Page 1 of 15



 
 
 
  





  
 
 
 

In September of 2005, Hillsborough County commissioned the Comprehensive Canal
Dredging and Preventative Measures (CCDPM) Study. The purpose of the study was to
evaluate known areas of concern within the residential navigable canals within the
unincorporated portions of the county in order to develop a plan to asses the potential canal
dredging needs. This document serves to outline the various recommendations developed by
the Canal Advisory Committee in conjunction with the CCDPM. These recommendations are
to be presented to the Hillsborough County Board of County Commissioners for evaluation.
Each of the following recommendations has several objectives that are considered integral
components to achieving the objective and are considered to be a complete package.

The first recommendation is to develop a Sediment Abatement and Remediation (SAR)
Program. This program will serve to diminish the degree of future siltation within the affected
areas as well as remediate by dredging any known areas of concern as identified through the
study. The initial objective outlines the funding models that have been deemed feasible for
implementation as well as outlining the operational structure of the program. The primary
funding models rely on grant and appropriations, establishing Municipal Services Benefit
Units (MSBU) and providing matching funds from the County. The recommendation
encourages increased public awareness efforts as well as developing and investigating new
standards and or practices.

The second recommendation deals with improving the County’s Preventative Measures as
they relate to siltation. It calls on the County to modify its existing maintenance practices to
be more environmentally conscious. The County should support recent environmental efforts
implemented within the Transportation Maintenance Division. Additionally the Planning and
Growth Management Department should investigate the feasibility of implementing Low
Impact Development (LID) practices within the County’s Land Development Code. These
practices allow for greater flexibility and increased water quality treatment while still
complying with local storm water runoff requirements.

The final recommendation calls for the County to increase its water quality monitoring
network to include these residential canal communities. As it stands, the County has limited
water data within these low energy, low flush systems. The CCDPM has begun the effort of
developing a body of data but this effort must be continued on a long term basis. The
objective calls for the Environmental Protection Commission to continue this monitoring
network by working with interested neighborhood volunteers for efficient access to sampling
sites. The County is also asked to fund a bacteriological study that would be conducted by
the University of South Florida in conjunction with the Hillsborough County Health
Department to evaluate the level of bacteriological contamination within the canal systems.
Finally the County is asked to support pending state legislation that would require onsite
sewage treatment systems to be inspected by the Health Department on a periodic basis in
order to assure that the systems are operating properly.



 
 
  



  
 

 
Page 2 of 15



 
 
 
  



  
 

This report serves to outline the final recommendations of the Canal Advisory Committee that
were derived from the Comprehensive Canal Dredging and Preventative Measures Study
(CCDPM). These recommendations were developed with the intent of outlining specific
measures that could be undertaken by the individual communities affected, as well as
Hillsborough County Government.

Rather than outline vague and sometimes ambiguous recommendations, each of the
recommendations are prepared with a deliberate structure. Each recommendation has a brief
description that outlines the key objectives that must be accomplished in order to achieve the
recommendation. Whenever possible, each objective outlines a strategy for achieving that
particular objective. In most of the cases, responsible parties have been defined for
implementing the strategy that has been outlined.
!"

#$    
# 
This recommendation would create a
program
tasked with
initiating
projects that have the affect of
reducing downstream sedimentation
within the coastal residential canal
areas as well as restoring the
navigable depths within the affected
coastal residential canal communities
and the traditional connecting canals
to navigable waters of Tampa Bay
proper. This program will rely on a
combination of
funding sources
including
federal
and
state
appropriations, public and private
grant funding, the creation of one or more Municipal Service Benefit Units and the levy of
non-ad valorem assessments on benefited parcels, and matching funds from the
Hillsborough County Board of County Commissioners. For the purpose of this study eight
separate funding models were investigated for feasibility of generating the necessary amount
of revenue. These models included direct funding from the Board of County Commissioners,
grant funding, federal and/or state appropriations, Municipal Service Benefit Units (MSBU), a
Countywide MSBU, use of Community Investment Tax Funds, beneficially reusing the spoil
material, increased doc stamp fees from the sale of homes along the affected canals, using
stormwater fee funds and increasing the boater registration fee. Of these models which were
investigated, only direct funding through the BOCC, funding through grants and or



 
 
  



  
 

 
Page 3 of 15
appropriations, and MSBUs were deemed feasible. With the exception of beneficially reusing
the spoil material, the remaining options were deemed to be nonviable for various reasons.
Beneficially reusing the spoil material was seen as a potential cost savings on the back end
of a project, and therefore was not deemed as being a viable upfront funding method.

