3rd Floor
Naples, Florida 34103
Phone: (239) 649-2712
Pax: (239) 261-3659
E-mail: dalewis@ralaw.com
Profile: Douglas A. Lewis
Both DOllg1as A. Lewis and Roerzel & Andress intend that lhis message be used excluRively by the adclressee(s). nlis message
may comain information that is privileged. coufide11lial arld exempt from disclosure under applicahle .law _ Unauthorized disclosure
or use of this information is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please penmmently dispost' of
the origi.nal message and notify Doug13s A. Lewis immediately at 1(239) 649-2712. Thank you.
Any federal tax advice contained herein or in any attachment
hereto is not intended to be used, and cannot be used. to (1)
avoid penalties imposed under the Internal Revenue Code or
(2) support the promotion or marketing of any transaction or
matter. This legend has been affixed to comply with U.S.
Treasury Regulations governing tax practice.
1
"
:)
.,)
~
')
II
~
/.J
..(
C+-
'~
t
oJ
q,..
l('
, j.
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24, 2009
'lffi2
-
~
{1
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24, 2009
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24,2009
P
-.'1,. ~
J::,~'li"
~':f~y;~,:,.:
',:",
-
,
.:. ~'
'I
I i'~
I',
....,
! i ~_
"
!
1.
,
...;.- "
'.~>.
~~~:--,
qi~~'e
r~>
~~"
~-~'): ,
Agenda Item No, 10A
February 24, 2009
I -
Agenda Item No, 10A
February 24, 2009
Page 360 of 462
Attachment E
Pre-Application Meeting Follow-up
FW: Tamiami Square - Pre-ApplicAtion Meeting with the County on W&S Impact F~nda It'~fNbof@l.
February 24, 2009
Page 361 of 462
FW: Tamiami Square -- Pre-Application Meeting with the County on W&S
Impact Fees
Jean E. Valadez
Sent: Thursday, May 22, 2008 2:35 PM
To: Gerry Hartman
Attachments: Document,pdf (10 K8)
FYI.
Jean E. Valadez
Senior Office Coordinator
GAl Orlando has moved I Please note our new address below:
GAl Consultants, Inc.
301 East Pine Street, Suite 1020
Orlando, Florida 32801
T 407.423,8398 ext, 3126
F 407,843,1070
www.gaiconsu Ita nts,con}
c,;.<<.r CQlN:Si,lLTAtITS
~
nan:;fo:nHng ld{.-<tis i11t!::t reiil,ty i"t<r 1)<112':, s.O years, Go..;! Is 3 601J-p~:t'E'J,', e."lT,pICt~e\:,"(lv,,';I':,ea,
mulUC}]9:i,lliMd en9i[;{"edn') op.:! elhf',1'C'llllil::ntal OJ!1$l.1lnng firm, Srt"t";'lng 'Jljr r.:1~~nj5 'tlork1wi1e
\!l ':r!,~ en,::rgy, lr'~nS\-"(jft,~Uonl {lSa~ l2~nb~, indu~t!ial and go~'~mmel'ltal m?i!-!~,=n ~ro.."'r! .Q~tlC\3
tI1~O'"ctQ\~'0,,-\l th,~. NCr,tf.t~'\~~l. i"iI::!\'\II:.';l, and SoutnecClsle:.::11 Llnile-:::l 'i;t.(jle;;.
C~lt:&AA1'rtiG ~tmf
'I't:hRS Or ScR:_vrc;e
CONFIDENTIAUlY NOTICE
The documents and material~ transmitted herewith contain confidential and proprietary information belonging to the sender and are legally privrleged.
They are solely for the use of their intended recipient. If you are not the intended recipient or the person responsible for delivering e-mail to the
Intended recipient, you havE' received this e-mail in error. Inform the sender of the f'rror and remove this e-mail from your system. If this transmission
includes design data and recommendations, they are provided oniy as a matter of convenience and should not be used for final design and/or
constructlo n.
,___...__ _____________. .________.__.__________.___ _m__. ._______.__ .--~---..,..-..--..-..--.----~-----.-""-."-.-----.---.-.--.---.--------
From: Lewis, Doug [mailto;dalewis@ralaw,com]
Sent: Thursday, May 22, 2008 2:25 PM
To: CrifasirealtyCo@aol.com
ee: Jean E. Valadez; Nelson, Karen
Subject: RE: Tamiami Square -- Pre-Application Meeting with the County on W&S Impact Fees
<<Document.pdf>>
Jack,
In follow-up to the below, I will follow-up on items 1 & 2 below, You are handling #3 below directly with the
consultant, correct? Also, the County asked who is Sunwest plumbing and if they work for you? They work for
you correct?
The County said that the irrigation meter information provided to the County seemed incorrect. Jerry is going to
review this information and provide foiiow-up to you and the County on this,
https:llwebmaiJ ,gaiconsultants,cornlOW A/?ae=Item&a=Print&t=IPM.Note&id=RgAAAA... 5/27/2008
.-----.... '
-----.... )
FW: Tamiami Square -- Pre-Application Meeting with the County on W &S Impact FeA~enda IllOge~of6\<\
February 24, 2009
Page 362 of 462
Finally, please review the attached and confirm with Jerry and I whether it is correct and that the ERC calculation
reflects what you are showing based on issued permits for the project, Thanksil
Douglas A, Lewis
1_~";~~~"s&11
A LEGAL PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATION
www.ralaw.com
850 Park Shore Drive
Trianon Centre - 3rd Floor
Naples, Florida 34103
Phone: (239) 649-2712
Fax: (239) 261-3659
E-mail: dalewis@ralaw.com
ProfIle: Douglas A, Lewis
Both Douglas A. Lewis and Roetze! & Andress intend that this message be used exclusively by the addressee(s), This
message may contain information that is privileged, confidential and exempt from disclosure under applicable law.
UnauthOl;zed disclosure or use of this infonnation is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in elTor.
please permanently dispose of the original message and notifY Douglas A, Lewis immediately at 1(239) 649-2712, Thank
you.
From: Lewis, Doug
Sent: Monday, May 12, 20086:03 PM
To: 'CrifasirealtyCo@aol.com'
Cc: Neison, Karen
Subject: Tamiami Square -- Pre-Application Meeting with the County on W&S Impact Fees
Importance: High
Jack,
In follow-up to the pre-application meeting today, the County is asking for the following items:
1, Sewer flows for February, March and April '08 (Shall I follow-up with J&N on this or can someone in your office
track this down?);
2, The number of sewer pumps on the property, where located and how are they configured - e,g, will these
pumps or single pump seryice all of the sewer flows for the entire project (Shall I follow-up with J&N on this or
can someone in your office track this down?);
3, Copy of the utility plan showing location of potable water and irrigation lines (if you go with a separate
irrigation meter, you'll need to have a separate irrigation line and the county will want controllers on the irrigation
lines to limit to 80 gpm at peak);
Also, the County asked who is Sunwest plumbing and if they work for you? They said that the irrigation meter
infonmation provided to lhe County seemed incorrect. Jerry is going to review this information and provide follow-
https://webmail.gaiconsultants,com/OW N?ae=Item&a=Print&t=IPM,Note&id=RgAAAA", 5/27/2008
FW: Tamiami Square -- Pre-Application Meeting with the County on W&S Impact Fe~endali\ll~~cJ;l:liBA
February 24, 2009
Page 363 of 462
up to the County on this, Finally, please review the attached and confirm whether it is correct and that the ERC
calculation reflects what you are showing based on issued permits for the project. Thanks!!
<< File: Document. pdf >>
Douglas A. Lewis
<< OLE Object Picture (Metafile) >>
www,ralaw,com <htto:llwww,ralaw,com/>
850 Park Shore Drive
Trianon Centre - 3rd Floor
Naples, Fiorida 34103
Phone: (239) 649-2712
Fax: (239) 261-3659
E-mail: dalewis@ralaw.com
Profile: Douglas A, Lewis <tillQ:llwww.ralaw.com/atlornev.cfm?id=4512>
Both Douglas A, Lewis and Roetzel & Andress intend that this message be used exclusively by the addressee
(s), This message may contain information that is privileged, confidential and exempt from disclosure under
applicable law, Unauthorized disclosure or use of this information is strictly prohibited, If you have received this
communication in error, please permanently dispose of the original message and notify Douglas A. Lewis
immediately at 1(239) 649-2712. Thank you,
Any federal tax advice contained herein or in any attachment
hereto is not intended to be used, and cannot be used, to (1)
avoid penalties imposed under the Internal Revenue Code or
(2) support the promotion or marketing of any transaction or
matter. This legend has been affixed to comply with U.S.
Treasury Regulations governing tax practice.
https:llwebmail.gaiconsultants,cOlnlOW N?ae=Item&a=Print&t=IPM,Note&id= RgAAAA", 5/27/2008
FW: Tamiami Square of Naples
Agenda I~IN~, qfy,!,
February 24, 2009
Page 364 of 462
FW: Tamiami Square of Naples
Jean E. Valadez
sent: Thursday, May 22, 2008 2:34 PM
To: Geny Hartman
FYI.
Jean E. Valadez
Senior Office Coordinator
GAl Orlando has moved! Please note our new address below:
GAl Consultants, Inc.
301 East Pine Street, Suite 1020
Orlando, Florida 32801
T 407.423,8398 ext, 3126
F 407,843,1070
www.gaiconsultants.com
GAl eQI'lS:UlTANT!;
rs
,~u;e'J.Tt~. -tm
'l'EkRS q~ S'Eft'litCE
CONFiDENTIALITY NOTICE
The documents and materials transmitted herewith contain confidential and proprietary Information belonging to the sender and are legally privileged.
They are solely for the use of their Intended recipient. If you are not the intended recipient or the person responsible for delivering e~mail to the
intended recipient, you have received thIs e~mait in error. Inform the sender of the error and remove this e~mail from your system. If this transmission
includes design data and recommendations, they are provided only as a matter of convenience and should not be used for final design and/or
construction.
mmifOi:nltng ldca~ intO reaMy (Ot 0'.....:1 50 vea:$., GAl is. a 600-V~j:., emphJ1~e-(r'h'rJed, 1
m(J11I61~lpll"'ed ~nglr~tt...~ing aM enwonmeo121 oon:;ulung firm, ~l"t'jflg (1)1 clif.onts VlQtldwlje
1Il 'ille en.::rg)!:, lfar~po:ta-UOIl, reiH estat.e-! lrKlu5t;'lal and ga..'tmmentJ.1 (!:'\.f.,t;:c-45. ft0nl -cffi~)~
!1~:'C-u'g:WJ~! tile ~'!C;;L~~l.'ISL. t>'lld:p,'C:~t, ilI00 Sou(:tj{:!21~;ff'l unlled $tates.
./
._----------_._._------------,-~.._--------_.._-_._-_.------------------<..------------
From: Lewis, Doug [mailto:dalewis@ralaw,com]
Sent: Thursday, May 22, 2008 2: 14 PM
To: Lewis, Doug; CrifasirealtyCo@aol.com
Cc: Jean E. Valadez; Nelson, Karen
Subject: RE: Tamiami Square of Naples
Jack,
Have you provided a copy of the utility plan showing location of potable water and irrigation lines to the
consultant? If not, can you follow-up with Jean on this, See her contact information below,
--Doug
From: Lewis, Doug
Sent: Tuesday, May 13, 2008 10:17 AM
To: 'Jean E. Valadez'
Cc: 'CrifasirealtyCo@aol.com'
Subject: RE: Tamiami Square of Naples
https://webmail.gaiconsultants,com/OW N?ae=Item&a=Print&t=IPM,Note&id=RgAAAA.,. 5/27/2008
AgendaFa~~fQA
February 24,2009
Page 365 of 462
FW: Tal1liami Square of Naples
Yes, Thank you, I have an inquiry into the client requesting this,
-- Doug
From: Jean E. Valadez [mailto:j,valadez@gaiconsultants,com]
Sent: Tuesday, May 13, 2008 10:09 AM
To: Lewis, Doug
Subject: RE: Tamiami Square of Naples
Thanks!
Gerry asked me to remind you that you were going to send us the plans and drawings for Tamiami Square.
Jean E. Valadez
Senior Office Coordinator
GAl Orlando has moved! Please note our new address below:
GAl Consultants, Inc.
301 East Pine Street, Suite 1020
Orlando, Florida 32801
T 407.423,8398 ext. 3126
F 407,843,1070
www.gaiconsultants.com
GAl ccmSQi,..T/O.flT.!;
r~.~
~
'\
TrillllSfo1l11mg lij.~~ into r.;;:2llity fN c...er S-I.l ye03t~. G.l\I i~ a .sCO-~~.;I1..,)~", efl;~lojl~e-(l'ft"lied, I
/r{l.Ittll!'JZipl!.l~ed engi~et~!lng and envituf\IlE~n!21 consull.:ing firm, 5~vlrlg (JUl cfieM..s wor!~h'..:lde-
m ~~le ~i"w.::n,NJ It.3.m,poTt~licn, ,e;1! .estate, lI1OIJst!J~, .~nd g(I',',:::rnlw.;n;:;;:.,1 'lioE-ri':L'1s (tl)fn o!~i'.:e...
tluv;':f1.l1;'O!.:1 t.he rJ0rti/~asl, 1''''ldW~l, ",,(I'd Sl)ut~"t:~5.lern Ulll\!~j 'StiitCS.
,
eE1.E:IlP,J,'rr!'t(; l1:rrY
YE,I;.ttS. 0' Sert'll!CE-
CQNFIDENT1AUlY NOTICE
The documents and materials transmitted herewith contain confidential and proprietary information belonging to the sender and are legally privileged.
They are solely for the use of their intended rel;ipient. If you are not the intended recipient or the person responsible for delivering e-mail to the
intended recipient, you have received this e-mail in error. Inform the sender of the error and remove this e-mail from your system. If this transmissIon
Includes design data and recomme~dations, they are provided only as a matter of convenience and should not be used for final design and/or
construction.
From: Lewis, Doug [mailto:dalewis@ralaw.com]
Sent: Tuesday, May 13, 2008 9:48 AM
To: Jean E. Valadez
Subject: PN: Tamiami Square of Napies
Fyi - for your file,
From: Lewis, Doug
Sent: Tuesday, May 13, 2008 9:48 AM
To: 'wldes_tom'; 'GilbertMonclvalz@colliergov.net'
Cc: 'belpedlojennifer'; 'CrlfaslrealtyCo@aol,com'
Subject: Tamlami Square of Naples
https:l Iwebmail.gaiconsultants,comJOW A/?ae=Item&a=Print&t=IPM,Note&id=RgAAAA", 5/27/2008
FW: Tamiami Square of Naples
AgendaIlllgll So:>MA
February 24, 2009
Page 366 of 462
<<Tamiami Square 020,jpg>> <<Tamiami Square 021,jpg>> <<Tamiami Square 022,jpg>> <<Tamiami Square
023,jpg>> <<Tamiami Square 024,jpg>> <<Tamiami Square 025,jpg>> <<Tamiami Square 026,jpg>>
Tom & Gil,
In follow-up to our meeting yesterday, Jerry Hartman and I went to the site and walked the property after our
meeting, For your review and file, attached are photographs of the only lift station located on the very north end
of the property, Let me know if you have any further questions related to the lift station, Also, in the right-of-way
median just north of the site, we noticed thatlhe median is being irrigated by reclaimed water, Does the site have
access to reclaimed water for irrigation purposes? Let us know, Thanks!!
Douglas A, Lewis
1_t$i)ANDRESS II
A LeGAL rROFESSiONA,L ASSOCIATION
www.ralaw.com
850 Park Shore Drive
Trianon Centre - 3rd Floor
Naples, Florida 34103
Phone: (239) 649-2712
Fax: (239) 261-3659
E-mail: dalewis@ralaw.com
Profile: Dou~las A, Lewis
Both Douglas A. Lewis and Roetzel & Andress intend that this message be used exclusively by the addressee(s), 1l1is
message may contain infonuation that is privilegedl confidential and exempt frOlll disclosure under applicable law.
Unauthorized disclosure or use of this infoID1ation is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error,
please pennanently dispose of the original message and notify Douglas A, Lewis immediately at 1(239) 649-2712, 1l1ank
you.
Any federal tax advice contained herein or in any attachment
hereto is not intended to be used, and cannot be used, to (1)
avoid penalties imposed under the Internal Revenue Code or
(2) support the promotion or marketing of any transaction or
matter. This legend has been affixed to comply with U.S.
Treasury Regulations governing tax practice.
Any federal tax advice contained herein or in any attachment
hereto is not intended to be used, and cannot be used, to (1)
avoid penalties imposed under the Internal Revenue Code or
(2) support the promotion or marketing of any transaction or
https://webmail.gaiconsultants,corn/OW AJ?ae=Item&a=Print&t=IPM,N ote&id=RgAAAA". 5/27/2008
Agenda~NcofiGA
February 24, 2009
Page 367 of 462
FW: Tamiami Square of Naples
matter. This legend has been affixed to comply with U.S.
Treasury Regulations governing tax practice.
https://webmaiLgaiconsultants,com/OW AJ?ae= Item&a=Print&t=IPM,Note&id= RgAAAA", 5/27/2008
Agenda Item No, 10A
February 24, 2009
Page 368 of 462
Attachment F
Excerpts from ~stem Development
Charges for Water, Wastewater, and
Stormwater Facilities
by Arthur C. Nelson
--------- -- - -- ---- - --- - .- ---
Agenda Item No, 10A
February 24, 2009
Page 369 of 462
~
~ ~ ~
QJ 'J) QJ ~ 'J)
es~~ ~~ ~~
QJ~~~QJ~'O~~
~oa~~~~a~
~~.d ~~ ~~
>U ~ S~
~ P rJJ
=
o
~
Q)
Z
.
u
~
]
~
~ ~
~ ....
:c"
V') .g
@:J g
~ ~~
-0 ::J f.
o....~
z
V')
- "
;$ ~
~ ::J
.....J cil
~o ~
~ c ~
::::: .2 l'O
...J:
-Ctl,..
cts--
c:::::S...
o~ C
:t::Ctl4l
~()E
C') ~ .2
c ... 4l
.- 0 >
>-... 4l
-
Q.CI)C
Q.4lE
< :e. 4l
U'"
C CI)
.;:: en
a..
M
~ 6.1-6 c-~ ~~ .s
~O(,j..j8--St):g
O:U'OOd~::;:::lO
~>l])OCcCl,)..o
_Q.)>uS:~bO,,",
;;l '1:l 'z:l " ,9 <:l bO 8..
c 1J ~ ,g 1:: ~ ,9 0
.~ ';w ]~.~ 2..~ ~ l:t
:..:. >-., ...... - -+-':=l ~
.....,.0 dJ t:j ~ 0
Q.) (!.) ...... -S "5 ~ t::l
g ~ '" ~ '" .., " ,g
.. J:I'1:l >< '" 'i:!~ '"
'1:l,,"~"il" ;j
;j" "", E ....; "
o " '1:l 'il ti.:l " " "il
..c:l ~ B :: l]) 6. ~ (,)
VJ Q) g .8"0 I.. ~ C)
..-.......c - ...... Q.) ~. ",:0
(/J..o (1) ~..c ~ _ clj
U '" ~ ""~" '"
Q '" " " '" ,. ~ 0
rIl g "~'1'3 " ;j "l gj
'-'<<I 4-f,.I:::l_ Q)
V,l P 0 U l<:l ~ l-l
o"'l])1a:a~l:UQJ
it~i5,,~~';'~
.rl~bO.rl,.~"'~
~ '~ 13 ~ ~ ~.g ~
Z "", 0 ~.rl"1O ,,~
o s"-.-<"'aE~
t....., Q.)o.,B ~o
~ 5' ~ ';:I ~ '" Do "l ~
U QJ VJ !3 E3 ~ .S ()J ~
~ ~ ~ s 8':e.'5"5 ~d
~ 'OBS"O&~.8SQ
o I'l '" 8 :a 0 ""'''l 1:l rIl
~ B 'E...... .. a '"' ~ '3 (I)
~ VJ-' ~~:: ~,.g Q"l~
7: ~"q s.... .~ 4-1 C IU (!.) ,..q
~ ~ u u 0 U I.. ~ ~
Agenda Item No, 10A
February 24,2009
Page 370 of 462
U) ..... Q) O' 4-l I
R ~ .-d -0' ~ ~ ~ 0 .d ...... .~ 0 51
~::~u "d5;:::::1't:l~ C~d'
I:l;I '"'4 ....~ 0" ~ Q.) 11);:::1 '0.0 0 -d'
UO~~ VJ6~~o "'~~~
15 il gj ~ 11 il ",.0 ih 1ij<,~ OJ) "
,. "d ....... ~,> ttl Q).... t.) C'C:l a)
r;,; !:l "0...... "" ..c ,.J ..0
;:::IoQ.)..s::::l ..cObJJ ~ ~....>.
"'''"~" ~OJ)d'1:l """'>'
.. ~ .a :E rg "il '~ ;; d .""1l "'El
~ " ,,~ I'l g ',. ,g >. bO.", ,-
ep.o, -;;I ,__ - " '" -a '~d ~ 5
ttl-u.... o;t;Io Q.)t:l uo-,,~
.rl"'",_ U-"Bu~ ;:l '"
U S eel Q.) 0 -.::J '.-1 -d J:j "'0 ,.-c
d '" ~ ~ rIl ,:1 ~ ~'" g * 'S 'is
"u O~, 4-1 "0 ctI Cf.l ~ ;::I iU
S ().... o~, U J, . 1{ U:::l >
CI ~ u .... ..... ........... 4-l U lU
""0 U) ll) 'r; ;::: P.. ~ 0 ~ 0 Cd 73 g
_0 ~ 0 0 ~ aJ ~ ..... U
'O~'P~ '.g]~:>~ ~VJ;';;';
;> ...c:l ll) U'- lU ll)
(!.)~oCJ 1jlU"d-1J) "':::f~~~
'1:l"':El-S ~~il~.o "'il~~
~ ,~ ~ .S u ~:a -g '~ ~ %l @
<;; e; .... '1'3 " ., - ..l '" U 0 '" B
;>, ll) ~ .- ~ ll) p.. = ll) - e: (tJ
~ : b ~ .~.~ ~ s bOi .-B ~ "'0 !S
::l S ;;1 il t; e; ''; ""' oj 1:; ~ :a D-<
'>l.l '"d u..... I.o:l ll) Q: 0 G)
/o-11)~() ~v.Jll)a:) ~~~I-I......
t$u,4-4::S Cl.i-!...c:I>"'at"Cl:.,)Q)~~
~~l.l-(o' OQ)Q) Q)~=""'Q
.8::: D u '"d ~ $ ~ '"d ] ,~ .";::l OJ ~ 1;;j
t~"'1:lB;>"s~"~9<e;....,,,
~Mb~]~~g~g&;d~&~
~
.
.
~~~~~~rw,i~~~~k~<;(.;~~{~~~~~)j~w4~'~~~#i7,~g~:,~;;.'/;.;~<'!;~1;(:-i'lm~p.ii~0~1~;;~~;.b~:'~;'i~:,,,,.~~:r.:"'"'_"'.w::i,.;;1;,ji.:s,.;.,;'-",....,: :'~-;':~-";'\.i-;i1;';'::':,,~,;'~'~-';";-;'~~:~';-"';i,~:';'~"'i.'l;>,)_
.....
'"
V'l
r:::l
""
P-
.....
U
Z
.....
~
P-
~
:><i
~
'-l
~
o
f:::
~
ll:i
\!)
Z
.....
:><
""
0-
0-
~
'ti
'"
co
8
'"
~
~ ~ ~ ~ f~
s gf~ .-B-o
o Vol t:l en Q
15-:3 g,go,g
''::>:;;: S "' "" co
a .;1 Q.~ '
'a g 00 ~ 0 .~ ]
E '.::> ,;:i B ~ 'ti ~
~ 13'~ ~ 0 ~ ~
'O~&tr.l~;>'~
fZl~~OU';~~
o 0 0"" ';:; ~ "
....:lo.......\-;~Cj~
lU;;.-..92d,.lo;::jo
-:3",0""""',,,
Cd ~ 0 ~ aJ.....
..;; "0 ca '.0 ~ v.J ~
Q) Il) l:1 0, It> :::l 0
:.d bJJ '@ 0 r; Cd ~
~~t..Q'1:jc:l~
~ d) Q) 'S l1.) 0 f.f.l
~fdu'O!:j~5
10 l-l ~ Q) ~ M ~
...... 0 0 b.O (JJ ':<:J
rn 4..:... C'l:I d...c:: c:::
~~'ti:U"bOO
..... l1.) Q) ;> ~ :a. s
~ p.., ~ cd '"d ..!:d
> ....'~ .~ ,,-:3 '",
~ cU CI;l ~ ctl...... Il)
'0 -:3 ~" S ~ <=><
a ....-l l1.) v.J ll,) V) (])
\1) 1a ;:::l '"d C":l -B
~ c::: 0;;.-.. ~ ~
~OS~i~k
::: ~ ~ ~ '"d..... ~
I-< C':l tf:l U l1.) ~ S
&s~~gp.DUJ
,::.
..
co
~
'"
""
"
....
'"
..
~
'ti
'"
co
."l
"'
'"
P-
'"
'"
'"
::
~
'"
!Xl
bO
'"
'V;
o
o
..::l
U
d~~IJ)~~""'l!) I
"1l.""~cis5-:31l
~ ..~ v.t 0 ',,, > k 0..8
4-<t:,..t::;Io'.ad5~O
~ .g Q) ~ 0..8 .~ :- ~ 8
u.......t:; c:roCf.l.....-!
1;'6:;0:::",-:35'"
~ v.t ~..Cl CI) Cf.I Cf.I g
<1.) 'd 0 Cf.l ~ d) Cf.I ~ ~
.~ ~ ..... u u > a 2 l1)
~ ~ '........ 0 t) u 'r;;j'~ oS
~ ~.......... A '.0 t:l B.r.:l
~ v.J a3 bJJ ~ ~ B ;g g .S
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ .~ 8 ; ~
.~ G)l1.):::~'"O~~llJfl
....- > r; d} co B S C':l ~ v.J
~::b.Q.o~~bO~ ~
Vl 5 ~ ~.D -B ,g -:3 'E "
>. ~oSa:C:::~l-<b.o
.c te.............g ,0 1; 0 u;g
~iUC:::CI.l.gH;:fO:::l
~ ~ a .S .~ ~ 'B :: ~
cd E rn.!:l 4-< ~ 11) III
..0 d) 0 (\)"d 1:3 '"0 '.;:j ()
8 -:3 ~ ~ ~ s; 'E '[j 'E
,,~bllt:;?. cd .2., cd Q,)
~. ....-1 9 0 Q) .... 4-( V,I
..0 ro-......... '" 4-l
....-l.,.-l U l/"J l1.) ta 4-l Cd 0
3 :::,.8 t t) u O.-=: U)
0.. U'l cr) 't<j S'5iJ 11 ~ ~
:>, ~ -:S ~ ll) ..s 0... u ~
.-<~ .--< .-<
8roaS4-i.oroa:gf......
ll) 0 .--< 0 .s .~ .--<.;:! t:l
.-< U p,.. t:f.l = ~ ::l "0 ill
U .,...; R.-<':- C) .U ~ H
.~ ~ Cd d.l 'r", H D iU <2
"'><.."Bll~ti""
~ lI'l 1I).--< ro o::l P.. Q.) 'i::I
'"
u
,~
..
...
'"
Vl
..
o
-
'"
,.
'"
""
""
0::
';;'
....
co
,..
Agenda Item No, 10A
February 24, 2009
Page 371 of 462
11) 0) ...... IJ) '"d .. Q VJ ;>-.0..
;:l ::a il -:3 "3 [:l ,. !.i 'ti o:l
~ "' 8 0"'"' S '" ""
~O)e'i~~~ll)~",o~
~~~] ~~"E e ~g.g
'" " 0 '" p ~ 0 U ~ u u
:@SbO"iaiil~Q"E"''i3
...... ~ 0 0 !::; ~ tI) r.';) U ,t3
urI'J6ri~u~"O ~O::s
'" ~ 0 ..... 11,) -:S ~ 0 tI) '-'
.... .--<C3~~O~~:>.Q.)
Vl,,"'''"'''~''''ti-S"'-:3
~>~c~=]&o~'O
'" 0 ,,~ ~ ~ 0 ~ = U lI'l
d bO _ .s '.::> 0> '" '::l '"
a ta ~ t3 ';;'.u v.l......~ 'tj gg
is g ~ g. '6 'E ,~ ,~ :;J ,S ~
~ ~ ~ -g .s g E g ~"E ~
l-t "'0 ll) ......,.....; 0.. U rn
"0 1l ,$1 fii -:3~,g :3 ~ :::> 8
d.l _ <=l C) (1).
