St. Lucie County to overhaul bulk water policy following capacity dispute with motorsports developer
St. Lucie County, Florida · Meeting date: September 8, 2026 · Published: September 10, 2026
The Florida county is updating its utility extension policies to formally define bulk water agreements after a clash over Equivalent Residential Connection (ERC) calculations threatened to stall a major private development.
Key points
- P1 Motor Club requested a bulk water agreement of 6,000 gallons per day for its Phase 1 'garage townhomes,' disputing the county's standard calculation of 98 ERCs (26,460 gpd).
- County utility staff warned that granting a project-specific reduced ERC methodology could violate bond covenants tied to a recent $200 million utility bond issuance.
- The Board directed staff to execute a bulk agreement using the current ERC methodology for Phase 1 while initiating a year-long process to formally define bulk water customer classes.
- Water for the development will eventually be supplied by the county's upcoming 2 MGD Peacock reverse osmosis plant, expected online in early 2028.
Full report
St. Lucie County’s Water and Sewer District is navigating a policy gap regarding bulk water agreements, sparked by a capacity dispute with the developers of the P1 Motor Club. During a September 8, 2026, informal meeting, the Board of County Commissioners directed utility staff to draft a bulk water agreement using existing capacity metrics while launching a comprehensive update to the county’s Uniform Extension Policy (UEP) and Utility Service Policy (USP).
The conflict centers on a request from P1 Motor Club, a private mixed-use motorsports development, for potable water service. While the county agreed to serve the site at no net cost to taxpayers, the two parties clashed over the calculation of Equivalent Residential Connections (ERCs). P1 argued its 68 'garage townhomes' are part-time residences that will use a fraction of standard residential water, requesting a bulk agreement for just 6,000 gallons per day (gpd).
However, Public Utilities Director Rebecca Ventrella noted that the county's adopted policies do not currently feature a reduced ERC methodology for bulk, master-metered, or limited-use projects. Applying standard metrics—which allocate 270 gpd per ERC—Phase 1 of the project requires reserving 98 ERCs, or 26,460 gpd, factoring in the townhomes and commercial structures.
Financial and legal implications heavily influenced the county's stance. Ventrella and Deputy County Attorney Jean Stasio cautioned that creating a project-specific exception could set a dangerous precedent and jeopardize utility revenues. The district recently issued $200 million in utility bonds, and the bond resolution requires maintaining a uniform rate and fee structure. Staff emphasized that applying the policy consistently is necessary to remain fair to all customers and transparent to the bonding agency.
Reserving accurate capacity is also critical for the county's long-term infrastructure planning. The P1 development will ultimately be served by the district's new 2 million gallon per day (MGD) Peacock reverse osmosis (RO) plant, slated for completion in early 2028. Currently, the county relies on a bulk water agreement with the Fort Pierce Utilities Authority (FPUA) to serve the area. Demand on the future Peacock plant is already mounting; a separate development, Oak Ridge Ranches, has reserved 500 ERCs and is projected to eventually require 1.8 MGD, which would nearly max out the facility's baseline capacity.
To avoid stalling the P1 project, the Board directed staff to proceed with a bulk water agreement based on the county's standard 98 ERC calculation for Phase 1, requiring the developer to pay standard commercial rates for that reserved capacity. Concurrently, staff will hire a consultant and spend the next year updating the UEP and USP to formally define bulk water agreements and establish alternative methodologies for future development phases.
This summary was generated by AI based on the source document and may contain errors.
Source: Board of County Commissioners- Informal Meeting, St. Lucie County