%$&
 '( 

  ))  

  *  +   *
#

 

The BOCC should direct County staff to begin lobbying both the State of Florida as well as
the federal government for appropriations to defer the cost of implementing the SAR
Program. Hillsborough County’s legislative liaison should initiate a dialogue with Hillsborough
County’s legislative delegation educating and informing them as to the intent and scope of
the program. Former members of the Hillsborough County Board of County Commissioners
who have advanced to other elected offices should be consulted and asked to assist in
garnering support within their respective offices. CCDPM project staff should be made
available to brief these party’s whenever possible.

In addition, County staff should be directed to aggressively pursue both public and private
grant opportunities. Emphasis should be placed on obtaining grants that deal with
Improvements to Water Quality, Environmental Monitoring and Habitat Restoration.

Despite the apparent need amongst the local governments within the state of Florida for
funding regional dredging operations, few grant or cooperative funding opportunities exist.
Within the state agencies such as FDEP and the Water Management Districts as well as the
federal regulatory agencies (EPA, FWS), dredging is not traditionally viewed as an
“environmental” issue. Instances in which funding has been provided in the forms of grants or
cooperative funding only occur when the applicant can show some form of other collateral
environmental gain associated with the project. For instance, a project within Hillsborough
County could apply for cooperative funding with the SWFWMD for a dredging project if the
project were able to show that it would improve water quality, improve or increase
environmental habitat, or contribute to some form of stormwater improvement. Historically,
dredging has not been viewed favorably by the regulatory agencies in regards to any of the
aforementioned parameters. That is not to say that there is a total lack of state and/or federal
grant funding available, it simply means that there is no blanket funding program available to
cover every and any type of dredging project. Projects would need to be reviewed on a case
by case basis in regards to what funding is available and allow the specifics of each project
to dictate the level of interest from other funding sources. Okeechobee County was recently
able to persuade the South Florida Water Management District to provide almost $1 million in
funding towards removing an estimated 150,000 cubic yards of sediment. This funding was
provided because the County was able to show that the dredging would have a beneficial
affect to one of the three aforementioned parameters. Grant funding can also be secured in
instances in which dredging is not the sole purpose of the project. The installation of
sediment exclusion / prevention systems at known critical areas would be fundable under
numerous existing state and federal grants. This is due to the focus of the project being
prevention. In the past the federal government, under their Clean Water Act’s Section 319(h)
Grants, has allocated funds for dredging in instances in which the likely source has been
identified and preventative measures are being undertaken.




 
 
  



  
 

 
Page 4 of 15
Thanks to the coordinated efforts of Congressman Jim Davis during the 2004 Federal fiscal
cycle, the City of Tampa (the City) was able to receive a federal appropriation of $1.2 million
dollars to be used to improve its existing stormwater infrastructure and to conduct some
dredging within its residential canals. This funding was allocated within the Environmental
Protection Agency’s Omnibus funding. The City has approximately $700,000 of those funds
designated for stormwater improvements associated with existing systems. The remainder of
those funds will be used to assist in funding the actual residential canal projects. The City
intends to use the money as “seed money” to fund individual feasibility studies within its
known areas of concerns. The remaining funds will be used to pay portions of the total
project cost. The lion’s share of the individual project costs will be funded by the actual canal
residents through a MSBU type assessment.

Federal appropriations are not unheard of but are time consuming lengthy processes that are
generally seen as one time expenses that the federal government will contribute to. It
requires substantial congressional support as well as the necessary local support to maintain
the constant pressure on the federal government.

The state generally allows its agencies, such as FDEP and SWFWMD, to fund projects
rather than simply outlaying funds to a local governmental agency for projects. These funds
are traditionally outlaid in the form of cooperative funds.

If Hillsborough County were to pursue this as a viable funding source for any future projects it
would require substantial coordination and effort on the parts of the requesting agency, in
this case Public Works and the County’s Legislative Liaison. A structured lobbying campaign
would need to be implemented and the appropriate members of the County’s state and
federal political delegations would need to be brought onboard.

Any funding, either through grants or appropriations will be used to offset the total cost of the
project(s).