.c~~~~~~~~~d
] ,,'iJ f.l ,~..s r;; ~ -B f.l ""
..... 0 ~ ll) 3: $,.d 0).,...; (\) R
~ "{g .~.~ ll) l-< "0 ll) 3: .~ ~
8. i3 ,g 1: ,~ 0 "3 -:3 i@ 1: ""
,,...; Q) Q) > Q) 0 rl Q) 0) -a
Q) en '"d rn he > :3:'.;:1 ~ U'l ;::i
-:S~b.Q~~or/;J;5l1)~lI)
,,; ~ ,3 ,5' "0 {j :J ,,~ ~ g
'blllUO'l- l-<~o~ l=l
ci ,3 tl ';< s fj.s ,,'0 '" ,S ro
c<:l v,l ;>-. ll) >'Qj U ro S ~ ~
"a ~ ~ .s ] ~ ill .~ g..:o '0 0
Q.) 19 P (;) tr.I b./J..o Q.) U ll) ~.g
,. "8"''' '" '" ~ '" '"
.....,.s u .0'.0;>-' Q.) tr.l a3 '6 bO
~ ~ ~ ctl .W':l Ci} Sill;:::: t.;::l .~
o oo~K..!><:lO~OQ)c:
..cl U')_OlU~rn....U'"d'O
'" " '"
~~Ji
~ '0 "
S " bO
".D "'
,g fii <=
o u 8
<=>< '" ....
B~ 8.
].~ S
~ " 0
" u '"
.00( = b1J
.. 'ti "
.2 ~'BiJ
"., 8 ~
8~-5
u W':l is
Q~U)
tIl <=><0
.sS""
"-<oll
o '" '"
d'~ co
d = 0 .S
a ~~~m
gs ill "0 .s 9
~ -:3 fii ;,;'~
-< "'.ci"" d
Q) bO I:':l (::l
~ 8';::1 ~ d)
"a) .~ ~ 0..9
.. 8 8 ~ fii
~ ~ ~ ,S ;9
";'-"_'...:,:,;, t..'."'-''',''''~: ;:~':.'- ,- '''->c'';,"' '
Agenda Item No, lOA
February 24, 2009
Page 372 of 462
I
L~ - '
;:::~~KI'l-...liJl!;.:~~"".........,...,.~,...,. "~" .. ..........,..,,,......' '"""',.,, .~l;".. .""..-,..',,'r, < ,....'....,....., ,'.... ,....,."
'"
I"l
"
~
~
::c
u
Eo<
Z
I"l
:;s
~
o
...:i
I"l
>-
I"l
~
:;s
I"l
Eo<
'"
i><
'"
s ch ro "0 (1.) IV 0)
o '" " ,~ {j .D ,g
~ ~ '3 -B ~ S ~
-d'~CT']O~gj
'a u ~ ~] ~ ~
::j Cl. ...... rl tI':I r.;.;.:. u
uCl)OQ~O:::3
glD~B.o-S~
~~~~~~"O
",,~.g~;@il~
1l "0 ij....... b.JJt.8
aJ cd -'"1 _~ en
.........0( ..... --.e:! ~ ::::l:.a.....
a'~ ".:.:::J' o..D cl :a
o '0 C1,) "t:I :::::l Cd VJ
t)~~~~E~
QU4-lStfJOO
~ 0 0 C1,) \-(] {/.l
.oU)o'Ot8.;j~
0,8 gp1A""ll'U
cl b-l Cd ~ d} ...... 2
C1,) .~ \-( tI':I,.d cd
>~utJ~"""8
..a ~ ro.S ~ '~ '.0
~ lI) \-( 03 Cl:j ,,~
~::;c8.gJ5,~iil
;:1og1jO J1)
~......a...o...... v,a
,-,~tJ.....r~-B.a
~ ~ ~ .~ ~ ~ fJ ~
.; ~ ~ & ~ ~ ~ ]
" bO '" bO '" "" "" '"
" ;@ '" 'l'" " " '"
~ :>w( ~ ~ q -g ~ -g
:> 0 ;j .~ - ~ "> .~
~ ~ S...o.~.S ~ t5
00
'<t
] ~ ~ ~ [j E) ;@b.O.~ 3 ~ J, 'cd J, S .~
,. ;.qO'+-l. g4=ot'";i:Jo.a~oo
..s:"';;.'"8"""'Oj,gEl,,,~il
roOn) ~c.g:.co;9t:l()o~~.8
cn.D P-l~ i:d P-l..cl'b a.> o13rJ:l 0) O"d
~ ~~ b ~ ~ bI) E ~ ',g ~ oo~ ~t> ~
.a 'a >- ~ ~ t'd ;:j t:: t) .~ .i3 Cd. 0
"g '" ~ '" "",S " g '~ 8 '8 -a - '" ~
(1) cd '0 't:l . C1J 0..::S "'d :>-.......
o ~ < ~ ~, '> tI':I ~ ~ cd ~ :> ';:j en
.........n Il.) ~ 0 Q) '1:l .;:;( ....-l ~ \-( ~ Q Q)
CI;l........d....\..-tOcdv.JtJ'-'U"'Ooo
K5 l1) 8 :::l >-. ~ '+-. 0 Q.) 15 0. .S '0 4=<
gila .9' a ~ II 'OJ ,g ,jj i:l rn "g ifi ~
\-( .g Il.) 0 E3. ~ if.) U ctl r/) 11) d ~ ~
0...9:0>...... 4-4'1:l~.b~-B v....cl
~ 15 t3 .g ~ ~ ~] ~ .~ ij3 cd i ~ g
& >. U ,~ 'J:1g ~ 0] :~ 8' & g;,~ .0
ft td Q :c; ~ :.a ~ ~ 0.. ~ 0.. ~ ctj 8 .~
StI)O+:!H8 ~cd"d>-.l1JO-lB
~~OB'1:l~a)~......"'.s~~~~E)
",,{j~a","il ~ ",lOoil'"
_ "0 ~ v.. E--t I1.l I-c ...... 0....
= ::jP-lS~ca 1-c~u:::-B8~l1Jl1.lo
'" 'U '":"" 0 " ,..; ~ -B 'S' '" ~ :g !;j "
:::l ,9 " " i1 g; 1l 0 "oj .fj ~ p. ~ '"
> ....E9td~cQas.e3~O~ ~3~"E~
~ g "~ ~ B ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 2"E 8
Cl Rtf.ltf.l;::l......U4-iH en-ro'-tf.lOB
: e.~ -8 ~ ~B 8 ~ 2 ~ ~ ] .@ .~ ~ ~
'" "'~ >." '," .9 ~ >':::l "" '" 0 9
~ Cd ~ "0 '";;.B ~ ~ ~. g S 0..'> ~ :~ ~ u
~ ,'l "" ..8 il ;;'l P ~:.s :;r '6 r-<'" ,~
~ ~. 0 0 p 0 S ~ 0 ~ u
] (5 ~ ~ ~'il1.-g'~ t1)~~. v.J ~OCd
'" U 'D..s '" 8 ~ '" '" "" '" iil " ~ " ,~
~ogo~' ~g:eg.g~eu}eeO&
< rI).~ ~ (d ~ '""d ~ co 'VJ v.J _.s 0.. S 13 en
~
o:l
"
S
'"
'"
"
'"
'"
~
"
"
r...
0...... I V,I '0 ., ""'-- "- 0 .
'" '"~ ll" ~.Dn"Elo'"\.......?:->
........ 0 0 ......'" ~ -
"'8< 0.. u ~........ 0 "' ...t:l.t::
v.J A' ~'...-I..o ....... 0 en bl)
.... ..... ...... u I=l "'l:::::I...-I 0
Bot-B.ooou:?;:.....
o:l la ... ~ 5:=l El" 8
" '" ;> 'U :rJ 0 " '" >"
::: II s:.s " " ... .':l 11 ~
:l o~-B:?;:.oo8g v.J
==::SQ ~"02fr8~~
IJ,l B.s ~ ~ ~ >- .;:l U Q) 0
S ...,,:.s~oel'"'"El~
~ ~--o~~~;.....~28.a
.... 0 '0' ~ ~~ ill' I::l
= ta ~ ~ ~. t'3 .~ u ....; ~ ~
~ ~v.J~_I::l...... ..... ~
Q) cD o;::louii}O'O......
~ "';;lCl..d R "" ,n '"
bO "", t) ,- "" El ';;l .5
b.O~~~..gctj2g~g
.S ~.o >:..s 2:3 :-;:j ~Ijj: 15
-= ""8"~);J>.i;El.':l
;:I -g la '" ,8 '" ~ .D "" 0 "
o _ ctj ~ o.c en '"'""1 v.J =
~ bO~'~.~ 5 ~ "i:l ~ ~ ~ 8
-"""" . .B S ta ..~'.;j ~.o u
........ .~ iU "0 C,) ctl :> "' ro
"t:l oc.)t)8BiB.O'O~J2m
~ "", >"" '" ",:::l " p
i-I o::t u:i ~ C,) v.J.o .;::;l (1)
~.o~4-;o2 O>,s..a
..... lU 0 <r.l UJ .S "d ..a 11) 0
~ 0" Q " ,~ "" iil "" bO '"
:;:l p(;oil"" " a[ijla
ca :9 f5 OJ) c:l B B 00"' "' t:1.o..
H ::s.~ iU .~ u' Q) ctl co 0)
- 0.... ~ '"d 0 !3' OJ en
.~ ,.c: ~ U I=l:a.l=l........ ~ :u .Q
.S - en ll) d (.) ~ ~ ~ ~~
S U ~ .s] ~ ~ .~ ~ .n
~ OSHUO--OP'!\.-,l 19
~ rn.;::c8..!l"a~1AJ5:rJ
IJl
o:l
...
<
Eo<
>-<
Po<
<
U
'"
<;:>
<
Eo<
Z
>-<
;>-
r;J)
z
o
.....
Eo<
U
e;
o
~
~
~
<
~
u
~
f;j~
...z
o~
....<~
~~
;>
~...
....<0
Agenda Item No, 10A
February 24, 2009
Page 373 of 462
~E~S' ~E~~~a ~~8~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~]~~
.........; ~ Q ~ o...t:l ~ ~ .~ "0 ..... d} \-t ~ I-< ~ ~ ..... c.. -..... d} i:t 000( 0.. "C
n)_ d ~13 \i~I-<~Srnctl B.....'-' o..~-gtj....l;j~~~ru
;> 0.. 0 ~ Ji ~ ~ u.... .c ~.... g fr C'f"l ; '~.s 0; C) ~ Cd ctl I-r U t; CI) CI)
~ ~~.;3 ~':>..urg~ ~]t1 ~.~ g:~ B~ ca .~ E S~-S ~~::E'E~
~ S ~ c-{..... ~ ~ ,:3 ~ ~ ~ ::I ~ .0 :s ] ~ ] ] -d' '0 .g ;:l ~ ~ "'".. ~ u ~
"C ~ ::: oS !!?" '"g o.~ a u o.g ~ ~ ": "CI .- =: ~ u ctI = u:::~ '0 Ed} ........ B Q ~ .~,.-.I
o do) ..... _ ::::-' 0 ~.. @ 'v.l l1,) -cd G) d} .a .,0-( cd ....., co Q) '" r.f.l 0 \..I P .B
o..l-l.........t:::u.....r--. Q).........;b.Oc..ud~!5Q:)cr:l S ..... cr:lCI:I~~-~
S ~ .0" ~ .8 ~ ~ ~ (5 d) --: _rJJ (f) ~ .g ::l "0 ~ "0 'a .g ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ o..g
..... tr.I "0 8 Vol...... ..... ~ ..... d 0,....-(. 0 e:: 'Ej [;j d} 1-<0 5 ;> '~o.d 11} N N '9 E--<
..........0 ol-<.....~ c..........~~ n"o.~~"C ......~I-l\-t~~_~~~~
CI)~~d}~ 0..... .....~u d)-ce..... O_c..Q.).~~N~ .~
s~~~g~~]~ e~~~B~SSo%~ ~~CI)~~~~ONC
~'O>-<,~=o""~~o ~<il >~~"oo-oJJ~ ~~."' ~o~~",d
d ~ cd I-< U ..;> "'0 ctI ~ lJ.) ...... 0 0 CI) .. 1:.:1 ,.0 .......0\ 0-
_gd}b"O~CI)~~_ Q.).....goQ.)a~uo~c ~~~~Q~~.G-~~~
";:;l J::::.'"'1 ~, ~..... :; '-' I.J en ~ '.;j c;::: bO 11,) en'S: '0 N I-< S ~ ~ ':;:J (j ~ 4-l cO 0 rJJ
.tJ ctI ...... S [/,l ~ a t: L.>' 0.. ~ e .... 11,) ~ > I-c ........ ~ 0 Q.,.o..,l tU
~~~~:::lt5E,--,s cnroS:::l~S1..gtl).Qo~-S ro~cn~~:;:;~~o~~
J:jl-<_I-<~coj:l Q) _ .....~....- ~ ~ t/.l.l:JroO\.......o 0\
'..-1 ...., t'Cl Q) ....-l J:j ;>. Q)~ 0 ~ d ~ .d o,sQ) 11,) "O~ cO Cl:I ~...-l r-: 0 .- '"d :::::: ~ 5-
~'-O;>'-O,.;rorn"O;> ~ >0,.; vo"t:l N .......tI.)~
u~~rnO_Q)~~ ~ g ~.~~~ 11,)~ .~~~~~~~t~~
~~Bu~5bt~ ~]ul1,)==e;>~5 ~1-c8~~'Gi'8~~~
I-<O~-B''';:;sto.."d ]~~gpo"""8~..=lt:':~ 11,)~Q)..-tOro"Ot:v.l"t:l]
~~~Od~~~aQ) .cn~~~]~u~~~N =~,"O~]~U&eN~
,>...d Oo...O~ObO ~..-.~>~ ;>':;:J.Q"o.... 0 bI).oixlUOO ::1-::1
!;".;:: ......rs.t:l :::je ~~ roroo8 ~3oO "O~Cl:lS"O~20.0~o
.... .,,,I.J rn 'C'd Q) ~ p::; El d..o - o....g rJ'J [/,l ~ ~ ';::1 E-c 0 11,) ..... ~ ~ !:l
~~8~v~~bO> ~~~ixl.~~~ro~!~~ ~.....rJJ~~~~t:bQ)~
g: I:: u Cl:l r::...cI g ~ C\l en . "'CI 11,) U). S C'd 1:3 ~!l) ~ Q.) a d p..-:S 0
.... (l) Cl:I ~ r-' ...... ,~ 0 d v.i ~ ,,"'I dO do) I-c 0 "g en..c:l 53 ~, ~ 0 -3~;>-' t: Cd en C4 .......
dOtll I-c_~~....._-~cn=o...i:d''''' .......e ....~ . 0 "O=I-c"d
~~i;*~8~~j]]~!~~=g9;~ ~3J5 ~]~~~~
~~d....."t:loQ.)~"d~~-~.~~~~i~~~~b!)~8~~~ o~d~
i~!~~]PG~~~~B~~6E~P~~i~~S~;~i!~m:
~ .~ ~ u 8 ~ a) 0 Ul 15 u ~ I-c 'd ^ ~ Q) tj ~ 0 ro 0 ::::>.:EJ 0 ..... ;>..;Q ...... ~ ~ ~ ~
l-<> o.....uii1~'c~8 'SB~~...-l~B~~ ~ ............gC'd~l.Jd58"t:l~
otl"'013:<l _ ~gS~dO"P::O<il~ :'1"'-.0=' "8.g~Cl'5!
~U)~B~~.....=...-I~ ~~~~.~u~~ooti~ ~~.~~ ~I.J~~
",
g .E
';j ~
6 ~
.B ,5
"
'0 8
3 0
cl::
~ ~D
- '.:I
~u::
'-' "
" =
" "
.0
r;J)
r:l
Eo<
>-<
::l
u
<
...
00
'" ,,-
7. :E il
;;:< :;:: 8
~ JS ~
f!;l oil"
i><: ~ '"
~ "t; ~
... ';:2 "'
o ""
~ =
:>-< 0"",
~ c'~
O 0 ~
'" "'
~ ~ 13
~ 'S"2J
C !l 1]
~ p ~
.~ .~
j~{;;:::r.~m::~.i~r~if.:~~wifij ~~i7'~' ...,
z
o
A
'"
'"
<
~
<;:>
z
....
Eo<
<
...
::0
U
..
<
u
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24, 2009
Page 374 of 462
Attachment G
Excerpts from AWWA Principles of
Water Rates, Fees, and Charges
---.-..--
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24, 2009
Page 375 of 462
'. ' ~"
. ,.'
Principles of Water Rates,
Fees, and Charges
AWWA MANUAL M1
Fifth Edition
FOUNDED ~
1881
'"
American Water Works Association
f...........'....'.
.. ~.
,,',;,"
if:''';
~" i
t:- "
~
r
f
~.
\...
~.
r
F
~.
f
,
"
~: .
I:
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24, 2009
Page 376 of 462
LOW-JNCOME AFFORDABILITY RATES 131
government provides assistance to less affluent countries to make water service
available at more affordable prices. Within North America, an increasing number of
water utilities have adopted af'fordability programs. It is not unco=on to find some
ele~ents of affordability rates in many major cities.
POLICY ISSUES
Low-income affordability alternatives are intended to address social issues, and
utility involvement in such issues may be controversial. Although each utility needs
to decide whether or not it will participate in such programs, an increasing number
of utilities are addressing water affordability in their rates.
These types of rate alternatives should be considered when a utility's cost of
water is high and some customers have problems paying their bill. Indications of this
scenario can include rising arrearages, higher collection costs, and more frequent
shutoffs for nonpayment. In making this determination, the cost-of-service analysis
should be done first without any affordability considerations. During the rate design
portion of the analysis, affordability considerations can be taken into account. The
rate analyst then can measure the effects of affordability alternatives and better
quantifY any discounts and subsidies involved.
Low-income rates typically require some degree of subsidy. The question of
which customer groups should provide the subsidy needs to be addressed. UtilIties
should recoguize that adopting more affordable rates can reduce the utility's costs if
the low-income rates result in increased collections and reduced collection costs.
The first issue to consider is at what point a water bill becomes unaffordable,
While there is no clear answer to this question, the following guidelines can help
utilities make such a determination:
(,
\
\
I
i
t
. The Safe Drinking Water Act (S, 1547) established special assistance in
co=uuities where the average residential water bill exceeds 2 percent of
median income.
1
~
I
I
l
I
I
!
. The US Department of Agriculture has a program to provide funds for water'
and wastewater systems, Loans are made for projects where the residential
water bills are 1.5 percent of the community's median income, Grants are
awarded for costs in excess of 1.5 percent,
. The AWWARF report, Water Affordability Programs, suggests that programs
should not be based on median income but on rates that cause water bills to
exceed 2 percent of income for impoverished households. Because of the
focus on impoverished households, a measure of 2 percent was selected to
determine if water service costs were burdensome.
Different measures of poverty can be used to determine eligibility. These include
Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC), Supplemental Social Security
Income (SSl), minimum wage incomes, and US poverty level. Many of these
measures vary with family size.
Based on the results of national water and wastewater rate surveys, bills have
become unaffordable for low-income households in some of our major cities. For those
living on SSI,' water and wastewater bills exceeded 5 percent of income for these
households in a number of cities.
Perhaps the biggest issue involved with affordable rate programs is how to
determine eligibility. Utilities are often uneasy about gathering, administering, and
verifying income data. Fortunately, a number of existing programs can help.
,
j.
Aoenda Item No.1 OA
- February 24. 2009
Page 377 of 462
SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT CHARGES 205
I
~
,.
i
amount of available capacity and investment of these existing facilities should be
documented to substantiate the actual cost and value of the facilities.
Determining development units. To calculate the SDC, the projected system
growth in demand must be converted into common units. Units used to establish the
SDC will vary with available information, timing of the SDC assessment and
collection, and the billing practices used by the utility. Units may be derived from the
system growth analysis and capital improvements planning.
Most SDC-related facilities are. designed on the basis of annual average day
use, maximum day demand, or maximum hour demand. After the SDC-related
capital investment is determined, it must be divided by the applicable design
capacity to obtain a cost per uuit of capacity, Each type of customer (Le., residential,
commercial, or industrial) has a particular demand or capacity requirement that,
when applied to the unit cost of SDC facilities, provides a measure of the investment
in SDC facilities applicable to that type of customer. It is common to develop an SDC
for a resideptial customer, or equivalent residential unit, using this uuit cost
approach, then'develop a schedule of SDCs using co=on billing determinants that
relate potential demands of other types of customers to that of the base, or
residential, demand. Among the more frequently used uuits for this purpose are
meter size, fixture units, and land area with associated land-use characteristics.
Meter size is the most common determinant for assessing SDCs, and the capacity
factors developed in Table 28-2 often are used to establish charges for cu~tomers
with meters greater than %-in.
When charges are coJ1ected at the time of service initiation, meter size is often
used as a basis for computing SDCs although many utilities use alternative
approaches in defiuing the base service uuit, including equivalent residential uuits
(ERUs) or fixture uuits. Usually, equivalent service uuits are developed for customers
with more intense uses or potential demand. For example, charges for larger meters
may be based on AWWA-rated meter capacity using a 5IB_in. meter as the base service
uuit. Total overall premise use, facility size, capacity requirement, and number of
fixtures also are used with ERU-based charges.
The meter size approach may be easiest to explain to customers. It is based on
the potential maximum demand that the customer may put on the system, but it does
not consider patterns or intensities of customer usage. Meter sizes are expressed in
terms of equivalent meters, generally based on the relative capacity of various meter
sizes. The ERU approach differentiates among customer classes, but it can be difficult
to explain and, in some situations, difficult to determine and apply consistently_ The
ERU approach is often directly related to the number of fixture units and is based on
the potential loading of various fixtures. As a result, the charge for each new
customer must be computed individually, which is a disadvantage to this approach.
If collection of the SDC is made at the time of platting, the service uuit usually
is based on an equivalent dwelling uuit. The equivalent dwelling unit is based on the
estimated demand of a single-family residential unit in the service area. The charge
is then based on the size of the dwelling, the types and number of fixtures, or both.
Utility billing records are a data source related to system utilization. Water demand
characteristics are normally expressed in terms of equivalent units to quantifY the
capacities of system expansion projects.
An example of the calculation of an SDC on an incremental cost basis is shown
in Table 28-4. For purposes of the example in Table 28-4, it is assumed that all local,
on-site facilities, su~h as distribution mains, meter, services, and hydrants, are
contributed by the developer through charges and assessments other than the SDC,
i
I
I ~
J[.,
Ilj
~ !
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24, 2009
Page 378 of 462
Attachment H
Pre-Application Meeting with
Tamiami Square and
Collier County Utilities
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24, 2009
Page 379 of 462
Attachment H
Pre-Application Meeting with Tamiami Square and Collier County Utilities
A pre-application meeting was held in accordance with the agreement between Collier
County and Tamiami Square developers.
1. Tamiami Square Initial Suqqestion
Numerous cities, counties and FPSC regulated entities utilize FPSC/AWlNAlFAG/F.S.
section 25-30.055 and related similar sections for larger service areas which involve the
methodology of meter equivalency factors.
Since Tamiami Square is served by one 5/8" x %" meter and one 3" meter, as approved
by the Gounty and installed and in operation and form the basis of the monthly billing
Mr. Hartman initially suggested the consideration of that method.
Using the meter equivalency factor methodology the resulting ERGs for the non-
residential customer would be:
5/8" x 3/4"
3"
Total
= 1 ERG
= 16 ERCs
17 ERCs
See pg. 3-2 and Section 25-30.055
2. Public Utilities Response
a,) Rejected due to ERG/unit approach pursuant to Ordinances 2007-52 and
2007-57 and water and wastewater impact fee study by PRMG.
b.) Provided 3/31/087 letter from Gilbert Monciviaz of the Gounty suggesting
two @ 2-inch potable irrigation meters for the irrigation meters for the
irrigation water demand @ 6.1 ERGs, meter tapping fee of $1,140 and
water impact fee of $22,060.59. See letter attached.
In the future, if and when non-potable water is available then reuse water could be
substituted. It was pointed out that reuse mains and service to the landscaped medians
adjacent and north of the project are served by reclaimed water.
GCH/jev/AOB0376.00/corresp/Attach H
Page 1 of 3
07230B
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24, 2009
Page 380 of 462
customer billing data for 12 consecutive months and accumulates by customer clas e
number of ERCs and flows at incremental usage levels, in this case 1,Q gallon
increments.
The City provided detailed customer and monthly billing infor on for the fiscal year
2005/06. The data received was sorted first by customer s then by meter size into
subclasses of users pursuant to meter size and servic eceived in order to detennine
the number of ERCs and flow for each of the cus er classes. To verify the results, .
the existing rates were applied to the calcula ERC and flow data and the resulting
revenues reconciled to the reported reven during the same time period.
The details of the Billing Frequen nalysis and Revenue Reconciliation are provided
in Appendix A, 8, and C for r, wastewater, and reclaimed water respectively.
3.4
An account, a sed herein, consists of a single connection regardless of customer
class, met ize, metered flow, or location. An ERC for water represents a level of
ased on the connection's water meter size as compared to the standard water
me size of 5/8" x 3/4" for a single family connection. The factors associated with the
ater ERCs are provided in Table 3-1, as developed from the AWVl/A standards,
Table 3-1
AWWA Meter Equivalency Factors
Meter Size
5/8" x 3/4"
1,0"
1.5"
3.0"
ERe Factor
1.00
2.50
5.00
8.00
16.00
25.00
50.00
80.00
115.00
2.0"
4.0"
6.0"
8.0"
10.0"
TLH/jev/Reports/R-1/Sec 3
HCD # A070299,00
3-2
112907
Agenda Item NO.1 OA
February 24,2009
Page 381 of 462
25-30.055 Systems with a Capacity or Proposed Capacity to Serve 100 or Fewer Persons.
(1) A water or wastewater system is exempt under Section 367,022(6), F.S" if its current or proposed water or wastewater
treatment facilities and distribution or collection system have and will hsve a capacity, excluding fire flaw capacity, of no greater
than 10,000 gallons per day or if the entire system is designed to serve no greater than 40 equivalent residential connections (ERCs).
For purposes of this rule oniy, one ERC equals 250 gallons per day.
(a) Unless the Commission detennines that valid local ststistical data should be used, ERCs for residential use are as follows:
Single family detacbed dwelJiogs I ERC per unit
Multiple family dwellings .8 ERC per unit
Mobile homes ,8 ERC per unit
(b) ERCs for nonresidential use shall be based on meter size and type as follows:
I, For Water Systems .
Meter Size
5/8"
3/4"
1"
1112"
2"
3"
3"
3"
4v
4"
6"
6v
8"
8"
1011
10"
12"
Meter Type
Displacement
Displacement
Displacement
Displacement or Turbine
Displacement, Compound or Turbine
Displacement
Compound
Turbine
Displacement or Compound
Turbine
Displacement or Compound
Turbine
Compound
Turbine
Compound
Turbine
Turbine
2. For Wastewater Systems
Mctcr Size
5/8"
3/4"
I"
1112"
2"
3"
3"
3"
4"
4"
6"
6"
8"
8"
10"
10"
Meter Type
Displacement
Displacement
Displacement
Displacement or Turbine
Displacement, Compound or Turbine
Displacement
Compound
Turbine
Displacement or Compound
Turbine
Displacemeot or Compound
Turbine
Compound
Turbine
Compound
Turbine
ERCs
1.0
1.5
2.5
5.0
8.0
15.0
16.0
17.5
25.0
30,0
50.0
62.5
80,0
90.0
115.0
145.0
215.0
ERCs
1.0
1.5
2.5
5.0
8.0
15.0
16.0
17.5
25.0
30,0
50.0
62,5
80,0
90.0
115.0
t45.0
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24, 2009
Page 382 of 462
12"
Turbine
215.0
(c) Where undeveloped land is adjacent to a system or proposed system the Commission msy, where appropriate, estimate
ERCs for service to future development on the adjacent undeveloped land. Unless the Commission determines that valid local
statistical data should be used, ERCs for residential acreage sbould be estimated as follows:
Residential Use ERCs/ Acre
Mobile home 4.8
Detached single family 4.0
Estimstes for other types of residential acreage and for commercial and industrial uses shall be made on a case by case basis.
