Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutBOCC Workshop on Airport Master Plan Packet 12-07-20094 k ~ J = _ w • MONDAY, DECEMBER 7, 2009 2:00 P.M. BOARD WORKSHOP ON THE AIRPORT MASTER PLAN CALL TO ORDER -COMMISSIONER CHARLES GRANDE, CHAIRMAN, BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS 2. MASTER PLAN TECHNICAL ADVISORY RECOMMENDATIONS 3. PROPOSED INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT CONCERNING DEFERRAL OF THE ANNEXATION OF THE RESEARCH PARK 4. QUESTIONS AND COMMENTS 5. ADJOURNMENT CONFERENCE ROOM #3 2300 VIRGINIA AVENUE, FORT PIERCE FLORIDA 34982 NOTICE: All Proceedings before this Board are electronically recorded. Any person who decides to appeal any action taken by the Board at these meetings will need a record of the proceedings and for such purpose may need to ensure that a verbatim record of the proceedings is made. Upon the request of any party to the proceedings, individuals testifying during a hearing will be sworn in. Any party to the proceedings will be granted the opportunity to cross-examine any individual testifying during a hearing upon request. Anyone with a disability requiring accommodation to attend this meeting should contact the St. Lucie County Community Services Manager at (772) 462-1777 or TDD (772) 462-1428 at least forty-eight (48) hours prior to the meeting. Technical Advisory Meeting Master Plan Update St. Lucie County International Airport Recommendations Meeting Date: October 14, 2009 Subject: Master Ptan Technical Advisory Recommendations Author: T. Fantinato, The LPA Group Incorporated THE GROUP ~~~ TRANSPORTATION CONSULTANTS During the October 14, 2009 Technical Advisory Meeting Workshop, see attached meeting minutes, four proposed alternatives were presented: • Alternative 1- GA Only/Demand Based Development • Alternatives 2A and 2B -Limited Commercial Development • Alternative 3 -Air Carrier Commercial Development Based upon intensive discussion, a vote was taken in which all attending members of the TAC approved of Alternative 2A, Limited Commercial Development, as a base for future airport development. The type of aircraft typically associated with the recommended development option are shown in Figures i and 2. Figure 1 Gulfstream 550 (ARC C-III) Draft 1~~'age Source: Gulfstream Aviation, 2009 Technical Advisory Meeting Master Plan Update St. Lucie County International Airport Recommendations Figure 2 Bombardier DH-8 Q300 LPA~~ GROUP -- TRANSPORTATION CONSULTANTS In addition, the TAC members also voted to preserve property as illustrated in Alternatives 26 and 3 for future aviation development. However, preservation of property must be carefully worded in both the master plan update and County Comprehensive Plan to state development will be based upon demand. Projects associated with the preferred development graphic (attached) are highlighted below. I. Projects and Preliminary Phasing Based upon the TAC's recommendation for long-term development, the following projects are required to accommodate planned development. Phasing shown is based upon planning, engineering and environmental requirements rather than financial feasibility. Further, it is important to note that a requirement for one project (i.e. a runway extension) may trigger other projects, such as a taxiway extension, approach lighting improvements, Air Traffic Control Siting Study, etc. Preliminary cost estimates, funding and phasing based upon financial feasibility and cash flow analyses will be provided in Chapter 7 of the Master Plan Update once the final recommended long-term development option is determined. A. Required Projects Short-Term (2009-20131: Rehabilitate Runway 10R-28L (Completed December 2009) Security Fencing Improvements Instal! Medium Intensity Approach Lighting on Runway 10R (MALS or ODALs) Draft 2~?age Source: Google Images, Seabee.info, 2009 Technical Advisory Meeting Master Plan Update St. Lucie County International Airport Recommendations LPA~~ GROUP= TRANSPORTATION CONSULTANTS • Rehabilitate Taxiways A, B, and C • Widen Taxiway A and C to 50 feet • Relocate Lighted Segmented Circle • Construct holding pad near east end of Taxiway A • Retrofit/Expand Airport Terminal Building • Preserve On-Airport Property for Future Aviation Related Development • Install High Intensity Rotating Beacon • Environmental Assessment or Environmental Impact Statement (determined by FAAj • Permitting and Drainage Improvements • Expand US Border and Customs Facilities • Install lighted Runway, Taxiway and Apron lighted identification signage and runway hold signs (as needed) • Complete Airport Operating Certificate, Airport Certification Manual, TSA Airport Security Plan, Wildlife Hazard Management, Emergency Plan and Exercises in preparation for FAA Inspection and potential commercial service. Mid-Term (2014-20181: • Expand Electrical Vault • Strengthen Runway 10R-28L to 90,000 Ibs dual wheel • Strengthen Taxiways A, B, C and E to 90,000 Ibs dual wheel • Strengthen Aprons South, East, Center & Run-Up to 90,000 Ibs dual wheel • Perform Required Environmental Studies and Permitting • Airport Drainage Improvements Long-Term (2019-20281: • Airport Master Plan and Airport Layout Plan Update B. Recommended Master Plan Projects The following recommended projects will improve the airport's overall safety and operating capacity as well as provide additional revenue generation options. Since a commercial forecast was not developed as part of this master plan update, recommended commercial requirements are based upon a typical aircraft as well as Federal Aviation Regulations (FARs) Part 139 (Commercial Airport Requirements) FAR Part 121 (Air Carrier Requirements), Transportation Security Regulation (TSR) Parts 1540 and 1542 (Airport Security Requirements), and FAA Design Requirements. Draft 3~Pagc-~ Technical Advisory Meeting . Master Plan Update St. Lucie County LPA~~~ GROUP== International Airport TRANSPORTATION CONSULTANTS Recommendations Short-Term (2009-2013): • Install Runway End Identification Lights (REILs) on Runways 10R, 10L, 28R and 28L • Install Precision Approach Path Indicator Lights (PAPIs) on Runway 10L-28R • Rehabilitate Air Traffic Control Tower • Install Bird Tracking Radar • Add another segmented circle near Runway lOl-28R • Install Lighted Distance to Go Signs • Install Taxiway Centerline Reflectors, Clearance Bar Lights, Stop Bar Lights, and Runway Guard Lights • Install additional lighted wind cones near Runway Thresholds • Extend Internal Perimeter Road • Expand Terminal Automobile Parking (as needed) Mid-Term (2014-2018): • FAR Part 150 Study (unless required by FAA) • ARFF Emergency Response Facilities (includes helipad) • Extend Taxiway A to Airport West Commerce Park • Remove Taxiway E connector between Taxiway A and Runway 10R-28L • Construct New Taxiway A Connector (90 degree) near threshold of Runway 28L • Construct Additional Taxiway A Holding Pad • Extend Runway 14-32 to 5,700 feet • Strengthen Runway 14-32 to 60,000 Ibs dual wheel • Extend Taxiway B and add Holding Pad • Install PAPIs and REILs on Runways 14 and 32 • Replace Visual Approach Slope Indicator Lights with PAPIs • Extend Taxiway A-3 North and construct Holding Pad near threshold of Runway 14 • Construct five (5) 10-unit T-Hangars • Construct 8 Corporate Hangars (65 x 65 ft) • Construct 2,500 SY General Aviation Apron between Runways 10L and 10R • Construct North-South Taxiway between Runway 10R-28L and 10L-28R • Acquire Easement/Property -Runway 32 Runway Protection Zone • Environmental Studies (Categorical Exclusion, EA or EIS), Permitting and Drainage Improvements Draft 4 ~ Page . ~ .._.~,..~:. ,.. ,.., s. y r_ `' Technical Advisory Meeting Master Plan Update St. Lucie Coun International Air ort GROUP~~ p TRANSPORTATION CONSULTANTS Recommendations Lang-Term (2019-20281: • Runway Length Justification • Benefit Cost Analysis • Additional Security Fencing, Markings and Surveillance • Expand Fuel Facilities • Tree Survey • North Industrial/Commercial Development • Corporate and T-Hangar Development • Access, Automobile Parking and Signage Improvements • Utilities and Infrastructure • Wetland and Tree Mitigation Bevond Twenty-Year Planning Period (2029...): • Acquire Parcels 40-42 (currently zoned residential) • Relocate FPL Power Lines to Seminole Blvd • Construct Partial North Taxiway -Runway 10R • Install Local Area Augmentation System (LAAS) • Install Runway Centerline Lighting System and Entrance Lights • Install Taxiway Centerline Lights and Centerline Lead in and Lead Off lights • Install approach lighting and/or NAVAIDs on Runways 28L and 28R • Install Transmissometers (3) on Runway 10R-28L associated with RVR • Upgrade Medium Intensity Runway Lights to High Intensity Runway Lights -Runway lOR-28L • ATCT Siting Study • Construct Satellite ARFF Station • Relocate Tree Mitigation Area (110 Acres) • Relocate Gopher Tortoise Mitigation Area • Relocate Wetland Mitigation Area • Roadway, Access and Signage Improvements • Non-Aviation Development • Airport Drainage, Permitting and Environmental Studies Draft 5 ~ Page Technical Advisory Meeting Master Plan Update St. Lucie County International Airport Meeting Minutes Meeting Date: October 14, 2009 @ 6:00 pm EST Subject: Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) Meeting/Workshop #4 Attendees• Attached Sign-In Sheet Author: Tricia Fantinato GROUP TRANSPORTATION CONSULTANTS These meeting minutes provide a summary of the information and comments provided during the Technical Advisory Committee meeting. Please note that Mr. Philip Jufko, Director of Planning, The LPA Group Incorporated acted as moderator during this process. Comments or questions provided by him to stir discussion are designated as Moderator Question or Comment". Questions from TAC Members will be designated as such. Comments and opinions from TAC members are denoted as "Commentator stated". Any questions, opinions or comments from the Public are also designated as such. This meeting was held in a workshop type of environment to encourage discussion amongst the TAC Members as well as members of the public. We have attempted to capture this dialogue in these meeting minutes. Note: The TAC meeting was taped, and can be made available upon request. Copies of the meeting presentation and agenda are provided on the project website (www stlucieco.ore/airport). SHOULD YOU DISAGREE WITH THE INFORMATION IN THIS RECORD, PLEASE ADVISE IMMEDIATELY (TFantinatoCn)Ipaeroug com). Thank you. i. Airport Tour Prior to the Technical Advisory Meeting, 05:00 pm EST, airport management organized a tour of the airport facilities to familiarize members with existing airport facilities and available land/leaseholds for development. 11. tntroduttion Following the tour, members of the TAC joined airport tenants and some members of the general public in the Airport Administration Building to evaluate airport requirements and determine the long-range direction of airport development. Ms. Diana Lewis (D. Lewis), AAE, Airport Director, welcomed everyone to the meeting and thanked them for participating in the Master Plan process. She also reminded the TAC members that they are still bound by Sunshine Rules and that their active participation in this process is encouraged especially during the next few meetings. D. Lewis also conveyed the Board of County Commissioners policy that members of the TAC, especially those nominated to represent the five commissioners, who miss more than two (2) meetings, may be replaced. The Board is very interested in the recommendations of the TAC in this process so participation is important. Members of the public are also encouraged to provide written comments either at the meeting via comment cards or through the project website. Page ~ 1 DRAFT November 2009 Technical Advisory Meeting Master Plan Update LPA GROUP St. Lucie County TRANSPORTATION CONSULTANTS International Airport Meeting Minutes D. Lewis than introduced Todd Cox, Airport Manager, and members of the master plan team, and turned over the meeting to Mr. Robert Greene, Chairman of the Technical Advisory Committee to call the meeting to order. 111. Technical Advisory Committee Workshop Mr. Robert Greene was elected during the previous TAC Meeting (June 30, 2009) as the chairperson of the TAC committee. Mr. Greene called the meeting to order, and then turned it back over to the presentation team for confirmation of the June 30`h meeting minutes and a project status report. No comments were received and the meeting minutes were approved. Mr. Philip Jufko (Moderator) explained the purpose of the meeting. He emphasized that the alternatives to be presented were based upon TAC input received from the June 30`h Workshop. In order to move forward, it is necessary to determine, during this meeting, the long-term role of St. Lucie County Airport as well as the type of development necessary to accommodate that role. Moderator Comments: the Alternatives Chapter will include the recommendations and comments received during the TAC and Public Meetings. This information is to be presented to the Board of County Commissioners at a Board Meeting. Upon the BOCC's approval, Chapter 5 will be finalized. Moderator Comment: At the request of the BOCC, LPA had individual meetings with each of the Board members. They were all very interested in the process and want to make sure that their representatives are participating because they are looking to the TAC to provide input to them with regard to the alternatives as well as provide a recommendation for future aviation development. Today, at the request of the BOCC, LPA presented an abbreviated version of master plan development to the St. Lucie County Tourism Development Council. The purpose of which was to demonstrate how the master plan can relate to tourism in St. Lucie County. III. Airport Roles Moderator Comment: In order to accurately determine airport requirements for the twenty year planning period, a consensus must be obtained from the TAC on the long-term airport role. Currently the airport serves general aviation operations only, which include flight training, corporate traffic, emergency services, fractional ownership, and on-demand air taxi/air charter operations. However, at the request of the BOCC and based upon interest by the Bahamas Tourism Board, generalized facility and operational requirements needed for FPR to support commercial service was requested. Moderator Comment: Based upon this request, alternative scenarios were developed based upon the following three (3) roles: ^ General Aviation: o Airport's current role o What needs to be addressed in the next five to 10 year period • Limited Commercial Service: November 2009 Page ~ 2 DRAFT Technical Advisory Meeting Master Plan Update ~pq nt GROUP St. Lucie Cou y TRANSPORTATION CONSULTANTS International Airport Meeting Minutes o Potential Bahamasair opportunity o What is the opportunities to bring limited commercial service to FPR o How quickly can FPR implement the requirements needed to support such a commuter type service (i.e. Part 139 Certification) ^ Air Carrier Commercial Service o Anticipate to occur well beyond 20-year planning period o Primarily evaluated to determine highest and best land use and coordinate development with countywide long-range