%$&
 ,(   $
 

  
 -)
 .
  -.  
/#0 #   

The County should enact a procedural ordinance providing for the establishment of Municipal
Service Benefit Units (MSBU) and the levying of non-ad valorem assessments to address the
non-navigable canals within the coastal canal residential communities within Hillsborough
County. This ordnance would be consistent with Board Policy - Section Number: 03.02.02.28
Method for Funding Citizen Initiated Localized Capitol Improvement Projects. These
communities include the Alafia River Area, Apollo Beach, Baycrest, Bayport, Dana Shores,
Lower Sweetwater Creek, Essex Downs and the Ruskin Little Manatee River Area. The
Canal Advisory Committee has chosen to recommend one or more MSBUs composed of the
waterfront properties within each of these communities. In total there are 4,011 residential
waterfront properties within the affected project areas. The purpose of the MSBU would be to
fund the restoration of navigable depths within the affected residential canals and entry
canals to Tampa Bay based on the dredging footprints and templates developed within the
Comprehensive Canal Dredging and Preventative Measures Study (CCDPM) and or
subsequent engineering studies. These funds would be used solely for the purpose of
restoring the navigable depths within each of the respective communities for which an MSBU
is created. In order to garner as much participation as possible, interested communities



 
 
  



  
 

 
Page 5 of 15
would have one year from the date of the inception process to determine whether their
individual community is interested in establishing an MSBU or declare their intent to abstain.
Participation should be restricted to residential (singe or multi family as defined by the Land
Development Code) and commercial properties with direct usage of the adjacent waterbody
(i.e. commercial marinas, commercial boat ramps and commercial parcels with boat access
or docks). After the interested communities are identified, the affected parcels will be isolated
and those parcels will be given an opportunity to acquire the necessary number of
signatures, as determined by the BOCC and specified on the referenced ordinance, to initiate
the establishment of their respective community’s MSBU. The CAC recommends that the
required number of signatures for the MSBU process to proceed be set at 50% +1.

A Municipal Services Benefit Unit (MSBU) is a non ad valorem assessment that is usually
applied to a specified geographic area and is allowable under the existing state legislative
rules (Chapter125.01(1)(q) FAC). Unlike the existing Stormwater Fee which can be used for
several individual purposes, a MSBU is used to achieve a particular project or “benefit” and
then expires once that project is completed and sufficient funds have been recouped to cover
the cost. A MSBU is managed by the local government by collecting the funds and or
managing the use of the funds within the MSBU. A MSBU can be used for various purposes
but must be clearly defined and allocated only to accomplish the goals set forth within the
MSBU. One of the distinct benefits of utilizing a MSBU to fund municipal projects is that it
allows for the administering entity to borrow against the MSBU. This is to say that the County
could issue bonds to cover the expenses of a particular project allowing the project to
proceed without requiring the complete project funds to be encumbered.

Based on information gathered through the CCDPM, project staff has determined the
estimated cost for each of the affected communities as well as a total for conducting all of the
identified project areas. Table 1: Parcel, Volume and Cost per Project Area provides
valuable information regarding each of the individual project areas. The first of these being
the total number of parcels identified within each of the project area’s boundaries at the
inception of the project. Secondly it states the total volume of material identified within the
Areas of Concern in that particular project area. The linear feet of water front are also
depicted within this table. This number is not the linear feet of work to be conducted within
that project area but rather the length of waterfront property along both sides of the centerline
of the individual canals. Finally, the table depicts the estimated cost of conducting
remediation within the identified project areas. For a more detailed discussion of each of the
factors, please see the individual project area feasibility reports.




 
 
  



  
 

 
Page 6 of 15
Table 1: Parcel, Volume and Cost per Project Area


Based on the information gathered through the individual feasibility reports, project staff has
conducted a preliminary evaluation of a conceptual county wide MSBU imposed on the
waterfront properties within the affected communities and determined the approximate cost
per parcel. This amortized cost was developed with the assistance of the County’s Debt
Management Officer based on a ten and twenty year amortization schedule with a respective
bond yield rate of 5% and 5.3%. Initially, the cost was interpreted on a per parcel basis but
after input from the Canal Advisory Committee, cost was interpreted into linear feet of water
frontage. This would appear to be a more appropriate method of apportioning cost amongst
the MSBU participants as the cost is apportioned by the degree of actual benefit. Table 2:
MSBU Cost per Parcel and Per Linear Water Frontage depicts the projected annual cost
of amortizing the projects identified within the individual feasibility reports across both a ten
and twenty year period. This table also depicts the cost of amortizing the cost across a
composite of all of the individual project areas into a single MSBU.

