Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
Agenda Council Agenda 122100
IV. CITY MANAGER REPORT: a. Status of Building Permit - Veridian Office Building. CITY OF PALM BEACH GARDENS CITY COUNCIL Agenda Cover Memorandum Date: November 6, 2000 Subject/Agenda Item City Manager's Report: Customer Service Report Recommendation /Motion: N/A Reviewed by: Originating Dept.: Costs: $ Council Action: Total City Attorney eA Administration [ ] Approved Finance $ [ ]Approved w/ conditions ACM Current FY [ ]Denied Human Res. NA Advertised: NA Other Funding Source: [ ] Continued to: Date: [ ] Operating Attachments: Paper: [ NA] Not Required [ ] Other I Submitted by: Beth Ingold -Love Affected parties [ ] Notified Budget Acct. #:: [ ] None Approved by: / [ NA ] Not required BACKGROU d D: See attached memorandum. CITY OF PALM BEACH GARDENS MEMORANDUM 1 ti TO: Ron Ferris, Interim City Manager DATE: November 6, 2000 FROM: Beth In g old -Love, Assistant to the City Manag i SUBJECT: Customer Service Survey Background In order to establish a baseline for the development of Customer Service Training for City staff, a needs analysis was conducted to gauge the level of service currently provided to the City's customers. During the month of July 2000, the City conducted a study of employees' customer service performance. The goal of the study was to review the nature of the City's business communication practices with its customers. Discussion The study consisted of 76 contacts with City employees during the 16 business days between July 7 and July 28, 2000. Each department was contacted, including visits and telephone calls, between five and eight times during the study period, averaging seven calls per department. Contacts consisted of requests for service or information. The contacts were then documented and analyzed to measure the quality of the interactions from a citizen's point of view. The attached Executive Summary presents the results of the study. The number of observations supports a broad indication of relative performance. The purpose of the study was not to compare departments with one another. The findings are therefore best interpreted as information to be useful to the City in improving its overall communications with citizens. Findings Overall, the study found that the City performed adequately. The overall scores reported are ratios of the actual ratings to the perfect ratings, i.e., how close did employees come to handling the calls or visits perfectly. The overall score of 72% equates to a C -, using standard college scales for grading. The Executive Summary also lists recommendations for areas of focus in future customer training. If you would like a copy of the complete report, in addition to the Executive Summary, please let me know. BIL:bil City of Palm Beach Gardens Citizen Business Communication Survey Final Report - 2000 HAYS MAR, INC. Research & Ana aysis City of Palm Beach Gardens Citizen Business Communication Survey EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Introduction The City of Palm Beach Gardens has reviewed the nature of its business communication practices with its customers, the City's residents. It has done so by having interviewers, posing as citizens, directly Icontact city employees and ask normal business questions. Most organizations do not study their performance in this detail because the results are harder to anticipate, and therefore harder to prepare for, than any other approach. The City of Palm Beach Gardens accepted this uncertainty and commissioned a thorough analysis of the nature of its employees' service to individuals calling or visiting City Hall seeking answers to questions or help with problems. While there are certainly areas for improvement, overall the results are promising. Research Approach and Design The City of Palm Beach Gardens wanted to: 1. define the quality of city workers' communications with citizens; 2. identify any problem areas in the communication patterns; 3. provide a baseline against which to measure improvements where improvement was deemed necessary; and, 4. guide the design of any training activities that might be thought necessary. The research methodology chosen was to contact eleven City departments, both in- person and by telephone, with a series of normal requests for service or information. The contacts were documented and analyzed to measure the quality of the interactions from a citizen's point of view, a concept based on six characteristics: 1. the perceived attitude of the City employee handling the request; 2. the efficiency with which the request was handled; 3. the initiative demonstrated by the City employee in dealing with the request; 4. the level of effort exhibited by the City employee in dealing with the request; 5. the accuracy of the information provided; and, 6. the continuity if/when a caller was passed from one department to another. HAYsMAR, INC. Research &Analysis City of Palm Beach Gardens - Citizen Business Communication Survey Page 2 Executive Summary Data was gathered through contacts by telephone and in- person from Friday July 7, to Friday, July 28, 2000. Five different types of contacts were defined: 1. Base Telephone: Simple, clear telephone calls to each department about routine subjects commonly handled by the department contacted. 2. Base Visits: In- person visits made to each department, also concerning routine subjects handled by the department. The visitors ranged in age from 25 to 67; gender was equally divided; there were 12 whites, 4 African - Americans, and 4 Hispanics. They came in a variety of dress styles from work clothes to business formal. 3. Wrong Department Call: Telephone calls on subjects that were the responsibility of a department other than the one initially called. The objective was to learn how well and accurately callers are linked to the correct department. 4. Citizens Services: Telephone calls to each department from a caller who asked about "a general complaint number for the City." The object was to determine how well callers were directed to the Citizens Services number 625 -4PBG. 5. Director: Telephone calls in which an insistent caller asked to speak with the department Director or Chief. The object was to assess the accessibility of the department heads to citizen questions. A total of 76 contacts were made with City employees during the 16 business days between July 7 and July 28. Each department was contacted, including visits and telephone calls, between five and eight times during the study period, most received seven contacts. No department was contacted more than once on any day and the total contacts to the city never exceeded five per day. Table 1 (on the following page) presents a contact inventory. HAYSMAR, INC. Research &Analysis City of Palm Beach Gardens - Citizen Business Communication Survey Page 3 Executive Summary Table 1: Type and Frequency of Department Contacts First Impressions Each contact was analyzed using as many of the facets of the definition of quality as possible. Table 2 (on the following) presents performance rankings, by department, for each type of contact. There were, at most, eight observations per department. That is an insufficient number to support, with certainty, an absolute measurement of quality differences between departments. These rankings do not measure "statistically significant" differences from one score to the next. However, the results do support a broad indication of relative performance, i.e., there may be no difference between departments ranked 6' and 7', but the highest ranked two or three certainly performed better than the lowest ranked two or three. Ji JSAYt.l'Md R, INC. Research &Analysis Base Wrong Citizens Director Base Total Department Telephone Department Services Calls Visits Contacts Call Administration 2 1 1 1 1 6 Building 2 1 1 1 2 7 City Clerk 1 1 1 1 1 5 Code 3 1 1 1 2 8 Enforcement Finance 2 1 1 1 2 7 Fire/Rescue 2 1 1 1 2 7 Human 2 1 1 1 2 7 Resources Parks & 3 1 1 1 2 8 Recreation Planning & 2 1 1 1 2 7 Zoning Police 2 1 1 1 2 7 Public Works 2 1 1 1 2 7 Total Contacts 23 11 I 11 I 11 I 20 I 76 First Impressions Each contact was analyzed using as many of the facets of the definition of quality as possible. Table 2 (on the following) presents performance rankings, by department, for each type of contact. There were, at most, eight observations per department. That is an insufficient number to support, with certainty, an absolute measurement of quality differences between departments. These rankings do not measure "statistically significant" differences from one score to the next. However, the results do support a broad indication of relative performance, i.e., there may be no difference between departments ranked 6' and 7', but the highest ranked two or three certainly performed better than the lowest ranked two or three. Ji JSAYt.l'Md R, INC. Research &Analysis City of Palm Beach Gardens - Citizen Business Communication Survey Page 4 Executive Summary Charts summarizing the results of every visit are presented in Appendix 1 of the full report; the verbatim documentation of every visit is included in Appendix 2. The verbatim documentation more fully explains the City's strengths and weaknesses. Table 2: Summary Ranking by Department Ji 11AYsML R, INC • Research &Analysis Rank by Type of Contact (1 to 11, 1 is the highest ranking) 3. City Clerk 2 Department Basic Wrong g Citizens Basic omposite Rank Telephone Department Services Director Visits 1 (n = 23) Call (n =11) (n =11) (n = 20) 5. Finance 3 (n =11) 2 (tie w /9) 1 (tie wl 1,3,6,8) 8 i 4 1 (tie w/ 3 5 1. Administration 10 9 (tie w /10) 3,5,6,8) (tie w /3) 1 2. Building 7 7 8 (tie w /11) 6 9 Ji 11AYsML R, INC • Research &Analysis 3. City Clerk 2 4 8 (tie w /4) 1 (tie w/ 1,5,6,8) 3 (tie w /1) 1 4. Code Enforcement 4 1 8 (tie w /3) 6 (tie w /9) 10 ( tie w /11 ) 7 5. Finance 3 8 2 (tie w /9) 1 (tie wl 1,3,6,8) 8 i 2 6. Fire/Rescue 8 10 11 1 (tie w/ (1,3,5,8) 1 8 7. Human 1 2 1 10 9 3 Resources (tie w /11) 8. Parks & 5 5 10 1 (tie w/ 7 6 Recreation 1,3,5,6) 9. Planning & 6 6 2 (tie w /5) 6 5 4 Zoning (tie w /4) 10. Police 9 11 4 (tie w /1) 9 2 10 11. Public Works 11 3 6 (tie w /2) 10 (tie w /7) 10 (tie w /4) 11 Ji 11AYsML R, INC • Research &Analysis City of Palm Beach Gardens - Citizen Business Communication Survey Page 5 Executive Summary Findings Generally speaking, the City performed adequately. Although some departments were not evaluated as highly as others in overall performance, each department usually had one strong area. It is important to remember that this study was not designed to identify the best and worst departments. Its goal was to identify areas for improvement on a city wide basis. There are too few observations for any department to say, unequivocally, that it provides better service to customers than another. The value of this research is in the observations it makes for the City as a whole, rather than for any single department. Overall Performance In order to provide an initial understanding of the overall performance, an overall representative score was calculated. For each type of contact (visits, director calls, etc.) values were assigned to the level of performance for each of several factors contributing to the quality of the contact. Although perfect scores were occasionally achieved, most contacts were less than perfect. The overall score was 72 %. At most two or four year colleges this would earn a "C -," certainly not poor, but with room for improvement. Table 3 presents the scores by contact type and the overall score Table 3: Results by Type of Contact Jl JI.AY,9 lld R, INC Research &'Analysis Maximum Actual Perfect Cumulative Cumulative Score for a Score Score Percent of Single (perfect score (summation of Maximum Type of Contact Contact times # of contacts) earned scores) Achieved Base Telephone (n =24) 13 312 231 74% Base Visits (n =20) 18 360 274 76% Wrong Department (n =11) 20 220 153 70% Citizens Services (n =ii) 19 209 140 67% Director Calls (n =ii) 17 187 133 71% I Totals I n/a 1126 I 808 I 72% Jl JI.AY,9 lld R, INC Research &'Analysis City of Palm Beach Gardens - Citizen Business Communication Survey Page 6 Executive Summary General Findings: Strengths 1. Almost everyone in every department was pleasant and positive and seemed interested in helping. 2. Department directors who spoke with citizens generally handled the calls very well. Weaknesses 1. People who come to City Hall are, on average, treated with more energy than people who call with a problem. 2. Employees are generally interested and good at answering questions about matters concerning their own departments. 3. How well a problem is handled seems to depend more upon who one happens to ask than upon a City wide performance standard for serving customers. Often a department scored both well, when one employee handled a contact and poorly, when a different employee handled a similar issue. 4. Employees are much less effective and concerned with problems that are the provenance of other departments. They often did not know where to send the person and showed less concern than they did with their "own" issues.. Two callers from "outside the city limits" were dismissed almost immediately. 5. Hardly anyone knew the Citizens Services number as 625 -4PBG, but almost everyone knew Debbie Andrea at 799 -4130. 6. "Office" departments generally performed better than "field" departments. Recommendations This project was commissioned in order to provide baseline information and direction for improving communications with residents. What is learned in this project will be used to shape workshops or similar activities to improve communications. As noted above, the City's performance on this project was acceptable but there are several areas that would benefit from direct attention. We recommend that any workshop, etc., focus on the following concepts. City employees need to foster empathy with callers. Citizens call because they are confused, because they do not know the rules, or because they are concerned that something they have seen or heard might adversely affect them. In reality it may or may not be important, but callers do not know that. Employees would do a better job of handling calls if they remember that, from the caller's perspective, all issues are important. HAYS MAR, INC Research &Analysis City of Palm Beach Gardens - Citizen Business Communication Survey Executive Summary Page 7 a. Departments that work more with the City's infrastructure than with citizens, e.g., Public Works, Police, or Building would benefit more from empathy training than departments that work with citizens on a regular basis, i.e., the City Clerk's office and Human Resources. b. Similarly, empathy training may be more important for employees in positions requiring more formal education and/or more technical knowledge than for employees who deal with residents on a more frequent basis. 2. City employees should remember that most callers are not familiar with the operations of a governmental organization. Answering questions using departmental jargon and referring to a department's internal processes often confuses and frustrates callers. 3. Similarly, City employees should be aware that legal "fairness" and general society's definition of "fair" are often different. This does not mean that employees should forsake legal requirements. However, acknowledgment by a City employee of the difference between the two points of view will make it easer for the caller to accept the City's position. 4. The level of effort exerted by a City employee when answering a resident's call implies to the caller how important their concern is to the City. Callers who are summarily transferred or whose calls are given superficial answers will often feel that the City is uncaring or worse. 5. City employees should have a better understanding about the functions and capabilities of departments other than their own. 6. Similarly, employees should be reminded that, to most citizens, they are City employees not "A Department's" employees. Help from, say Parks & Recreation, is perceived as the City helping, not Parks & Recreation. Helping a citizen with an issue, regardless of where the call starts or ends, improves everyone's image. 7. The City should adopt, and continually emphasize, a general standard for handling citizen calls. The standard would include, among others, guidelines regarding: a. the level of effort an employee should exert in an effort to answer the query, e. g., at a minimum posing the question to their supervisor before transferring the caller to someone else if they don't know the answer. b. passing on the subject of the question on to the next person when a call is transferred. (This, of course, is policy now but is not often followed.); and, c. requiring that employees say something to a caller that makes them feel as though the employee understands why the caller is concerned about the issue. HAYSMAR, INC. Research &Analysis wit Caro I CITY OF PALM BEACH GARDENS MEMORANDUM TO: Ron Ferris, Interim City Manager DATE: December 14, 2000 FROM: Beth Ingold -Love, Assistant to the City Manager6v/ SUBJECT: City Clerk Achievement We have recently received notification from the International Institute of Municipal Clerks that Carol Gold, City Clerk, has achieved the Master Municipal Clerk designation through completion of the Third Level of the IIMC Master Municipal Clerk Academy. Carol is the twelfth Municipal Clerk in the State of Florida to achieve this designation. This professional accomplishment is a recognized honor according credibility and prestige not only to the recipient but also to the City the recipient represents. BIL:bil cc: Ann Schilling, Public Information Specialist International Institi Los Angeles County, California . BOARD OF DURECTORS- 2000-2001 Executive Committee SUSAN A. LAMBLACK, MMC President City Secretary /Treasurer Newark, Delaware RANETTE LARSEN. MMC 1st Vice President City Secretary Garland, Texas PIERRE PAGE, CMC 2nd Vice President City Clerk Ottawa, Ontario. Canada MARY LOU RAND, CMC Immediate Past President Town Manager /Town Clerk /Treasurer Garner, North Carolina Directors-2001 Expiration DIANE C. MEDEROS, CMC Town Clerk - Bristol. Rhode Island DONNA BOONECALDWELL, CMC Town Clerk - Blacksburg, Virginia RENEE R RAY- MOORE, CMC City Clerk - Gulf Shores, Alabama ANY J. RODDY, CMC City Clerk - Durand. Michigan ALICE J. MORRISON, MMC City Clerk /Treasurer - Ralston. Nebraska MONA LISA DRERLER, CMC Municipal Borough Clerk Fairbanks North Star Borough Fairbanks, Alaska GALL SHAHAN, CMC City Manager /General Director Louder Galilee, Israel Directors-2002 Expiration ELIZABETH H. KISS, MMC Municipal Clerk East Brunswick Township, New Jersey CINDY GREENWOOD, CMC Sr. Deputy City Clerk West Memphis, Arkansas EVELYN L. WOULFE, CMC City Clerk /Assistant City Manager Bloomington. Minnesota MARY C. REED, CMC City Clerk /Assistant City Manager Parsons. Kansas KAREN GOLDMAN, MMC City Clerk - Lakewood. Colorado EVELYN L. ORTH, CMC Regional Clerk /Director Council - Adminlstrative Services Regional Municipality of Waterloo Kitchener. Ontario. Canada GYSBERT RE172 HOFMEYR Director Corporate Services Tygerberg, South Africa Directors-2003 Expiration PATRICIA P. ULATOWSKL MMC Town Clerk - Stratford. Connecticut ELIZABETH WEST FORTNER, CMC City Clerk - Clinton. North Carolina HARRELL GRANBERRY, CMC City Clerk - Yazoo City. Mississippi MARILYN CHITTICK, CMC Clerk /Treasurer - Frankfort. Indiana JANE A. WILMS, MMC Village Clerk - Germantown. Wisconsin SANDRA L. WILLIAMS. CMC City Clerk - Branson. Missouri PAMYLA NIGLLAZZ.n, MMC City Clerk - Napa, Caltfornta BRUCE A. HAWKSHAW, CMC City Clerk North Vancouver, B.C.. Canada J.W. (Jae) Tiernay Executive Director Francis L. Adshead, Ph.D Director of Education Phoi November 29, 2000 (its -�, At (2�,L7:A & Mr. Robert Ferris Interim City Manager City of Palm Beach Gardens 10500 N. Military Trail Palm Beach Gardens, FL 33410 Dear Mr. Ferris, The International Institute of Municipal Clerks and the Board of Directors is very pleased to announce that Carol Gold, MMC, Clerk for the City of Palm Beach Gardens, Florida, has achieved the Master Municipal Clerk designation through completion of the Third Level of the IIMC Master Municipal Clerk Academy. The Master Municipal Clerk Academy was established to further professional education and enhance the performance of today's Municipal Clerk. Academy members must demonstrate that they have participated in educational -and professional accomplishments and have kept current with changing events in the local government scene. Requirements for maintaining Academy status include attendance at recognized academy and college programs, other seminars and workshops, teaching and writing in the profession, participating in professional meetings and conferences, and receiving honors for unusual accomplishments. Ms. Gold entered the Academy in September 1993 and has completed three Levels in Academy Membership.. She joins 170 other Municipal Clerks in iiMC Membership and is the twelfth Clerk in the State of Florida to reach this goal. We express our sincere pride in her accomplishments and are honored to know her as our colleague and friend. Again, our congratulations to Ms. Gold for this outstanding achievement. Sincerely, Susan A. Lamblack, MMC President, IIMC Us CS 1773 1555 :.com 1 QFFICI May 20 -24, 2001 ... 55th IIMC Annual Conference ... Kansas City, Missouri (Acaderny May 19) International Institute of Municipal Clerks Los Angeles County, California 1212 N. San Dimas Canyon Rd. • San Dimas, California 91773 MMC -170 — November 30, 2000 Phone: (909) 592 -IIMC • Fax: (909) 592 -1555 E -mail: hq@iimc.com Contact: Sheri Burdick CAROL GOLD, MMC NCITY CLERK of PALM BEACH GARDENS, FLORIDA RECEIVES MASTER MUNICIPAL CLERK DESIGNATION IN THE EIIMC MASTER MUNICIPAL CLERK ACADEMY PROGRAM WCarol Gold, MMC, City Clerk of the City of Palm Beach Gardens, Florida, has become the Twelfth Municipal Clerk in the State of Florida to achieve the MASTER MUNICIPAL CLERK Sdesignation through the IIMC Master Municipal Clerk Academy Program. The Master Municipal Clerk Academy was established to further professional education and to enhance the performance of today's Municipal Clerk. All Academy members must demonstrate that they have actively pursued educational and professional activities and have remained informed of current Revents in local government. Academy points are earned through the completion of IIMC - recognized Academy Programs, Eattendance at professional seminars and workshops, teaching or writing in the profession, participating in professional meetings and conferences, and being recognized for unusual accomplishments. To date, Lapproximately 14% of the International Institute. of Municipal Clerks' 10,000 members have qualified for the Academy status. E IIMC President Susan Lamblack, MMC, City Secretary/Treasurer of Newark, Delaware, announced, "I am honored to announce that Ms. Gold joins 170 other Municipal Clerks who have received the Master Municipal Clerk (MMC) designation. It symbolizes her status as a true A Municipal Clerk professional." Ms. Gold has been employed with the City of Palm Beach Gardens since April 2000, where she S serves in the position of City Clerk. Previous municipal service includes two ears as City Clerk for the P tY P Y tY City of Tamarac and twenty years as City Clerk/Risk Manager for the City of Oakland Park. E MORE Page two, News Release, Carol Gold, MMC She achieved IIMC's Certified Municipal Clerk status in December 1991, entered the Master Municipal Clerk Academy (formerly Academy for Advanced Education) in July 1993, and has continued to fulfill the educational service requirements through each of her Three Levels of Membership in the Academy. Since Ms. Gold's inception into the Academy, she has completed IIMC- approved Academy Programs and Seminars conducted by the Institute of Government, Florida State University, Tallahassee, Palm Beach Community College, Florida Association of City Clerks, Association of Records Managers and Administrators, CompUSA, and other educational programs relating to local government. Her professional affiliations include active membership with the Florida Association of City Clerks, Broward County Municipal Clerks Association, Palm Beach County Municipal Clerks Association, and Association of Records Managers and Administrators. President Lamblack praised Ms. Gold's accomplishments. "Ms. Gold has been a member of the International Institute of Municipal Clerks since July 1988 and currently serves on the IIMC Program Review /Certification Committee. Her personal commitment and service to the Municipal Clerk's field is at the heart of true professionalism." Editor's Note: Founded in 1947, the International Institute of Municipal Clerks is the professional association with over 10,000 members throughout the United States, Canada and 15 other countries. IIMC prepares its membership to meet the challenge of the diverse role of the Municipal Clerk by providing educational seminars in 47 permanent college -and university-based learning centers. IIMC offers Municipal Clerks a Certified Municipal Clerk Program (CIVIC), the Master Municipal Clerk Academy and three continuing membership levels (Master Municipal Clerk (MMC) designation upon completion of third level), and services for continuing professional development opportunities to benefit members and the government entities they serve. It is governed by a 26- member Board of Directors, four - person Executive Committee and 20 Standing Committees. CITY COUNCIL WORKSHOP MEETING, 11/13/2000 1 CITY OF PALM BEACH GARDENS CITY COUNCIL WORKSHOP MEETING November 13, 2000 The November 13, 2000, Workshop Meeting of the City Council of the City of Palm Beach Gardens, Florida, was called to order at 6:00 P.M. in the Council Chambers of the Municipal Complex located at 10500 North Military Trail, Palm Beach Gardens, Florida; and opened with the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag. ROLL CALL: In attendance were Vice Mayor Eric Jablin and Councilmember Carl Sabatello. Others present were Patrick Glas, Project Manager for Florida Department of Transportation, Matthew Thys, Assistant Public Transportation Manager for Florida Department of Transportation, Steve Cramer, Principal Planner, Beth Ingold -Love, Assistant to the City Manager, and Dan Clark, City Engineer. LINKAGE PLAN MITIGATION MEASURES: Vice Mayor Jablin explained the necessity for the proposed roadway; and recommended mitigating the train whistle, explaining that quiet zones could be declared so that the train whistles would not be blown in those neighborhoods. Patrick Glas reviewed the grade separation project for the intersection of PGA Boulevard and State Road 811, which would eliminate the railroad crossing at that location. Vice Mayor Jablin, Councilman Sabatello, and Mr. Glas responded to a suggestion by a resident to use Hood Road instead of the proposed roadway. Mr. Cramer explained that a roadway had recently been eliminated from the City's comprehensive plan. The Vice Mayor explained that the upland preserve for Legacy Place project was proposed as a 10 -acre buffer for the north end of the proposed road, which would mitigate many of the concerns expressed. Realignment of the proposed roadway was suggested by a resident. Resident Alex Perez, an engineer, explained the meaning of the CRALLS designation, which he stated was the issue to be discussed. Discussion ensued regarding the CRALLS designation. It was noted that a 10 -acre lake planned for drainage purposes would also provide a buffer. The length of time it would take to get quiet zones instituted was discussed. Matthew Thys explained that the automated horn system had only been tested in Boca Raton for one day and that more testing and approval by Congress was required. Past legislation and new gating systems were reviewed. Vice Mayor Jablin commented there were many alternative safety measures including 4- quadrant gates, paired one -way streets, medians or channelization devices, temporary night closures, use of photo enforcement technologies, etc. The Vice Mayor proposed application of quiet zones from Hood Road to Lighthouse Drive, and explained he was asking for the residents' help in getting this done. Roger Blangey, Garden Woods resident, discussed the noise effect of train whistles on this development which would result from placing the railroad crossing 500 feet away. Vice Mayor Jablin proposed a task force made up of residents impacted by the FEC train and tracks. The proposed road, which a resident commented would only be used by plat 4, was discussed by the Vice Mayor, who commented that many others would use the road. Turn lanes were discussed. A plan presented by residents was identified as an old conceptual plan, which would not be approved. Councilman Sabatello, former resident of Plat 4, explained that roadways were not planned to benefit current developers but had been in the City's comprehensive plan for many years; and traffic was controlled by the County rather than the City. CITY COUNCIL WORKSHOP MEETING, 11/13/2000 2 Councilman Sabatello urged the residents to remain a part of the process to make the outcome the best solution possible. City Engineer Dan Clark explained the lake was a part of Northern Palm Beach County Improvement District's drainage system. Ownership of the lake was discussed. Councilman Sabatello explained that it was the responsibility of the City to provide the best roadway system possible for traffic flow. A resident proposed 5 lanes to eliminate the flyover. It was explained that it would be very costly to have DOT eliminate the flyover. Residents interested in serving on the proposed task force were asked to leave their names at tonight's meeting. The Vice Mayor explained that new Catalfumo headquarters would be built on land marked "sold" on the presentation map, and that residents would have an opportunity to attend the public hearing for the project to provide their input at that time. City Engineer Dan Clark responded to a resident's comments regarding alternative roadway alignment. Discussion ensued, including stacking situations. Other residents made comments and asked questions. It was explained that the roadways were being planned for the future and all the new developments must be considered in the planning. The option of closing the railroad crossing at night was discussed. New FRA rules to be instituted next year were discussed and it was noted that then quiet zones could be established and that the FEC Railroad would have to comply. Putting a road south of Kyoto Gardens Drive was discussed, for which the private property would need to be acquired, and staff was directed to look into the possibility. It was explained that acceptance of the plan would approve the right -of -ways but alignments could still be moved. Vice Mayor Jablin noted that a snapshot of the City today was not the same as one would be five years or ten years from now. The Vice Mayor commented that while he wished the City could do everything the residents asked, the City must comply with County traffic standards. Developers who did not comply with the City's requirements were discussed, and it was explained that the City was very strict in dealing with such situations. Rules for placement of traffic lights were discussed in response to a question from a resident. To assure that the dead end of Banyan Road remained a dead end with no access, Principal Planner Cramer explained it would be shown as a dead end on the Comprehensive Plan and the change would be made in early 2001. The Vice Mayor asked the residents to continue to be a part of the process and help the City make their neighborhood a better, safer place to live by attending all the meetings and working with the City. The Vice Mayor commented that the City could not deny developers their rights to build projects, but could shape those projects to be the best they could be for the City. A suggestion was made that a model of the flyover be created as an aid to all the meetings on that subject. It was noted that a blind spot resulting from using solid walls on the southwest ramp railroad - crossing overpass had been eliminated by creating an opening for sight. In response to a resident, the Vice Mayor commented the City must work with the County and the Commissioner for this area in order to accomplish the City's goals. Councilman Sabatello commented the lower numbers were to be used and revisited in a year to see if changes would be needed, to which the Commissioner had agreed. Moving a specific linkage in the linkage plan farther south was discussed by a resident, to which Mr. Weisberg, Traffic Engineer from Palm Beach County, responded that different alignments other than those in the proposed linkage plan had not been studied, but making configurations that were more circuitous or lengthy generally increased the traffic numbers. Mr. Weisberg noted there was not time to rework the numbers before the adoption date on Thursday. Mr. Weisberg indicated that the Board of County Commissioners would have to answer the question of whether linkage modifications could be made after adoption, and explained that changes to the comprehensive were only made twice a year. Mr. Weisberg explained the traffic analysis had been done without the CITY COUNCIL WORKSHOP MEETING, 11/13/2000 3 linkage system and with all the linkage system, but not using various plans for the system. Mr. Weisberg noted the Regional Center was a huge draw for the area and a road feeding directly into it would be of more benefit than a road up from it, and the demand was 90,000 cars crossing the interstate at PGA Boulevard, and the more alternate routes that were provided would remove more traffic from PGA Boulevard, and linkage roads which were to relieve that traffic worked together as parts of the overall relief but would not stand on their own. Mr. Weisberg explained that the intent was to develop interior linkage roads as each development came in, and no time limit had been established for those. Discussion ensued. The Vice Mayor explained that traffic engineering was an art and predictions were made that might or might not work, and responded to a resident that this plan was not being done to service any individual developer. A resident suggested a second flyover. Councilman Sabatello asked how long it would take to run the model with a specific change, considering staff backup and input time, to which Mr. Weisberg responded it, could probably be done in 30 days. Based on the time it took a consulting firm to get the current figures, it was estimated by staff that it might possibly be done in two weeks by that same firm. It was noted that the intersection of the new southwest connector road and PGA Boulevard would be the new congestion point along the corridor. City Engineer Clark expressed his belief that specifically not having the connection between Kyoto Gardens Drive and having that connection somewhere else had not been investigated. Vice Mayor Jablin and Councilman Sabatello proposed to the residents that if the full City Council agreed, and if the present plan was approved by the full City Council and accepted by the County, that subsequently a southern linkage would be investigated and if it could not work the fallback would be the present plan, and that the train whistle mitigation would continue to be investigated. The Vice Mayor commented the City was trying to help the residents in any way they could, and asked residents to sign up for the task force and to attend other meetings. ADJOURNMENT: There being no further business to discuss, the meeting was adjourned at 9:40 p.m. APPROVAL: MAYOR JOSEPH R. RUSSO VICE MAYOR ERIC JABLIN CHAIRMAN PRO TEM CARL SABATELLO COUNCILMAN DAVID CLARK COUNCILWOMAN LAUREN FURTADO ATTEST: CAROL GOLD CITY CLERK CITY COUNCIL WORKSHOP MEETING, 11/14/2000 1 CITY OF PALM BEACH GARDENS CITY COUNCIL WORKSHOP MEETING November 14, 2000 The November 14, 2000, Workshop Meeting of the City Council of the City of Palm Beach Gardens, Florida, was called to order at 12:00 noon. in the Council Chambers of the Municipal Complex located at 10500 North Military Trail, Palm Beach Gardens, Florida; and opened with announcement by Vice Mayor Jablin that the topic for this workshop was review of the Agenda for the City Council meeting of November 16, 2000. ROLL CALL: In attendance were Vice Mayor Eric Jablin and Councilmember Carl Sabatello. REVIEW OF CITY COUNCIL AGENDA OF NOVEMBER 16,2000: PRESENTATIONS Presentation by Northern - Unit 2 Drainage Report - City Engineer Dan Clark explained that the presentation would include discussion of whether the City would participate and would lay out the plan and discuss its issues and implementation. Mr. Clark answered questions regarding drainage issues. It was noted that additional storage would be required, and flexibility to place a second outlet structure would come with the Toll Brothers project. Presentation by CH2MHi11- Unit 19 Drainage Report - A set of as built plans for the mall had been obtained, were available for review or copies, and the attorney who requested them had been notified. Drainage problems resulting from the mall being built higher than the original plans would be fixed with adoption of the new drainage plan. Attorney John Gary, representing Kolter, advised the outstanding issues were the ability to delete the central road from the linkage plan so that Kolter could gate it and to add a north -south road. During ensuing discussion, it was found that Mr. Gary had been working with an incorrect map. Mr. Gary advised that the project would not be,built with the two roadways proposed on the latest map, and therefore unit 19 would be put on hold. Since it was believed that elimination of the two roadways from the linkage plan would not affect traffic numbers or traffic flow, Dan Clark was directed to call George Webb, County Engineer, to assure the numbers would not change, report back to the City Manager and then to conduct a conference call with Mr. Webb, the City Manager, and Commissioner Marcus to request her approval before the transmittal at the November 16 City Council meeting. The developers were directed to go to a plan B as a fallback position. Guaranteed funding so that the interior roadways could be built, as projects proceeded, was discussed, which City Engineer Clark was to verify. CITY MANAGER REPORT Municipal Complex Change Orders - Councilmember Sabatello requested the amount of a possible future claim be broken out of the total. Customer Service Report - Beth Ingold Love reported customer service training would be done. Councilmember Sabatello requested improvement in telephone transfers so that people did not get lost in the system, to which Dr.. Love responded it was the responsibility of the person transferring the call to assure the call went through or to take it back. CONSENT AGENDA - Resolution 109, 2000 was discussed and found to be incorrect, and was to CITY COUNCIL WORKSHOP MEETING, 11/14/2000 2 be corrected. A tickler system was to be set up so that expiration dates of the terms of all Board members would be known. Resolution 110, 2000 was discussed. PUBLIC HEARINGS - There were no comments regarding Ordinance 22, 2000 or Ordinance 29, 2000. Ordinance 30, 2000 - Councilman Sabatello expressed concern regarding parking at the ball field Staff reported this item would be continued. Ordinance 31, 2000 - The ability to pool money from credits to developers was requested, with the agreements to be subject to City Council approval. It was requested that both secondary and tertiary roads be allowed to have private easements. The language in this Ordinance was requested to be clarified before the meeting so that the City would not be giving up something they should not give up. Ken Blair requested clarification that the roads should be built to the City's technical specifications; Dan Catalf imo requested the language be to City standards from curb to curb. It was noted by the members of the City Council that some of these issues should be worked out with staff ahead of time. Resolution 93, 2000 - Councilman Sabatello commented that the ability to adjust the alignments should be in the language. Vice Mayor Jablin commented at last night's meeting it had been proposed that the City ask the County if it would work to delete a particular link through Plat 4 going across the grade crossing and link it to another grade crossing on RCA Boulevard. The City Attorney was requested to prepare a Resolution stating the City would revisit the alignment of the railroad crossing and that the City would request the County to run the numbers and would respect what the County concluded in regard to the possibility of deleting that road. Ordinance 33, 2000 - Senior Planner Talal Benothman noted changes had been made and distributed revised copies. RESOLUTIONS: Resolution 85, 2000 - Mary Smith clarified minimum, midpoint, and maximum salary ranges were compiled from market studies and union negotiations. A comprehensive pay plan study was recommended for all non -union employees. It was requested the City Council be included. Resolution 91, 2000 - Target completion was noted as October 2001. Resolution 104, 2000 - It was requested City building codes be followed. Resolution 108, 2000 - No comments. ORDINANCES: Ordinance 34, 2000 - No comments. CITY ATTORNEY REPORT: The City Attorney announced he would distribute a memo at the Council meeting regarding payment for legal counsel for Council members. ADJOURNMENT: There being no further business to discuss, the meeting was adjourned at 1:40 p.m. APPROVAL: MAYOR JOSEPH R. RUSSO VICE MAYOR ERIC JABLIN CITY COUNCIL WORKSHOP MEETING, 11/14/2000 CHAIRMAN PRO TEM CARL SABATELLO COUNCILMAN DAVID CLARK COUNCILWOMAN LAUREN FURTADO ATTEST: CAROL GOLD CITY CLERK 3 CITY OF PALM BEACH GARDENS CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL REGULAR MEETING November 30, 2000 The November 30, 2000, Special Regular Meeting of the City Council of the City of Palm Beach Gardens, Florida, was called to order at 7:00 P.M. in the Council Chambers of the Municipal Complex located at 10500 North Military Trail, Palm Beach Gardens, Florida; and opened with the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag. ROLL CALL: The Recording Secretary called the roll and the following elected officials were found to be in attendance: Mayor Joseph R. Russo, Vice Mayor Eric Jablin, Councilmember David Clark, and Councilmember Lauren Furtado. Councilmember Carl Sabatello arrived later. PRESENTATIONS: Drainage Report for Unit 2A - Pete Pimental, Director of Northern Palm Beach Improvement District, presented a report on drainage in Unit 2A. The 6 -mile unit had been divided into three areas that were further divided into sub - basins. Mr. Pimental explained that the District's plan was to establish basic structure and the parameters for the unit so that additional requirements could be met as developments came in