Specific Authority 350.127(2), 367.121(I)(f) FS. Law Implemented 367.022(6) FS. History-New 1-5-84, Formerly 25-10.10.25-10.010. Amended
11-10-86.
B3/31/2BB8 B7:15
9417322585
CC ENG PLAN ROOM
Agendal~~~o'~~l
February74, :[(j()g'
Page 383 of 462
COLLIER CO(NTY PUBLIC UTILITIES DIVISION
33-01 Ea.sl j;u'T)i!!mi Tr.tlll . Na[>ltS..Fl:ucida 34112 . [.!39-) 732:.25:15 . Fax (2.)9) n2-1.,)2'6
March 31, 2008
Ms. Stacey Morales
Sunwest Plumbing, LLC
4376 I S\ Ave NW
Naples, FL 34119
Subject:
Potable lnigation Meter
14700 Tsrniarni Trail North - Taniami Square
Dear Ms. Morales:
Our office has reviewed the preliminary water-o'1Iy meter sizing information for the above-
referenced address, Based on the information that you supplied to our office, the requested two
inch (2") meter meets our miuimum requiremen::s and is therefore acceptable with certain
conditions placed on the meter.
This does not consider any continuous load d=llld. Since our review is for the miuimum size
requirement, the engineer should consider all rel::vant factors before approving the final meter
size.
You should apply for the meter with the Public Utilities CUstomer Service Department located at
4420 Mercantile A venue. A meter tapping fee (of $1 ,140 and a water impact fee of $22,060.59
will be charged based on an ERe value of 6.1. Please bring this letter with you at time of
payment. The fees quotod in this letter are valid for 90 days from the date ofthis letter.
If YDU have any further questiDns or concerns reg:arding the information conllrined in this letter or
in the attachments, please feel free to contact me at (239) 252-42 I 5.
Sincerely,
(]Jk;t ~.
Gilbert Moncivaiz
Operations Analyst
co: Pam Libby, Water Distribution
Heather Sweet, Customer Service Supervisor
Craig Callis, Engineering Services
Diane Deoss, Utility Billing Supervisor
C:fG'\(liJl~erirls 7e<:h/Meftt slxinalPl'<>jtct:rlJrrI m"'=I" &: 10<<
,
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24, 2009
Page 384 of 462
239 261 5775 P.01
May-15-07 08:26 Cr1~as1 Raa1 EstatQ
FACIMILE
~I1WAI~ M!AJ.ltJiIMJI,NJlII'~
\q1rP ~
TO:
PAM - Collier Coun
Phone: 239-530-6727
fax: 239-530-6237
FROM:
Diane Hall, Administrative Assistant, Property Mnet.
Phone: 239-594-7000
Fax: 239-261-5775
DATE:
Mav 16.2007
Pages (with cover sheet):
3
SUBJECT: Potable Irrie:ation Meter Applications Piper's Crossin!!
and Tamiami Sauare
o Urgent
~or Review
o Please Comment 0 Please Reply
Pam:
PI~ase find attacheu the compJet~u information with regard \0 the applications for potabk
irrigatinn for Piper's Crossing and Tal11iami Square.
Thank. you. again. for your help in this matter.
If you shmtld have any que,;tions, please give me a call.
Diane Hall
Property Management AssistanT
Off: 239-594-7000
Cell: 239-877-1556
""f.k-'<:_ h,-~', ..:!!1liI _..........",.~<-.~
<<.... J4......~ d;6<~';--- /c; ~
1h-u....,u../-t
fdh
Attm:hmenT
. ("lImmtnt1i: Tilt' infnrrnarioll t'0I11fli..t'd ht:Tt"ln ill '('Ue-I)I pri....ilt'Jt"l:d :md ((mGl1cDti.lllnfnl'mulluJI illtc-nckd "'lly rU'l" tile lllie...r
tnr. i1tdiylduul ur- entity nfllUtd Ilbl1ve. If the' rttu!er ur thl1l. mN,ftRg.e is: nut lhe irll('ndtd reelpk.t. )'1'10 art her-ehy nurifir.l thAI
nlll' unauthnrl7.('d di,!leminilltllll1. d!lIi'ribuliu... fir ropy r,(lblli cmnmunlNlriOn b: tilrh:lly pmhlbikd. U)flU hllvf' "~(C'h'ed Ibis
cummunit-lIlth)llln error. plu!fot' IIOlif" ulllm.medl.tl'ly b1lelcphonc-. Th..nL, you.
Crite51 Management, Inc.
2375 Tamiaml Trail North. Suite 208 C . Naples, Florldlll34103
PH: a3$.S!W.7600 . Fax: 239.261-6775Email: Crtfaslreallyco@aol.com
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24, 2009
Page 385 of 462
COLLIER COUNTY PUBLIC UTILITIES DMSION
3301 ~ Tami,mj Tnrli . N.~les. i'lari4.. 34112 . (tl9)7~2'261S . Far,:!.39) 1j2-~..6
Mary 17,2007
Ms. Diane Hall
Crifasi Management, Inc.
2375 Tamiami Trail North, Suite 208 C
Naples, Florida 34103
Subject:
14700 Tamiami Trail North I Tamiami Square
Potable Irrigation Meter Sizing
Dear Ms. Hall:
Our office has reviewed the preliminary irrigation meter sizing information for the above-
referenced address. Based on the information that you supplied to oUr office, a
irrigation meter meets our minimum requirement and is therefore acceptable with certain
conditions placed on the meter.
This does not consider any continuous load demand. Since our review is for the minimum size
requirement, the engineer should consider all relevant factors before approving the final meter
size.
You should apply for the meter with the Public Utilities Customer Service Department located at
4420 Mercantile Avenue. A meter tapping fee of $ and a water impact fee
of $ will be charged, based upon an ERC value of . These fees
are in addition to the fees paid on the domestic meter.
If you have any further questions or concerns regarding the information contained in this letter or
in the attachments, please feel free to contact me at (239) 732-2575,
Sincerely,
C~d,m<L<<. G"'"
Pamela Eck
Engineering Technician
cc: Pam Libby, Water Distribution
Heather Sweet, Utility Billing and Customer Service
Wes Hill, Engineering Services
Jacquelyn DeSear, Impact Fee Coordinator
May-1.6-07 08:26
Cr1~as1 Rea' Estata
239 261. 5775
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24, 2009
Page 386 of 462
P.02
.'
~cv
POT ABLE lRRIOA TlON MF.TER APl'LICA TrO~
SlteAddre.sr. Itf100 T&rifflo-<.. 'fieA..ll. ~
"-l'pU=I'.Nam", J~i".__ ~w-.-~ /'f4IU V(J!.,
Ap~llesllt'f~m~#: ~j '1-,:,1 -:?~ Faxfl:">-,,Jr-;:;"~/-:-J.'7'f1 S--
0/. ~.,At"'/M:lilng :G.i"~ J?,r ~k flf:r;~_ IV ~;-Oi. I(/d/ILJ /Pc.+ ~~3'
l'..-...llN'UlIIber ("A,,"UCUU):
R.Jq~..t.d M.ltr SI>o: 3 "
SUMMARY 01' lRlUGATIOl'lSYSTEMc.u.cut.AnON,S:
1'0<01 tI o(ZO....: / /.)
,
Tot;d CoJl.... t>oo,. ''!In."I. (C'PM)
Pl."r~1'I.'"
ZOl'lJ;;l: fie:> zo.lIt.E 6,
ZONE 2: "to ZONE 7:
ZONE 3: 6(1 ~ ZONE S:
ZONE ., I c><-' zom ~:
Iou
"-0
'To.
9(;>
ZONE 5: '/t':__
'ifmar. tIw\ tell (10) ~ntS. ple1ls. oc\llch IlllditlolUll SlIm .
MuI....um NUll\bcr .rZancs RuMlne .t 0"0<: (j)
ZONE I~:
2.t1/YE. /I
2..(Jf>J{: 11.
~o
NdN'L.
_A/tJMF -
I'U.uz Sfl1!MlTCOMPUT];l> FOJfN ,J.VD 605" X JJ- J>RAwtNC1 $HOWfN01.oe,<'1"tONOF P/lOJ'..,.ItTr....'1D
n(2UE-ST&D }:.OCA7'JO}J O}" P!<OPO.<:E:D lRfUG,<t'/Otl MGrE!< TO:
.E:~.~cri".. Tcc..tcin
Pu,>Uc \.1utU5n O~.ll,,-.s
:"QJ"t~ Tl"1dI t.. :BhlfH'
Napl.., FL J'U~
l'~"" (%:lPI ""-'>71 r..: (D') "f>.I>T.I1
.~Imt).ct rC'~ win unu1\1 to ALL I:)oto.bll! mel:t-I1o',
~ 1~~~ln~ r..
.75" s~16..PO
I" S73&.OO
<P
'\Y= Imp:u:l Fee . Sl,4151ERC: ER~l+[(P.al< GPM'-24)120)
MIrlbnul1I Imp.ct Foes . I UC
r..st R.n~e
1
I.1-U
SIuo
1.5"
T'Rn"hn~ Fer
51,012.00
SI,140.00
ERe RAnRo
2.6.5
5,1-8
PU)J.LJ'c; {l'rt!.lTlES rise ONLY
pe.1l1:.(;PMrnr-Propa,,~li SY'tetI.C
Mlnlmu.m M"tt. SlulUqulrO<l:
Approved:
Dat<;
I'o'lLlo. I.'p"et F..,
T.pplDg Ch.rge:
Tc~
Initials or rrvioww-:
/?, #
S l! S 1 ~ ~ (
(,HiHH,'
,C"~^ IJ'....~, '^ /" ,~
..,.,.
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24, 2009
Page 387 of 462
3. Developer Comments on Payments
Doug Lewis summarized the payments and water and wastewater ERCs vested for the
project as:
Permit #
2003092564
2007080564
2003092564
2005121723
Cafe Italia
2005121721
2005072983
Total
. Before C.O.
ERCs Paid
7.5
4.5
1,9
5.6
2.3
2.0'
3.5'
27.3
4. Consensus on IrriQation Meters
Developer agreed with the County 3/31/08 letter and committed to install the two (2)
irrigation two (2) inch meters as stated. The above plus the agreement between the
parties for the 2-year audit/study following County acceptance provides for reasonable
assurance on the irrigation portion of the service.
5. General Discussion Proposed Alternate MethodoloQY by Developer
Mr. Hartman proposed the M-1 AWWA, Impact fee book, and consistent with PRMG
and County ordinance unit county approach per ERC,
Phase 1
Phase 2
Phase 3
Total
17 units
10 units
5 units
32 units
(Bldg 100)
See units and tenant information attached dated 5/6/08.
6. Meetinq Result Alternate Methodoloqy
A.) Water and Wastewater
Total Units
Paid Units
Payment Due
32
27.3
4.7
ERCs
ERCs
ERCs
B.) Irrigation Meters (2) @ 2" (3/31/08)
Total ERCs 6.1 Water Only
GCH/jev/AOB0376.00/corresp/Attach H
Page 2 of 3
072308
0)
::l
'"
'"
>-<
0)
0)
I'L<
.....
~
i
....
0)
~
IZl
,
~
~
,
::l
o
'.g
~
]
g
al
E-'<
~
o<l
>-<
0)
gj
..::l
p..
~
0'
IZl
I
E-'<
00
o
o
N
\0
~
<r>
Agenda Item No. lOA
February 24, 2009
Page 388 of 462
, .S
'" <l>
..... - ;>
.. 0 0 0 '0
= .. ::8 <r> <r> 0 0 0
'lt1Zl ..... ..... '" ..... <r>
."
.. 'D r--
-
= 'D r-- - 0 0
.. .. 0 0 8 , 00 ,
~ - , , <r> 0 <r>
.. ..... ..... 0 , .....
d.~ N , ." , ..... ,
, r-- .~ N , N
~ ..;- 0 Q ..... N .....
,
'D
- 'D ..;- 0 'D 00 r--
= 0 r-- 0 , r-- 0 0 0
.. .. , 0 , <r> 0 , , ,
'" - ..... , 00 0 , ..... 0-, .....
.. .. N ..... N , <r> , ..... ,
>~ , , , N , ..... , N
..;- ..... 00 ..... N .... ..... .....
<l>,g
"0 .~
.. ~ .~ .f'I
... .. .s 6
"'- 0 0 <r> <r> <r> 00 0\ 0\ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N ..;- N N N N N 0
= = <r> <r> N N N 0 0 r-- r-- N N N N N N N N N 'D ..;- ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... N
0"= ..;- ..;- r- r- r-- ..;- 0 ..... ..... 'D 'D 'D 'D 'D 'D 'D 'D 'D ..;- 00 0-, 0-, 0\ 0-, 0\ N
<f.l~ '" '" ..... ..... ..... '" 00 '" '" .... ..... ..... ..... ..... .... ..... ..... ..... 'D ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... N
.Q
-."
= " g ~ ~ 'g g g ~
<l>_
~ is '" '" '" '" is '" '" '" is is '" '" '" '" '" '" '" '" '" '" is is '" 0 0
u~ <l> ~ " ~ <l> <l> <l> <l> <l> <l> ~ " ~ <l> ~ <l> <l> <l> .. ..
:>-< :>-< > :>-< :>-< :>-< > > :>-< :>-< :>-< :>-< :>-< :>-< :>-< > > :>-< > >
- r--
N Sd .....
'8 o<l r--\oo ,
0 0 ..... N '" '" ..;- 00 0\ 0 ..... N '" ..;-
P 'It .... ..... '" '" ..;- <r> 'D 'D 0\ ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... N N N N N
-
Cl
'"
B
" '" ..;- ..;- 'D ..;- ..;- ..;- r-- ..;- r-- r-- r-
Cl_ 0 0 0 0 0 0 <r> <r> 0 0 0 0 0
'" .. >r> >r> >r> r-- , <r> , , , <r> 'D , 00 , 0 0 , , , , ,
Bi=l 0 0 0 0 00 0 r-- <r> r-- 0 0 r- 0 r-- , " <r> r-- 0 0 0
B , , , , N , ..... 0 ..... , , ..... , ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... <';l N N
.... ..... ..... ..... , ..... , , , ..... ..... , ..... , , , , N , ,
Q , , , , 00 , N N N , , N , N N 0 N N N N
U ..... ..... 'D r-- 0 r-- ..... ..... ..... 00 ..... ..... N ..... ..... ..... ...... ..... ..... ...... .....
C;> '"
<l> a
'" <l> .s .rg {3 C;>
0) S .<:: f!J 0 .~
~ ~ i:J IZl E-'< .. Q 0
0 ~ ~ ] '" '" o<l <l> :r: ::l .s ~ tl
" A'S .S ::l .g P=l 0 <l>
S ~ 0 .... I~ '" '" ..::l 01 .. 0 .~
00 0 t;l f-;' 0 <l> ...... <f.l <l> os -B s s .<:: P=l
.. ~ ~ ~ 0 ::8 ~ ..... 0 is IZl p.. ..
z ~ 0 '" 0 <l> ...... j ~ ~
"0 01 g J 0 Z <l> .~
'" == 1'1 '" ~
- ..... .~ ~ .... .~ t; P=l ::l <l> ::l P=l ....
= ~ <l> P=l r:<: '" ~ ::l .. 0 ~ '" o ~
" ~ <l> <l> .~ 'g ~ " ~
'" '" ] ~ '" u ~ ~ ] '"
= '" B ~ ~ ~ '" '<l>
".CI g .S gj P=l .!:1 .s ~ 0 Z .CI .. ~ <l> ~
:c:: .~ CI3 :>0
~J::o. p.. ~ IZl E-'< :r: u u IZl ~ P IZl fll ~ Z u
"
f;l
'"
>-<
"
"
""
~
u
'"
J
....
"
~
"
rF.l
~
"d
i3'=
,
c:
o
'.;::J
'"
E1
]
@
i'l
E-<
~
~
>-<
"
~
..c:
~
~
CI
rF.l
~
~
00
C>
C>
C:!
\0
~
V'>
:l
'E "
..
=ll:rF.l
'tl
..
-
=
~ ..
cL~
~~
-
=
" ..
"'-
" OS
;>~
.. ~
~.so~o
:=CV)Nv)
r.::r:CO\O\O'\
OO~_.......,......(
.?;>
-
E'~@@@
~ == CJ 0 CJ
:= Q,) ea ~ t'j
u~;>:>;>
=ll:
-
.~
=
p
-
"
"
El
..
"
"
..
El
El~
" "
U~
..
S
OS
Z
-
=
OS
=
..
Eo<
V'> \0 t-
N N N
,
....
"
en
"
....-=
0....
~ ~
'" " ....
!5 ~~
t"'....
.. '" '
Uo~
Agenda Item NO.1 OA
February 24, 2009
Page 389 of 462
~
..
en
os
....-=
0....
~ ~
!:i CI t-
!5 ~9
- = =
I..l ~ ~
.. '" N
Uo....
. 1._
> I I
" ~I " \. <!
- 5i' ~ Ii' , . t I: t
~ ~ 1 '"
.; .~ '; ~ l!!l
" .. '; .
" " . -f' " ",'
I I
""
N
BUILDING KEY
PHASE I
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24, 2009
Page 390 of 462
\iirm tPsN\ t ~U.A R:E
14"10b 'TA-mIArrlllli. No.
t-.!-AFte5, \9-..1Ano
/::::::-.. r---~
YWytl,-~
t1:..J
U.u6 ' p~:1
J.17hq. fL b~ilJ
--.-.----.---... ~i0
Unit 1 1~:}~ I j
.,- .',. . ~
.-.~~~~---~l41
""":"1:1)
- J
-' 1
,1
I
UnitS
1\61~Jq.ft.
-.--'---'
Unl!'."
1,6201q. ft.
Ua.it10
l,610Iq. ft.
tlnittt
1.610 sq. n.
---.-'-'-'
UnIt 11
1,610 sq,. {to
Unlt13
1,o2()s:q.~
.-.-'--.-
Unit If
1.6"2.0 sq. ft.
Unit IS
1,6'10sq.l't.
,~~-,-'-'-'
Un.lt16
1,620 $q. n.
C711"a"~
Unit 17
1.601 sq. n.
"
iJ'---"
" ..J
I ,.----
f li~
I l.~
I t-------
"
--7--J f~
---....:--, ~-----~
~ t:i
I ,
~------
"
"
..'------
"
"
,
t-------
"
"
,
1-------
"
"
,
1------- -
"I!!
I'H
...-----
I \.--------
-------...;
,
I
I
.
,
I
,
,
I
I
,
,
,
,
,
,-
,
I
I
.____J
.-'L 5:'
.L_
I
I
.... I
-
~
=> I :2::1
I ~~
::l_
,Ell\~r
El
I:l
Z
~
I:l
I
I
~
~~R
o 'L,;
~~ia
!~i~
I
I
I
I
I
Agenda Item NO.1 OA
February 24, 2009
Page 391 of 462
~::i
!i~
:J_
-------------
!;5
'"
"'"
~
l!l~
~~
=>-
ifl f=-" p,,-;:~- ~ ~:rlii 1 : 1~1: ';-.1~ :"1:'--1:':.1 ::.1=:"1 ::.1~til :ifil;":..1;-:.1;;;-.1.....1;-:.1~1
I I I I I I' I I 1 1 I I 1 I I , I I I I I I I I
I I I I I \ , l ~ ~ : : : ~ : \ , :. : : : : : r
! i ! 1 ! '-' , , , , , . . , '-' , , , , , . ~----iU
- ---=~~=;~~~----- ~!i~I:==~]1
5Q~::) '.'
~i~~6'----i1
,f 1212[_____.
~~r:;1 __njj
i!i~~~----jj
~~~f----i!
~~~;~~----'i:i
,... !2~I'___':~
I'"' i!i... I
~!{J92 ,,____.
!l!li5i~ Il;:
~:s~~>- ----=-i~
~ ~::i~~I-----ij
~ :~!o~ -.---~~
~~~~UI -----ii
!~I:~~r:'----ij
l!(:?iao~-___-":'
,::lf~%1f ~il
I ......,
r----~
I '
, ~ I
. '
I I
I Q I
I '
II
I 0
, Z
l~ ~
~~
~$
~~i(
:58~
~~~
------------
:qu.:
1:;.-$
z~
=>-
1 I
I ~ I
@18 ~ t;;~Q
tn:m ~ 2:~g~
2, IOU: 8>""QIn
I vi Sir:....
~19 $! ~ !i1z 6
a..'/Xl ;} ~ i=>
I - 1
~'" I I
..... I I
\:.. I' I
55 I I
'l:C
~
8
-
E:::E3, I 1
" t
I I 1
I-I ---I rT-p---j
, I .
I I I I .tEE"9S'U I I ...,'
--~--~----------------~-_._-----~------~--~--------------
=
=
=
=
=
=
I"'---~TI'---,
L__Lt:LJ
,,---...--..-....
, '
l_____,.____)
a.,ta
l.,--"'l---~...
l____~ .............
mi. "
H
H
I
f
I
f
I
I
,
I
I
I
I
,
,
I
I
,
I
I
.
z
-
"-
co
~.
~ "E
...J.co
"-
c5"E
ZCO
...-4F
.COo
:EO
=>[:::
...J :'1
0.,.-1
~~
U)u..
w<:(
~=>
0'
Z: Cf)':
:):
U)........
.:;E~.,
<
........
:E
~
~
~
,
~
{,
,
t
,
~;
t
r
t
,
,
t
S0 39\1d
. , :Ii
0
a:
0
0
('II
-
....
0(
=
l-
i
0(
~
I-
...
"'iI'
en
::i
.,
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24, 2009
Page 392 of 462
bl : 1'1 ;"111 : !i ! l~ ; 11j
, ,
.JI.l .11
,
,-
IU
I
I
I I
I
....t.."
'./'l> \14
I
"H. '1\ .,.:. oi.; ":
ms,w"c;r,\l:KI""
~xrs.TtNG PARKlNG
,I; 'I Il!.! :;; ":
'-Ii. ~\" \\ 1!l:
1\1'(..\\1,1'"
.
,.
.. '1'1"'1
1'1' ' ,.'
-' (I'! ~. .: r
. .,":
.,
~ ~', ::-.. : .
::-'t~Wr~~c. .....
21 ,^"lUt. v., III ~
~:(l;'l,~l/ 1"~Ull}1
PdSTINr. 1'1..
,"(lI'sn,\.
~l 1
'J '~ 'n 'i,{ WI .1
:~
1\: \ :'. ::~ : I' l'
rRO"O~~U RfCl'CLt!
nU.SIII NClQSURr
. . ~~.Wlllr..t.q\'1
'.ltWIl;,f~l'\Kf' "II
'.:UP~H,~;
,;;'1
___ .~b.~l\l,L
I,' ,iI':{l"
LII^iQ,,(i
::~~:i'~~":; >"\lE
:; . . ~:. ;. '! : ~
. "i
': 1', ,,tol'IH :.\ll!
_ ~m."" ~!'..n' .......'....
1, ! "r,'.',L.tI'.'"
'1 i ,
UHlT2 PROPOSED :' : [
-,-,-~,,~_~f?9.: 1?~ _j~ I it! "'"'.
:' 7,OOHS, WNc..........il .
.ti~lij ~J;~~t ' IIIIIIIIUi-J''''
". : \ UHSPllNWD m\..
-'. ., OHESlOO
;::-~~:;!'':'r~'"iii<rHT:i4'i ..,.-
H. EI.l\', . '''~ KG.v.n
u~rn
;"
r ;,0;
"'. ,.,.
':1 I;'. Ii,'
: I : ~ !
'.
UNrr,'"
"
..
l{
OJ
E.
~
CI,l C.,...
U.~c:
'--~
i::~,
CI,l'E ..
III (JJ
(I}-.oJ\
c; "C 10.
Il=: OJ 3,::
~ Clh:: ~
IX) 0('1'1:
C-Q'li
XeC,
0..'-
....., ..1
2\',rFR~.~J- ~ '-"1
Bl[)(;,\f.l"""'" ~', 1.-".","
I
I
t.X!\T\Nt:. P.
,
,
,
I .: I
16'''1(1[ \ fro>
CONI" wALK -. l '~,
. ',,:
, "
I l;-I
, ,
I I
I I
\ i I
. I....\.
\'1.
';', "!',
. 'I ...., ,! ~~ 'IJ., Ii":
il".;'\"'l),".'!
UNITS
....-r
I :
, ,
: ;
! :
: !
"'!
, .m_ ;', ::::-'f11
~c:.::~:r1~l
. . ... I
'~i 1'1 'i.1 : .il I;
('O,",,"\.~I;,\I+:I,I.l\d'.
IIUH.:(.lll,I"
txl~Tlt"t; I
'.J
I,'
.:..i I',
A~
x
I:: j"
'(~l :'.~
. 'f:~'~.'~; .
" .
"~'!.~~ ~..
;7 ':'.~::
!
1.:=;:
"
\
.~:.( .,i~ '"
.-...~~- ... .-. ..
I;;:h
. ,',
'.
i
1
.~.
i
4
'.
-----
9NIHWn"ld.LS3MNnS
g1558pS5sn
01:91 B000/S0/E0
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24. 2009
Page 393 of 462
7. Vested Flow Rates for Study/Audit (cil 32 ERCs (Potable Only) Water and
Wastewater
a.) Water LOS 350 gpd AADF
(i) Annual Average Daily Flow through potable (non irrigation meters)
= 32 x 350 gpd AADF or 11,200 gpd
(ii) 2 month peak factor (see page 29 Table 1 PRMG 40.00 + 33.33 =
1.2
(iii) 2 month audit use on average day of that period limit is 11,200 gpd
x 1,2 or 13,440 gpd for test period.
b.) Wastewater LOS 250 gpd AADF
(i) Annual Average (12 month period) Daily Flow = 32 x 250 = 8,000
gpd AADF
(ii) 2 month peak factor (see page 32 Table 2 PRMG) 40.100 + 30,846
= 1.3
(iii) 2 month audit of use on average day for that period is 8,000 gpd x
1.3 or 10,400 gpd.
8. Proposed Additional Payments
a.)
Irrigation meters 3/3/1/08
(i) Tapping fee
(ii) ERCs irrigation
$ 1,140.00
$22,060.59
b.) Water potable service) impact fees - unit count
(i) 4.7 ERCs x $3,575 $16,803.00
c.) Wastewater impact fees - unit count
(i) 4.7 ERCs x $3,495
$16.427,00
$56,430.59
Total Amount Due
9. Consensus of Follow-up
a.) Answer questions and requests for information by County. This activity is
complete.
b.) Submit alternative methodology signed and sealed by engineer. This letter
report and attachments satisfies this final item.
GCHfjev/A080376.0D/correspJAttach H
Page 3 of 3
072308
-..--.
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24. 2009
Page 394 of 462
Attachment I
Gerald C. Hartman, PE, ASA
Resume
GERALD C. HARTMAN, PE, BCEE, ASA
Vice President
Agenda Item NO.1 OA
February 24,2009
Page 395 of 462
Page 1
EDUCATION
B.S., Duke University, 1975
M.S., Duke University, 1976
PROFESSIONAL AFFILIATIONS
Diplomate - American Academy of
Environmental Engineers
American Society of Civil Engineers
National Society of Professional Engineers
Florida Engineering Society
American Water Works Association
Fiorida Pollution Control Association
American Water Resources Association
Water Environment Federation
Fiorida Water and Pollution Control Operators
Association
Florida Waterworks Association
American Concrete Institute (ACI)
Water Management Institute
American Society of Appraisers
PROFESSIONAL REGISTRATION
Alabama No. 19422
Arizona No. 28939
Colorado No. 31200
Florida No. 27703
Illinois No. 062-053100
Indiana No. 10100292
Kentucky No. 22463
Louisiana No, 30816
Maine No. 10395
Maryiand No. 12410
Mississippi No. 12717
New Hampshire No, 10820
New Mexico No, 15990
North Carolina No. 15264
Ohio No. 70152
Pennsylvania No. 38216
South Carolina No. 15389
Tennessee No. 105550
Virginia No. 131184
Wisconsin No. 32971
NCEES National P.E. No. 20481
American Society of
Appraisers CM No. 7542
QUALIFICATIONS SUMMARY
Mr. Hartman is highly qualified in environmental
engineering with special expertise in utility
management; facility planning; rate charge and
fee studies; and funding and grants. Mr.