planning. Moderator Questions: Does the TAC still support GA and some limited commercial development if demand warranted at FPR? Also does the TAC still want show the reservation of on-airport property to support expanded service beyond the 20-year planning period? Moderator Questions: Are there any other roles that need to be considered? Is the planning team going in the right direction by evaluating the potential for limited commercial service within the twenty-year planning period? Moderator Comment: A commercial forecast was not developed as part of this master plan, so at this time there is no justification for commercial development merely potential. TAC Question: Why wasn't a commercial forecast developed? Team Answer: At this time, there is no historical or existing demand for such service at FPR. Therefore an accurate forecast of commercial demand cannot be determined at this time. However, the potential for commercial service was considered to determine highest and best land use of airport property. TAC Question: To what extent do projections play into these roles? Team Answer: ^ Available projections drive some of the requirements and impact the size and type of facilities required. ^ However, for commercial service, the aircraft, FAA Part 139, US Customs and TSA requirements are driving the recommended improvements outlined in two of the alternative development scenarios (Alternatives 2A, 2B and 3). ^ For Alternative 3, Air Carrier Service, recommendations were based upon similarly sized airports that support air carrier (legacy) commercial service as well as the type of aircraft, FAA and TSA regulations. Recommendations and requirements denoted for this alternative were merely used to obtain a land use envelope in an effort to reserve property for the potential of future commercial development. One Commentator stated `When it comes to projections, a lack of facility does not preclude future development. We do this on roadway development all the time.' Team Comment: In this case, accurate projections could not be developed. Therefore, typical corporate and commercial aircraft were used as a benchmark for development. However, November 2009 Page ~ 3 DRAFT ~~nrz Technical Advisory Meeting Master Plan Update St. Lucie County International Airport Meeting Minutes GROUP TRANSPORTATION CONSULTANTS projections drive the justification and project funding. Commercial development can be shown but is not likely justifiable in the near term (next 5 years). IV V. Moderator Request/Verification: Does the TAC want this master plan to address the immediate airport needs associated with its role as a general aviation airport? Does the TAC also want the master plan to identify minimum requirements needed to accommodate commercial service if warranted? At least three commentators stated 'Even though there is no demonstrated demand at this time, it should still be included so it can be reevaluated in later master plans.' Review of TAC Recommendations A summary of group recommendations provided in the June 30`h meeting provided the basis for the Alternative Development Options. Some of the issues that required evaluation included: ^ Impacts of Power Lines ^ Existing and Future Aircraft Fleet Mix and Airfield Requirements ^ Evaluate runway extension options (east and west) ^ Extension of Runway 14-32 ^ US Customs and Passenger Terminal Requirements ^ Surface transportation network, multimodal facilities, aviation and industrial development, etc. One Commentator Requested `Please evaluate as part of the master plan update how FPR can become an official US Customs Port of Entry airport so that the hours of operation can be extended from the current schedule of 10:00 AM to 6:00 PM. US Customs' limited hours of operations impacts our businesses (Volo Aviation and Key Air Aviation) because it makes the airport less attractive to potential users. If the airport became an official Port of Entry, it would likely (in my opinion) expand services provided and hours of operations and support new business development.' Team Response: FPR is currently a landing rights airport, and US Customs also serves the Port of Ft. Pierce. According to Customs, the hours were cut because there wasn't sufficient demand at certain times of the day to warrant the staff. If demand increases, US Customs will reevaluate their operations at FPR. However, the Team will determine what may be required for FPR to become an official Port of Entry. Facility Requirements ^ Extension of Runway 14-32: The Team presented two options for the extension of Runway 14-32: extend to 5,500 feet or 5,700 feet. The TAC, during the June 30`h Workshop, agreed that the longer option allowed for aircraft to remain outside the Object Free Area of Runway lOR-28L. An extension of Runway 14-32 has been included in the last two previous master plan updates. Although it may not be considered a high priority, an extension is still warranted. Moderator Question/Verification: Do you the members of the TAC still agree with the longer extension of Runway 14-32? November 2009 Page ~ 4 DRAFT Technical Advisory Meeting THE Master Plan Update ~pq GROUP St. Lucie County TRANSPORTATION CONSULTANTS International Airport Meeting Minutes Although not put to a vote, the TAC members attending either provided a verbal or physical response (nod of the head) that they agreed with the extension of Runway 14-32. Note: support of this option is also shown in the June 30`h published and approved meeting minutes. Pavement Streneth: Pavement strength requirements were also identified as part of the facility requirements. Demand at this time does not support a strengthening of Runway 10R-28L, but it may be warranted in the future (next 6 to 10 years). However, an environmental assessment must be conducted prior to preliminary design. NextGen Opportunities: Dr. Dave Byers (D. Byers) presented how NextGen can improve airspace, airport and aircraft operations by: o Providing a virtual tower to assist pilots when landing at an airport when the tower is closed during poor weather. o Can be used in support of voluntary noise abatement procedures by clarifying requirements and thereby limiting the aircraft "scatter pattern". o Improve airspace efficiency allowing aircraft to fly direct routes rather than point to point and utilize controlled descent procedures rather than step-down descent procedures. This will improve not only noise but air quality. o Decrease runway incursions and provide ATC greater visibility of airfield "hot spots". o Allows aircraft and ground vehicles to be monitored even in low visibility conditions. o Could decrease the area needed to support approach and departure procedures thereby freeing up real estate for revenue use. o Corporate and commercial aircraft are currently being equipped with this technology, and this technology is being implemented at a number of commercial airports. The south Florida region is also one of the first areas to be equipped with the ground based system (antennas are located at Hobe Sound and Sebastian Airport). The region is being used as test bed for future quantifiable development. TAC Question: How accurate is vertical GPS? Team Response: The GPS is accurate enough for Air Traffic Control. One Commentator Stated:'It looks like NextGen can be used for voluntary noise restrictions.' Team Response: Yes, FAA is working on this now by allowing controlled descent rather than a step down descent which drastically decreases noise on approach. Further, GPS limits the "scatter" pattern typically caused by pilot interpretation of noise abatement procedures, therefore decreasing noise impacts to residential areas adjacent to an airport. Aircraft follow the "yellow brick road" in the sky. TAC Question: Is this something that can be incorporated into the master plan update? Team Response: Yes, a recommendation can be added to the master plan that as new technology becomes available that operating procedures be implemented to support future development. TAC Question: As the technology becomes more widely available, would the FAA limit funding available to airports not equipped with these facilities? Page ~ 5 DRAFT November 2009 Technical Advisory Meeting Master Plan Update St. Lucie County International Airport Meeting Minutes GROUP ~~ TRANSPORTATION CONSULTANTS Team Response: It is unlikely that FAA will limit funding. However, it is suggested that on the local level that the airport embrace this technology and incorporate procedures to improve operations at the airport while limiting impacts to noise sensitive areas. TAC Question: What type of equipment is needed in support of this technology? Team Response: No additional equipment is required. To implement, procedures should be coordinated with local policies and the FAA to develop operational procedures to address the airport and community's needs. TAC Recommendations: • Look at NextGen to address noise; ^ Want St. Lucie to take the lead with regard to NextGen: o Implement into local policy, and o Current airport procedures TAC Question: Are they eliminating the hub and spoke structure? Team Response: Yes and no. At hub airports, it is anticipated to help. However, the biggest problem is not airspace or operational procedures but lack of gates and limited parking. This has been the biggest cause of delays within the airspace system. ^ Draft Noise Contours: Preliminary 2008/09 Noise Contours show that when compared to the 2005 Part 150 Forecast and with the construction of the new training runway, the contours remain on airport property. Additional noise contours based upon the TAC's recommended development and forecast fleet mix will be run as part of the refined airport development analysis. TAC Question: Is DNL the same as LdN? Team Resoonse: Yes TAC Question: If commercial service were to start, say with Bahamasair, would that negatively impact St. Lucie Village? Team Response: No, it is anticipated that Bahamasair would use the DH-8 Q300 which is a turboprop aircraft which is designed to operate in populated areas and its operational noise levels are very quiet. TAC Question: What about the aircraft shown in Alternative 2B (CRJ-900)? Would this impact the St. Lucie Village? Team Response: The CRJ-900 used for this alternative is based upon the newest model (CRJ-900ER (NextGen). Again like the DH-8 Q300, it is a Stage IV aircraft under Federal Aviation Regulations and was designed to be more environmentally friendly than its predecessors (lower noise and particulate November 2009 Page ~ 6 DRAFT Technical Advisory Meeting Master Plan Update LPA n t GROUP St. Lucie Cou y TRANSPORTATION CONSULTANTS International Airport Meeting Minutes emissions). Further both aircraft have a steeper climb gradient allowing for aircraft to reach altitude much quicker thereby decreasing noise impacts to properties adjacent to the airport. Two members of the public stated that 'The new Training Runway (10L-28R) is not improving aircraft noise over St. Lucie Village.' One Commentator stated that 'he had also heard from people in the Village, although he was personally not impacted, that the training runway had not improved aircraft noise'. Mr. Bob Greene. TAC Chairperson, stated that the Training Runway has several drawbacks including lack of connectivity to the main airfield, taxi back procedures and no precision approach path indicator lights. D. Lewis stated that Mr. Jerry Groendyke, FAA Air Traffic Control Manager, should address the use of the new training runway. Mr Groendvke's Response: • Runway lOl-28R is being used more than originally anticipated. It is being used for all full stop taxi back and touch and go procedures including those from transient (visiting) aircraft. • All runways are being used by training aircraft based upon operating conditions. However, when possible, ATC is directing operations to the Training Runway. • Students however are requesting to use Runway lOR-28L when the ATCT is still open in the evening because of the power lines and the lack of approach lighting. • Further, instructors request that pilots on their first solo flight use Runway lOR-28L since they are able to watch their students from the apron and because Runway 10R-28L is wider and longer. ^ Approximately 80 percent of training traffic is currently routed to Runway lOl-28R, so St. Lucie Village should see a significant decrease in noise impacts associated with training operations. ^ He did say he was not aware of what happens after the tower closes. Public Question: Residents of St. Lucie Village saw an increase in traffic on October 14. Why? Mr Groendvke's Response: Today was a different situation since they had training aircraft using Runway 14-32 because survey work was being done. Mr. Groendyke stated that the new runway provides greater separation of traffic between corporate and training activity, has reduced runway crossings by 50 percent, and reduced over flights of St. Lucie Village. 0. Lewis also stated that the airport is tracking evening operations (when the ATC is closed), and has seen that over 80 percent of traffic is using Runway lOl-28R (Training Runway), and this information is available on the airport website. TAC Question: Does the website also have daytime operations? D. Lewis Response: is closed. No, we are currently only tracking operations when the air traffic control tower November 2009 Page ~ 7 DRAFT Technical Advisory Meeting Master Plan Update SPA St. Lucie County TRA SOORTAT~TS International Airport Meeting Minutes Vi. Preliminary Alternatives As part of the preliminary development, development zones were created to identify priority zones for future on-airport development during and beyond the twenty-year planning period. Moderator Comments: The goal of this meeting is to determine which one of the alternative options or a hybrid of the three options reflects the TAC's vision for long-term development at FPR. • Some projects are phased throughout the planning process, such as fencing. The storm water master plan update is in process; therefore the recommendations of the Airport Master Plan Update will be incorporated into this document. ^ Ultimate development is based upon the airport's role, operational demand and critical aircraft. • To accommodate commercial service (FAR Part 139), the airport must meet the requirements outlined in FAR Part 139 for the type of service it is supporting (Class 1, II, III and IV), TSA 1540/42, Airport Security Requirements, Aircraft Rescue and Fire Fighting Requirements (AC 150/5210-6D) as well as a host of design requirements outlined in various Federal Aviation Advisory Circulars. • Airport requirements to support commercial service are also dependent upon the Part 121 operator likely to use the airport. Some carriers (typically legacy) have stricter standards as part of the operating certificate than even those outlined in the FAA Advisory Circulars and Regulations. Therefore, sometimes requirements and timing of development not exactly "black and white". ^ Thus, alternative development was based upon anticipated level of service and aircraft typically used in support of that service. TAC Question: In evaluating long-term requirements, shouldn't development be based upon a Gulfstream 6 or a DH-9? Team Response: A future fleet mix was done as