for approval, and that Northern Palm Beach Improvement District was meeting with South Florida Water Management District to convince them of the merits of this concept, and were optimistic that they would issue a permit. Mr. Pimental pointed out that berms were needed along the western side of Military Trail and the western side of Central Boulevard through City preserve land; and that the plan included the land for the City Park. If a SFWMD permit could be obtained by February, Mr. Pimental estimated work could be completed within the following 6 -8 months. Negative impacts to wetlands were to be addressed by mapping the wetlands so that any damage could be identified on the map in order to make repairs. Councilwoman Furtado requested an environmental study as a part of the drainage plan to assure the berming would not have a negative impact, and Mr. Pimental agreed to provide a report. City Engineer Clark noted SFWMD would decide how they wished to address regional issues, that the drainage within Unit 2 was critical to protect Plat 4 from future flooding, and that the City needed to work with both Northern and SFWMD. Councilmember Clark expressed concern that pine upland preserves might be damaged by berming, and received assurance that this issue could be confirmed at this stage. Councilwoman Furtado noted that the conceptual system should not pose problems for already developed projects, and she did not want to see a band -aid approach applied to certain areas. It was explained that an interlocal agreement between SFWMD, the City, and possibly Northern Palm Beach Improvement District, was being explored, to assure that unknown issues would be dealt with at appropriate times. Vice Mayor Jablin expressed his opinion that SFWMD would make sure Northern would do the right thing and that he was confident that between the two this plan would be right. The City Engineer requested policy direction regarding placement of the berms, and was asked to provide a recommendation at an upcoming meeting. Drainage Report - Unit 19 - Rick Olsen, CH2MHill, described the location of Unit 19 and its three original drainage basins. Flooding events over the years and the improvements that had been made to prevent future flooding were reviewed. The consulting firm had evaluated a drainage model and whether proposed improvements would cause problems to areas outside the unit. Mr. Olsen reported that sound engineering practices had been used and that the proposed plan would alleviate flooding. Councilwoman Furtado questioned whether there was anything else that could be done rather than CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL REGULAR MEETING, 11/30/2000 2 berming to save the oak preserve and also allow the property to be developed. Mr. Olsen explained that faster drainage could be accomplished with installation of an operable gate. The City Engineer commented staff would review the report and respond within a week. Mr. Olsen reported the only unresolved concern was within drainage basin 4 that was a land use and environmental problem rather than an engineering problem. Discussion ensued regarding the plan to replace the static weir with an operable gate to protect the oak preserve in a 100 -year storm, and Mr. Pimental confirmed that the gate would be installed and used to effect faster drainage. Prosperity Farms Road CRALLS - Mayor Russo explained that .Commissioner Marcus favored moving forward with the CRALLS application even though whether it would actually be needed would not be determined until the traffic forum was completed, because the process needed to start in order not to miss the 2001 window. The earliest adoption date would be September 2001. Principal Planner Steve Cramer explained that the County would request the CRALLS and wanted the City not to object. Councilwoman Furtado suggested that as long as the County did not object to the City's CRALLS request for PGA Boulevard that was to be considered next week, the City should support the County's CRALLS request for Prosperity Farms Road, if the traffic forum determined it was warranted. Mayor Russo reported that Commissioner Marcus had met with the City's neighborhood associations and told the residents she supported the CRALLS designation; and explained that the original lower numbers would be used. Mayor Russo reported that the residents did not want to see PGA Boulevard become eight lanes, had expressed concern with placing additional traffic on Northlake Boulevard, and was encouraged to attend the traffic forum. Staff was directed to draft a letter in support of the Prosperity Farms Road CRALLS to Commissioner Marcus for the Mayor's signature. Councilwoman Furtado reported the PGA Bridge would have fewer openings per hour and an improved rush hour schedule that would facilitate the flow of traffic. Mayor Russo reported a resident had indicated that improved landscaping had been promised for MacArthur Boulevard, to which Councilwoman Furtado responded money from that project had to be used to correct the serious Holly Drive drainage problems, which had been decided at a public meeting. Mayor Russo requested that the residents be notified the landscape improvements would be made as soon as money was available. CITY MANAGER REPORT: Mayor Russo expressed his opinion that reductions in spending were necessary this year to replenish reserves. City Manager Ferris recommended reducing operating expenditures, possibly not filling proposed new positions at this time, and reducing both engineering and capital expenditures by determining which capital projects that could be delayed. Councilmember Sabatello arrived at this point in the meeting. Mayor Russo reported Finance Director Olson would be presenting a plan which the City would be able to obtain because of their excellent credit rating, to finance future projects at 1% to 2% below the normal municipal bond interest rate, and to refinance the Municipal Golf Course, which would save the taxpayers $150,000 annually. Municipal Complex Change Orders - Councilman Sabatello reported he felt comfortable with the amounts of the change orders for the work that had been performed, but there were some for which he felt the City was not responsible. Councilwoman Furtado questioned a code required item on one of the change orders; and also questioned whether some input from Department Heads prior to construction had been ignored by the design team or the builder. Councilwoman Furtado requested research to see if there had been any written input from the Department Heads. Councilman Clark CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL REGULAR MEETING, 11/30/2000 3 moved approval of the change orders described in City Attorney Rubin's memoranda dated October 30, 2000 and November 2, 2000. Vice Mayor Jablin seconded the motion. It was clarified that results of any research by the City Attorney would not change payments to Suffolk Construction. Motion carried by unanimous 5 -0 vote. Mayor Russo reported the design group had expressed surprise at the newspaper articles. Ray Casto reported the design group had been made aware of everything and recalled pre - construction meetings with staff where staff had been told not to bring some items to the City Council. Mayor Russo commented the bottom line was that the Municipal Facility was a beautiful facility at a cost - effective rate to the taxpayers. CONSENT AGENDA: Councilman Clark moved approval of the Consent Agenda with the exception of Item 0) on the original agenda, which had been pulled on the revised agenda. Vice Mayor Jablin seconded the motion. The City Attorney noted that in Resolution 109, 2000, item (f), a minor change had been made clarifying that the Art Advisory Task Force was to report to the City Council. Motion carried by unanimous 5 -0 vote. The following items were approved on the Consent Agenda: 1. Consideration of approving Minutes from the October 11, 2000 Special City Council Meeting. 2. Consideration of approving Minutes from the October 16, 2000 Special City Council Meeting. 3. Consideration of approving Minutes from the October 19, 2000 Regular City Council Meeting. 4. Consideration of approving Minutes from the November 1, 2000 City Council Workshop Meeting. 5. Resolution 107, 2000 - Veridian Office Building Plat. Consideration of approving the Viridian Office Building Plat. 6. Resolution 109, 2000 - Art Advisory Task Force. Consideration of Reactivating Municipal Complex Art Advisory Task Force. 7. Resolution 110, 2000 - Consideration of authorizing an application for a Florida Department of Transportation general use permit relating to the construction of sidewalk improvements within the FDOT right -of -way adjacent to Oakbrook Square and authorizing execution of an Indemnity Agreement with the owners of Oakbrook Square. 8. Resolution 111, 2000 - Statewide Mutual Aid Agreement. Consideration of approving the Statewide Mutual Aid Agreement with the State of Florida. 9. Resolution 112, 2000 - Consideration of declaring Asset #9515, Rescue Chassis, a surplus asset. 10. Resolution 115, 2000 - Golf Digest, Consideration of Approving the Golf Digest -Jog Road (a.k.a. Mirasol -Plat One) Plat. RESOLUTIONS: Resolution 85, 2000 - Job Classification and Salary Plan. Consideration of adopting a Wage and Compensation Plan for job classifications for the Personnel Program of the City of Palm Beach Gardens. Staff answered questions from the City Council regarding the list of positions and salaries presented. Councilman Clark moved approval of Resolution 85, 2000. Councilman Sabatello seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous 4 -0 vote. Resolution 91, 2000 - Fire/Police Station (Petition #SP- 00 -12). Consideration of approving an CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL REGULAR MEETING, 11/30/2000 4 application from the City of Palm Beach Gardens for a site plan for an 8,620 square foot Fire/Police Station that will include a 3.363 square foot Fire Station, a 3,448 square foot truck bay, an 1,809 square foot Police sub - station, and a future 4,500 square foot training facility in Phase 2, located at the Northeast corner of Howell Lane and Northlake Boulevard; and providing for conditions of approval. Principal Planner Steve Cramer announced that this item had been pulled. Resolution 93, 2000 - City Center Linkages Plan. Consideration of approving the City Center Linkages Plan to serve as one of several mitigation measures designed to alleviate the impacts of the proposed and modified designation of Constrained Roadway at Lower Level of Service (CRALLS) for PGA Boulevard. An old road that was no longer on the map was discussed. Principal Planner Steve Cramer reviewed some of the important links on the plan, which he explained were critical to reduce traffic on PGA Boulevard from Military Trail to Prosperity Farms Road. Mr. Cramer answered questions from the City Council. The roads were to be built by the developers as they developed their adjacent land, with the road impact fees to be allocated to credit their cost to build those roads. Staff explained that a letter of credit would be surety provided to the County. Financing by the developers was discussed. Mayor Russo requested information regarding the AlA issue by the next meeting, and what happened if the letter of credit went away. The City Manager explained that the funding issue was not linked to approval of the CRALLS. Vice Mayor Jablin reported what had happened at the meeting he and Councilman Sabatello had held with the Plat 4 residents, and proposed submittal of an alternate linkage for Koyoto Drive going across the grade crossing after this plan had been submitted, and explained that it would be the County's decision whether to accept the alternate plan. The Vice Mayor explained that the train whistles were also discussed, and reported that quiet zones could be adopted in a rail corridor if certain contingencies across the rail crossings were met, and requested that the City work with the proper authorities to establish quiet zones into the four grade crossings along the FEC tracks, for which there were grants available. Discussion ensued. It was the consensus of the City Council to proceed with steps to establish quiet zones. Councilman Sabatello reported the meeting had been very good, that he and the Vice Mayor had committed to exhaust efforts to see if there could be an alternate linkage for Koyoto Drive, which would be the County's decision. Roger Blangy, Garden Woods resident, commented regarding the meeting with the residents, suggested no railroad crossing would be needed if four lanes were established on RCA Boulevard, and reported his conversations with the President of FEC Railway regarding safety of the proposed crossing and correspondence with FDOT stating they would work with the City. John Orosa, Garden Woods resident, expressed concern with moving the railroad crossing to Koyoto and reported he had overlaid noise contours on an aerial photograph to illustrate the increased impact of train whistle noise on the Garden Woods neighborhood, and expressed his concern that more engineering should have been done on Koyoto Drive. Mayor Russo responded that he understood Mr. Orosa's concern, that the roadways were conceptual, and that the City Council would commit to establishment of quiet zones. Future double tracking of the railroad was discussed. Vice Mayor Jablin recommended a task force to get the quiet zones established more quickly. Sharon Long thanked the other residents who had worked on these issues and thanked the Vice Mayor for his work on the noise issue, and questioned whether the railroad crossing might be delayed if Parcel 5A was developed in stages. Discussion ensued regarding traffic trips and the order in which properties could go forward. Attorney Larry Smith stated he was representing several people, and requested addition of the word "generally" before the word "consistent" in Section 2 of CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL REGULAR MEETING, 11/30/2000 5 the Resolution to make it clear this was a conceptual plan and that there was some flexibility. Mr. Smith noted he would present language changes to the Comprehensive Plan at the December 5 meeting, to which Mayor Russo responded he must be assured the County approved any proposed language changes. Mr. Smith requested a designation change for a specific roadway from secondary to tertiary, which staff indicated they did not support. Jeff Stem, Hemlock Street, suggested moving the railroad crossing south of PGA Boulevard. Councilman Clark made a motion to approve Resolution 93, 2000 with addition of the word "generally" before the word "consistent" in the first line of Section 2, and deleting Section 3 and renumbering Section 4 as Section 3. Vice Mayor Jablin seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous 5 -0 vote. Resolution 104, 2000 - Construction of Equipment Shelter. Consideration of authorizing execution of an agreement with Motorola, Inc. to build a structure to house radio receivers for Public Safety radio communications at Seacoast Utilities. Police Commander Carr presented the proposal. Councilman Clark moved approval of Resolution 104, 2000. Councilwoman Furtado seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous 5 -0 vote. Resolution 108, 2000 - Appointment to Fire Pension Board - Ken Altman. Staff requested appointment for an additional two years. Councilman Clark moved approval of Resolution 108, 2000. Vice Mayor Jablin seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous 5 -0 vote. ORDINANCES: Ordinance 34, 2000 - Fire Pension. Consideration of amending Chapter 38, Fire Prevention and Protection, Article II, Fire Department, Division 2, Firefighters' Pension Trust Fund, of the Code of Ordinances of the City of Palm Beach Gardens; amending Section 38 -51, definitions; amending Section 38 -78. Supplemental Benefit; Chapter 175 Share Accounts. Finance Director Kent Olson presented the proposal. Councilman Clark moved Ordinance 34, 2000 be placed on First Reading by title only. Vice Mayor Jablin seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous 5 -0 vote. The Recording Secretary read Ordinance 34, 2000 on First Reading by title only. ITEMS FOR DISCUSSION: Joint Meeting with Planning Commission December 12, 2000 - Legacy Place - Mayor Russo announced he probably would not be able to attend the December 12 meeting and expressed concern that this development not become a strip center with big box retail but stay a specialty center as originally proposed. Councilman Sabatello noted the petitioner must present any changes to the City. Mayor Russo proposed that future preliminary project workshops be held with the City Council attending the Planning & Zoning Commission meeting. Improving the big box concept was discussed. It was clarified that the workshop would convene at 6:30 with the Planning & Zoning Commission scheduled to begin at 7:00 or 7:30. ITEMS & REPORTS BY MAYOR AND COUNCIL: CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL REGULAR MEETING, 11/30/2000 0 Councilwoman Furtado thanked the staff members who had been supportive during her recent family situation. Mayor Russo reported the first recreation planning meeting had been held and he had attended a meeting at the high school with residents of PGA, the fact that sound walls were no longer being installed, and increased traffic on Northlake Boulevard, and the Mayor had invited them to attend the traffic forum. Councilwoman Furtado expressed her opinion that sound walls might be possible. Mayor Russo requested and received agreement from the City Council that the high school could proceed at their own risk to make improvements to the City's ballfield before the ballfield swap was completed. CITY ATTORNEY REPORT: City Attorney Rubin reported he had provided a memo to the Council members regarding reimbursement of legal fees for Councilwoman Furtado and advised the members should call him with any questions. ADJOURNMENT: There being no further business to discuss, upon motion by Vice Mayor Jablin seconded by Councilman Clark, carried 5 -0, the meeting was adjourned at 10:30 p.m. APPROVAL: MAYOR JOSEPH R. RUSSO VICE MAYOR ERIC JABLIN CHAIRMAN PRO TEM CARL SABATELLO COUNCILMAN DAVID CLARK COUNCILWOMAN LAUREN FURTADO ATTEST: CAROL GOLD CITY CLERK CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL REGULAR MEETING, 11/30/2000 7 CITY OF PALM BEACH GARDENS CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING December 5, 2000 The December 5, 2000, Special Meeting of the City Council of the City of Palm Beach Gardens, Florida, was called to order at 12 noon in the Council Chambers of the Municipal Complex located at 10500 North Military Trail, Palm Beach Gardens, Florida; and opened with the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag. ROLL CALL: The Recording Secretary called the roll and the following elected officials were found to be in attendance: Mayor Joseph R. Russo, Councilmember David Clark, and Councilmember Carl Sabatello. Vice Mayor Eric Jablin arrived at 12:20 p.m. PUBLIC HEARINGS: Ordinance 31, 2000 - Finance Director Kent Olson presented Ordinance 31, 2000 - An Ordinance of the City of Palm Beach Gardens, Florida, providing for Amendment of Division IV, "Citywide Impact Fees ", of Article III, "Development Review Process ", of the City's Land Development Regulations, to Provide for Collector Road Impact Fees by Amending Sections 49, 50, 51, 54, 55, and 57; Providing for Codification; Providing for Severability; Providing for Conflicts; and Providing for an Effective Date. Mayor Russo declared the public hearing open, held on the intent of Ordinance 31, 2000. Hearing no comments from the public, Mayor Russo declared the public hearing closed. Councilman Clark made a motion to place Ordinance 31, 2000 on Second Reading by title only and to approve Ordinance 31, 2000. Councilman Sabatello seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous 3 -0 vote. The Recording Secretary read Ordinance 31, 2000 on Second Reading by title only. Ordinance 33, 2000 - An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Palm Beach Gardens, Florida, providing for Amendments to the Comprehensive Plan of the City of Palm Beach Gardens based on the Recommendations of the Local Planning Agency and Staff; Providing for Transmittal; Providing for Codification in the Comprehensive Plan; Providing for Severability; Providing for Conflicts; and Providing for an Effective Date. Senior Planner Talal Benothman announced that a letter had been received from the County stating the proposed amendments would have no negative impact on the proposed CRALLS designation, and reviewed the proposed amendments to the future land use element, transportation element, capital improvements element, and intergovernmental coordination element. Councilman Clark requested staff delete the reference in the table relating to the CRALLS designation that the Military Trail CRALLS designation expired in 1999, since it was no longer applicable; and fix the exhibit on the southern alignment of Hood Road as had been pointed out by Councilman Sabatello. Councilman Sabatello verified with Mr. Benothman the correctness of roadways depicted on Exhibit A. Mr. Benothman verified that the County was in agreement with the proposed language and that Mr. Frank Duke, Palm Beach County Planning Director, was present at this meeting. Mayor Russo declared the Public Hearing open, held on the intent of Ordinance 33, 2000. Roger Blangy, 11658 Hemlock, questioned how the change in the railroad crossing proposed at the last meeting would be incorporated, to which Mayor Russo responded the County had been contacted and knew the City would be working on that issue, which would be another amendment CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING, 12/5/2000 2 to the City Linkage Plan and to the Comprehensive Plan. Mr. Blangy proposed that if RCA were a 4 -lane road, no railroad crossing would be necessary, to which the Mayor responded that nothing could be changed at this point but that the City had committed to work on that item. Pat Hughey, 9120 Reed Drive, expressed appreciation for the grand opening and requested that future events on Saturdays and Sundays be scheduled later in the day and expressed concern that alcohol was served at City functions. Mayor Russo advised these items could be addressed at the next meeting attended by Ms. Hughey since this was a public hearing for amendments to the Comprehensive Plan. Mayor Russo commented that a significant majority of the neighborhood associations favored keeping PGA Boulevard at 6 lanes and the residents knew this was a beginning process and that there would be a transportation forum. John Gary, Attorney for Coulter Corporation, expressed concern that the Linkage Plan approved at the previous Thursday night meeting and the Linkage Plan shown at today's meeting were not the same, and that the plan approved on Thursday night had been the one requested by Coulter Corporation. Discussion ensued, during which staff clarified that the correct map had been adopted. Frank Duke, Palm Beach County Planning Director, verified that the 4 -way intersections on the map were permanent but that the alignments shown were conceptual, and as site plans were presented for approval roadways could be realigned within reason. Attorney Gary indicated he was satisfied based on Mr. Duke's explanation. Mr. Benothman noted Objective 2.1.6 as proposed did not accurately reflect the exact boundaries of the City Center Linkages Plan, in that where it stated bounded to the south by PGA Boulevard should be RCA Boulevard and instead of Alternate AIA to the west it should state Military Trail, and that staff would make the appropriate changes. Larry Smith, requested consideration for addition of proposed language he had drafted to assure the future flexibility of alignments on the City Center Linkages Plan as Mr. Duke had indicated, and language to assure that road right -of -ways could not be expanded at a later date. Mr. Smith read the proposed suggested language. Discussion ensued. Staff advised Mr. Smith's comments could be adopted in the interim period after transmittal and before adoption of the amendments if both the City and County staffs agreed. Mr. Duke expressed initial concern with the right -of -way suggestion. Mayor Russo noted that Mr. Smith's proposed changes could be studied after transmittal. Ken Blair, 4300 Catalfumo Way, stated his comments had already been addressed, and complimented staff on their efforts in addressing concerns of the developers. Heiki Parts, 13251 Crisa Drive, expressed his opinion that the CRALLS designation for PGA Boulevard was not appropriate and was a new level of service, and predicted heavy stop and go traffic. Mr. Parts commented the solution was to eliminate the major traffic generators in the PGA Corridor by reducing density. Mayor Russo responded that landowners had the right to develop their properties and to expand the roads to meet traffic performance standards. Mayor Russo advised that a CRALLS designation was going to be requested soon for Prosperity Farms Road, and invited Mr. Parts to attend the traffic forum on all North County traffic to be held in January or February. Mr. Parts expressed concern regarding the left -hand turn into Lohemann's Plaza where many accidents had occurred, to which Mayor Russo responded that would be corrected. CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING, 12/5/2000 3 Hank Skokowski reported he had met with John Glidden, Chair Elect of the Planning and Zoning Commission, regarding the issue of multiple floors in mixed -use developments, and that Mr. Glidden had indicated the Commission wished to continue discussion of the language for that issue and to have input prior to final adoption. Mr. Skokowski indicated this was very important, and that the amendment had included a sentence referencing 51 %, which could easily be misinterpreted, and that the primary intent was to have a certain scale and relationship of upper floors to ground floors, which was not exactly what the sentence said. Mr. Skokowski requested and received clarification that he, the Planning and Zoning Commission, and Mr. Cramer could work on that language before final adoption to make it as clear as possible. Mr. Skokowski noted that a December 12 joint meeting between Planning and Zoning and the City Council had been scheduled to discuss Legacy Place, which would be the first project which would have to meet the standards of that language. Nancy Graham, WCI, thanked the City for their work on the CRALLS but stated an objection for the record to the numbers for the CRALLS submitted under page 2.4 Exhibit A, and requested that the combined traffic study numbers would be the numbers submitted. Ms. Graham clarified that she knew the City Council was not inclined to make any changes at this point, but wished her objection to be in the record. Also for the record, Ms. Graham explained that she had submitted proposed language to the City Council, the essence of which was to ask the County to add that the number of trips requested in the current CRALLS was sufficient to service the forbearance properties, and if they were proved to be insufficient that the Comprehensive Plan would be amended, and that the County was not willing to add the language. Ms. Graham expressed her opinion that the City Council would need to formally request the County next year to re -look at the CRALLS and that the developers and their lenders would be more comfortable if the City would commit to make that request next December. Ms. Graham stated for the record that the developers had voluntarily reduced their densities and intensities by deed restrictions to almost 70% less than the Comprehensive Plan allowed, and if increased CRALLS numbers could not be obtained if needed in the future to complete the developments as proposed without further reductions to densities then the developers were placed in a catch 22 situation because only very expensive communities could be created where people working in the City could not afford to live and they would create more traffic because they would have to travel to and from their jobs. Public transportation alternatives would not be viable since people living in homes that cost half a million dollars would never use it. Mayor Russo responded that Ms. Graham's issues needed to be addressed on a north county basis at the traffic forum; that he could not accept the language she proposed knowing that what was planned was higher than the present numbers, and that Commissioner Marcus had also indicated she could not support it, but that the City Council would commit to revisit this issue. Councilman Sabatello noted that the City Council was not making a commitment to change the CRALLS but only to revisit it if there was good reason and to speak to the County Commissioner. Hearing no further comments from the public, Mayor Russo declared the Public Hearing closed. Councilman Clark made a motion to place Ordinance 33, 2000 on First Reading by Title only with the amendments that had been read into the record regarding the southern alignment of Hood Road; in Objective 2.1.6 to correct the boundaries of the City Center Linkages Plan; and in the conceptual thoroughfare plan roads list to correct the deletion of the southern alignment of Hood Road. Vice Chair Jablin seconded the motion, which carried by 4 -0 vote. CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING, 12/5/2000 4 ADJOURNMENT: There being no further business to discuss, upon motion by Councilman Clark, seconded by Vice Mayor Jablin, carried 4 -0, the meeting was adjourned at 1:05 p.m. APPROVAL: MAYOR JOSEPH R. RUSSO VICE MAYOR ERIC JABLIN CHAIRMAN PRO TEM CARL SABATELLO COUNCILMAN DAVID CLARK COUNCILWOMAN LAUREN FURTADO ATTEST: CAROL GOLD CITY CLERK CITY OF PALM BEACH GARDENS CITY COUNCIL Agenda Coker Memorandum Date Prepared:. December- 7,.2000 Meeting Date: December 21, 2000 Subject/Agenda Item: Purchase and installation of new roller hockey rink dasher boards and surface coating. Recommendation/Motion: Approve purchase of new Border Patrol Fiberglass rink- system and new surface coating of hockey rinks by "piggybacking" Palm Beach County bid :# 99054 with Contract Connection, of Pembroke Pines, Florida, in the amount of $160,881.68.to install new roller hockey rink system and surfacing at hockey rinks at Plant Drive park. The $10,881.60 that was not budgeted will be coming out of Account_# 01- 2080- 519.6300 which is the Thompson River Pump renovation that will not be needed until October 2001. Reviewed by: Originating Dept.: Parks Costs: $160,881.68 Council Action: and Recreation Total City Attori [ ] Approved �.-Y� Finance t�.�C. $ 150,000 [ ] Approved wicondieons Current FY ACM [ ] Denied Advertised: Human Res. Funding Source: [ ] Continued to: Attachments: Other Date: [ x ] Operating Paper: [ ] Other 1. Memo from Director of Parks and Recreation 2. Quote sheet 3. Copy of County- [ X ] Not Required Contract Submitted by: Sue Miller Department Director Affected parties Budget Acct. #:: 01 -2080- [ ] Notified 519.6300 [ ] None Appropeb City [ ] Not required T,; -•iii �4 /1i CITY OF PALM BEACH GARDENS MEMORANDUM TO: Ron Ferris, Interim City Manager DATE: December 7, 2000 FROM: Sue Miller, Director of Parks and Recreation SUBJECT: Award of new Roller Hockey Rink system and surface coatin; BACKGROUND: Replacing the wooden roller hockey rink dasher boards at Plant Drive park with anew .fiberglass system, due to the deterioration of the present system, was included as a renovation item in the city's Plant Drive park grant application for a, Florida Recreation Development- Assistance Program Grant (FRDAP). The City has been notified that this grant has been funded, and as a result, the, department solicited "piggyback" bids from firms to purchase and install the new system. DISCUSSION: After visiting numerous roller rink sites (Plantation, FL; Lauderhill, FL; Weston, FLYCo;al Springs, FL; Tamarac, FL and, Kissimmee, FL) to look at various vendor's systems, staff has determined that the best value for the city would be to have the "Border Patrol Pro_ - 30.00" system installed at our rinks. This system includes fiberglass dasher boards around each of the two rinks as well as a 4' fence chain link fence atop the sidelines of the dasher boards, and an 8' high fence at the end of each rink. The Border Patrol Pro -3000 system is available by "piggybacking" the Palm Beach. County bid #99054 "Playground and Park Equipment" for a total installed cost of $160,881.68. This includes the dasher board system and the resurfacing of the rinks. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends "piggybacking" the Palm Beach County Bid # 99054 and awarding the piggybacked bid of $160,881.68 to Contract Connections of Pembroke Pines to furnish and install the new Roller Hockey rink system_ -r RU F . 2*N. FPG'za!C:Y ' SO job Bush Governor FAX N0. : Dec. 14 2000 11:45AM P2 Department of Environmental Protection Ms, Susan Miller, Director Parks and Recreation Department City of Palm Beach Gardens 4404 Burns Road Palm Beach Gardens, Florida 33410 Re: Skate Park Plant Drive Park FRDAP Project No. F01362 Dear Ms. Miller: Marjory Stoneman Douglas Building 3900 Commonwealth Boulevard Tallahassee, Florida 32399 -3000 June 21, 2000 David B. Struhs Secretary We are pleased to inform you that the Florida Legislature has funded the 2000/01 Florida Recreation Development Assistance Program priority list that was approved and submitted by David Struhs, Secretary of the Department of Environmental Protection. The City of Palm Beach Gardens has been approved for $150,000.00, which is a grant for Skate Park - Plant Drive Park. Please return your written acceptance of the grant award to our office by July 14, 2000, so that we may prepare the contract agreement. In your letter, please identify any costs you may have incurred on this project to date. A ceremonial check is available for your project. We encourage a joint event with your legislative delegation and local elected officials.. Your legislative delegation has also been informed of the ceremonial check availability. It has been requested that they coordinate with you for a dedication ceremony if desired. The request for the delivery of a ceremonial check should come from one of your legislators. To assist you with this grant, we will be conducting a Grant Implementation Workshop in your area. You will be receiving further information soon. If you have any questions, please contact our office at (850) 488 -7896. We look forward to working with you on this project. Sinc pe` ly, r,xucinda Coverston Community Assistance Consultant Bureau of Design and Recreation Services Division of Recreation and Parks Mail Station #585 LJC /bg cc: Fran Mainella, Division Director Gerald Oshesky, Jr_, P.E., Bureau Chief "More Protection, Less Process" Printed on rMcfed poper. CITY OF PALM BEACH GARDENS CITY COUNCIL Agenda Cover Memorandum Date Prepared: December 5, 2000 Meeting Date: December 21, 2000 Subject/Agenda Item: Approval of conceptual plan and Letter of Intent for the H. and R. Bloch sponsored Cancer Survivor's park. Recommendation /Motion: Consider a motion to approve conceptual plan and sign letter of intent with H and R Bloch for the development of the Cancer's Survivor park. Originating Dept.: Parks Costs: $ Council Action: - Reviewed by: and Recreation Total [ ] Approved City Attorneeyy $Current [ ] Approved w /c«,daions Finance 1� �� FY [ ] Denied ACM Advertised: Human Res. Funding Source: [ ] Continued to: Attachments: Other Date: [ ] Operating Paper: [ ] Other 1. Memo from Director of Parks and Recreation 2. Copy of Letter of [ X ] Not Required Intent Submitted by: Sue Miller Department Direct Affected parties Budget Acct. #:: Approv : byg ed [ ]None City M [ ] Not required Ali; CITY OF PALM BEACH GARDENS MEMORANDUM TO: Ron Ferris, Interim City Manager DATE: December 5, 2000 FROM: Sue Miller, Director, Parks and Recreation SUBJECT: Cancer Survivor's BACKGROUND: At the October 5, 2000 meeting of the City Council, Mr. Darrel Bofamy, Assistant Vice President/Regional Director of the H. and R. Bloch Company, made a presentation to the council regarding the desire of H. and R. Bloch to enter into an agreement with the City of Palm Beach Gardens to fund the development of a Cancer Survivors park The park would be located at the southeast corner of the intersection of Burns Road and Military Trail. In order to proceed with this project, Council needs to approve the conceptual plan of this park and sign a Letter of Intent with the R. A. Bloch Cancer Foundation, Inc. Upon receipt of the signed Letter of Intent, the R. A. Bloch Cancer Foundation, Inc., will review the conceptual plan, and, if approved, will sign the Letter of Intent. Following that approval, work on the project can begin. DISCUSSION: This proposed conceptual plan, as designed by the firm of Glatting Jackson Kercher Anglin Lopez and Rinehart, addresses the four major elements required to participate in the program including; I. The sculpture created by renowned Mexican artist Victor Salmones has been placed in the most visible location in the park. 2. The computer containing the names of local five year survivors is prominent in the park. 3. The "Positive Mental Attitude Walk" establishes an area where an individual can stroll through the park and read the inspirational plaques, as well as the plaques containing information on how to fight cancer. 4. The Road To Recovery offers the seven plaques explaining what cancer is and the basic actions necessary to successfully overcome the disease. These fundamental elements combined with the prime location of the park should qualify the project for acceptance by the R. A. Bloch Cancer Foundation, Inc. The Terms of the Letter of Intent can be summarized as follows: PARK NAME: The park will be referred to an known as the "Richard and Annette Bloch Cancer Survivors Park ". RIGHTS, DUTIES AND OBLIGATIONS OF THE DONOR: Donor agrees to pay to the City for the design, construction and maintenance of the Richard & Annette Bloch Cancer Survivors park the sum of $850,000 as follows: $250,000 on signing the agreement $250,000 upon beginning construction (i.e., groundbreaking) $250,000 upon completion of construction $100,000 at dedication to fund perpetual maintenance. Additionally, the donor will deliver the sculpture, "Cancer... there's hope" by Victor Salmones. RIGHTS, DUTIES AND OBLIGATIONS OF CITY: City agrees to: - Utilize Donor's contributions solely to pay actual costs incurred by City for design, construction, site amenities and improvements, and maintenance of the Richard & Annette Bloch Cancer Survivors park. - Construct the Richard and Annette Bloch Cancer Survivors park in an agreed timeframe. - Organize a dedication ceremony upon completion of the park. - Maintain the park in a neat, orderly and attractive appearance and operating condition. An independent group of three or more individuals as designated by both parties shall review the condition of the park from time to time and make recommendations on proper maintenance. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the City Council approve the conceptual plan and authorize the Mayor to sign and execute the letter of intent with the R. A. Bloch Cancer Foundation, Inc. CITY OF PALM BEACH GARDENS CITY COUNCIL Agenda Cover Memorandum Date prepared: December 7, 2000 Meeting date: December 21, 2000 SubjectlAgenda Item: Bid award one (1) Suburban and one (1) Expedition Recommendation /Motion:Award the Purchase of one (1) Suburban and one (1) Expedition, to Maroone Fleet Reviewed b� Originating Dept.: Costs: $61,383.00 Council Action: City Attorn� r PUBLIC WORKS Total Approved [ ] Finance K $71,519.00 [ ] Approved wl conditions Current FY ACM [ ] Denied Human Res. Funding Source: [ ] Continued to: Advertised: Other Date: [ ] Operating Attachments: Paper: [ ]Other Memo Fla. Assoc. of Counties contract FSA00 -0905 Public Works' vehicle request forms Public Works' budget [ ] Not Required detail sheets Submitted by: John Donahue,P.E., Interim Public Works Dir. Peter Bergel, Fire Chief jq k ��j Department Director Affected % 1 parties [ ]Notified Budget Acct. #: 031 - 3020 - 539.6410 [ )None �ppr d gerhis Ro ald M. Interim City Manager Not required i CITY OF PALM BEACH GARDENS MEMORANDUM TO: Ron Ferris, Interim City Manager DATE: December 7th, 2000 APPROVED: Pete Bergel, Fire Chiek:2-1EW FROM: John Donahue,P.E., Interim Public Works Director ge SUBJECT: Fire Department Suburban Recommendation A request for purchase of one Chevrolet Suburban 3/4 ton 4x4 utility vehicle and one Ford Expedition 4x2 utility vehicle with options, as replacements for vehicles 682 and 687 for the factory cost of $60,337.00 and $1,056.00 of fleet installed equipment for a total cost of $61,383.00 the City will piggy -back contracts #FSA00 -08 -0905. This contract was issued to Maroone Fleet. The Public Works Department budgeted $71,519.00 in the Vehicle Replacement Account #31- 3020 - 539.6410 for these two vehicles. Public Works' staff has discussed the findings and recommendations with the Fire Chief, who concurs with Public Works' recommendation. At this time, the Public Works Department is requesting Council consider a motion to award the purchase of two vehicles to Maroone Fleet. Should you have any questions regarding this recommendation, please contact me. I will make myself available for the next Council Meeting to answer any questions. JD /ca Attachments Fla. Assoc. of Counties contract FSAoo -0905 Public Works' vehicle request forms Public Works budget detail sheets Cc: Beth Ingold -Love, Assist. To City Manager M.A.Vadas, Jr. Kent Olson, Finance Director 1 NEW VEHICLE REQUEST FORM FY2000 12001 DEPARTMENT FIRE DIVISION ADMIN WILL REPLACE VEHICLE 682 ADDITION TO FLEET NO DATE FACTORY INSTALLED OPTIONS ESTIMATED COST FLEET INSTALLED EQUIPMENT BASE VEHICLE: Ford 2rMW ONE 12/07/00 EXPEDITION.Utility, 4x2 Vehicle $ 24,548.00 1 BUCKET SEATS ORDER CODE $ - 1 TAG & TITLE $ 55.00 2 PUSH BUMPER $ - 2 SPECIAL WIRE TERINALS $ 35.00 3 1 SPOT LIGHTS $ - 3 LENS KIT $ - 4 ROOF REINFORCEMENT $ - 4 COMPUTER BRACKET $ - 5 REAR END SLIP $ 217.00 5 RADIO,ANTENNA ( OLD CABLE ONLY) $ - 6 REAR DOOR LOCKS,HANDLE,WINDOW INOPERATIVE $ - 6 GRAPHICS $ 250.00 7 DOME LIGHT INOPERATIVE $ - 7 LIGHT BAR, ARROWSTICK(OLD BRACKET ONLY). $ - 8 KEYED ALIKED & 3rd KEY $ 78.00 8 SIREN,CONTROLLER (OLD BRACKET ONLY $ - 9 RADIO SUPPRESSION $ - 9 RACK FOR VANS $ - 10 SILCONE HOSES $ - 10 TRUNK BOX COMPLETE $ - 11 RAINSHIELD $ 76.00 11 RADIO COMPLETE $ - 12 AUX FUSE BLOCK $ - 12 PHONE $ - 13 ROOF WITHOUT HOLE $ - 13 K -9 CAGE & WARNING $ - 14 TRAILER HrrCH,TOW CHAINS ELECTRIC BRAKES $ - 14 SHOT GUN RACK $ - 15 TRUCK RELEASE $ - 15 CAGE $ - 16 REAR BENCH SEAT $ - 16 FIRST AID KIT $ - 17 KEYLESS ENTRY $ - 17 LIGHT BAR, ARROWSTICK COMPLETE $ - 18 STROBE LIGHTS $ - 18 BACK -UP ALARM $ - 19 PUSH BUMPER $ - 19 WINDOW TINT $ - 20 IABS BRAKES $ - 20 SIREN COMPLETE $ - 21 GRILL GUARDS $ - 21 22 PRIVACY GLASS $ 295.00 22 23 TRUNK RELEASE $ - 23 24 MAP LIGHT $ - 24 25 SKID PLATE $ - 25 26 A/C FRONT & REAR $ 755.00 27 LIGHT BAR COMPLETE $ - 28 POWER SEATS $ - TOTAL WITH OPTIONS $ 25,969.00 TOTAL FLEET INSTALLED $ 340.00 REMARKS/) USTIFICATION Total Facto w/O tions and Fleet cost $26,309.00 TOTAL ESTIMATED VEHICLE COST $ 26,309.00 ' Number of this a vehicle to order type Approve ne 1 ) Date U 8JC0 NEW VEHICLE REQUEST FORM FY2000 /2001 W2J00 ONE DEPARTMENT FIRE DIVISION Adminstration NEW /REPLACEMENT FOR APPROVED DATE CA!