Sanitary Sewer Collection System for New Service Areas

Utilities Planning & Policy

ManateeCountyGovernmentWorksession
January20,2015
1

Whatourprocesshasbeen
Issuesthatprocesscreates
Fundamentalprinciples

underlyingproposedsolutions
DS

Proposedsolutions(recentexecuted

LDAshaveincorporatedthese)
ChangetoFIFschedule,presentation

ofthatstudy
Processchanges codeofordinances
UpdateourMasterPlans
DS

CurrentProcess
4

500,000
450,000
400,000
350,000
300,000
250,000
200,000
JO

Unincorporated
Population
Estimate
AllCounty
Population
Estimate

EstablishesWater&

SewerServiceAreas
Basedonengineering
ReflectedonFuture

LandUseMap
Large servicearea
Vacant/aglands
JO

JO

JO

SM

Addzoomlikeprevious.addlinestoprevious
graphic

 Collection/DistributionSystems
Computermodelplanforutilitiesbuildoutof
servicearea
Forcemainroute/location,pipesize,Master
pumpstationlocations,etc.
FutureMasterliftstations
Intendedtooptimizecapitalinvestmentfor
longterm
SM

10

11

CurrentDevelopmentProcess
Developer:
Responsibleforextendingutilityservicetotheir projects
Designsnewlines&stationssizedtotheir needs
County:
Participatesinupsizingnewlines&stationssizefor
consistencyw/masterplan(buildout)
Builditrightthefirsttimephilosophy
Minimizesduplicativeconstructionprojects
Multiplelineswithintherightofway notdesirable

SM

12

CurrentDevelopmentProcess
Initialdevelopmentin areaswherefuture

forcemaindoesnotexistbears
significantinitialcostinstallingtheline.
Countybearstheremainderoftheabove
costwiththeinitialdevelopment
Subsequentdevelopmentbearsverylittle
costornocostandbenefitsfromabove
installation.
SM

13

14

Issues Current Process

SM

15

 Multipleapprovedprojectsrequesting

utilityservicenow

Developmentprojectsoriginallyapproved
in2000s
Requireupsizing requiresCountyinvestment
ROWmayormaynotnotexistforlineextensions
MasterPumpStationsnotbuilt

SM

16

 Newdevelopmentprojectsrequestingservice

inareasrequiringsignificantlineextensions
Constructionofnewlinestoofarinadvanceof

needs(customers)createsoperationalissues

SM

17

ExistingFacilityInvestmentFee

(FIF)
Newplant,newcollectionsystems,

newliftstations
ExistingFacilityInvestmentFee

SM

scheduleneedstobeupdatedto
reflecttheneedforlineextensions

18

 Initialdevelopmentinareaswhere

futureforcemaindoesnotexistbears
significantinitialcostinstallingthe
line.

SM

19

 Countybearstheremainderofthe

abovecostwiththeinitial
development
Builditrightthefirsttime
Multipleparallellines=operationalissues
Goingforward,theCountyneedsto

addressfundingforthisparticipation
SM

20

 AlternativeConnections
Somedevelopmentsrequestingusing

existinglinesratherthanconstructingfuture
linescalledoutinMasterPlans(Alternative
Connections)

Lowerupfrontcosttodeveloper
Takesawaycapacityofline increasescosts

later
Evaluatedonacasebycasebasis
SM

21

 AlternativeConnections

Currentprocesshasnomeansof

capturingcountyscostofincorporating
alternativeconnectionstomeetthe
masterplan

SM

22

Fundamental Principles

DS

23

Countyresponsibletooperate

utilitiesinanefficientand
financiallysoundmanner
Utilitiesisanenterprisefund

Fromsystemrevenues
Notmixedwithotherfunds
DS

24

Ratepayerspayforoperationsand

maintenanceofexisting system
Developmentpaysforexpansion

ofthesystemviaFacility
InvestmentFees(FIFs)
CountyusesFIFsforupsizing
DS

25

Growthshouldpayforgrowth

PolicyoftheBoardofCounty

Commissioners
January2009adopted

DS

26

Recommendations

DS

27

UpdateFIFschedule
UpdateCodeofOrdinances
UpdateourMasterPlans

DS

28

 AdoptUpdatetoFacilityInvestment

FeeSchedule
Covercostsassociatedwithimproving

infrastructureindevelopingareas
Ensuresmasterplanapproachto
safeguardefficiencyofsystem
DS

29

 ReflectMasterPlans&consistencyof

developmentwithmasterplans
Feasibilityofextensions
Alternativeconnections

DS

30

 CreditstowardFacilityInvestmentFees
Continueagreementswithdevelopersas

appropriate:
Alternativeconnections
Developmentprofferingcommitmentof

improvements,rightsofway,etc.
Extendedcapacityreservations
DS

31

Facility Investment Fees

Rob Ori, President
Public Management
Resources Group, Inc.
32

 SupportPolicyof"GrowthPayingforGrowth"
ExistingCustomersNotResponsibleforNew
Capital
FavorableRateBenefit KeepsMonthlyUtility
RatesReasonable

33

 RecoverCapitalCostofCapacityAllocabletoNew
Users
MustMeet"RationalNexus"ProvisionsDictated
byCaseLaw,FloridaImpactFeeAct
MustRelateCapitalExpenditurestoGrowth
FeemustbeBasedonMostRecentand
LocalizedData

34

 FIFanalysisonlyencompassedwastewater
ExistingFIFIncludesTwoPrimaryCapital
CostRecoveryComponents:
IdentifiedasSystemCosts Benefitall
Users
TreatmentandDisposalComponent
(plants)
PrimaryTransmissionComponent
(largelines&pumpstations)
35

 ExistingFIFIncludesTwoPrimaryCapitalCost
RecoveryComponents:(contd)
DoesntIncludeonsiteCostsSpecificto
Development
Manholes,LocalLiftStations,CollectionLines,
Laterals
GenerallyDonatedasPartofDevelopment
Process
AnalysisFocusedOnlyonPrimaryTransmission
ComponentofFee
36

"SystemBuyIn"Approach
TheMostEquitableMethod
DeterminationofProRataCosttoServeNew

EquivalentResidentialConnection(ERC)
ERCRepresentsCapacityAllocatedtoaSingle
FamilyResidence

37

"SystemBuyIn"Approach
ConsideredOriginalCostofUtilityPlantConstructed

andAvailabletoServeNewGrowth
ConsideredTodaysCostEstimatestoServeNew
Growth
ConsideredBuildoutPopulationEstimatesto
DetermineERCsand"UnitCost"

38

LevelofService(LOS)=AllocatedCapacity
(Flow)perERC

LOSAssumedat210gpd perERCtoDerive
UnitCost

39

NoChangeinFeeApplicationMethodology,JustAmount
oftheFeeCharged
FeeBasedonMeterSize LinkstoImpliedCapacityofCustomer
BasedonMeterEquivalents AmericanWaterWorksAssociation

ComparisonofExistingandProposedWastewaterFees
ERC
FACTOR

EXISTING
FEE

PROPOSED
FEE

DIFFERENCE

STANDARD RESIDENTIAL
CUSTOMER

1.00

$2,315

$3,027

$712

MULTI-FAMILY
RESIDENTIAL (PER UNIT)

0.67

$1,580

$2,028

$448

5/8-INCH METER

1.00

$2,315

$3,027

$712

1-INCH METER

2.50

$5,788

$7,568

$1,780

COMMERCIAL VARIES BY
METER SIZE

40

41

UpdateFIFschedule
UpdateCodeofOrdinances
UpdateourMasterPlans

DS

42

Disposal of Surplus County Property