part of the forecasting and facility requirements efforts. Aircraft can stay within a fleet up to 20 to 30 years with maintenance and modifications. We used the newest and most advanced of each model in an effort to determine facility requirements. However, new technology is coming out all the time. So when there is demand for such facilities, a justification must be done based upon the actual aircraft at that time. TAC Question: (Related to Noise' Since you can't regulate or prevent certain aircraft operating at an airport, can you not provide some incentive in order to attract quieter aircraft? Team Response: Yes, it can be done but it would take a lot to implement. This has been used at some airports through landing fees. However, how do you determine the marginal benefit, and the airport cannot discriminate against other operators. One Commentator stated land was suauorted by another) that 'The FBO's do have incentives as part of their marketing plans in an effort to attract newer aircraft. They offer discounts in order to promote development. However, it is difficult (in my opinion) if not impossible to attract these aircraft if the airport itself does not meet design standards required by that aircraft. In order to continue to grow and promote the airport, infrastructure must be in place to accommodate this demand.' November 2009 Page ~ 8 DRAT-T Technical Advisory Meeting Master Plan Update LPA TRANSPORTATION CONSULTANTS St. Lucie County GROUP International Airport Meeting Minutes Team Comment: This, however, is the "Catch-22" -FAA won't support certain improvements until you show demonstrated demand (i.e. 500 annual operations in the next five years). However, some aircraft operators won't use the airport because it doesn't meet their operating requirements. TAC Question: What is the market area of Charlotte County Airport? How does it compare to St. Lucie County? Team Response: Charlotte County Airport's market area includes Ft. Myers, Sarasota and South Tampa. The users of Charlotte County Airport are price sensitive and don't need to get to a specific city rather they are looking to get to a certain region and then they will use other transportation to get to their ultimate destinations. This is why Allegiant has been so successful. One Commentator stated 'Skybus was at St. Augustine Airport but went out of business.' Team Response: Skybus didn't go out of business because of lack of demand rather it was associated with the credit crisis and credit card hold backs. Skybus proved that people would fly to a region rather than a specific city if the fares were low enough. TAC Question: What does Allegiant Air Fly? Team Response: Allegiant flies DC9 Aircraft which are typically 90 percent full. However, as part of their model, if they can't achieve this load factor at an airport, they will pull out as they have recently done at Columbia Metro in South Carolina. TAC Q_ uestion: ~Nhat is required to support commercial service at St. Lucie? Team Response: With the exception of the Terminal and TSA requirements, the airport has a lot of the physical facilities necessary to support some level of commercial service. However, some air carriers as part of their operating certificate may have certain physical requirements with regard to where they operate. We won't know this until you speak to the operator. The Moderator described Alternatives 2A and 26, Limited Commercial Service, and stated that each alternative is based upon different critical aircraft. Alternative 2A is based upon the requirements of the Gulfstream 550 (General Aviation Critical Aircraft) and DH-8 4300 (Commercial Critical Aircraft). Alternative 26 is based upon the CRJ-900ER (NextGen). The Moderator presented two draft commercial options based upon a rehabilitation of the existing Airport Administration Building. However, the Architectural Team associated with this development still needed to speak with TSA regarding their commercial requirements. D. Lewis mentioned that the Architectural Team was looking at coordinating development with US Customs and possibly connecting the two buildings. The Moderator stated that one of the biggest differences between Alternative 2A and 26 is that in 26, the FPL Power Transmission Lines will need to be relocated to allow for lower approach minima. In an effort to provide the airport with the greatest flexibility for future development, it was November 2009 Page ~ 9 DRAFT ^_~ - - -~-~ ~~- ~ ~ Technical Advisory Meeting Master Plan Update LPA ~ C GROUP • ~ - St. Lucie County TRANSPORTATIONCONSUITANTS -` ~ '~' ~~` -~ International Airport Meeting Minutes recommended, when demand warrants, that the power lines be relocated to Seminole Road. Although previous master plans recommended moving these lines west of North King's Highway, it was concluded as part of this master plan that moving the power lines to Seminole Road would never require the airport to have to move them again even in the case of a runway extension. TAC Question: Why does anybody have a problem with moving the power lines? Seems like a "no brainer"? D. Lewis Response: FPL requires the County to pay for the relocation. Just to move the power lines to accommodate the training runway was over $1.7 million, and they were lucky enough to get some money from the agencies in conjunction with the training runway construction. Also, if the power lines are moved off airport property, the county will need to purchase the land for the right of way in addition to moving the lines. Team Comment: The Master Plan Team has been coordinating with the County's Transportation and Growth Management departments since they have long-range plans out to SO years. According to Growth Management, with planned TVC development, the existing power lines may not be able to support their development and improvements will need to be made anyway. TAC Question: Can the power lines be buried? One Commentator stated `No, since these are power transmission lines you would need to insulate using a special gel, etc, etc. It would be extremely cost prohibitive.' TAC Question: Does Alternative 2B lower visibility minimums? Team Response: Yes, with the addition of Medium Intensity Approach Lighting with Runway Alignment Indicator Lights (MALSR) and upgrading the existing runway lighting to High Intensity, the visibility minimum would be reduced to a true Category I instrument landing system (ILS) approach of '/: statute mile. (Note: a MALSR uses lighting which includes sequenced type strobe lighting to direct aircraft to the runway) The Moderator presented Alternative 3, which is based upon the possibility of FPR serving unconstrained air carrier service. Since many of the TAC (but not all) wanted the Team to evaluate preserving land for future aviation development beyond the twenty-year planning period, Alternative 3 was developed. Projects shown that relate to full air carrier service, such as the extension of Runway lOR-28L and lOL-28R although shown, were developed to determine the area required to support such development. These projects will not occur within the twenty-year timeframe since no justification exists. Further, prior to design, a justification, benefit cost analysis, environmental assessment, etc. must be done. TAC Question: Could you extend to the East? Team Response: We evaluated this in the report. Because of the terrain, noise issues and anticipated costs, we determined it was not worthwhile to pursue a runway extension to the east. However, as shown in Alternative 3, it is recommended that land be reserved to support future navigational aids and lighting in support of new technology, such as NextGen. November 2009 Page ~ 10 DRAFT Technical Advisory Meeting Master Plan Update LPA~ TRANSPORTATION CONSULTANTS St. Lucie County GROUP International Airport Meeting Minutes TAC Question: How far could you extend to the west without relocating the power lines? Team Response: You cannot extend to the west any further without negatively impacting the approach minimums. TAC Question: What is the difference between Alternatives 2A and 2B? Team Response: The primary difference is the approach visibility on Runway lOR and the associated costs related to relocating the power lines, upgrading lighting, etc. However, from a cost benefit side, there is no justification for this development at this time. The Moderator: The alternatives were developed to provide almost a systematic approach or phasing for development over a 50+ year time period at FPR if demand were to exist to justify such development. Alternative 1 supports the airport's current role as a GA airport, and recommended projects are in support of that role. Alternatives 2A and 2B provide varying levels of commercial service. And far into the future, Alternative 3 shows what may be required, based upon current aircraft fleet and federal requirements, to support full commercial service. It is important to note that aircraft are becoming more efficient, quieter and in some cases requiring less operating runway length than their predecessors. This combined with new technology, including NextGen, may negate the need for some of the improvements shown here. The purpose of Alternative 3 was merely to address the potential future land use needs associated with commercial development, to provide the County greater flexibility for such development while also coordinating with other long-term countywide planning efforts. TAC Question: What is the benefit side of Alternatives 2A and 2B? Team Response: Some operators may prefer to operate under a more controlled environment. However, Bahamasair is operating at airports with 1 mile visibility in the Bahamas and legacy carriers (i.e. Delta) operate at Ft. Lauderdale which has visibility minimums down to only'/, statute mile. But in support of the potential for commercial service, do you want to at least preserve land to allow for such future development if demand warranted? The Moderator stated that the purpose of the master plan is to identify projects and associated costs so they can be put into the FAA and FDOT funding cycle. The airport may or not obtain funding for some recommended master plan projects since they may rate low based upon funding priorities or there is another more important project at another airport within the region that needs the money more. Master Plans are also updated every five to ten years, so the purpose of reserving areas for aviation development is so future planners will revisit the issues in subsequent master plans. The reservation of land, as shown in Alternative 3, is not just for a runway extension, it could be related to runway lighting, shifting the runway, approach and departure protection zones, etc. TAC Question: Why is FPL "off the hook" from participating in relocating the power lines if needed? Also, the advantage of identifying such projects even though they may not be needed in the next 10- 20 years helps coordinate local planning efforts with airport development. November 2009 Page ~ 11 DRAFT Technical Advisory Meeting Master Plan Update GROUP St. Lucie County TRANSPORTATION CONSULTANTS International Airport Meeting Minutes Team Response: Right now there is no justification for relocating the power lines; therefore, FPL will not participate in the cost of relocating. Further, it is likely that a cost benefit analysis will be done to see if demand warrants the cost of relocation. One commentator stated 'The (St. Lucie) Village Board will likely. be ok with Alternatives 2A and even 26, but will be set against Alternative 3.' A member of the Public further stated that 'The previous Part 150 Study (not sure if he was referring to 1987, 1994 or 2005 Noise Study) showed that the noise contours went straight down the center of the Village; therefore, it is unlikely that anyone from that community would support the introduction of large commercial aircraft operations as suggested in Alternative 3.' M.,ap~ator Comment: During the previous meeting, the majority of the TAC (not all) was in some agreement with preserving land on the airport to accommodate the potential for future development. Is this still true? TAC Question: Can you first explain how you "reserve land"? Team Response: Land reserved for future "aviation development" will be shown as a box. The language used will be very generic and non-committal. The team needs to do this in order to identify areas that can be used for other sources of revenue generation and environmental mitigation. However, the focus of the master plan will be on the short to mid-term, but it is our suggestion that the County not lose out on an opportunity. At !.east Three 131 Commentators stated that `It is important to reserve for the long-term.' Two Commentators also stated that `It is important to not say that the St. Lucie Community may not support Alternative 3. The county is home to more than 280,000 people who in the future will demand other transportation options.' One Commentator stated `Still demand must be there in order to justify development.' One Commentator stated `There is definitely a cost of reserving property for future development. We have Vero Beach, Sebastian, Okeechobee, etc nearby. What are they doing? What is the demand? There is competition for money and if we are taking property off the market, wouldn't that negatively impact the airport?' TAC Question: But how does this compare? Based upon the entire airport property, what is the cost of reserving the portion of the airport property as suggested in Alternative 3? Isn't there a way to preserve but use language that allows for alternative development if warranted? Team Response: Yes, the purpose of Alternative 3 is not to make the property unusable for anything but aviation, but to help the team determine areas for non-aviation development without limiting the long-term potential of FPR. Page ~ 12 DRAFT November 2009 Technical Advisory Meeting Master Plan Update THE St. Lucie County GROUP~~,:~ TRANSPORTATION CONSULTANTS International Airport Meeting Minutes One member of the Public asked 'What are the impacts to the community? It is (my opinion) that St. Lucie Village residents will support Alternative 3.' One Commentator stated in response that 'The airport serves the entire county, so you need to consider the entire county as the community not just contiguous properties. I know of many subdivisions located near I-95 and that noise far surpasses anything from the airport. This airport supports the county community not just people contiguous to it.' Moderator Comment: If recommendations don't end up in the plan, they will not be considered. Further, development must still be evaluated based upon financial feasibility. One Commentator stated that `The last master plan did not address a number of key issues. We need to do the right thing to address development. The primary obligation of this airport is economic growth. The airport needs to reinvent itself since both Vero Beach and Stewart Airports have no desire to grow. Therefore, as part of this master plan update, it would be to our benefit to consider not only the existing issues but to provide recommendations (including the reservation of land) to accommodate potential opportunities.' In an effort to determine preferred development, The Moderator