`TP►DV ILICTAI i Cn nDTInMC FCTIUATPII C nCT FI FFT INSTALLFn FOUIPMFNT ESTIMATED COST 1 BASE VEHICLE: Chevy lea. 314 TON Suburan 4x4 w /options $ 29,467.00 1 VINLY REAR SEATS $ - 1 TAG & TITLE $ 59.00 2 PUSH BUMPER $ - 2 SPECIAL WIRE TERINALS $ 35.00 3 SPOT LIGHTS $ - 3 LENS KIT $ - 4 ROOF REINFORCEMENT $ - 4 COMPUTER BRACKET $ - 5 REAR END SLIP $ 252.00 5 RADIO,ANTENNA ( OLD CABLE ONLY) $ - 6 REAR DOOR LOCKS,HANDLE,WINDOW INOPERATIVE $ - 6 GRAPHICS $ 125.00 7 DOME LIGHT INOPERATIVE $ - 7 LIGHT BAR, ARROWSTICK(OLD BRACKET ONLY). $ - 8 KEYED ALIKED & 3rd KEY $ 70.00 8 SIREN,CONTROLLER (OLD BRACKET ONLY $ - 9 RADIO SUPPRESSION $ 35.00 9 RACK FOR VANS $ - 10 SILCONE HOSES $ - 10 TRUNK BOX COMPLETE $ - 11 RAINSHIELD $ 68.00 11 RADIO COMPLETE $ - 12 AUX FUSE BLOCK $ - 12 PHONE $ - 13 ROOF WITHOUT HOLE $ - 13 K -9 WARNING $ - 14 TRAILER HITCH,TOW CHAINS ELECTRIC BRAKES $ 164.00 14 SHOT GUN RACK $ - 15 DUAL BATTERYS $ 190.00 15 CAGE $ - 16 REAR BENCH SEAT $ 685.00 16 FIRST AID KIT $ - 17 KEYLESS ENTRY $ - 17 LIGHT BAR, ARROWSTICK COMPLETE $ - 18 STROBE LIGHTS $ - 18 BACK -UP ALARM $ 22.00 19 PUSH BUMPER $ - 19 WINDOW TINT $ - 20 ABS BRAKES $ - 20 SIREN COMPLETE $ - 21 GRILL GUARDS $ - 21 CAGE BEHINE 2nd SEAT $ 475.00 22 PRIVACY GLASS $ 1,542.00 22 23 TRUNK RELEASE $ - 23 24 MAP LIGHT $ - 24 25 SKID PLATE $ 95.00 25 26 A/C FRONT & REAR $ - 27 LIGHT BAR COMPLETE $ - 28 TWO TONE PAINT $ 1,800.00 TOTAL FLEET INSTALLED $ 716.00 TOTAL WITH OPTIONS $ 34,368.00 REMARKS /JUSTIFICATION TOTAL ESTIMATED VEHICLE COST $ Front Bucket Seats —Full size spare ---- Rubber Floor Mats — Medium Gray interior I I - I Number of this type vehicle to order Approved Date I'24ef oo Z— 4/ CITY OF PALM BEACH GARDENS CITY COUNCIL Agenda Cover Memorandum Date: December 12, 2000 Meeting Date: December 21, 2000 Subject/Agenda Item Resolution 127, 2000 — Mirasol Plat Two Recommendation /Motion: There are no Engineering concerns with this plat, therefore approval is recommended. Reviewed by: Originating Dept.: Costs: $ 0 Council Action: Growth Management (Total) City Attorney � [ ]Approved $ 0 [ ] Approved w/ Current FY conditions ACM [ ] Denied Other Funding Source: [ ] Continued to: Advertised: Attachments: Date: [ ] Operating Paper: [ X ] Not Required [ ] Other Memorandum b, taed Donahue, P.E. n irec or Affected parties [ ] Notified Budget Acct. #: [ ] None Approved by: Ci Man ty Manao:r [ X ]Not required BACKGROUND: See attached memorandum. INC. CONSULTING CIVIL ENGINEERS, SURVEYORS & MAPPERS CIVIL AGRICULTURAL WATER RESOURCES WATER & WASTEWATER TRANSPORTATION SURVEYING & MAPPING CIS "Partners for Results Value by Design" 3550 S.W. Corporate Pkwy. Palm City, FL 34990 (561) 286 -3883 Fax: (561) 286-3925 www.lbfh.com TO: Carol Gold FROM: DATE: FILE NO. MEMORANDUM Sean C. Donahue, P.E. `� December 11, 2000 00 -4127 00 -4147 SUBJECT: Golf Digest - Parcels 1 -5 Golf Digest -Spine Road (AKA Plat Two) We have reviewed and approved that plats for the referenced projects prepared by Mock, Roos & Associates, Inc. Therefore, we recommend their approval. The original plats on Mylar are enclosed along with paper copies of applicable sections of the plats for reference. We note that the plat for the Spine Road (AKA Plat Two) must be recorded at the County prior to the plats for Parcels 1 -5. The applicant needs to include the recorded information from the County for the Spine Road on the plats for Parcels 1 -5 prior to recording these plats. SCD/ cc: Steve Cramer Melissa Prindeville Bahareh Keshavarz Mary Hanna Clodfelter -Mock, Roos & Associates, Inc. P:\PROJECTS\PBGMEM0\4127\4127i P: \PROJECTS\PBGMEMO \4147\4147L RESOLUTION 127, 2000 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM BEACH GARDENS, FLORIDA, APPROVING MIRASOL PLAT TWO AND, PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, the City Engineer has reviewed the Mirasol Plat Two; and WHEREAS, the City Engineer has determined that the proposed plat meets all the technical requirements of the City's Land Development Regulations and Chapter 177, F.S. and recommends the approval of the plat; and WHEREAS, the Plat is consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan and LDRs. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM BEACH GARDENS, FLORIDA: SECTION 1. The Mayor and City Clerk are hereby directed and authorized to execute the Mylar of the Mirasol Plat Two consisting of five (5) sheets dated March, 2000 prepared by Mock Roos Engineers Surveyors Planners, attached hereto as Exhibit "A ". SECTION 2. This Resolution shall be effective upon adoption. INTRODUCED, PASSED AND ADOPTED THIS DAY OF ATTEST: Carol Gold, CMC, City Clerk VOTE: Mayor Russo Vice Mayor Jablin Councilwoman Furtado Councilman Clark Councilman Sabatello Joseph R. Russo, Mayor APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM AND SUFFICIENCY. City Attorney AYE NAY ABSENT 0 3 a J a J 0 N a N oo Z .� a ° W F-. .9 0o v och A 4 N O� O n. LL._ 0 c Z rr O CD 0O r 0 U� wW �-_ Z N V U O aj50 LL- m N O a ~L .,Jt�U Z O U W 4.0 Waop gi�r7 p < - °J i i r QW!i? 0O!i r W Wr <Or r <2r §r ag��}33'jj,,��uQQrej�iyaaw4� - 18 15{9y��� ZZ<JJ�K ZZ<JJ.�C LYt/1�y�C70`a Q&)- WNS,7d WOl<il= -•Z W LL. 0 WW/!f0/1ZZr <Z NLatLA Wvi�1a- a'vyia N Cp - -QZ_J d U11������jjjWJ�jW7}y�pJ, N •WO <ir UO'$U�� N1-WUrW NF-oU~(�W tXUWm 00m Z� �•r0 {WW� ` Z`Z4 N`y Ot r0 -i -j W {W<y 3 W ~W F W ~WID N ~oUK< LY�a4 >g�F{p/W►.. v FO IN-O 5�CI40V OZ trA&W aZ y=� <2yZ/yyZ yZ�y�fQ� W r y� N_r 0yr�r kl- ,WnW yid <21WA 0 pH6t=/ Ma: W.Z�ry0�0 WJZZta19< WJZZ� y<N' y0yJ0 a N9 towgw 0 o O N -p0.0 N -00¢Q 3W <0W 1a1QrQ� �V psOm Z Om1/l 3WN�1W -IW-< C� N tit; W JU JC) N{y -r0r S F- T T - Wppyars tYNGtoyg WNOaA s0�- 0W4onZ3.b J. OHOS Z-ZypF� - 3!- Hc<�' ZNaHcgi tbOi mN4 S0 Z �H FW �ltil- <WyyO� i XUV W Wg•W� < Z5 N Zy = 0OtiJ J 0 to- JmmJ r•m «< COW O <WrW y Z O < ^ J <rW •W •WJ <r WF CjFF 0� r y(�1 <r0> y�r> y�N > <NNWWZ Zr �O�Z<OO }o� �i -ro <W`fr/1j WWI <m`Na� <I�fr/1 ^<pW� >} - (� > W N } - < XT a ty�� O- yy 4 {��!!• JO Z r WJOhWJO0iW2 0ysy7 < 3N`�NO- dVrWy1!`N } <N?N`OO� rn F .. a a WHO OCD <30N <� -N< tA_S,.:t� r< O *> F .WSQ�� �N!1<K�U 70�WS0r�MMfSO�O+i 3<�Z0.- WnOZ`04 +t/)t <3 NU1}OCCNWW �WN V!?Wrtr. GZJ N a3r 0Z ><C5Q5QN y0 W N W Ql- �r 060; < Is 00 O � � - ZNW N x in 0 N ~Z <r OI-U-K }p0 • -SWWr 8J • - =N r N <rrs r O�V,1 • <Wf�OtY` -S �S$a�i� win J yy t1�� tt�� } tU NgWO O�C7rt�pr2 OSP <OrN� }a ti UU r W ZZOp_ < Ny�> r� 0r6� rrt�1 r- 40�WaW< PWOPW W�4 - SO�: Z 0!-< ti2SK4 >9yp(y�NWS� Z Fr <L?LJ Zp rSN�U •yZ�N ep St a_ OO�f> W 0�[1< ►-m O_ OIC04 Mfyy(���rr �W Ur r > rCM,0O2WONr rNrO< tf1Z` 4 WIWi >QQ00 >QQ'W'Sl{��WttN��fr/1 W ^> rttlnyQN�tt��Wt4� S y� OW r F S r2?r OWOt+01Wi��WOOWOW ��rSW1 01r {to.WrQU r M SSt yy,I W r O wig y,4. ONO WO ON tUy MZrQ7{N�NZyNJaOM f0 O Op S < r• < t/1 0 < 3 V1 �' < F7 <- • • W p p ryp(C(C,��M tN��rryy��ltfyfrtZ�UCUt0ryyySl��t{�� r yy��ta,,��OrM{ZZ� r((ZJJZ��-pQ tt,� U. Z <Pn to LL - pO►- `�OFOMOHFS -OOnF- IWi `i` -a11�C NfzQaaO <OW O.WON�goa4y� OPyp _ 2N tJ � � pp E UZ ZK 9 N• <R- r t CITY OF PALM BEACH GARDENS CITY COUNCIL Agenda Cover Memorandum Date: December 12, 2000 Meeting Date: December 21, 2000 Subject/Agenda Item Resolution 128, 2000 — Mirasol Parcel One Plat Recommendation /Motion: There are no Engineering concerns with this plat, therefore approval is recommended. Reviewed by: Originating Dept.: Costs: $ 0 Council Action: City Attorn y Growth Management (Total) [ ] Approved $ 0 [ ] Approved w/ Current FY conditions ACM [ ] Denied Other Funding Source: [ ] Continued to: Advertised: Date: [ ] Operating Attachments: Paper: [ X ] Not Required [ ] Other Memorandum bmitted by: C Donahue, P.E. Jepp rtment Director Affected parties [ ] Notified Budget Acct. #: [ ] None Approved by: �. r City Manager [ X ] Not required RESOLUTION 128, 2000 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM BEACH GARDENS, FLORIDA, APPROVING MIRASOL PARCEL ONE PLAT AND, PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, the City Engineer has reviewed the Mirasol Parcel One Plat; and WHEREAS, the City Engineer has determined that the proposed plat meets all the technical requirements of the City's Land Development Regulations and Chapter 177, F.S. and recommends the approval of the plat; and WHEREAS, the Plat is consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan and LDRs. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM BEACH GARDENS, FLORIDA: SECTION 1. The Mayor and City Clerk are hereby directed and authorized to execute the Mylar of the Mirasol Parcel One Plat consisting of four (4) sheets dated March, 2000 prepared by Mock Roos Engineers Surveyors Planners, attached hereto as Exhibit "A ". SECTION 2. This Resolution shall be effective upon adoption. INTRODUCED, PASSED AND ADOPTED THIS DAY OF ATTEST: Carol Gold, CMC, City Clerk VOTE: Mayor Russo Vice Mayor Jablin Councilwoman Furtado Councilman Clark Councilman Sabatello Joseph R. Russo, Mayor APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM AND SUFFICIENCY. City Attorney AYE NAY ABSENT W Z O J W V OC Q a J 0 N a {SyQ�wlw W N 1* L_ LLJ Zo° U � O W F w. O 0 U V' 5 N O� 0a U_ _ ON Z 'a MO O a. ~ L ,470 Z w _ 0 U0 m N -, wm W a� O Z U Ll C1 � J Z �a � U N � O F `Ogle HIRWO CNSWW>- W 1yy- WOZ Q< d Z H wF$ga<�20W aw 'Q_G <Ny_ZC gn Zt g-w�(A 4 In NOF�w�ilNO�< O— 222 O (°g, 2$ < �a5� �i =a3 < <i$5r5 << a N N w W $yp W 4, wwle (A WYA � FO t; U. � O QQ <aN O N� N W, Q Z W W v W6 F ~< w W U) SaO F N ti F z r �i<19 i< 3 3 d `Ogle HIRWO CNSWW>- W 1yy- WOZ Q< d Z H wF$ga<�20W aw 'Q_G <Ny_ZC gn Zt g-w�(A 4 In NOF�w�ilNO�< O— 222 O (°g, 2$ < �a5� �i =a3 < <i$5r5 << a N N w W $yp W ONOO Z FO t; r zpP o5jqr �:z r NZd wq v, O . CQ' �W #udf. al o Z i. v uuuZ1w . id> x w 3 �� I.- `_j!) �2oc < <- Vcjo�W�r W$081 !IOU., -Z WW � � < U. 5m yN= 0 W Od �A 5 §,` dw)gq`dd -j 9 w zmau 11194 -�z WY 010 1'xa:j Qn V 6� s U. IL 66 w < < <m�< H N < PO g Q�NSQ O�wo 4 W U. rwa( < — NWW -FmF W� W'i ( IMUS 19 92- FH�! h- J S CIO CL Z�N! =IN 4 ~� IaJ W WSW W W�1FW W 5�, Z ] W Q— - Z(~/!1- yZJ<WQ1 -11aa��M1 i- 20Ww�1wiJtLS�O <3Ja1 l t-�'V CITY OF PALM BEACH GARDENS CITY COUNCIL Agenda Cover Memorandum Date: December 12, 2000 Meeting Date: December 21, 2000 Subject/Agenda Item Resolution 129, 2000 — Mirasol Parcel Two Plat Recommendation /Motion: There are no Engineering concerns with this plat, therefore approval is recommended. Reviewed by: Originating Dept.: Costs: $ 0 Council Action: Growth Management (Total) City Attorne� [ ] Approved $ 0 [ 1 Approved w/ Current FY conditions ACM [ ] Denied Other Funding Source: [ J Continued to: Advertised: Date: [ ] Operating Attachments: Paper: [ X ] Not Required [ ] Other Memorandum Omitted by A C. Donahue, P.E. e t Director Affected parties [ ] Notified Budget Acct. #: [ ] None Approved by: City Manage r [ X ] Not required RESOLUTION 129, 2000 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM BEACH GARDENS, FLORIDA, APPROVING MIRASOL PARCEL TWO PLAT AND, PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, the City Engineer has reviewed the Mirasol Parcel Two Plat; and WHEREAS, the City Engineer has determined that the proposed plat meets all the technical requirements of the City's Land Development Regulations and Chapter 177, F.S. and recommends the approval of the plat; and WHEREAS, the Plat is consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan and LDRs. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM BEACH GARDENS, FLORIDA: SECTION 1. The Mayor and City Clerk are hereby directed and authorized to execute the Mylar of the Mirasol Parcel Two Plat consisting of four (4) sheets dated March, 2000 prepared by Mock Roos Engineers Surveyors Planners, attached hereto as Exhibit "A ". SECTION 2. This Resolution shall be effective upon adoption. INTRODUCED, PASSED AND ADOPTED THIS ATTEST: Carol Gold, CMC, City Clerk VOTE: Mayor Russo Vice Mayor Jablin Councilwoman Furtado Councilman Clark Councilman Sabatello DAY OF Joseph R. Russo, Mayor APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM AND SUFFICIENCY. City Attorney AYE NAY ABSENT 0 3 J W V OC Q a J 0 N a w 04 v U- w O C)OZO U W�� CL W o 171 �4.W � _ m . W�j =� oc°n6� Nm0 0�m =O a4C-)0 LL. =a6N �; O IX a° 3m ai Ua2 V Z O O Z U W V) �o N , t _U Q m 3 �J a F N a � 1 N aNO OF <= WUWUQ°Qrrsi CZ 81Z O i.-!i S�� 1-VZZW ZC� a o cc �W!i ••6.OU�W< {�-W Sy'. 8`4 W SW F11 - www v < -i ccXp jkwa�a a - W o�5 L4 W a9Z O N (U�� <z 's Z -Zp W W y m y� Z U O O W Q `W Z F O N ZZ Qy� _ <a •l N O Q Z Z Z n` W O y4_OZ l w v qq Wy ~a W V I� faga �U.aW d Ny,� N al Z F- Z Z F Z pia � 3< 3 3 a 02 -JyZJ y�NZ>WWWp??S Q WtWHOO `H U WOIJ Q�a}} CN F W F LU fl,—Z4 In 2 N X < LL W -mu) _�� . iu W p . JO }O -aU NOQ2W <XWpU > < N O F v cc W~7 ��N►W- z _{(N���11 I. -w >y� N F LLWC7 H yali 7F - ~WaF- l4JJ ZOvNNN$d�az >ONOHw Z HIVN--WQ W� ti �o``sW<<5� ~� 4 R. J lnx<l,<9,al9 W< Z N N Z iswaw <F ►- �_ U O Lut- �v 88 Z W LLJ c CL < Z uj V `v`o Fiac�csi5� JO2 < III 1+ IC <mal� >�iwd W IZZa2A~ >osiN-W�r z tN Ss ~ Z `V YN -W 4pp WF-Q- u) In w <cl- « Z�W1$oW Z F�Zy v OI NvK{(N�I 11.... F- <� d U Vt� Z C Y WX -tKWW QW W *Qr � ZFp Zp <W N tj tO WZOU <W h=--2 6 J �a W H IV) pa:4 `NF FOi Z W• QOJ X� yy4 �WOJQ� UW` WW. �WF, 1 Jo <Cf�i 'j. UUaV1 ZZo'i w�l u�W�f o Laz 2 ICU< W19 - <o� -ia :56 C7 ON�: ow <V y� S JWWLL o N 4FOW= <v�Ni��SZ <5SQ 61 I-i<tjo 3 QJ -FZW Z aw MW F� a W x - W Z p yy��N 1=-SN W���iyr.� ow J ' F O� 4 1 Ca 1 t 1 C � �1 �1 W 1 R• � WN 1 Z 1 r- 3' I z N aNO WyWc� WUWUQ°Qrrsi CZ 81Z O i.-!i S�� 1-VZZW ZC� ZZF< -J <� �W!i ••6.OU�W< {�-W Sy'. 8`4 W SW F11 - W!v i - <WoO: v < SI jkwa�a a - ;H1 o�5 L4 VW CITY OF PALM BEACH GARDENS CITY COUNCIL Agenda Cover Memorandum Date: December 12, 2000 Meeting Date: December 21, 2000 Subject/Agenda Item Resolution 130, 2000 — Mirasol Parcel Three Plat Recommendation /Motion: There are no Engineering concerns with this plat, therefore approval is recommended. Reviewed by: Originating Dept.: Costs: $ 0 Council Action: Growth Management (Total) City Attorney <� [ ] Approved $ 0 [ ] Approved w/ Current FY conditions ACM [ ] Denied Other Funding Source: [ ] Continued to: Advertised: Date: [ ] Operating Attachments: Paper: X j Not Required [ ] Other Memorandum ue, P.E. W[ ector Affected parties otified Budget Acct. #: ( ] None Approved by: City Manager [ X j Not required RESOLUTION 130, 2000 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM BEACH GARDENS, FLORIDA, APPROVING MIRASOL PARCEL THREE PLAT AND, PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, the City Engineer has reviewed the Mirasol Parcel Three Plat; and WHEREAS, the City Engineer has determined that the proposed plat meets all the technical requirements of the City's Land Development Regulations and Chapter 177, F.S. and recommends the approval of the plat; and WHEREAS, the Plat is consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan and LDRs. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM BEACH GARDENS, FLORIDA: SECTION 1. The Mayor and City Clerk are hereby directed and authorized to execute the Mylar of the Mirasol Parcel Three Plat consisting of four (4) sheets dated March, 2000 prepared by Mock Roos Engineers Surveyors Planners, attached hereto as Exhibit "A ". SECTION 2. This Resolution shall be effective upon adoption. INTRODUCED, PASSED AND ADOPTED THIS ATTEST: Carol Gold, CMC, City Clerk VOTE: Mayor Russo Vice Mayor Jablin Councilwoman Furtado Councilman Clark Councilman Sabatello DAY OF Joseph R. Russo, Mayor APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM AND SUFFICIENCY. City Attorney AYE NAY ABSENT W W 2 F J W V Q a J 0 N Q N LL. O dozy C) W0 r a ° tZ _ LL. W ^ wV/ , W S2OVZVI a V) 0 —MO 0�m20 a �U00 =a45N 0 Z LL- M W °L�Wm d. U W Z O O Z U W cn rrM N S<y� U. L6 W N h < -2W ~y< W C <�jZN N r � if.JOWC�3� a Q JJ~VppQ- ~~ Il�J 6 �Op� yOyW,WHQ� O W Q ^< J iWsWH{{<�� 2 m -36 lel�2W4 <O6 $ N 4.0 HJZ H N Z Fw-Z V .Zglx Q w H� � W I LA- W Z I.- U OW It 2 yy>0a<2 �W F= _OF- ZZQ SWv W (z ` ZJC - �c C 0 < W86Y W 903 QQNa � V U Q a 2 #WW2 G J < Wm Hyy I- QN {�_ 25 y?�t7J►► SaI�Z 2 -H 2W1 -J<F -" O (� -C OYW =I N FOW e i EtZ yWW t :5 ":J 4��.��IUU" :J 16 �Z�7 pZw�Za4 CH 3 <C1<W1 SZZ<Z~ < J3 =ZIw --W cn6T- Li Ago <`- <go��pd �r� N N - W p FQQH W4N{�QN 11'QQ`g cgWlS 'Inn tb ~; a � 6 �U�Nm �y ~�� �� =W N N W W gg Z 4WW �7 <.3� pN NH �� t qO W~?'-.'.I,� %2h y6y��504ww-FO- <'WN -NONC7 W<LL VI m V) OW za i� {5y� WWW _jZ YO-11- m = '2 ~W I9' O i aJ J/- �OC 3W J(AO' L3 M=SS§ w`6' Igl- 046 ltc'33 roWa§ `I���` �Q ~�dQw�6UZ� WH -NI i� §WLA81�t��wW. oz�o 39 WaOW4!N �nie le -is, �b CITY OF PALM BEACH GARDENS CITY COUNCIL Agenda Cover Memorandum Date: December 12, 2000 Meeting Date: December 21, 2000 Subject/Agenda Item Resolution 131, 2000 — Mirasol Parcel Four Plat Recommendation /Motion: There are no Engineering concerns with this plat, therefore approval is recommended. Reviewed by: Originating Dept.: Costs: $ 0 Council Action: Growth Management (Total) City Attorne [ ] Approved $ 0 [ ] Approved w/ Current FY conditions ACM [ 1 Denied Other Funding Source: [ ] Continued to: Advertised: Date: (] Operating Attachments: Paper: [ X ] Not Required [ ] Other Memorandum SUbmitted by:: n �ahu1 P.E e ent Director Affected parties [ ] Notified Budget Acct. #: [ ] None Approved by: City Manager [ X ] Not required RESOLUTION 131, 2000 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM BEACH GARDENS, FLORIDA, APPROVING MIRASOL PARCEL FOUR PLAT AND, PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, the City Engineer has reviewed the Mirasol Parcel Four Plat; and WHEREAS, the City Engineer has determined that the proposed plat meets all the technical requirements of the City's Land Development Regulations and Chapter 177, F.S. and recommends the approval of the plat; and WHEREAS, the Plat is consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan and LDRs. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM BEACH GARDENS, FLORIDA: SECTION 1. The Mayor and City Clerk are hereby directed and authorized to execute the Mylar of the Mirasol Parcel Four Plat consisting of four (4) sheets dated March, 2000 prepared by Mock Roos Engineers Surveyors Planners, attached hereto as Exhibit "A ". SECTION 2. This Resolution shall be effective upon adoption. INTRODUCED, PASSED AND ADOPTED THIS DAY OF ATTEST: Carol Gold, CMC, City Clerk VOTE: Mayor Russo Vice Mayor Jablin Councilwoman Furtado Councilman Clark Councilman Sabatello Joseph R. Russo, Mayor APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM AND SUFFICIENCY. City Attorney AYE NAY ABSENT 6WWW �s~� �( �wwg 0 . 0 41W W lJi N —� a�Q W Za 9 _Si FUL Iz ZZU1�,+JW m q3 O ZZt QEWN �� Z N1•-Ol Uy�SS � <ZZl�ll -1 Vi OFI-a UU W! < 2Z� O^Q 32N< ZI- ^ JO� 14 z LL W W_ <i aR Vi <O ;7- wi, i i$�� W ����� y �HIA i< 3 3 y _ V �° � -N O�N CLMO Q U F - -70C 0 1!F S > N$ y= o1 W O�ff• -• WC aJO (�Z� O<N W 2-i ON C &Nr 1� 0t UZ� =NA a�W4 �N W HN � o WO-~ N6paN O� � M/ �w U H w0 1i yak -�y OJ S�aWW VO <U� J C7 FY- OF N KF- W < -rte LL� W W �t -� 0 L) �li� f. Q �m >-2-4.w �- ~W� a t" N Q � -<H �}'►ON - ~OW{�7J//J�yV1- �V HCC<QZcppF� (QZ�- tY ZON- ZK Q ZON - Z �A�h J � OwS =A HN5a' 3W~ W 8< - &4W -C W �K < Z N1- < Z Z , r <OOJN6" F NFN��SSSSa li ►-a W N —Z <..O 7pZ— t 5 a ►- m < <J3 Na`` cgy c8ty(t��IJJ� -xZi - U iNW O OZWFO Z< Wo W 3 >OV);_ V) Y91 - W N Hj N Z {.;�gsW Q X1W.. <mmZ2_ppappZ< r-S ZZ �ymv��r '0' a�— a� Ng 0Z<U<NNW OF ~WJ ~Z 55 -y w <O WUO 1 <"a S1-9- 98 �j� V, 1"Z C ZZ m z C��+JN44d <} l<oF wti F'86WZ«i <rzdc~iuwtWii :r m W WW C W N1pp� < ��ppZZ3 w EV) 1.- 9 Y U) a Ow j -. h <NN23a O 21� 4ss <11��1aJW 20d F O1yHM O F F�W�O �V. W <Z< 'NW C WZ INN WO Z Lali jPn4 Z �Z� ZIW Za�N_F - _ WON Zy�O W ayHJ --c R�7&n J U1 o FO =Y70 > ZJMF 10 <O70 i- � �1 N' < o�vM r W^�aa t t(/t in a 0 CITY OF PALM BEACH GARDENS CITY COUNCIL Agenda Cover Memorandum Date: December 12, 2000 Meeting Date: December 21, 2000 Subject/Agenda Item Resolution 132, 2000 — Mirasol Parcel Five Plat Recommendation /Motion: There are no Engineering concerns with this plat, therefore approval is recommended. Reviewed by: Originating Dept.: Costs: $ 0 Council Action: Growth Management (Total) City Attorney [ ] Approved $ 0 [ ] Approved w/ Current FY conditions ACM ( ] Denied Other Funding Source: [ ] Continued to: Advertised: Date: [ ] Operating Attachments: Paper: [ X ] Not Required [ ] Other Memorandum S uomitted by: lZ��hue, P.E. elt ec or Affected parties [ ] Notified Budget Acct. #: [ ] None Approved by: 4a ityna r [ X ] Not required RESOLUTION 132, 2000 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM BEACH GARDENS, FLORIDA, APPROVING MIRASOL PARCEL FIVE PLAT AND, PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, the City Engineer has reviewed the Mirasol Parcel Five Plat; and WHEREAS, the City Engineer has determined that the proposed plat meets all the technical requirements of the City's Land Development Regulations and Chapter 177, F.S. and recommends the approval of the plat; and WHEREAS, the Plat is consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan and LDRs. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM BEACH GARDENS, FLORIDA: SECTION 1. The Mayor and City Clerk are hereby directed and authorized to execute the Mylar of the Mirasol Parcel Five Plat consisting of four (4) sheets dated March, 2000 prepared by Mock Roos Engineers Surveyors Planners, attached hereto as Exhibit "A ". SECTION 2. This Resolution shall be effective upon adoption. INTRODUCED, PASSED AND ADOPTED THIS DAY OF ATTEST: Carol Gold, CMC, City Clerk VOTE: Mayor Russo Vice Mayor Jablin Councilwoman Furtado Councilman Clark Councilman Sabatello Joseph R. Russo, Mayor APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM AND SUFFICIENCY. City Attorney AYE NAY ABSENT W 04 u 'W^ V J `` .° W0 .WOE m a�0w N V (1 _ OC _ �N ON U Q 0 0. m U a oN =o oZ: )p U- Q a N J ° 0 �°�W O m CLO OM aUaO Q �1 Z 0 Z ° U W N ,-� -,t:s W W W R NrF JWSO W Ill- LL 'Z6 Q�ZZZ o -rttKKS k p •N C)KONi ZZa=r1LZyyrW4 — ~QQ 00 }� 88JO�U W V •_UW tt O_ Z OO�Q Z Z _OwI- 1--a N 191.- +1 11- N aW"" Q 8a Zt Wa��25 <� � ig � I LLJ <oLL - 9 w r5 � 7SN Z - • ^U JOVrV�Lt2 2 W • qN Z y� Li 30 W 3�010C V) 8 ti _� �_ w} s LA Lri1 0 �g< � �Q 3 3 a H � <i� _W ((�� $Z c Wr�F' H �H ZW� 9OW JZ W r� �O pZ Q p a yJ F- r �W�aV `�a�LL- pLLp������W Jrym Z�- 'fiJs �� yC WLYa�Z�O rp }NS t0 O O N < <P O Z O W_ I.- Q aSf W �yrya��NOr_ yNW�r_yW—� WOJ< r ZJx 6_rt L/1WCy�1 -NU C7 <ybL� —_ <aJ W YN8 -. zu PZ i 4a N�wr �m �rz 7 t` W� LnJ��Lg��axjajg < ~� rrr N Or— J J J i ip F _ wd <L9fQr' -O�g Lxa+Ka rW� c �< } sJ `SZppZ ij� N�opZZ W1Q� �JJZWOXWJ <yW� _N�Nrsr Y y�. C co N <Z <1 ZrWW6� -M W l-K �V o 7 cl rN LW- p) QNLL(���W- ZZZZ20 -Wr NC Zd -�WVVV _ y2jW �Zr 6 r <Of�rLtJ< Zwo 0 L. lQ }L+J<r i LIZ —z wN 3 !9006<— LJZU. , 52 Z�; LY� r f CJ�N r— (WC��rQQ -V) — wcr y�SSSN(q (yLZ���4pp.�s� yi��L� 0 < —rWNn Q�OL.>C9U aNNKWW NNQNO <Z3 w00 40yK.�p <_ dW <—Z_ZO Q<�Sr8 {4440 map <r *ZC 0Wy ~y,,77Lyyay��<3�fl68 x 4V<N n&',� Ii waZ<I. -- NO r2 u-W tJ ZZO —v N -.A r < < v N Vlr`� a_ O� NNqq..9[[ Y7W— NrSNggr� 0 ��¢•1+ ixCKW Q w -C W ,^ Z N m zm 189a22 a -W oro° w U J wwwNCxia Z QW NU 0 o� �xj LJ O O} Vt .r a� S wu UUZ r NN r rYNW��� pp LOWZSUZF+.yc�ro�QppNWaLLnD a`°LN i S<4l<QO U rO < - x 2( g1` g.9 r rsS o F O�rN``rWao F r<O lL3 a • ZZzz OyZy��. y�y�� y�yW� O.O X <Nx MS 4�r<W iLi2s4CjK CITY OF PALM BEACH GARDENS CITY COUNCIL Agenda Cover Memorandum Date: 12/11/00 Meeting Date: 12/21/00 Subject/Agenda Item Award of lonq -term disability insurance proposal. Recommendation /Motion: Staff recommends awarding the long -term disability insurance proposal to Sun Life of Canada. Reviewed by: Originating Dept.: Costs: $ 11,652 Council Action: City Attorney Finance (Total) [ ] Approved $ 13,000 [ ] Approved w/ Finance Current FY conditions [ ] Denied ACM Advertised: Funding Source: [ ] Continued to: Other Date: [ x] Operating Attachments: Paper: [X ] Not Required [ ] Other Memorandum Submitted by: p Kent R. OlsonIl\,� Finance Director Affected parties [ ] Notified Budget Acct. #: 01- 900 - 519.2330 [ ] None Approve City M nager [ X ] Not required BACKGROUND: See attached memorandum. CITY OF PALM BEACH GARDENS MEMORANDUM TO: Ronald M. Ferris, Interim City Manager DATE: December 11, 2000 FROM: Kent R. Olson, Finance Directorgo SUBJECT: Long -term Disability Insurance BACKGROUND Since the inception of the defined contribution pension plan for general employees in 1995, the City has purchased long -term disability insurance for these employees. Our employees in the City's police, fire and general employees (old plan) defined benefit pension plans all have disability coverage in the pension plan. In addition, there are about 50 employees who purchase voluntary long -term disability insurance through payroll deduction to supplement their coverage. The City's insurance policy will expire on December 31, 2000, thus we have solicited proposals to provide this coverage. DISCUSSION The long -term disability insurance coverage had several companies propose on the City provided coverage but only two which offered to cover the voluntary insurance program as well. Of these two, Fortis, our current carrier, offered an annual premium of $12,040, up 7% from the rate it has held in effect for the last four years. Sun Life of Canada, which currently provides the City with group life insurance coverage, offered an annual premium of $11,652, only a 3% increase over the current annual cost. Both of these proposals are less than the $13,000 budgeted for this fiscal year. I recommend we award the proposal to Sun Life of Canada for the year beginning January 1, 2001. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends the City award the long -term disability insurance proposal to Sun Life of Canada in the amount $11,652. l Wu CITY OF PALM BEACH GARDENS CITY COUNCIL Agenda Cover Memorandum Meeting Date: Dec. 21, 2000 Date Prepared: Dec. 12, 2000 Subject/Agenda Item: Funding for the Northern Palm Beach County Transportation Forum. Recommendation /Motion: Motion to authorize the expenditure of $5,000 for the Northern Palm Beach County Traffic Forum. Reviewed by: Originating Dept.: Costs: $ N/A Council Action: Total City Attorne Planning Division [ ] Approved Finance $ N/A [ ] Approved w / conditions Other Current FY ( ] Denied Funding Source: [ ] Continued to: Advertised: Date: [ ] Operating Attachments: Paper: [ X ] Other 1. Letter dated 11 -21 -00 [ X ] Not Required City Council Contingency Fund from Patricia Schapley. ub ed by: G wth Mgt. Director Affected parties otified Budget Acct. #: 01- 0100 - 511.5910 ( ] None Approve" City Ma [ X ]Not required BACKGROUND: The facilitators for the Northern Palm Beach County Transportation Forum have sent the attached letter dated November 21" to the City. The letter indicates that the proposed cost is $18,000 for the forum, which is currently being planned for one or two days in late January or February 2001. The proposed dates should be known by December 14th. Palm Beach County and the Town of Jupiter have committed to fund $5,000 each toward the cost of the forum. The City of Palm Beach Gardens is also being requested to fund $5,000. The remaining $3,000 will be requested from the other six smaller municipalities. Staff is recommending: (1) The City contribute $5,000 from the City Council Contingency Fund. This budget account had a total budget of $30,000; and (2) The Mayor forward a letter to the facilitators committing to fund $5,000 toward the cost of the forum. FAU /FIU els OINTCENTE s 10 170 for Environmental & Urban Proble R November 21, 2000 � 00A! Lauren Furtado, Council Member, City of Palm Beach Gardens Karen Golonka, Mayor, Town of Jupiter Karen Marcus, Commissioner, District 1, Palm Beach County i5 SUBJ: North Palm Beach County Traffic Forum Dear Council Member Furtado, Mayor Golonka, and Commissioner Marcus: This letter is a follow -up to our proposal and statement of scope of services dated July 24, 2000 and sent to initial convenors of the North Palm Beach County Traffic Forum (Lauren Furtado and Roxanne Manning, City of Palm Beach Gardens; Karen Marcus, Palm Beach County; Karen Golonka and Sam Shannon, Town of Jupiter). A copy is attached. During our initial contacts with you this past summer, it was hoped that a one and one -half day Traffic Forum could be accomplished in October, 2000. The Forum was set tentatively for November 13 and 14, 2000, but was ultimately postponed because a few important issues were pending that could have undermined the process. It is our understanding that these matters have been resolved to an extent that will allow you to now move forward with plans for the Forum. While conducting interviews in preparation for the November dates, it became clear to us that your three entities, and other entities, share a strong desire to engage in a collaborative process for the purpose of building consensus on the traffic issues affecting your region. We have spoken to you about rescheduling the Forum sometime in January 2001. However, it first will be necessary for us to reach agreement quickly on the scope and cost of our services, thereby allowing us enough time to properly plan such an event. As you are all aware, we have already spent considerable time meeting with you and your representatives, in joint meetings, in individual interviews, as well as telephone calls and correspondence. We feel that additional meetings between you and us will be necessary to determine the exact scope and agenda of the Forum. When we submitted the attached letter outlining the costs for our services, it was not anticipated that this much time would be required to arrange the initial Forum. Further, we still have not received formal assurances from each of you that your respective entities are committed An Equal Opportunity /Access /Affirmative Action Institution North Palm Beach County Traffic Forum Page 2 to this process and its costs. Therefore, before we proceed further, we would require the following: 1. A commitment, in the form of a letter, from each of the three convening entities (Palm Beach Gardens, Jupiter, and Palm Beach County) to the Joint Center agreeing to our services and costs, as outlined below. 2. A commitment from each of the three convening entities to name three designated representatives per entity to a "Convenor's Council" for purposes of attending pre -Forum organizational meetings. (This would cap the number of decision - makers to nine and would guarantee that those attending were familiar with the issues and prior agreements.) These representatives would be expected to attend such meetings, work collaboratively and rule by consensus, and be able to approve decisions on agenda design, scope of the meeting and any other matters relating to the Forum. Two alternates per entity could be named if all the three designated representatives were not available. In this way, we could be assured it would not be so difficult to schedule these vital meetings and the Forum could occur on time. These meetings would be based on consensus decision making so there is no worry about majority voting. 3. A designated single "point of contact" person from each entity for us. These individuals should be taken from the representatives named above and would be responsible for assisting in scheduling meetings, having certain "housekeeping" decisions addressed, etc. At this time, we have reevaluated our original proposal and suggest our services to be delivered in three distinct phases: First Phase: Planning the Forum • 2 -3 organizational meetings with the Convenor's Council to determine consensus on Forum goals and content. Interviews of all stakeholders, either in person or by telephone. It is estimated that there would be approximately 25 interviews, including follow up interviews, if necessary. Interviewees would include: 1 elected official and 1 appointed official from each local government, including Martin County (10 interviews); 2 developers; 2 representatives of the area Chambers of Commerce; 2 -3 environmental; 2 -3 utilities; 5 other agencies (RPC, FDOT, WMD, Taxing Districts). Neighborhood groups are not included here, as explained below. North Palm Beach County Traffic Forum Page 3 • Mail -out survey to a representative group of stakeholders to anticipate responses. This is how we plan to involve the neighborhood groups at this phase. This would help limit the participant numbers for the Forum. In addition to the surveys, time would be set aside for Public Comment to ensure that those not at the table would feel their voices were heard. Second Phase: Designing and Facilitating the Forum • Logistics such as: securing the facility, making catering and AN arrangements, inviting participants, and preparation of Participant Package. • Designing the Agenda, including meeting guidelines and participant instructions for small group work. • Facilitating and staffing the Forum as well as providing flipcharts, pens, etc. • Preparation of a formal report post- Forum, to be submitted to all participants and any attendees who request it. It is our opinion that, to assure you get as much information- . sharing and decision - making out of this Forum as possible, you limit the number of participants. We recommend you have no more than 40 -50 participants, not including observers. Also, given the upcoming holidays and the amount of time needed to properly plan, we feel that the earliest possible date for the Forum would be early to mid - February 2001. The cost for these first two phases would be: $18,000. Details on sharing costs among the convenors and other entities can be worked out once we have your agreement on this revised scope and budget. Third Phase: Forum Follow -up It is our hope that the Forum will produce a consensus that the stakeholders engage in a longer process to develop a device to guide future transportation decisions for the region. If so, we propose to coordinate and facilitate that process in cooperation with you and representatives of other entities, as appropriate. We would propose and submit to you a separate scope of services and budget for that process at that time. Our July proposal to you suggested a 4 -8 month process consisting of 4 -6 half -day meetings with a $35,000 budget. However, we now feel this may not be accurate. The scope and budget of any further process will depend on the outcome of the Forum and the desires of the key stakeholders. North Palm Beach County Traffic Forum Page 4 We will follow up with each of you by November 30th to discuss this letter and securing a commitment to proceed. We look forward to continuing our work with you on this process. Sin rely yours, atrici M. Schapley Associate Director cc Steve Cramer, Palm Beach Gardens Janice Fleischer, Florida Conflict Resolution Consortium Sam Shannon, Town of Jupiter CITY OF PALM BEACH GARDENS CITY COUNCIL Agenda Cover Memorandum Meeting Date: December 21, 2000 Date Prepared: December 8, 2000 SUBJECT /AGENDA ITEM Public Hearing: Ordinance 30 , 2000, a request to re -zone a 50 acre parcel of land from Planned Development Area to Public /Institutional with an overlay zoning of Planned Unit Development (PUD). RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of petition PUD -00 -01 with eleven conditions of approval. Staff is also recommending approval of three waivers from Land Development Regulation requirements. Reviewed by: Originating Dept.: Costs: $ Council Action: Total City Attorney Growth Management [ ] Approved Finance NA $ [ ] Approved w/ ACM Current FY conditions Human Res. NA Other NA 1 tCe by d h anag men Director 2 .��' D . Approv City Ma ag I. REQUEST Advertised: Date: Paper: [X] Not Required Affected parties [ ] Notified [X] Not required Funding Source: [ ] Operating [ ] Other Budget Acct. #:: [ ] Denied [ ] Continued to: Attachments: • Ordinance 30 , 2000 e Legal Description [ ] None DEC 11 2000 ^� Urban Design Studio, agent for The Benjamin Private School, Lin-�Ps'r_ s na$� ?IBC rezoning to Planned Unit Development (PUD) from the existing Planned Development Area zoning for the development of a high school campus. The site is located approximately' /2 mile north of Hood Road, west of Central Boulevard. The 50 -acre site City Council Meeting Date: December 21, 2000 Date Prepared: December 8, 2000 Petition PUD -00 -01 will contain 187,671 square feet of educational building space as well as athletic fields and amenities. (7- 42S -43E) II. BACKGROUND A. History This is a vacant parcel of land with Planned Development Area zoning. There have been no previous approvals by the City which affect the site, except for the requirement for a thoroughfare plan road to the south. B. Land Use and Zoning The subject site is currently zoned Planned Development Area (PDA). The petitioner is proposing a Planned Unit Development zoning with an underlying zoning of Public /Institutional. The Comprehensive Plan requires that all lands currently zoned PDA be rezoned to either Planned Unit Development or Planned Community District. The property presently has a future land -use designation of Residential Low (RL), and is listed as Residential Low on the Vision Plan. The Comprehensive Plan requires that the City change the land use to Public during the next round of "staff- initiated" Comprehensive Plan amendments following PUD approval. For a complete listing of adjacent uses, land -use designations and zoning districts, see Table 1 below. Table 2 on page four (4) examines how consistent the proposed project is with the City Code and future land -use designation for the site. Subject Property: I Planned Development Area I Residential Low Benjamin High School North I Planned Development Area I Residential Low Vacant South Planned Unit Development Residential Low San Michele Underlying Zoning RL -3 West Planned Development Area Residential Low Vacant East Public /Institutional/ Public Dwyer High School/ Planned Development Area Residential High Vacant K City Council Meeting Date: December 21, 2000 Date Prepared: December 8, 2000 Petition PUD -00 -01 C. Concurrency The petitioner received concurrency certification on April 28, 2000 for traffic, drainage, water and sewer. Traffic concurrency is certified until the buildout date indicated in the Traffic Impact Analysis, which is December 31, 2004. Should the square footage indicated in the TIA not be constructed by such time , then the petitioner must undergo an additional concurrency review prior to construction. Concurrency has been certified with no conditions. D. Development Review Committee The Development Review Committee members, representing public and private agencies affected by the proposed development, reviewed this petition on June 22, 2000. A listing of various departmental comments is attached. The applicant has submitted revised plans and other documents in response to DRC comments. E. Procedure This is a request to rezone to Planned Unit Development. The request is reviewed by City Staff and the Development Review Committee, who forward comments and recommendations to the Planning and Zoning Commission. Acting in an advisory role, the Commission considers the recommendations of the DRC and City Staff and makes a recommendation to the City Council. The City Council reviews the request for, and makes a final determination of approval, approval with conditions, or denial. III. PROJECT DETAILS A. Site Location and Existinq Conditions The proposed project is located on a 50 -acre tract of land on the western side of Central Boulevard, approximately Y2 mile north of Hood Road. The tract is presently heavily wooded, consisting primarily of Upland Pine Woodland System. This consists primarily of slash pine tree story and saw palmetto understory. There is also a small wetland located on the eastern side property, adjacent to Central Boulevard. To the north, south and west are vacant lands. To the east, across Central Boulevard, are a vacant tract and the William T. Dwyer Public High School. To the south is vacant land, which has recently received development approval for the San Michele residential community, consisting of 90 single family homes. This land was owned by the MacArthur Foundation , was part of the sell -off to WCI, and is subject to the stipulations set forth in the Forbearance Agreement. The Benjamin School now owns the property. The petitioner is proposing a 187,671 square foot educational facility which will include classrooms, a performing arts facility, administrative and media centers, 3 City Council Meeting Date: December21, 2000 Date Prepared: December 8, 2000 Petition PUD -00 -01 physical education facilities, food service facilities, field house facility, a soccer /track field, softball field, baseball field, football field and four tennis courts. B. Compliance with Land Development Regulations, Section 76 Site = Public /institutional Minimum Building Site Area = 2,178,000 sq. feet Yes 15,000 sf Minimum Site Width= 900 feet Yes 100 feet Maximum Building Lot 9% Yes Coverage 40% Maximum Building Height = 53 feet No 45 feet Front Setback = 155 feet Yes 25 feet Side Setback = 200 feet Yes 15 feet Side Setback Facing a Street = 128 feet Yes 15 feet Rear Setback = I 202 feet I Yes 15 feet C. Waiver Requests The petitioner is requesting waivers from the following code requirements: • Section 76, to allow for a 53 foot high structure to exceed code requirement by 8 feet. • Section 256, to allow for a sidewalk on only one side of the "Conceptual Thoroughfare Road ". • Section 180 (3) Number of Parking Spaces in excess of 10% required parking. • Section 282, Lake Maintenance Tract, to allow for vertical structures within the required lake maintenance easement. 