Hartman is a qualified expert witness in the
areas of water suppiy and treatment, wastewater
treatment and effluent disposal, rate making,
service areas, utility system appraisals, landfill
siting, and utility creation/managemenU
acquisition projects.
EXPERIENCE
Utilitv Finance, Rates. Fees and Charqes
Mr. Hartman has been involved in hundreds of capital charge, impact fee, and installation charge studies
involving water, wastewater, stormwater and solid waste service for various Florida,entities, He also has
participated in hundreds of user rate adjustment reports. Since 1976, Mr. Hartman assisted in the
development of over 50 revenue bond issues, 20 short-term bank loan systems, 2 general obligation
bonds, 26 granUloan programs, 10 capacity sale programs, and 20 privatization programs. He has been
involved in over hundreds of utility acquisitioniutility evaluations for acquisition. and is a qualified expert
witness with regard to utility rates and charges, and utility negotiation. arbitration and condemnation cases.
A few of his water, wastewater, reuse and/or solid waste rate and charge projects include:
. Flagler County - Impact Fee Analysis, 2005
. Flagler County - Base Facility Charge Analysis, 2005
. Marion County - Silver Springs Regional - Water and Wastewater Revenue Sufficiency, 2004
. Beverly Beach - Water and Wastewater System, 2004
. Village of Bald Head Island - Water and Wastewater Rate Sufficiency, 2004
. Farmton Water Resources, Inc. - FPSC, 2004
. B&W Water Resources, Inc. - FPSC, 2004
. Marion County - Stonecrest, Marion Oaks, Spruce Creek, Salt Springs, South Forty, Smyral Vilias -
Rate Integration/Phasing Program, 2003
. City of North Miami Beach - Water and Wastewater Adjustment, 2003
. City of Fernandina Beach - Water and Wastewater Rate Study, 2002
. 51. Johns County - 51. Johns Water Co. Rates, 2003
Ii
gai consultants
ttllnsfurmlngldces Into ttlllllv.
GERALD C. HARTMAN, PE, BCEE, ASA
Vice President
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24, 2009
Page 396 of 462
Page 2
. St. Johns County - Intercoastal Rates, 2001
. Nashua, NH - Pennlchuck Water Co., 2002
. City of Deltona - Water and Wastewater, 2002
. Town of Lauderdale By-The-Sea, 2001
. FICURA - Palm Coast Rates,Certification, 2000
. Marion County - Pine Run, Oak Run, AP, Utilities - Rate Integration, 2000
. City of North Miami Beach - Revenue Sufficiency Analysis, 2000
. North Key Largo Utility Authority, 2000
. Port St. Lucie - St. Lucie West - CDD, 1999
. Hanover County - Water and Wastewater, 1999
. UCCNSB/Sugarmill,1999
. Town of Hope Mills, 1998
. Town of Palm Beach, 1998
. City of Winter Haven. 1998
. Palmetto Resources, Inc. - Raw Water, Reuse, Water, and Wastewater, 1997
. City of Miami Springs - Analysis, 1997
. Widefield - Water and Wastewater, 1997
. Bullhead City - Wastewater, 1996
. Marion County, 1996
. Utilities Commission, City of New Smyrna Beach - Water and wastewater Rate Study, 1995
. Okeechobee Utility Authority - Rate and charge study, 1996
. Southern States - Statewide rate case, 1995
. Englewood - AFPI and capital charges, 1995
. Lee County - Rates and charges, 1995
. Venice - Reuse rate study, 1994
. Utilities Commission, City of New Smyrna Beach - Capital charge study, 1996
. Port St. Lucie" Water, gas and wastewater rates, 1994
. Port St. Lucie - Capital charge study, 1995
. Bullhead City - Assessment study, 1996
. Englewood - Assessment study, 1996
. Sanibel - Capacity sale study, 1995
. City of New Port Richey" Rate and charge study, 1995
. Acme Improvements District, Wellington, Florida - Water/wastewater studies, 1994
. Charlotte County, Florida - Water/wastewater studies; Rotunda West rate case, 1993
. Clay County, Florida - Water/wastewater studies, 1992
. City of Deerfield Beach, Florida - Water/wastewater studies, 1992
. City of Dunedin, Florida - Water/wastewater studies, 1991
. Englewood Water District, Florida - Water/wastewater studies, 1993
. City of Green Cove Springs, Florida - Water/wastewater studies, 1991
. Hernando County, Fiorida - Water/wastewater studies, 1992
. City of Lakeland, Florida - Water studies, 1976-89
. Martin County, Florida - Water/wastewater studies, 1993
. City of Naples, Florida - Water/wastewater and solid waste studies, 1992/94
. City of New Port Richey, Florida - Water/wastewater studies, 1994
. City of North Port, Florida - Water/wastewater studies, 1992
. City of Orange City, Florida - Water/wastewater studies, 1985-94 .
. City of Palm Bay, Florida - Water/wastewater studies, 1985-94
. City of Panama City Beach, Florida - Water/wastewater studies, 1993
. City of Sanibel, Florida - Water and reuse studies, 1988-94
. Southern States Utilities Inc., Florida - Wateriwastewater studies and statewide rate cases, 1991/93
. City of Tamarac, Florida - Water/wastewater studies, 1993
Ii gai S~E~~~J.!~:!!~.
GERALD C. HARTMAN, PE, BCEE, ASA
Vice President
Agenda Item NO.1 OA
February 24, 2009
Page 397 of 462
Page 3
. Utilities Commission, City of New Smyrna Beach, Florida - Water/wastewater and reuse studies,
1992/94
. Volusia County, Florida - Solid waste studies, 1989
. City of West Palm Beach, Florida - Water/wastewater and reuse studies, 1993/94
. City of Sebastian, Florida - Water/wastewater studies, 1993
. City of Tarpon Springs, Florida - Water/wastewater studies, 1994
. City of Miami Springs, Florida - Water/wastewater and solid waste studies, 1994
. City of Edgewater, Florida - Water/wastewater and solid waste studies, 1987-90
. City of Venice, Florida - Reuse studies, 1994
. City of Port Sl. Lucie - Water/wastewater studies, 1994
. Ocean Reef Club, Monroe County, Florida - Wastewater studies, 1994
. Placid Lakes Utilities Inc" Florida - Water/wastewater studies, 1994
. Old Overtown-Liberty Park, Birmingham, Alabama - Wastewater studies, 1994
. Bullhead City, Arizona - Wastewater studies, 1994
. Lehigh Utilities Inc., Lee County, Florida - Florida Public Service Commission rate cases for water,
wastewater and reuse, 1993
. Marco Island and Marco Shores Utilities Inc., Collier County, Florida - Florida Public Service
Commission rate cases for water, wastewater and reuse, 1993
. Venice Gardens Utilities Inc., Sarasota County, Florida - Rate cases for water, wastewater and reuse,
1989/91/93
. Mid-Clay and Clay Utilities Inc" Clay County, Florida - Water/wastewater studies, 1993
. Several expert witness assignments including Palm Bay vs. Melbourne; Tequesta vs. Jupiter; Town of
Palm Beach vs. City of West Palm Beach; Cily of Sunrise vs. Davie; Kissimmee vs. Complete
Interiors; and others.
Facility Planninq
Mr. Hartman has been Involved In over 50 water, wastewater and/or solid waste master plans, several
interlocal negotiations and agreements, over 100 capital improvement programs, and numerous capital
construction fund plans, He represented the American Society of Civil Engineers in the State
Comprehensive Plan as a Policy Advisory Committee Member on the Utility Element, and participated in
the preparation of Comprehensive Plans, Chapter 9J5, for more than 20 communities. Mr. Hartman was
involved in the impiementation of several stormwater utilities in Fiorida.
Economic Evaluations/Credit Worthiness Analyses
. Credit Worthiness Analysis for Drinking Water State Revolving Fund (1999) - Florida Department of
Envlronmentai Regulation
. Credit Rating Reviews (1980-2000) - for numerous investor-owned utiiities; many city-owned utilities
(Winter Haven, Port St. Lucie, Miramar, Tamarac, Palm Bay, North Port, etc.); many county-owned
utilities; several not-for-profit utilities; and utility authorities (OUA, etc.)
. Financial Feasibility and Engineer's Revenue Bond Reports (1980-2000) - fDr over $2 billiDn Df water
and/Dr wastewater bonds for some fifty (50) entities in the Southeast United States including Clay,
Lee, HernandD, Martin, and other counties; Lakeland, West Palm Beach, Miramar, Tamarac, Panama
City Beach, Winter Haven, Naples, North Port, Palm Bay, Port St. Lucie, New PDrt Richey, Clermont,
Orange Cily, Deerfield Beach, Sanibel, City of Peachtree City, Widefield, and many Dther cities; Lee
CDunty Industrial Deveiopment Authority, Englewood Water District, and other utilities.
. Privatization Procurement and Analysis for many water and wastewater systems including Sanibel,
Town of Palm Beach, Temple Terrace, Palm Bay, Widefield, Bullhead City and sever others.
Neaotiations/Service Area
Mr. Hartman has participated in over thirty-five (35) service area formations, Chapter 25 F,S. certifications,
Chapter 180.02 reserve areas, authority creations, and interlocal service area agreements including
Lakeland, Haines City, Bartow, Winter Haven, Sanibel, Sl. Cloud, Palm Bay, SBWA, ECFS, MWUC,
Edgewater, Orange City, UCCNSB, Port St. Lucie, Martin County, OUA, NKLUA, DDUA, and many others
Ii
gai consultants
tr31'lsfonnlng Ideas Into reallt.,.
GERALD C. HARTMAN, PE, BCEE, ASA
Vice President
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24, 2009
Page 398 of 462
Page 4
Mr. Hartman has been a primary negotiator for interlocai service agreements regarding capacity, joint-use,
bulk service, retail service, contract operations and many others for entitles such as the Town of Palm
Beach, Miramar, Lauderdale-By-The-Sea, North Miami Beach, Collier County, Marion County, St. Johns
County, JEA and many others.
PUBLICA TIONS/PRESENT A TIONS
Mr, Hartman has presented several training sessions and seminars throughout the State of Florida for the
American Water Works Association, the American Society of Civil Engineers, the Water Pollution
Association, and the Florida Water and Pollution Control Operators Association, He has presented and/or
published more than 30 papers on water, wastewater and solid waste utility systems including:
Hartman, G.C,; "Determining The Effectiveness of Solid Waste Collection;" M.S. thesis, Duke University,
Durham, North Carolina, 1976.
Dajani, J.S" Vesilind, P.A., Hartman, G,C.; "Measuring the Effectiveness of Solid Waste Collection,"
Urban Analvsis, 1977, Vol. 4; Gordon and Breach Science Publishers LId,; Great Britain.
Vesilind, P.A., Hartman, G,C., Skene, E.T.; Sludae Manaoement and Disoosal for the Practicino Enoineer;
Lewis Publishers Inc.; Chelsea, Michigan; 1986.
Rimer, A., Vesllind, P.A., et. aI., (Hartman contributing author) Resource Recoverv Unit Ooerations,
Prentice Hall, 1981,
Hartman, G.C., Utility Management and Finance, (presently under contractual preparation with Lewis
Publishing Company/CRC Press).
Hartman, G.C., and R. J. Ori, "Water and Wastewater Utility Acquisition," AWWA Specialty Conference,
1994.
Hartman, G.C. and R.C. Copeiand, "Utility Acquisitions - Practices, Pitfalls and Management," AWWA
Annual Conference, 1995.
Hartman, G.C., "Safe Drinking Water Act" and "Stormwater Utilities" FLC Annual Meeting, 1995.
Hartman, G.C" M.A. Rynning, and R.A. Terrero, "5-Year Reserve Capacity - Can Customers Afford the
Cost?" FSASCE Annual Meeting, 1996.
Hartman, G,C., T.A. Cloud, and M.B. Alvarez, "Innovations in Water and Wastewater Technology" Florida
Quality Cities, August 1996.
Hartman, G.C., Seth Lehman, "Financing Utility Acquisitions" AWWNWEF Joint Management
Conference, February 1997.
Hartman, G.C., M.B, Alvarez, and J.R. Voorhees, "Softening for Color Removal" FWRC Conference, April
1997.
Hartman, G.C" BV. Breedlove, "Water: Where It Comes From and Where It Goes" FRT & G/FDEP
Conference, September 1997.
Hartman, G,C., W.o. Wagner, T.A. Cloud, and R.C, Copeland, "Outsourcing Programs in Seminole
County' AWWNWEF/FPCOA Conference, November 1997.
tj
gai consultants
trDr\sforrnlng IlIen Into r~~lltl'4t
GERALD C. HARTMAN, PE, BCEE, ASA
Vice President
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24, 2009
Page 399 of 462
Page 5
Hartman, G.C., M,B, Alvarez, J.R. Voorhees, and G.L. Basham, "Using Color as an Indicator to Comply
with the Proposed D/DBP Rule" AWWA, Water Quaiity Technology Conference, November 1997.
Hartman, G,C" "In-House, Outsourcing and the Non-for-Profit Utilities Option", Florida Government
Finance Officers Association (FGFOA) Conference, March 27, 1998.
Hartman, G,C. and D.P. Dufresne, "Understanding Groundwater Mounds - A Key to Successful Design,
Operation and Maintenance of Rapid Infiltration Basins' April 4-7, 1998. FWWNWET/FPCOA Joint
Meeting.
Hartman, G.C. and Seth Lehman, "Financing Water Utilities - Acquisition and Privatization Projects"
AWW A Annual Conference, June 24, 1998,
Hartman, G,C., "Utility Valuation," Wake Forest University Law School Seminars Series, February 7,2003.
Hartman, G,C" H.E. Schmidt, Jr., and Michael S. Davis, "Biosolids Application in Rural DeSoto County,
Florida," WEF/AWWAlCWEA Joint Residuals & Biosolids Management conference, February 19-22,
2003.
Hartman, G.C. contributing author, Chapter 14B, Nichois on Eminent Domain, RCNLD Valuation of Public
Utilities, March 1999 Edition, Release No. 48,
Hartman, G.C" M.A. Rynning, and V, Hargray, "Assessment of Commercial Customer Water Impacts,"
AWWA2000.
Hartman, G.C.,M. Sloan, N.J. Gassman, and D.M. Lee, "Developing a Framework to Balance Needs for
Consumptive Use and Naturai Systems with Water Resources Availability," WEF Watershed 2002
Specialty Conference, February 23-27,2002.
Hartman, G.C. and Dr. M. Wanielista, "Irrigation Quality Water - Examples and Design Considerations,"
ASCE Conference, April 4, 2003,
Hartman, G,C" M.A. Rynning and V, Hargray, "Assessing the Water Demands of Commercial Customer,"
WEF Volume 6, No, 4, July/August 2003 - Utility Executive.
Hartman, G.C., D. Cooper, N, Eckloff and R. Anderson, "Water," The Bond Buyer's Sixth Southeast Public
Finance Conference, February 23, 2004.
Waniellsta, Marty and G.C. Hartman, "Regional Stormwater Facilities", Stormwater Management for
Highways Transportation Research Board TRB AFB60, July 12, 2005.
Ii
gal consultants
lnnsformlngldenlntorelllltye
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24, 2009
Page 400 of 462
MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT OF APPEAL TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS
OF COLLIER COUNTY. FLORIDA
I amiami Square of Naples, LLC, a Florida limited liability company
PETITIONER,
vs.
\11' Jim Mudd,
County Manager, Collier County, Florida
RESPONDENT.
/
MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT OF APPEAL OF LETTER DATED AUGUST 29, 2008
FROM MR. THOMAS G. WIDES, OPERATIONS DIRECTOR, PUBLIC UTILITIES,
COLLIER COUNTY WATER-SEWER DISTRICT AND
REQUEST FOR ALTERNATIVE IMPACT FEE CALCULATION BASED ON
PETITIONERS ALTERNATIVE IMPACT FEE STUDY
Petitioner, Tamiami Square of Naples, LLC, a Florida limited liability company, by and
thmllgh their undersigned counsel, file this memorandum in support of the appeal of the above
referenced letter (the "Letter") pursuant to the terms of that certain Agreement Regarding
Alkratm: Impact Fee Calculation dated May 13,2008 by and between Petitioner and the Collier
County Board of County Commissioners acting as the governing body of the Collier County
Water-Sewer District (the "Agreement") and state in support thereof as follows;
Points in Support of Appeal
I. Petitioner's shopping center project is known as Tamiami Squarc, Petitioner's
first phase of development is known as Unit 300, and it contains 17 constructed and built-out
tenant spaces comprising over 31,000 square feet of shopping center space. Petitioner's second
phase of development is known as Unit 400, and it contains 10 constructed tenant spaces
. '7) ~ i 11I...l. i i)[J(j,
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24, 2009
Page 401 of 462
c"ll1prislllg over 19.000 square feet of shopping center space. Only 4 of the tenant spaces in the
,econd phase have been built-out by tenants. In addition, Tamiami Square contains 2 out-parcels
""'lYn as l nit 100 and Unit 200. Unit 100 is under construction and a certificate of occupancy
has not becn issued by the County for this Unit. Unit 200 was sold by the Petitioner to a third-
partv purchaser for value, and the County is withholding issuance of the certificate of occupancy
on tills Umt until water and sewer impact fees due and owing for this Unit are paid, Water and
.,ewcr Impact fees were not invoiced or collected by County staff at the time the building permits
were issued for these Units.
Out of the combined 27 tcnant spaces in the first and second phases of Petitioner's
dewlopment, 6 tenant spaces have never been built-out or leased to a tenant. All such 6 tenant
spaces arc located in Petitioner's second phase of development.
In February 2008. Petitioner's representatives met with County staff to discuss a
demdnd hy staff for payment of an additional $46,920 in water and sewer Impact Fees (e.g.
S-I1.12()(J() for water impact fees instead of the $19,275 charged by the County and paid by
Petitioncr plus $47,200.00 for sewer impact fecs instead of the $22,125 charged by the County
and paid hy Petitioner), which amount staff failed to invoice and collect from the Petitioner in
Cllnnectlon with building permit number 2003092564 applied for in September 26, 2003.
4. In Fcbmary 2008 and subsequent to staffs initial demand for payment of an
aJdiuonal 546,920, staff then: (i) recalculated the water and sewer impact fees and demanded
paymcnt thlJ1] Petitioner of an additional $288,623.50 in water and sewer impact fees; and (ii)
delayed and withheld issuance of building permits and certificates of occupancy for tenants of
lan1laml Square. Petitioner disputed Staff's dcmand for an additional $288,623.50 in water and
selVcr Impact fees and sought to pursue an alternative impact fee calculation process with County
sian
71 ~ 'I lid; IKUI'
2
Agenda Item NO.1 OA
February 24,2009
Page 402 of 462
, To date, a total of $131,968.00 in water and sewer impact fees for Petitioner's
lirst and second phases of development have been paid to the County.
(l. Pursuant to the Agreement, Petitioner delivered on August I, 2008 its alternative
IInpaet fee calculation proposal to the County based on the unit count method (not the meter
c'yUivalcney approach that was rejected by County staff in the Letter).
7. On Sunday, August 31, 2008, Mr. Tom Wides sent an e-mail to Petitioner's
attorney with the Letter (the Letter was attached as a .pdf file and was dated as August 29, 2008)
c<lIlfinnlng that the alternative impact fee calculation proposal was complete and rejecting the
Petitioner's alternative impact fee calculation proposal. See, Exhibit "A". This e-mail and Letter
not ice was received by Petitioner's attorney on Tuesday, September 2, 2008 as the offices of
Pctitioner's attorney were closed on Sunday and also closed on Monday in recognition of Labor
I
l)ay
g On October I, 2008, the County Attorney's Office received bye-mail delivery
J rom Petitioners Attorney tiling a formal appeal of the Letter and requesting that the Board
approve its alternative impact fee calculation proposal. See, Exhibit "B".'
<J. After filing its appeal, Petitioner has been working in good faith with County staff
tu seek a fair resolution to this dispute.
10. On Thursday, January 8, 2009, Petitioner first received noticc from the County
Attorney's Oftice that the appeal had been scheduled to be heard by the Board on Tuesday,
January 13. 2009. Petitioner thereafter immediately requested a continuance for purposes of: (i)
helllg ahle to comply with Resolution 98-167, (ii) assisting the Board better understand the
! Iht' Executive Summary prepared by County staff in advance of the January 13,2008 Board meeting incorrectly
"ialcs that Stafr notified Petitioner on August 29, 2008 of its rejection of Petitioner's alternative impact fee
ccllculation proposal.
~~ I'he ExecutIve Summary prepared by County staff in advance of the January 13,2008 Board meeting incorrectly
~l,lks th.llllle Appeal was received by the County Attorney's Office on October 2, 2008.
'-)[t-' '11(,.PI)lJI);
3
Agenda Item NO.1 OA
February 24, 2009
Page 403 of 462
disputed ISsues, and (iii) having time to continue working with staff to seek a resolution beforc
tile appeal hearing before the Board.
liOn January 13, 2009, the Board granted a continuance of the appeal until the
January 27. 2009 Board meeting, and Pctitioncr continues to work with staff in good faith in
order to scek a [air resolution acceptable to all parties.
12 The Executive Summary prepared by County staff in advance of the January 13,
201)~ Board meeting states that based on Section 74-303 (d) 2 (g) of the Code, water and
wastewater impact fees are based on flows. Pursuant to Section 74-303 (d) 2 (g), water and
sewer Impact fees are to be determined by the ERC value resulting from the projected average
daily flows See. Exhibit "C".
L') In establishing water and sewer impact fee rates, annual average daily flows
(";\,\DF) are used in the Collicr County Water and Wastewater Impact Fee Study by Public
Resources Management Group, Inc., not four month averages and not peak flows, See, the
Appeal and see also Exhibit "E," As such, Section 74-303 (d) 2 (g) looks at estimated or
projected AAIJF In order to make an apple to apple flow comparison.
14 Based on the data period (e.g. March 2007 to August 2008) for historical water
no\!' s as contained in Exhibit 3 to the letter by Mr. Wides dated August 29, 2008, the annual
average daily nows ("AADF") for the project is 41.6 water ERCs, not 54.9 water ERCs.
I; urther. wilen the data period is expanded to include the months of September, October,
November and December 2008, the AADF for the project is approximately 40.1 water ERCs and
the !c)ur month average is 31 water ERes, not 54.9 water ERCs. See, Exhibit "D",
l:i Based on the historical flow for wastewater usage contained in the appeal, the
,\,'\I)f for Petitioner's first phase of development is 18 ERes, not 54.9 ERCs. See, Table t of
Pctitioner's alternative impact fee calculation proposal. According to Petitioner's consultant Mr.
. ,-, P I i II'~-' (J()II,'
4
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24, 2009
Page 404 of 462
[Jerry Hartman. any inflow and infiltration is already accounted for in the runtimes providcd to
('ounty stalT and included in the 18 sewer ERC calculation. Further, when sewer discharges out
1'rom the project pump station it goes into a pressurized (not a gravity) system, and as such, does
not create any into inflow and infiltration. See, Exhibit "E". To account for the 6 tenant spaces
Incated in Petitioner's second phase of development that have not been built-out or leased to
date. our client proposed in its alternative fee calculation 26.5 sewer ERCs for Petitioner's first
and second phase of development (which includes credit for additional shopping center retail
I:CRs based on square footage for these 6 units) and 5.5 additional ERCs for Units 100 and 200
In be paid prior to issuance of any certificates of occupancy,
II> Pursuant to Paragraph 6 of the Agreement Regarding Alternative Impact Fee
Calculation dated May 13, 2008, the methodology used in Petitioner's alternative impact fee
calculation does not need to be the same methodology used by the County to calculate water and
sewer Impact fees pursuant to Chapter 74 of the Collier County Code of Ordinances. Petitioner's
~Iwrnativc methodology is the unit count approach. Further, as stated in Petitioner's appeal, at
no tnne prior to the delivery of Petitioner's alternative impact fee calculation did staff object to
the unit count methodology. Further, the Letter certifies that Petitioner's alternative impact fee
calculation whIch was based on the unit count methodology was complete,
17. The unit count method is well documented and supported by the historical flow as
demonstrated in Petitioner's alternative methodology report.
Petitioner's alternative
methodology report documents the correlation between the unit count methodology and
histOrical record by looking at 2007 annual averages for water and wastewater flows. The only
"ill calendar year with complete data. Pctitioner's alternative methodology report concludes that
the Ul1It count method is valid and approximately applied, See, Tables 1,2 and 3 of Petitioner's
alternative methodology report.
; -~ I':: I I I {,../ ~ d(Jlll
5
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24, 2009
Page 405 of 462
l~. Taken as a whole, staffs calculation of 54.9 water ERCs (for Petitioner's first
,lIld second phase of development only) and 54.9 sewer ERCs or 32 sewer ERCs (for
I'etilioner', lirst and second phase of development only) is incorrect and is not supported by
hlstoncal Ilow data or the unit count methodology,
Whercfore, Petitioner respectfully requests that the Board of County Commissioners
rClcd Stairs calculation and that the Board approve Petitioner's alternative impact fee
c"kulation proposal.
Respectfully submitted,
~~~
Douglas A, ~q.
Attorney for Petitioner
Florida Bar No. 0177260
Roetzel & Andress
850 Park Shore Drive,
Trianon Centre, Third Floor
Naples, FL 34103
(239)649-6200
. " _, I 111l"1' O(J(ll
6
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24, 2009
Page 406 of 462
Certificate of Service
I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true and correct copy of the foregoing was sent via e-mail to
lhe fClllowing persons this 1751 day of January, 2009.
feffi'cy A. Klatzkow, Esq.
Icnnifer Bclpedio, Esq.
Collier County Attorney's Office
.BI) I E. Tamiami Trail, 8th Floor
Naples, FL 34J 12
Mr. Jim Mudd,
Collier County Manager
3301 E. Tamiami Trail, 2nd Floor
Naples, FL 34112
~~~
Douglas A. Lewis, Esq.
Attorney for Petitioner
Florida Bar No, 0177260
Roetzel & Andress
850 Park Shore Drive,
Trianon Centre, Third Floor
Naples, FL 34103
(239)649-6200
'''17 111,J-{HI(!l
7
Agenda Item NO.1 OA
February 24,2009
Page 407 of 462
EXHIBIT "A"
J"' ~ I r, -l- -. 011 ( I ,
8
Lewis, Doug
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24, 2009
Page 408 of 462
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
wldes_tam [TomWides@colliergov.net]
Sunday, August 31, 2008 729 AM
LewIs, Doug
belpediojenmfer; MoncivaizGilberl; CurryAmiaMarie
FW: Tamiami Square Final Response Package
Attachments:
z-Package-FINAL Response to Tamiami Square Calcuation.pdf
i!J7 '.
l-,
.'
~-Package",FINAL
Response to Ta.
Dou,:? I
/d:tached Y()l~ wi.Ll find staff's response to the propposed alternative fee calculation that
""Ol: subrni tted on behalf of Tamiami Square. As I noted to you last week when we saw each
other- at:: Community Development, staff considers the submittal complete; however, upon
.-e\ iew of the documents you submitted, staff has rejected the submittal.
:.;t:aEf ~l rEsponse is attached with the available options for your client to pursue to
:-e~O~\lt~ t}-e outstanding impact fees.
]'-YU}: t;:rwa.rd to hearing your client1s decision on the options very soon. Tom Wides
:..'C'lTI r1ULcJ,\aizGilbert
:';I~~t; '[~L 8/28(2008 2:17 PM
""cde~: tom
I:>~ Cll)~(yAm]aMal"ie; , Rob Ori'; MoncivaizGilbert
SlJt'ject: Tamiami Square Final Response Package
l'rI,
I~'::l.e L:~ t rJe Fl nal Response Package for Tamiami Square. All supporting documentation has
been .'I.GdE-'c!
1-{,;l::"ct,:O]:>/ i:; scheduled for certified mail tomorrow.
T~1dn~ }-';)\I
G1 _b~' rt
, i1:: q,: l/'W'.VW exchangedefender. com/verify. asp? id=m7SEix9B005972&from=scalalay@prmginc.com>
Page 1 of 2
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24, 2009
Page 409 of 462
Lewis, Doug
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
be I ped loje n n ifer [Jen niferSel ped io@colliergov.net]
Wednesday, October 01,2008151 PM
LewIs, Doug
wldes_tom
Subject: FW Tamiami Square Final Response Package
Attachments: z~Package-FINAL Response to Tamlaml Square Calcuation.pdf
> 3\ -e,:(;lved your telephone message
ntn ,otee en August 31 to you bye-mail
Sl'-:GtI'J t:cnstrue the Agreement deadline.