requested TAC members vote on the alternatives. TAC Question: Do we have to vote for only one alternative? Team Response: No, you can vote for an alternative in its entirety as well as parts of another if you so choose. It was anticipated that the preferred development would consist of a hybrid of the alternatives presented as well as requests from the TAC. Moderator Question: How many approve of using Alternative 2A as the base for development? TAC Members: All TAC members in attendance approved of Alternative 2A as a base. Three Commentators stated 'Use Alternative 2A as the base but preserve for future development as shown in Alternatives 26 and 3.' Several (3 or morel Commentators stated (and all attendees seemed to agree either through a verbal or physical affirmative) that `in the master plan, the following recommendations should be included: power lines should be moved; use of NextGen encouraged and implementation of policies and operating improvements to support economic development.' TAC Question: Does anyone have any idea how much it will cost to actually move the power lines to Seminole Road? Team Response: At this time no, but we are trying to get some information from FPL. This information will be incorporated into the financial feasibility section of the report if that is the wish of the Committee. November 2009 Page ~ 13 DRAFT ,~ • Technical Advisory Meeting Master Plan Update St. Lucie County international Airport Meeting Minutes THE ~~ GROUP TRANSPORTATION CONSULTANTS One Commentator stated 'Agree with Alternative 2A being used as a base for development with areas reserved to accommodate development shown in Alternatives 26 and 3. The previous Master Plan did not cover a lot of stuff, so we should consider the potential for such development in the future.' One Commentator stated 'The Airport should try to be all things to everyone.' one member of the Public stated 'However, Alternative 3 is offensivoert °ommoercial ervicearland airport. When the 1983 master plan suggested that FPR would supp owners used it to falsely boost the price of property.' nnnderator Question: Do you have an issue with just preserving land for potential long-term (50+ year) development? One Commentator stated 'Do what is necessary to make the airport safe and encourage economic development, but stay away from Alternative 3. Don't have an issue with preserving, but don't want to see something like what is shown in Alternative 3 to happen in the next 10 years. Just because it is on the master plan, don't want to see things speed up. Want to make sure that there is justification for such development. Also want to see something encouraging noise abatement.' One member of the Public stated 'I (Mayor Thiess) will take this information back to the Board of St. Lucie Village but think they will oppose Alternative 3 unless aircraft operations totally change. The Village has been here since 1885 and unlikely to move, but I do not object to either Alternative 2A or 26 with some reservation of land for future development.' One Commentator stated 'For Alternatives 2A, 2B and preservation of 3 -You have to give County and Airport Administration flexibility in dealing with potential opportunities.' One Commentator stated 'Agree with safety and operational upgrades needed to preserve airport. Also, agree with using very nebulous (vague) wording to identify on-airport land preserved for future development that is not as yet justified.' One Commentator stated 'Don't want to take away the option of preserving for future development. Don't want to give away the land and therefore limit options -better to add a justification codicil associated with proposed development.' Moderator Comment: The comments and recommendations of this committee as well as the general public will b epCha tend, aoport ayout planoand f nanc alsanalys s cantbelcompleted. approval before the Alternat p TAC Question: Could Runway 14-32 be used as the primary runway? Can this runway be extended to 8,000 feet? Team Response: No, extending this runway beyond a total length of 5,700 feet would cause several safety and capacity problems by limiting the use of both Runways 10R-28L and 10L-28R. Also, it does not provide 95 percent wind coverage. In addition, Runway 14-32 has pavement strength of only 15,000 Ibs single wheel. To support potential long-term commercial service as outlined in Alternative Page ~ 14 DRAFT November 2009 Technical Advisory Meeting Master Plan Update THE St. Lucie County GROUP TRANSPORTATION CONSULTANTS International Airport Meeting Minutes 3, the runway would need to be widened and extended, pavement strengthened, lighting changed and added, markings changed, etc. Much more costly than Runway lOR-28l even, we believe, with the power line issue. TAC Question: Before we prioritize the power line issue, can there be a study? Team Response: A benefit cost analysis will likely be required to determine if moving the power lines would be the best course of action. One Commentator stated 'Even though it is costly to move the power lines, we should keep this in the master plan along with the recommended right of way west of Seminole Road so development can be coordinated with the County's long-term plans.' One Commentator stated 'However, the power lines are not just an airport issue and should be coordinated with land use planning.' TAC Question: How much land is associated with the airport? D. Lewis: Approximately 3,672 acres TAC Question: How much on-airport land is under conservation easement? D. Lewis: Approximately 120 acres are under conservation easement with another 200-250 acres set aside. TAC Question: Is there any way to determine the operating requirements of the airlines? Team Response: We would need to contact each airline. Moderator Comment: In Alternative 2A, the airport can accommodate the majority of general aviation, corporate and Part 135 operations as well as small commercial/commuter service. One Commentator stated 'However, you can't just consider Bahamasair.' Team Response: True, there are other commercial operators that most likely can operate at FPR once it becomes certified. Again, since a commercial operator has not as of yet provided a letter of interest, we have to make an educated guess based upon other airports that support commercial operations in the region. TAC Recommendations: • All attending TAC Members supported development outlined in Alternative 2A • 10 of the 12 attending TAC members voted to preserve land for future development as shown in Alternatives 2B and 3. However, demonstrated demand must be shown prior to approval of development. Also, language must be added to consider other development if aviation demand is not warranted. The TAC also wants to make sure that these options are re-evaluated in subsequent plans. November 2009 Page ~ 15 DRAFT .... ~ t Technical Advisory Meeting Master Plan Update ~pq GROUP ;s St. LUCIe COUnty TRANSPORTATION CONSULTANTS International Airport Meeting Minutes • Do not allow accelerated development -just because development is on the plan doesn't mean it has to be done unless justified. VII. Additional Questions and Comments This section provides a summary of additional questions and comments provided during TAC Meeting #4. Meeting minutes and written comments will be incorporated into Appendix B, Key Members and Public Participation, of the Master Plan Update report. Public Question: Does the airport have to be an official US Customs Port of Entry to have commercial service? Team Response: No. Bahamasair and other carriers can operate here without FPR being an official Port of Entry since the airport is a Landing Rights Field. One Commentator stated 'However, not being a Port of Entry does make the airport less desirable to some users because of the limited operating hours of US Customs.' D. Lewis: US Customs because of budget cuts and lack of demand is trying to maximize the use of their existing staff rather than adding staff -until there is a definitive need, will be unlikely to expand hours. One Commentator stated `However, can't show demand if the US Custom's is not open. The airport used to be a twelve hour field until they cut funding and staffing.' Public Questions: What has to be done to bring commercial traffic in? What is the timeframe that you envision that those could be completed? One Commentator stated 'This may be difficult for the Planning Team to determine since there are a number of variables.' Public Resuonse: These people have a lot of experience and they should be able to say from their expertise that from this list (of requirements) what needs to be required. Some may be negotiable but they (LPA) should be able to say, "Here is what is required in the regulations and here is what we are able to negotiate." Moderator Comment: Some of this information we could characterize using the Bahamas Air scenario. Given this example, we could come up with a list of projects. Pubtic Comment: You should be able to come up with a list of projects and costs using ball park estimates. Public Comment: You are not doing a feasibility analysis as part of this master plan? Team Resuonse: No, we always do a financial feasibility analysis as part of a master plan. Once the preferred alternative development is determined, the team can start on the cost estimates, phasing and financial analysis. This is usually the last chapter in the report. November 20Q9 Page (16 DRAFT 'y ~ °-~ ` Technical Advisory Meeting - Master Plan Update GR APP ~ ~ St. Lucie County °U ~-~ • ~ TRANSPORTATION CONSULTANTS ~~, p~£~ '~ ~ - International Airport Meeting Minutes VIII. Summary and Next Steps T. Fantinato requested if the TAC would please provide comments on Chapter 4, Demand Capacity and Facility Requirements by November 6, 2009. T. Fantinato stated that the team is incorporating Staff Comments on Chapter 5, Airport Alternative Analysis. Once we receive approval of the changes, we will provide to the TAC for their review. We will provide at least three weeks for review of the chapter because of the size and amount of information. D. Lewis also stated that we will be presenting this information to the Board of County Commissioners at an informal workshop. As of today, the date for that meeting has not been set. The Moderator also invited members of the TAC to attend the public workshop at the Fenn Center Tomorrow, October 15, starting and 5:30 pm EST October 14th Meeting adjourned at 9:50 pm EST. November 2009 Page ~ 17 DRAFT INTER-OFFICE MEMORANDUM ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA TO: Board of County Commissioners Faye W. Outlaw, MPA, County Administrator Mark Satterlee, Growth Management Director FROM: Daniel 5. McIntyre, County Attorney C.A. NO.: 09-1574 DATE: December 1, 2009 SUBJECT: Interlocal Agreement -Treasure Coast Education, Research and Development Authority Attached for discussion purposes is the first draft of an Interlocal agreement pertaining to the annexation of the Treasure Coast Research Park. Also attached is a copy of an Interlocal Agreement between the County, FPUA and the City of Fort Pierce pertaining to the County's Glades Road Landfill. Please note that Paragraph 7 (on page 9) provides fora 15 year annexation deferral period. I have requested a copy of the Walmart annexation agreement from the City of Fort Pierce. DSM/caf Attachments INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT THIS IS AN AGREEMENT made and entered into this day of , 2010, by and between ST. LUCIE COUNTY, a political subdivision of the State of Florida (the "County"), the TREASURE COAST EDUCATION, RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, an authority established pursuant to Chapter 159, Florida Statutes (the "TCERDA"), the FORT PIERCE UTILITIES AUTHORITY, an authority created and established by the City Commission of the City of Fort Pierce, Florida (the "FPUA"), and the CITY OF FORT PIERCE, n municipality organized under the laws of the State of Florida (the "City"). WHEREAS, the County owns property within the Treasure Coast Research Park (the "Park"); and WHEREAS, TCERDA lenses the property in the Park from the County and operates the Park pursuant to Chapter 159, Florida Statutes; and WHEREAS, in order to develop the Park, water and wastewater service must be provided; and WHEREAS, the Park is located in FPUA's retail service area and FPUA has the capability to provide water and wastewater service to the Park; and WHEREAS, as a prerequisite for the County and TCERDA to use the FPUA utility services, the City requires the County to enter into n Voluntary Annexation Agreement, a copy of said Agreement being attached hereto and incorporated by reference herein. NOW, THEREFORE, FPUA, County, TCERDA and City hereby agree and covenant on the terms and conditions hereinafter stated. 1. GENERAL. This Agreement is entered into pursuant to Section 163.01, Florida Statutes, the Florida Interlocal Cooperation Act. This Agreement embodies the whole understanding of the parties. There are no promises, terms, conditions, or obligations other than those contained herein, and other than those contained herein, and other than those contained in the Annexation Agreement attached hereto. This Agreement shall supersede all previous telecommunications, representations, or agreements, either verbal or written, between the parties hereto. Approvals required by any other parties shall not be unreasonably withheld. 5:\ATTY\A6REEMNT\INTERLOC\TCERDA-FPUA-FP-Utilities.wpd Page 1 2. WATER AND WASTEWATER SERVICE. The FPUA agrees that it shall provide water and wastewater service to the Pnrk under the terms and conditions of the attached Agreement. 3. CONDITIONS OF ANNEXATION. The County agrees to sign the City's standard annexation agreement on condition that the City will not exercise any rights to annex the County's Park property sooner than ten (10) years from the dote the County signs the annexation agreement. If the City annexes the Park into the jurisdiction of the City, the City agrees that it shall not enact or enforce any regulation (hereinafter referred to as the "Conditions of Annexation") which would in any way affect the operation of the Pnrk without the express written consent of the County or unless the City is specifically required to do so by clear mandate of a State or Federal statute, rule or regulation. Regulation of the Park by the City includes, but is not limited to, negotiations related to zoning, land use designation, site plan or any other development regulations. Upon annexation, the City agrees to utilize economic development incentives such as nd valorem tax abatements, to the extent the incentives are available. The parties stipulate and agree that this agreement on behalf of the City with respect to the Conditions of Annexation is a material consideration for the County to enter into this Agreement and except for the City's agreement to the Conditions of Annexation, the County would not have entered into this Agreement. The County or TCERDA shall have the right to seek injunctive relief or to seek damages if the City should violate any of the terms or conditions of this Interlocnl Agreement as to any attempt to regulate or restrict the development of the Park. 4. NOTICE. All notices or other communications hereunder shall be in writing and shall be deemed duly given if delivered in person or sent by certified mail return receipt requested and addressed as follows: If to County: St. Lucie County Administrator 2300 Virginia Avenue, Annex Fort Pierce, Florida 34982 With a copy to: St. Lucie County Attorney 2300 Virginia Avenue, Annex Fort Pierce, Florida 34982 5:\ATTY\AGREEMNT\INTERLOC\TCERDA-FPUA-FP-Utilities.wpd Page 2 Public Works Director 2300 Virginia Avenue, Annex Fort Pierce, Florida 34982 If to FPUA: Director of Utilities Fort Pierce Utilities Authority 206 South Sixth Street Fort Pierce, Florida 34950 With a copy to: FPUA Attorney Fort Pierce Utilities Authority 206 South Sixth Street Fort Pierce, Florida 34950 If to TCERDA: Executive Director Indian River Research & Education Center University of Florida - IFAS 2199 South Rock Road Fort Pierce, Florida 34945 5. ASSIGNMENT. Neither party shall assign this Agreement to any other persons or firm without first obtaining the other parties' approval. 