4 City Council Meeting Date: December2l, 2000 Date Prepared: December 8, 2000 Petition PUD -00 -01 D. Proposed Buildinq The property is intended to be developed as a 50 -acre private high school campus which will include 69,846 square feet of classrooms, 30,305 square feet of performing arts facilities, 18,362 square feet of administrative and media center facilities, 39,247 square feet of physical education facilities, 11,225 square feet of food service facilities, 18,684 square feet in field house facilities, one soccer /track field; one softball field; one baseball field; a soccer /football field; and four tennis courts. Approximately 490 students are expected to attend the private high school. The performing arts facility has a seating capacity of 490 seats. The performing arts facility and the athletic field will not be used simultaneously or during school hours. The high school is designed in a contemporary style featuring stucco buildings with towers and flat concrete the roofs. The roof styles include mansard and hip. All rooftop equipment will be screened. The color scheme of the buildings will be peach and white. The school facilities will be one and two stories in height. The gymnasium and performing arts center will be greater in height. Art in Public Places The petitioner has been informed of the "Art in Public Places" program, should the cost of development exceed $1,000,000. The petitioner has indicated that they would like to designate an area on the site plan for an "Art in Public Places" location. The petitioner shall provide a note on the site plan indicating that exact location is to be determined in conjunction with the Art Advisory Board, after City Council approval. E. Siqnaqe The petitioner is proposing to bring back a sign package for review and approval by the Planning and Zoning Commission and the City Council at a later date. F. Landscaping and Buffering Section 102 of the Code of Ordinances requires a 25% preservation of all upland native communities located on site. Environmental consultant Jim Schnelle has determined that this required preservation area equivalent to 7.92 acres (memo dated November 18, 1999). The petitioner shall be providing 7.92 acres of preserved upland native community. In addition to the upland community preservation, the petitioner is proposing to preserve an existing wetland area. 5 City Council Meeting Date: December2l, 2000 Date Prepared: December 8, 2000 Petition PUD -00 -01 The petitioner shall be providing a total of 83,853 landscaping points. The landscape code requires 72,048.2 points of landscaping. The proposed development provides for a surplus of 11,804.8 points of landscaping. Of the 83,538 points provided, 52,900 points, or 63.3 %, are provided by existing vegetation preserved as upland native community and wetland. The petitioner has been notified that they will be required to provide littoral zone plantings. The City Forester has requested that the petitioner refrain from identifying littoral zone plantings and cross sections at this time, as these requirements are subject to change in the near future. Staff shall provide the petitioner with direction on how to meet the code requirements for littoral planting zones prior to City Council approval. Central Boulevard Parkway The proposed development is located along the Central Boulevard Parkway, as defined in Section 106 of the LDRs. This section requires that the developer preserve a 90 foot "parkway easement" of upland native system within the subject site, adjacent to the Central Boulevard right -of -way. Within the parkway shall be a six or twelve foot multi- use pathway shall be provided , pedestrian path, landscape medians, linear parks, greenbelts and landscaping buffers. The petitioner has provided for the 90 foot parkway easement, consisting of upland native system and meandering six foot multi - pathway system. The petitioner has also provided for landscaping within the median and road shoulder, consistent with the upland native community system theme as specified in Section 106 of the LDRs, titled "Parkways ". G. Parking Based on the revised LDRs Section 180 specifies that High Schools provide one space per classroom, plus one space per 250 square feet of office plus one space for every three students. The petitioner is proposing approximately 50 classrooms, 18,364 square feet of office space and 490 students. This would equate to approximately 288 parking spaces required. The petitioner is proposing 328 parking spaces. These spaces shall be located in two areas, adjacent to the administrative and academic buildings, and adjacent to the field house and athletic facilities. The total number of spaces provided is approximately 13.8% above code requirement. The excess parking is being provided for 6 City Council Meeting Date: December21, 2000 Date Prepared: December 8, 2000 Petition PUD -00 -01 "visitor" parking. The petitioner is requesting a waiver for exceeding more than 10% of the number of spaces per code requirement (see attached waiver justification). H. Site Access and Circulation The petitioner is proposing three entrances, two of which shall connect to a roadway, to be constructed by the petitioner, which will run perpendicular to Central Boulevard. This yet to be named roadway is a segment of the Conceptual Thoroughfare Plan. This roadway will eventually run from Donald Ross Road to Alternate A1A, as specified in the Comprehensive Plan. A third entrance shall connect to Central Boulevard. This entrance will have controlled access, and will connect the parking area adjacent to the field house and sports complex. The petitioner will be providing a 6' foot multi -use pathway along Central Boulevard as well as a 5 foot meandering sidewalk along the future east -west road. This will be part of an overall pedestrian /bike system, which will tie in to an overall Citywide system. I. Drainage Drainage concurrency has been approved. Legal positive outfall from this site will be from the northern end of the site, into a Northern Palm Beach County improvement District Canal. The conceptual drainage plan indicates that there will be three retention facilities on site. The water feature in front of the academic campus will accommodate runoff from the proposed roadway (Conceptual Thoroughfare Plan Roadway) and from the parking and drive areas in front of the campus. The wetland will receive runoff from the academic campus area and back portions of the main parking lot. The retention pond in the rear of the property will receive runoff from the academic facilities and the front water feature. Outfall from the site will run from the rear retention pond to the Northern canal along the northern boundary of the site. This development shall be subject to the Northern Palm Beach County Improvement District Unit 2 condition of approval. J. Liqhtinq The petitioner is proposing parking lot lighting throughout the campus area. The petitioner is proposing stadium lighting for the athletic playing fields. The petitioner has submitted a lighting plan, which indicates that the highest footcandle reading bordering future residential property (to the west) is 0.45. Additional shielding on light fixtures may be required once future residential development is initiated. 7 City Council Meeting Date: December21, 2000 Date Prepared: December 8, 2000 Petition PUD -00 -01 J. Legal Non - Conformities There are no legal non - conformities on site. K. Platting The petitioner is proposing to plat and record this parcel, consistent with the approved site and master PUD plan, prior to the issuance of the first building permit. L. Phasing The petitioner has indicated that the development will be constructed in one phase. IV. COMMENTS FROM THE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW COMMITTEE (DRC) This petition has received DRC certification. DRC certification indicates that all major outstanding issues have been resolved. Planning and Zoning Division Staff is not supporting a waiver from Section 256 of the LDRs entitled "Sidewalks ". Staff is not supporting this waiver based on concerns that this will create a "missing link" once development to the west occurs. To ensure that the western developments will have a continuous link to Central Boulevard Parkway system, staff considers this sidewalk segment to be essential. Therefore, this segment should be completed at this time. Staff has recommended that the petitioner provide irrigation and electrical service to the Central Boulevard medians as part of the City's Citywide Median Improvement Program. This program envisions upgrading the existing Native Upland Community System to include irrigated annuals, flowering species and lighting. The petitioner has indicated that they must "jack and bore" a conduit under Central Boulevard at the northern end of the site in the existing main. Staff is requiring that service to the Central Boulevard medians connecting the north and south medians. order to extend water and sewer lines from the petitioner add irrigation and electrical via this conduit and an "open cut" conduit Also as part of the overall City beautification program, staff is requiring that the petitioner utilize either a paver block system or a "bowmanite" pressed concrete system to delineate the crosswalk at the new "Conceptual Thoroughfare Plan Road ". The E-3 City Council Meeting Date: December21, 2000 Date Prepared: December 8, 2000 Petition PUD -00 -01 petitioner should carry out this construction as part of the overall new construction of this roadway. See Public Works Comments City Forester The City Forester has reviewed this project and has made his recommendations on conditions of approval regarding littoral plant requirements, Central Boulevard Parkway plantings, and removal of exotics (memo dated July 17, 2000). The petitioner has responded to the other comments made by the City Forester. They have also revised landscape plans in response to comments made by the Planning and Zoning Commission at the August 8, 2000 workshop. The City Forester has reviewed the revised plans and has no outstanding concerns. City Engineer The petitioner has addressed the City Engineer's concerns by revising the site plans accordingly. The City Engineer shall review and comment on the revisions prior to Planning and Zoning public hearing. The City Engineer's office has reviewed the revised plans and has indicated that all major outstanding concerns have been addressed. The petitioner shall, however, provide for a letter from NPBCID that verifies the release of all ties /or holdings for the southern lake. Building Division No concerns at this time (transmittal dated June 8, 2000) Public Works Jon Iles, Public Works Supervisor, has submitted a memo addressing the Citywide Median Planting Plan and beautification program. These issues are being worked out with the petitioner (memo dated June 12, 2000) This concern is being addressed through Condition of Approval #1. 9 City Council Meeting Date: December2l, 2000 Date Prepared: December 8, 2000 Petition PUD -00 -01 Police Department The Department has submitted their Public Safety Recommendation Matrix. The petitioner has responded to the concerns of the Department in their July 5, 2000 memo (Police memo dated June 20, 2000) Fire Department The Site Plan and building elements meet Fire Rescue access standards (memo dated July 12, 2000). Seacoast Utilities Seacoast has reviewed the latest revisions and has made additional comments. Seacoast has identified a conflict between a water main and an exfiltration ditch. The have also identified a conflict between the existing Central Boulevard storm drain and the proposed sanitary sewer line running parallel to Central Boulevard. Seacoast has reviewed the revised plans and has indicated that all their outstanding concerns have been addressed. (Memo dated September 25, 2000) Northern Palm Beach County Improvement District No concerns at this time (memo dated June 13, 2000). V. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION On August 28, 2000 the Planning and Zoning Commission held a public hearing on this petition. The Commission voted 7 -0 to recommend approval of this petition to City Council. The Commission also recommended approval of all four waivers requested by the petitioner by a 6 -1 vote. The Commission recommended approval with fourteen conditions, seven of which have been addressed by the petitioner. 10 City Council Meeting Date: December21, 2000 Date Prepared: December 8, 2000 Petition PUD -00 -01 VI. CITY COUNCIL Conditions of Approval Waiver Requests The City Council also indicated that they would not support the waiver request for the sidewalk requirement on the southern side of the Future East -West Roadway. Due to the fact that this petition was pre- advertised for a November 16 public hearing, staff is recommending that the public hearing be continued to a date certain. VI. RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL At first reading, staff recommends approval of petition PUD -00 -01 with the following waivers from LDR requirements: • Section 76, to allow for a 53 foot high structure to exceed code requirement by 8 feet. • Section 180 (3) Number of Parking Spaces in excess of 10% required parking. • Section 282, Lake Maintenance Tract, to allow for vertical construction within a Lake Maintenance Easement. Staff supports the waiver request for the southern lake only, which is to be privately owned and maintained. Staff does not support a LME waiver request for the northern lake, a portion of which which is to be owned and maintained by Northern PBC Improvement District. Staff also recommended approval of petition PUD -00 -01 with the following conditions of approval: (1) Prior to issuance of the certification of completion for the athletic fields or certificate of occupancy, whichever comes first. the applicant, successors or assigns shall install and maintain in perpetuity, the Parkway System, including landscaping, irrigation, lighting and related amenities to City specifications per the citywide streetscaping beautification program, in the road shoulders and median within the right -of -way, along Central Boulevard and the future East -West Roadway. The City shall require, as a condition of approval of any new project located on the east side of Central Boulevard, across from subject site, that they bear the proportionate share of the cost of the continued maintenance thereof. In the event a Special Parkway District is formed by the City of Palm Beach 11 City Council Meeting Date: December21, 2000 Date Prepared: December 8, 2000 Petition PUD -00 -01 Gardens, or another entity, pertaining to the roadway maintenance around this project, the property owner, or its successors, shall immediately become a member of said District. The exact location of irrigation lines and electrical sleeving shall be determined at time of construction plan approval. (City Forester) (2) Prior to the issuance of Certificate of Occupancy, all exotic vegetation shall be removed from the site. (City Forester) (3) Prior to the issuance of first buildingq permit, the applicant must submit a letter from Northern Palm Beach County Improvement District (NPBCID) that verifies the release of all ties /holdings that NPBCID has or plans to have in the future with the lakes on the Benjamin School site. Therefore, all lakes will be required to remain privately owned and maintained in accordance to a management plan consistent with section 117 of the City's LDRs. (City Engineer, Planning & Zoning) (4) No building permits except for the clearing of exotic vegetation shall be issued until a revised Surface Water Management System for Unit 2 has received final approval from the City of Palm Beach Gardens and all other applicable governments and agencies, including a schedule for implementing the plan and a definitive commitment for funding from the required improvements, unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer. (City Engineer, Planning and Zoning) (5) The build -out date of this project is December 31, 2004 as referenced in their March 10, 1999 traffic impact analysis. For the purposes of this condition, the project shall be considered built -out if the student enrollment has reached the level as indicated in the traffic impact analysis, or 50% of square footage approved by this ordinance is completed. (Planning and Zoning) (6) The number of students shall not exceed 490 as indicated in the traffic impact analysis. Enrollment shall be verified by City staff. An annual report indicating the number of students shall be submitted to the City on or before December 31St of each year, until the build -out date occurs. (7) Prior to the issuance of the permit for site drainage, the City shall review and approve construction details for littoral zones, including their location, slopes and vegetation. As a requirement, at least 50% of the shoreline shall be planted with wetland trees and /or aquatic plants at ten square feet of littoral zone for every one linear feet of shoreline. There shall be a minimum of one tree for every 80 square feet and plants shall be on three -foot centers, minimum. A sum total of area(s) constituting no less than 15% nor more than 25% of the total shoreline 12 City Council Meeting Date: December21, 2000 Date Prepared: December 8, 2000 Petition PUD -00 -01 distance shall be constructed as littoral shelf at the ratio of 10 square feet of shelf per running foot of shoreline. (City Engineer) (8) Prior to issuance of certificate of occupancy, the applicant shall submit all legal documents pertaining to ownership and maintenance of the property to the City for review by the City's legal counsel and the City Forester. (Planning and Zoning, City Engineer) (9) The open space /landscape maintenance and environmental preserve management plan shall be found sufficient by the City Forester prior to final approval of construction drawings or commencement of land alteration. The City shall review documents for landscaping maintenance and management language that meets or exceeds the City's guidelines included in the City's Landscape Handbook and City Codes. (Planning and Zoning) (10) The City will assess the Developer a pro -rata share of the City's cost to review and comment on Northern Palm Beach County Improvement District's (NPBCID) Unit 2 Environmental Resource Permit Modification based upon the project's acreage within NPBCID's Unit 2. (City Engineer) (11) The petitioner shall submit construction plan drawings that indicate a sidewalk along the southern side of the East -West Road riqht -of -way, in accordance with the LDRs. Staff is recommending denial of the following waiver request: Section 256, entitled "sidewalks" which requires both sides of roadways to have a minimum five foot wide sidewalk. The applicant is requesting to build a sidewalk only on the north side of the east -west road. Section 282, entitled Lake Maintenance Tracts, for the northern lake, a portion of which is to be owned and maintained by the Northern PBC Improvement District. 13 Ordinance 30, 2000 Date Prepared: December 8, 2000 ORDINANCE 30, 2000 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM BEACH GARDENS, FLORIDA, PROVIDING FOR APPROVAL OF THE APPLICATION OF THE BENJAMIN PRIVATE SCHOOL, INC., FOR REZONING OF 50 ACRES OF LAND, LOCATED AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF THE INTERSECTION OF CENTRAL BOULEVARD AND AN UNNAMED FUTURE EAST -WEST ROAD AS MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED HEREIN, FROM PLANNED DEVELOPMENT AREA (PDA) TO PUBLIC /INSTITUTIONAL (P /1) WITH A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (PUD) OVERLAY, IN ORDER TO CONSTRUCT A 187,671 SQUARE FOOT PRIVATE HIGH SCHOOL CAMPUS; PROVIDING FOR WAIVERS; PROVIDING FOR CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; PROVIDING FOR CONFLICTS; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, the City of Palm Beach Gardens received an application from The Benjamin Private School, Inc., for approval of rezoning of 50 acres of land located at the northwest corner of the intersection of Central Boulevard and unnamed future east -west road from Planned Development Area (PDA) to Public /Institutional (P /1) with a Planned Unit Development (PUD) overlay as more particularly described in Exhibit "A" attached hereto; WHEREAS, the Growth Management Department has reviewed said application and determined that it is sufficient; and WHEREAS, the Growth Management Department has reviewed said application and determined that it is consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan and Land Development Regulations; and WHEREAS, the Growth Management Department has recommended approval of the planned unit development (PUD) known as "The Benjamin Private Upper School "; and WHEREAS, the City's Planning and Zoning Commission has reviewed said application and recommended that it be approved with the requested waivers and subject to certain conditions. Ordinance 30, 2000 Date Prepared: December 8, 2000 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM BEACH GARDENS, FLORIDA: SECTION 1. The City Council of the City of Palm Beach Gardens, Florida hereby rezones 50 acres of land owned by The Benjamin School, Inc., located at the northwest corner of the intersection of Central Boulevard and unnamed future road, as more particularly described in Exhibit "A" attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference, from Planned Development Area (PDA) to Public /Institutional (P /1) with a Planned Unit Development (PUD) overlay, in order to allow the construction of a 187,671 square foot private high school campus. The PUD will be known as "The Benjamin Private Upper School." SECTION 2. Said Planned Unit Development is approved subject to the following conditions which shall be the responsibility of the applicant, its successors or assigns: (1) Prior to issuance of the certification of completion for the athletic fields or the first certificate of occupancy, whichever first occurs, the applicant, successors or assigns shall install and maintain in perpetuity, the Parkway System, including landscaping, irrigation, lighting and related amenities to City specifications per the citywide streetscaping beautification program, in the road shoulders and median within the right -of -way, along Central Boulevard and the future East -West Roadway. The City shall require, as a condition of approval of any new project located on the east side of Central Boulevard, across from subject site, that they bear the proportionate share of the cost of the continued maintenance thereof. In the event a Special Parkway District is formed by the City of Palm Beach Gardens, or another entity, pertaining to the roadway maintenance around this project, the property owner, or its successors, shall immediately become a member of said District. The exact location of irrigation lines and electrical sleeving shall be determined at time of construction plan approval. (City Forester) (2) Prior to the issuance of Certificate of Occupancy, all exotic vegetation shall be removed from the site. (City Forester) (3) Prior to the issuance of first building permit, the applicant must submit a letter from Northern Palm Beach County Improvement District (NPBCID) that verifies the release of all ties /holdings that Ordinance 30, 2000 Date Prepared: December 8, 2000 NPBCID has or plans to have in the future with the lakes on the Benjamin School site. All lakes will be required to remain privately owned and shall be maintained in accordance with a management plan consistent with section 117 of the City's LDRs. The management plan must be submitted by the applicant and approval by the City Engineer prior to the first certificate of occupancy. (City Engineer, Planning & Zoning) (4) No building permits except for the clearing of exotic vegetation shall be issued until a revised Surface Water Management System for Unit 2 has received final approval from the City of Palm Beach Gardens and all other applicable governments and agencies, including a schedule for implementing the plan and a definitive commitment for funding from the required improvements, unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer. (City Engineer, Planning and Zoning) (5) The build -out date of this project is December 31, 2004 as referenced in their March 10, 1999 traffic impact analysis. For the purposes of this condition, the project shall be considered built -out if the student enrollment has reached the level as indicated in the traffic impact analysis, or 50% of square footage approved by this ordinance is completed. (Planning and Zoning) (6) The number of students shall not exceed 490 as indicated in the traffic impact analysis. Enrollment shall be verified by City staff. An annual report indicating the number of students shall be submitted to the City on or before December 31 sc of each year. (7) Prior to the issuance of the permit for site drainage, the City shall review and approve construction details for littoral zones, including their location, slopes and vegetation. As a requirement, at least 50% of the shoreline shall be planted with wetland trees and /or aquatic plants at ten square feet of littoral zone for every one linear feet of shoreline. There shall be a minimum of one tree for every 80 square feet and plants shall be on three -foot centers, minimum. A sum total of area(s) constituting no less than 15% nor more than 25% of the total shoreline distance shall be constructed as littoral shelf at the ratio of 10 square feet of shelf per running foot of shoreline. (City Engineer) (8) Prior to issuance of the first certificate of occupancy, the applicant 3 Ordinance 30, 2000 Date Prepared: December 8, 2000 shall submit all legal documents pertaining to ownership and maintenance of the property to the City for review by the City's legal counsel and the City Forester. (Planning and Zoning, City Engineer) (9) The open space /landscape maintenance and environmental preserve management plan shall be found sufficient by the City Forester prior to final approval of construction drawings or commencement of land alteration. The City shall review documents for landscaping maintenance and management language that meets or exceeds the City's guidelines included in the City's Landscape Handbook and City Codes. (Planning and Zoning) (10) The City will assess the Developer a pro -rata share of the City's cost to review and comment on Northern Palm Beach County Improvement District's (NPBCID) Unit 2 Environmental Resource Permit Modification based upon the project's acreage within NPBCID's Unit 2. (City Engineer) (11) Prior to issuance of the first building permit, the petitioner shall submit construction plan drawings that indicate a sidewalk along the southern side of the East -West Road riqht -of -way, in accordance with the LDRs. SECTION 3. The following waivers are hereby granted with this approval: Section 76, to allow for a 53 foot high structure to exceed code requirement by 8 feet. Section 180 (3), Number of Parking Spaces in excess of 10% required parking. Section 282, Lake Maintenance Tract, to allow for vertical structures within the 25 foot Lake Maintenance Easement. SECTION 4. Construction of the Planned Unit Development shall be in compliance with the following plans on file with the City's Growth Management Department: 1. Date Stamped November 29, 2000 Master Site Plan, Urban Design Studio, Sheets SP -1 through SP -3. 2. September 7, 2000 Engineering and Landscape Plan, Urban Design Studio, 1 Sheet. 3. October 3, 2000 Landscape Plans, Urban Design Studio, 4 Ordinance 30, 2000 Date Prepared: December 8, 2000 Sheets 1 through 6. 4. September 8, 2000 Plant List and Detail Sheet, Urban Design Studio, 1 Sheet. 5. September 7, 2000 PUD Parkway Plan, Urban Design Studio, 12 Sheets. 6. April 5, 2000 Architectural Elevations and Plans, Schwab, Twitty and Hanser, Sheets A -1.1.1 through A -3.1.3 and A- 3.1.5. 7. August 9, 2000 Architectural Elevations, Schwab, Twitty and Hanser, Sheet A- 3.1.4. 8. July 6, 2000 Sports Complex Lighting Design, Hubbell Lighting, 1 Sheet 9. October 2, 2000 Photometric Plan, AGI , 1 Sheet 10. October 6, 2000 Conceptual Drainage Plan, Scheaffer and Fagan, 2 Sheets. 11. April 13, 2000 Boundary and Topographic Survey, Benchmark Surveying, 2 Sheets. 12. March 10, 1999 Traffic Impact Analysis, Kimley — Horn Associates, 17 pages 13. March, 1999 Environmental Assessment, E.W. Consultants, 16 pages. SECTION 5. If any section, paragraph, sentence, clause, phrase, or word of this Ordinance is for any reason held by a court of competent jurisdiction to be unconstitutional, inoperative or void, such holding shall not affect the remainder of the Ordinance. SECTION 6. All ordinances or parts of ordinances of the City of Palm Beach Gardens, Florida, which are in conflict with this Ordinance are hereby repealed. SECTION 7. This Ordinance shall be effective upon adoption. PLACED ON FIRST READING THE 2nd DAY OF NOVEMBER 2000. PLACED ON SECOND READING THIS DAY OF 200_. PASSED AND ADOPTED THIS DAY OF 200_. MAYOR JOSEPH R. RUSSO 61 Ordinance 30, 2000 Date Prepared: December 8, 2000 VICE MAYOR ERIC JABLIN COUNCILWOMAN LAUREN FURTADO COUNCILMAN DAVID CLARK COUNCILMAN CARL SABATELLO ATTEST BY: CAROL GOLD INTERIM CITY CLERK APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM AND SUFFICIENCY BY: CITY ATTORNEY VOTE: AYE MAYOR RUSSO VICE MAYOR JABLIN COUNCILWOMAN FURTADO COUNCILMAN CLARK COUNCILMAN SABATELLO UILE_SWCOMPROMShort Range \pud0001or1.doc [.1 NAY ABSENT (7RR 1 1 00 4 Egg 1$ Z ExlY MIT A LEGAL DESCRIPTION PARCEL ON CENTRAL BOULEVARD A PARCEL OF LAND LYING IN SECTION 25, TOWNSHIP 41 SOUTH, RANGE 42 EAST, PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA, BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCING AT THE INTERSECTION OF THE SOUTH RIGHT -OF -WAY LINE OF DONALD -ROSS ROAD WITH THE WEST RIGHT -OF -WAY LINE OF CENTRAL BOULEVARD; THENCE, SOUTH 00 648'04" WEST, ALONG SAID WEST RIGHT -OF -WAY LINE, A DISTANCE OF 1269.31 FEET FOR A POINT OF BEGINNING. THENCE, CONTINUE SOUTH 00 °48'04" WEST ALONG SAID WEST RIGHT -OF -WAY LINE, A DISTANCE OF 2335.74 FEET; THENCE, NORTH 80."l 1'56" WEST, DEPARTING SAID WEST RIGHT -OF -WAY LINE, A DISTANCE OF 944.95 FEET TO THE INTERSECTION THEREOF WITH THE WEST LINE OF THE SOUTH ONE -HALF OF SAID SECTION 25, THENCE, NORTH 01 *1732" EAST, ALONG SAID WEST LINE OF SECTION 26, A DISTANCE OF 1050.56 FEET TO THE WEST ONE - QUARTER CORNER OF SAID SECTION 25; THENCE, NORTH 01°20'3T' EAST, ALONG THE WEST LINE OF THE NORTH CONE -HALF OF SAID SECTION 25, A DISTANCE OF 1274.75 FEET; THENCE, SOUTH 89 051'04" EAST, DEPARTING SAID WEST LINE OF SECTION 25, A DISTANCE OF 923.93 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. CITY OF PALM BEACH GARDENS CITY COUNCIL Agenda Cover Memorandum Meeting Date: December 21, 2000 Date Prepared: December 8, 2000 SUBJECT /AGENDA ITEM Consideration of Approval: Resolution 97, 2000, a request to remove all exotic vegetation and establish the upland set aside on Parcels 4.03 and 4.06, which are bounded by Donald Ross Road to the north, Alternate A1A to the east, Hood Road to the south, and Military Trail to the west. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of Resolution 97, 2000, which contains conditions of approval. Reviewed by: City Attorney Finance NA ACM Human Res. NA Other NA Originating Dept.: Costs: $ Council Action: Growth Management Total [ ) Approved 144 $ [ ] Approved w/ Current FY conditions Funding Source: [ ] Denied [ ] Continued to: Advertised: Attachments: Date: [ ] Operating • Resolution 97, 2000 Paper: [ ] Other Maps Land Management Plan ifted by: [X] Not Required Aa ement Affected parties Budget Acct. #:: Director �� X00 Approved i ied o [ ] None City Man er [X] Not required P� City Council Meeting Date: December 21, 2000 Date Prepared: December 12, 2000 Petition MISC -00 -13 REQUEST Communities Finance Company (CFC) is requesting to remove all exotic vegetation and establish the upland set aside for Parcels 4.03 and 4.06. No change to zoning or land use is being requesting. The total acreage for both parcels is 362.72 acres. The parcels are located north of Hood Road, east of Military Trail, west of Alternate A1A and the FEC roadway tracks and south of Donald Ross Road. (25 & 36 - 42S - 42E) BACKGROUND To the north, across Donald Ross Road, is the Abacoa Development of Regional Impact project within the Town of Jupiter, specifically the Abacoa conservation area. To the east, across the railroad tracks and Alternate A1A, is the Planned Community District of Frenchman's Creek. Along Hood Road, adjacent to Parcel 4.06, is the Church of Jesus Christ, which is within the City, and the KOA Campground, which is within unincorporated Palm Beach County. To the south, across Hood Road, is the proposed low density residential Planned Unit Development of The Isles and the Seacoast Utility Authority site. To the west, across Military Trail, are mostly vacant lands and the Dwyer High School site. In the past, this site has supported agricultural uses such as a tree nursery and a horse farm. The site contains the largest lake in the City of Palm Beach Gardens. LAND USE & ZONING The subject site is zoned Planned Development Area (PDA), has a future land -use designation of Residential Medium (RM), and is listed as Residential Medium (RM) and Recreation Open Space (ROS) on the Vision Plan. The applicant is not changing the zoning with this petition. Conservation land is permitted in a PDA. CONCURRENCY Petition MISC -00 -13 does not require concurrency certification. For your information, the City is presently processing a concurrency application for these two parcels for a future residential project. City Council Meeting Date: December 21, 2000 Date Prepared: December 12, 2000 Petition MISC -00 -13 PROCEDURE This request is unusal in that most petitioners do not separate out the preserve set aside and exotic removal requirements from their typical site plan application. The last time the City approved an upland preserve set aside prior to concurrency approval was with the Bent Tree PUD in 1994. Section 146 of the Landscaping Division of the Land Development Regulations allows a petitioner, who does not have a site plan and who desires to clear trees or plants for the expansion of a permitted use within a particular zoning district, may submit a development application for City Council approval. PROJECT DETAILS Site Access: Access is currently available off of Military Trail, Alternate A1A and Hood Road. Staging areas are predominately interior to the site. Mechanical equipment will use existing interior dirt roads and trails installed by the previous agricultural user. Phasing: The two phases are broken down into tasks as follows: Task I Litter and Trash Removal — manual labor Task 11 Exotic Species Removal and Control — manual labor with chainsaws, machetes and herbicides. Task III Exotic Plant Control Maintenance — Mechanical and manual labor Task IV Reduction Mowing and Chopping — Mechanical and manual labor. Roller chopping, Kershaw mowing and or bush hog mowing in conjunction with machete work. Task V Drainage Ditch Maintenance — Mechanical and manual labor The above mentioned work will not take place within jurisdictional wetlands without applicable permits. Upland Preserve: As designated on the attached Preservation Plan, preserve areas "A through W should be used to meet all future site plan development petitions set aside requirements. Based on the City's Environmental Consultant's report, a total of 53.9 preserved acres are required for this site. The petitioner is providing 53.9 acres. STAFF COMMENTS Planninq & Zoninq Division: The City Forester and Environmental Consultant Jim Schnelle have no objection to the conceptual location of the proposed preserves "A through K." The City and petitioner need the ability to modify the preserve boundaries 3 City Council Meeting Date: December 21, 2000 Date Prepared: December 12, 2000 Petition MISC -00 -13 as more site details are worked out. The City Forester indicates that he will not have time to monitor this work and recommends both the petitioner's environmental consultant and the City's environmental consultant monitor the work and report to the City on a monthly basis until the project is finished. He recommends conditions of approval as listed within the attached Resolution 97, 2000. No objections have been received from the following departments and agencies: Building Division, Police Department, Fire Department, Parks & Recreation Department, Public Works, City Engineering, City Legal, Seacoast Utility Authority, Palm Beach County School District, and North Palm Beach Improvement District. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of petition MISC -00 -13 with the following conditions of approval: Conditions: 1. The petition's environmental consultant and the City's environmental consultant shall monitor this project through the life of the project at the petitioner's expense. A written report shall be submitted to the City monthly on the progress of the exotic removal project and a final inspection shall be conducted by the City Forester once the consultants complete the project. 2. Exhibit "A" shall be used as a guideline for the conceptual location of the upland preserve set aside for all future development orders. The City and the petitioner shall have the ability to modify preserve boundaries during site plan development review as more site details are worked out. There shall be a minimum 53.9 acres of upland preserve area for the Parcel 4.03 and 4.06 owned by Communities Finance Company, and as shown in exhibit "A." 3. If environmental damage occurs and is documented by the aforementioned consultants or the City within non - preserve areas, Section 149 of the City's Landscape code shall apply. If documented environmental damage occurs within preserve set aside areas, as shown on exhibit "A," Section 109 of the City's Environmental code shall apply. G /short: MICS- 00 -13.cc 4 December 12, 2000 RESOLUTION 97, 2000 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM BEACH GARDENS, FLORIDA, PROVIDING FOR THE APPROVAL OF AN APPLICATION FROM COMMUNITIES FINANCE COMPANY REQUESTING APPROVAL FOR REMOVAL OF EXOTIC VEGETATION, AND CONCEPTUAL UPLAND PRESERVE SET ASIDE FOR PARCELS 4.03 AND 4.06 LOCATED AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF ALTERNATE A1A AND DONALD ROSS ROAD, AS MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED HEREIN; PROVIDING FOR CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, the City of Palm Beach Gardens received an application from Communities Finance Company for approval of removal of exotic vegetation, and conceptual upland preserve set aside located at the southwest corner of Alternate Al and Donald Ross Road, east of Military Trail and north of Hood Road as more particularly described in Exhibit "A" attached hereto; and WHEREAS, the 362.72 -acre site is currently zoned Planned Development Area (PDA), and a future land use of Residential Medium (RM); and WHEREAS, the Growth Management Department has reviewed said application and determined that it is sufficient; and WHEREAS, the Growth Management Department has reviewed said application and determined that it is consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan and Land Development Regulations; and WHEREAS, the Growth Management Department has recommended approval of the application. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM BEACH GARDENS, FLORIDA: SECTION 1. The City Council of the City of Palm Beach Gardens, Florida hereby approves the removal of exotic plants and the conceptual upland preserve set aside at the southwest corner of Alternate A1A and Donald Ross Road, as more particularly described in Exhibit "A" attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference, to permit the exotic Resolution 97, 2000 Meeting Date: December 21, 2000 Date Prepared: December 12, 2000 Petition MISC -00 -13 removal work. SECTION 2. Said Planned Development Area is approved subject to the following conditions, which shall be the responsibility of the applicant, its successors or assigns: 1. The petition's environmental consultant and the City's environmental consultant shall monitor this project through the life of the project at the petitioner's expense. 2. A written report shall be submitted to the City monthly on the progress of the exotic removal project and a final inspection shall be conducted by the City Forester once the exotic removal is completed. 3. Exhibit "A" shall be used as a guideline for the conceptual location of the upland preserve set aside for all future development orders. The City and the petitioner shall have the ability to modify preserve boundaries during site plan development review as more site details are worked out. There shall be a minimum 53.9 acres of upland preserve area for the site as shown in exhibit "A." 4. If environmental damage occurs and is documented by the aforementioned consultants or the City within non - preserve areas, Section 149 of the City's Landscape code shall apply. If documented environmental damage occurs within preserve set aside areas as shown on exhibit 'A" Section 109 of the City's Environmental code shall apply. SECTION 3. The Planned Development Area shall be in compliance with the following plans on file with the City's Growth Management Department: Official Exhibits: 1. December 11, 2000 Preservation Plan, CZR, consisting of 3 sheets. 2. August 17, 2000 Land Management Plan — Parcel 4, CZR, consisting of 4 sheets. SECTION 4. This Resolution shall be effective upon adoption. 2 PASSED AND ADOPTED THIS DAY OF MAYOR JOSEPH R. RUSSO ATTEST BY: CAROL GOLD CITY CLERK APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM AND SUFFICIENCY BY: CITY ATTORNEY VOTE: AYE MAYOR RUSSO VICE MAYOR JABLIN COUNCILMEMBER CLARK COUNCILMEMBER FURTADO COUNCILMEMBER SABATELLO G /short: Mics0013.res /mih 3 Resolution 97, 2000 Meeting Date: December 21, 2000 Date Prepared: December 12, 2000 Petition MISC -00 -13 2000. NAY ABSENT C 30 Z 133HS 33S — 3NIl H:Dlb'W II I) I • P I • • 4 w I Z a. I:g li 0 I� a Ii > W II a N. N M a O li LL. d .4 0 m IL F CL W pin ass o IL a Z 0 3 oo O N Z \ aN Ld a a � a V) o O O La 0 ° IN a LAND MANAGEMENT PLAN Parcel 4 I. INTRODUCTION The subject parcel was systematically surveyed by Joanne Davis for an environmental assessment report completed in compliance with the City of Palm Beach Gardens' "Natural Resources and Environmentally Significant Lands Code ". Field surveys were conducted to (1) identify, locate and characterize vegetation communities and wildlife on site, (2) assess the functional viability and quality of existing habitat, (3) identify the presence of any listed flora or fauna species on -site, (4) identify areas of previous alteration or degradation, (5) delineate and evaluate wildlife habitat and quality, and (6) determine if there will be any irretrievable or irreversible environmental damage from the proposed land management techniques. II. GOAL AND OBJECTIVE The goal of this land management plan is the removal of all exotic species. This will enhance the native quality of the site and assist in the preservation of native plant and animal species. Since prescribed fire may or may not be an option for this site, a combination of mechanical and manual land management method is proposed below. III. EXISTING AND SURROUNDING LAND USE The site is bordered on the east by the Florida East Coast Railroad; on the south by Hood Road and KOA Campground; on the west by Military Trail; and on the north by Donald Ross Road. IV. LISTED SPECIES All listed flora and fauna species will be preserved on site and managed to ensure potential long -term survivability. lot Wildlife surveys indicate Wactive and inactive burrows, which yield a resident gopher tortoise population of approximately 50 individuals. A 50 -foot radius will be maintained around all active, inactive and abandoned gopher tortoise burrows found outside the active gopher tortoise habitat to provide protection during enhancement and restor . 