Table 2: MSBU Annual Cost Per Parcel and Per Linear Water Frontage


The following graph (Amortization Cost per Linear Water Frontage) depicts the annual
MSBU cost per project area on a linear water frontage basis. In addition to this the graph
Site
# of Waterfront
Parcels
Volume CY
(AOCs)
Linear
Waterfront (ft)
Cost
Alafia
242
42,080
21,300
$3,858,071
Apollo North
577
9,472
86,899
$986,444
Apollo South
1343
29,242
129,182
$2,515,889
Ruskin
410
14,402
45,838
$1,393,635
Baycrest
498
15,895
26,000
$1,526,912
Bayport
235
15,847
22,155
$1,522,997
Dana Shores
434
16,394
40,206
$1,571,738
Essex Downs
272
19,576
15,620
$1,855,803
Total
4011
162,908
387,200
$15,231,489
Site
Cost / Parcel
10 Year
Cost / Parcel
20 Year
Cost / Linear Ft
Waterfront 10 Yr
Cost / Linear Ft
Waterfront 20 Yr
Alafia
$2,664
$1,658
$30.27
$18.83
Apollo North
$297
$186
$1.97
$1.24
Apollo South
$315
$197
$3.28
$2.06
Ruskin
$583
$364
$5.22
$3.25
Baycrest
$524
$327
$10.04
$6.26
Bayport
$1,106
$692
$11.73
$7.34
Dana Shores
$618
$386
$6.58
$4.17
Essex Downs
$1,160
$724
$20.19
$12.61
Composite
$627
$390
$6.50
$4.04




 
 
  



  
 

 
Page 7 of 15
also depicts the cost for a composite MSBU of all of the project areas combined as well as a
composite of the north and south canals combined as single MSBUs.

Graph 1: Amortization Cost per Linear Water Frontage


The following question was posed to the attendees of the final set of project charrettes.
Citizens were asked to answer yes or no as to whether they would support just such an
initiative.

Would you support the implementation of a Municipal Service Benefit Unit
(MSBU) to pay for the improvements within the navigable canals within your
community? The purpose of the MSBUs would be to fund the restoration of
navigable depths within the affected residential canals based on the dredging
footprints and templates developed within the Comprehensive Canal Dredging
and Preventative Measures Study (CCDPM). These funds would be used
solely for the purpose of restoring the navigable depths within each of the
respective communities for which an MSBU is created.



In order to establish an MSBU, County staff will have to coordinate with the affected
community to educate homeowners as to the process and gauge the level of interest and
participation. This effort should be spearheaded within the Public Works Department, with


Yes
No
No
Answer
No
Name
Total
% Yes % No
North Canals Meetings
60
59
6
10
135
50.42% 49.58%
South Canals Meeting
72
32
6
28
138
69.23% 30.77%
Total
132
91
12
38
273
59.19% 40.81%



 
 

   


!"#$%&#'( $
 
30.27
1.97
3.28
10.04
11.73
6.68
20.19
5.22
6.50
5.12
10.35
18.83
1.24
2.05
6.26
7.34
4.17
12.61
3.25
4.04
3.19
6.44





























































!


"











"











"






$













)








#



#
"$

"%&
'
#
"$

"%&
'
)* 




 
 
  



  
 

 
Page 8 of 15
the creation of a SAR Program Coordinator and participation from key members of the
Management and Budget Department, the Communications Department as well as the
County Attorney’s Office. County staff members should begin by conducting informational
meetings with the affected communities on the MSBU establishment process. Once the
interested communities are identified, County staff should work with representatives from
each of these communities in order to complete the MSBU establishment process.

%$&
1(
  
 
-.

The CCDPM recommends that the BOCC provide matching funds on a dollar per dollar basis
towards any funds raised through the Sediment Abatement and Remediation Program
MSBU. These funds would be capped at $750,000 per year for the life of the program. This
recommendation places the onus to participate squarely on the citizens with the County only
agreeing to match their contribution. Should the affected communities choose not to
participate Hillsborough County is under no obligation to proceed with solely funding the
process.

In addition to this, Hillsborough County will receive credit towards their matching funds for
any staff positions, existing or created, dedicated to managing the SAR Program as well as
any other staff time or expenses incurred throughout this process.