6. FILING. With a copy to: R.I. MacLaren, Esq. Post Office Drawer 40 Boca Raton, Florida 33429-9974 This Agreement and any subsequent amendments thereto shall be filed with the Clerk of the Circuit Court of St. Lucie County pursuant to Section163.01(11), Florida Statutes. ATTEST: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA Deputy Clerk BY: Chairman APPROVED AS TO FORM AND CORRECTNESS: BY: County Attorney 5:\ATTY\A6REEMNT\INTERLOL\TCERDA-FPUA-FP-Utilities.wpd Page 3 ATTEST: FORT PIERCE UTILITIES AUTHORITY BY: Secretary Chair APPROVED AS TO FORM AND CORRECTNESS BY: FPUA Attorney ATTEST: CITY OF FORT PIERCE BY: City Clerk City Attorney APPROVED AS TO FORM AND CORRECTNESS BY: Mayor TREASURE COAST EDUCATION, RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY BY: Chair APPROVED AS TO FORM AND CORRECTNESS BY: Attorney 5:\ATTY\AGREEMNT\INTERLOC\TCERDA-FPUA-FP-Utilities.wpd Page 4 ,, -- INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT THIS is an AGRk~MENT made and .entered into this ~._ day of ~~..~A,,,~ , 1994, Sy and between ST. I,UCIE COUNTY, a political subdivision of the S .ate of Florida ( the "County'") , the FORT PIERCE UTILITY AUTHORITY, as Author~.ty created and established by the City Commission of the City of Fort Pierce, Florida (the "FPUA"), and the CITY OF FORT PIERCE, a municipali~y organized under the laws of the State of Florida (the "City"). WHEREAS, the County owns and operates the St. Lucie County Glades Road Landfill (the "Landfill"); and WHER&A5, the percolation of water through the solid waste at the Landfill generates a leachate product (the "Leachate") which must be treated pricy to disposal; and WHEREAS, the FPUA has the capability to properly treat the Leachate at the FPUA Wastewater Treatment Plant; and WHEREAS, the FPTJA has agreed to provide treatment service to the County for the Leachate to be conveyed initially by truck (Phase I) and ultima.ely through a force main to be constructed by the County (Phase II); and WHEREAS, as a prerequisite for the County to use the City Wastewater' Treatmen- Plant and for FPUA to provide treatment service to the County, the City requites the County to enter into a Voluntary Annexation Agreement, a copy of said Agreement being attached hereto and incorporated by reference herein. NOW, THEREFORE, FPUA, County and City hereby agree and covenant on the terms and conditions hereinafter stated: 1. GENERAL. This Agreement is entered into pursuant to Section 163.01, Florida Statutes, t5e Florida Interlocal Cooperation Act. This Agreement embodies the whole understanding of the parties. There are no promises, ter~rs, conditions, or obligations other than those `,contained herein, and other than those contained in the Annexation Q Agreement attached hereto. This Agreement shall supersede all 4~ ~T• ~~ v ~. ` ~ n `~% -1•- moo I !7 N n o ~ axm a~o n~ a •• w N o i ~ ~' n ~Wm ~~~ No ry ~ rn N M ~ '~' w h,y m ro ~ w ~ +~ • n 00 7d r• to ~ gn 0 xa n rr ~ ~ ~~ ~ ;t ~r 0 n roro ~n ~~ N ~' N G) previous telecommunications, representations, or agreements, either ° verbal or written, between the parties hereto. Approvals required ~ by any other the parries shall not be unreasonably withheld. ° a x 2. LEACHATE TREATMLNT AND DISPpSAL. .The FPUA agrees that it shall accept Leachate conveyed from Q the County for treatment and disposal under the terms and ~ conditions provided herein, and shall not refuse to accept Leachate W for treatment and disposal, .except for non-payment of properly a1 rendered invoices or for failure to provide pretreatment should such pretreatment be determined to be necessary as provided for herein. 'ti ° 3. LEACHATE QUA.r,IT°; TESTING; PRE-TREATMENT. ~ A. The County agrees to comply with the provisions of N Sections II-3G, II-4. II-5, and II-6 of FPUA Resolution No. U.A. F~ 93-6 relating to industrial pretreatment requirements for N wastewater and as such requirements may be amended from time to ~, time to comply with i'ederal, state and local regulations. A copy of Resolution No. U.h. 93-6 is attached hereto as Exhibit "A". B. The County agrees that it shall not concentrate nor dilute Leachate after it leaves the holding ponds prior to conveyance of the Leachate to the FPUA. C. The Gounty agrees to provide for semi-annual sampling and analysis of the Leachate to be perforated by an independent laboratory certified in the State of Florida. The County shall direct the laboratory to provide the FPUA with a copy of the results of the initial and all subsequent sampling and analysis events. During Phase I operations, one sampling point shall be established at each location tram which Leachate is withdrawn for conveyance to FPUA. Upon commencement of Phase II operations the sampling point shall be the wetwell of the Leachate pump station. The first sampling an3 analysis shall be completed, and the report of same received accepted by the FPUA, prior to commencement of Phase I operations. Tate pollutants for which sampling and analysis shall be perforated are set forth in Section II-4 of FPUA Resolution U.A. 93-6 and as may be amended from time to time. D. The FPUA shall have the right at all times, upon giving reasonable notice, to have' a different independent laboratory certified in the State of Florida perform sampling and analysis at the established sampling points at the sole cost of the FPUA. If the FPUA elects to .lave such additional, sampling and analysis performed, it shall direct the laboratory to provide the County with a copy of the results of the sampling and analysis. -2- The County and FPUA acknowledge that, based on the E d ~ . results, of analyses of Leachate previously conducted,. no the County o pretreatment is required at the present time. However, sampling and analysis conducted f an lt x y s o agrees that if the resu the FPUA or any other agency, state or federal, indicate by it h , that one or more pollutants exceed the allowable limits set fort 93--6 or other federal, 0 in Article II of FPUA Resolution No. U.A. the County will cause an additional lations l ~ ~} , regu state or loca sampling and analysis by the independent laboratory certified in f di the State of Florida to be performed within fifteen~(15} days o that laboratory. The County receipt of the initial report from shall be responsible for the cost of the additional sampling and ~ analysis. ~ If the results of the retesting performed by the County F t~ . confirm the presence of one or more pollutants in excessive amounts federal agency having N as described above, ar if any state or aspect of the FPUA operation of the an ~ y jurisdiction over wastewater plant ox any adjunct operation thereto, asserts a r i N on, o problem, serves a notice of violation, or such similar act i ' s s use enters an order relative to its operation and the County the County shall immediately asserted to be a causative factor, employing the best available basis enc , y take action on an emerg technology for pretreatment, to remedy the problem. An additional sampling and analysis shall be conducted within one week after the h emergency pretreatment operations have coin¢nenced. retreatment and enc p h y emerg be responsible for .he cost of suc additional sampling and analysis. G. If the emergency pretreatment operations are effective in II-4 of FPUA i on achieving compliance with the provisions of Sect and applicable State or Federal law, rule 93-6 U A N , . . o. Resolution or regulation, the County shall have the option, at its sole ~~'-~ discretion, to either continue with such emergency pretreatment ermanent pretreatment t e p operations, or to construct and opera facilities. H. If the r_sults of the retesting performed after commencement of emergency pretreatment operations indicate that such operations are not effective in meeting the limitations of Section II-4 of Resolution No. U.A. 93-6 or other federal, state or local regulations, t:zen, upon the written request of the County, FPUA agrees to .give the County a reasonable time but not less than two (2} years to bring the Leachate back into compliance (the "Extension Period"}. If requested by FPUA in writing, the County agrees to discontinue the conveyance of Leachate to the FPUA force main during the Extension Period or until the Leachate is brought back into compliance. If the County does not request the Extension Period or if the County determines that it cannot bring the Leachate into compliance within the Extension Period, either the County or FPUA may terminate this Agreement. If either party so terminates this Agreement, FPUA agrees to refund to the County the -g_ remaining value of the Conveyance System as of the effective date of termination bassi on historical booked asset values (the "Refund"). Payment of the Refund to the County shall be made within six weeks of the effective date of termination of this Agreement. For the purposes of the Refund, the Conveyance System will be assumed to have a useful life of twenty (20) years. The remaining value to be refunded to the County will be an amount equal to the historical booked asset values divided by twenty (20) multiplied by the balance of the twenty (20j year life remaining at the termination date, expressed in years or fractions thereof; provided, however, that the parties agree that no refunds shall be made to the County after the facility has been in service for fifteen (15) years. 4. PHASE I. A. Delivery p~ Leachate. 1. The County agrees to deliver all Leachate in 6,000 gallon tanker trucks to the Discharge Point at the wetwell of FPUA Lift Station No. 59 located on Rock Road. The County agrees not to discharge Leachate into the FPUA system at any location other than the Discharge Point, unless permitted or directed to do so in writing by FPUA staff. FPUA agrees that it shall not permit any deliveries of wastes from any entities other than the County to be discharged into Lift Station No. 59. 2. The County agrees that it will limit all deliveries of Leachate to the period of 7 a.m. to 5 p.m., Monday through Saturday, and excluding holidays. The County shall limit its deliveries to a maximum of twenty (20) truck loads during any~7 a.m, to 5 p.m. delivery period. 3. FPUA shall allow the County to deliver Leachate by tanker truck until the Phase II improvements have been constructed, are placed into service, and actually conveying Leachate. B. Payment. The County will pay tv the FPUA an amount not to exceed $25.20 per tanker truck load equivalent to $4.20 per thousand gallons of Leachate. All tanker trucks shall be presumed to deliver full load of 6,000 gallons. The rate of $9.20 per thousand gallons shill be construed as including all .Sewer surcharge fees far: chemical oxygen demand ("C.O.D."); biochemical oxygen demand ("B.O.D."j; suspended solids ("SS"); and total fats, oil, and grease ("TFOG"). 5. PRASE zz. The long-term method of conveying Leachate contemplated by this Agreement is through the construction of a "Conveyance System" ) to include a pump station at the Glades Road Landfill, construction of a 6" diameter force main along the route described bd 0 0 x tD GJ ~1 ro c~ N N N 01 -4- in paragraph 5.A.2. below, and discharge into the FPUA force main The County shall tation lift ~ . s adjacent to the Palm Lake Gardens be responsible for all costs associated with the .design and ~ O construction of the Conveyance System. x A. Conveyance 5vstem. Q 1. Upon execution of this Agreement by all parties, the te ~ m. County shall commence the design phase far the Conveyance Sys ermits and easemennts. ll l f ~ p or a e The County shall be responsib ded for the Conveyance System. FPUA shall permit the County to e e n utilize FPUA easements when available. Upon approval of the design asements and ~ by the FPUA, and the obtaining of all necessary e ursuant to County Purohasing Policy, shall t ~, ~ , p y permits, the Coun immediately commence the bidding and construction phase of the roject th e p project and shall use its best efforts to complete ths of execution of this agreement. N within eighteen (18) mon ~ 2. The pump station force main and related b N e appurtenances which comprise the Conveyance System to hall be generally as follows: pump t C ~ y s oun constructed by the station at the Glades.~oad Landfill shall be of sufficient capacity to deliver Leachate to the Palm Lakes Garden lift station; the ll run h a force main receivinc flow from the pump station s northeastward along G_ades Road under the Florida Turnpike, cross the Florida East Coast Railroad east of the Florida Turnpike, run generally parallel to the Florida Turnpike southeastward in or near Road Midwa y the Chiquita property to Midway Road, run parallel to and run parallel to ad R l , o ey eastward along Midway Road to Haw Hawley Road northward along the went side of Hawley Road to the FPUA's Palm Lake Gardens lift station. Any modifications to the route must be agreed t.o by the parties in writing. 