Attached IS an e~mail evidencing the transmittal of Tom Wides' AU9ust
In the splnt of cooperation, the County Attorney is very likely not gOing
Jennifer
From: wides_tom
Sent: Tuesday, September 30, 2008 10:05 AM
To: belpediojennifer
Subject: FW: Tamiami Square Final Response Package
From: wides_tom
Sent: Sunday, August 31, 2008 7:29 AM
To: LEWIS, DOUG
Cc: belpedio]ennifer; MoncivaizGilbert; CurryAmiaMarie
Subject: FW: Tamiami Square Final Response Package
Doug
Attached you will find staffs response to the propposed alternative fee calculation that you submitted on behalf of
Tamlaml Square As I noted to you last week when we saw each other at Community Development, staff
conSiders the submittal complete; however, upon review of the documents you submitted, staff has rejected the
submltta:
Staffs response IS attached with the available options far your client to pursue to resolve the outstanding impact
fees
I look torward to heanng your client's decision on the options very soon. Tom Wides
From: MoncivaizGilbert
Sent: Thu 8/28/2008 2:17 PM
To: wides_tom
Cc: CurryAmiaMarie; 'Rob Ori'; MoncivaizGilbert
Subject: Tamiami Square Final Response Package
Tom
H'lee IS tne Final Response Package for Tamiaml Square All supporting documentation has been added.
H,"dcopy IS scheduled for certified mall tomorrow
111aClK /0,_,
I 'j"'lilllJ
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24, 2009
Page 410 of 462
EXHIBIT_"B"
. -II : ] I ,..;- OliO ~
9
Page I 01'2
Agenda Item No.1 OA
February 24, 2009
Page 411 of 462
Lewis. Doug
From:
lewIs, Doug
Sent: Wednesday, October 01,20086:09 PM
To: 'belpediojennifer'
Cc: wldes_tom; KlatzkowJeff; SchmittJoseph; 'jimmudd@colliergov.net'; Nelson, Karen
Subject: RE, Tamlami Square Final Response Package
Attachments: Document.pdf
J';:iln"fl::-r
Suny [i1~ll missed you when I called. On behalf of my client. I am making every effort possible to work this out
Wlth:lUl 'lavln9 to go to the Board on this matter, and I appreciate your assistance on thiS, Attached, please find a
CC pv 0' the Appeal Hard copies to follow I would like to meet with Jim Delony, if possible. Thanks'
C'iUj
From: belpedlojennifer [mailto:JenniferBelpedio@colliergov.netj
Sent: Wednesday, October 01, 2008 1:S1 PM
To: leWIS, Doug
Cc: wides_ tom
Subject: FW: Tamiami Square Final Response Package
I >SI received your telephone message
2,'tr etl'Of' on AU9ust 31 to you bye-mall
s[i"lcliy :onstrue the Agreement deadline
Attached IS an e-mail evidencing the transmittal of Tom Wides' August
In the spirit of cooperation, the County Attorney is very likely not going
Jennifer
--~ ---~._-_. --.-.-.. - --_.._-_.._-_.,.,.._---_._--------_.__._--'----~-----
From: widestom
Sent: Tuesday, September 30, 2008 1O:0S AM
To: belpediojennifer
Subject: FW: Tamiami Square Final Response Package
From: wldes_tom
Sent: Sunday, August 31, 2008 7;29 AM
To: lEWIS, DOUG
Cc: belpediojennifer; MoncivaizGilbert; CurryAmiaMarie
Subject: FW: Tamiami Square Final Response Package
Doug
Attached you Will find staff's response to the propposed alternative fee calculation that you submitted on behalf of
Tamlaml Square, As I noted to you last week when we saw each other at Community Development, staff
conSiders the submittal complete; however, upon review of the documents you submitted, staff has rejected the
submittal
Staff's cesponse ;s attached with the available options far your client to pursue to resolve the outstanding impact
fees
I ;)0<. forward to hearing your client's deCision on the options very soon. Tom Wides
I I~": lillt)
Page 2 of2
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24, 2009
Page 412 of 462
--"'-'-'~--^'-'--_.-----._-~.."",_.__.__._-
From: MoncivarzGilbert
Sent: Thu 8/28/2008 2:17 PM
To: wrdes_tom
Cc: CurryAmiaMarie; 'Rob Ori'; MoncivaizGilbert
Subject: Tamiami Square Final Response Package
T eFTI
Here IS the Final Response Package for Tamiaml Square. All supporting documentation has been added.
H''''Jcopy is scheduled for certified mail tomorrow
Tha'IK 'IOU
Gilbert
I '17 '..'(III<i
Agenda Item NO.1 OA
February 24,2009
Page 413 of 462
EXHIBIT "C':
I I : (,.1' 00(1 ~
10
,\II.IICII: Ill. SPECIAL REQUIREMENTS FOR SPECIFIC TYPES OF IMPACT FEES Page I of 16
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24, 2009
Page 414 of 462
ARTICLE III. SPECIAL REQUIREMENTS FOR SPECIFIC TYPES OF IMPACT FEES
Sec. 74-301. Overview of special requirements.
Because this chapter is a consolidation of impact fee regulations for different types of public
facilities, this article III shall establish and provide additional or different provisions, requirements and
limitations that apply only to a particular type of public facility. A separate section within this chapter has
been included for each type of public facility. In the event of a conflict between the general provisions of
this chapter and the specific provisions set forth in this article III, the terms and provisions of article III
shall control
(Ord No 01-13, S 1, 3-13-01)
Sec. 74-302. Special requirements for road impact fee.
(a) Short name. This section may be known as "Special Requirements for Road Impact Fee."
(bl Purpose. It is hereby ascertained, determined and declared:
(1) Both existing development and development necessitated by the growth
contemplated in the comprehensive plan will require improvements and additions to the
transportation network to accommodate and maintain traffic at the level of service
adopted by the county. Future growth, as represented by new development, should
contribute to the cost of improvements and additions to the transportation network
required to accommodate and traffic generated by such growth as contemplated in the
comprehensive plan.
(2) The required improvement and additions to the transportation network needed to
accommodate existing traffic at the level of service adopted by the county shall be
financed by revenue sources of the county other than road impact fee,
(3) Implementation of a road impact fee to require future development to contribute the
cost of required transportation capital improvements and additions is an integral and vital
element of the regulatory plan of growth management incorporated in the
comprehensive plan of the county.
(4) Future growth as represented by new development requires capacity additions to
roads within the state highway system, the county road system and the city street
system, The provision of these growth necessitated capacity additions to the state
highway system and certain portions of the city street system directly benefits all
residents of the county and is interrelated with the provision of growth necessitated
Improvements to the county road system. In recognition of these findings and the
interconnections between the various road systems, it is the intent of the board to
Impose an impact fee on development occurring within the county and to utilize the
proceeds to construct or acquire contemplated improvements and capacity additions to
the transportation network.
(5) The board expressly finds that improvements and additions to the transportation
network provide a benefit to all development within the county in excess of the road
Impact fee.
(6) In recognition that transportation planning is an evolving process, it is the intent of
the board that improvements and additions to the transportation network be reviewed
and adjusted periodically to insure that road impact fees are imposed equitably and
http ,Ii hr"ry:5 .rnunieode.com/defaultlDoe View/ I OS 78/l/! 29/ 132
I/ 17/2009
M~]\(II III SI'FC1AL REQUIREMENTS FOR SPECIFIC TYPES OF IMPACT FEES Page2of16
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24,2009
Page 415 of 462
lawfully and are utilized effectively based upon actual and anticipated growth needs at
the time of their imposition.
(7) The county has a responsibility to provide and maintain certain roads in the county
In both the unincorporated areas and within incorporated areas of the county. Placing a
fair share of the burden of the cost of providing the improvements and additions to the
transportation network required by development within incorporated areas constitutes a
county purpose, Construction occurring within incorporated areas impacts the county
road system and state highway system within the county, In recognition of these
findings, it is the intent of the board to impose the road impact fee on all development
occurring within the county, including areas within municipal boundaries
(8) The purpose of this section is to require the development within the county to
provide for capital improvements and additions to the transportation network which are
necessitated by such development. This chapter shall not be construed to permit the
collection of road impact fees from development in excess of the amount reasonably
anticipated to offset the demand on the transportation network generated by such
development.
(9) This chapter shall not be construed to permit the expending or encumbering of any
monies collected through road impact fees for the construction of improvements or
additions to roads which are not contained within the transportation network.
ie) Limitation on applicability See section 74-103.
(d) Payment. See section 74-202.
\ e) Use of funds.
(1) The road impact fee shall provide funds only for off-site growth necessitated
improvements or addition(s) to transportation network roads within the same road impact
fee district where the respective development is located or for arterial or collector
roadways of anyone or more adjacent districts. Road impact fees from each such road
impact fee district may be used in the respective adjacent district(s) provided that:
a, The improvement to be made in the adjacent district is part of the
transportation network that will directly benefit development in the district from
which the road impact fees are generated; and
b. The expenditure of road impact fees within the respective adjacent road
impact fee district is reasonably related to the benefit derived by the district
wherein the road impact fees are collected
(2) Prior to the expenditure of road Impact fees for a capital improvement or addition
located in a road impact fee district other than where the impact fees were derived, a
professional engineer shall provide a specific determination of benefit and demonstrate
compliance with the requirements of this section for the proposed expenditure.
Expenditure of road impact fees in a road impact fee district other than from where the
impact fees were derived shall require approval from the board and the board shall
su pport the approval by a specific finding of benefit.
(3) Access improvements, including required right-of-way dedications, shall be provided
by the applicant in accordance with all other applicable ordinances of the county.
(4) Road impact fee district boundaries (where a road right-of-way is used to define
road district boundaries, that portion of the road right-of-way demarcating the boundary
may be considered as part of either district that it bounds).
a Road impact fee district number 1 is hereby created or affirmed to include the
boundaries set forth and established as described and depicted in appendix S,
attached hereto and incorporated by reference. Road impact fee district number
hur:.1 i bral) 5 .l11unicode.com/defaultJDoc Viewl I OS78/I/I 291 132
I !17 12 009
..\I{II(IJ III. SI'I~.ClAL REQUREMENTS FOR SPECIFIC TYPES OF IMPACT FEES Page 3 of 16
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24, 2009
Page 416 of 462
1 shall include all areas previously included within district numbers 1 and 2
created by Ordinance No. 85-55, as amended The road impact fee rate
schedule incorporated in schedule 1 is hereby adopted and the road impact fees
established in the road impact fee rate schedule are hereby imposed on all
development located within road impact fee district number 1 at a rate
established under the applicable impact fee land use categories.
b. Road impact fee district number 2 is hereby created or affirmed to include the
boundaries set forth and established as described and depicted in appendix B,
attached hereto and incorporated by reference. Road impact fee district number
2 shall include all areas previously included within district numbers 3 and 5
created by Ordinance No. 85-55, as amended. The road impact fee rate
schedule incorporated in schedule 1 is hereby adopted and the road impact fees
established in such road impact fee rate schedule are hereby imposed on all
development located within road impact fee district number 2 at a rate
established under the applicable impact fee land use categories.
c. Road impact fee district number 3 is hereby created or affirmed to include the
boundaries set forth and established as described and depicted in appendix B,
attached hereto and incorporated by reference. Road impact fee district number
3 shall include all areas previously included within district number 4 created by
Ordinance No. 85-55, as amended. The road impact fee rate schedule
incorporated in schedule 1 is hereby adopted and the road impact fees
established in such road impact fee rate schedule are hereby imposed on all
development located within road impact fee district number 3 at a rate
established under the applicable impact fee land use categories.
d. Road impact fee district number 4 is hereby created or affirmed to include the
boundaries set forth and established as described and depicted in appendix B,
attached hereto and incorporated by reference. Road impact fee district number
4 shall include all areas previously included within district number 6 created by
Ordinance No. 85-55, as amended. The road impact fee rate schedule
incorporated in schedule 1 is hereby adopted and the road impact fees
established in such road impact fee rate schedule are hereby imposed on all
development located within road impact fee district number 4 at a rate
established under the applicable impact fee land use categories.
e. Road impact fee district number 5 is hereby created or affirmed to include the
boundaries set forth and established as described and depicted in appendix B,
attached hereto and incorporated by reference. Road impact fee district number
5 shall include all areas previously included within district number 9 created by
Ordinance No. 85-55, as amended. The road impact fee rate schedule
incorporated in schedule 1 is hereby adopted and the road impact fees
established in such road impact fee rate schedule are hereby imposed on all
development located within road impact fee district number 5 at a rate
established under the applicable impact fee land use categories.
f. Road impact fee district number 6 is hereby created or affirmed to include the
boundaries set forth and established as described and depicted in appendix B,
attached hereto and incorporated by reference. Road impact fee district number
6 shall include all areas previously included within district number 8 created by
Ordinance No. 85-55, as amended. The road impact fee rate schedule
incorporated in schedule 1 is hereby adopted and the road impact fees
established in such road impact fee rate schedule are hereby imposed on all
development located within road impact fee district number 6 at a rate
established under the applicable impact fee land use categories.
g. Road impact fee district number 7 is hereby created or affirmed to include the
hllp:, bbrary5.1111ll1icode,com/default/DocView/10578/11129/132
1117/2009
..\1\ I I{ll II I -;j>I:CIAL REQUIREMENTS fOR SPEClFIC TYPES OF IMPACT FEES Page 4 of]6
Agenda Item NO.1 OA
February 24, 2009
, ... Page 417 of 462
boundaries set forth and established as descnbed and depicted In appendix B,
attached hereto and incorporated by reference. Road impact fee district number
7 shall include all areas previously included within district number 11 created by
Ordinance No. 85-55, as amended. No road impact fee shall be initially imposed
upon development located within road impact fee district number 7.
h, Road impact fee district number 8 is hereby created or affirmed to include the
boundaries set forth and established as described and depicted in appendix. B,
attached hereto and incorporated by reference. Road impact fee district number
8 shall include all areas previously included within district numbers 7 and 10
created by Ordinance No 85-55, as amended. No road impact fee shall be
initially imposed upon development located within road impact fee district number
8.
(5) The board of county commissioners hereby establishes (or affirms) eight separate
trust funds for the road impact fees to be designated as the "District Number 1 Road
Impact Fee Trust Fund", "District Number 2 Road Impact Fee Trust Fund", "District
Number 3 Road Impact Fee Trust Fund," "District Number 4 Road Impact Fee Trust
Fund," "District Number 5 Road Impact Fee Trust Fund," "District Number 6 Road Impact
Fee Trust Fund", "District Number 7 Road Impact Fee Trust Fund, and District Number 8
Road Impact Fee Trust Fund."
(6) The monies deposited into the respective road impact fee trust funds shall be used
solely to provide additions and improvement to the transportation network required to
accommodate traffic generated by growth.
(f) Impact fee rates. The road impact fee rate schedule incorporated in schedule 1 is hereby
adopted and the road impact fees established in the road impact fee rate schedule are hereby
imposed on all development as required in this chapter at a rate established under the
applicable impact fee land use categories
(gl Annual mid-cycle road impact fee rate indexing. Beginning November 1, 2002, the county
shall commence a three-year road impact fee update cycle pursuant to subsections 74-201 (b)
and 74-502(a) of this chapter. During each of the two mid-years between updates, the county
shall implement indexed adjustments to the cost components of design, utilities, mitigation,
Interchange, carrying cost, construction, engineering, inspection, the non-land components of
nght-of-way acquisition costs and the land value component of rights-of-way costs based on the
percentages of increase set forth in the adopted "Collier County Impact Fee Indexing Study"
prepared by Tlndale-Oliver and Associates. Inc., in association with Robert W Burchell, Ph.D.,
as updated annually and in accordance with the indexing methodology specified in the current
and adopted road impact fee study.
(Ord No. 01-13, ~ 1. Ord. No 02-66, ~ 1; Ord. No. 2006-19, ~ 2; Ord. No. 2007-29, ~ 2; Ord. No. 07-
57.83)
Sec. 74-303. Same--Water impact fee and/or sewer impact fee.
(a) Short name. This section may be known as "Special Requirements for Water Impact Fee
and/or Sewer Impact Fee."
(b) Purpose The purpose of this section is to tailor the general common requirements of this
chapter to the specific requirements of water and sewer impact fees. In addition, the board finds
that the Florida Legislature has adopted growth management legislation which requires local
governments to plan for and provide for capital infrastructure facilities such as water and sewer
systems. The board has alternative, cumulative and supplemental authority to plan for and
provide water and sewer systems under the laws of the State of Florida, including, but not
limited to F,S. ch. 125, pI. II of chapter 153, chapter 164, and chapter 380; chapters 78-489 and
hilI': Iihrary:i.l1lunicode.com/defaultlDocYiew/ I 0578/1/129/132
1117/2009
.\1Z i It Lilli. SPECIAL REQUIREMENTS FOR SPECIFIC TYPES OF IMPACT FEES Page 5 of 16
Agenda item No. 10A
February 24.2009
Page 418 of 462
88-499, Laws of Florida, and Article 8 of the Constitution of the State of Florida. Collier County
Land Development Regulations and Policies require persons to install, use, operate or employ
Interim water and/or sewer treatment facilities when such persons choose to develop lands in
advance of the expansion of the regional sewer system within the district. Collier County Land
Development Regulations and Policies require that owners of land connected to interim sewer
facilities disconnect from such facilities and connect to the regional water and/or sewer system
whenever the regional sewer system becomes available within the district. The board
specifically finds that future growth within the non-excluded areas (as described in section 74-
303( c)) should contribute its fair share to the cost of improvements and additions to the water
and sewer facilities that are required to accommodate the use of such facilities within the non-
excluded areas.
Ie) Limitation on app/icabiiity. Notwithstanding the general applicability provisions set forth in
this chapter, water and sewer impact fees shall be limited as follows:
(1) Shall not apply within the geographic areas expressly excluded by this chapter from
the imposition of water and sewer impact fees: For purposes of the water and/or sewer
service, development shall include only development on lands within the county water-
sewer district, exclusive of lands encompassed by the geographic areas described
hereunder. Lands within the county generally excluded from the generally applicable
definition of "development" as it relates to the water and/or sewer service include (the
exclusions set forth below are not all-inclusive); lands lying within the excluded areas
which are either required to connect or request connection to the regional water system,
or which otherwise create a growth necessitated demand upon the regional water
system shall be subject to the imposition of impact fees in accordance with this chapter
in the same manner as if said lands were not within an excluded geographic area:
a. Those areas lying within the boundaries of the former Marco Water and
Sewer District. Exclusion of the Marco Water and Sewer District recognizes that
this area is not presently planned to be served by treatment capabilities of the
regional water and/or regional sewer systems.
b. Those areas lying within the boundaries of the Goodland Water District.
Exclusion of the Goodland Water District recognizes that this area is not
presently planned to be served by the treatment capabilities of the regional water
and/or regional sewer systems.
c. The following exclusion of the geographic areas in Golden Gate Estates
recognize that the nature of the previous development, the platting of these areas
primarily into large residential tracts and the present zoning and constraints of
the comprehensive plan have severely limited the density and use of these areas
in such a manner as to make it economically impractical to serve most of these
areas in the foreseeable future via the regional water and/or regional sewer
systems or any other centralized water and/or sewer utility.
1. Golden Gate Estates, Unit No.1, Plat Book 4, Page 73, Public
Records of Collier County, Florida.
2. Golden Gate Estates, Unit No.2, Plat Book 4, Page 75, Public
Records of Collier County, Florida.
3. Golden Gates Estates, Unit No.3, Plat Book 4, Page 77, Public
Records of Collier County, Florida.
4. Golden Gates Estates, Unit No, 4, Plat Book 4, Page 79, Public
Records of Collier County, Florida.
5. Golden Gates Estates, Unit No. 26, Plat Book 7, Page 15, Public
Records of Collier County, Florida.
hllp II, hrary 5 .ll1unicodc.com/dcfaultlDoc Viewll 0578/1/129/ 132
1/17/2009
,\R [Ii 1.1111. SPECIAL REQUIREMENTS FOR SPECIFIC TYPES OF IMPACT FEES Page 6 of 16
Agenda Item NO.1 OA
February 24, 2009
Page 419 of 462
6. Golden Gates Estates, Unit No. 27, Plat Book 7, Page 17, Public
Records of Collier County, Florida.
7. Golden Gates Estates, Unit No. 28, Plat Book 7, Page 19, Public
Records of Collier County, Florida
8. Golden Gates Estates, Unit No. 29, Plat Book 7, Page 57, Public
Records of Collier County, Florida.
9. Golden Gates Estates, Unit No. 30, Plat Book 7, Page 58, Public
Records of Collier County, Florida. This subdivision is now part of Florida
Cities Water Company's certificated area.
10. Golden Gates Estates, Unit No. 31, Plat Book 7, Page 59, Public
Records of Collier County, Florida. This subdivision is now part of Florida
Cities Water Company's certificated area.
11. Golden Gates Estates, Unit No 32, Plat Book 7, Page 21, Public
Records of Collier County, Florida.
12. Golden Gates Estates, Unit No. 33, Plat Book 7, Page 60, Public
Records of Collier County, Florida.
13. Golden Gates Estates, Unit No. 34, Plat Book 7, Page 23, Public
Records of Collier County, Florida.
14. Golden Gates Estates, Unit No. 35, Plat Book 7, Page 85, Public
Records of Collier County, Florida.
15. Golden Gates Estates, Unit No. 95, Plat Book 9, Page 45, Public
Records of Collier County, Florida.
16, Golden Gates Estates, Unit No. 96, Plat Book 7, Page 94, Public
Records of Collier County, Florida
17. Golden Gates Estates, Unit No. 97, Plat Book 7, Page 95, Public
Records of Collier County, Florida.
d. Those areas lying within the Macro Shores, Unit 1, Sections 26 and 27,
Township 52 South, Range 26 East, and recorded in Plat Book 14, Page 34 of
the Public Records of Collier County, Florida. Exclusion of the Marco Shores,
Unit 1, recognizes that this area is not presently planned to be served by
treatment capabilities of the regional water and/or regional sewer systems.
e. Ridge Farms Subdivision (not platted) described as follows: Begin at
Southeast corner of Section 6, Township 49 South, Range 26 East, Collier
County, FlOrida; thence north 88 degrees 50 minutes 15 seconds east along the
south line of said Section 6; thence north 0 degrees 13 minutes 20 seconds west
along the east line of Section 6 a distance of 3044.40 feet to the east quarter
corner; thence continuing north along said line a distance of 42884 feet; thence
leaving said east line north 88 degrees 40 minutes 58 seconds west, a distance
of 1285.80 feet; thence south 1 degree 10 minutes 35 seconds east, a distance
of 523.35 feet; thence south 0 degrees 00 minutes 00 seconds east, a distance
of 137.19 feet; thence north 88 degrees 41 minutes 53 seconds west, a distance
of 3959.46 feet to the east line of aforesaid Section 6; thence south 0 degrees 00
minutes 00 seconds east along said east line a distance of 3038.77 feet to the
point of beginning. Said described tract contains 371.460 acres, more or less.
More generally described as those properties adjacent to or abutting Hunters
Rcad, Livingston Road, and Daniels Rcad.
f Areas North of Radio Road located within Section 31, Township 49 South,
IHlp: /1 i hrary :ill1l1nicoue.com/detaultJDoc View/1 0578/1 /129/ 132
1/17/2009
,\1{ 11< I I III SPI.cIAL REQUIREMENTS FOR SPECIFIC TYPES OF IMPACT FEES Page 7 of 16
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24, 2009
Page 420 of 462
Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida, generally described as those properties
adjacent to or abutting San Marco Boulevard, SI. Clair Shores Road, Owen Lane,
and Family Circle Lane.
g. All of Section 8, Township 50 South, Range 26 East (excluding Falling
Waters); Parts of Section 9, Township 50 South, Range 26 East; Parts of Section
16, Township 50 South, Range 26 East; Part of Section 17, Township 50 South,
Range 26 East; Part of Section 17, Township 50 South, Range 26 East; and Part
of Section 7, Township 50 South, Range 26 East all of Collier County, Florida;
more specifically described as those properties adjacent to or abutting Heritage
Trail, Unity Way, Cope Lane; Crews Road, County Barn Road, Sheddon Lane,
Whittaker Road, Sunset Blvd., Sandy Lane Adkins Avenue, Everett Street, Polly
Ave., Wendy Lane, Landsdale Lane and Cynthia Way.
h. Those areas lying within the Key Marco Community Development District.
Exclusion of the Key Marco Community Development District recognizes that this
area is outside the county water-sewer district.
i. All those areas lying within the county water and wastewater authority
certificated areas of Florida Cities Water Company, and Florida Water Services
Corporation (formerly known as Southern States Utilities, Inc.), or their
successors or assigns, located within Collier County, Florida. (The only
exceptions to this provision to provide service within these certificated areas may
exist when the parties enter into a written agreement for water service to be
provided by the county.)
J. All those areas located within the City of Naples service areas as described in
the October. 1977 city/county agreement and amendments thereto, or other
geographic areas within the City of Naples that are not served by the county with
the respective water and/or waste water service.
k Area of CR951 and US41: One mile sections that run west of the Collier
County water-sewer district boundary described as follows: All of Section 36,
Township 49 South, Range 26 East; All of Sections 1, 11, 14, 23, 26 and 35,
Township 50 South, Range 26 East; All of Section 2, Township 51 South, Range
26 East; Parts of Sections 1, 11, and 12, Township 51 South, Range 26 East;
Parts of Sections 7, 8, 16, 17, 18, 20, 21,22, and 27, Township 51 South, Range
27 East, all of Collier County, Florida.
I Parker Hammock Subdivision (not platted) as described as follows: Located
within Section 16, Township 50 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida,
generally described as those properties adjacent to or abutting the north side of
Rattlesnake Hammock Road, east of Shadow Wood Villas and west of
Huntington Woods; shown on property appraiser tax map as Lot 13 through Lot
44.
(2) Areas generally excluded from the imposition of only the sewer component of the
water and sewer impact fee: The exclusions set forth below are not absolute; lands lying
within the excluded areas which are either required to connect or request connection to
the regional sewer system, or which otherwise create a growth necessitated demand
upon the regional sewer system shall be subject to the imposition of impact fees in
accordance with this chapter in the same manner as if said lands were not excluded:
a. Those areas lying within the Pine Ridge Subdivision as shown in Plat Book 3,
Page 24, Public Records of Collier County, Florida.
b, Exclusion of the following areas in Pine Ridge Subdivision, Pine Ridge
Extension, and Pine Ridge Second Extension recognizes that the nature of the
previous development. the platting of these areas primarily into large residential
hup:, 'librarv S .IllUfllcode.com/default/DocViewll 0578/1/129/132
1/] 7/2009
,\1\ 1Il'I,I Ill. SPLCIAL REQUIREMENTS FOR SPECIFIC TYPES OF IMPACT FEES Page 8 of] 6
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24, 2009
Page 421 of 462
tracts and the present zoning and constraints of the comprehensive plan have
severely limited the density and use of these areas in such a way as to make it
economically impractical to serve most of these areas in the foreseeable future
via the regional water and/or regional sewer systems or any other centralized
water or centralized sewer utility.
1. Pine Ridge Extension, Plat Book 3, Page 51, Public Records of Collier
County, Florida.
2. Pine Ridge Extension, Plat Book 4, Page 29, Public Records of Collier
County, Florida
3. Pine Ridge Second Extension, Plat Book 10, Page 86, Public Records
of Collier County, Florida.
4. Pine Ridge Second Extension, Plat Book 12, Page 57-58, Public
Records of Collier County, Florida.
c Coconut Creek. Unit 1, according to Plat Book 1, Page 108, Public Records
of Collier County, Florida; Coconut Creek, Unit 2, Plat Book 3, Page 4, Public
Record of Collier County, Florida; Coconut Creek, Unit 3, Plat Book 3, Page 48,
Public Records of Collier County, Florida; Westview Plaza, Plat Book 13, Page
50, Public Records of Collier County, Florida; more specifically described as
those properties adjacent to or abutting Lorraine Road, Kathy Street, Gail
Boulevard, Esther Street, Donna Road, Westview Drive, and on North Road.
d Four Seasons, according to Plat Book 10, Page 95, Public Records of Collier
County, Florida; and Four Seasons Unit 2, according to Plat Book 12, Page 6,
Public Records of Collier County, Florida.
e. Quail Woods (previously known as Edgewild), according to Plat Book 13,
page 44, Public Records of Collier County, Florida; more specifically described
as all single family lots adjacent to or abutting "The Lane."
f Tall Pines, according to Plat Book 12, Page 70, Public Record of Collier
County, Florida;
g. Isle of Capri No.1, according to Plat Book 3, Page 41, Public Records of
Collier County, Florida; Isle of Capri No.2, according to Plat Book 3, Page 46,
Public Records of Collier County, Florida; Isle of Capri No.3, according to Plat
Book 3, Page 66, Public Records of Collier County, Florida; Isle of Capri
Business Section, according to Plat Book 3, Page 52, Public Records of Collier
County, Florida.