While the CCDPM was not able to definitively quantify the degree of sedimentation for which
the County is responsible for, it is apparent that storm water run off, either direct or indirect,
has contributed to some degree of the sedimentation within many of the identified Areas of
Concern. This recommendation allows the County to assist the citizens in addressing the
sedimentation within the residential canals.

The following question was posed to the attendees of the final set of project charrettes.
Citizens were asked to answer yes or no as to whether they would support just such an
initiative.

Would you support the use of County funds to create a “matching fund” for
revenue raised within the MSBUs? The CCDPM recommends that the County
match dollar for dollar any funds raised through the Sediment Abatement and
Remediation Program MSBU. These funds would be capped at $750,000 per
year for the life of the program. This recommendation places the onus to
participate squarely on the citizen with the County agreeing to match their
contribution.






Yes
No
No
Answer
No
Name
Total
% Yes % No
North Canals Meetings
68
51
6
10
135
57.14% 42.86%
South Canals Meeting
78
25
6
29
138
75.73% 24.27%
Total
146
76
12
39
273
65.77% 34.23%




 
 
  



  
 

 
Page 9 of 15
%$&
2(
  3


  # 

A program of this nature would require extensive oversight, coordination and project
management in order to effectively operate and succeed. To this end, we recommend
creating a position at the level of a Project Manager I to serve as the SAR Program
Coordinator. This staff position would coordinate efforts amongst the various governmental
entities and serve to usher the communities through the establishment and management of
the MSBU. It would develop and provide educational programs to be used within the affected
communities as well as the remainder of the County advising individuals on appropriate Best
Management Practices. The position would also investigate and apply for applicable grants
opportunities. The position should be housed within the Public Works, Engineering Division,
Stormwater Management Section. The cost of funding such a position with salary and
benefits is estimated at $80,924.00 annually. This position should be funded initially as a
limited duration position for a two year period utilizing the $500,000 in funds approved by the
BOCC at the inception of the study for the implementation of the recommendations. After the
initial two year period, the County can reevaluate the position based on the level of program
participation. The two year cost of funding just such a position, assuming a 2.5% percent
annual increase, amounts to $163,875 with a balance of $336,125.

A reconstituted version of the existing Canal Advisory Committee (CAC) consisting of five
committee members should serve as an advisory committee to the BOCC. These committee
members should consist of three citizens representing the participating communities, two
County staff members and be facilitated by the SAR Program Manager. This reconstituted
CAC will advise the BOCC with respect to any proposed work that is conducted within any
particular MSBU. Guiding this committee shall be the dedicated County SAR Program
Manager as well as any information derived from the CCDPM study and any subsequent
engineering studies.


%$&
4( ! $
#5   

 !  

Initiate a concerted effort to disseminate information regarding coastal ecosystems and the
affect that individual communities and development have on them. These efforts should not
be focused merely on residential homeowners but on the surrounding commercial parcels as
well. These efforts could include but not be limited to:
• The distribution of the “Canal Owners Manual” which outlines several existing Best
Management Practices that can be implemented within each of the affected
communities. Project staff has already completed this task within the scope of the
study and has obtained grant funding to prepare 5000 copies for interested
communities. Distribution will begin in April of 2007.
• Expand the County’s existing Storm Drain Marking Program to include these affected
communities. The marking of targeted storm drains within affected communities can
help reduce the incidence of point source pollution emanating from the parcels
bounded by the canals.
•
In conjunction with HTV22 staff, develop and produce Public Service Announcements
(PSA) educating homeowners on affective ways to live within the fragile Florida
ecosystem. Topics can include proper lawn care and landscaping practices, proper
vessel maintenance practices and proper means of disposing of pet waste. 



 
 
  



  
 