3. During the design phase of the Conveyance System, County staff and/or i~s designee, shall meet as needed with FPUA d facilitate the design t e an staff and/or its designee to coordina The County shall furnish all necessary easements, road rocess . p right-of-way use permits, and a complete set of design ,documents, The A . plans and specificaticns, for review and approval by the FPU basis for construction. accepted design documents shall serve. as a ll select a contractor(s) to construct the h a The County s Conveyance System based on the standard County purchasing policies and provide a proposed contract with that contractor(s) to FPUA for and i ew z'eview and approval. FPUA shall have the right to rev evaluate the contract cocuments and acquisition and installation of materials. If FPUA determines there are deficiencies in the ropriate action to ke a ll t h pp a a contract documents, t`:e County s correct the deficienciies. Said review and evaluation of bids or contract documents by the FPUA shall not relieve the County of any responsibilities and liabilities for defects in said contracts. -5-- 4. .The County shall furnish inspection of construction, shop drawing approvals, change order approvals, project certification, and record drawings. Upon completion and approval of the project by t~ze FPUA, the County shall convey title of the Conveyance System to the FPUA from the Point of Connection downstream to the termination point of the project at the Palm Lake Gardens Lift station. Both parties agree -that the "Paint of Connection" shall be the upstream connection fitting of the farce main to the meter in the meter pit to be situated at the point at - which the force main first crosses the property line of the Glades Road Landfill. Upon acceptance of the project, the FPUA shall own, operate and maintain such facilities from the Point of Connection downstream. S. The County shall incorporate into the design and construction of the meter pit at the Point of Connection, a meter suitable for measuring the flow of Leachate. The meter~shali be capable of recordinc and displaying totalized flows. Both County and FPUA staff sha1.1 have access to the locked meter pit. FPUA meter reading personnel shall read the flow meter each month and record the totalized flow. The FPUA shall use such totalized flows as the basis for rendering monthly bills to the County. The FPUA shall have the flow meter inspected and calibrated at least bi- annually (once every two years) by the manufacturer or a person qualified to perfoxn such inspections. The FPUA shall bear the total cost of such bi-annual inspection and calibration. The FPUA shall furnish a copy of the report of such bi-annual inspection and calibration to the Gounty. The County shall have the right at any time, upon giving ~f reasonable notice to the FQUA, to have additional inspections and calibzations performed of the flow meter if the County believes the meter is not operating within its design - accuracy range. If :he meter is found to be operating outside i.ts _ design accuracy range, the FPUA shall bear the total cost of such - meter inspection and calibration; if the rnetez~ is found to be operating within its design accuracy range, the County shall bear the cost of such meter inspection and calibration. ,.. - 6. The C©unty agrees to assign, to the FPUA, contractor warranties for the completed work pursuant. to this agreement. The warranty shall begin on the date of final acceptance by the FPUA. The terms of the warranty shall be that the Contractor shall reimburse the FPUA for any work required to be done on the project resulting front defc_encies in ar failure of the design, materials or installation done pursuant thereto. 7. The County agrees to pay all fees and costs associated with the Conveyance System up to the time of acceptance by the FPUA including, but not limited to, consultants, testing, permitting, utility connections, surveying, legal, construction management, certification, bands, warranties, and record drawings. The County shall bear the cost of construction of a 6-i.nch diameter 0 O x ro c~ N N N -6- force main, and the FPUA shall be responsible for any additional cost of sizing the :=orce main larger than 6-inch diameter. g. The County agrees to convey title to the FPQA for the facilities it construota, downstream from the Point of Connection, under tie teams of this agreement, as a contribution- in-aid-of-canstruct~on. The FPUA agrees to accepg theorCoanveother System in lieu of any impact fee, connection ohar e, Y capital charge. ^he FPUA agrees that it will enter into a reimbursement .agreement with the County for a fair share pro-rata reimbursement within one year of completion of the project. FPUA agrees not to allow anyone to connect to the line until it has entered into a reimbursement agreement with the County. The purpose of such a reimbursement agreement is to allow the County to be reimbursed for a portion of construction costs when other customers connect to the line. The County will not reasonably withhold approval of such an agreement. Nothing in this Agreement shall be construed to prevent the County from imposing special assessments against properties that may specially benefit from the construction of the facilities if the FPUA and. the County do not enter into such an agreement within the specified time. In the event the County im;~oses a special assessment district, the FPUA agrees that it will not allow oonnectians by persons within the district who had nc~t paid the assessment to the County or made other arrangements satisfactory to the County for ~a period of 15 years from the placement of the line into use. Any payments made to the County shall be credited against amounts. if any, due from the FPUA to the .County in the event of termination of this agreement. 9. The County agrees that if .sections of the force main are south of the centerline of Midway Road, FPUA may connect wastewater customers tram .the north side of Midway Road to that ;.~., force main. The County pumping systems will have suffa.cient ;~~: capacity so that re-pumping of Leachate will not be required at the "' Sheriff Office's lif = station or at Palm Lake Gardens lift station. B. Treatment CaDaci.ty. 1. The County currently contemplates that it will require an ultimate rapacity of 100,000 gallons per day, computed as the average daily flow during any consecutive 30-day period. However, if the County determines at some future ,time that j.t requires additional capacity beyond the 100,000 .gallons per day, the County shall regiest in writing from the FPUA such additional capacity. The Count~• shall not exceed the 100,000 gallons per day limit unless and until it receives written approval from the FPUA to do so. 2. The County agrees to mitigate its impact on the capacity of the FPUtA.`s conveyance and treatment facilities by pumping all Leachate volume at a relatively constant rate over 24 _7_ 0 0 x ~a t~ hours each day. If and when pumping leachate during system peak oar hours places burden upon the Conveyance System, the County agrees to coordinate with t:ie FPUA to modify its time of pumping and flow ~ rates to reduce such burden, p x C. Payment, 1. The County shall be classified as an Industrial User, but not a Significant User, as such terms are defined ~.n FPUA Resolution No. U.A. 93--6. The County shall obtain an Industrial Wastewater Discharge Permit, and pay all required fees for such permit. Upon commencement of operations of the Conveyance System, the FPUA shall commence billing the County monthly as an Qutside City -General Service Gustamer in accordance with the prevailing wastewater user charge system. In addition to the wastewater user charges, the County agrees to pay any Sewer surcharge fees for those pollutants determined from the semi-annual sampling events to exceed the standard strength concentrations set forth in Section III-4A of FPUA Resolution No. U.A. 93-6. 2. The County agrees to pay to the FPUA, at the time of commencement of operations, the prevailing Sewer Initiation Charge and Sewer Deposit for the size of meter installed in the meter pit at the Point of Connection. Such charges shall be based on the Outside City - General customer classification. The County agrees to install a properly sized meter in the meter pit at the Point of Connection, and convey said meter to the FPUA as a contribution-in- aid-of-construction. In recognition of the County bearing the cost of the meter installation, the FPUA agrees to accept such installation in lieu of any Meter and Service Charge for the County. - 3. The Ccunty agrees to be billed monthly at the FPUA's - prevailing, wastewater user charge schedule based on the outside City - General Customer rate for the size of meter actually installed in the meter pit at the Point of Connection, and the totali2ed flows read by FPUA meter reading personnel. ~. If FPCA can demonstrate a higher cost of operation as a direct result of the County exceeding the limits specified in Section II--4 of U.A. Resolution No. 93-6, including, but not limited to, the cost of solids residuals disposal, the County shall bear the total additional cost thus demonstrated. 6. TERMINATION. A. Any of the parties to this Agreement may terminate for cause or for a breacr. or violation of any terms or conditions of this Agreement. In the event of litigation arising out of the terms of this Agreement, the prevailing party shall be entitled tc reasonable fees and costs. ~1 t~ N N N 0 -8- B. Tf the County fails to pay its monthly payments within sixty (60) days of the date on which such payment is due, FPUA shall be entitled to terminate this Agreement upon not less than fifteen (15 ) days prior written notice to the County, provided, however, that the County shall be entitled to cue~~.ode default in payment prior to the expiration of this notice p C. The County shall have the right to terminate this Agreement without cau the eventtthe6Gounty determines toe terminate provided, however, i.n the County shall not be the Agreement pursuant to this subsection, entitled to any reimbursement from FPUA for the cost of the line extension. 7. CONDITZON5 OF ANLIEXATION. The County agrees to sign the City's standard annexation agreement an condition that the City will not exercise any rights to annex the County's landfill property soonez' than fifteen (151 years from the date the County signs the annexation agreement. If the City annexes the St. Lucie County Gladethe Cit aadrees (the "Landfill") into the jurisdiction of the City, y g that it shall not enact or enforce any regulation (hereinafter referred to as the "Conditions of Annexation") which would in any way affect the operation of the Landfill without the express ~ written consent of t~ze County oz unless the City is specifically _ required to do sa by clear mandate of a State or Federal statute, rule or regulation. Regulation of ulationsnr elatedyta zoning includes, but is not limited to, reg ~x=: land use designation,' site. plan or any other development ~';,;" regiklations. The parties stipulate and agree .that this agreement ;;:~;; on behalf of the City with respect to the Conditions of Annexation `""`~ is a material consideration for the County to enter into this Agreement and except for the City's agreement to the Conditions of Annexation, the County would not have entered into this Agreement• The Landfill. is the existing county landfill being operated by St. Lucie County, Florida. The County wishes to deliver leachate from said Landfill fcr the purpose of treatment and disposal to the FPUA Wastewater Trea~ment Plant. As an express consideration and condition of this Agreement, the City agrees that if the annexation of the County Landfill ever occurs, the City wi~l never try to regulate, restrict, manage, control or limit the operation of said County Landfill. The City will not restrict the opening of new cells, will not restrict the expansion of said Landfill and will not restrict the further development of said ILandfi.ll. t~ {j1 ca N N µ -9- the County shall have the right to seek injunctive relief or 0 ~y to seek damages if the City should violate any of the terms or attempt to t ~ 0 o any conditions of this Interlocal Agreement as id Landfill. f t 0 x sa o regulate ar restrict the developmen Both the City and the County agree that under Florida Statute 0 403.706, the governing body of the County has been given the f the Glades Road ti ~ on o responsibility and the power for the opera d the City would have no authority ox' power to ll ~ , an Landfi interfere with the County in operating said Landfill. The only dfills l 01 an other governmental bodies with any authority to regulate vironmental Protection and the Federal f E n are the Department o ro Government. ~ 8. NOTICE All notices or other cottmnunications hereunder shall be in ~ writing and shall be deemed duly given if delivered in person or t requested and addressed as n recei t il N p re ur sent by certif ied ma follows: If to County: With a copy to: St. Lucie County Administrator St. Lucie County Attorney 2300 Virginia Avenue, Annex 2300 Vizginia Avenue, Annex ida 34982 Fl or FoXt Pierce, Florida 34982 Fort Pierce, Public Works Director 2300 Virginia Avenue, Annex Fort Pierce, Florida 34982 _ If to FPUA: With a copy to: :~_~<_~ '-:~~ Director of Utilities FPUA Attorney Fort Pierce Utilities Authority Fort Pierce Utilities Authority ~~; 206 South Sixth Street 206 South Sixth Street ,. - ' ::.. P.O. Box 3191 P.O. Box 3191 Fox't Pierce, Florida 34948 Fort Pierce, Florida 34948 If to the City: With a copy to: City Manager Fort Pierce City Attorney City of Fort Pierce 100 North U.S. One 100 North U.S. One P. 0. Box 1480 Fort Pierce, Florida 34950 Fort Pierce, Florida 34954 9. AUDIT; ND TERRITORIAL AGREEMENT. The parties agree that the other party or any of its duly authorized representatives shall, until the expiration of three (3) -10- years after expenditure of funds under this Agreement, have access. to and the right to examine any directly pertinent books, documents, papers, and records of that party involving transactions o related to this Agreement. This Agreement shall not be construed to ~° constitute a territorial agreement, nor to prohibit the FPUA from 0 extending service to~any area to which it may lawfully do so. p ~~ x Z0. PUBLIC RECORDS a The parties agree to allow public access to all documents, t¢ papers, letters, or other material subject to the provisions of W Chapter 119, Florida Statutes, and made or received by them in ~ conjunction with thx.s Agreement. 11. ASSIGNMENT ,ti Neither party shall assign this Agreement to any other persons ~ or firm without first obtaining the other parties' approval. 12. FILING N N This Agreement and any subsequent amendments thereto shall be N filed with the Cle.k of the Circuit Court of St. Lucie County ~ pursuant to Section 163.Q1(11), Florida Statutes. BOARD OF COUNTX COMMISSIONERS,.:.,, ATTEST: ST. hUCZE COUNTX, FLORIDA;~~~' ~j ~• D pu p,, r cIiAl~i:~+iAN `. . , ~~. ,.. ._ ~ ~ p APPRO AS TO FORM D ;~ ` I FORT PIERCE UTILITIES A(IT~iORITX ATTEST ;. ~./ SECRETARYCHAIRMAN APPROVED AS TO FORM AND CORRECTNESS: ,, . . , ~'. i . /~, . ,Y' i~ Y:: ~,•, y~Fp »~ ., -~ L.' ~;~ ;4. j Nn: v FPUA Attoruey~ "~ CITY OF FORT PIERCE ,,~ BY : ~ er~~'C~~ ~' ` ~j Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM AND CORRECTNESS: `~ - C City A tarney 0 W O x ~D Qt ^~ V, N N ~P -12- INTER-OFFICE MEMORANDUM COUNTY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA T0: Board of County Commissioners County Administrator Growth Management Director Utility Services Director FROM: Daniet McIntyre, County Attorney C.A. NO: 09-15$9 DATE: December 4, 2009 SUBJECT: Walmart Annexation Agreement Attached is a copy of the October 20, 2003 Pre-Annexation Agreement between the City of Fort Pierce and Walmart, along with a proposed First Amendment to the Agreement. DSM/cb H:\DSM-BCC-Walmart.wpd OITY OF FORT PIERCE -OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY MEMORANDUM TO: Cassandra Steele, City Clerk FROM: Robert V. Schwerer, Esq., City Attorney SUBJECT: Annexation of Wal-Mart Distribution Center DATE: November 23, 209 I attach three (3) original sets of the First Amendment to Pre-Annexation Agreement. which has now been executed by Wal-Mart. The agreement needs to be executed by the City and FPUA. This agreement pertains to the early annexation of the Wal-Mart Distribution Center located off Selvitz Road adjacent to the County's landfill property. 