(d) Payment.
(1) For purposes of the water and sewer impact fees, development shall be subject to
the payment of impact fees under this section 74-303, upon the first occurrence of any of
the following:
a. Subject to subsection 74-201 (d)(4), whenever any building or use which has
not previously paid the applicable water and/or sewer impact fees under this
chapter, or any predecessor ordinance in function, connects to the regional
sewer system and/or the regional water system;
b. Any building or use is connected, or interim water and/or sewer systems, is
connected either directly or indirectly, to the regional water system and/or
regional sewer system; or
c Whenever (i) any person applies for a building permit to construct (or place or
install) a building or utilize a use or development improvement within the
Imp: 'II brary -' .lllunicode.com/dcfaultlDoc Viewll 0578/11129/132
III 7/2009
.\Rlll ,I III ;;('ICIAL REQUIREMENTS FOR SPECIFIC TYPES OF IMPACT FEES Page 9 of 16
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24. 2009
Page 422 of 462
boundaries of the county water-sewer district, even though the subject lands are
then receiving (or may in future receive) interim water and/or sewer services from
a source other than the county water-sewer district, or (ii) do not then request
any such service but are located in a place where it is physically possible to
effect a physical interconnection with the respective regional water-sewer
district's facilities. This last provision is to preclude the possibility of unauthorized
interconnections without first paying to the county all then applicable water and/or
sewer impact fees.
d. Whenever a person applies for a building permit to alter an existing building,
use or applicable improvement then connected to the regional water system
and/or regional sewer system, if such alterations increase the demand or the
potential demand on the regional water system and/or regional sewer system.
(2) Subject to availability of funds, the county may enter into agreements to extend
payment (offer installment payments) of water and/or sewer systems impact fees and
associated costs over a period not to exceed seven years with owners of then existing
buildings, structures or applicable improvements which are mandated to connect to the
regional water and/or regional sewer systems. Prior to the county entering into any
agreements to extend payments, and from time-to-time thereafter, the board shall
identify a specific source of funds to be used relative to providing extended payment and
the cost of such funds, including all expenses and costs incidental to obtaining or
providing same, including interest at the interest rate that the board or the public utilities
administrator will employ in offering extended payment with interest, and a reasonable
estimation of the administrative costs of expenses associated with administering the
extended payment alternative to the respective land(s).
a. The county shall only enter into agreements to extend installment payment of
the water and/or sewer systems impact fees and associated costs with owners of
then existing buildings, structures or applicable improvements, mandated to
connect to the regional water and/or regional sewer systems.
b. The amount of payment, including any title verification expenses and a
reasonable estimation of the cost and expense associated with providing an
extended payment alternative, shall be paid in equal monthly payments with an
annual interest rate as determined by the state comptroller's office. State
document stamp and recording fees will be upfront costs borne by the owner and
shall be paid in full at the time the extended payment agreement is executed
The interest rate charged shall be representative of the county's cost of funds,
including all expenses or costs incidental to obtaining or providing same, if any,
The interest charged should be adjusted during January of any calendar year in
accordance with the then applicable ordinance (currently Ordinance No. 96-17
and No, 96-18) and shall be based on the county's cost of funds for the
immediately preceding fiscal year. Failure to make such an adjustment in any
given January shall not preclude retroactive adjustments of such interest rates.
c. With the exception of the approval and execution of agreements, or an
aggregation of related agreements, with a face amount in excess of $6,000.00,
the board hereby delegates to the public utilities administrator the power and
authority to enter into, modify, and release such extended payment agreements
in conformance with the provisions of this chapter. The standard form agreement,
and any other associated documentation, shall be in a form approved by the
board and acceptable to the county attorney. No such standard form agreement
shall be modified unless, in the opinion of the county attorney, there then exists a
compelling reason to do so. Each such agreement shall be recorded in the
official records upon approval of the publiC utilities administrator,
d, For an agreement, or an aggregation of related agreements, to extend
hur: ,Ilhrar") .11lLll1lcode,com/detault/Doc View/1 0578/1/129/132
1117/2009
,WI J('U III. Sl'll'IAL REQUIREMENTS FOR SPECIFIC TYPES OF IMPACT FE... Page 10 of] 6
Agenda Item NO.1 OA
February 24. 2009
. '. Page 423 of 462
payment of Impact fees and associated costs with a face amount in excess of
$6,000.00, the county shall require the procedure and documentation for
extending payments to substantially and reasonably conform to generally
accepted and reasonably applicable commercial lending practices, including but
not limited to the requirement for acceptable personal guarantees from one or all
of the owners (or individuals owning a beneficial interest therein. At its sole
option the county may contract with outside counselor a servicing agent to
prepare such documentation and to advise the county relative to conformance
with generally accepted commercial lending practices and the costs of same
shall be borne by the owner
e. Upon satisfactory payment of all principal, interest, and associated costs
under an extended payment agreement, the county shall execute a satisfaction
of lien and record same in the official records of the county. A copy of the
recorded satisfaction of lien will be mailed (to the mailing address provided to the
county by the other contracting party) by regular U.S. mail to the record owner
within 60 days from receipt of full payment.
f In recognition that the payment of the water and/or sewer systems impact
fees for then existing mobile home park or rental housing will generally, in some
manner, be passed through to the occupants by an owner, and in recognition that
if such pro-rata impact fee pass-through IS collected as one single payment by
the owner, that such a pass-through may cause financial hardship on these
occupants, the board, in its sole discretion, may require the owner to covenant
and agree, for the benefit of all affected persons, to pass through entirely and on
the same terms all the benefits of any extended payment of the impact fees to
the affected persons.
J g. Water and wastewater (sewer) impact fees for individually metered water
and/or sewer service to residential use of less than 5,000 square feet living
space and which will have less than five toilets shall have an ERC value of one.
;' master metered service to residential use of less than 5,000 square feet living
/ space and having less than five toilets shall be determined by the specific impact
fee value assigned by Appendix A, Schedule Two, Individually metered service
and master metered service to non-residential uses, or to residential use having
living area of 5,000 square feet or more, or service to residential use having less
square footage but having five or more toilets, shall be determined by the ERC
value that results from projected average daily flows. Projected average daily
fiows for residential use of 5,000 square feet living area or more, or to have more
than four tOilets, shall be determined by applYing applicable provisions in the then
current edition of the Florida Plumbing Code. Projected average daily fiows for
non-residential uses shall be determined by calculating the applicable provisions
in the then current edition of the Florida Plumbing Code compared with the
/ applicable provisions in the then current editions of the Florida Administrative
I
J Code. The correct average daily fiows for non-residential uses shall be the
(greater of the Florida Plumbing Code calculation or the Florida Administrative
Code calculation The Public Utilities Administrator or authorized designees shall
\ have final approval authority with regard to these impact fee calculations.
(e) Os..~ offunds. See section 74-203.
(f) Impact fee rates. The water and sewer impact fee rate schedule incorporated in schedule 2
is hereby adopted and the water and sewer impact fees established in the water and sewer
Impact fee rate schedule are hereby imposed on all development as required in this chapter at a
rate established under the applicable impact fee land use categories.
Ig) Annual mid-cycle water and sewer impact fee rate indexing. Beginning January 1, 2005,
the county shall commence a three-year water and sewer (wastewater) impact fee update cycle
I
.'
!
(
"-
)
,
!
hllp Ilihrarv:ill1l1nicodc.com/dcfalllt/DocYiewll 057811/129i] 32
1/17/2009
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24, 2009
Page 424 of 462
EXHIBIT "D"
. Ji III,~ (11)(1'
II
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24, 2009
Page 425 of 462
bhlblt "Co, ... Tamlaml Square of Naples, LLG
Period Water Usage (in the thousands)
12/01108
11101/08
10/01/08
09101/08
08/01/08
07/01/08
07/01/08
05/01/08
04/01/08
03/01/08
02/01/08
01/01/08
12/01/07
11101107
10/01/07
09/01/07
08/01/07
07101/07
07/01/07
05/01/07
04/01/07
03/01107
Monthly Average (All)
Average ERGs (All)
Last 4 Month Average
F our Month Average ERGs
488
140
160
515
549
541
674
601
560
382
413
781
374
223
244
239
292
385
312
423
420
549
421 1
401
325.75
31,0
'l'.t<~J.,:-;;. 5Q OF NAPLES LLC
(1' I t3si Ma:1agment Inc
", ::J
;' ',union:,,:, Trl N
'if ,.eF FL 34103-4439
-, Vi7A"'~
',~,', '::'''",- l.~ W;'I'"
ILl,';':"" ,. 'l. \
II D' . . -
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24, 2009
Page 426 of 462
12/09/08
04046017600 CO
14700 TAMIAMI TR N-PHA
7.:(.;)
:)/811
311
10/30/0E
10/30/08
5717
13487
12/03/08
12/03/08
5882
13610
165
323 WA
WS
SM
IP
PE
BL
2,351.53
294.98
2,064.30
36.00
74.12
1,482.36
. 1,,'; ~ :J ~) .;
,: .'''IM)) PHASE II WATER RESTRICTIONS ARE IN EFFECT!
,':co 0,11 may include a 15% Surcharge depending on total usage.
l>~l::"':) ':_~!? water conservation daily to protect Florida I s water resources.
F:::: :.r;t.:' VIsit www.colliergov.net. Utility Billing\Customer Service.
/",'Y',r.; Ii,'".: G:\:" iii;COM-ES OEUNQUErH1F lHE TOTAL AMOUNT OUE IS NOT PAID BY 12/24/0B
i;~iq'i "-{ :";'IAHGb';:' .11':-.1'
, TOT""_
CUST()MEn SUl'NJ
6,303.29
,!;, r;;E'''!~r. ':HI ,iE'j,IN'.",,!.T r,,H(
SEE BACK OF BiLl. fOR ADDITIONAL mLL IN-FORMA TIQN
~
,r:, ["""
14700 TAMIAMI TR N-PHASE 2
OAll ! TOTAt QUi
04046017600
12/09/08 12/24/06
6,303,29
1/,\.<.
. ',Y-:". FCj;r:
':'J.J.;1A1vl:' SQ OF NAPLES LLC
(' 'C' Cr ~ tas i Managrne:nt Inc
Illmlml~ljlllll~
';!:'f~,:~Uj' UN;
L:: t~ ::. C; 8
,; :'~:"::~^:"n.-
:'i"~' :'arniami Trl N
N~lp~es FL 34103-4439
;:',(' n~
ihG ~;rji>'l;
000000404601760000630329
>!
LL..l
:~-!.~',,":j~'
Agenda Item No. 10A
Februa'y2,'1;,2,O.og
Page1W12V'b~2
"Al>1IAMI SQ OF NAPLES LLC
'~:'o C::ifasi Managment rnc
~;te 208
.;l"75 Tarniami Trl N'
Naples n 34103 -4439
Il/70t
"ifi; N'i')J_~;:;- .' ;,:~
04046017600 CO
,"!,..'-
14700 TAMIAMcr TR N-PHA
:14.;3635
: 10 3709C
'~'--'''''''''i'-'--=''' ''''TAIlml'~6~-- ~\",--, ..
., :Ji"""'","".,...:.oi,;;"~,....~_~i:i;i~~ ::;i,"':'"ii{.1j'H~1,;,;:.Iil~~~';,) CO"..
"r GAL;, ;~FAtllN;" DATE: READlNG ' CQN5iJMPTl,:'N ",--'.'j'
5/8" 10/03/08 5599 . 10/30/08- 5717 118
3" 10/03/08 13465 10/30/08 13487 22 WA
WS
SM
XP
BL
]",IO'.IN~
5 90.17
30.78
825,42
36.00
O.OlCR
SF'WMD PHASE II WATER RESTRICTIONS ARE IN EFFECT!
This bill may include a 15% Surcharge depending on total usage.
Practice water conservation daily to protect Florida1s water resources.
Fer info visit www.colliergov.net. Utility Billing\CUstomer Service.
'I'}'j
" HI:i Bil.L BIoCOMES DELINQUENT IF THE TOT AL AMOUNT DUE IS NOT PAID BY 11/27/08
: Ii:; l)l,~E :;;i-1AL BE' ::"Ub,Jt,'.:: .C) ,TW\l )'v CHARGES Af'l.D ,-A'hVRf TO PAV BY THIS DATE 1;1.50 SHAlt
,-, "~,,;u:OH;;:;F_~~,AT~R.';ER1ICL lIN[; AUTO\,V,TlC LIENS WIHOUr FiJP1'"HER NOTIC~ If YOU DlSPUTE nuS
;f;ft:\:7~Ti';'T[ ~'Ij .t.~jY w;..:'Y --:,:~)U P.1~i:~ r l;;>Nl At; 1 IHE'. COLU!:R (;()i.)N'r y u::Ur~ 3n.CU"'G M4U (-,USTOMER SfH'.'ICE-
':N..~' O'jg!NCS~, QOV<1S;- ,~'j Il.."~ :'.10.' P M Me) I1f~ORS THE' :JU;NouFNT nArE
WAHHING
~, "
SEE BACK OF BILL FOR ADDITIONAL BILL INFORMATION
J_' ')[1 A".:.< '~::!':':'
,.
'~~
.. .",J r'h t'/'>..t:.l.t '1,:._'
14700STiM~fTR N-PHASE 2
. C'UN 'Y UTiLiTiE') flU '!\':
'))Q~, 252-232C:
04046017600
t),ll-Tto {~ILll:,r.
11/12/08:
;:"'l~'::'\',';,n '"ii!,~8;",""
TAMIAMI SQ OF NAPLES LLC
clO Crifasi Managment Inc
Ste 208
2375 Tamiami Trl N
Naples FL 34103-4439
IttlltllllW
MAIL THE: lOWER PORTJON W\iH Y"::'UR
PAYMENT IN U.S. FUNDS TO
COLUEH COUNTY ;,,;!iL,IT1E:S SnUNG
p,O, BOX 74D74.H
C;,NGINr~ATj_ CJ~! "~5r'~-,;)-'.HJ
OOOOOO~O~b01?b000014a23b
.,~....~t--..I!'J(.
""./;:,
"'.
Agenda Item NO.1 OA
February 24. 2009
Page 428 of 462
,c- I,;]\;:>L=::"; ':",1..-'
"!'tit
10/C8/08
:'1_1r.i.1gmen~ 1".-.
'-",,'.(j',,';Tr..;'.'_r."
It) t5 f?~(:
,t'....;;'., ;"!'.
04046017600 CO
!:"'l 'N
:<1lC3-,gj:;
14700 TAMIAMI TR N
:L [11
:1:1:tll{.1IF~;' ;~, iil;l ,H_J[~r.
DATE ~ READING
L1:1::f.:~:!:~11l:1 '~I:l:I:I:::r.~.!!:[t ~
I >:lEADING : CCNS'JMP1DN CODE
AMOU'I'
DATE
'10/03/08
10/03/08
09;05 06
09/05 foe
5599
13465
S471
13.1J j
128
32 WA
WS
SM
IP
FE
BL
635.72
39.60
866.36
36.00
243.62
5,134.83
!i'~.. ~ lS
, . cci ~' , '.'28)
'-'--4{"'S
'-.
~c~;; lr WATER RESTRICTIONS ~~E IN EFFECT!
c' 1_ .:'Iay include a 15\ Surcharge depending on total usage.
:~c wa:er conserva~ion daily to protect Florida's wacer resources.
'::'Sl.t W'WW.colliergov.net. Utility Billing\CUstomer service.
.:;..~ -'0\'-;'
TrioS iJ,L~ 8ECOMES DELINQUENT IF THE TOTAL AMOUNT DUE IS NOT PAID BY
10/23/08
-...--
6,956.13
'I';"; ~!Arf ~,"'A,.i BF "UB.I~r:f ro PfNo\l tv CI-1ARGFS AND f-t.;U;~f: 10 PAi BY THIS DArE AI.SO SHALL I
c.WT(:H' OF WATER c;f'~ICt' MID -"vrOMATI': uENS WITI--l0-UT FURTHE'~ NOTiCE IF "ou DISf"U1E THIS
. ,,0,. ':-I.:RA1E IN lI,NY '-filA-V 'fOL' MLrc-;' CGNT"cr lHiC COLLIER COl'tlTV UTlLlf'" BrLLiNG AND cuS-rOMEA SEAYICF. \
," :,114!'5<;; ..;()I.JA~. ,:')0:, r. f,l . ,,, PM M F, rrEt0RE THE LlEI iNUUFIiT ()f\Tf '-
SEE BACK OF BILL FOR ADDITIONAL BilL INFORMATION
',c, P..YABLE fO
I)', IV UTILITIES BilLING
.: jI!) 252-2380
~
q'R'.,JIC( AODRESS
14700 TAMIAMI TR N
DA 'E .'L" D ~1!1~.."r"
10/08/08 10 23 081._ _6'.:.S.~:.:_3
lJETAC'"< H[R[
<>
"
ACCOUNT Nl'MBE R
04046017600
r ' _. ,)r NAPLES LLC
:~":JS~ v'anagment Ir.c
illllllll~ g 11IIII1
W,AIL THE LOWER PORTION "'11TH YOUR
PAYMENT IN U,S, FUNDS TO
.i. i ,1(-:-._ Trl N
:<-110)-4439
COLLIER COUNTY UTILITIES BILLING
P.O. BOX 740748
CINCINNATI. OH 452/"4.0,46
000000404601760000695613
-,"- ..,"'- ~
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24,2009
Page 429 of 462
[,,.. r~ :;;;, .
. ~- ~';A:?LES LLC
;; t'~0.:lagmen'.:. Inc:
9/c?ai
09/10/08
::'/'
:i.,_iU~';" t.LMi'l~_;;;
~ a,;:. j "'1'1~;
04046017600
co
.,,,~ . '-":
3':1,J3 -.:; -i 39
~:: r.I '.';r.:..: r.f;::'1{ ~ .
14700 TAMIAMI TR N
j:~;;,"~i:~:';~::2rl~iLill!~~(~-
,'.\:! f'i[AV:N';
~ ~. :
,;" 05/05/08
08/05/08
5247
13142
:.i:I:h"1;1,'III,'I~t=l;I.l;f"~:I,[, T------ i
DATE T P;EIIOINCi : C(\l>(SUI,l"TlC~ : conI" '
09)05/68--'- --5471 224
09/05/08 13433 291 WA
WS
SM
IP
PE
BL
A'H,',r,'
""t" ";'
.2f44S,97
304 . 92
2,085.58
36.00
262.36
5,499,47
/'F0, ,/;;,? 1>
1!12":~'; ~
fh';- '! /. 'i(J08 )j
. '--/.0~ ')
~~-
(.1 L:J './.;1 I
,-<,/ ~ r- ~?j
.if',;ND PfiA3E (1 ',;ATER RESTRICTIONS ARE IN EFFECT!
._~:s 0:11 may include a 15\ Surcharge depending on total usage. _
~~d:tlCe wacer conservation daily to protect Florida's water resources. ~
'0: ::1b '::,It www.colliergov.net. Utility Billing\customer Service. 'If. S; /3Lf
Wt..FtI~IN~i Ii:,) Gll ~ on ::Jr,llES DELINQUENT IF THE TOTAL AMOUNT DUE IS NOT PAID BY' 09/25/08 ~
',"J' '" .<. IJ~l'-' ~f'''J, ( '."r-:j AND ~AllUJ.lE ~O pAY By TM,S C,l,~r.: ,l"L:'O SHA~L
_ _~f'-, ~~~'iJ.._:";'!..'!..::' _,_I'NS WlH,OtJT FUA1HFR NOTIC'" 'I' You ["SI'V"!: THIS 34.30
I . .',,.,', J' 1,1\" ''',.11\'' I ',I (fl COUNT~ UTILITY BilLING ANt '.h~'- ;',\(R ::'ERVICf I
, .. I ~ "." "" II~..!!L TH[ (1[uNOIJINT !)Afl- -.--
. ~ ~ ~
SEE BACK OF BILL FOR ADDITIONAL BILL INFORMATION
04046017600
~
SERVI::;[ ADDRESS
14700 TAMIAMI TR N
DATE BlLlEO ~= .......
09/10/08 L_09/2S/08 ___.~.~~_34, 30
UPACH !-'~RE
..
>-4";\&: 1i)
" 1 I,) r:I.lnfS BilLiNG
~.' :::/-238D
.',::;COi,ltH NLlMBER
!'J'~_-:),;~: .:;:: CEo' NAPLES LLC
',l c~:f~s" Managment Inc
It: .:. 02
. :\' '::__cf1'~:j. rL~ Trl N
'i;l.t=':'CS F:. 3..103-4439
m1il111H11I
MAIL THE LOWER PORTION WITH YD' ;~j
PAYMENT IN U.S. FUNDS TO
COLLIER COUNTY UTIUTIES Blt,L'tl(,
P.O, BOX 740748
CINCINNATI. OH 45274-0748
0000004046D176DOO~063430
Aaenda Item No. 10A
- February 24, 2009
Page 430 of 462
EXHIBIT "E"
. -/7 i _; I I 'l~ -'O()(i_~
12
Page ] of 3
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24, 2009
Page 431 of 462
Lewis. Doug
From: LewIs, Doug
Sent: Wednesday, November 05, 2008243 PM
To: 'wides_tom'; DeLonLJlm
Cc; belpediojennifer; KlatzkowJeff; MoncivaizGilbert; 'Gerry Hartman'
Subject: RE Tamlaml Square
Attachments; Documentpdf
.hlli. ::"1
;",.t leu ai' 8-m311 earlier today on thiS. and the clear communication that we have had is that any settlement
SI'DUld ado less Clur client's desree to resolve this as qUickly as possible and Without uncertainty (especially in
111 s ;,urrent eCOnOfTliC climate) of further audits or monltonng of the site Private parties need time to plan for
e.penses and unanticipated costs are not easily obtainable and recovered. As we discussed, I prefer to be clear
OC' Wl1St County staff IS offering before I 90 to the client as I will likely have an uphill battle with Gerry and the
el,,,,,; to wo'k to get thiS settled 9iven the below e-mail Jim, you asked me yesterday to get back to staff
\i\l!t'l JP:IO:-1S ~c a!low us to proceed without any further audits or mOnitoring of the site In response to this request,
I '3r 3 GlUpOSal oy Gil yesterday afternoon. and he did not have any objection to It (he did say that this is
Li!TiJerr'y's call 'lowever) My e-mail to you thiS morning contains this proposal. Please carefully look at this and
:Pl nl:~ r;~l{)\.V yo,: - thoughts
I)r' lIE";]:) be;ow and according to our consultant, all Inflow and infiltration (Ill) is accounted for in the runtimes
pr:Vided te the County in our report, When sewer dlscharges out from the pump station it goes Into
pr~SsulI?e(: InGt gravity) system and does not have any Inflow and Infiltration. The annual average daily flow for
sew", IIClkll1g ,cto account III) for Units 300 and 400 (based on the historical data prOVided to the staff) is 18
EflCs :Jur cilent's proposal of 26,5 ERCs IS for sewer for Units 300 and 400, and it also Includes ERCs for all
n(!1 peTl"lea letall space Within Units 300 and 400 ThiS ERC count is supported by historical flows and our
ell"r: 5 stucy/methodology To date. Gerry and I have not seen any data provided by County staff to support 32
Ef,C'; f)' Units 300 and 400, The only thln9 I have seen raised by staff on thiS IS the Inflow and rnflltratlon (III)
!S~;J::- fCli:;e:J Di Tom's e-mail today and you now have our response above on this.
;)I~ ;~l~' '/.3td :;Ice and given 3 proposed 2 year inonltormg/audlt period, staffs proposal puts the developer In a
wurse pCJsltlor tnen he would have been In had the County charged water Impact fees at the time of building
perr-Issuance Several years after the fact after tenants (not the developer) have pulled permits, after lender
f",ancI"g IS ger'" thls!s not something that I can eaSily take to my client On item c. per Exhibit 3 to the County's
A,II'J.:st /~I 200"3 i'?tr.;;, the annual average Uron: August 07 to ,L\'Jgust 08) is 42 +/-ERCs, not 54.9 ERCs. 54.9
E f,C'1 IS based eft a 4 month average, With the last month being August 2008 On what basis are we looking at
th".1 morth avelage to calculate ERCs? For purposes of derrvlng the current Impact fee rate of $3.200.28 per 1
sew,'1 1'1,(: per the May 2006 Impact Fee Study, the County looks at AADF, not 4 month averages, and not
pc a I'. 0" 1'1C cost Side of the ledger. Impact fees Include the total cost of additional sewer treatment plants and
II", <3!j)",;te,j cost of eXisting plants (expressed as a % of the total capacity remaining to serve new development).
011 the plant capacity Side of the ledger. however, the total number of ERCs needed to pay such costs are based
or Ap.Df' which Incorporates a peaking factor of 1 3 to adjust down plant capacity. For example, if plant capacity
IS 4010:) MGD :111S '5 adjusted down to 30,846 MGD to allow for peakln9. Inflow and Infiltration, etc, If the total
lie mbel ,of ERCs needed to pay such wastewater system costs were based on total plan capacity (e.g. 40.100
M'3l:ij "'ore Ef,Cs would be available for issuance. thereby reducing the cost per ERC. However, this creates
C,"p<3Clty Issues for the County To aVOid thiS. a peakrng factor of 1 3 IS already bUilt into the cost of the ERe. This
h,_s me "ffect of raising the cost per ERC by haVing less ERCs available to pay for the costs of such wastewater
systern Our c;IiE'nt's only point here IS that ERCs are based on AADF, not 4 month averages, and not peak. As
st.-ell V\"E snouid compare apples to apples Typically, you don't have these historical AADF numbers as impact
fe." are paid [nor to bUilding perm I' Issuance, Here. however. the County's own histOrical numbers show an
A/IOfe '0' the s,te at 42 ERCs from August 07 to Aug 08, As such, ERCs should not exceed the the AADF
DI!1erwl;e our client IS paYing too mucn Please see the attached back-up Information on this,
_>c "", '10N dS soon as pOSSible If we are gOing to the Board on this appeal, My preference would be to work
I I 71~()()1)
\f.:n ;t,:"- ~nc; T
cl'ent to get thiS wDrked out as soon as possible
Page 2 of3
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24. 2009
Page 432 of 462
Thank you for your continued efforts on this.
U ,j:
From: wides_tom [mailto:TomWides@colliergov.net)
Sent: Wednesday, November OS, 2008 8:39 AM
To: lewIs, Doug
Cc: belpediojennifer; KlatzkowJeff; Delony-Jim; MoncivaizGilbert
Subject: Tamiami Square
D{Jug.
HJs~d on our previous and most recent discussions, the information received to date from the owners of
Tanllami Square. their consultants and you. the County's current position that we feel can be
accommodated and eventually incorporated into an agreement is as follows:
a) We will agree to forcgo payment of the water and wastewater impact fees for buildings 100 (a
minimum of 2.0 ERe's, depending on build out) and 200 (a minimum of 3.5 ERC's, depending on build
out) until the request for certificate of occupancy is made by the owners of such buildings. Accordingly,
the then current owners will be responsible for payment of the impact fees as a condition of issuance of
a certificate ()f occupancy.
hi rhe County will accept payment for wastewater impact fees at 32 ERe's; this approximates the
actual wastewater flows and allows for any additional flows due to normal and recurring inflow and
in!iltration (1111 events experienced in the system (which must be recognized since the level of service is
measured at the plant and includes allowances for Ill). The remaining impact fecs due and payable are
$~ 1 ,266 (~2.0 ERes. lcss 21.8 ERe's already paid) (see calculations in attachment). Note that these
wastewater impact fees only apply to existing tenants of Building 300. Future impact to our water and
wastewater systems. by new or existing tenants, will be applied on the future building permits,
e, Actual observed and recorded observations of metered water usage at the current customer base
cqueue to a 'i-f.'J ERe' calculation However, the calculated value for water was 61.4 ERe's which
included all of the buildings. Subtracting thc 5.5 ERe's for buildings 100 and 200, the remaining impact
fees <.Iue and payable for water are $89,346 (61.4 ERC's - 5.5 ERe's -I ERC = 54.9 ERC's, less 21.8
LRC'"s already paid) (see calculations in attachment), Note that these wastewater impact fees only apply
to existing tenants of Building 300. Future impact to our water and wastewater systems, by new or
e,-::,ting tenants. will be applied on the future building permits.