 
Page 10 of 15
• Almost fifty percent of the homeowners responded that they currently use mulching
mowers to maintain their yards. While this practice is typically to be commended and
promoted, in areas with proximity to their eventual storm water receiving body, this
may not be the most advantageous approach. Mulching mowers create biological
material that enters the canals and is then decomposed into fine organic muck. The
low flushing potential within these canals all but assures that the material is trapped
within the receiving body. Hillsborough County currently has an aggressive yard
waste recycling program which allows homeowners to bag their yard waste and have
it disposed of in an environmentally advantageous manner.
• Additionally, homeowners should be educated as to the most appropriate usage of
fertilizers and pesticides. The Hillsborough County Extension Service has numerous
educational materials detailing proper yard and garden maintenance. According to
the data garnered from the survey, the average canal homeowner is applying fertilizer
/ pesticide 3 times per year with those employing lawn services applying almost 6
times per year. This search for lush green lawns results in over fertilizing and only
helps to increase the amount of nutrients entering the bay and impairing water
bodies. This excessive amount of fertilizer also has the additional effect of increasing
both the rate and degree of muck build up within canals.
• While Hillsborough County currently has
a pet waste ordinance,
it should
implement an education program to
make citizens aware of the deleterious
effects of animal waste. Studies have
shown that ounce for ounce pet waste
carries three to four times more harmful
bacteria than human waste. Recently,
the Tampa Bay Estuary Program and
Pinellas County, have both begun pilot
programs
to educate homeowners
within identified focus areas (dog parks,
recreational facilities, large residential
developments, etc) to advise them to
pick up after their pets. Hillsborough
County should mimic these efforts to
every extent possible. The use of
existing County resources such as
Parks, Recreation and Conservation
Services staff and the County’s public
broadcasting resource, H-TV, should be
tapped for cooperation. Attached in
Appendix A is copy of a sign developed
by Pinellas County and the Tampa Bay Estuary Program educating residents on the
deleterious affects of animal waste.

%$&
6(  7      

 8



Hillsborough County should establish sea wall maintenance standards within Hillsborough
County. This is an effort that several agencies within the area have tried to implement for




 
 
  



  
 

 
Page 11 of 15
several years with varied success. Many counties and municipalities within the state employ
the use of design and maintenance standards both to identify failing systems as well as
reduce the amount of canal maintenance that is eventually required. Through the
implementation of required inspection periods, homeowners are better able to address
issues with their retention system before they are allowed to become catastrophic and
therefore more costly. New design standards should also be created for any instances of
new sea wall construction or repair.
In conjunction with the previous recommendation, Hillsborough County should develop a
Marine Contractor licensing program. Several of the counties within the state of Florida have
just such a program in place. Contractor licensing programs help to assure that the
individuals conducting work within these canals are both versed in the latest design and
construction methods as well as protecting the eventual homeowner. This program should be
developed with assistance from the Tampa Port Authority (TPA) as well as other pertinent
agencies and be administered through the Planning and Growth Management Department.
To date, the County is implementing just such a program. In January of 2007, the County
received preliminary approval from the Hillsborough County BOCC to coordinate efforts with
Planning and Growth Management to create a marine contractor licensing program.
The County should develop suitable construction standards for both residential and
commercial shore protection structures and begin inspecting existing structures in the near
future.

%$&
9(  
0
)))
 ) - 
   
 -

One of the primary issues identified has been the input of deleterious materials into the
residential canals through the storm water infrastructure. The myriad of materials carried
within storm water runoff can have the effect of diminishing water quality, impairing
navigation and impairing habitats. It would appear to be both impractical as well as financially
unfeasible to implement structural BMPs throughout each of these affected communities.
The sheer cost of implementing and maintaining such systems would dictate that these are
used sparingly and in a concerted manner. These units should be planned and located so as
to have a more regional than individual impact. To this end, several potential points have
been identified as possible suitable locations for some form of structural BMP to reduce the
deleterious effects of storm water runoff. Many of these systems are multi-focal meaning that
they address several of the issues associated within storm water runoff.
“Structural, Non-Structural and managerial techniques that are recognized to
be the most effective and practical means to control non-point source
pollutants yet are compatible with the productive use of the resource to which
they are applied. BMPs are used in both urban and agricultural areas.”
There are a wide variety of structural BMPs in use for storm water management. Structural
BMPs include engineered and constructed systems that are designed to provide for water
quantity and/or water quality control of storm water runoff. Structural BMPs can be grouped
into several general categories.

Storm water detention is usually defined as providing temporary storage of a runoff volume
for subsequent release. Examples include detention basins, underground vaults, tanks or



 
 
  



  
 

 
Page 12 of 15
pipes, and deep tunnels, as well as temporary
detention in parking lots, roof tops, and
depressed grassy areas.