1 am requesting that everyone please review and become familiar with the terms of this First Amendment. It would be preferable if this agreement is submitted to the Commission for approval simultaneously with our standard Annexation Ordinance annexing this property. By copy of this memorandum, I am requesting that the City's Annexation Coordinator work with your office in creating the Annexation Ordinance which should thereafter be p--operly advertised and scheduled for Commission action on the first avai]able agenda. Approval of this agreement should be the immediately preceding agenda item. However, if the Comtnissiou would prefer to approve this agreement separately from the annexation, the agreement can be scheduled on a Commission agenda but the property will not be annexed until a proper ordinance is prepared, advertised, and adopted. Within 45 days after the effective date of the annexation, Wal-Matt will be submitting to the City a completed form that is required by the Florida Department of Revenue relating to certain City taxes. Within 30 days following receipt of such form, the City is to submit the form to the St. Lucie County Property Appraiser for completion as required by the statutes. Thereafter, the City is to promptly consider adoption of an ordinance providing far exemption of all taxes as set forth in the Pre-Annexation Agreement. You will find these requirements at Paragraphs 7 and 8, respectively, of the agreement. Please note our office alre<lcly has a preliminary draft of the ordinance that will provide for exemption of such taxes. Finally, you will note that the FPUA, as a signatory to the original agreement, is also being asked to sign this amendment. By copy of this memorandum to the FPUA counsel, I am requesting that Mir. Koblegard please take whatever action is necessary to have his Board approve and execute this document. Nleasa let me know if you have any questions- ~.--'"~ ,-' Robert V. Sch erer, Lsq-----__--- - City Attorney Enclosures RVS/cf ca: Fot1: fierce Mayor & Commissioners David L. Recar, City Manager Gltiria Jol.tttson, Finance. Director Matthew .11~Iargotta, .Uirec:tor of Community Response R. N. I~oblegard, III, Esq. Susan I'. Motley, Fsq. 2 $:tC=ilp Att.irnerytCurre.nt File pbldaYslMtiMOS.RVStSteele, C.nssnndrnlWol-tclari I)intrilxttimt (:aMar Atmexatinn 1 f-23•(N:dcx FIRST AMENDMENT TO PRE-ANNEXATION AGREEMENT This First Amendment ("Amendment") to that certain Pre-Annexation Agreement dated October 20, 2003 is herein entered by and among the City of Font Pierce, Florida, a mutucipal corporation ("City"), the Font Pierce Utilities Authority {"FPUA"), a special district organized under the Charter of Fort Pierce, and Wal-Mart Stores East, LP, a Delaware limited partnezship ("Wal-Mart" or "Owner"). WITNESSETII WHEREAS, certain property owned by Wal-Mart ("Property") is the subject of that certain Pre-Annexation Agreement, a copy of which is attached hereto and made a part hereof as Exhibit "A", and such Property is now contiguous to the boundaries of the City as of January 1, 20()4; and WHEREAS, the Pre-Annexation Agreement provides that annexation shall take place ten {10) years after the Property becomes contiguous to the boundaries of the City; and WHEREAS, the City desires to annex the Property into the boundaries of the City of Fort Pierce at this time rather than at a later date as set forth in the Pre-Annexation Agreement; and WHEREAS, the Owner is willing to annex earlier conditioned upon certain valuable inducements and considerations described herein including, but not limited to, a reduction in water and sewer utility fees and energy franchise fees which will result from such annexation; and WHEREAS, the parties agree that for puzposes of this Amendment the business of the Owner conducted on the aforesaid Property is, and constitutes, a "new business" as defined by Florida Statutes, Section 196.012{15)(a} by virtue of the nature of the business activities of the Owner and the number of employees engaged thereon, and this business meets all of the RM:6683315:4 1 requirements of Section 196.012 to be an eligible "new business" for ad valorem tax and personal property tax exemptions as provided by Article VII, Section 3 of the Florida Constitution, and general law; and WHEREAS, on November 5, 2002, a majority of voters in the City of Fort Pierce approved and adopted the Fort Pierce Economic Development Referendum, whereby the City was then authorized to grant certain tax exemptions pursuant to Section 3, Article VII of the Florida Constitution, to new businesses and expansions of existing businesses; and WHEREAS, the parties are entering into this Amendment with the intention to be bound by each of the provisions set forth herein. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the muhral promises and covenants contained herein and~other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, the parties hereto agree as follows: 1. The above recitals are true and coi~reci and are incorporated herein by reference. Any exhibits to this agreement are hereby deemed a part hereof. 2. The parties agree that the annexation described herein is expressly subject to the approve! of this Amendment by the City and the enactment of an ordinance (or ordinances) to effectuate this Amendment. 3. The Property shall be annexed into the City with consent of the Owner subject to all of the conditions subsequent set forth herein. 4. The City agrees that upon annexation, the six (b) existing billboards located on the Property shall constitute lawful non-conforming structures and shall be treated as such with regard to the City's Codes. RM:6683315;4 2 S. From the effective date of the annexation until January 1, 2414 (the date the annexation would have occurred pursuant to t}te Pre-Annexation Agreement), the City shall not assess ad valorem taxes or tangible personal property taxes (collectively "City Taxes") on the Property, or on any additional improvements to the Property installed prior to January 1, 2014, or on any of the business assets located thereon. All City Taxes due until January 1, 2014 are hereby waived and the Owner exempt from payment of such taxes. After January 1, 2014, City Taxes shall be assessed in the manner provided for by law, except for those certain taxes exempted under the terms of the Pre-Annexation Agreement which shall remain in full force and effect, except as specifically amended herein. 6. Nothing set forth herein, or in the Pre-Annexation Agreement, shall prohibit the right of Wal-Mart to challenge any tax assessment at any time pursuant to state, county or local law. 7. In order to effectuate the exemptions described above, the Owner shall submit to the City, within forty-five (45) days after the effective date of the annexation, a completed form, as required by the Florida Department of Revenue pursuant to Piorida Statutes, Section 8. Within thirty (30) days following the City's receipt of such form, the City shall submit the form to the St. Lucie County Property Appraiser for completion and return as provided by Section 19G.1995 (9)(a-d), wltereupan the City shall promptly consider adoption of an ordinance providing for exemption of all the taxes provided for herein and in the Pre- Annexation Agreement. g. This Amendment and Pre-Annexation Agreement sets forth all of the promises, covenants, agreements, condi#ions and understandings among the parties and supersedes all prior RM:6683315:4 3 and contemporaneous agreements, understandings, inducements or conditions, express or implied, oral or written, except as contained herein. 10. A(1 pronouns and any variations thereof shall be deemed to refer to the masculine, feminine and neuter; singular or plural, as the identity of the party or parties, personal representatives, successors or assigns may require. I1. Each party acknowledges that the other is relying upon the terms of the Amendment, the representations of the parties and their respective authority to enter into and perform their obligations under this Amendment, and that all parties have complied with all procedural and substantive conditions precedent or subsequent in so doing. 12. The invalidity of any provision hereof shall in no way affect or invalidate the remainder of this agreement but shall be severed and shall be of no fiuther force or effect whatsoever. 13. This Amendment may be executed in one or more counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original, but all of which shall together constitute one and the same instrument. 14. This Amendment shall be construed in accordance with the laws of the State of Florida, and any proceedings arising between the parties in any manner pertaining to this agreement shall, to the extent permitted by law, be submitted to a court in St. Lucie County, Florida. 15. The obligations imposed pursuant to this Amendment shall inure to the benefit of any heirs or successors to the ownership of the Property, shall run with, and bind, the Property as covenants running with the land and shall be binding upon, and enforceable by, the parties hereto, their successors, grantees and assigns. A duplicate original of this agreement may be RM:6683315:4 4 recorded in the Public Records of St. Lucie County, Florida, for the purpose of serving as notice to all. persons or entities. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this agreement as of the date and. year written above: tress / ~" , _~ Printed I'dame:~i7SfiI1E~. ~~.u~•%G,~ ~~ ~~~> Witness s Printed Name• QC~,-~- (~'tr.~l'~o€~ STATE OF ARKANSAS j SS: COUNTY OF BENT4N ) WAL-MART STORES EAST, LP, a Delaware limited partnership By: WSE MANAGEMENT, LLC, a Delaware limited liability compan and Gei •ai P ~. B. I HEREBY CERTIFY that an this day, before me, an officer duly authorized in the Stats aforesaid and in the County aforesaid to take acknowledgments,. the foregoing instrument was acluiowledged before me by .:~ ~L , as y~7%rsrY~~r' , of WSE MANAGEMENT,. LLC, a Delawar~~ted liability company, the General Partner of WAL-MART STORES EAST, LP, a Delaware limited partnership, freely and voluntarily under authority duly vested in him byy the limited liability company. He/she is personally known to me or has produced .1V/A ~ identification. WITNESS my hand and official seal in the County and State last aforesaid this 1~day of1Y~~6u~ , 200 My Colnmission Expires: ,,7 ~~ ;,l~:,rv .: t ~, ~~ o t "tVC3'i'E1t-7Y 5 t~L'` CAIidL FUNK 3tede of Arkansas, Macflson County I,Ay Comrn(saion Expites 10-1 tiJ2015 , RM;6683315:4 ~~ ~" ~~~~ Nlo~tary Public \ .h r,cti ~ ~~t r1 ~J __ Printed, typed or stamped name of Notary Public 5 CITY OF FO~tT PIERCE, FLORIDA By: ATTEST: Cassandra Steele, City Ctexk A oved as Form and GorxecMess: o . Schwexer, Esquire City Attorney RM:6683315:4 FORT PIERCE UTILITIES AUTHORITY Approved as to Form and Correctness: By: Name: Title: K.N. Koblegard, III, Esquire Ariorney for FPUA STATE OF FLORIDA } } SS COUNTY OF ST. LUCIE } I HEREBY CERTIFY that on this day before me, a Notary Public duty authorized in the State and County named above to take acknowledgments, personally appeared to me known to be the person described as the of Fort Pierce Utilities Authority, who signed the foregoing instrument as such person, and acknowledged the execution thereof to be his/her free act and deed as such person for the uses and purposes therein mentioned, and heJshe affixed thereto the official seal of said corporation, and that the said instrument is the act and deed of said corporation. WITNESS my hand and official seal in the State and county last aforesaid this day of _.2009. NOTARY PUBLIC, State of Florida at Large Print Name: My Commission Expires: RM:6683335:4 EXHIBIT `~A" (12 pages total) to First Amendment to Pre-Annexation Agreement dated October 20, 2043 bet~vveen the City of Fort Pierce, Florida, the Fort Pierce Utilities Authority, and Wal-Mart Stoxes East, LP. l:~Y jl C i%s= Crii4i Li F`t~'ua ris` r3 i=~. ~: <.; ... ~ ~ ~. l ;~,~. ;;.;;;, ; c.z3 _ PRE~ANNEXATIQN AC~tEEMENT This Pre-Annexation ("Agreement") is made and entered into this ~~' day of ~~~-pr(?er.-~ , 20Q3 between the CITY OF FORT PIERCE, FLORIDA, a municipal corporation ("CITY"), the FORT PIERCE UTILITIES AUTHORITY ("FPUA"), a Special District organized under the Charter of Fort Pierce, and WAL-MART STORES EAST, L.P, a Delaware limited partnership ("WAL-MART"' or "OWNER"). WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, Owner owns approximately z31.o7 acres of real property, located in (Nixed IIse Development -Midway/lades) unincorporated St. Lucie County, Florida ("C;ounty"), which is designated Hxn on the (Industrial Light County's Land Use Plan, zoned IL and is legally descn~bed on Exhibit "A" attached hereto and made a part hereof ("Property"}; and WHEREAS, Owner has obtained site plan approval from the County for a warehouse m Y o ~' m z " " `~' distribution center ( DC ); and ~ ~ ~ a~Q WHEREAS, Owner desires water and wastewater utility service for the Property; and o N w `~~ WHEREAS, the Property is located within the exclusive service area of the FPUA and o ri,',~'- c,i m m ~a outside the current municipal boundaries of the City; and c7'm ~c µ p° F7J WHEREAS, Owner acknowledges that the City has a policy requiring annexation of any ~ om o~ • property incident to the furnishing of utility services by the FPUA once such property becomes ~,-~ ~~ contiguous to the City; and ~ n Q m c WHEREAS, the City and FPUA have agreed to serve the Property with water and ~-+ ~` wastewater utilities and the Owner has agreed to annex the Property info the City subject to the terms z: and conditions of this Agreement and as more fully described herein; and ~ Pre-Annexation Agreement M m DC Fort Pierce, FL ~ 0 #7038-00 ~ --~ -~ Exhibit "A" (1 of 12) 'WHEREAS, the parties are entering this Agreement with the intent to be bound by each of the provisions herein. NOW, 'THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual promises and covenants contained herein, and other good and va{uable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, the parties hereto agree as follows: The foregoing recitations are true and correct and are incorporated herein by reference. Any exhibits to this Agreement are hereby deemed a part hereof. 2. Ciiy agrees that the voluntary annexation of the Property is expressly contingent upon the approval of this Pre-Annexation Agreement by the City. 3. Owner agrees that in consideration of the furnishing of water and wastewater services to the Property, or any portion thereof, that this Agreement shalt be considered as a voluntary application for the annexation of the Property to be annexed into the City of Fort Pierce, Florida =, should the Property, or any portion thereof, become contiguous to the municipal boundaries of the ~ X City (as such term is defined by the laws of Florida); provided, however, the Ciiy agrees to defer N .... -.~ annexation of the Property until ten (10} yeazs after the property becomes contiguous to the rn municipal boundaries of the City. Additionally, in the first year the Property is annexed within the City, Owner shall receive a 100% exemption from City's ad valorem real property taxes; in year 2 Owner shall receive a 90% exemption from City's ad valorem real property taxes; in year 3 Owner shall receive a 60% exemption from City's ad valorem real property taxes; in year 4 Owner shall receive a 40% exemption from City's ad valorem real property taxes; in year S Owner shall receive a 20% exemption from City's ad valorem real property taxes. 