4 " activities. Only dead tree removal will be accomplished in the active tortois I tats area. Cit; of F9. Gardens MF.NA�FM`y V. RESPONSIBLE PARTY The land owner, Communities Finance Company, will be responsible for the implementation of this management plan through its contractors. No modifications are permitted to this plan or within the site area and easements without prior approval from the City of Palm Beach Gardens. VI. MANAGEMENT PLAN A. Management Strategies 1. Enhancement — Phase I Activities The applicant proposes to enhance the subject property by the following methods: a. Litter and Trash Removal Utilize manual labor and pick -up truck to clean up small areas of debris and litter such as glass, iron and bulky waste trash. Existing trails will be utilized as haul routes in the removal of illegally dumped materials. b. Exotic Treatment and Removal and Nuisance Species Control Exotic species which include Melaleuca, Brazilian Pepper, Australian Pine, Acacia, Java Plum, Surinam Cherry, Climbing Fern and Guava shall be treated with herbicide in accordance with Exotic Plant Treatment. C. Exotic Plant Control, Maintenance and Monitoring Following the initial herbicide treatment, a second herbicide application will be conducted following a 21 -day waiting period for regrowth. The site will then be monitored at quarterly intervals for the first year and semi - annually thereafter for a period of two years to define regrowth areas requiring herbicide treatment. All seedlings will be hand removed where possible. 2. Restoration — Phase II Activities The following restoration activities will be implemented ut ' 4 combination of mechanical and manual labor. .� City of P.B. Gardens nr. r per, 17 LJJil MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT ll, � a. Reduction Mowing and Chopping In lieu of prescriptive fire, mechanical management techniques employing a Kershaw mower, roller chopping, and/or bush hog mowing shall be accomplished in conjunction with manual labor using machetes and chainsaws to eliminate exotic species to restore open understory features. The intent is to mimic earlier pioneer stages of vegetative development prior to the successional changes which have occurred. b. Drainage Ditch Maintenance Duckweed, melaleuca and other exotic species occurring in the on- site drainage ditches shall be treated with the appropriate aquatic herbicide and/or mechanically removed. The contractor shall strictly adhere to the manufacturer's label requirements. A backhoe shall be used to clear debris from the ditch. PROHIBITED ACTIVITIES The following activities are prohibited within the site area: • Construction or placing of buildings or other structures on or above the ground. • Dumping or placing soil or other substances or material as landfill or dumping or the placing of trash, waste or unsightly /offensive materials. • Excavation or removing of loam, peat, gravel, soil, rock or other material substance in such manner as to affect the topography. ■ Diking and any other activities detrimental to drainage, flood control, water conservation, erosion control, soil conservation, or fish and wildlife habitat conservation or preservation. VIII. IMPLEMENTATION PROGRAM SUMMARY Prior to commencement of Phase I and Phase H activities, a field inspection will be conducted with the City forester, and others, to visually inspect the proposed work areas, discuss management strategies and take project photographs. Record photographs shall be maintained for the duration of the project depicting "before" and "after" specific work programs are accomplished. A. Enhancement Program — Phase I Activities Task I Litter and Trash Removal — manual labor ;\ M EQPRZM�Nj \`� Task II Exotic Removal and Nuisance Species Control — manual labor with chainsaws, machetes and herbicides. Task III Exotic Plant Control Maintenance — Mechanical and manual labor with chainsaw, machetes and herbicides. B. Restoration Program — Phase II Activities Task IV Reduction Mowing and Chopping — mechanical and manual labor. Roller chopping, Kershaw mowing and/or bush hog mowing in conjunction with manual labor using machetes shall be used to eliminate exotic species. Task V Drainage Ditch Maintenance — mechanical and manual labor 3 4 :; City of P.B. Gardens AUG 17 20� ��� GRUWIH v MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT fd' � I ��4, City Council Meeting Date: December2l, 2000 Date Prepared: December 11, 2000 Petition SP -99 -18 CITY OF PALM BEACH GARDENS CITY COUNCIL Agenda Cover Memorandum Meeting Date: December 21, 2000 Date Prepared: December 11, 2000 SUBJECT /AGENDA ITEM: Consideration of Approval: Resolution 105, 2000, a request for site plan approval for a senior living facilities located known as La Posada within the Regional Center Development of Regional Impact (DRI) at PGA Boulevard (Blvd.) and Alternate A -1 -A. The gross acreage of subject site is approximately 22.5 acres and consists of a total of 301 living units and beds and a two -story community center. The proposed development is planned for two phases. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of Resolution 105, 2000, with conditions of approval and provided the applicant has adequately addressed the issues and concerns raised by the City Council during its meeting on December 7, 2000. Reviewed by: (� Originating Dept.: Costs: $ Council Action: e,� V js"_ , V Total City Attorney LkA^ Growth Management [ ] Approved Finance NA $ [ ] Approved w/ ACM /C� Current FY conditions Human Res. NA [ ] Denied Other NA Advertised: Funding Source: [ ] Continued to: Attachments: Date: [ ] Operating • Resolution 105, 2000 Paper: [ ] Other Site plan • Landscape plan • Architectural renderings e DRY PCD Map H • Aerial map • Staff comments • Resolution 64, 1998 with [X] Not Required attachments b L<tte ro agement Dir r Affected parties [ ] Notified Budget Acct. #:: [ ] None Ap ve ager [X] Not required 1 F TW DEC 11 2000 1" A a 9 Clerks Office City Council Meeting Date: December2l, 2000 Date Prepared: December 11, 2000 Petition SP -99 -18 SUMMARY OF PREVIOUS MEETING: The City Council has directed staff and the applicant to revise the site plan to adequately address the sidewalk, covered parking, the 15 -foot landscape easement (along New Loop Road) waivers, and the non - conforming signs. The City Council indicated that the waivers might have not been justified. Staff is currently working with the applicant to address these issues and expects the site plan to be revised accordingly. I. REQUEST: A request by Urban Design Studio, agent, for site plan approval of a senior retirement community situated on an approximately 22.5 acre site within the Regional Center Development of Regional Impact (DRI). The subject site is located immediately north of the Gardens Mall. The proposed development consists of 301 living units and beds and a two -story community center in a community to be called "La Posada." It is proposed to be completed in two phases. (06- 42S -43E) II. BACKGROUND: The proposed development is located within the Regional Center DRI/PCD. The subject site is located along the north side of Gardens Parkway, south of Cabana Colony, north of Gardens Mall, and immediately east of Mira Flores Apartments. The proposed Kolter apartment project is immediately to the east. On February 16, 1984, City Council approved the Development Order of the Regional Center DRI by Resolution 9, 1984. The DRI was approved for a mixture of land uses consisting of Retail, Office, Hotel, Residential, Open Space, and Community Use. The Development Order has been previously amended four times. It currently permits the development of 1,440,000 square feet of Retail, 1,210,000 square feet of Office (business), 235,200 square feet of Office (Research), 510,000 square feet or 600 rooms of Hotel, and 1,600 dwelling units. The total acreage of the entire DRI is 458.2 acres. The most - recently approved Notice of Proposed Change (NOPC) to the Development Order of the Regional Center DRI was approved by the City Council on April 6, 2000, by Resolution 25, 2000. The NOPC approved the conversion of office research space to 50,000 square feet of commercial use. This conversion was needed for the Catalfumo project along PGA Blvd. at Minsk Gardens Avenue. Currently there are two pending NOPCs to the Development Order of the Regional Center DRI. The Kolter NOPC proposes reconfiguration of the water management tract to maintain the oak preserve on site, designating the oak hammock portion of the site as a preserve, relocating and eliminating internal roadways from the Master Plan of Development, and converting approximately 9.3 acres of Office/Hotel/Community Use to Multifamily /Office /Community Use by converting 151 hotel rooms to 213 additional residential units. This NOPC is associated with the Kolter residential project located immediately east of La Posada. 2 City Council Meeting Date: December2l, 2000 Date Prepared: December 11, 2000 Petition SP -99 -18 The other remaining NOPC has been proposed by Catalfumo Development and Construction to simultaneously convert various land uses and increase the total square footage of retail and other uses approved for the DRI. Both NOPCs are presumed to be substantial deviations and outstanding issues are yet to be resolved. III. Procedure: This is a request for a major site plan review within a PCD. The request is reviewed by City Staff and the Development Review Committee, who forward comments and recommendations to the Planning and Zoning Commission. Acting in an advisory role, the Commission considers the recommendations of the DRC and City Staff and makes a recommendation to the City Council. The City Council reviews the request for site plan approval, and makes a final determination of approval, approval with conditions, or denial. IV. Land Use and Zoning: The future land -use designation of the subject site, as reflected on the City's Future Land Use Map, is Residential High (RH). The zoning classification of the site is a Planned Community District (PCD). The subject site's land -use designation on the Master Plan of Development (Map H) of the DRI is Multifamily Residential/Office /Community Use. The following tables illustrate the adjacent uses, land use designations, zoning districts, consistency with City Code, and site analysis. ZONING CLASSIFICATIONS, LAND USE DESIGNATIONS ----...................... EXISTING USE . ... _ ... -....... ------- ..... _ ................................................................ . ................................. . ... ZONING .............. . ............................... _.— .- ................. - -- ........................ ...... LAND USE Subject Property Planned Community District (PCD) Residential High (RH) Vacant Lot coverage- 35% 27% North Palm Beach County Residential Medium Palm Beach County Residential Cabana Colon y (RM ) Medium RM South Planned Community District (PCD) Commercial (C) Gardens Mall West Planned Community District (PCD) Residential High (RH) Mira Flores Apartments East Planned Community District (PCD) Residential High (RH) & Professional Vacant (Kolter) Office (PO) SITE ANALYSIS AND CONSISTENCY WITH CODE Consistent Code Requirement Proposed Plan Yes PCD - Planned Community District Senior living facilities Yes Lot coverage- 35% 27% Yes Parking: 433 spaces 433 spaces 3 City Council Meeting Date: December2l, 2000 Date Prepared: December 11, 2000 Petition SP -99 -18 No* Covered parking: 5% of required parking 25 covered spaces) 53% of proposed parking (231 spaces) No* Location of covered parking: in rear and 100 -foot setback, from right -of- way Provided in front, rear, and side and a min. of zero setback Yes Parking stall dimensions : 10'X18.5' 10'X18.5' Consistent Code Requirement Proposed Plan N/A PGA Blvd. Corridor Overlay- site plan, landscape, and design requirements N/A 118,000 sq. ft. SETBACKS Amenities center Yes Front: 30' 33' No* Side: 30' 6.3' and 11.3' (Apartment 2 Yes Rear: 23 65' Yes Building height: 45' 39' (community center Yes Open space: 35% 52% Yes Sp ecial avers: Allowed S ecial avers proposed No Master Signage Program for DRI Different ground and directional signs * Waiver Requested V. Project Details: The applicant is proposing to construct three apartment buildings, one community center, a health center, seven cottage buildings, and a guardhouse on approximately 22.5 acres of land. The following table provides the square footage and the number of units within each proposed building. Project Development Details Building Use Number of Units Square Footage Apartment 1 Independent living 36 units /three story 57,000 s . ft. Apartment 2 Independent living 111 units /three story 163,000 s . ft. Apartment 3 Independent living 84 units /three story 118,000 sq. ft. Community Center Amenities center Two story building 28,500 s . ft. Cottage Buildings For independent living 7 buildin s /11 units /one story 20,4000 s . ft. Guard House Controlled access One story 200 s . ft. Health Center: Dependent living: Two story building 62,700 s . t. Assisted living 30 beds 130 units 28,000 s . t. Skilled nursing 40 beds 120 units 22,5000 s . ft, Alzheimer 18 beds 19 units 12,000 s . ft. Total 301 units 449,800 s . ft. The proposed development is projected to be completed in two phases of development. One phase consists of all proposed buildings except Apartment 1, which is proposed to be built during phase two of the development. rd City Council Meeting Date: December2l, 2000 Date Prepared: December 11, 2000 Petition SP -99 -18 The proposed development consists of 242 independent living units, 30 assisted living units, and 58 skilled nursing and alzheimer beds, 3,000 square feet of office space located in the health center, and 28,500 square feet of community center. The setback of the closest building (Apartment 2) to the property line is approximately 6.3 feet. Section 75, Residential Zoning District Regulations, requires that this side setback be thirty feet, based on the minimum required setback of twenty feet and one additional foot for every foot of building height greater than two stories. The subject building consists of three floors with a height of thirty feet measured from the ground to the building parapet. Each floor is approximately ten feet. Therefore, the side setback is thirty feet. The total number of parking spaces proposed by the applicant is 433 spaces. The minimum required number of parking spaces is 433, per Section 180. The proposed development consists of skilled nursing, assisted living, and independent living. Section 180 specifies the parking requirements for these facilities to be one space per four bedrooms and one additional space for every 250 square feet of office space for skilled nursing facilities. As for assisted living, the requirement is one space for every four residents. The requirement for independent living is 1.25 spaces for every dwelling units. Code requires one parking space for every 300 square feet of private club. The community center operates much like a private club and therefore, the parking requirement for the private club is used to calculate the number of spaces for the community center. The applicant proposes to provide covered parking (carports) that are aesthetically pleasing and complement the overall architecture of the buildings on site. The covered parking is much better in appearance and function than open space parking (uncovered parking spaces). The proposed material and color to be used on the roof of the covered parking are the same as in the material and color for the roofs of the buildings on site. This is consistent with LDR Section 190(b), which specifies that appearance, and material of such structures is compatible with the architecture, style, and color of the principal structures on site. The total number of net external trips potentially generated by this project is 565. The applicant used the trip generation rates published in the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) manual to estimate the number of trips for skilled nursing and used Palm Beach County rates to estimate trips for independent and assisted living facilities. Staff concurs with the trip generation analysis provided to the City. The Regional Center DRI has allocated 1,260 daily trips for this property, according to the applicant. Therefore, this project generates 695 (55 %) less trips than what has been allocated to it. Whatever the number of vehicular trips allowed for this project by the master developer, all development that has been approved within the DRI (including La Posada) has not exceeded the total number of external trips approved for the Regional Center DRI. City Council Meeting Date: December2l, 2000 Date Prepared: December 11, 2000 Petition SP -99 -18 The overall layout of the site plan is aesthetically and functionally well done, given the linear configuration of the parcel and the two water bodies on site. Most of the buildings have been situated to take full advantage of the two lakes. The community center is located in the center of the site and serves as the dominant;md focal point of the entire development and is visible from the Gardens Parkway. The few open parking spaces provided along Gardens Parkway are screened by a 3 -foot berm. Staff has requested and the applicant has provided additional landscaping in front of these spaces in order to screen them from view along Gardens Parkway. The screening provided for the carports along Gardens Parkway appears to be adequate. An extensive system of well landscaped, meandering pedestrian pathways has been proposed throughout the site linking the various buildings together and the subject development with other adjacent parcels within the Regional Center DRI. And applicant has provided additional landscaping along the pedestrian pathway on Fairchild Gardens Avenue, as requested by the Planning and Zoning Commission and staff. A gated pedestrian connection on the site at the corner of Fairchild Gardens Avenue and Atlantic Road is provided. This would provide controlled access to residents from the Cabana Colony development north of Atlantic Avenue. A guardhouse is also provided on site at the main entrance fronting on Gardens Parkway. The guardhouse, however, is situated on a private driveway leading from Gardens Parkway north to New Loop Road. The master developer of the DRI Watermark Community Inc. (WCI) has reviewed the proposed development, along with the proposed signs, and has raised no comments. VI. Architecture of Buildings: A proportioned vertical as well as horizontal massing and deep articulation characterize the architecture of the buildings, which give the elevations pleasant appearance. The apartment buildings have extensive horizontal massing, but the deep articulation, exhibited on most elevations, coupled with the balconies and window treatments lessen the appearance of over whelming horizontal massing. Most of the elevations have a dominant central feature in the form of a tower, balconies with iron rails, and extensive architectural details. Staff believes all elevations have been treated equally and that the architectural style of the individual buildings is consistent with one another. The floor plans of the proposed buildings demonstrate convenience, comfort, and adequate function of space. According to the data provided on the site plan, the maximum number of bedrooms in each unit is two. CI City Council Meeting Date: December2l, 2000 Date Prepared: December 11, 2000 Petition SP -99 -18 VII. Site Access: There are four access points to the site from New Loop Road to the north, one from Fairchild Gardens Avenue, and the main entrance from Gardens Parkway. All roadways surrounding the subject development are public roadways and no controlled access /gates are proposed on such roadways. VIII. Art in Public Places: This development is not required to provide development, pursuant to Section 120(a)(2). VIII. Sinam Art in Public Places, since it is a residential The applicant has proposed three ground, two directional, and two directory signs. First, two of the three ground signs are proposed to be located at the main entrance of the site on Gardens Parkway. The other sign is to be located along north New Loop Road. The Master Signage Program for the MacArthur Regional Center approved by Resolution 64, 1998 allows this development three ground signs (labeled as building identification signs), two of which are to be located along Gardens Parkway Blvd. and one along north New Loop Road. The three proposed ground signs are not consistent with the Master Signage Program. The applicant has requested an amendment to Resolution 64, 1998 to modify the signage program in order to accommodate the newly - proposed and non - conforming design of the two ground signs. The amendment also requests relocating one of the ground signs, currently positioned west of the main entrance along Gardens Parkway on the master signage program map, to the main entrance of the site. The two ground entry signs are ten feet in height and 14.3 feet in width. The Master Signage Program provides for seven feet in height and eleven feet in width. Second, the two directional signs are not consistent with the Master Signage Program either. The directional sign located along north New Loop Road has five messages posted on it and its height is 7.1 feet. Whereas the Master Signage Program provides that directional signs are to be no longer than six feet in height and have no more than three messages. Most importantly, the Master Signage Program does not assign any directional signs for this project. Third, the Master Signage Program does not provide for directory signs for this development. However, according to the Land Development Regulations, such signs are allowed for developments with two or more buildings on site provided the copy area does not exceed 18 square feet, one sign face, and placed within a 25 -foot radius from the main entry of a building. The two proposed directory signs comply with these standards. All proposed signs are visible from public rights -of -way. Since these signs are visible along public right -of -ways and are not internal to the site, they should conform to the Master Signage Program for the MacArthur Regional Center, per Resolution 64, 1998. 7 City Council Meeting Date: December2l, 2000 Date Prepared: December 11, 2000 Petition SP -99 -18 Staff recommends denial of the proposed amendment to the Master Signage Program adopted by Resolution 64, 1998. The three ground and two directional signs should conform to the adopted program. Staff believes that it is the intent of the City Council to have a unified system of signage for the entire DRI to project a unified identity and serve as landmarks by which a motorist can identify the boundaries of the DRI/PCD when entering or leaving the site. This concept becomes important in the future once the DRI is fully incorporated into the surrounding area. Staff's view is based on the premise that the adoption of Resolution 64, 1998, by the City Council implies that the Council expects all proposed signage located at the exterior of individual sites and along right -of -ways to conform to the master signage program for the DRI. The landscape plan submitted by the applicant for Quad 6 should be revised by deleting a reference indicating that the ground signs are consistent with the Master Signage Program approved for the DRI, since this is not the case. IX. Requested Waivers: The applicant is requesting six waivers from the Land Development Regulations. Staff supports all six waivers. The applicant has also requested an amendment to Resolution 64, 1998, for which staff recommends denial for the reasons given below. The requested waivers are as follows: 1. A waiver to allow an increase in the number of covered parking beyond the maximum 5 %. The total number of parking spaces required by Code is 433. The applicant proposes a waiver from Section 190(g) to allow 231 covered parking spaces. Section 190(g) specifies that the maximum amount of covered parking shall not exceed five percent of the total required parking for the development, which amounts to 22 covered parking spaces. The number of covered parking proposed by the applicant represents 53% of the required parking by Code. The waiver is requested for 209 covered parking spaces. 2. A waiver to allow the setback of covered parking structures to vary. Section 190(h) of the City Code requires that covered parking be "located a minimum of 100 feet from any public right -of- way..." Section 190(h) further requires that covered parking be located in the rear of principal structures on site. The waiver would allow the covered parking to be located in the rear as well as in front of principal structures. Covered parking placed in front of principal structures is fronting on Gardens Parkway and is approximately 30 feet from the public right -of -way. Parking structures located in the rear are at zero feet from the right -of -way. The waiver is requested for 100 feet in the rear along north New Loop Road and 70 feet in the front along Gardens Parkway Boulevard. Staff recommends approval of both requested waivers because the appearance and function of the proposed covered parking complements the architecture of the buildings and protects the residents from the elements, respectively. N. City Council Meeting Date: December2l, 2000 Date Prepared: December 11, 2000 Petition SP -99 -18 3. A waiver to eliminate two sidewalks. One is on the south side of the north New Loop Road and the other along the western side of the New Loop Road immediately adjacent to apartment building 2. The waiver is requested from Section 256 of the City Code, which specifies that concrete sidewalks that are at least five feet wide must be provided on each side of all streets. The applicant has justified the request on the basis that the sidewalk on the south side of the New Loop Road is not likely to be fully utilized due to its location. There are multiple driveways or access points to the site off of north New Loop Road, which may pose a safety hazard to potential pedestrians using the sidewalk. Instead, a sidewalk along the most northern edge of the buildings fronting on north New Loop Road has been provided. This alternate location is more suitable because it provides safety and better utility of the sidewalk. The justification for the other sidewalk is that alternative walkways are provided throughout the site in addition to the walkways around the entire perimeter that are required by the DRI Development Order. The waiver is requested for one sidewalk along the right -of -way of north New Loop Road and another sidewalk along the eastern right -of -way of New Loop Road. Staff recommends approval of the requested waiver because several DRI landscaped walkways around the site and adequate pedestrian pathways have been proposed on site. 4. The applicant has requested a waiver to allow a reduction in the required 15 -foot landscape buffer on land adjacent to public rights -of -way. Section 160 requires the provision of a 15 -foot buffer perimeter on land adjacent to any public right -of -way. The proposed buffer will not be less than 11.5 feet on the eastern perimeter of the property. However, zero buffer is provided along the northern property line. The applicant has provided a 15 -foot buffer, but within the right -of -way. Therefore, the requested waiver pertaining to the northern perimeter of the property is for the entire 15 feet, since the applicant has proposed zero buffer outside of the right -of -way along that northern boundary. The other waiver is for 4.5 feet along the eastern perimeter of the development. The waiver has been justified on the linear configuration of the parcel and the additional amenities not required but provided on site, such as the elevated walkways and the grotto walk along the water's edge. The applicant has provided an adequate justification for the requested waiver. Staff recommends approval of the requested waiver. The applicant has exceeded the minimum requirements /standards of the Code by providing several non - required amenities on site, such as covered parking and specialty pavers. City Council Meeting Date: December2l, 2000 Date Prepared: December 11, 2000 Petition SP -99 -18 5. A waiver to allow a reduction in the street side setback. Section 75 requires a minimum setback of twenty feet and one additional foot for every foot of building height greater than two stories. The subject building consists of three floors with a height of thirty feet measured from the ground to the building parapet. Each floor is approximately ten feet in height. Therefore, the side setback is thirty feet. The applicant has proposed a setback of 6.3 feet for apartment building two. The waiver is requested for 23.7 feet. The applicant has justified the waiver on the basis that the subject building is set back at various distances from the property line. The shortest distance is 6.3. The entire building does not sit at the same distance from the property line because the intent is to create a sense of interaction between the building and the passer -by. The other justification is that the applicant has exceeded other minimum requirements of the Code, such as providing additional landscaping. Staff recommends approval of the requested waiver. 6. A wavier of the required lake maintenance easement slopes and to allow structures and existing vegetation within the lake maintenance easement tract. Section 282 states that a lake maintenance tract must be created around any permanent lakes or water bodies. The dimensions of the required tract are at least 20 feet wide with a minimum slope of 8:1. Primarily, the community center, two sidewalks, enclosed structure with stairs, and the grotto walk are proposed to be partially or completely located within the easement tract. The applicant has justified the waiver on aesthetic value and has proposed to enter into a high - level maintenance agreement with Northern Palm Beach County Improvement District to maintain the lakes on site. The applicant has also agreed to work with the City to determine the boundaries of the lake easement tract during construction plan review by the City. The City Engineer has recommended approval of the waiver. Accordingly, staff recommends approval of the requested waiver as well. 7. An amendment to Resolution 64, 1998 to modify the Master Signage Program by allowing different design of the ground signs and relocating one of the three ground signs to the main entry of the project. As well as adding two directory and directional signs and modifying the design of two directional signs. The Master Signage Program does not provide for directional and directory signs for this development. The applicant has justified the proposed amendment on the bases that the Planning and Zoning Commission requested these signs be located on site during a workshop on June 13, 2000. The purpose for these signs is to provide better direction to residents, visitors, and emergency personnel. 10 City Council Meeting Date: December2l, 2000 Date Prepared: December 11, 2000 Petition SP -99 -18 Staff recommends denial of the proposed amendment to Resolution 64, 1998 because the signs are not consistent with the Master Signage Program approved by Resolution 64, 1998 by the City Council. Staff believes the City Council has set the direction that staff should follow with respect to signage in the Regional Center DRI. The adoption of Resolution 64, 1998 by the City Council implies that the City Council would like to see a unified and consistent signage plan throughout the Regional Center. Accordingly, staff does not support the proposed amendment to the mentioned resolution because it undermines the purpose of the adopted resolution. Staff, however, supports the intent and purpose of the signs proposed to be added to the Master Signage Program for this development, provided they conform to the Master Signage Program. This is the second amendment proposed to Resolution 64, 1998 within the past four months by the same applicant for two different petitions. Staff seeks clarification and direction from the City Council with regard to the applicability and relevance of the Master Signage Program to future proposed signage in the Regional Center DRI. X. Comments from the Development Review Committee (DRC): To date, no objections have been received from the following departments and agencies: Building, Police Department, Parks & Recreation, City Engineering, Legal, Seacoast Utility Authority, Palm Beach County School District, South Florida Water Management District, Waste Management, and Florida Power & Light. However, a few comments and concerns have been received, primarily from the City Engineer's office regarding the lake maintenance easement tract. Those that have not been adequately addressed by the applicant have been incorporated into the conditions of approval. Please see attached staff comments. XI. Summary of Previous Planning and Zoning Commission: The Planning and Zoning Commission discussed this petition on September 12, 2000. The Commission had a favorable view of the project as a whole and requested that the applicant include the color and material for each building on the same architectural sheets. The Commission also requested architectural renderings of important building corners to show the architectural features in detail and to serve as samples as well. The Commission also expressed its support for the proposed signage by the applicant and recommended approval of all the requested waivers. XII. Planning and Zoning Commission Recommendation: The Commission has recommended approval of Petition SP -99 -18 with conditions. The vote was five to zero in favor of approval. The Commissioners also recommended approval of six waivers and the amendment to Resolution 64, 1998 to modify the Master Signage Program for the Regional Center DRI. 11 City Council Meeting Date: December2l, 2000 Date Prepared: December 11, 2000 Petition SP -99 -18 XIII. Staff Recommendation: A. Staff recommends approval of Petition SP -99 -18 with conditions and recommends approval of five of the six requested waivers and denial for the proposed amendment to Resolution 64, 1998. Staff offers the following conditions of approval: Prior to the issuance of the first building permit, the petitioner shall obtain written authorization from applicable utility companies authorizing the horizontal construction/planting within utility easements (Engineering); 2. No Building Permits except for the clearing of exotic vegetation shall be issued until a revised Surface Water Management System for Unit 19 has received final approval from the City of Palm Beach Gardens and all other applicable governments and / or agencies, including a schedule for implementing the plan and a definitive commitment for funding the required improvements (Engineering); 3. Prior to the issuance of the clearing permit, the petitioner shall present to the City of Palm Beach Gardens a permit from the Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission to relocate the Gopher Tortoises off -site (City Forester); 4. The petitioner shall install the 25 -foot Atlantic Boulevard buffer in conjunction with the construction of North Loop Road, including the sidewalk to Atlantic Boulevard (City Forester); 5. The petitioner is responsible for the maintenance of Gardens Parkway, Fairchild Gardens Avenue, and New Loop Road (north and east) landscaping and irrigation abutting the subject property, if for any reason the Regional Center Owners Association terminates its maintenance of said areas. Said maintenance shall comply with landscape maintenance standards recommended by the City of Palm Beach Gardens and shall commence upon installation of landscape materials (City Forester); 6. Prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy for each building, the Landscape Architect of record shall certify that all landscaping associated with each building is complete. Prior to issuing the last certificate of occupancy for the entire development, the Landscape Architect of record shall certify that all landscaping for the development has been completed per all the approved landscape plans (City Forester); 7. Should the approved land use of the development change in the future, a comprehensive re- evaluation of parking demand on site based on the new land use will be conducted and the petitioner shall comply with the recommendations of the City and the findings of the parking study (Planning and Zoning); 12 City Council Meeting Date: December2l, 2000 Date Prepared: December 11, 2000 Petition SP -99 -18 8. All utility equipment located on top of buildings must be effectively screened so that they are not visible from ground level (Planning and Zoning); 9. All covered parking spaces must be assigned and the identified 21 parking spaces on the site plan must be marked for future conversion into parking spaces, should the need arise Planning and Zoning); and 10. The petitioner, the City of Palm Beach Gardens, and Northern Palm Beach County Improvement District, shall establish the boundaries of the Lake Maintenance Easement. In order to accommodate the existing lake condition the easement may vary from the standards of Section 282 as acceptable to Northern Palm Beach County Improvement District, and the City engineer. The attached "Exhibit E" shows the general area in which the easement shall occur (Engineering). B. Staff recommends approval of the following requested waivers: 1. A waiver from Section 190(g) to allow an increase in the number of covered parking beyond the maximum 5 %. The waiver is requested for 209 covered parking spaces; 2. A waiver from Section 190 (h) to allow the placement of covered parking in the front and rear of principal structures and reduce the setback requirement for such structures to less than the required minimum setback of 100 feet. The waiver is requested for 70 feet in the front along Gardens Parkway Blvd. and 100 feet in the rear along north New Loop Road; 3. A waiver from Section 256 to eliminate two on- street sidewalks required by Code. One sidewalk is on the south side of north New Loop Road and the other along the western side of New Loop Road immediately adjacent to Apartment 2; 4. A waiver from Section 160 to allow a reduction in the required 15 -foot landscape buffer on land adjacent to public rights -of -way. The waiver is requested for the entire 15 feet along the northern perimeter of the site on north New Loop Road. Part of this request includes a 3.5 and a 8.7 foot - waiver along the eastern perimeter of the site in front of apartment building 2; 5. A waiver from Section 75 to allow a reduction in the street side setback in front of apartment building 2. The requested waiver is for 23.7 and 18.5 feet. 6. A wavier from Section 282 to allow the club house, the enclosed structure immediately west of the community center, and the existing vegetation surrounding the lakes to remain within the lake maintenance easement tract. These are to be considered as permitted encroachments into the lake easement. The waiver is requested for the 13 City Council Meeting Date: December2l, 2000 Date Prepared: December 11, 2000 Petition SP -99 -18 community center, existing trees, and the enclosed and elevated structure next to and west of the community center. The applicant and the City Engineer's office during construction plan review will determine the final boundaries of the lake easement tract. C. Staff recommends denial of the following amendment: 1. An amendment to the Master Signage Program for the Regional Center DRI approved by Resolution 64, 1998, to modify the design and location of proposed ground signs and to add two directional and two directory signs, as reflected on the landscape plan and attached exhibits. G: Talal /SP- 99- 18 -str2 14 N d 3 L V n J r sS � a IE C G QO O n O h n n n O l) m lo d r < O N p dp e7 M N N r N N O O A O a! ♦ N O r! N h O O N N N O W,1 1 a' 1 J e 1 o r c.) a O O v 4a Q F a a3�3$� 1 IN i V W O y' a W W W i- r '� • i O 0 00 `faa ►' �o-J ~ 0 o N y \ Z G. IC N 4L N Q u7 S s( t GGGa777 U� o N i a ¢ °C WW O a OV w 0:3 arc a: 0- 04L 07 1(A m ZN 1 i I �d. S q W z i! � i i °!!I ! lill!! "fill b L w i4lgi Z � -}-�-� O // o o. m 0 0 h 0 a.Q Wcc LL .2 W �W U 111 u W. a x� is „x� ! wN HS WN'i Memo to File From: Mark Hendrickson, City Forester Subject: SP- 99 -18, Westport #1114 Date: May 8, 2000 I have reviewed the revised plans submitted July 6, 2000. The following are my recommendations for the July 25, 2000 P &Z Commission meeting: • The Gopher Tortoises shall be moved off -site per a FGFWFC permit that will be copied to the City, prior to issuing the clearing permit. • The 25' Atlantic Boulevard buffer shall be installed in conjunction with the construction of the North Loop Road, including the sidewalk to Atlantic Boulevard. • Prior to the issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy for each building, the Landscape Architect of record shall certify that all associated landscaping with each building is complete. Prior to issuing the last Certificate of Occupancy for the entire project, the Landscape Architect of record shall certify that all landscaping for the project has been completed per all the approved landscape plans. CITY OF PALM BEACH GARDENS MEMORANDUM CITY OF PALM BEACH GARDENS 10500 N. MILITARY TRAIL • PALM BEACH GARDENS, FLORIDA 33410 -4698 TO: Talal Benothman, Senior Planner DATE: February 17, 2000 FROM: Scott Fetterman, Asst. Chief / Fire Marshal 4e SUBJECT: SP -99 -18 Westport Senior Living Facility The Fire Rescue Depajament has reviewed the above reference petition and has the following comments or concerns: The pedestrian bridge will need to have a vertical clearance of at least 13' -6 ". 2. Several areas of the parking lot do not allow Fire rescue access. A 20' inside radius is V required as a minimum. 3. The proposed fire hydrants on the water distribution plans are not in compliance with V City Code — requires 300' spacing. Thank you for your continued assistance and consideration in these matters. Please contact me if you have any questions or any future changes are proposed. 7 = -a FEB 1��j�t,, F` "A 4App/Afe "� �- yjd 41k Seacoast Utility Authority 46 CC . SL EXECUTIVE OFFICE July 17, 2000 Mr. Talal Benothman Planning and Zoning Department City of Pahn Beach Gardens 10500 North Military Trail Palm Beach Gardens, FL 33410 RE: Westport - La Posada Dear Mr. Benothman: VIA FAX:--799742.8-1 Mailing Address: P.O. Box 109602 Palm Beach Gardens, Florida 33410 -9602 We offer the following comments on your transmittal dated July 6, 2000 concerning the referenced project. 1. The landscaping plans need to be revised to show the proposed location of fire hydrants and meter/backflowprevente= assemblies. Plans currently show these devices beneath covered parkway in several locations. 