<.I) In light of the fact that a significant percentage of building 300 has not been built out, the potential
for a<.l<.litional water and wastewater impact fees will be monitored for two years, in line with the existing
Alternative Fee agreement. Future assessments of impact fees will be measured based on actual water
u"c an<.l the same ratio of wastewater ERC's to water ERe's will be applied as established in this
setliL'ment agreement. This method of calculation will eliminate the need for the Developer to furnish
wastewater monthly reports and will supply the County with a consistent monitoring process. In no
e\ent will the alllount ofERC's as referenced in items band c be reduced.
e Ilbe potential installation of a separate irrigation meter will be addressed outside of the agreement.
11/'!200'l
Page 3 of3
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24. 2009
Page 433 of 462
Iloug, therd",e. staff is willing to resolve this alternative impact fee issue for a remaining combined
water and wastewater impact fee payment of $120,904 (see calculations in attachment). Of course, this
is subject to Il"ard of County Commissioners approval.
Sl!1Lcrr..:-i;.
I ,10111<1, G. \Iv Ides.
a, Operations Ilirector
(\,llier County Puhlic Utilities
I. ,dlall~dh 1< IIdcf Message Security: CheCK Authenticity
I 17 '10liC)
Agenda Item NO.1 OA
February 24, 2009
Page 434 of 462
reponed plant-in-service bslances has been made in order to not double-count plant-in-
,enlce (recognized a retirement of plant associated with the addition oftbe new facilities as
iJcntified in the 2005 Master Plan Updste), Since a match of the facility upgrsde to the
existing plant-in-service balances ss reported on the District's Fixed Asset Records was not
possihle, the adjustment was based on: i) sn average in-service date based on the weighted
ill-service date of all functional assets in service as reported on the Fixed Asset Records; and
Ii I the estimated replacement cost of the ssset being placed in service as identified in the
:'005 Master Plan Update, based on an analysis of historical and projected inflation as
mcasured by the Construction Cost Index as measured by En~ineering News-Record, It was
cunsiJered that the use of the replacement cost of the assets, which would generally include
an upgrade to the facilities and probably result in s higher cost due to such factors as
restoration expenses, would be conservative in the evaluation of the capital costs recognized
in the detennination of the fee, It was assumed that approximately $16,415,000 of existing
\\..lSlewaler and reclaimed water system assets would be retired as a result of the
implementation of the County's identified capital improvement program.
\ ,) capital facility costs associated with the existing collection facilities - including local lift
'-ildliollS. manholes, and on-site collection facilities - have been included in the calculation of
the wastewater impact fees since the County generally requires the developer to contribute
such facilities, or the County has adopted s separate fee (e.g., wastewater tap-fee) on behalf
"I the District to recover such capitsl additions (contributions in aid of construction). All
capital improvements to such respective facilities a. recognized in the 2005 Master Plan
Lpdatc were also not recognized in the wastewater impact fee analysis.
~ Ihe level of service for a wastewatcr ERC wss assumed to be 250 gallons per day (gpd)
~xpressed on an average daily flow basis. This level of service represents no change from
the previous impact fee study, The level of service was predicated on the level of service
reyuircments as contained in the County's Growth Management Plan (sanitary sewer sub-
dement); information contained in the 2005 Master Plan Update regarding wastewater
capacity; fDEP !low standards as reported in FAC Rule 64E-6.008; FPSC capacity
relationships for private utilities (FAC Rule 25-30.020); and discussions witb the District.
\1.' ~rant funds have been or are expected to be received by the District relative to the
funding of the wastewater capital improvement program, and none of the existing
\\<.iste\\'atcr treatment and transmission assets were assumed to have been funded from
gr:ll1b.
fl",cd on discussions with the County and as part of the review of the monthly rates for
IV"tewater service (a separate study of the District), it was determined that the lowest
I,verall cost to the existing ratepayer (in terms of rates to be chsrged and financial health of
the District System) wss to use impact fees first for capital project funding as opposed to the
pa) ment of debt service. Because of this benefit and the need to recover the full capital cost
assigned to growth, no rate adjustment was reflected in the detennination of the fee. All
impact fee funds remain in the system and the long-term financing costs are mitigated by
using the fees for capital project financing. Although a new rate payer will potentially pay
deht service on expansion-related financing, the overall cost to the ratepayer is less by not
applying impact fees to current year debt and the sdditional customers to the system actually
ti2nJ 10 maintain or reduce the debt service component built into the rates for service. Thus
18
Table 2
Collier County Water-Sewer District
Water and Wastewater Impact Fee Study
Oc\'e1opment of Existing Wastewater Treatment Facility
(~aDacjtv A \'ailabJe to Serve Customer Growth
:JI::
'J\l
EXlsting Plant Capacity of System (MMADF-MGD) (J)
r:- A.dju5tmcflt to Reflect Capacity on Annual Average Daily Flow Basis (2)
Adjustt:d Treatment Plant Capacity @ A.A.DF
-\nnual Average Daily Flow - Existing System (3)
R,-'maining Capacity (AADF) at Existing Plant
Percent of Total Capacity Remaining
Percent of Iota I System Capitalization Recognized
Capital Costs of Existing Faciljties
Existing Facility Costs (4)
\dditional Costs (5)
! I' Less Assumed Retirements (6)
Le.~S Grant Funds and Other Contributions (7)
rota! Applicable Capital Costs of Existing Facilities
blimated Amount Allocable to Future Growth
\1{,O = Million (iallons Pel Day
\1\1ADF'" Ma>;irnllm M(lm;~ Ave~age 011(1)' F1m.,:
\ADF '" Annual Average Daily Flow
I ootnotes start on page 33.
')
"~
Agenda Item NO.1 OA
February 24,2009
Page 435 of 462
Wastewater
System
40.100
(9.254j'J
30.846
16.323
14.523
47.08%
47.08%
$ 157,420,647
38,212,595
(11,080,708)
(1,753,062)
$ 182,799,472
$ 86,061,991
Tahl~2
r:lllli~r County Watl'r-Snvl'r Di~'rjcr
Water and Wlltcwl!l'r Impact Fee Study
Ol'l'e1opmeIlt of Existing Wastewater Trtlltment Fntillty
Cftl1acitv AVllilllble tu Serve Cuslom~r Grn'ft'th
"',I .....I~'
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24.2009,
Page 436 of 4621
\m()un;s reOeet permitted MMADf wa~tC:W8ter treatment plant capactty offacllilies as represented in the Z005 Wastewater System Master Plan
t 'ptl~tc rievclorc:J by Greeley & lfansen, the District's Consulting Engineers. The permitted CIIpacities oflhe individual region.!ll facilities an: 24.1
MMADF-MGll (North County WlIter Rcclllmlltion Facility) amJ 16.0 MMADF-MGD (So..th County Water Rec.]amation Fac.ility)
\\'ith JeSpCello the elCistil1!,,1 wastewall:f facilities. the plant capacity is expressed 011 a lTIall;.UIlUm monlhavc:ragc: daily flow basis as referenced in
the 2(0) Wastewater SYRlem Muter PIIl1l Update. To be consistent with Ihe level ofscrvic.e requirements for the \YIl5lcwll.ler system, lhc: plant
capRcltv was adjusted to reflect an annual average daily flow basts.
\ SUllIll1l1r)' vflhe len liste! year a~lual wasleWlilter llows 15 summarized helow As can he seen based on the actual
reponed flow data, the eapacity adjustment faetor averaged J ,27
Annual
Averas:eDaily
FI(1w(MGD)
MaximumMOIlth
A V1::rage Daily
Flow (MGD)
Fisen! Year 1996
FiSCllI Year 1997
f'i=l Year 1998
Fisca! Year 1m
Fi~l:al Year 200IJ
Fisc.al Year 2001
hscal Year 2001
)-isCilI Year 2001
['isCIlI Year20CH
risesl Year200'i
Ten- Year Maximum
Ten-Yl-:ar Avcra8c
8.744
10,065
9.962
10.499
12,)62
15.100
15.528
15,500
15921
16.323
I'~ctor Used in 2006 Wastewater Masler Plan Updnte
II ;hould be nnted that the :)istriet's Comprehensive Plell assumes that the treatment fill:II'lies are 011 an i1nrlUll[ llveraBedail'l
~1, ".v ~\aSIS I'ur Lleterminiltiorl of capacity needs to service the County population
11,,1 MM~D.MGD Capacity I !.JOPcaking FllelOr"" JO.R4~ AAOO-MGnCapacity 4{l,IOO Less 30846 -9.254
r,~ tkch the highest repurt~d annu~l average daily flow experienced by the District's WQstewater treatment facilitie3 for the ten
1"'1;<11 )'l'al p",riml cmJed 2005 liS ,hUWlL bdow
Ma"itQulIl Period Reported AADF (+)
Wastewater
16,323
(')Ref<..noe..m"doIOFoOI~o'e2f",.pphC8bl"Jlrtnu.r._ed.ilyn.......dote
\ j ''.I'',''~i~l~ dcri~l:d from Appt;ndix A, reflect only Wlt5tcW3teT treatment and effluenl dlSposallllld &:;sociated reclaimed
'1'.; III) 1:11"I.~ ncc{)ulllec! for WIthin the 'W1I~tCWII'Cf ~ylltem opcnltion~, shown liS follows'
\\ D.~t<!,,\;.lter Trcotmcnt Costs
Ill"l<<uI'l:LI ~"i(;ility Costs
Tllwl
Amounl(.)
$137,4]2,664
20,007,983
$157,420,647
',Ikrlved fmlll Appendtx 1..1. Linc2l\7'J
JJ
Pe.akinaFacwr
]].450
12494
14.180
15.944
15.800
]6.600
20,160
17.279
18,899
J9J06
1.31
1.24
142
1.52
1.28
1.10
lJO
1,11
1.19
J.IR
1.52
127
1.30
1_'.'.[,')'('
Tahlc2
Culli!:!" (.;lJlllTty Watn-Sewcr District
WlIltrllmi WUIfi"IlICrlnlpllct FeeStu1Jy
fh\lclopmtnt or Eli..tinc Wute'Wlltcr l"rtlllment Facility
CAllariI)' AYAllablc fa SCn'c CUslomer Growth
m"'''115 ,hov.n derived fmm Table 6; reile.:!: i) upgnu..i~~ lIm.llli.ldllJOIlS 10 ell;istmg phml which wouli.l bl; allocable in part to
>'r,11:11\ ~mwlh, and ii) facility additions which are allocable 10 both e)(i~ting Ilni.l new users oflhe WA!tewater,y,tcm
JI'~lvt'U from "Existing" column in Table 6 - See Lme 136 of Table 6
Ir'IV~j trum 'Estimated Original Cost" column in'fllble t'>. See Line 136 QiTnble 6.
\r:lOunls ~hown derived from Line 2881 of Appcmhx R ($26,305 + $1 ,726.757 ~ $1.753,062)
34
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24, 2009
Page 437 of 462
Table/l:
C~lIIcr Cnunty W;lter-$c",cr fHslritt
Water ~nd Wuh':".al~r Iml'llU .'ee Sludy
Jlev~l"lIm~ntofWlIstewaterS\'Sl..rn I~
1'lIe
ho
r)~s~riplll)ll
'ol~1 blimatcd Cost of Existmg Wastewater
TreatlllenflDispo!lllIFlICdihcs'
CO~I ufExistmg Facilities (1)
AdditmflllJ r:ous Cllpitlllized to PllInt in SN\'ice (2)
Les~AnliciplltcuH.clirt:mcJ\ls(3)
l.es~UralltFunds"ndOtherColltrib\LtIQns[4)
Sublotal Wastewater Treatmentll)i~p"~1I1 Facilltics
{, Exisllng Nomll1al Plant CapacIty (Mm)) (M~^l)F) (5)
-; existing NomInal Plant Capacity (MGD) (AADF) (5) (6)
f\ F.RCFacl0r. (;1-'0(7)
9 Eslimllled ERes to be Served by bj~hllg Facihues
to Percp.nl Remailling Capacity of Existing Facilities
j 1 AllO\:lllion urExislm!: rllcililies to Il\crtlllenusI Grow1h
12 Rate per ERC As'iOc:inted with cxislinc F/lCililies
lo1ll1 Estimaled Cost of Additional Wastewater
Treatl"1tntIDisposatFaeihties'
, 1 Cn~t of Addiliunal Wastewa.ttf TfeatmentlDispo~t Facilities (8)
14 Cnpl!lltized Interest Durin!: CQns\fuctlon of Alklitiollllt FaCilities
I 'j l'ol~i Cost or Additional Wastewater Treatmtl'lVDlsposal Fac\1ilies
16 New Plant Captlcity (MGD) (MMADF) (9)
17 New ~Iant Cal'licity (MOD) (AADF) (6)
18 Estimaled ERCs to ~ Served by Addilional facilities
if) Rale per ERC Associated wijh Additinnal Fa~lhl":S
20 !{alc f'''' ERe Allocable 10 Wa~teWl.llef TrellDnentlUisp<.lsal Facilities (10)
Prlm~lyTlansU\issIO:1System.
21 bi5tlngFllcili\ies(II}(12)
,,, Add,t,emal Co>!:s Capitalized to Plant in Service (I l)
2\ Ncwl:aci1ily Cosls(14)
24 Capitali~..ed llllerest Dun..~ ConstructIOn of Addition",l Facilities
2~ Les~ AftllCIDatcd Rel1rements( ]5)
2~ Less Heceipt ofGrnntFunOsl.IndOtherConuibutiuns(16)
27 Total PrtmnryTIIlllsml5siun t'acility Costs
1R r~limllled Plant Capacity (MGD) (AM)F) (17)
Ten,"' F.,rTr>c "nn ~~\
W J:-.,tllllnted r-YCs ,erved hr Transml~Slon r:,,~iljtles
; j blatt reor r~r{(: OrPnmlll')' lrJnsmi~siun r:~(~iJlllt>
1.2 fOlal ('omhined Rate ner ERe Refort' Rnte ^~Jmlmp.nl
33 Rllumkll Ralc fler ERe
q (O~l C'crGa1!on
M(;I! 'M,lIwnrr;ltot,.r'IIJ.y
M...MOr . M.~,m"", MOl'll. Average O.dy Fl"..
AA\lF. A.,,~.I A.e,"uo 1)",ly rluw
H<C' r.,,~,y&j'"L k."ClO~li.1 CooneOl,',"
Gl'l)vci.llon<Pv,D.y
fO(lIIl"lc.\sl11rlollPa[:e7S
74
Ameun!
, 157,420,647
3&,212,595
(11,080,70&)
(1753,062)
1&2,799.472
40,100
30,846
2.50
123,385
47.08%
, !l6,O6],99]
, 1,48154
, 2B2,000,727
2B2,OOO,727
18.500
14.230
56,920
, 4,95433
3,20Ll2B
, 32,423,291
ro,469.632
25,491)73
(5.334.203)
(5,858.663)
57,lYl,431
45,071
~r"
180,308
317,\9
I 1 ~ 17 47
I 3,515.00
, 14060
Agenda Item NO.1 OA
February 24, 2009
Page 438 of 462
I
I
l
I
TableS
Collier Count)' W~ler.~wer Oistrirl
Waler and WUlew,ltCr Impacl Fee Study
I)eve]fmment of Wutcwuer S\.~ttm ImDRcr Fee
J'I.'i."'1""
'\ '11,111 delll'ed from Appcndi;o; B; reflecls estimated wlIslcwlIt\:r treatment and effluent dispo5l1 nsels cllrrenlly in service,
.!1<lW' ",r"llo.....s.
V/astewater Trcatment Costs
R~l:lnimed Facility Costs
Tolill
Amnunt(-)
SI}7,412,664
20,007,983
$157,420,647
(0) nerived trom Appendix B, line 2879
\1T1.HlIlb .~llIlWn derived !rom Table 6; refl~t: i) upgrades and additions to exi:;tiJlg plant which would be allocable in part 10
'v~lell1 grt'lwth; and i'l fllcility additions which are allocable to both existing and new users of the wast,
::>er,v~d lrom "!:xlsling" column in Table 6 - See Line 136 of Table 6.
^:!1olJnl derll'~tl from Table 6 and reflects estimated treatment and lram;mission fi;o;ed asset ~tiremenl! due to impclsiticm
0' Ihl' capitallmprovcmcnt pllln oftne District Derived from 'Eslim~ted Ol"igilllll Co~t" column in Table 6 ~ See Line
11(j"ITnnlc6
, 1: <\~'1-'IHlt> Sh,'wn derived from Ltn~ 2881 of" Appendix H ($26,305" $1,726,757 '" $1,753,062)
"e", '''111 ',h"WIl derived from ;'nblc 2 And includes thc following focilities'
',,';'", "lInt}' Wlltcr Reclamation Fllcilll)'
'. "1'1" "I'"ry Wat~r Rceblllation FRcility
Capacity. MGD
MMADF AADF
24.]00 18.538
16.000 ]2.30B
i (Jill! }1~1l1 C:lflaciry
40.100
30.846
III~ ,1"'1<1<1.1 Jver~ge dally !low lor existiu8 capocil)' was calculated assllmmg a maximum monthly average dllily flow to
,111"1';11 a\'~'ilgc daily flow factor (pl:llking factor) of 1.30 MGD in aceordllllee WIth capacity planning assumptions in
Ie :UL'5 Wa,lcwaler MaSler I'lan Update. See Tab]e 2 and corresponding footnotes,
11,; ,'VCi 01 ,,,rvicc factor for ~lll ERe n:f1cc~s capacity requirements eXprc~scd on an average dllily waslewlller flow
'''''',.1111' faClOr was b~sed on the caplleity plluming assumptions l.:unlainc:o in Ihe DislTi!;t'~ Comprehensive Plan. 2005
W~~l~....alt-r ~v!ftsler ['Ian Update and other sources available to I'RMG.
),r",illlflll1 "F"r~nsioll'I'(lIl)mn 111 Tllblc 6- Sce l,inc llhoflablctl
" "'''..11 I>a,d "11 dl"c;"~'<;Lon!> with tbe Di~tricr and refl~ct~d in the 2005 Wastewo.rer Master PllIJIlJpdale, which
,11,.,\,".lhefj-,llowingplllntllddilions/cxpnllSions
'~Th l <'lulIy W~Ter ReclRmatl0f'l Facility I-':xJl3n~ion
-..j,'t!leLlsT ('nllnry WutCf Rl:dalOLlliun J'at.;diry CunMrul.:(iun
~;,mh~ast COllnty Waler Reclamation Facility EXj)llllsion
'.-",ht'<I.\ll ,)lH\!)! Wlltr;:[ Rr;:clarnlllion F~lilrty r:ol)slrudillll
Co.;>ocity
MMADF - MGD
6.500
4.000
4000
4.000
Period
2006.2010
201] - 2015
201l,20l5
2011.2015
I ulal Plant Capllcity - MMADF BaSIS
18.500
75
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24, 2009
Page 439 of 462
Table II
Collier CUlln!)' Wlter-S~wcr District
Wllter ~nd W1UlrwlItcr Impllrl Fcc Study
Drvelol:lmelt orWutrwlter Svstem Iml:lut Fee
fQ.'2IiWtCt
(10 I l>cnved as follows~
Cu~t of i:xisling Wastcw&lerTrealment Facilities
Pere.:nt of r:xisling WaslewaterTrelltment Facilities Availahle to Ser'Yc New Growth
AdJUSlCd Cost of Existing WastcwlllerTreatmenl fadlities
Cost of Additional Wastewater Tn::lltment Facilities
lotal Costs
S 182,799,472
47,011%
$86,O6l,991
282,000, n7
$)611,052,719
l::stimllted ERes to Be Served My Existing Wastewater Treatment Facilities
Percenl (If Existins Wastewaler Treatment I-'Bcilitiet Anilable to Serve New Growth
Adjus1ed ERes to Be Served By Ex.islina Wastewater Treatment Facilities
Estimated ERes 10 Be Served By Additional Wl5tewaterTreatment Facilities
I'otal ERes
123,)85
47.08%
58,089
56,920
115,009
Hate Per I:HC Associate<! With Wastewater Treltment Facilities
53,200.28
(1 I Amount does not include IlIe estimated cost of retail on-site capital el(pcnditu~ sucb as manholes, Jocal1ift stations.
scrvicl: IlItCn:US, ant.! on-&ite (local) collection utility pllint f.cilities or general planl asse15 (vehicle!!, equipment, ctc.)~
such costs arc: i) generally provided by the dC'Yeloper or owners ofpropcrty which specifically benefit frum such
fil.cilities: Of ii) funded by Il sepal1lte I!.nd distiftl:t fee (eg_. wastewaler lap charge).
(11 J Amount derived from Line 2879 of AppClldix B; reflect, cosl of wastewater 1rnns.mission aIltI master pumping slation
UlllltyplaOlHls.:rvicc.
(I J. I lerived frllm 'Exis(in&~ column in Table 6 - See Line 137 of Table 6.
04. UCfi~cd flUlIl"bpwsion" column in Table 6. See Line 137 of Table 6.
(15] t>erived from "Eslimllted Originlll Cost" tolumn in Table6 - See Line 131 ofTa.ble 6.
(lfll Amounts shown derived fromLioe 2881 of AppcndixB
( t 71 Rct1ects total estimaled plan! capacity {or tile forecast period for the wllter service area hased on capacity planning eSlimates
liS cOlltained in the 2005 Was_ewlller System Master Plan Update. Amount calculated as follows:
ESl1Jnated service Area Capacity (MMADF - MOD)
Assumed MMADF to AADF Faclor
Estimated AADF Capacity for Anlllysis Period (MGD)
Assumed ERe Factor (gallont per day per ERe)
TollIl Eslimllle:d ERCs Available: 10 be Served
Amount
58600
l.300
olS.O??
250
1&0,308
76
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24,2009
Page 440 of 462
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24, 2009
Page 441 of 462
SECOND MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT OF APPEAL TO
THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA
Tamiami Square of Naples, LLC, a Florida limited liability company
PETITIONER,
vs.
Mr. Jim Mudd,
County Manager, Collier County, Florida
RESPONDENT.
/
SECOND MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT OF APPEAL OF LETTER DATED AUGUST
29,2008 FROM MR. THOMAS G. WIDES, OPERATIONS DIRECTOR, PUBLIC
UTILITIES, COLLIER COUNTY WATER-SEWER DISTRICT AND
REQUEST FOR ALTERNATIVE IMPACT FEE CALCULATION BASED ON
PETITIONERS ALTERNATIVE IMPACT FEE STUDY
Petitioner, Tamiami Square of Naples, LLC, a Florida limited liability company, by and
through their undersigned counsel, files this Second Memorandum in support of the appeal of the
above referenced letter (the "Letter") pursuant to the terms of that certain Agreement Regarding
Alterative Impact Fee Calculation dated May 13, 2008 by and between Petitioner and the Collier
County Board of County Commissioners acting as the governing body of the Collier County
Water-Sewer District (the "Agreement") and states in support thereof as follows:
Points in Support of Appeal
I. Page I of the Executive Summary prepared by County staff in advance of the
February 24, 2009 Board meeting (attached hereto as Exhibit "A") states that "Staff notified
Dcveloper~s representative that their submission was deemed "complete". but rejected due to use
of a calculation method (e,g. a proposed approach to calculate ERCs) inconsistent with the
579533 \ 111&47.0003
1
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24, 2009
Page 442 of 462
methodology established within the Consolidated Fee Ordinance (Ordinance) and inconsistent
with the discussions held in the pre-application meeting with staff." Page 5 of the Letter gave
Petitioner three (3) options, Option one -- recognize 64.1 ERCs for both water and sewer per
Exhibit I and pay $229,240.50, Option two -- recognize 54.9 ERCs both water and sewer now
and agree to a two (2) year monitoring period, Option three - file an appeal to the Board within
thirty (30) days of the Letter,
2. Petitioner objects to Staffs rejection of its calculation method after Petitioner has
invested significant time and money to prepare its alternative impact fee calculation/report based
on the Unit Count Method and after staff has deemed Petitioner's alternative impact fee
calculation/report to be "complete". See. pages I and 2 of Petitioner's Appeal.
3. Pursuant to Paragraph 5 of the Agreement, "If the County Manager disagrees with
the proposed approach, the County Manager shall identify the problem areas for Developer to
incorporate and address in its re-submittal to the County." At no point has Staff given Petitioner
the option to re-submit another calculation method, and the Letter rejects the "Meter
Equivalency" approach, but does not specifically address the "Unit Count Method,"
4. Further, pursuant to Paragraph 5 of the Agreement, "If the County Manger has not
approved Developer's proposed approach after one re-submittal, Developer may request a
decision from the County Manager whereupon the County Manager shall either approve,
approve with conditions, or deny the proposed approach." At no point has Staff given Petitioner
the option to re-submit another calculation method. Further, pursuant to Paragraph 6 of the
Agreement, the calculation method (e.g. a proposed approach to calculate ERCs) may be based
on an independent source.
5. In the months of October and November 2008, Petitioner and Staff explored
possible settlement options. However, the parties did not reach an agreement.
57953] \ 111647.0003
2
Agenda Item NO.1 OA
February 24, 2009
Page 443 of 462
6. In a November 5, 2008 e-mail to Staff, Petitioner raised significant concerns
about how Staff was calculating water and sewer ECRs for Petitioner's project. See, Exhibit
"8". To date, Staff has not responded to the questions/concerns raised by Petitioner in this e-
mail and subsequent e-mails sent to Staff by Petitioner.
7. On January 8, 2009, Staff notified Petitioner by facsimile ofa January 13, 2009
Board hearing on the Appeal. Petitioner objected to this hearing date on the basis that Staff did
not provide adequate notice of the hearing and on the basis that Petitioner would like to settle the
matter without going before the Board.
8. After the Board granted a continuance of the January 13, 2009 hearing, Staff
agreed to waive the two (2) year monitoring period per Paragraph 14 of the Agreement.
Petitioner has been working in good faith with Stafflo resolve this.
9. On January 15, 2009, Staff proposed for the first time a 25/25/50 three (3) year
repayment plan. See, Exhibit "c"
10, On January 21,2009, Petitioner proposed reasonable settlement terms that were
rejected by Staff on a January 23, 2009 conference call.
11. Staff (without request by Petitioner) sought to continue the January 27, 2009
Board meeting until February 10, 2009. Upon seeing this in the posted Board agenda, Petitioner
asked Staff for a February 24, 2009 hearing date in order to allow its consultant Gerry Hartman
to attend the hearing, See, Exhibit "D".
I 2. Based on the historical flow for wastewater usage contained in the appeal, the
AADF for Petitioner's first phase of development is 18 ERCs, not 54,9 ERCs. See, Table I of
Petitioner's alternative impact fee calculation proposal. According to Petitioner's consultant Mr,
Gerry Hartman, any inflow and infiltration is already accounted for in the runtimes provided to
County staff and included in the 18 sewer ERC calculation. Further, when sewer discharges out
579533 \ 1116470003
3
Agenda Item No.1 OA
February 24, 2009
Page 444 of 462
from the project pump station it goes into a pressurized (not a gravity) system, and as such, does
not create any into inflow and infiltration. To account for the 6 tenant spaces located in
Petitioner's second phase of development that have not been built-out or leased to date,
Petitioner proposed in its alternative fee calculation 26.5 sewer ERCs for Petitioner's first and
second phase of development (which includes credit for additional shopping center retail ECRs
based on square footage for these 6 units) and 5.5 additional ERCs for Units 100 and 200 to be
paid prior to issuance of any certificates of occupancy.
13. On February 9, 2009, Staff calculated the water impact fees due and owing for
irrigation to be 6. I ERCs. See, Exhibit "E"
14. When 6.1 ERCs for irrigation water are added to the 32 ERCs that account for all
of the water going into the project wastewater system, total water ERCs for the project are at
approximately 38, I ERCs, not 54.9 ERCs.
15. Taken as a whole, staff's calculation of 54.9 water ERCs (for Petitioner's first
and second phase of development only) and 54.9 sewer ERCs or 32 sewer ERCs (for
Petitioner's first and second phase of development only) is incorrect and is not supported by
historical flow data or the unit count methodology.
Wherefore, Petitioner respectfully requests that the Board of County Commissioners
reject Staff's calculation and that the Board approve Petitioner's alternative impact fee
Respectfully submitted,
~.