4. In enteringthis Agreement, Owner far itself, its representatives, successors and assigns does also hereby approve the annexation of the Property into the City of Fori Pierce, Florida subject Pre-Annexation AgrBement Dt„ Fort Pierce, FT. $'7038-00 Exhibit "A" (2 of 12) to the terms and conditions contained herein and consents thereto, and in doing so waives any and a!I objections to annexation of the Property and agrees that this Agreement shall be construed to satisfy all requirements of law for consent to, or approval of, such annexation now or hereafter required under the terms and conditions of this Agreement. The City agrees that upon annexation; the DC shall not constitute anon-conforming use or structure provided that it was built in compliance with a!t applicable County codes at the Lime of construction, and the City agrees that Owner sha{I have the right to expand the use within the County's building setback requirements applicable at the time of the original construction of the DC. 6. The FPUA agrees to serve the Property with water and wastewater services in accordance with the specifications set forth in Exhibit "$" to this Agreement. 7. FPUA's capital improvement charges for Owner's water and wastewater shall not exceed the following: Water: 55,000 gpol300 gpd per ERC =183.33 ERCs 3 83.33 ERCs x $7,378 perERC =$252.629 Wastewater: 55,000 gpd1240 gpd per ERC = 229.17 ERCs 229.17 ERCs x $1,222 per ERC $280.04 Total Capital Improvement Charges (Water & Wastewater) _ $532,b75. 8. Unti3 annexation, Gity or FPUA agree not to impose fees or surcharges to Owner which exceed the formula which is charged to similar properties that are serviced by P'PUA with utilities outside the City's municipal limits: The Owner acknowledges that the FPUA shat! be the exclusive service provider for water and wastewater services for the Property and the DC, pwner agrees that any and all agreements, whether written or oral, with any other service provider for water or wastewater services to the Property or the DC, including but not limited to certain existing development agreements with Pre-Annexation Agzaement DC ~'t_ Pierce, FL X7038--00 0 0 n~ 'D m -a Exhibit "A" (3 of 12) St. Lucie County for such utility services to the DC, shall be cancelled and made void and of no further force and effect as they apply to these utility services. In exchange, the City agrees to acknowledge and confirm that Owner's Property wilt no longer be a part or subject to the claims contained in that certain Lawsuit entitled CITY OF FORT PIERCE. a Florida muni dal corporation. and the FORT PIERCE UTILITIES AUTHORITY a Special District organized under the Charter of Fort Pierce v CITY OF PORT ST LUCIE a Florida municipal corporation and ST. LUCIE COUNTY, a political subdivision of the State of Florida, now pending in the Circuit Court ofthe Nnetecnth Judicial Circuit in and for St. Lucie County, Florida, Casc No.: 03-CA-400530 (OC) (the "Lawsuit"). Within thirty (30) days after this Agreement is fully executed by the parties hereto, the Ci#y shall either amend its Lawsuit or file appropriate notices or pleadings acknowledging that aft issues of the Lawsuit which in any way relate specifically to the Property have been resolved. ] 0. This Agreement sets forth aq of the promises, covenants, agreements, conditions and understanding among the parties hereto, and supersedes all prior and contemporaneous agreements, understandings, inducements or conditions, express or irnpIied, oral or written, except as herein Contained. 11. All pronouns and any variations thereof shall be deemed to refer to the masculine, fenunine and neuter, singular or plural, as the identity ofthe party or parties, personal representatives, successors or assigns may reyuire. , . 12. Each party acknowledges that the other is relying upon this Agreement, the representations oftheparties, and their respective authority to enter into and perform their obligations under this Agreement, and that al] parties have complied with .alt procedural and substantive conditions precedent to doing so. Pre-Annexation Agreement pC Ft. Pierce, FL X703$-00 0 a° -v m r Exhibit "A" (4 of 12) - - 13. The invalidity ofany provision hereofshall in no way affector invalidate the remainder _ " ' of this Agreement. 14. This Agreement may be executed in one or more counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original, but all of which shall together constitute one and the same instrument. 15. This Agreement shat! be constnsed in accordance with the laws ofthe State of Florida, and any proceeding arising between the parties in any manner pertaining to this Agreement shall, to the extent permitted bylaw, beheld in St. Lucie County, Florida. ' 26. The obligations imposed pursuant to this Agreement shall run with and bind the Property as covenants running with the Property and this Agreement shall be binding upon and enforceable by and against the parties hereto, their successors, grantees and assigns, and a duplicate original of this Agreement, may be recorded in the .Public Records of St. Lucie County, Fiorida.for the purpose of serving as notice to all persons or enfsties. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed ibis Agreement as of the day and year written above. CITY OF FORT P CE, FLORxDA Cs ~ '. - ~ - ~~ ~~C.~ 1 ~ ";, :1 ti's,. _ •`~:.~...y'~.:• ` . "'"~:'~pp~gv', ~as~ o~Foi~'and Correctness: Robert V. Schw , Esqu'u"e Assistant City Attorney Pre-Annexation Agreement DC Ft. p3.erce, FL #7038-00 o' 0 m v m Exhibit "A" (5 of 12) FORTPIERCE UTILITIES AUT`$ORTTY Approved as to Form and Correctness: R.N. Knob-le~gard, XTI, fisquire Attorney for FPUA STATE OF FLORIDA ) SS: COUNTY OF ST. LUCIE ) Name.. ,. :. ~xomasrs:t~;..~~~erona~~`....: Title: ,`~. r" ,ChaYt~t.. ••J: ~ • ~ ;7 . w_ ~ > z' . ~., ~ r~.; 1.. -'Q'C ' ... s .. I HEREBY C`ERTIF'Y that on this day before me, a Notary Public duly authorized in the State and County named above to take acknowledgments, personally appeared 9~homas x . Perona to me known to be the person described as the Chairman of Fort Pierce Utilities Authority, who signed the foregoing instrument as such person, and acknow}edged the execution thereof to be his/her free act and deed as such person for the uses and purposes therein mentioned, and helshe affixed thereto the official seal ofsaid carporation, and that the said instrument is the act and deed of said corporation, WITNESS my hand and official seal in the State and County last aforesaid this ~-1~' day of Cie }t, be ~ , 2003. ~~J.~,t~tL ~. o~arL..~ Notary Public-State of orida at Large Printed: ~~r32R ~. t~o NAti My Commission Expires: • Delia E Rohan ~.. MYCOMtrtlssiJPiP p014249I ~!E$ • May 7, 2x17 ea+o~omaumarrw RIC ~~. N Pre-Annexation Agreement UC Ft. Fierce, FL @7038-00 0 ~-, °o x r~ m a D -, Exhibit "A" (6 of 12) WAL-MART STORES EAST, )LP, a Delaware limited partnership Signature Printed: ~r~ 1~,~•~er- Si ature ~ ted: ~`L/Zy,~~if/ .~ ~~ By: WSE IViANA~ Delaware liar i Tts General P~ Wiley Lott, Director of Real Estate, Distribution Centers~~ Apprr~v ~ a~ t~ feral terms ority STATE OIL ARKANSAS ) ~y~u~~Y ~~ ss: WAL-n:. ,..; ..~~~1 ~ SPY coul~y o>F BENTON ) Date: 9-Z~~ z I HEREBY CER'I`~Y that on this day before me, a officer duly autharized in the State and County named above to take acknowledgments, the foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me by Wiley Lott, Director of Real Esta#e, Distribution Centers, of WSE Management, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company, freely and voluntarily under authority duly vested in him by said company and that the seal af'f'ixed thereto is the true corporate seal of said company. He is personally fiN3 ~ known to nZ or has produced as identification. o d WITNESS my hand and official seal in the County and State last aforesaid this; day of µ 2003. W ..~ '~~ rq ~p'fAgA ~ !Vt? tt,?~IN ,~~j°tlBL1a ~ _~~ ~iy~i~h Cgif~ i~ Pze-AnnexatioTl Agreement AC Ft. Pierce, FL ~T038-00 -o rn -~ Notary Public-State f '~`.', Printed: ~heL~~, / A - ~- My Commission ExpiFes: ~, ~/ _ r~ ~ Exhibit "A" (7 of 12) Exhibit "A" Legal Description Tract 6, Tract 6-A and Tract 6-B of FLAGI_ER PLAT NO. 1, according to the Plat thereof, recorded in Plat Book 42, Pages 8, 8A through 8$, of the Public Records of St. Lucie County, Florida. n a:+ v Cr -a -~ rn Exhibit "A" (8 of 12}- EXHIBIT B UTILITY REQUIREMENTS A. Water ' 1. Service Requirements a) Fire Protection (t) A minimum of 625 gallons per minute at a residual pressure of 40 psi, sutficlent to sill one of two 300,000 gallon tanks in eight hours. 2. 3. b) Domestic (i) 55,000 gpd (20,000 gpd domestic, 35,000 gpd truck wash). 200 gpm max flow @ 65 psi for permanent domestic water. {2) 600 gpm @ 40 psi, approximately 6 to 7 motion gallons for temporary construction water. Service Dates: a) Construction service is required by July i, 2003. FPUA's water and sewer Ifnes will be constructed within the South Jenkins Road right-ol- way (ROW). based on St. Lucie County's schedule for the road, it is unlikely the ROW will be available to FPUA to meet the July 1, 2003 service date. Since St. Lucie County has extended a 6" force main to 0 the western property line of the s(te, FPUA wtil enter into an agreement o with St. Lucie County that will allow FPUA to use the force main to meet ~, the temporary construction water requirements. m b) Permanent domestic service will be provided to the site by FPUA within ~ of receipt of notice from Wat-Mart but no later than November 90 days ~ m . 17, 2003. FPUA must have access to the South Jenkins Road ROW ,~ by October 17, 2003. FPUA wilt coordinate wRh St. Lucie County to L^',., ensure access wilt be available. c) Fire protect">on service wilt be provided to the site by FPUA by November 17, 2003. FPUA must have access to the South Jenkins Road ROW by October 17, 2003. FPUA will coordinate with St. Lucas County to ensure access to the ROW will be available. Service Availability: a} Construction W aler Service -FPUA will enter into an agreement with St. Lucie County that will allow FPUA to use the force main to meet the temporary construction water requirements. b) Permanent Water Service -FPUA has a i2" loop on Glades Cutoff Road. A 12" line wail be extended to the site for permanent service along the South Jenkins Road ROW. FPUA must have access to the page I of 4 br- Exhibit "A" (9 of IZ} B. ROW by October 17, 2003 in order to meet the November 17, 2003 schedule. 4. Service Connection Location a) See Attachment 1 for utility plan showing the point of connection. Sanitary Sewer 1. Service Requirements: • a) 58,000 gpd (20,000 gpd domestlc, 35,000 ypd truck wash). 2. Service Date 3. 4. 5. 6. a) Service will be provided to the site by FPUA within 90 days of receipt of notice from Wal-Mart requesting such service but no later than June 4, 2004: Service Availability: a) A 6"force main is located on Glades Cutoff Road and will be brought to the site by FPUA. Service Connection Location a) See Attachment t for utility plan showing the point of connection_ Local Requirements: a) The truck wash facility will be in FPUA's lnduslrial Pretreatment Program because the flow exceeds 25,000 gpd. An Industrial Pretreatment Program permit application will be submitted by Wat-Mar# and a wastewater characterization will be performed by FPUA. b) The onsite sanitary sewer system will be designed sa that FPUA wilt have the ability to monitor the quality of the wastewater of the TMG, fuel island, and the truck wash facility independently of each other and any other waste stream. Wat-Mart will provide a manhole for the purpose of compliance monitoring of the total industrial discharge. FPUA will have access to this manhole ai alt times. If the wastewater is below FPUA limits, ii will be discharged directly into the sanitary sewer system. The compliance manhole will be placed downstream of the combined TMG, fuef island, and truck wash facility sewer lines or downstream of the combined TMG, fuel island, truck wash tacility, and domestic waste streams. Lift Station a) An on-site lilt station and force main will be designed and constructed by Wal-Mart The lift station wilt be built in accordance with FPUA standards. The lilt station wit! be owned and operated by FPUA. b) A minimum 35' x 35' easement wilt be required for the lift station. An easement will also he required over the onsite force main. A 12' wide concrete or asphalt drive to the lift station will be provided by Wa{-Mart. Page 2 of 9 c7 0 0 T '+a r~ a n7 Exhibit "A" (10 of 12) Wal-Marl will prepare the legal description for the easement after construction 1s complete in order to assure tine accuracy of the easement location. Wal-Mart will execute the easement and FPUA will record it. c) Water and electric service to the lilt station will be paid for and provided by FPUA. C. Natural Gas i. Service Requirements a) 3,000,000 it' annually at a pressure of f0 psi at the building. 2. Service Date a) Service wib be provided to the site by FPUA within 90 days of receipt of notice from Wai-Mart requesting such service buk no lalerthan June 4, 2004. 3. Service Availability: a} An f3", 42 psi main is located on the north side of Glades Cutoff Road. b) ~ FPUA will extend a gas line from Glades Cutoff Road to the site. 4. Service Connection Location a) See Attachment t for utility plan showing the point of connection. Q m_ a 0 r m N -J 'O 9 m n~ Page 3 of 4 Exhibit "A" (11 of 12) •~_~' ••~ ; ~s Jo ,~ o h- U . ~ • ~ ._ o a ,~ ,~a~ O / J .~ V-F' i 11 if ~~~ y F-V . - o ~" . .~ rqw ~. -aC•------------ N , ~ ii 1 I• ~ Z -._~_7 ~ U ~ ~` ~. S'} ~ :4 ~ } 0 O ~ [[O ft 1 1 -- i = 't ~.;s` ~ : ~ ~~~ o ~ s - I'~~~I!~91N~ ~i~~~IN III ' ~~ `~ ~ , , ~ ,, l 3w 'i tiii'F ~ '¢? ~~ 1 3 "!•-I-!•1.1-: I r }' _ _~ .LIJ.LI.2 _ p 1 1 i ~ 1 ~~ - \ ~~ '~ i 6 "~ 81~` } ~ ~~.'`, l ~ ' ~.n .ll..i_I.J._1.Y.1.,L_,LJ_}.a ~ i ~ 'l % j IEhWHA!4']IMF .{-I_-{...1_J.. L.ILt_11..1.J.1. - °~~ 1 Z ~ -.~ LI_ J. J.J_l. LI_t J, J.1.~. O 1 • a.! IHelalliallel ~•~•. ~ _ ~ i ; r _, ; ~I :e `•` ` • `t S `: LL J..1.}.L.L1_(_}J_~..i..l. I U- • 3. / L.t_l J..~.1.i.LA_1_I1_I._ ~ 1 J ~ / t ~ '~tF,~`.~ _ ~ft `, : ~ ~ ~_p_1~.1-1.L.L_~i_j..ar. '~ i Z JJtfl_~} J !_I_I J.J.LL.L.L Lt_1 J. i O e 41 I i ~ i L L i 4r~ ~ L i i y ~_ ~. _1. . I_ _ l_ _ , _ _ a ~. , l ' ~ ~ t` ~;; IR1111p I111IbIp41 J_1_tJ.1.Li. LJ•.11J - ~ U ~ ~ ~.~ L 193 't~NCBru _i_.~.}--F-E-l-k-i_}J.~.r.~ _- ;11 t W = `'j f Li 11 J 1 1, L L L!_I J ( [C ~ i; ` : _ . . .. . . •. •.}• r j 1 ~ 11lf9 k9AEFA1 ' l 1 1 l 1 11 J J l 1 ,~ a ( ._ . ~, .. • , . .. . . f J_f_.lJ.J1.1-F.L{-11J. _ il` /~ W~ ~ _i_I_I J.l_1. L.L_~L~a J "~ i ~t Yj JJJ ~~ a • r I¢ • _ i _;_r_j~.~.i_i.i.}_. j_(.i.i. _ - X31 i f ~`' ~ ~1_tJ.J.1.1.1_LI_(.,.lJ. _ - i ~i 1 ' i i ~ ~li~ of i ~ ~ d_ '~ '}+ ~ ~ lll 1 i i O 1 ~ 1 ~ w Q4f / U ~ ~ ~`~~ ~ i 1 ' i i r ~~ ,R '`% ij td a 1 y :S S.r _~ serta ':5:~ ~ ~ ' ~ ' ._ / dl :sr.~•--'•"' INSERS7ASE 95 ~ , _- _ _._.-.-._._ . - - ' -~ ~ iJ darter==Buwgess ``~~ ~ "~`" "`'~'"°' ~°`~'`"°" L CVMMMiM IMwyeme.d, ald R•lokd SYY{tA e,s Ca»w b Bw Ine ATTACHMENT 1 p , , •"-•a,,.,,,,,,,,,,„ DATEI fl6/03/03 ~ • m n:. ~~.~, MMwh•iw iH0 la7aa+sro r.`M'ym.arro J08 N0. 290446 > T7 ; Page 4 of 4 O d Q •~ m W Exhibit "A" (1Z of 12)