2. The following comments concerns the typical cross sections shown on Sheet C1.2. fa. Section A -A - Water main appears to be too close to the covered parking and to the storm sewer. This section location should be shifted east 75' to reflect covered parking on both sides of the road. b. Section B -B - Facilities shown in section do not match those shown in the plan view on Sheet C1.11. C. Section D -D - Water main appears to be too close to the storm sewer. It appears that there will be a conflict between the water main and proposed royal palms along this road. d. Section F -F - The location of the water main and gravity sewer line does not appear to be acceptable. It may be necessary to master meter the cottage section. Please call if you require additional information. Sincerely, COAST UTILI AUTHORITY Bruce Gregg Director of Operations ad cc: Rim Bishop, Sean Donahue Jim Lance, Scott Serra 4200 Hood Road, Palm Beach Gardens, Florida 33410 -2174 Phone: Customer Service (561) 627 -2920 / Executive Office (561) 627 -2900 / FAX (561) 624 -2839 COMMUNITIES FINANCE COMPANY 4400 PGA Boulevard Suite 900 Palm Beach Gardens, FL 33410 Phone -561- 775 -2120 Fax - 561- 775 -1099 December 17, 1999 Via Facsimile and Regular Mail Ms. Dodi Glas Urban Design Studio The Concourse -Suite 600 2000 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard West Palm Beach, FL 33409 -8582 RE: Parcels 27.17, 27.21, 27.OPN4, and 27.RO6 Dear Dodi: We are in receipt of your plans dated November 17, 1999 for the Westport Senior Living Center. At this time, Community Finance Company (CFC) has no comment on the plans submitted. Any future modifications to the plans must be forwarded to our office for review. Thank you for your cooperation. Sincerely yours, Nancy . AGraham. President NMG:bt DEC 2 u 1999 INC. 0 7NSUI I IN(; (IVII IN( INH RS. SURVI :YOKS & MAPPLRti CIVIL AGRICULFURAI_ WATER RESOURCES VVATER & WASTEWATER TRANSPORTATION SURVEYING & MAPPING GIS "Partners For Results Value by Design" 3550 S.W. Corporate Pkwy. Palm City, FL 34990 (561) 286 -3883 Fax: (561) 286 -3925 vvww.lb(h.c0m i MEMORANDUM TO: Talal Benothman FROM: Sean C. Donahue, P.E. DATE: September 12, 2000 FILE NO.: 00 -4115 (City Petition No. SP- 99 -18) CITY" PALM BEACH GARDENS SEP 1 2 2000 PLANNING & ZONING DEPT. SUBJECT: Westport Senior Living Facility (AKA La Posada) On August 24, 2000, we received the following plans and comments for review: • P &Z Response letter prepared by Urban Design Studio. • Elevations prepared by Rink Reynolds Diamond Fisher Architects, P.A. • Proposed Lake Sections prepared by Messler & Associates, Inc. • Preliminary Civil Engineering Plans prepared by Messler & Associates, Inc. • Landscape Plans prepared by Urban Design Studio. • Site Plans prepared by Urban Design Studio. On September 5, 2000, we received Lake Maintenance Easement Plans prepared by Messler & Associates, Inc. We have the following comment, which are based on our August 8, 2000 memorandum: 1. Previously Satisfied. 2. Conditionally Satisfied. The Paving, Grading and Drainage plans have been reviewed on a conceptual basis only. Complete review of these plans will be conducted during the Construction Plan Review Phase, once we have received an approved Site Plan and Development Order. 3. Previously Satisfied. 4. Previously Satisfied. 5. Satisfied. The parking for this project has been resolved with the Planning and Zoning Department. a s �q",4 0/0 1 6. Previously Satisfied. gym. -e 7. Previously Satisfied. o J S Westport Senior Living Center Page 2 of 4 LBFH File No. 00 -4115 8. Previously Satisfied. 9, Previously Satisfied. 10. Conditionally Satisfied. Prior to the issuance of the first building permit the applicant will need to submit written authorization from the utility owner for the horizontal construction/planting within the utility easements. 11. Previously Satisfied. 12. Previously Satisfied. 13. Satisfied. The applicant has provided safe sight triangles at the appropriate intersections. The applicant has provided the appropriate turning radii at the intersection of the loop roads. 14. Previously Satisfied. 1 Conditionally Satisfied. Prior to Site Plan approval, the City of Palm each Gardens and the South Florida Water Management District must re ew and approve the modifications to the Surface Water Management System for the Regional Center. 16. Conditionally Satisfied. Any condition contained in the City's approval of the modifications to the Surface Water Management System that effects individual parcels within the Regional Center must be addressed prior to Site Plan approval for any parcels within the Regional Center. 17. of Satisfied. No building permits except for the clearing of exotic L vegetation shall be issued until a revised Surface Water Management System for North Palm Beach County Improvement District's Unit 19 has received final approval from the City of Palm Beach Gardens and all other applicable governments and/or agencies, including a schedule for implementing the plan and a definitive commitment for funding the required improve 18. Con on atisfied A 0 -foot wide unencumbered lake maintenance tract, t a nimu slope of 8:1, is a requirement of Section 282 of the City s Land opment Regulations (LDRs). The purpose of this Section of the LDRs is to provide access to the lake banks for the normal maintenance of the lake (such as the dredging of the lake bottom, maintenance of slopes, etc.), and for emergency management operations during and after storm events (such as the removal of trees from the water body, control structures and culverts) for the protection of upstream developments such as Mia Flores. The applicant has presented a Lake Maintenance Tract Plan that shows the tract around this existing lake will be encumbered by large existing trees Westport Senior Living Center LBFH File No. 00 -4115 Page 3 of 4 and proposed structures (including a building and a set of staircases). Access to the lake for maintenance and emergency management operation during storm events will need to take place from the water since the lake banks are encumbered. We do not recommend amending the code to remove the lake maintenance tract requirements. We also understand that there is support for this lake to remain in its existing condition from the Planning & Zoning Department.. Therefore, if the waiver from Section 282 of the City's LDRs is approved, the applicant needs to submit an Emergency Operations Management Plan prepared by Northern Pam Beach County Improvement District for the maintenance of the lake during storm events` The plan will need to be reviewed and approved by the City prior to the issuance of the building permit for this pr_ oje_ct. We also recommend that the lake maintenance tract br moatarxgd and that no new trees be added to the tract at any time_, 10 �*nine e applicant has provided a cross section of the lake bank ewalk that is required as a part of the Regional Center DRI. The applicant has proposed to construct the sidewalk at a minimum elevation of 8.0 feet. Sidewalks are typically constructed along roadways, at the back edge of the right -of -way. The sidewalks normally enjoy the same protection from the 10- year /1 -day storm event as the centerline of the roadway. Based on NPBCID Unit 19 Flood Routing Simulations for Proposed Conditions, this sidewalk will be 2.58 -feet underwater during the 10- year /1-day storm event. We do not recommend approval of this sidewalk location. 20. Satisfied. The applicant has revised the parking at the east and west entrances by replacing the adjacent parking spaces with green space. The applicant has increased that stacking distance at all of the entrances to the site, except the entrance directly north of the service yard. We understand that the employees will predominantly use this entrance, and we recommend dedicating the adjacent parking spaces as employee parking to increase that stacking distance at this entrance. 21. Satisfied. The applicant has provided that appropriate turning radii at that entrances and intersections. The applicant has also satisfied the requirements of the Fire Department. 22. Satisfied. The applicant has provided a stop bar and stop sign at the entrance to the north of the service yard. 23. The applicant has shown several stop bars and crosswalks to be placed in areas where there are brick pavers. Due to adhesion problems, paint or thermoplastic will not be permitted to be install on paver bricks. We recommend using flush header curbs to outline crosswalks. We also recommend that the applicant either adjust the locations of the stop bars or provide white paver bricks to be used as stop bars. Westport Senior Living Center LBFH File No. 00 -4115 Page 4 of 4 The applicant is requested to return a copy of our comments with the applicant's acknowledgement of each comment and the response. Compliance will expedite the subsequent review. SCD\ cc: Roxanne Manning Jim Norquest P:\PROJECTS\PBGMEMO\4115\4115e.doc RESOLUTION 64,1998 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM BEACH GARDENS, FLORIDA, PROVIDING FOR APPROVAL OF A MASTER SIGNAGE PROGRAM FOR THE MACARTHUR CENTER; PROVIDING FOR ADDITIONAL CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL; PROVIDING FOR WAIVERS FROM CODE REQUIREMENTS; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, the MacArthur Regional Center was approved per Resolution 9, 1984; WHEREAS, the City's Growth Management Department has received a petition from the MacArthur Center Property Owners Association for the approval of a Master Signage Program for the MacArthur Regional Center, located at the northeast corner of the intersection of PGA Boulevard and Alternate AIA, Palm Beach Gardens; WHEREAS, the City's Growth Management Department has recommended approval of the MacArthur Center Master Signage Program; and WHEREAS, the City's Growth Management Department has determined that the proposed Master Signage Program is consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan and Code provisions. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM BEACH GARDENS, FLORIDA: Section L. The City Council of the City of Palm Beach Gardens hereby approves a Master Signage Program consisting of seven Main Entry Signs, 13 Directional Signs, 28 Building ID Signs, Regulatory Signs per code and four Temporary Site Signs, for the MacArthur Regional Center located at the northeast corner of the intersection of PGA Boulevard and Alternate AIA, Palm Beach Gardens. Section 2. The Master Signage Program shall be implemented in accordance with the following plans on file with the City's Planning and Zoning Department: 1. April 24, 1998, Sign Location Plan and Message Schedule, Sheet SL1 2. April 29, 1998, Typical Landscape Plans, Sheets 1 -2. 3. August 7, 1997, MacArthur Center Signage and Graphics Standards; Main Entry Sign, Building ID Sign, Directional Sign, Temporary Site Sign, Street Name Signs, Routing Signs, and Regulatory Signs (dated May 13, 1998) Section 3. The Master Signage Program approval shall comply with the following conditions: (1) The MacArthur Property Owners Association shall maintain all signage.. (2) Prior to the issuance of the first sign permit, the applicant shall submit construction plans and specifications for the break -away design for review and approval. This shall apply to the Main Entry Signs, the Building Identification Signs and the Directional Signs. (3) No sign shall be erected within, over, or adjacent to any existing or future water or sewer line without the prior written consent of Seacoast Utilities, its successors, and or assigns. (4) Each temporary sign shall be removed at the issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy for the building for which the temporary sign was erected. Section 4. The approval of this petition is contingent upon the approval of the following waivers: a. Waiver of Section 110- 36(c), minimum landscaping required around ground signs and minimum front setbacks to allow: 1) Directional Signs and Building ID Signs within medians to be located within one foot from the edge of the curb (they are required 6 -7 feet of side landscaping, depending on the height of the sign). 2) Building ID Signs in medians to have a 3 foot front setback (15 feet is the required setback). b. Waiver of Section 110- 36(b), maximum length of ground signs (15 feet required) 1) To allow Main Entrance Sign of 16 feet Section 5. This Resolution shall be effective upon adoption. Page 2 Resolution 64, 1998 INTRODUCED, PASSED AND ADOPTED THIS&I dDAY OF ATTEST: LINDA V. KOSIER BJi�it VOTE: MAYOR RUSSO VICE MAYOR FURTADO COUNCILMAN SABATELLO COUNCILMAN JABLIN COUNCILMAN CLARK Page 3 Resolution 64, 1998 1. APPROVI�D AS TO LEGAL FORM AND SUFFICIENCY. Co-, A- (;101 W/,-- eG CITY ATTORNEY AYE NAY ABSENT r r V O V 1 L N X10 '1 �� t1i I I i i a.- -j-- - - -L— I \I I j ° \\ j lllfl.�� ai�iil�1D oil Ila � a I�® O I ° p ° o O m 0 ©® d° #e i 1 t i� z O O I d � i S i I i m December 11, 2000 RESOLUTION 105, 2000 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM BEACH GARDENS, FLORIDA, PROVIDING FOR APPROVAL OF A SITE PLAN FOR A SENIOR ASSISTED LIVING FACILITY (LA POSADA) LOCATED WITHIN THE REGIONAL CENTER DEVELOPMENT OF REGIONAL IMPACT (DRI) CONSISTING OF 301 UNITS, AS MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED HEREIN; PROVIDING FOR SIX WAIVERS TO ALLOW THE ADDITION OF 209 COVERED PARKING SPACES, THE LOCATION OF COVERED PARKING SPACES WITHIN THE REQUIRED 100 -FOOT SETBACK, THE ELIMINATION OF TWO SIDEWALKS, A REDUCTION IN THE 15 -FOOT LANDSCAPE BUFFER, THE REDUCTION IN THE STREET SIDE SETBACK ALONG THE EASTERN PERIMETER, AND THE ENCROACHMENT OF STRUCTURES WITHIN THE LAKE MAINTENANCE EASEMENT TRACT; PROVIDING FOR AN AMENDMENT TO THE MASTER SIGNAGE PROGRAM FOR THE DRI AS ADOPTED IN RESOLUTION 64, 1998 TO MODIFY THE DESIGN AND LOCATION OF THE PERMITTED SIGNS AND ADD TWO DIRECTIONAL AND TWO DIRECTORY SIGNS TO THE MASTER SIGNAGE PROGRAM; PROVIDING FOR CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, the City has received an application from Urban Design Studio, agent, for approval of a site plan known as La Posada consisting of 22.5 acres for a senior assisted living facility with 301 units, a community center, and a health center located within the Regional Center DRI along PGA Blvd., as more particularly described in Exhibit "A" attached hereto; and WHEREAS, the applicant seeks six waivers and an amendment to Resolution 64, 1998, adopting the Master Signage Program, to allow 209 covered parking spaces, the location of covered parking within the required 100 -foot front and rear setbacks, the elimination of two sidewalks, the reduction in the 15 -foot landscape buffer along the eastern and northern perimeters, the reduction in the street side setback along the eastern perimeter, the encroachment of structures within the lake maintenance easement tract, and a modification to the Master Signage Program to change the design and location of proposed signs and add two directional and two directory signs; and WHEREAS, the subject parcel is currently zoned Planned Community District (PCD) with future land -use designations of Residential High (RH) and Professional Office (PO); and WHEREAS, the Growth Management Department has reviewed said application and determined that it is sufficient; and Resolution 105, 2000 December 11, 2000 WHEREAS, the Growth Management Department has reviewed said application and determined that it is consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan and Land Development Regulations; and WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission has recommended approval of the site plan for the subject parcel; and WHEREAS, the Growth Management Department has recommended approval of the site plan for the subject parcel. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM BEACH GARDENS, FLORIDA: Section 1. The City Council of the City of Palm Beach Gardens, Florida, hereby approves a site plan for a senior living facility with 301 units, a community center, and a health center, located within the Regional Center DRI along PGA Blvd., more particularly described in Exhibit "A" attached hereto and incorporated herein. Section 2. Said site plan approval shall comply with the following conditions which shall be binding upon the applicant, its successors, assigns, and /or grantees: 1. Prior to the issuance of the first building permit, the petitioner shall obtain written authorization from applicable utility companies authorizing the horizontal construction /planting within utility easements. Utilities shall only be allowed in buffers in accordance with Section 147(d) of the City's Land Development Regulations; 2. No building permits except for the clearing of exotic vegetation shall be issued until a revised Surface Water Management System for Unit 19 has received final approval from the City of Palm Beach Gardens and all other applicable governments and / or agencies, including a schedule for implementing the plan and a definitive commitment for funding the required improvements; 3. Prior to issuance of a clearing permit, the petitioner shall present to the City of Palm Beach Gardens a permit from the Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission to relocate the Gopher Tortoises off -site; 4. The petitioner shall install the 25 -foot Atlantic Boulevard buffer in conjunction with the construction of North Loop Road, including the sidewalk to Atlantic Boulevard; 5. The petitioner is responsible for the maintenance of Gardens Parkway, Fairchild Gardens Avenue, and New Loop Road (north and east) landscaping and irrigation abutting the subject property, if for any reason the Regional Center Owners Association terminates its maintenance of said areas; Resolution 105, 2000 December 11, 2000 Said maintenance shall comply with landscape maintenance standards recommended by the City of Palm Beach Gardens and shall commence upon installation of landscape materials; 6. Prior to issuance of the certificate of occupancy for each building, the Landscape Architect of record shall certify that all associated landscaping with each building is complete. Prior to issuing the last certificate of occupancy for the entire development, the Landscape Architect of record shall certify that all landscaping for the development has been completed per all the approved landscape plans; 7. Should the approved land -use of the development change in the future, a comprehensive re- evaluation of parking demand on site based on the new land -use will be conducted and the petitioner shall comply with the recommendations of the City and the findings of the parking study; 8. All utility equipment located on top of buildings must be effectively screened so that they are not visible from ground level; 9. All covered parking spaces must be assigned and the identified 21 parking spaces must be marked for future conversion into parking spaces, should the need arise; 10.The petitioner, the City of Palm Beach Gardens, and Northern Palm Beach County Improvement District, shall establish the boundaries of the Lake Maintenance Easement. In order to accommodate the existing lake condition the easement may vary from the standards of Section 282, as acceptable to Northern Palm Beach County Improvement District, and the City engineer. The attached "Exhibit E" shows the general area in which the easement shall occur. Section 3. The City Council of the City of Palm Beach Gardens hereby approves the following six waivers with this approval: 1. A waiver from Section 190(g) to allow an increase in the number of covered parking beyond the maximum 5 %. The waiver is requested for 209 covered parking spaces; 2. A waiver from Section 190 (h) to allow the placement of covered parking in the front and rear of principal structures and reduce the setback requirement for such structures to less than the required minimum setback of 100 feet. The waiver is requested for 70 feet in the front along Gardens Parkway Blvd. and 100 feet in the rear along north New Loop Road; 3. A waiver from Section 256 to eliminate two on- street sidewalks required by Code. One sidewalk is on the south side of north New Loop Road and the other along the western side of New Loop Road, immediately adjacent to apartment building 2; 3 Resolution 105, 2000 December 11, 2000 4. A waiver from Section 160 to allow a reduction in the required 15 -foot landscape buffer on land adjacent to public rights -of -way. The waiver is requested for the entire 15 feet along the northern perimeter of the site on north New Loop Road. Part of this request includes a 3.5 and a 8.7 foot - waiver along the eastern perimeter of the site in front of apartment building 2; 5. A waiver from Section 75 to allow a reduction in the street side setback in front of apartment building 2. The requested waiver is for 23.7 and 18.5 feet; 6. A wavier from Section 282 to allow the club house, the enclosed structure immediately west of the community center, and the existing vegetation surrounding the lakes to remain within the lake maintenance easement tract. These are to be considered as permitted encroachments into the lake easement. The waiver is requested for the community center, existing trees, and the enclosed and elevated structure next to and west of the community center. The applicant and the City Engineer's office will determine the final boundaries of the lake easement tract during the construction plan review. Section 4. The Master Signage Program for the Regional Center DRI, as approved by Resolution 64, 1998, is hereby amended to modify the design and location of the proposed ground signs and to add two directional and two directory signs, as reflected on the landscape plan and the attached exhibits "B ", "C ", and "D." Section 5. Said approval and construction shall be consistent with plans filed with the Growth Management Department as follows: 1. Site plan and architectural renderings, sheets S -1 to A 30 2h, by Rink Reynolds Diamond Fisher; Greystone Communities, Inc.; and Urban Design Studio, last revised on 9 -18 -2000; 2. Architectural renderings, sheets A 30 1 a to A 70 2a, by Rink Reynolds Diamond Fisher and Greystone Communities, Inc., last revised on 9 -18 -2000; 3. Site Lighting and Photometrics, sheets E 1.1 and E 1.2, by Rink Reynolds Diamond Fisher; Greystone Communities, Inc.; and Urban Design Studio, last revised on 9 -18- 2000; 4. Landscape Plan, sheets LA 2.1 to LS 1.1, by Rink Reynolds Diamond Fisher; Greystone Communities, Inc.; and Urban Design Studio, last revised on 9 -18 -2000; 5. Signage Plan and Signage Details, sheets S 1.1 and S 1.2, by Rink Reynolds Diamond Fisher; Greystone Communities, Inc.; and Urban Design Studio, last revised on 9 -18- 2000. Section 6. Thy representations made hearing. Resolution 105, 2000 approval expressly incorporates and is contingent upon all by the applicant or applicant's agents at any workshop or public 4 December 11, 2000 Section 7. This Resolution shall be effective upon adoption. PASSED AND ADOPTED THIS THE DAY OF 2000. ATTESTED BY: JOSEPH RUSSO, MAYOR APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM AND SUFFICIENCY: Carol Gold, CMC,City Clerk CITY ATTORNEY VOTE: AYE NAY ABSENT MAYOR RUSSO VICE MAYOR JABLIN COUNCILMAN SABATELLO COUNCILWOMAN FURTADO COUNCILMAN CLARK G:Talal/SP- 99 -18 -re 5 Resolution 105, 2000 ft Aug. 24, rkOM ANN IE, 1999 12:49PM M I I Mjj,, uut;KEY� (WED) 8. 18' 99 16:0 '�16:00/NV.1tLV86197UU 11/19 Exhibit A LAND - LEGAL AESCRIPT(ON Parcels 27,17; 27.21, 27.0PN4 and 27.R06 A parcel of ]and located in Section 6, 'township 42 South, Range 43 East, within the municipal limits of the City of Palm Beach Gardens, Palm Beach County, Florida, and being more particularly described as follows. Uginning at the Northeast comer of the plat of Mira Flores, as recorded in Plat Book 75, pages 122 through 125, public records of Palm &wb County, Florida, proceed along the East line of said pld through the following 8 courses: Thence South 01 ° 15' 12' West, a distance of 76.07 feet; thence South 460 15' 12" West, a distance of 35.36 feet; thence South 010 15' 12" West, a distance of 152.74 feet to a tangent curve having a radius of 265.00 feet, and a ccatral angle of 5S° 49'40"; thence proceed Soutberly and Westerly along the arc of said curve. a distance of 258.13 feet to the end of said curve; thence South. 57° 03' 52" West, a distance of 230.54 feet to a tangent curve having a radius of 185.00 feet, and a central angle of 63" 44' 10 "; t1 =ce proceed Southerly along the arc of said curve a distance of 205.80 feet to the end of said curve; thence South 060 40' 24" Eas4 a distaste of 75,35 feet; thence South 53° 32' 54" East, a distance of 36.49 feet to a point on the North right of way line of Gardens Boulevard, as described in Official Records Book 5072, page 356, public records of Palm, Beach County, Florida; thence Noah 7V 34' 36" `Fact, along said North tight of way line of Gardens Boulevard a distance of 1,3-72.19 feu to a tangent curve having a radius of 1,190.92 feet, and a central angle of 24° 1943 "; thence proceed Easterly along the arc of said curve and North right of way line of Gardens Boulevard, a distance of 505.68 feet to the end of said curve; thence North 60° 12`06" East, continuing along said North right of way line of Crardens Boulevard, a distance of 3455 feet; thence South 73° 30' 08" East, continuing along said North right of way line of Qardm Boulevard, a distance of 7038 feet; thence North 000 55' 29" East, departing said North "right of way line of Gardens Boulevard, a distance of 38.78 -fed to a non-tangent curve having a radial tearing of South 730 30' 11" East, a radius of 271.60 feM and a central angle of 32° 50' 0019. Thence proceed Northerly and Easterly along the arc of said curve, a distance of 155.64 feet to the end of said curve; the= North 490'08' 41" East, a distance of 48.92 feet to a tangent curve having a radius of 331.14 feet, and a central angle of 48° 04'29". Thence proceed Northerly along the arc of said curve, a distance of 277,85 feet to the and of said curve, Thence North 01 ° 06' 32" East, a distance of 48.01 feet; thence North 46° 0724" East, a distance of 44.04 feet:. thence North 010 11'28n East, a distance of 76.19 fea to a point on a line 30.00 feet Southerly of and parallel with the North line of said Section 6, Township 42 South, Range 43 East; thence North 88° 45' Ol" West, along said lel line, a distance of 1,829.53 fat; to the POINT OF BMNNING of the d Parcel. b LESS AND F_XCEPTiNG THEREFROM those certain tracts of d d ged1 9 Official Records Book 5072, page 354, public records of Palm Beach ty, - rl .,A 3 z m 0 w O W 0 PAX F 0 R E � .si. H"YI +YI -1ii 1- 1 }I�li}s'1'YI-H-1-F'1 -f fft.xJ �e as}I.t,i -ti. ixYYHs NRNUSn uf�l y ; u s14 I � •- P I r � P li m P�1 P i y P rd�e 0 ` 1, i uP UP �l c� o M�l h / r r � I I I j o. P I j I x � n x y Y I ��P L_ r I s ♦_� _ I N I I \\ I I a P I y I—,— m x co ® m to IN a �W � l R F = .si. H"YI +YI -1ii 1- 1 }I�li}s'1'YI-H-1-F'1 -f fft.xJ �e as}I.t,i -ti. ixYYHs NRNUSn uf�l y ; u s14 I � •- P I r � P li m P�1 P i y P rd�e 0 ` 1, i uP UP �l c� o M�l h / r r � I I I j o. P I j I x � n x y Y I ��P L_ r I s ♦_� _ I N I I \\ I I a P I y I—,— m x co dR � da a m it r 999 4 d I , c I .si. H"YI +YI -1ii 1- 1 }I�li}s'1'YI-H-1-F'1 -f fft.xJ �e as}I.t,i -ti. ixYYHs NRNUSn uf�l y ; u s14 I � •- P I r � P li m P�1 P i y P rd�e 0 ` 1, i uP UP �l c� o M�l h / r r � I I I j o. P I j I x � n x y Y I ��P L_ r I s ♦_� _ I N I I \\ I I a P I y I—,— m x co a m � & � a � � h �— — -- -- — — . I - , ,) i I� I . . m �� f$ . ■, - �E. <m � /I ! / � r \y )\ (A � ■� � , ■ ; -4, �D )) \ m . I - , ,) i I� I . . m . \ I � /I ! / �\ (> LA P OSADA ¥ ( 3 SENIOR LIVING cOMMUNI tor . q (� § §� q . .w _e »»� % (. . AM , $ a 4� t+P x m a 2 (9 p� q1 3 I I i I I I F I �1 �o����asqq�a�a� ^ i `; 33mn m$ ava° - a _ 3£3eg 3� V,2 o � i ONO 1 T yNy NNN�NAN�2A CA pI £ s �s� oaa�A =o3am wh #'o v oA w �a O 1 /p !/ /... fA NfA OJ O.m_rio Nd 19 Two .. �o����asqq�a�a� ^ i `; 33mn m$ ava° - a _ 3£3eg 3� V,2 o � i a �� 1 I I II III II I I d3c �3� 3 11 II �3 i I it �► I — I I I II I II , B- II v mo m= -u °'� II A Ago' � d N v e3 � -1 � � S fA I" a O 2 Z z I —Y n� \ w 3 L I msW 5 HIP P 7 all � f !m zm i ;Ri LIB# POSADA jvgFi SENIOR LIVING COMMUNITY a�jpy[lil� ��8 oz IfvIS for ell YR IIII� yM a WESTPORT HOLDINGS, PBG ONO 1 T yNy NNN�NAN�2A CA pI £ s �s� oaa�A =o3am a �� 1 I I II III II I I d3c �3� 3 11 II �3 i I it �► I — I I I II I II , B- II v mo m= -u °'� II A Ago' � d N v e3 � -1 � � S fA I" a O 2 Z z I —Y n� \ w 3 L I msW 5 HIP P 7 all � f !m zm i ;Ri LIB# POSADA jvgFi SENIOR LIVING COMMUNITY a�jpy[lil� ��8 oz IfvIS for ell YR IIII� yM a WESTPORT HOLDINGS, PBG � \,- - I 1 13 1 -2 m X cr ;w m 451 LA POSADA In T COO co p Nm 0 tie" SENIOR LIVING COMMUNITY for WrSTPORT HOLDINGS, PSG m X cr ;w m 451 City Council Meeting Date: December 21, 2000 Date Prepared: December 11, 2000 Petition: School Concurrency CITY OF PALM BEACH GARDENS CITY COUNCIL Agenda Cover Memorandum Meeting Date: December 21, 2000 Date Prepared: December 11, 2000 SUBJECT /AGENDA ITEM: Consideration of Approval: Resolution 126, 2000, a request to approve the adoption of the Interlocal Agreement between Palm Beach County municipalities, Palm Beach County, and the Palm Beach County School District to establish public school concurrency. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of Resolution 126, 2000. Reviewed by: lZeAXII Originating Dept.: Costs: $ Total Council Action: City Attorney ' Growth Management [ ] Approved Finance NA $ [ ] Approved w/ ACM \ Current FY conditions Human Res. NA [ ] Denied Other NA Advertised: Funding Source: [ ] Continued to: Attachments: Date: [ ] Operating • Resolution 126, 2000 Paper: [ ] Other • Interlocal Agreement [X] Not Required • City Attorney Memo Su b Gro Management Direct,Aff d parties [ ] Notified Budget Acct. #:: [ ] None Approve y City [X] Not required I Background: The Planning and Zoning Commission has requested Planning and Zoning staff and the City Attorney to provide the City Council with information pertaining to the legal ramifications and advantages and disadvantages of signing the Interlocal Agreement establishing a County -wide public school concurrency. 1 City Council Meeting Date: December 21, 2000 Date Prepared: December 11, 2000 Petition: School Concurrency Staff comments: Staff has identified the most important advantages and disadvantages with respect to adopting or not adopting the public school concurrency Interlocal Agreement. The following is the information the Planning and Zoning Commission requested that be provided to the City Council. A. Potential Advantages: ■ Controlling school overcrowding by establishing a cap on school capacity through the adoption of a Level of Service (LOS) Standard of 110% capacity utilization for each school and Concurrency Service Area (CSA). However, the LOS can be increased to 120% provided the Technical Advisory Group (TAG) recommends the increase. Upgrading or modernizing existing, older schools. The agreement commits the School Board to improve deteriorating, existing public schools in Palm Beach Gardens and in other municipalities. The School Board must adopt a financially- feasible capital plan for school construction. The plan commits the Board to complying with the plan to ensure that needed capacity is provided for to accommodate anticipated enrollments as a result of new, projected residential developments. This requires a major coordination effort between the municipalities and the Board. Planning and coordination between each local government and the Board to accurately project student enrollment and therefore the potentially impacted schools based on anticipated residential developments. This effort will also include providing the Board with the local development permits twice a year. Accordingly, the Board will revise its capital improvements plan to reflect the actual numbers based on the development permits provided by the local governments. This would eliminate or minimize the "guess work" likely to occur when projecting student enrollments. ■ Palm Beach Gardens along with other cities will have the opportunity to participate meaningfully and substantively in determining the location and timing of new public schools within the City's jurisdiction. ■ The concurrency program is likely to have a positive impact on class size within each of the schools located in the City. This is because class size is related to the capacity utilization rate of a particular school. Palm Beach Gardens and each other local government will have the opportunity to opt out within the first three months after signing the agreement, should the City choose to do so. The agreement will go into effect three months after all the local governments have signed the agreement. K City Council Meeting Date: December 21, 2000 Date Prepared: December 11, 2000 Petition: School Concurrency ■ The School Board will be held accountable and will be expected to perform in accordance with the agreement. ■ The School Board will loose some of its discretion in formulating and modifying its capital facilities plan. B. Potential Disadvantages: ■ Loss of some local control over the residential development process. The City will not be able to issue development permits to residential developments that do not receive concurrency approval from the School Board. ■ Local governments will not be able to grant exceptions to school concurrency regulations. ■ The Board must maximize utilization of capacity of schools within each CSA for concurrency purposes and not necessarily for educational purposes or based soley on educational factors. ■ Local governments can not suspend the concurrency program without obtaining a 33% vote and after a recommendation from TAG to suspend concurrency. Municipalities can not vote to suspend concurrency without a prior recommendation to suspend concurrency from TAG. ■ A local government can not decide to leave and no longer be a party to the agreement on its own. A 75% majority vote of the other parties must vote to approve the petitioning local government for termination. ■ The agreement will be effective for a period of five years. Thereafter, it is automatically renewed, unless one of the parties files an objection to the agreement in writing. The party objecting to the agreement must notify the other parties no sooner than ninety days prior to the end of the term. ■ If the School District does perform its duties under the agreement and does not issue concurrency certificates to potential residential developments due to lack of adequate capacity, the local government then must deny approval of the development in question. As a result, the City could potentially be liable. ■ The City could face negative political consequence as a result of not signing the agreement. ■ The City may loose valuable cooperation and coordination currently existing between the City and nearby municipalities and the County. One example of this important cooperation is the County's support for the City's requested CRALLS designation for PGA Blvd. 3 City Council Meeting Date: December 21, 2000 Date Prepared: December 11, 2000 Petition: School Concunency Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of Resolution 126, 2000. Staff's recommendation is based on the logic that there are several implementation mechanisms and safeguards to ensure that school concurrency succeed. Most importantly, staff believes local government involvement in the School District's decision making process allows the municipalities to know early on in the process any potential problems before they occur. G:Talal \School- Con- CC -str 4 Date Prepared: December 8, 2000 RESOLUTION 126, 2000 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM BEACH GARDENS, FLORIDA, ADOPTING THE INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT WITH THE MUNICIPALITIES OF PALM BEACH COUNTY, PALM BEACH COUNTY, AND THE PALM BEACH COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT TO ESTABLISH A COUNTY -WIDE PUBLIC SCHOOL CONCURRENCY; AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND CITY CLERK TO EXECUTE THE INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, the Interlocal Agreement establishes a County -wide public school concurrency to limit public schools overcrowding, as more particularly described in Exhibit "A" attached hereto; and WHEREAS, the Growth Management Department and the City Attorney have reviewed the Interlocal Agreement and determined that its objectives are consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan, Land Development Regulations, and does not limit the City's legal options in resolving potential, future disputes with the Palm Beach School District; and WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission has recommended approval of the Interlocal Agreement; and WHEREAS, the Growth Management Department has recommended approval of the Interlocal Agreement. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM BEACH GARDENS, FLORIDA: Section 1. The City Council of the City of Palm Beach Gardens, Florida, hereby adopts the Interlocal Agreement with the municipalities of Palm Beach County, Palm Beach County, and the Palm Beach School District to establish a County -wide public school concurrency, more particularly described in Exhibit "A" attached hereto and incorporated herein; and authorizes the Mayor and City Clerk to execute said Agreement. Section 2. Said approval and adoption shall be consistent with the following document on file with the City's Growth Management Department as: 1. Interlocal Agreement with Municipalities of Palm Beach County and the School District of Palm Beach County to Establish Public School Concurrency, June 6, 2000. Resolution 126 Date Prepared: December 8, 2000 Section 3. This Resolution shall be effective upon adoption. PASSED AND ADOPTED THIS THE DAY OF 2000. JOSEPH RUSSO, MAYOR ATTESTED APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM AND BY: SUFFICIENCY: Carol Gold, CMC,City Clerk CITY ATTORNEY VOTE: AYE NAY ABSENT MAYOR RUSSO VICE MAYOR JABLIN COUNCILMAN SABATELLO COUNCILWOMAN FURTADO COUNCILMAN CLARK G:Talal/School- Con -res 2 Resolution 126 i M E M O R A N D U M WATTERSON, HYLAND & KLETT, P.A. To: cc: From: Subject: Date: Hon. Mayor and City Council Ron Ferris, Interim City Manager Members of the Planning & Zoning Commission Steve Cramer, Interim Growth Management Director Leonard G. Rubin, City Attorney6�41 Palm Beach County Interlocal Agreement/Public School Concurrency December 6, 2000 At its November 28, 2000 meeting, the Planning & Zoning Commission considered a request by the Palm Beach County School District to execute the Interlocal Agreement for the implementation of countywide public school concurrency. After much debate, the Planning & Zoning Commission, on a 3 -2 vote, recommended approval of the Interlocal Agreement subject to the resolution of two issues. First, the Planning & Zoning Commission requested that staff provide Council with a reasonably definite statement describing the circumstances under which development within the City may be stopped for lack of school concurrency. Second, the Commission asked this office to examine the dispute mediation provision to ensure that the Council would not be relinquishing its ability to seek legal recourse through the court system for any disputes that may arise under the terms of the Interlocal Agreement. During the Commission's consideration of the Interlocal Agreement, individual members expressed concern that the City and the School District might disagree as to the proper ratios to be utilized when projecting student population. Article VII of the Agreement provides two methods for resolving disputes among the parties. Such disputes may be resolved either by 1) the Circuit Court or 2) mediation and binding arbitration. The Planning & Zoning Commission was concerned that the specific language of the Agreement was not clear as to whether the two parties in dispute must agree as to the dispute resolution method. That language provides as follows: Hon. Mayor and City Council Page 2 December 6, 2000 In the event objections cannot be resolved within 20 days or such othertime as may be mutually agreeable, the PARTIES shall have the right to petition the Court in accordance with the provisions of Article IX.C., or submit their disagreement for mediation under the protocols of the Palm Beach County Comprehensive Plan Amendments Coordinated Review Interlocal Agreement of October, 1993, as specified in Article X therein, attached as Exhibit A to this Agreement. Having reviewed the Agreement in detail and having discussed this issue with John Corbett, Esquire, who reviewed the document on behalf of the Palm Beach County League of Cities, I am confident that the City does not waive its right to seek judicial review by executing the Interlocal Agreement. First, while the language quoted above refers to the "PARTIES," only one party need file a petition or complaint in Circuit Court. Second, the dispute resolution provision references Article IX.C., which expressly provides that the School District, the County, and each of the municipalities shall have the right to petition the Circuit Court for the Fifteenth Judicial Circuit for specific performance of any and all provisions of the Agreement. While, under certain circumstances, parties to an agreement may contract away their right to seek judicial redress in favor of some alternate dispute resolution procedure, any such waiver must be clear and unequivocal. There does not appear to be any intent to waive a party's right to seek judicial review of disputes that may arise under the terms of the Agreement. If the City Council were to determine that it is in the City's best interest to execute the Interlocal Agreement, it would only be committing to participation in the school concurrency program for approximately four years. The effective date of the Agreement is the date it is signed by the last required party. The term of the Agreement is for five years; however, the school concurrency program will not officially commence for at least one year after the Agreement is executed because each of the local government signatories must amend its Comprehensive Plan to add a public schools facility element and incorporate the School District's Capital Improvement Schedule. While the Agreement will automatically be renewed Hon. Mayor and City Council Page 3 December 6, 2000 for an additional five year term, any party may terminate the Agreement at the end of the initial five year term. Therefore, if one municipality objects, the Agreement is terminated. Should you have any additional questions or concerns relating to the terms of the Interlocal Agreement, please do not hesitate to contact this office. PACPW in\ HISTORY\001106A\446.56(319.055) q Ru (66 R2000 0808 , J 6 200 PALM BEACH COUNTY INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT with MUNICIPALITIES OF PALM BEACH COUNTY and THE SCHOOL DISTRICT OF PALM BEACH COUNTY To Establish PUBLIC SCHOOL CONCURRENCY TABLE OF CONTENTS I. DEFINITIONS .......................... ..............................s II. SCHOOL CONCURRENCY OVERVIEW . ............................... 