Retention is generally defined as providing
storage of storm water
runoff without
subsequent surface discharge. With the strict
interpretation of
this definition, retention
practices would be limited to those practices
that either infiltrate or evaporate runoff, such
as infiltration trenches, wells or basins.
However, retention is also commonly used to
describe practices that retain a runoff volume
(and hence have a permanent pool) until it is
displaced in part or in total by the runoff event
from the next storm. Examples include
retention
ponds,
tanks,
tunnels,
and
underground vaults or pipes, and wetland
basins.
Hillsborough County should initiate a pilot
study, implementing one or more of the
structural BMPs detailed within the Preventative Measures report of the CCDPM Study at a
suitable location. This pilot program should document the effectiveness of the implemented
BMP as well as its ease of maintenance. Detailed records should be maintained regarding its
cost of implementation and maintenance with an eventual cost benefit analysis detailing the
feasibility of implementation on a more wide scale basis. This pilot study should be
conducted by the Hillsborough County Stormwater Management Section.
In addition to this, the County should support the private efforts of the Baycrest Community
by agreeing to monitor and maintain the Suntree Inlet Protection Baskets. In an eight month
period these baskets were able to capture over 2.5 tons of material originating from the
residential homes and streets within the Baycrest Community. A detailed report generated by
the vendor regarding the materials collected since their implementation has been included as
Appendix B. Hillsborough County should agree to maintain these baskets for a one year
period in order to properly evaluate the associated cost of labor and maintenance of these
assets. Detailed records should be maintained regarding the amount of material collected
and the associated time and costs. After the one year period, the County will be better able
to determine the long term logistical and financial ramifications of maintaining these assets in
perpetuity. The CAC has recommended that in the event that this project is not funded
through the FY08 – FY09 budget process, that up to $25,000 of the original $500,000
reserved be allocated for implementing the recommendations of the CCDPM.
!!"
! 
  
%$&
'(!
) 
)


  
 
Hillsborough County should modify its existing maintenance practices to be more
environmentally conscious. Several of the shoaling issues identified within the CCDPM Study
Example of a vendor supplied Structural BMP.



 
 
  



  
 

 
Page 13 of 15
can be attributed to shoddy and faulty maintenance practices employed over the years. To
this end, Hillsborough County has made concerted efforts over the past several years to
begin addressing just such issues. Recent efforts within the Public Works Department,
Transportation Maintenance Division have had great success in diminishing the degree of
down stream impacts as well as increased regulatory compliance. Efforts such as this should
be promoted and encouraged throughout the County. These efforts should focus on proper
training on the implementation of appropriate erosion and sediment control measures. The
State of Florida currently provides training and certification as a Qualified Stormwater and
Erosion Control Inspector, and the Florida Stormwater Association is just beginning to
implement a training program for stormwater system operators and maintenance personnel.
Key staff within each of the TMD Maintenance Units should be identified and trained in just
such programs.
In addition to this, the County should consider increasing the breadth of its existing Street
Sweeping Program. Currently, the program has an annual funding of just over $437,500 and
covers approximately 12,500 lane miles per year. In the past the program has collected over
3,900 tons of material within the various areas where the program is implemented. Trapping
and collecting these materials prevents them from entering the numerous waterways within
the County. In order to expand this program beyond its existing capabilities, Hillsborough
County’s Transportation Maintenance Division must be allocated sufficient resources within
subsequent budget cycles. Its current funding allows $35 for each lane mile covered within
the program. Increasing the Street Sweeping program by an additional $100,000 would allow
for an additional 2800 miles to be swept and an estimated 892 tons of material to be
captured annually.

%$&
,(!85!  
 

Hillsborough County should promote the
use of Low Impact Development (LID)
practices. The practices can be used in
conjunction with new development as
well as retrofitting existing communities.
LID is simple and effective. Instead of
large investments in complex and costly
centralized conveyance and treatment
infrastructure, LID allows
for
the
integration
of
treatment
and
management measures into urban site
features.
LID is economical. It costs less than
conventional stormwater management
systems to construct and maintain, in
part, because of fewer pipes, fewer
below-ground
infrastructure
requirements, and less imperviousness. But the benefits do not stop there. Space once
dedicated to stormwater ponds can now be used for additional development to increase lot
yields or be left as is for conservation. The greater use of on-lot multi-purpose landscaping /
vegetation also offers human "quality of life" opportunities by greening neighborhoods and
contributing to livability, value, sense of place, and aesthetics. Other benefits include
Rain gardens are a quintessential example of Low Impact
Development practices.