\ 2_~
.::--- - -
Douglas A. 's;-f!'sq.'
Attorney for Petitioner
Florida Bar No, 0177260
Roetzel & Andress
850 Park Shore Drive,
Trianon Centre, Third Floor
Naples, FL 34103
(239)649-6200
calculation proposal.
579533 \ lI1b47.0003
4
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24, 2009
Page 445 of 462
Certificate of Service
I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true and correct copy oflhe foregoing was sent via e-mail to
the following persons this 13th day of February, 2009.
Jeffrey A. Klatzkow, Esq.
Jennifer Belpedio, Esq,
Collier County Attorney's Office
3301 E, Tamiami Trail, 8th Floor
Naples, FL 34112
Mr. Jim Mudd,
Collier County Manager
3301 E. Tamiami Trail, 2nd Floor
Naples, FL 34112
I:x? -
Douglas A. Lewis, Esq.
Attorney for Petitioner
Florida Bar No, 0177260
Roetzel & Andress
850 Park Shore Drive,
Trianon Centre, Third Floor
Naples, FL 34103
(239)649-6200
579533 \ 11 1647.0003
5
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24, 2009
Page 446 of 462
EXH.llllJ "A"
579533 \ ] 11647.0003
7
Agenda Item NO.1 OA
February 24, 2009
Page 447 of 462
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Recommendation to deny tbe Ahemalive Impact Fee AppeallDbmlt1ed by TamiaJIIi Sqnare of Naples,
LLC (Developer) Imd autllorlze tile Cbalrman to execute a notice to tile DeYeIoper for tbe ...u..tio. of
tbe Collier County Water-llewer District (CCWSD) A1teraative Impact Fee caleulation of $120,904 for
Building 300.
OBJECI'IVE: That the Board of County Commissioners, Ex.Officio, the Governing Board of the Collier
County Water-Sewer District (Board). deny the Appeal submitted by Tamiami Square of Naples, LLC and
authorize !be Chainnan to execute a notice to the Developer for the collection oftbe Collier County Water.
Sewer District (CCWSD) Altemative Impact Fee calculation of $ 120,904 for Building 300.
CONSIDERATIONS: On December 27, 2007, !be Developer's repr<seotative initiated a discussion with
staff concerning potential changes to the water, wastewater, and irrigation demand. In preparation for the
meeting, staff uncovered an underpayment of prior water and wastewater impact fees associated with
property located at 14700 Tamiami Trail North. The Developer's .cp<esentative was contacted and ultimatcly
advised that $288,623.50 was due and payable to CCWSD. The Developer's representative disputed the
calculation, and infonncd staff of its intent to pursue an alternative impact fee calculation process.
In March 2008, !be Developer made a paymont to the CCWSD in the amount of $43,444 for unpaid water
and wastewater impact fees. An additional amount of$15.939 was collected on permit number 20070911176
for water and wastewater impact fees, In total, an amount of $59,383 has been collected and applied to the
original balance of$288,623.50. The outstanding balance for the development now stands at $229,240.50,
On May 13, 2008, Agenda Item 16C3, the Board approved !be Agreement Regarding Alternative Impact Fee
Calculation (Agreement) that allowed !be Developer to proceed with an Alternative Impact Fee Calculation
Process with the CCWSD.
On August t, 2008, tbe County Attorney's Office received tbe Developer's Alternative Impact Fee
Calculation proposal for review.
On August 29, 2008, Staff notified the Developer's representative that their submission was deemed
"complete," but rejected due to use of a calculation method inconsistent with the methodology established
within the Consolidated Impact Fee Ordinance (Ordinance) and inconsistent with the discussions held in the
pro-application meeting with staff,
On October 2, 2008, the County Attorney's Office received an Appeal from the Developer's representative
requesting that tbe Board approve the Alternative Impact Fee Calculation proposal submitted on August I,
2008, No facts or figures related to the Developer's representative calculatioos or cooclusions were cbanged
horn the submission that was rejected on August 29, 2008.
As supported by a letter horn the current CCWSD rate consultant, dated August 26, 2008, by Mr. Robert J.
Ori, President of Public Resources Management Group, Inc., the Developer's submission is based on a static
and int1exible criterion that did not account for the variance of business types and their associated flows. The
Developer's representative submission and appeal must be denied because the proposed methodology is not
consistent with the Ordinance as it does not provide an accurate reflection of waterlwastewater use.
In the months of October and November 2008, Staff met with tbe Developer's representatives on multiple
occasions. On November 4, 2008, Staff proposed an alternative calculation of $120,904 (54.9 Equivalcnt
Residential Connections [ERCs) for water impact rees and 32.0 ERCs for wastewater impact fees) for
immediate resolution of the outstanding balance for Building 300. Staff used a combination of historical data
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24, 2009
Page 448 of 462
and the Developer'. representative .ubmitted infurmation as the basi. for the proposed dollar amoWlt. It i.
Staff's position that this historical data is the methodology that should be relied upon during the alternative
impact fee calculation as it is fully consistent and sufficient with the Ordinance, Section 74-303 (d) 2 (g).
Due after a ments
Building 100
$ II 770.00
Bnilding 200
$ 20 597.50
Building 300
$ 196,873.00
Total
$ 229,240.50
\CCWSDAlternativeU) ~ $120,904.00__
/, During A/I_ lmpocl Fee dlscwsions in Oc/ober, 1M Dweloper requ..ted that Building J(}(J and 200
he excluded from the calcuJatlon because there (11'11 no eiating tenJ1nls. Thh figure rejlecu historical data
and submitted information/rom the Developer for Building 300. The collection o/water and woslewaler
impact fees for Buildings J (}(J and 200 will OCCtll' at a later date,
Staff believed that a tentative agreement was reached during the meeting on November 4,2008 and prepared
to move forward with the caJculation. Subsequent communication from the Developer's .....f'I....8C1htatives
altered the agreement and terminated the process. Staff placed this item on tbe January 13.2009 agenda for
Board direction.
On January 9, 2009 the Developer's representative requested a continuance to the January 27, 2009 Board
meeting and requested another opportunity to meet wilh Staff for a resolution.
On January 13,2009 Staff met briefly with the Developer'. representative to discu.. tenns of the Altemative
Impact Fee Calculation. Staff believed that a tentative agreement was reached at that time.
On January 14,2009, an e-mail was sent to the Developer's .ep.c.sentative with an outline of the terms for
the Alternative Impact Fee Calculation provided by Staff.
On January 21, 2009 the Developer'. representative altered the term. and condition. that were establi.hed
within the January 14'" e-mail. A. a result, agreement was not reached.
On January 23, 2009, Staff engaged the Developer's representative via phone confcreoce to discus. the term.
for the Alternative Impact Fee Calculation provided by Staff. The Developer's representative, once again,
refused to accept the conditions, terms and amount ofthi. calculation.
On January 23. 2009, the Developer's representative requested another continuanee until February 24, 2009.
Staff has made it clear to the Developer's Representative that this Alternative Impact Fee process is not a
negotiation, but rather, a calculation that must be suppotted by a soWld methodology that provides
consistency with our Ordinance. The Developer's representatives have failed to provide a supportable
calculation for their development.
LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS: On or before 30 day. after the hearing on the Alternative Impact Fee the
County is required to provide written notice to the Developer of the amount of any impact fees owed based
on the outcome of the alternative impact fee process. See Paragrapb 22 of the attached Agreement. The
notice made part of this item has been approved for form and legal sufficiency.
The Developer has 30 days from the date of the notice to pay all such impact fees in full or to enter into a
binding agreement with the County to make installment payments to include the statutO!)' interest rate which
.ball commence upon the Board meeting date. Typical payment plans require equal monthly payments
throughout the term of the payment plan. The statuto!)' interest rate is presently 8.0% per annum or .0002192
per day. Paragraph 22 alloWll the County Manager to enter into sucb binding agreement for a payment plan
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24, 2009
Page 449 of 462
This item is quasi-judicial and as such requires ex parte disclosure to be DUIde. This item requires . majority
vote. ~ mw
FISCAL IMP ACT: Denial of the appeal will initiate the collection process outlined in Paragraph 22 of the
Agreement and allow the CCWSD to pursue tho outstanding balance of $120,904.
GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: Th.... is no associated Growth Management Impact.
RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of County Commissioners, Ex-Officio, the Governing Board of
the Collier County Water-Sower District, deny the Appeal submitted by Tamiami Square ofN.ples, LLC and
authorize tho Choinnan to execute a notice to the Developer for tho collection of tho Collier County Water-
Sewer District Alternative Impact Fee calculation of 5120,904 for Building 300,
PREPARED BY: Jennifer B. White, Assistant County Attorney / Thomas G. Wides, Operations Support
Director, Public Utilities Division
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24, 2009
Page 450 of 462
EXHIlill.JE
579533 \ 111M7.0003
8
Age,Qda 11,em:r,Jo. 10A
rr'~ar9~. 2009
Page 451 of 462
Lewis, Doug
From: lewis, Doug
Sent: Wednesday, November 05, 2008 2:43 PM
To: 'wides_tom'; Delony-Jim
Cc: belpediajennifer; KlatzkowJeff; MoncivaizGilbert; 'Gerry Hartman'
Subject: RE: Tamiami Square
Attachments: Document. pdf
JimfTom,
I sent you an e-mail earlier today on this, and the clear communication that we have had is that any settlement
should address our client's desire to resolve this as quickly as possible and without uncertainty (especially In
this current economic climate) of further audits or monitoring of the site. Private parties need time to plan for
expenses and unanticipated costs are not easily obtainable and recovered. As we discussed, I prefer to be clear
on what County staff is offering before I go to the client as I will likely have an uphill battle with Gerry and the
client to work to get this settled given the beiow e-mail. Jim, you asked me yesterday to get back to staff
with options to allow us to proceed without any further audits or monitoring of the site, In response to this request,
I ran a proposal by GiI yesterday afternoon, and he did not have any objection to it (he did say that this is
Tom/Jerry's call however), My e-mail to you this morning contains this proposal. Please carefully look at this and
let me know your thoughts.
On Item b. below and according to our consultant, all Inflow and infiltration (III) is accounted for in the runtimes
provided to the County in our report, When sewer discharges out from the pump station it goes into
pressurized (not gravity) system and does not have any infiow and infiltration. The annual average daily flow for
sewer (taking into account III) for Units 300 and 400 (based on the historical data provided to the staff) is 18
ERCs. Our client's proposal of 26.5 ERCs is for sewer for Units 300 and 400, and it aiso includes ERCs for all
non-permitted retail space within Units 300 and 400. This ERC count is supported by historical flows and our
client's study/methodology. To date, Gerry and I have not seen any data provided by County staff to support 32
ERCs far Units 300 and 400. The only thing I have seen raised by staff on this is the inflow and infiltration (Iii)
issue raised by Tom's e-mail today and you now have our response above on this.
On the water side and given a proposed 2 year monitoring/audit period, stairs proposal puts the developer In a
worse position then he would have been in had the County charged water impact fees at the time of building
permit issuance. Several years after the fact, after tenants (not the developer) have pulled permits, after lender
financing is gone, this is not something that I can easily take to my client. On item c, per Exhibit 3 to the County's
August 29,2008 letter, the annual average (from August 07 to August 08) is 42 +/-ERCs, not 54.9 ERCs. 54.9
ERCs is based off a 4 month average, with the last month being August 2008. On what basis are we looking at
the 4 month average to calculate ERCs? For purposes of deriving the current impact fee rate of $3,200.28 per 1
sewer ERC per the May, 2006 Impact Fee Study, the County looks at AADF, not 4 month averages, and not
peak. On the cost side of the ledger, impact fees include the total cost of additional sewer treatment plants and
the adjusted cost of existing plants (expressed as a % of the total capacity remaining to serve new development).
On the plant capacity side of the ledger. however, the total number of ERCs needed to pay such costs are based
an AADF which incorporates a peaking factor of 1,3 to adjust down plant capacity. For example, if plant capacity
is 40.100 MGD, this is adjusted down to 30.846 MGD to allow for peaking, inflow and infiltration, etc. If the total
number of ERCs needed to pay such wastewater system costs were based on total plan capacity (e.g. 40.100
MGD), more ERCs would be available far issuance, thereby reducing the cost per ERC, However, this creates
capacity issues for the County. To avoid this, a peaking factor of 1.3 is already built into the cost of the ERC. This
has the effect of raising the cost per ERC by having less ERCs available to pay for the costs of such wastewater
system. Our client's only point here is that ERCs are based on AADF, not4 month averages, and not peak. As
such, we should compare apples to apples. Typically, you don.t have these historical AADF numbers as impact
fees are paid pnor to building permit issuance. Here, however, the County's own historical numbers show an
AADF for the site at 42 ERCs from August 07 to Aug 08. As such, ERCs should not exceed the the AADF.
Otherwise, our client is paying too much. Please see the attached back-up information on this.
Let me know as soan as possible if we are going to the Board on this appeal. My preference would be to work
2/13/2009
Age~alt~~Q. 10A
Ft!B\IlIi.H''j~~2009
Page 452 of 462
with staff and my client to get this worked out as soon as possible. Thank you for your continued efforts on this.
- Doug
From: wides_tom [mailto:TomWldes@colliergov.net]
Sent: Wednesday, November 05, 2008 8:39 AM
To: Lewis, Doug
Cc: belpediojennifer; KlatzkowJeff; DeLony-Jim; MoncivaizGilbert
SUbject: Tamiami Square
Doug,
Based on our previous and most recent discussions, the information received to date from the owners of
Tamiami Square, their consultants and you, the County's current position that we feel can be
accommodated and eventually incorporated into an agreement is as follows:
a) We will agree to forego payment of the water and wastewater impact fees for buildings 100 (a
minimum of 2.0 ERC's, depending on build out) and 200 (a minimum of 3.5 ERC's, depending on build
out) until the request for certificate of occupancy is made by the owners of such buildings. Accordingly,
the then current owners will be responsible for payment of the impact fees as a condition of issuance of
a certificate of occupancy,
b) The County will accept payment for wastewater impact fees at 32 ERC's; this approximates the
actual wastewater flows and allows for any additional flows due to normal and recurring inflow and
infiltration (III) events experienced in the system (which must be recognized since the level of service is
measured at the plant and includes allowances for III). The remaining impact fees due and payable are
$31,266 (32.0 ERC's, less 21,8 ERC's already paid) (see calculations in attachment). Note that these
wastewater impact fees only apply to ",lIi~...!.l~ tenants of Building 300. Future impact to our water and
wastewater systems, by new or existing tenants, will be applied on the future building permits.
c) Actual observed and recorded observations of metered water usage at the current customer base
equate to a 54.9 ERC calculation, However, the calculated value for water was 6 1.4 ERC's which
included all of the buildings. Subtracting the 5.5 ERC's for buildings 100 and 200, the remaining impact
fees due and payable for water are $89,346 (61.4 ERC's - 5.5 ERC's - I ERC = 54.9 ERC's, less 21,8
ERC's already paid) (see calculations in attachment). Note that these wastewater impact fees only apply
to existing tenants of Building 300. Future impact to our water and wastewater systems, by new or
existing tenants, will be applied on the future building permits.
d) In light of the fact that a significant percentage of building 300 has not been built out, the potential
for additional water and wastewater impact fees will be monitored for two years, in line with the existing
Alternative Fee agreement. Future assessments of impact fees will be measured based on actual water
use and the same ratio of wastewater ERC's to water ERC's will be applied as established in this
settlement agreement. This method of calculation will eliminate the need for the Developer to furnish
wastewater monthly reports and will supply the County with a consistent monitoring process. In no
event will the amount of ERC's as referenced in items b and c be reduced,
e) The potential installation of a separate irrigation meter will be addressed outside of the agreement.
2113/2009
Agelf>l.'l.lta,I1)J'J". 1 OA
FllflAlm'y'2~ 2009
Page 453 of 462
Doug, therefore, staff is willing to resolve this alternative impact fee issue for a remaining combined
water and wastewater impact fee payment of $120,904 (see calculations in attachment). Of course, this
is subject to Board of County Commissioners approval.
Sincerely,
Thomas G. Wi des,
as Operations Director
Collier County Public Utilities
Exchange[}efender Message Security: Check Authenticity
2/13/2009
Agenda Item No.1 OA
February 24, 2009
Page 454 of 462
The current study employed the same methodology, and the impact fees were calculated on an ERC
basis, The capital-related costs were identified in the 2005 Master Plan Update reports prepared by
lhe County's Consulting Engineers, which documented the capital improvement plan for Fiscal
Years 2006 through 2015 (the "ClP Planning Period") which was relied upon in the preparation of
thj~ report.
Level of Service Requirements
In Ul. evaluation of the capital facility needs for providing water and waslewaler utility services, it
is critical that a level of service (LOS) standard be developed. Pursuant to Chapter 9J-5, Florida
Administrative Code, the tllevel of service" means an indicator of the extent or degrees of service
provided by, or proposed to be provided by a facility, based on and related to the operational
characteristics of the facility. Level of service shall indicate the capacity per unit of demand for
ouch public facility or service, Essentially, the level of service standards arc established In order to
ensure that adequate facility capacity will be provided for future development and for purposes of
issuing development orders or permits, pursuant to Section 163.3202(2)(g) of the Florida Statutes.
As funher stated in the Administrative Code, each local government shall establish a LOS standard
fN each public facility located within the boundary for which such local government has authority
to issue development orders or permits. Such LOS standards arc set for each individual facility or
fad Ii!)' type or class and not on a system wide basis.
For water and wastewater service, the level of service that is commonly used in the industry is the
amount of capacity (service) allocable to an ERC expressed as the amount of usage (gallons)
allocated on an average daily basis. This allocation of capacity would generally represent the
amount of capacity allowable to an ERC, whether or not soch capacity is actually used (commonly
referred to as "readiness to serve"). As previously mentioned, an ERC - sometimes known as an
Equivalent Residential Unit (ERU) - is representative of the average capacity required to service a
typical individoally-metered or single-family residential account. This class of users represents the
largest amount of customers served by a public utility such as the District and generally the lowest
level of usage requirements for a specifically metered account.
For the purposes of calculating water and wastewater system Impact Fees, PRMG utilized LOS
standards of 350 gallons per day (gpd) expressed on an averap;e annual daily flow basis per water
ERe. The wastewater 1.0:; standard used in the study was 250 ex ressed on an avera e annual
Q!illy flow baSis: Der wa~ewatp.r ERe. ese stan ar s were reviewed in previous studies or
the District and discussed with District staff and its Consulting Engineers. In the development of
the level of service standards the following reference sources were considered:
. 2005 Water and Wastewaler Master Plan Updates prepared by the District's Consulting
Engineers, Greeley and Hansen LLC;
. Collier County Growth Management Plan adopted on October 28, 1997;
. Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FOEP) general design standards;
. Florida Public Service Commission (FPSC) capacity relationships for private utilities; and
. Actual water production and wastewater flow data reported by the District over the past several
years.
5
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24, 2009
Page 455 of 462
EXHIBIT "e"
57953] \ 111647.0003
9
AgeQdalt~~~o. 10A
F'E!!ll'd<lrJ"N. 2009
Page 456 of 462
Lewis, Doug
From: whitejennifer [JenniferWhite@colliergov.net}
Sent: Thursday, January 15, 2009 4:57 PM
To: Lewis, Doug
Cc: DeLony-Jim; wides_tom
Subject: Tamiami Square LLC
Doug,
1. Payments of 25% prorated over the first year, 25% prorated over the second year, and 50% prorated over the
third year is acceptable. These amounts would be invoiced monthly but not on the monthly water bill. Please
keep in mind that a larger payment at the end will result in your client paying mare interest than if the payments
were prorated monthly over the entire 3 year period.
2. I will draw up the Agreement once Tamiami Square accepts. You may prepare the Exhibit of permits that you
mentioned for our consideration.
3. There is no need to mention the irrigation meter in the Agreement or agenda back-up, An irrigation meter
may be applied for at any time.
4. We recommend that you start preparing your appeal presentation and documents in the event that terms
cannot be reached as I do not believe that we will be supporting a continuance of the hearing. Notwithstanding
the foregoing, I'll remain optimist that terms can be reached.
Regards, Jennifer
je.......l.fer'S. Whi.tt
Assistant County Attorney
(239) 252-8400 phone
(239) 252-6300 fax
2/13/2009
Agenda Item NO.1 OA
February 24, 2009
Page 457 of 462
Lewis, Doug
From:
Sent:
To:
SUbject:
Attachments:
Lewis, Doug
Friday, January 16,20094:07 PM
'whitejennifer'
RE: Tamiami Square, LLC
Picture (Metafile)
Jennifer,
I appreciate your continued efforts on this. I forwarded your proposal from late yesterday regarding payment terms
onto our client, and I have a follow-up call into my client today on this. As we discussed yesterday, our client is taking your
settlement proposal to the members of the LLC and will not be able to give you a response on this until aner he speaks
with the members of the lLC. .
Should you have any questions, please feel free to contact me. Thanks!
Douglas A, Lewis
A lEGAL PROfESSIONAL ASSOCIATION
www.ralaw.com
850 Park Shore Drive
Trianon Centre - 3rd Floor
Naples, Aorida 34103
Phone: (239) 649-2712
Fax: (239) 261-3659
E-mail: dalewis@ralaw.com
Profile: Douglas A. Lewis
HlIth Dllugla~.\. Lcwi\ and Rnt:ll,d & Andr..:s\ intend thaI thi.. lTIeS'iil!,":C: Ilt: ll.<,ctll....l.'hl.\jvl.ly by (he aJdrl;'\st:c(s), Thi~ nll'\:-;Jse may
l:lllllain inl'llnTlatitln thaI is rri\'ileg\.~1. l'lll\lil1ential and 0:\1;'1111'1" frum disdl)~un: under applkahlt: !;.lw. Unauthurized llisclmiurc (If
lJ\t' <\1' thi, inl;lrmalinn j" slril~ll~; rruhihict'd. If ~'ou have received thi... 1,:tlnlnlllui"::;tli(\1l in erwr. rlC'a~t' permant'llll)' di.<;po~ I'lf lilt:
nri!,'inal mc:-.<;age <lnd 11\llify Doug-Ia<; '\. l_l~wis imllll'diall"ly :II !1!J9l 649.27 11. Th:lIIk you.
From: whitejennifer Imailto:JenniferWhite@coliieroov.netl
Sent: Friday, January 16, 2009 3:34 PM
To: Lewis, Doug
Cc: DeLany-Jim; wides_tom
Subject: Tamiami Square, LLC
Doug,
We need to load the Executive Summary into Novus today and therefore need a response from you today. Regards,
Jennifer
Jennifer B. White
Assistant County Attorney
(239) 252-8400 phone
(239) 252-<3300 fax
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24, 2009
Page 458 of 462
f:XBlBIT "P"
519533 \ 111647.0003
10
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24. 2009
Page 459 of 462
Lewis, Doug
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Lewis, Doug
Monday, January 26, 2009 2:07 PM
Lewis, Doug; (JamesMudd@colliergov.net)
whitejennifer, KlatzkowJeff; g,hartman@gaiconsultants.com
RE: BCC Agenda Item 10A - 1/27/09
Picture (Metafile)
Attachments:
In follow-up to the below e-mail, I spoke with Gerry Hartman, and he confirmed that he can attend the BCC hearing on
February 24th.
Gerry, as you will be attending from our of town, please confirm if you need to make a time certain request.
Thanks!!
Douglas A. Lewis
A lEGAL PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATION
www.ralaw.com
850 Park Shore Drive
Trianon Centre. 3rd Floor
Naples. Florida 34103
Phone: (239) 649-27t2
Fax: (239) 261-3659
E-mail: dalcwis@ralaw.com
Profile: Dougla!:i A. Lewis
BUlh nilu;;!<I~ ,\. Lc\\i, anJRnl:\zd.'(: .\ndr..;~" inklh.1 thai this InC.',,;lgl' h.: lI\cd O.dl!Sl\I,;:h h.\ Ih.;: ;Idur~''''''t.-.;I\). Ttll" lm'I,~;I!!s' nlJY
cPlIfain ml~lrmilli<ln Ihill is I"llvik.::,r,:d. r.;l)nfiucntial1Jllu I.:.\l:mptlrom di'id,l:,HrC umkr appli..:ablt l:tw, Urw.uth<Jriz.;:d tlischlS\ln: (If
ll\l' ,,1' lId, ill(;mnalinll i" "Irkl!\' pmhihiu:J. ]1' Y'J\l h,I\'L~ n:tTivl.-'l.1111i}, l:lln1rlmrti..'sti()ll In error, rll':bt' rCn\lilllC'nlly disro_~c nf lhe
,)rip.inal mC--,<'>:lge <llld !l1)I((Y Dllu;;I:I~ A, I.twj~ imml"di:Hdy at J (~)9,l 6J.t).,2?!1. J'hallk )'(1u.
From: Lewis. Doug
Sent: Friday, January 23, 2009 2: 11 PM
To: ' (JamesMudd@colliergov.net)'
CC: 'whitejennifer; KlatzkowJeff; 'g.hartman@gaiconsultants,com'
Subject: BCC Agenda Item 10A -1/27/09
Importance: High
Our consultant Gerry Hartman is unable to attend the BCC hearing on 2/10/09 as he will be in depositions in DeLand,
Florida on that day, I have asked Gerry to see if he can clear his current schedule to attend the BCC hearing on February
24th. By way of this e-mail, I will ask Gerry to confirm his availability on this date and to provide the times he can attend the
hearing. Thank you.
Douglas A. Lewis
<<OLE Object: Picture (Metafile) >>
www.ralaw,com <httD:/Jwww.ralaw.com/>
850 Park Shore Drive
Trianon Centre - 3rd Floor
Naples, Florida 34103
Phone: (239) 649-2712
Fax: (239) 261-3659
E-mail: dalewis@ralaw.com
1
Profile: Douglas A. Lewis <htto:llwww.ralaw.com/atlorneV.cfm?id=4512>
Both Douglas A. Lewis and Roelzel & Andress intend that this message be used exclusively by the addressee(s). This
message may contain information that is privileged. confidential and exempt from disclosure under applicable law.
Unauthorized disclosure or use of this information Is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error,
please permanently dispose of the original message and notify Douglas A. Lewis immediately at 1 (239) 649-2712. Thank
you,
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24, 2009
Page 460 of 462
2
Agenda Item No. 10A
February 24, 2009
Page 461 of 462
~
579533 \ 111647.0003
11
62116/2669 15:52
12393489915
SUNWESTPLUWING
Ageoda.lter;!jl,No. 10A
Fe~'ffiarY''24, 20 9
Page 462 of 4 2
~ COlLIER COUNTY PUBLIC UTILITIES DIVISION
~ )"', -.........."'" . _._ :M"2 . ~,?32-m. . "..12>9'73'-,.....
Pebruary 9, 2009
Ms. Stacey MoraICl$
Sunwest PllIIDbiD&. LLC
43761" AvcNW
Nllploo, FL 34119
PotabIo IrrIplioa M_
14700 TsmilIIDI Trail North - TomlamI ~
D_ Ms. MoraIOII;
Subjoc:t;
OUr offioe h8s reyjewod !be prdimiDEy meterlizillg infimnalion (application datod Pobnuuy 9,
20(9) tor !be above-f1lfercncod IIlIdnu. Balled on !be infbrmlllion that you IRIppHod to our
ol'llce, a two (2) inch 1IlClG'm<llll3 our minimum ""Iuiranenta.
You should apply for !he meter with !be Public Utilities CuI1umcr Service Depattmmt locatod at
4420 Mercamile Avenue. ----. brbiRlIlIIl-..... DaY. ~ ._..~ ofS23.t12l1.50. Tbis
8IIIOIlIltilwludas the IIlClG'lIJl1lin&fee ofSl,213.00 .00 water imptIel fee ofS21,807.50ll.cd<>ll
6, I Bquivalenl RelridalliaI CmmeotiOOJ (BRCo). The fees Il8ZI wUbIn 8I'e valid tor 90 days
tiom the date of this leller.
If you h.vc any furth.... questions or llODoems repnling the lnfo1malian oontained in llris letter or
in the atlIIcInncnts, please foe! fiec to llOI1_ me at (239) 2S2-421 S.
SIo""",ly,
G~~
GUbclrt Moncivaiz
Operations Analyst, Public UtlHti... 0p0nli00ll
co: Gary Morocco, Rev_ S~
Heather Sweet, RlMlllue Supervisor
Joe Thom.., Watc:r Distribution Manager