10 A. Agreement to Establish School Concurrency ......................... 10 B. Required Concurrency Elements ...... .............................11 C. Specific Responsibilities of the Parties ........................ 4 ...... 12 M. CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN ....... ............................... 14 A. School District's Five -Year Capital Facilities Plan .................... 14 B. Ten and Twenty Year Work Program ............................... 16 C. Transmittal ........................ .............................17 D. TAG Review ....................... .............................17 E. Final Adoption ..................... .............................18 F. Material Amendment to the School District's Five -Year Capital Facilities Plan.............................. .............................18 G. Amend Comprehensive Plan ........ ............................... 19 IV. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENTS .............................. 19 A. Process for Development and Adoption of Capital Improvements Element........................... .............................19 B. Process for Development, Adoption and Amendment of the Public School Facilities Element (PSFE) ............................... ......... 20 -ii- C. Intergovernmental Coordination Element ........................... 21 V. SCHOOL CONCURRENCY PROGRAM .. ............................... 21 A. Commencement of School Concurrency Program ..................... 21 B. Concurrency Service Areas ......... ............................... 21 C. Level of Service (LOS) ............. ............................... 23 D. Exemptions ........................ .............25 E. Local Concurrency Implementing Ordinance ........................ 26 F. School District Review of New Residential Development Proposals ....... 27 G. Term of School Concurrency ....... ............................... 35 H. Suspension of Concurrency ........... .............................35 VI. MONITORING .......................... .................. ...........37 A. Establishment of the Technical Advisory Group (TAG) ................ 37 B. Purpose of the TAG ................. .............................37 C. Membership of the TAG ........... ............................... 38 D. Terms of Membership ............. ............................... 39 E. Election of Chair and Organization Meeting ......................... 39 F. Quorum and Voting ................ ...... ......................... 39 G. Meetings open to the public ....................................... .. ............... 40 H. Compensation ...................... ....... ......................40 I. Staff Support for the TAG ......... ............................... 40 J. Management Reports ................ .............................41 K. Enrollment Reports ... ............................... ....... 41 -iii- L. Monitoring Reports ................. .............................41 M. Program Evaluation Report ........ ............................... 42 N. Conflict of Interest ................ ............................... 43 VII. MEDIATION OF DISPUTES ............ ............................... 44 VIII. COORDINATED PLANNING ............ ............................... 45 A. The Coordination of Planning and Sharing of Information ............. 45 B. Population Projections ............. ............................... 46 C. Local Government Data Collection .. ............................... 47 D. School District Data Publication ..... ............................... 48 E. Multiplier Publication ............. ............................... 48 F. Proposals for Development, Redevelopment and Infrastructure required to Support Public School Facilities ..... ............................... 48 G. School Siting ....................... .............................49 H. School District Review of Future Land Use Element Plan Amendments ... 54 IX. SPECIAL PROVISIONS ................ ............................... 55 A. School District Requirements ....... ............................... 55 B. Land Use Authority ................. .............................56 C. Specific Performance .............. ............................... 57 X. ACTS OF GOD AND OTHER EXIGENT CIRCUMSTANCES BEYOND THE CONTROL OF THE SCHOOL BOARD ... ............................... 57 X. STANDING AND THIRD PARTY BENEFICIARY RIGHTS ................ 58 XI. AMENDMENT, WITHDRAWAL AND TERMINATION .................... 58 -iv- A. Amending the Agreement ............ .............................58 B. Withdrawal from Agreement ....... ............................... 58 C. Additional Participants ........... ............................... 59 D. Termination of Agreement ........ ............................... 59 XIII. TERM OF THE AGREEMENT .......... ............................... 59 XIV. INDEMNIFICATION OF PARTIES ...... ............................... 59 A. Hold Harmless ..................... .............................59 B. Third Party Claims ............... ............................... 60 XV. MULTIPLE ORIGINALS ............... ............................... 60 XVI. EFFECTIVE DATE OF AGREEMENT ... ......................:........ 61 A. Effective Immediately ............ ............................... 61 B. Nullification of Agreement ......... ............................... 61 -V- EXHIBITS EXHIBIT A - Comprehensive Plan Amendment Coordinated Review Interlocal Agreement, October, 1993 EXHIBIT B - Implementing Ordinance Elements EXHIBIT C - Participation Agreement EX MIT D - Student Generation Multiplier Table EX =IT E - Projected Units Table HMATA\ wP511 DOC" NCRNCMECT tONUNTERLOCULAS\AMD606C.WPD.71 pp -vi- R2000 0808,um_6z6w PALM BEACH COUNTY INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT with TR MUNICIPALITIES OF PALM BEACH COUNTY and THE SCHOOL DISTRICT OF PAT -M BEACH COUNTY To Establish PUBLIC SCHOOL CONCURRENCY An Interlocal Agreement between PALM BEACH COUNTY (hereafter referred to as the - COUNTY -), operating through its BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS; those mumcxpalities who nave executed this Agreement (hereafter referred to sinvly as "MUNICIPALITY" or collectively as "MUNICIPALITIES "); and The SCHOOL DISTRICT OF PALM BEACH COUNTY (hereafter refereed to as the "SCHOOL DISTRICT"), operating through the SCHOOL BOARD OF PALM BEACH COUNTY (hereafter referred to as the "SCHOOL BOARD "). WHEREAS, Section 163.0 1, Florida Statutes, enables local governments to cooperate with other local governments and public agencies, including school districts, to provide services and facilities on a basis of mutual advantage, and to enter into an Intertocal Agreement; and WHEREAS, the COUNTY, the MUNICIPALITIES and the SCHOOL DISTRICT have determined that the safe convenient, orderly and adequate provision of public school facilities is essential to the health, safety, and general welfare of the citizens of Palm Beach County; and Page, I�of 71 WHEREAS, in order to provide adequate public school facilities in a timely manner and at appropriate locations, the COUNTY, the MUNICIPALITIES and SCHOOL DISTRICT have further determined that it is necessary and appropriate for the entities to cooperate with each other to eliminate the current deficit of permanent student stations, and to provide capacity for projected new growth; and WHEREAS, the COUNTY, the MUNICIPALITIES, and the SCHOOL DISTRICT rewani7n that adequate revenue sources must be available to provide for the needed increase in permanent student stations; and WHEREAS, the Local Government Comprehensive Planning and Land Development Regulation Act requires the COUNTY and the MUNICIPALTIIES to adopt comprehensive plans to guide and control future development; and WHEREAS, Article IX, Sections i and 4 of the Florida Constitution require a uniform system of_fiee public schools on a county -wide basis, and provide that each county shall constitute a SCHOOL DISTRICT subject to supervision by the State Board of Education as provided by general law; and WHEREAS, Sections 235.193 and 235.194, Florida Statutes, require the coordination of planning between school districts and local governments to ensure that the plans for the construction and opening of public educational facilities are coordinated in time and place with plant for residential development; and Page 2fof;,71 ;:� WHEREAS, Section 235.193, Florida Statutes, requires the general location of educational facilities to be consistent with the COUNTY'S and the MUNICIPALITIES' Comprehensive Plans; and WHEREAS, Section 235.193, Florida Statutes, requires the SCHOOL DISTRICT to submit plans for public educational facilities to the COUNTY and the MUNICIPALTTIES and requires each local jurisdiction to determine the consistency of the plans with the effective Comprehensive Plan and applicable land development regulations; and WHEREAS, Section 163.3177(6)(h), Florida Statutes, requires the COUNTY and the MUNICIPALITIES to coordinate the adopted local comprehensive plan-, with each other and the plans of the SCHOOL DISTRICT; and WHEREAS, Section 163.3180(13), Florida Statutes, authorizes the COUNTY and the MUNICIPALITIES to adopt a school concutrency program; and WHEREAS, Section 1633180(13)(g), Florida Statutes, requires that prior to establish_ng•a school concurrency program, the COUN'T'Y and the MUNICIPALITIES and the SCHOOL BOARD adopt an interlocal agreement (hereafter referred to as the "AGREEMENT) for school eoncurrency to satisfy Section163.3180 (12)(g) 1, Florida Statutes, which will: establish a process by which they shall agree and base their plans on consistent population projections; coordinate and share information relating to cidstinga and planned public school facilities, projections and proposals for development, and in5raz-uucture required for public school facilities; establish a planning process that encourages the location of public schools proximate to urban residential areas and the Page 3 of ;7i - , - collocation of schools with other public facilities to the extent possible; jointly establish level of service standards for public schools; establish a process for the preparation, amendment and joint approval of a financially feasible public school capital facilities program; define the geographic application of ooncurrency; establish criteria and standards for the establishment and modification of school concurrency service areas and incorporate the criteria and standards into the COUNTY and MUNICIPALITIES co-mpr iensive plans; establish a uniform district wide procedure for implementing the school concurrency program that provides for the evaluation of development applications for compliance with school concurrency requirements; provide an oppoitunity for the SCHOOL DISTRICT to review and comment on the effect of comprehensive plan amendments and r+ezonings on the public school facilities plan; and provide for the monitorin4 and evaluation of the concurrency program. The AGREEMENT shall also provide procedures for its amendment, suspension, and termination. WHEREAS, the COUNTY, the MUNICIPALITIES and the SCHOOL DISTRICT pursuant to their various statutory responsibilities and powers, desire to establish joint procedures to establish and implement school concurrency; and WHEREAS, the COUNTY and MUNICIPALITIES, also known as the LOCAL GOVERNMENTS, are entering into this AGREEMENT in reliance on the SCHOOL BOARD'S commitment to prepare, adopt and implement a financially feasible capital facilities program that will result in all schools of each type in each CSA and each individual school operating at the adopted level of service consistent with the timing specified in the SCHOOL DISINICT's Five- Page -4 of!, .71 r: • w+ year Capital Facilities Plan, and the SCHOOL BOARD'S further commitment to update and adopt the plan yearly to add enough capacity in the new fifth year to address projected growth and to adjust the plan in order to maintain the adopted level of service and to attmin maximum utilization of school capacity pursuant to Section 1633180 (13xc)2., Florida Statutes; and WHEREAS, the SCHOOL DISTRICT operating through the SCHOOL BOARD, is entering into this AGREENffNT in reliance on the COUNTY'S and MUNICIPALITIES' commitment to adopt amendments to their local comprehensive plans to impose school concurrency as provided in Section 163.3180 (13), Florida Statutes; and NOW, THEREFORE, in order to accomplish these goals and purposes, and in consideration of the mutual obligations and benefits the COUNTY, the MUNICIPALITIES and the SCHOOL DISTRICT 0==nafler referred to collectively as "PARTIES" hereby enter into this AGREEMENT. I. DEFINITIONS Capacity Projects — New school construction or any project that adds necessary improvements to accommodate additional permanent student stations or core facilities needed for the educational program of each type of school based on the requirements of State Requirements for Educational Facilities (SREF). Consistency - The condition of not beinv in conflict with and in furtherance of the goals, objectives and policies of the Comprehensive Plan Elements and this AGREEMENT. Page 5 of 71 : Concurrency Service Area (CSA) - The specific geographic unit within a SCHOOL DISTRICT in which school concurrency is applied and measured. Concurrency Service Area Level of Service Standards - The maximum acceptable percentage of school utilization as established in Section V. (C.2.) below determined by dividing the total mrmber of students for all schools of each type in each CSA by the total number of pe manent student stations for that type of school in each CSA. Core Facilities The media center, cafeteria, toilet facilities, and circulation space of an educational plant. Development Order - As defined in Section 163.3164(7), Florida Statutes. Educational Facilities - The buildings and equipment, structures, and special educational use areas that are built, installed, or established to serve educational purposes only. Financially Feasible Facilities Plan - A plan which demonstrates the ability to finance capital improvements from existing revenue sources and funding mechanisms to convect deficiencies and meet future needs based on achieving and maintaining the adopted Level of Service for each year of the five (5) year planning period for all schools of each type in each CSA and-each individual school, and for the long range planning period. Florida Inventory of School Houses (FISH) - The report of the capacity of existing facilities. The FISH capacity is the number of students that may be housed in a facility (school) at any given time based on using a percentage of the number of existing satisfactory student st—A- ons and a designated size for each program In Palm Beach County, permanent capacity does not include Page•6 of, 71.1•• the use of relocatables unless they meet the standards for long term use pursuant to Section 235.061, Florida Statutes. Inter Governmental Plan Amendment Review Committee (IPARC) - The interlocal corpmittee, established through the "Comprehensive Plan Amendment Coordinated Review h to docal Agreeument, " dated October 1. 1993, which coordinates comnrehensive plan amendment review. League of Cities - Palm Beach County League of Cities, Inc. A not-for-profit corporation established to promote and advance the collective interest of municipalities of Palm Beach County, Florida. - Level of Service (LOS) - The measure of the utilization, exprp�,ned as a percentage, which is the result of comparing the number of students with the satisfactory student stations (FISH capacity) at a given location or within a designated area (ie., a CSA), e.g., a facility with 1000 students and a FISH capacity of 970, has a LOS of 103 %. Also referred to as the utilization of -a facility. Local Governments - Palm Beach County and the MUNICIPALITIES. Maximum Utilization of Capacity - Utilization of facilities to ensure the adopted LOS for all schools of each type in each CSA and each individual school is not exceeded. Municipalities - All municipalities in Palm Beach County, except those that are exempt from participating in the school coneurrency program, pursuant to Section 163.3180, Florida Statutes. Page 7 of :71 Permanent Student Station -The floor area in a public school facility required to house a student in an instructional program. Proposed New Residential Development - Any application for residential development or amendment to a previously approved residential development that increases the number of housing units. Ibis shall include any =quest for any approval of the type that establishes-a density of development and which approves a Site Specific Development Order on a specific parcel of property. Required Modernizations - A comprehensive upgrnt in¢ of schools to `lice new'school standards. This reqtLzs a comprehensive evaluation of schools which are 35 years old or older for a determination of the need for rehabilitation, remodeling or replacement of the facility. Residential Development - Any development that is comprised in whole, or part, of dwelling units; for permanent human habitation. School Board - The governing body of the SCHOOL DISTRICT, a body corporate pursuant to Section 230.21, Florida Statutes. School District - The district for Palm Beach County created and existing pursuant to Section 4, Article IX of the State Constitution. School District Five -Year Capital Facilities Plan - The SCHOOL DISTRICT of Palm Beach County Five -Year Work Plan and Capital Budget as authorized by Section 235.185 Florida Page 8 of -71P,` School District of Palm Beach County Six Year Capital Improvement Schedule - A Table of expenditures and revenues detailing how the School District shall achieve and maintain the Level of Service for public school facilities. Site Specific Development Order - A Development Order issued by a Local Government which establishes the density, or maximum density, and which approves a specific plan of development on a lot or lots pursuant to an application by or on behalf of an owner or contract purchaser, or initiated by a Local Government. it may apply to a lot or lots under single ownership or a group of lots tmder separate ownership. It shall apply to all parcels or lots in theirentirety taken together of any subdivision. It includes site specific rezonings, special exceptions, conditional uses, special pemuts� master plan approval% site plan approvals. plat approvals, building permits, and any "Development of Regional jmact" as A-fined in Section 380.05, F.S. It may or may not authorize the actual commencement of development. Two (2) or more Development Orders which individually do not constitute a Site Specific Development Order shall be considered a Site Specific Development Order if when taken together they meet the definition of Site Specific Development Order. Type of School - Schools in the same categories of education, i.e. elementary, middle or high school. Page 9 of 7 1.. . II. SCHOOL CONCURRENCY OVERVIEW A. Agreement to Establish School Concurrency I.- The PARTIES desire to establish a public school concurrency system consistent with the requirements of Section 163.3180, Florida Statutes. 2. The PARTIES agree that the timely delivery of adequate public school facilities at the adopted level of service requires close coordinAfion among the PARTIES at both the land use planning and residential development permitting levels. Further, the PARTIES agree that - new school facilities should be planned for and provided in proximity to those areas planned for residential development or redevelopment_ Accordingly, to implement an effective school concurrency system that will ensure that the construction and opening of public educational facilities are coordinated in time and place with residential development concurrently with other necessary services, the PARTIES agree that the SCHOOL DISTRICT must be afforded the opportunity to review and provide timely findings and recommendations to the COUNTY and the MUNICIPALITIES on proposed amendments to their respective Comprehensive Plans and on all applications for development orders which will have an impact on school capacity and the SCHOOL DISTRICT's Five -Year Capital Facilities Plan. 3. The PARTIES agree that in order to provide future public school facilities in a timely manner at appropriate locations, residential development orders issued by the COUNTY and by each MUNICIPALITY shall be issued and conditioned upon the availability of public school facilities at the level of service specified in this AGREEMENT concurrent with dwImpact of such Page 10 of='71` "" development. A determination that school capacity is available before issuance of a development order, consistent with the level of service standard, hereafter referred to as "concuirency ", shall be based upon the adoption of a Public School Facilities Element into the COUNTY'S and MUNICIPALITIES' comprehensive plans that is consistent with the SCHOOL DISTRICT's Five - Year Capital Facilities Plan and which shall be implemented by an implementing ordinance adopted by each local government party consistent with Section V. E. below. B. Required Concurrency Elements Comprehensive Plan Amendments - Within one year of this agreement becoming effective, the LOCAL GOVERNMENTS agree to adopt the following comprehensive plan amendments which shall be consistent with each other as required in Section 163.3180, Florida Statutes: 1. Amend its comprehensive plan to add a Public Schools Facilities Element (PSFE) consistent with the requirements of Section 163.3180, Florida Statutes, and this AGREEMENT. 2. Amend its Intergovernmental Coordination Element as required by Section 163.3177(6)(h) I - and 2., Florida Statutes, and this AGREEMENT. 3. Incorporate "The SCHOOL DISTRICT of Palm Beach County Six Year Capital Improvement Schedule" which is in the SCHOOL DISTRICTS Five -Year Capital Facilities Plan into its adopted Capital Improvement Element and update that Schedule consistent with the updated and adopted SCHOOL DISTRICT's Five -Year Capital Facilities Plan in order to set forth Paget l of 71 a financially feasible public school capital facilities plan, consistent with the adopted Level of Service Standards for public schools. C. Specific Responsibilities of the Parties 1. When the comprehensive plan amendments adopted in accordance with Section H.B become effective, the COUNTY AND MUNICIPALITIES agree to undertake the following activities: (a) Unless electing to be by the COUNTY implementing ordinance, each MUNICIPALITY shall adopt an implementing ordinance consistent with the time frame in Section V.E. 1. and the requirements of the basic framework contained in Exhibit B, the requirements of this AGREEMENT, and the LOCAL GOVERNMENT comprehensive plan. (b) Once the School Concurrency Program commences, not issue any site specific development orders for new residential units until the SCHOOL DISTRICT has reported that there is.school capacity available to serve the development being approved consistent with the requirements of this AGREEMENT. (c) Coordinate planning with the SCHOOL DISTRICT regarding population projections, school siting, projections of development and redevelopment for the coming year, inh a ucture required to support public school facilities, and amendments to future land use plan elements consistent with the requirements of this AGREEMENT. 2. By entering into this Interlocal AGREEMENT, the SCHOOL DISTRICT agrees to undertake the following activities: . Page 12 of 71 . (a) Prepare and update yearly a financially feasible Five -Year Capital Facilities Plan containin¢ enough capacity each year to meet projected growth in demand for student stations so that all schools of each type in each Concurrence► Service Area and each individual school does not exceed the adopted level of service for each year, consistent with the requirements of this P�i� (b) Institute program and/or boundary adjustments as necessary to rnaximim utilization of capacity in order to ensure that all schools of each type in each Concurrency Service Area and each individual school operate at the adopted level of service, consistent with the requirements of this AGREEMENT. (c) implement the SCHOOL DISTRICT's Five -Year Capital Facilities Plan by constructing the capacity enhancing and modernization projects in that program consistent with the timing specified in the program. (d) Provide the COUNTY and MUNICIPALITIES with the required data and analysis updated annually to support the comprehensive plan elements and any amendments relating to school concurrency. (e) Adopt a ten and twenty year work program consistent with the requirements of this AGREEMENT. (f) Maintain and publish data required in Section VIII for the review of proposed new residential development. Page 13 of 71 (g) Review applications for proposed new residential developments for compliance with concurrency standards, consistent with the requirements of this AGREEMENT. AGREEMENT- (h) Review mitigation proposals consistent with the requirements of this (i) Prepare reports on enrollment and capacity, consistent with the requirements of this AGREE F ITT. (j) Provide secretarial staff support for meeting of the Technical Advisory Group and all other District generated reports established by th i s AGREEMENT. (k) Coordinate planning with the COUNTY and MUNICIPALITIES regarding population projections, school siting, projections of development and redevelopment for the coming year, infmstiucwr+e required to support public school facilities, and amendments to future land use plan elements consistent with the requirements of this AGREEMENT. M. CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN A. School District's Five -Year Capital Facilities Plan 1. On or before September 15 of each year, the SCHOOL BOARD shall adopt; and update the SCHOOL DISTRICT's Five -Year Capital Facilities Plan for public schools in Palle Beach County. Page -14 of 7V_.. . 2. The SCHOOL DISTRICT's Five -Year Capital Facilities Plan shall specify all new construction, remodeling or renovation projects which will add permanent FISH capacity or modernize existing facilities. 3. The SCHOOL DISTRICT Five -Year Capital Facilities Plan shall constitute a financially feasible program of school construction for a five (5) year period which adds sufficient FISH capacity to achieve and maintain the adopted LOS yearly for all schools of each type in each concurreacy service area and each individ"M school based on projected increases in enrollment; which provides for required moderri7n*+on; and which satisfies the SCHOOL VSTRICT's constitutional obligation to provide a uniform system of free public schools on a county-wide basis. 4. The SCHOOL DISTRICT's Five -Year Capital Facilities Plan and each annual up,A*� shall include a description of each school project, the amount of money to be spent in each fiscal year for the planing, preparation, land acquisition, and actual construction and renovation of each school project which adds FISH capacity or modernizes existing facilities; the amount of FISH capacity added, if any; and a generalized location map for schools depicted in the SCHOOL DISTRICT's Five -Year Capital Facilities Plan which will be built within each CSA consistent with the SCHOOL DISTRICT's current Educational Plant Survey and with the Future Land Use Elements of each MUNICIPALITY'S Comprehensive Plan and the COUNTY'S Comprehensive Plan. 5. Upon achieving the adopted Level of Service, the SCHOOL DISTRICT shall maintain the adopted Level of Service standards and ensure that school capacity shall be utilized to the maximum extent possible District -wide. When preparing the SCHOOL DISTRICT's Five -Year Page 15 of 71 >, Capital Facilities Plan, the SCHOOL DISTRICT shall annually institute necessary program and/or boundary adjustments or provide additional capacity to ensure that all schools of each type in each CSA and each individual school will operate at the adopted level of service (LOS) throughout the Five year period. 6. The SCHOOL DISTRICT's Fivo -Year Capital Facilities Plan and each annual update shall identify the projected enrol Iment, amity and u+lli7nfion percentage of all schools of each type for each CSA and each individual school for each year of the Plan. The SCHOOL DISTRICT shall annually update the CSA Tables and "The SCHOOL DISTRICT df Palm Beach County Six Year Capital improvement Schedule" when updating the SCHOOL DISTRICT's Five- Year Capital Facilities Plan. 7. The SCHOOL DISTRICT shall initiate the necessary program and/or boundary adjubunents to reflect the new capacity for the schools that are scheduled to be constructed and opened for each year of the SCHOOL DISTRICT's Five -Year Capital Facilities Plan. These adjustments shall be consistent with the data and analysis provided in the CSA Tables of the SCHOOL DISTRICTS Five -Year Capital Facilities Plan. B. Ten and Twenty Year Work Program. In addition to the adopted SCHOOL DISTRICT's Five -Year Capital Facilities Plan, the SCHOOL DISTRICT shall annually adopt a ten year and a twenty year work plan based upon enrollment projections and facility needs for the ten year and twenty year period. It is recognised Page ,16166 71 -' that the projections in the ten and twenty year time frames are tentative and should be used only for general planning purposes. C. Transmittal. The SCHOOL DISTRICT shall transmit copies of the proposed SCHOOL DISTRICT Five -Year Capital Facilities Plan along with data and analysis necessary to demonstrate the financial feasibility of the Program, to the Technical Advisory Group (TAG), die NIUI`IICIPA IES and COUNTY on or before May 31 of each year commencing after the effective date of this AGREEMENT. D. TAG Review 1. By June 30 of each year, the Technical Advisory Group (TAG) established in Section VI of this agreement shall review the proposed SCHOOL DISTRICT Five -Year Capital Facilities Program and report to the SCHOOL BOARD, the COUNTY, and the MUNICIPALITIES on whether or not the proposed SCHOOL DISTRICT's Five -Year Capital Facilities Plan maintains . , the adopted Level of Service by adding enough projects to increase the FISH capacity to eliminate any permanent student station shortfalls; by including required moderpi "lion of existing facilities; and by providing permanent student stations for the projected growth in enrollment over each of the five (5) years covered by the Plan_ Page 17 of : 71 E. Final Adoption. Unless it is delayed by mediation or a lawful challenge, the SCHOOL BOARD shall adopt the SCHOOL DISTRICT's Five -Year Capital Facilities Plan and it shall become effective no later than September 15th of each year. F. Material Amendment to the School Distrieft Five -Year Capital'Facilities Plan. I. The SCHOOL BOARD than not amend the SCHOOL DISTRICT Capital Facilities Program so as to modify, delay or delete any project in the first three (3) years of the Program unless the SCHOOL BOARD determines by written findings, with the concurrence of at least five Board members: (a) That the modification, delay or deletion of a project is required in order to meet the SCHOOL DISTRICT's constitutional obligation to provide a county -wide uniform system of fiee public schools or other legal obligations imposed by state or federal law, or (b) That the modification, delay or deletion of a project is occasioned by unanticipated change in population projections or growth patterns or is required in order to provide needed opacity in a location that has a current greater need than the originally planned location and does not cause the adopted LOS to be exceeded in the CSA from which the originally planned project is modified, delayed or deleted. G. Amend Comprehensive Plan Once the SCHOOL DISnUCT's Five -Year Capital Facilities Plan, the annual update, or any material amendment has been adopted by the SCHOOL BOARD, the COUNTY and Page -18 of 7 h, a.F ,;_ . MUNICIPALITIES shall amend "The SCHOOL DISTRICT of Palm Beach County Six Year Capital Improvement Schedule" of the Capital Improvement Element of their Comprehensive Plans to include-the changes in their next round of amendments. IV. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENTS A. Process for Development and Adoption of Capital Improvements Element 1 _ The SCHOOL- DISTRICT shall prepare and the COUNTY and the MUNICIPALITIES shall adopt into the Capital Improvements Element of their comprehensive plan "The SCHOOL DISTRICT of Palm Beach County Six Year Capital Improvement Schedule"of the SCHOOL DISTRIC I"s Five -Year Capital Facilities Plan set forth in Section III, in this AGREEMENT. 2. The COUNTY and MUNIICIPALITIES, by adopting "The SCHOOL DISTRICT of Palm Beach County Six Year Capital Improvement Schedule" in the Capital Improvements Element of the LOCAL GOVERNMENT's Comprehensive Plan, shall have no obligation nor responsibility for funding the SCHOOL DISTRICT's Five -Year Capital Facilities Plan. 3. The procedures for the annual update and amendment of the local government's public school capital facilities program in its Capital Improvements Element is set forth in Section III of this AGREEMENT. Page 19 of 71l, "' B. Process for Development, Adoption and Amendment of the Public School Facilities Element (PSFE). 1 _ The COUNTY and MUNICIPA1 ITTES shall adopt a Public School Facilities Element which is consistent with this AGREEMENT and Rule 9J- 5.025, F.A.C. The COUNTY and WMCIPALTITFS shall notify TAG when thic element is adopted and when the element becomes effective. 2_ In the event it becomes necessary to amend the PSFE, prior to transmitting the amendment to the Department of Community Affairs pursuant to Section 1633184, Florida Statutes, the local government wishing to initiate an amendment shall request review through the Intergovenimental Plan Amendment Review Committee (IPARQ in accordance with the "Comprehensive Plan Amendment CoordinntAd Review" Interlocal Agreement dated October 1, 1993, attached as Exhibit A to this AGREEMENT. The IPARC Clearin¢ house shall be responsible for distribtmng the amendment to all PARTIES to this AGREEMENT that are participants in the Comprehensive Plan Amendment Coordinated Review Interlocel Agreement for review and Comment, (a) If all local governments agree to the amendment, they shall adopt the amendment in accordance with the statutory procedures for amending comprehensive plans. (b ) If any local government does not agree to the amendment, and the issues cannot be resolved between or among the PARTIES, the issue shall be referred to mediation Page 20nof 71 +, in accordance with Section VII of this agreement. In such a case, the PARTIES, agree not to adopt the amendment until the mediation process is completed. 3. Any local issues not specifically required by Statute or Rule in the Public School Facilities Element may be included or modified in the Local Government Public School Facilities Element by following the normal Comprehensive Plan amendment pry. C. Intergovernmental Coordination Element The process for the development, adoption, and amendment of the Intergovernmental Coordination Element shall be that set forth in Section 163.3184, Florida Statutes. V. SCHOOL CONCURRENCY PROGRAM A. Commencement of School Concurrency Program The School Concunency Program described in this Article shall commence ninety (90) days after the effective date of the last required LOCAL GOVERMvIENT comprehensive plan elements required for school concurrency. B. Concurrency Service Areas. 1. The PARTIES hereby -agree that School Concurrency shall be measured and applied on the basis of twenty -one (21) Concurrency Service Areas (CSR's) as described in the Public School Facilities Element. Page 21 ,of = 71 2. The COUNTY and MUMCIPALMES agree to incorporate and adopt these CSA's and the standards for the modification of the CSA's as established below into the local government comprehensive plans. 3. Any PARTY may propose a change to the CSA boundaries. Prior to adopting any change, the SCHOOL DISTRICT_verify as a result of the change first: (a) Adopted level of service standards will be achieved and maintained for each year of the five year planning mod; and (b) The utilization of school capacity is rnaximi7nd to the greatest extent possible. taking into account transportation costs, court approved desegregation plans and other relevant factors. 4. The PARTIES shall observe the following process for modifying CSA's. (a) At such time as the SCHOOL DISTRICT determines that the change is appropriate considering the above standards, they shall transmit the proposed CSA's and data and analysis,to support the changes to the MUNICIPALITIES, to the COUNTY and to TAG. (b) COUNTY, MUNICIPALITIES and TAG shall review the proposed amendment and send their comments to the SCHOOL BOARD within 60 days of receipt. (c) In the event there is no objection, the local governments shall amend their plans to reflect the changes to the CSA boundaries in their next amendment round. (d) The change to the CSA boundary shall become effective on the effective date of the last local government plan amendment adopting the change. Page 22-of X 71;; : - C. Level of Service (LOS) To ensure the capacity of schools is sufficient to support student growth at the adopted level of service for each year of the five year planning period and through the long term planning period, for each CSA, the PARTIES hereby establish the LOS as set forth below. The actual LOS (utilization) for all schools of each type in each CSA and each individual school shall be established each year by the first student count of the second semester. 1. Tiered Levels of Service shall be in force pursuant to the Tiered Level of Service Table in the Public School Facilities Element until August 1, 2004. Individual schools of each type may exceed the Tiered LOS during the period in which Tiered LOS are in effect, provided that the CWs Tiered LOS is not exceeded. However, each individual school's LOS which exceeds the Tiered LOS, during the time that the Tiered LOS is in effect, shall not exceed the utilization standards for that school type as shown in the Maximum Utilization Table of the Public School Facilities Element. During the time that the Tiered Level of Service Standard is in effect, the SCHOOL DISTRICT shall initiate necessary program and /or boundary adjustments so that the tiered LOS is not exceeded in each CSA. 2. After August 1, 2004, the following level of service (LOS) standards shalt be established for all schools of each type within each CSA and each individual school: (a) 110 percent of capacity (utilizatioa) as determined by the Florida Inventory'of School Houses (FISH); or Page. 23 of 71 (b) Up to 120 percent of FISH capacity (utilization/LOS) (test two), for individual schools subject to the results of School Capacity Study (SCS) undertaken by TAG, in consultation with all LOCAL GOVERNMENTS having jurisdiction within the CSA and the SCHOOL DISTRICT, to determine if a particular school can operate in excess of 110% capacity. The SCS shall be required if a school in the fast student count of the second semester reaches 108 percent or above of FISH capacity, once the Level of Service in V. B2. above is achieved. 3. The School Capacity Study (SCS) shA1 determine if the growth rate within each CSA, causing a particular school to exceed 110 percent of capacity, is tsmnorary nr reflects an ongoing Mend affecting the LOS for the Five year planning period. At a minimum, the study shall consider. redevelopment; and (a) Demographics in the school's CSA; and (b) Student population trends; and (c) • Real estate trends, e.g. existing redevelopment and new (d) Teacher /student ratios; and (e) Core facility capacity. If the SCS concludes that the school can operate within the FISH guidelines and not exceed 1200/a LOS (utili"tion), then that school shall be considered to be operating within the adopted LOS and the CSA Level of Service shall be amended and the local government comprehensive plans shall be amended in the next round of amendments to reflect this additional capacity. Page 24 of --71 _<.. 4. Any PARTY to this AGREEMENT may request a School Capacity Study (SCS) based on the criteria provided in paragraph 3. above. 5. Any PARTY to this AGREFIAE TT may propose to the TAG a modification of the adopted LOS standard at any time. Following a review and recomnmdadon by TAG and concurrence by at least 51% of the LOCAL GOVERNM RR TS to this AGREEMENT and the SCHOOL BOARD, the adopted LOS will be modified by addendum to this AGREEMENT, and each LOCAL GOVERNMENT shall amend its comprehensive plan to reflect this new LOS in the next round of amendments. D. Exemptions 1. Single family lots of record, existing as such at the time School Concurrency implementing ordinance is adopted, shall be exempt from School Concmrrmicy requirements. 2. Any residential development or any other development with a residential component that received final approval of a Site Specific Development Order prior to the commencement date of school concurrency or is exempt from conewmncy under a local government's concurrency regulations is considered vested for that component which was previously approved and shall not be considered as proposed new residential development for purposes of school concurrency. 3. Any new Residential Development filet has filed a complete application for a site specific development order or any amendment -to any previously approved site specific'- Page 256f -71 development order pending prior to the commencement date of the School Concurrency Program shall be exempt from the School Concurrency Requirements. 4. Any amendment to any previously approved residential development which does not increase the density is exempt from school concurrency. 