 
 
  



  
 

 
Page 14 of 15
enhanced property values and re-development potential, greater marketability, improved
wildlife habitat, thermal pollution reduction, energy savings, smog reduction, enhanced
wetlands protection, and decreased flooding.
LID is flexible. It offers a wide variety of structural and Non-Structural techniques to provide
for both runoff quality and quantity benefits. LID works in highly urbanized, constrained
areas, as well as open regions and environmentally sensitive sites. Opportunities to apply
LID principles and practices are practically infinite since any feature of the urban landscape
can be modified to control runoff and / or reduce the introduction of pollution. LID can be
used to truly create a "customized" watershed management design.
LID is a balanced approached. LID is an advanced, ecologically-based land development
technology that seeks to better integrate the built environment with the natural environment.
LID’s principles and practices allow the developed site to better maintain its predevelopment
watershed and ecological functions.
!!!" 
7 : 

%$&
'(   $
7 : 
 
 

 

One of the milestone accomplishments of the CCDPM is that it established water quality
monitoring stations within the affected communities. Prior to this effort, the majority of the
canal communities had little or no existing analytical data documenting the water quality
conditions. Research has shown that low flush, low energy systems such as these canals
experience serious water quality degradation issues. Establishing permanent water quality
stations within these areas will allow the County to develop an accurate profile of the existing
and ever changing conditions.

The sampling network can be coordinated through the Environmental Protection
Commission’s existing Water Quality Monitoring Program. In order to facilitate access to the
desired locations Hillsborough County should coordinate with interested citizens to allow
County staff to access potential sampling stations from their private property.

%$&
,( ! - 

 

One of the short comings of the CCDPM is that it lacked the authority, depth and expertise to
address many of the issues being brought before the project staff in regards to
microbiological contamination within the canal / coastal estuarine communities of
Hillsborough County. It has become apparent that the sheer complexity of the issue warrants
a study independent of the CCDPM. Valerie Harwood Ph.D., with the University of South
Florida, an expert in the field of microbiology and its relationship with the natural environment
was able to speak with the members of the CAC in regards to the this issue.

Hillsborough County should initiate a microbiological study within the coastal canal /
estuarine communities of Hillsborough County to address the issue of potential pathogenic
contamination. This study should address the various water borne pathogens including
bacteria, protozoans and viruses. Such a study should attempt to identify the various sources



 
 
  



  
 

 
Page 15 of 15
of these pathogens be they anthropogenic (waste water, stormwater, recreational practices,
etc), zoogenic (agricultural practices, migratory birds, etc.) or naturally occurring. The final
outcome of this study should be to identify if the potential for pathogenic contamination exists
and to subsequently recommend measures that can be taken to minimize the exposure to
and occurrence of such pathogens wherever possible.

Dr. Harwood has indicated that such a study would have a preliminary cost estimate ranging
from $120,000.00 to $250,000.00 and would take approximately one and a half years to
complete. This study should be conducted through the University of South Florida and
managed through the Environmental Protection Commission and/or the Hillsborough County
Health Department. The SAR Program Manager should be tasked with attempting to obtain
any available grants for funding this effort.


%$&
1(    ;  -
 '<94( ! 
 ) %
 5 
3   

The Florida State Legislature is proposing an amendment to Florida Statute 381.0065
requiring owners of onsite sewage treatment and disposal systems to conduct periodic
sewage inspections of those facilities to assure that they are operating correctly.
Hillsborough County should endorse this bill and its implementation. The inception of this bill
will have the affect of assuring that failing systems are identified and properly removed
and/or repaired. This bill will help in isolating and treating the potential deleterious impacts of
untreated septic waste within the environment. Hillsborough County should direct its
legislative liaison to meet with the County’s legislative delegation and voice the County’s
support for this action.
!0"


! 

%$&
'( # 
) ;
 

Within the body of this report, the CAC has outlined various objectives it feels should be
funded through the use of the $500,000 placed in reserve by the BOCC at the onset of the
study. These funds were dedicated specifically for implementing the recommendations set
forth within the study. The CAC also feels that any funds remaining after funding the specific
recommendations noted below should be used to defray any cost associated with the
implementation of the various MSBUs. The following table summarizes the priority of the
allocated expenditures.

Table 3: Prioritized Recommendations for Funding
Funding Rank
Cost
Balance ($500,000)
SAR Program Coordinator
$163,875
$336,125
Baycrest Inlets
$25,000
$311,125
Offset Cost of MSBU Inception
$311,125
$0