5. Any previously approved residential development or any other previously approved development with a residential component located within any existing `Transportation Concurrency Exception Area,' as defined in Section 163.3180(5), Florida Statutes, is exempt from school concurrency. E. Local Concurrency Implementing Ordinance 1. Within ninety (90) days after the effective date of the last required LOCAL GOVERNMENT'S adoption of the Comprehensive Plan Elements addressing school Concurrency, each local government shall adopt an ordinance regularino the issuance of development orders based on the availability of public schools at the required Level of Service. This ordinance shall be consistent With the components outlined in Exhibit B and with the provisions of this AGREEME U. 2. The COUNTY shall adopt an ordinance which provides procedures for review of municipal development orders and COUNTY unincorporated development orders. (a) In the event that any participating MUNICIPALITY does not comply with E.1. above by adopting an ordinance consistent with Exhibit B and this AGREEMENT within ninety (90) days of the effective date of the Comprehensive Plan Elements, that government shall Page 26-of..:71, ,may ,. � be deemed to have "opted in" to the COUNTY ordinance in E.2. above and agrees to be bound by the terms and provisions therein until it adopts its own ordinance. (b) At any time any LOCAL GOVERNMENT may opt out of the COUNTY's implementing ordinance through implementing its own ordinance consistent with the requirements of Exhibit B. F. School District Review of New Residential Development Proposals The SCHOOL DISTRICT agrees to review and make school concurrency determinations, for a proposed residential development for which an application for adevelopment order is submitted. The review and detennination are a four -part process which: a) accepts the residential development application; b) calculates the development's projected students; c) compares the development's students to projected students within the Five -Year Capital Facilities Plan for Level of Service; and c) issues a determination letter. The complete Development Review Process shall be as follows: 1. Intake Application - Requirements for Proposed Residential Development: a) The request for a school concurrency determination for a proposed residential development shall be submitted by either the applicant or the local government, whichever is specified in the local government's concurrency ordinance. b) The applicant of the proposed development shall provide the following: location, the build out time frame, and the number, type and size of all the residential units anticipated to be occupied each calendar year. Page 27 of 71 _: C) The SCHOOL DISTRICT agrees to log in by date and time stamp every completed application and agrees that each application shall be processed in the order they are received. d) The SCHOOL DISTRICT agrees that it shall review every application and issue its determination to the applicant within fifteen (15) working days of receipt of the application. e) The SCHOOL DISTRICT may charge ge the applicant a non - refundable application fee payable to the SCHOOL DISTRICT to meet the cost of review. 2. Calculate Students - Conversion of Proposed Residential Units to Students: To determine the proposed development's projected students, the proposed development's projected number and type of residential units for each year shall be converted into projected students for all schools of each type within the specific CSA using the SCHOOL DISTRICT's St -font Generation Multiplier as shown in EXHIBIT D of the this AGREEMENT. 3. Determine Utilization - Analysis of Enrollment to Capacity for Five years: The SCHOOL DISTRICT shall create a Development Review Table (DM (shown below) for each CSA, and will use the DRT to compare the projected students from proposed residential developments to the CSA's plarumed growth, enrollment, capacity and utilization (LOS) over the Five year period. The Development Review Table produces a calculation of the Level of Service for each school type in each CSA. The Figures in the Development Review Table are explained below. Page -28: of Figures (1), (2) and (3) are numbers obtained from the Concurrency Service Area Tables (CSA) as shown in the School District Five -Year Capital Facilities Plan. The Figures show the CSA's projected 1) enrollment, 2) capacity and 3) utilization. Figure (4) is the projected number of new residential units in each CSA obtained from the annual dis; I ggi ation of residential units county wide, based on historic absorption rates. ?his is established from the Palm Beach County Projected Units Table, as shown in Exhibit E of this AGREEMENT as amended annually. Figure (5) is the number of students expected from projected new units (Fig.4) multiplied by the student generation multiplier based upon a three bedroom, two -bath house. The multiplier used is the SCHOOL DISTRICT'S Strident Generation MtdrVier Table - shown in Exhibit D of this AGREEMENT. Figure (6) is a list of the new residential developments in the order that each application is received within the CSA. Figure (7) is a list of the number of annual units expected from each residential development. Figure (8) is the list of projected students from new residential development, calculated by type of unit and by school level found in the SCHOOL DISTRICT's Student Generation Multiplier Table shown in Exhibit D of this AGREEMENT. Figure (9) is the total number of students per school type from the proposed residential developments. Page 29 of X71 -- Figure (10) is the number of students which is the difference between the total students from new developments (Fig.9) subtracted from the expected projected students from new units (Fig-5). If the number is positive, the level of service (Fig.3) does not change. Figure (11).is the revised student enrollment by school type determined by the difference in (Fig.Io) if it is a iive number, that number of students shall be added to the projected student enrollment (Fig -1). Figure (12) represents the Level of Service calculated and revised, if needed. Figure (13) represents the development from adjacent an CSA (if required), recorded in the order that each application is received. Insert "Development Review Table" See page 30a Attached Page 30 of ' -71,, ;� YEAR Existing Prol. ki I A I :)ment Review Table Example For A Single Ycar I—M z v t"U_ t - uvin °- rI-? u!t-� e_ 0- ° t - 0 °` z U cn d N U -4, 2.849 2 3,195 3 89 %' 4 686 5 117 C B m C 7 CL E 5 m m j Adjacent 104 p CSA m 123 Z 11 New LOS 2,849 12 Remaining Student Availability Existing 1 } 1.185 2 1.188'3 A c B ! j E 6 C 7 ! o 1 am . E ] N Adjacent - p CSA 3 13 F m Z 11 - i New LOS 1,187 12' Remaining Student Availability Existing Pcoj. 1 4.0341 A c t3 E 6 C 7 C o 6 0 e� L E Cd Adjacent I p CSA 13'0- F m Z 11 New LOS 4,034 12 -' Remaining Student Availability *VDATAANPSSVOC CONCCRMCVISECTiONnNTERLOGOEvREv3C '3oa .f7t 22SF - 4� 17 193SF 33 200SF 34 65SF 1 11 9OMF 5 5 s 89% 1 104 " 4. The Three Year Rule If the level of service is exceeded, and new capacity in the CSA will be in place or under actual construction in the first three years of the School District's Five -Year Capital Facilities Program, the new capacity will be added to the capacity shown in Figure 2 and the level of service will be recalculated. 5. Adjacent CSA Capacity (a) Ifthe projected student growth from the residential development causes the adopted LOS to be exceeded in the particular CSA and that type of school and capacity exists in one or more contiguous CSA's, the development shall receive a letter of determination of concurrency. In conducting the review, the SCHOOL DISTRICT shall first use the adjacent CSA with the most available capacity to evaluate projected enrollment, and if necessary shall continue to the CSA with the next most available capacity until all adjacent CSAs have been evaluated or the letter of determination of concurrency is issued. (b) If a proposed new development in a CSA which has been used to provide capacity for a development in an adjacent CSA causes the LOS to be- exceeded, the development in the CSA which used the adjacent CSA's capacity will be re- evaluated by using the adjacent CSA with the next highest capacity until capacity has been identified or all adjacent CSAs have been evaluated. If there is capacity in an adjacent CSA,-projected enrollment will be moved from the originally used CSA to the adjacent CSA with the next highest available capacity. -Pages x ='of. :aLz._ -- (c) Example of Adjacent CSA Use CSA 18 1 CSA 17 Most capacity CSA 19 No capacity. CSA 20 F-�Rdmost capacity IF CSA 21 (1) The development in CSA 20 was evaluated using the adjacent CSA with the most capacity for high school students (CSA 19). (2) Later, a new development proposal in CSA 19 is submitted for evaluation and there is not enough high school capacity in CSA 19, or adjacent CSA's 17 and 18. (3) The previously approved development in CSA 20 will be re- evaluated based on capacity in CSA 21. If the capacity exists in adjacent CSA 21 (2nd highest capacity), the projected enrollment from the previous development in CSA 20 will be moved from CSA 19 and added to CSA 21. (4) The development in CSA 19 will be re- evaluated based on the new data for that CSA_ 6. Issue Letter of Determination of Concurrency Letter of Determination of Concurrency shall be issued if the impacts of the proposed development's student growth does not cause the adopted Level of Service (or Tiered LOS) to be exceeded, the Letter of Determination of Concurrency shall indicate the development to be in Page 32 of �,71 compliance. If the development is not in compliance, the Letter of Determination of Concurrency shall detail why the development is not in compliance and shall offer the applicant the opportunity to enter into the 90 day negotiation period described below. 7. Mitigation (a) Mitigation shall be allowed for those residential development proposals that the SCHOOL DISTRICT determines cannot meet adopted level of service standards. The applicant shall be allowed to enter a ninety (90) day negotiation period with the SCHOOL DISTRICT in an effort to mitigate the impact from the development Prior to the approval of the mitigation plan, the local government shall have the opportunity to review the mitigation options which shall be limited to those the SCHOOL DISTRICT recognizes and assumes the responsibility to operate, with the exception of charter and private schools, and which will maintain the adopted level of service standards for the first Five years from receipt of the school eoncurrency Determination Letter. Mitigation = options must consider the SCHOOL DISTRICT's educational delivery methods and requirements, and the State Requirements for Educational Facilities (S.R.E.F.) and may include: learning facility; and/or or or (1) Donation of buildings for use as a .primary or alternative (2) Renovation of existing buildings for use as teaming facilities; (3) Construction of permanent student stations or core capacity:, Page 33 of X71 (4) For schools contained in the adopted SCHOOL DISTRICT's Five -Year Capital Facilities Plan only, upon agreement with the SCHOOL BOARD, the developer may build the school in advance of the time set forth in the SCHOOL DISTRICT's Five -Year Capital Facilities Plan. The SCHOOL BOARD shall enter into an ngreement to reimburse developer at such time as the school would have been funded in the SCHOOL DIS1WGrs Five -Year Capital Facilities Plan; or (5) Charter School; or (6) Private School; or (7) For mitigation measures 1,2,3 and 4 above, the developers shall receive impact fee credit (8) Upon conclusion of the 90 day period, a second Letter of Determination of Concurrency shall be issued. If mitigation is agreed to, the new Letter of Detennina±±on of Concurrency shall find the development is in compliance and shall be conditioned on those mitigation measures agreed to by the developer and the School Board. The mitigation measures shall be memorialized in an agreement between the School District and the Developer that specifically details mitigation provisions to be paid for by the developer and the relevant terms and conditions. If mitigation is not agreed to, the new Letter of Determination shall detail why any mitigation proposals were rejected and detail why the development is not in compliance. Page 34 of 71 G. Tez-au of School Concurrency A Letter of Deter minntion for School Concurrency issued by the SCHOOL DISTRICT shall be valid for one year from the date of issuance. Once the Local Government Site Specific Development Order is issued, the eoncumency determination shall run with the Development Order. H. Suspension of Concurrency 1. School concurrency shall be suspended in all CSA's upon the occurrence and for the duration of the following conditions: (a) The SCHOOL DISTRICT gives written notice to the COUNTY and the WMCIPALTITES of the occ cream of an "Act of God" as provided in this AGREEMENT; or (b) The SCHOOL BOARD does not adopt an update to its SCHOOL DISMCT's Five -Year Capital Facilities Plan by September 15th of each year consistent with the requirements of this AGREEM]SNT; or (c) The SCHOOL DISTRICT's adopted update to its Capital Facilities Program Plan does not add enough FISH capacity to meet projected growth in demand for permanent student stations at the adopted level of service for all schools of each type for each CSA and each individual school as determined by TAG based on data provided by the SCHOOL DISTRICT; or (d) The SCHOOL DISTRICT's Five -Year Capital Facilities Plan is determined to be financially infeasible based on an evab,* on of all funds available to the SCHOOL DISTRICT for capital improvements as determined by the State Department of Education; or as defined by the issuance of a Notice of Intent to Find an Amendment to a Capital-improvement Page 35 of. 71 _ :; Element not in compliance as not being, financially feasible, by the Department of Community Affairs pursuant to Section 1633184, Florida Statutes; or by a court action or final administrative action; or e) If concurrency is suspended in one - third or more of the CSA's pursuant to G.2. of thin Section below. 2. School Concurrency shall be suspended within a particular CSA, upon the occurrence and for the duration for the following conditions: (a) Where an individual school in a particular CSA is twelve or more months behind the schedule set forth in the SCHOOL DISTRICT's Five -Year Capital Facilities Plan, concurrency will be suspended within that CSA and the adjacent CSA's for that type of school; or (b) The SCHOOL DISTRICT does not maximize utilization of school capacity by allowing a particular CSA or an individual school to exceed the adopted Level of Service (LOS); or (c) Where the School Board materially amends the first 3 years of the SCHOOL DISTRICT's Five -Year Capital Facilities Plan in accordance with Section III G., and that amendment causes the Level of Service to be exceeded for that type of school within a CSA, concurrency will be suspended within that CSA and the adjacent CSA's only for that type of school. 3. If the Program Evaluation Report in accor nnce with SectionVI.M., below, recornrtrends that concurrency be suspended because the program is not wodring, as planned, concurmncy may be suspended upon the concrirrence of 33% of the Parties to this AGREEMENT. Page 36 of ,711- 4. Once suspended, for any of the above reasons, concurrency shall be reinstated once TAG determines the condition that caused the suspension has been remedied or the Level of Service for that year for the affected CSA's have been achieved. VL MONITORING A. Establishment of the Technical Advisory Group (TAG). The PARTIES agree that the SCHOOL DISTRICT's Five -Year Capital Facilities Plan and the ten and twenty year work programs will be monitored by an independent Technical Advisory Group (TAG) to be established by the PARTIES of this AGREEMENT no later than 90 days from the date this AGREEMENT becomes effective. B. Purpose of the TAG. The purpose of the TAG is to function as a resource for the SCHOOL BOARD, the COUNTY-and the MUNICIPALITIES and to make recommendations including but not limited.to the following. 1. The SCHOOL DISTRICT's Five -Year Capital Facilities Plan. 2. Ten and twenty year work programs. It is recognized that the 10 and 20 year work programs are tentative and will be used for general planning purposes. 3. Schools that trigger a School Capacity Study (SCS). 4. CSA boundaries. 5. SCHOOL DISTRICT Management reports • " Page 37 of 6. Operation and effectiveness of the concurrency program C. Membership of the TAG. 1. The TAG will consist of five (5) members with relevant special knowledge or experience and shall include the following; (a) A Certified Public Accountant nominated by the FAU College of Business. (b) A general contractor nominated by the Local Chapter of the AGC. (c) A demographer nominated by the FAU College of Geography. (d) A planner nominated by the Treasure Coast Chapter of the American Planning Association. (e) A business person representing the for -profit private sector nominated by the Economic Council of Palm Beach County. 2. The parties expect the nominating agencies to make the initial recommendations no later than 30 days from the effective date of this -agreement and other nominations no later than 60 days prior to the expiration of the term of membership. 3 Interim vacancies shall be filled as quickly as possible. 4. TAG members shall be automatically approved within 60 days of the nomination unless vetoed by the SCHOOL BOARD, the League of Cities Board of Directors or the Board of COUNTY Commissioners (BCC). 1• Page 38 of 71 - D. Terms of Membership The initial terms of TAG members shall commence 90 days from the effective date of this AGREEMENT and be as follows: person. 1 _ Two Year Terms - The CPA and the General Contractor and the business 2. Three Year Terms - Demographer, and Planner Each succeeding appointment shall be for a term of three years. Upon the death, or reMenation, of a member, the nominating body will propose a successor for the unexpired term., or a full term, as the case may be, and will be accepted unless vetoed per Section C.2. above. E. Election of Chair and Organization Meeting 1. At the first meeting of the TAG and every year thereafter, on or about the anniversary of the fast meeting, the members of TAG shall hold an organizational meeting. 2. At the organ 7Ational meeting, the members shall elect a chair and vice-chair who will sesre one year terms. There shall be a limit of two consecutive terms the chair and vice- chair may serve. 3. The TAG has the authority to enact their own rules of procedure. F. Quorum and voting No meeting of TAG shall be called to order, nor may any business be trann-rIed without a quorum consisting of a majority of the members being present. All actions -,hall require a simple majority of the members then present and voting. In the event of a tie vote; the proposed Page 39 of: -71 motion shall be considered to have failed. No member shall abstain from voting unless there is a conflict of interest pursuant to Florida Statutes. G. Meetings open to the public All meetings shall be open to the public. IL Compensation The members of TAG shAtl receive no compensation for their services. I. Staff Support for the TAG The PARTIES will direct their staff to cooperate with the TAG in performance of its duties under this AGREEMENT. Clerical support for meetings of TAG will be provided by the SCHOOL DISTRICT. J. Management Reports By July 1st each year, the School Superintendent shall submit an annual management report to the SCHOOL BOARD and TAG detailing the status of the SCHOOL DISTRICT's implementation of its adopted Five -Year Capital Facilities Plan. The management report will contain reports on the status of each capacity or modernization project in the SCHOOL DISTRICT's Five - Year Capital Facilities Plan- including any related audits and a schedule of the proposed commencement and completion date of all programmed activities. Revisions to projected costs for unbuilt projects and the projected costs compared to actual costs of each constructed project shall also be included. Page 40 of ; 7 L.. ,. : K. Enrollment Reports The SCHOOL DISTRICT Superintendent shall submit a yearly report on the first student count of the second semester enrollment of all schools of each type in each CSA and each individual school by February 15th. L. Monitoring Reports The TAG shall review the information submitted by the SCHOOL Superintendent and shall compile and submit a report annually on the following: 1. The accuracy of previous pupil enrollment projections compared with actual enrollment. 2. The accuracy of previous population projections of each CSA compared with actual growth. 3. The accuracy of projected costs of school construction projects compared with actual costs. 4. The accuracy of projected school construction schedules compared with actual performance. All annual reports of the TAG shall be submitted to the MUNICIPALITIES, the COUNTY and the SCHOOL BOARD by August 1. Any interim TAG report shall be submitted to the parties within five days of completion. Page 41 of M. Program Evaluation Report 1. On or before August 1, 2002, or at the request of any party to this AGREEMENT, TAG shall initiate an evaluation of the effectiveness of the program. This evaluation shall consider but not be limited to the following: (a) Number of school concurrency suspensions by school type (b) Duration of school concurrency suspensions (c) Ability to achieve and maintain the adopted LOS (d) Tuneliness of parties' response required by this AGREEMENT - (e) (e) Operation and effectiveness of the concurrency program.. 2. TAG shall issue a report on the findings and recommendations to all PARTIES by November 1, 2002, and every 2 years thereafter, and within 90 days after the request for review by any party to this AGREEMENT. The recommendations shall include, but not be limited to, suspension and changes to the following: (a) Joint Planning and Coordination by PARTIES to this AGREEMENT (b) LOS Standards (c) Interlocal AGREEMENT (d) Goals, Objective and Policies (e) CSA boundaries (f) Implementing Ordinance (g) SCHOOL DISTRICT's Five -Year Capital Facilities Plait. Page 42 oU.71- N. Conflict of Interest 1. General. No TAG member shall have any interest, financial or otherwise, direct or indirect, or engage in any business transaction or professional activities, or incur any obligation of any nature which is in substantial conflict with the proper discharge of duties as a member of the TAG. 2. Implementation. To implement this policy and strengthen the faith and confidence of the citizens of Palm Beach County, members of the TAG are directed: (a) Not to accept any gift, favor, or service that might reasonably tend to improperly influence the discharge of official duties. (b) To make known by written or oral disclosure, on the record at a. TAG meeting, any interest which the memberh_As in any pending matter before the TAG before any deliberation on that mmuer. (c) To abstain from using membership on the TAG to secure special privileges or exemptions. (d) To refrain from engaging in any business or professional activity which might reasonably be expected to require disclosure of confidential information acquired by membership on the TAG not available to members of the general public, and refisin from using such information for personal gain or benefit. (e) To refiain from aoeeptma employment which might impair independent judgment in the performance of responsibilities as a members of the TAG. Page 43.0,•71:: : (f) To refrain from transacting any business in an official capacity as a member of the TAG with any business entity of which the member is an officer, director, agent or member, or in which the member owns-a controlling interest_ (g) To refrain from participation in any matter in which the member has a personal investment which will create a substantial conflict between private and public interests. VII. MEDIATION OF DISPUTES The PARTIES acknowledge that the intergovernmental coordination provisions of Section 153.3177(6)(h), Florida Statutes, may not eliminate all disputes between the PARTIES to this agreement and such disputes may affect the SCHOOL DISTRICT and the land use planning authority of the COUNTY and the MMCIPALITIES. In the case of the negotiation, adoption, and implementation of any provisions of this interlocal agreement or amendment thereto, COLTNTY, MUNICIPALITIES and the SCHOOL DISTRICT agree that those PARTIES in opposition shall attempt an informal resolution of the concerns raised. In the event objections cannot be resolved within 20 days or such other time as may be mutually agreeable, the PARTIES shall have the right to petition the Court in accordance with the provisions of Article DCC., or submit their disagreement for mediation under the protocols of the Palm Beach County Comprehensive Plan Amendments Coordinated Review Interlocal Agreement of October, 1993, as specified in Article X therein, attached as Exhibit A to this AGREEMENT. Page 44 of 71 eadlocked after three meetings, the PARTIES will submit their dispute to arbitration. The arbitrator will be selected by the Executive Committee of the Palm Beach County Issues Forum within 15 days after the third mediation meeting, and arbitration will commence within 30 days after the third mediation meeting. The arbitrator's decisions will be binding on the PARTIES, and the costs of arbitration will be borne equally by the PARTIES. VM- COORDINATED PLANNING A. The Coordination of Planning and Sharing of Information The PARTIES recognize that sound planning for both educational facilities and student growth emanating from existn -, redevelopment and new development of residential property requires adequate and accurate data and information and that effective coordination of these two planning functions requires that all of the PARTIES have access to and utilize the same data and information. Accordingly, the COUNTY, the MUNICIPALITIES, and the SCHOOL DISTRICT agree to share and coordinate information rebating to existing and planned public school facilities, proposals 'for development and re- development, infrastructure required to support public school facilities, and poptilation projections, including student population projections, which are utilized and relied on by the PARTIES for planning purposes. B. Population Projections The SCHOOL DISTRICT shall utilize the COUNTY'S population projections derived from the University of Florida Bureau 'of Economic and Business Research (BEBR) medium Page-45 of :71� . population projections for permanent resident population, which include municipal and unincorporated areas, as the basis for student population projections. The COUNTY shall convert the BEBR projections into both existing and new residential units and disaggregate these units throughout incorporated and tnincorporated Palm Beach County into each CSA ncina BEBR's ann"M estimates by municipality, persons-per- household figures, historic growth rates and development potential considering the adopted Future Land Use maps of all local government Comprehensive Plans. These are shown in Exhibit E of this agreement ("Projected Units Table") which shall be amended annually_ The SCHOOL DISTRICT shall evaluate the disaggregated projections prepared by the COUNTY, considering the population projections contnined in each local government Comprehensive Plan, and the State Department of Education Capital Outlay Full Time Equivalent (COFTE) student projections, malting modifications as necessary, and utilizing appropriate models and methodologies. The SCHOOL DISTRICT shall develop and apply the Student Generatlon, Multipliers as shown in EXHIBIT D of this AGREEMENT for all schools of each type to the projected residential units, considering past trends within specific geographic areas, in order to project school enrollment, consistent with the requirements of Chapter 235, Florida Statutes. All PARTIES agree to the continued use of this methodology, which has been used by the SCHOOL DISTRICT since 1996, and, based upon its historical accuracy, consider its results to be the best available data. Page 46 of .171 1 The SCHOOL DISTRICT, the COUNTY and the MUNICIPALITIES commit to continued efforts to improve this methodology and enhance coordination with the plans of the SCHOOL DISTRICT and local governments. Population and student enrollment projections shall be revised annually to ensure that new residential development and redevelopment information provided by the MUMCIPALTIIF,S and the COUNTY is reflected in the updated projections. The revised projections and the variables utilised in Makin¢ the projections shall be reviewed by all signatories through the Intergovernmental Plan Amendment Review Commies (IPARC). Projections shall be especially revisited and refined with the results of the 2000 Census. C. Local Government Data Collection On April 1 and October 1 of each year, local governments shall provide the SCHOOL DISTRICT with the information regarding the Certificates of Occupancy issued for new residential units. The actual students generated from new residential units will be used in the data and analysis for the annual update of the SCHOOL DISTRICT's Five -Year Capital Facilities Plan. D. School District Data Publication The SCHOOL DISTRICT shall publish data concerning school capacity, includino the enrollment of each individual school based on the first count of the second semester, the actual capacity of each school at the adopted level of service, the enrollment and capacity for all schools of each type iii each concunmcy service area. The SCHOOL DISTRICT shall specifically update the data upon meeting the following conditions: no later than fifteen (15) working daysjMer the annual Page 47 o.,f;J,1 �,; update of the SCHOOL DISTRICT's Five -Year Capital Facilities Plan; with the first count of the second semester each year, as new capacity becomes operational; when a SCS is approved; or as concurrency determinations are issued. E. Multiplier Publication Sixty (60) days prior to the implementnr6on of conmrency the SCHOOL DISTRICT chA t publish demographic multipliers. These multipliers will be used for the term of this agreement to determine the number of elementary, middle and high school students, based on the number and type of residential units from the proposed development. These multipliers must be supported by data and analysis based on existing enrollment for each type of residential unit and will be updated or re-verified by the SCHOOL DISTRICT upon renewal of this agreement- F. Proposals for Development, Redevelopment and Infrastructure required to Support Public School Facilities On or before January 1 of each year, for the SCHOOL DISTRICT's consideration and utilisation in preparing its annual upe%te of the SCHOOL DISTRICT's Five -Year Capital Facilities Plan the COUNTY and the MUNICIPALITIES shall provide to the SCHOOL DISTRICT a report setting forth the COUNTY'S and the MUNICIPALITIES' respective projections for development, and redevelopment, in the forthcoming year. In addition, before January 1 of each year the COUN'T'Y and the MUNICIPALITIES shall provide to the SCHOOL DISTRICT a copy of any amendments to their respective five -year road plans, five -year utility plans, and five-year plan-- for parks, fire protection and public safety and any other plans they have in their possession affecting infiasttucture. Page 48 of 71 G. School Siting 1. Unless a local GOVERNMENT has or does enter into a separate Interlocal Agreement relating to school siting, the following provisions shall be followed in school sitinu decisions. ;If a separate Interlocal Agreement that addresses school siting is in effect, the provisions of that Agreement shall control and this Section (G) and shall not be applicable between those parties. 2. The SCHOOL DISTRICT shall Coordinate planning and site location of educational facilities with each MUNICIPALITY and the COUNTY in which a school site is proposed for construction or site-acquisition within the SCHOOL DISTRICT's Five =Year Capital Facilities Plan in accordance with Chanters 235 and 163 of the Florida Statutes. This process shall assist in determining possible sines for the proposed schools and the consistency with the Comprehensive Plan, applicable land development regulations, the necessary existing or planned infrasttuc an e, and coordination of public facilities such as parks, libraries, and community centers. 3. Not less than 90 days prior to adoption of the initial Five -Year Capital Facilities Plan and any amendments or yearly updates, the SCHOOL DISTRICT shall coordinate with the COUNTY and each MUNICIPALITY in which a school is proposed for construction or expansion under the proposed plan to determine the consistency of one or more proposed sites with the local government's comprehensive plan and the availability of necessary or planned infrastructure and to coordinate the proposed location with public facilities such as parks, libraries and community centers. Alternative sites may be proposed by the LOCAL GOVERNMENT for the consideration of the SCHOOL DISTRICT. Page 49:ofas,1 4. At least 60 days prior to acquiring or leasing any property that may be used for a school site, the SCHOOL DISTRICT shall provide written notice of the proposed acquisition to the LOCAL GOVERNMENT in whose jurisdiction the proposed site is located. This written notice from the SCHOOL DISTRICT shall include a school site acquisition form, aerial map, location map and proposed acquisition and construction completion schedule. As quickly as possible but no later than 45 days from receipt of this notice, the LOCAL GOVERNMENT shall notify the SCHOOL DISTRICT if the proposed site is consistent with the land use categories and policies of the LOCAL GOVERNMENT's comprehensive plan and -zoning district and provide comments regarding the feasibility of each of the sites submitted by the SCHOOL DISTRICT. These comments should address the availability of necessary and planned infrastructure and the collocation of the proposed school facility with other public facilities such as parks, libraries and community centers. The SCHOOL DISTRICT shall include these comments in their rating system to determine the best overall site for acquisition. This preliminary notice does not constitute the local government's determination of consistency required by Section 235.193(5), Florida Statutes. 5. The SCHOOL DISTRICT shall submit a request for determination that a proposed site for a public educational facility is consistent with the LOCAL GOVERNMENt's comprehensive plan and land development regulations and an application for site plan approval as early in the design stage as feasible, but no later than 90 days prior to the proposed construction commencement date of a new public educational facility or modernization of an existing public educational facility. The SCHOOL DISTRICT application shall include the iteft required in Page 50 of 7 L `' paragraph 4, a site plan meeting the requirements of the LOCAL GOVERNMENT's land development regulations to the extent the land development regulations are not in conflict with the state uniform building code or the review criteria in subparagraph (b) below, any other information required for site plan review under the LOCAL GOVERNMENT's land development regulations, and, if in A�mnicipality, a municipal traffic concurrency let-ter from the County- Engineer. The LOCAL GOVERNMENT shall have 90 days to-determine in writing after receiving all of the required information from the SCHOOL DISTRICT whether the proposed site and site plan for the public education facility is consistent with the local comprehensive plan and local land-development regulations and if the site plan is approved_ (a) If the LOCAL GOVERNMENT informs the SCHOOL DISTRICT that a proposed site is not consistent with the land. use categories and policies of the LOCAL GOVERNMENT"s comprehensive plan, the SCHOOL DISTRICT shall not proud to construct any new or expanded public educational facility on the site I1nless and until the LOCAL GOVERNMENT comprehensive plan is amended to make the proposed facility consistent with the LOCAL GOVERNMENT comprehensive plan. If the site is consistent with the comprehensive plan's future land use policies and categories in which public schools are allowable uses, the LOCAL GOVERNMENT may not deny the development of the site for a public educational facility but may impose reasonable development standards and conditions through the site plan approval process in accordance with Section 235.34(1), Florida Statutes. Page 5 I of. ,7..1. _,. (b) The LOCAL GOVERNMENT may not deny the site plan based on the adequacy of the site plan as it relates solely to the needs of the educational facility. The LOCAL GOVERNMENT's review may consider the site plan and its adequacy as it relates to environmental concerns, health, safety and welfare, and effects on adjacent property. Standards and conditions may not be imposed which conflict with those established in Chapter 235, Florida Statutes, or the State Uniform Building Code, unless mutually agreed by the SCHOOL DISTRICT and the LOCAL GOVERNINffiW. The parties agree that the following criteria shall be applied in evaluating the site plan: (1) The proposed site and education facilities shall, at a minimum, meet the State Requirements for Educational Facilities (SREF), plus a ten percent (10%) opacity flexibility allowance in conformance with the SCHOOL DISTRICT's adopted level of service. (2) The site plan shall demonstrate that there are no adverse impacts on sites listed in the national Register of Historic Places or otherwise designated in accordance with appropriate State guidelines as locally significant historic or archaeological resources. (3) The site plan shall provide sufficient space to meet on -site parking and on -site traffic circulation requirements to satisfy current and projected site generated vehicular demand. (4) There shall be adequate setbacks, buffering and design controls to eliminate or decrease any negative externalities, such as noise, from affecting neighboring developments in accordance with SREF standards, at a minimum. Outdoor recreational facilities, Page 52 of 71 including stadiums and similar support facilities shall be located and buffered on the proposed site to minimise impacts on the adjacent properties. (5) The location of the proposed site shall comply with all provisions of Florida Statutes, as they relate to the siting of public education facilities. (6) The following amass standards shall apply to the proposed sites of the specific school types to ensure they are consistent with the LOCAL GOVERNMENrs comprehensive plan- (i) For elementary schools, special education facilities, and alternative education facilities, proposed school sites shall have direct access to at least a minor collector road or as otherwise approved by the LOCAL GOVERNMENT after determination of acceptable traffic (ii) For middle schools, the proposed site shall have direct access to at least a minor collector road or as otherwise approved by the LOCAL GOVERNMENT after determination of acceptable traffic impacts. (iii) For high schools, the proposed location shall have direct access to at least a major collector road, or as otherwise approved by the LOCAL GOVERNMENT after determination of acceptable traffic impacts. (c) Any facility not used exclusively for educational purposes and any non- educational uses are subject to the LOCAL GOVERNM R Ws land development regulations and such facility or use shall not occur unless approved pursuant to those regulations. . Page 53 o €T1. ;,� (d) Nothing herein shall preclude the SCHOOL DISTRICT and the LOCAL GOVERNMENT from developing alternative development standards based on mutually acceptable performance criteria, that would meet the intent of the provisions listed above. H. School District Review Of Future Land Use Element Plan Amendments. 1. Each LOCAL GOVERNMENT that is not a participant in the Comprehensive plan Amendment Coordinated Review Interlocal Agreement dated, October 1993, agrees to submit to the SCHOOL DISTRICT at least 30 days prior to its transmittal hearing an executive summary of any amendment to the Future Land Use Element that modifies or adds any residential designation along with a copy of the plan amendment and supporting material and the date, time, and place of the transmittal hearing. Each LOCAL GOVERNMENT that is a participant in the `Comprehensive Plan Amendment Coordinated Review Interlocal Agreement' shall follow the procedures of that AGREEMENT. 2. The SCHOOL DISTRICT shall review the information submitted and shall evaluate the impact of the proposed amendment on the Public School Facilities Plan, the consistency of the proposed plan amendment with the SCHOOL DISTRICT's Five -Year Capital Facilities Plan, the impact on the adopted Level of Service standard for public schools, and the projected timing and delivery of public school facilities to serve any residential development authorized by the Comprehensive Plan Amendment. 3. Within 20 days of receipt, the SCHOOL DISTRICT, shall submit to the COUNTY or affected MUNICIPALITY a written report setting forth the "findings and ' .r._ Page 54 of 71 recommendations of the SCHOOL DISTRICT, and specifically setting forth the capacity, or lack thereo& of existing facilities or planned facilities in the current SCHOOL DISTRICT Capital Facilities Program Plan to serve additional students without overcrowding such facilities beyond the adopted Level of Service. 4. The COUNTY or MUNICIPALITY shall consider the report and recommendations of the SCHOOL DISTRICT at its transmittal hearing, and if the COUNTY or MUNICIPALITY decides to transmit the proposed plan amendment to the Department of Community Affairs, the COUNTY or MUNICIPALITY shall include the written report and recommendations of the SCHOOL DISTRICT in its transmittal package. 5. In considering whether to adopt any Comprehensive Plan Amendment providing for residential development, the COUNTY and the MUNICIPALITIES agree to consider the factors set forth in the written report of the SCHOOL DISTRICT. 6. The COUNTY and the MUNICIPALITIES agree to abide by the procedures set forth in subparagraphs 1 through 5 above, in consideri nv, any proposed amendments to the Future Land Use Element of their respective plans. IX. SPECIAL PROVISIONS A. SCHOOL DISTRICT Requirements. The PARTIES acknowledge and agree that the SCHOOL DISTRICT is or may be subject to the requirements of the Florida and United States Constitutions and other state or federal Page 55.of 71 statutes regarding the operation of the public school system. Accordingly, the COUNTY, the MUNICIPALTIZE.S and the SCHOOL DISTRICT Agree that this AGREEMENT is not intended, and will not be construed, to interfere with, hinder, or obstruct in any manner, the SCHOOL DISTRICT's constitutional and statutory obligation to provide a uniform system of free public schools on a county wide basis or to require the SCHOOL DISTRICT to confer with, or obtain the consent of the COUNTY or the MUNICIPALTf1ES, as to vvhether that obligation has been satisfied. Further, the COUNTY, the MUNICIPALITIES and the SCHOOL DISTRICT agree that this AGREEMENT is not intended and will not be construed to impose any duty or obligation on the COUNTY or MUNICIPALITY for the SCHOOL DISTRICT's constitutional or statutory obligation. The COUNTY and the MUNICIPALITIES also acknowledge that the SCHOOL DISTRICT's obligations under this AGREEMENT may be superseded by state or federal court orders or other state or federal legal mandates. B. Land Use Authority The PARTIES specifically acknowledge that each LOCAL GOVERNMENT is responsible . for approving or denying comprehensive plan airiendments and development orders within its own jurisdiction. Nothing herein represents or authorizes a transfer of this authority to any other party. Page 56 of 71 C. Specific Performance The COUNTY, the MUNICIPALITIES and the SCHOOL DISTRICT shall have the right to petition the Circuit Court for the Fifteenth Judicial Circuit for the State of Florida for specific performance of any and all of the provisions of this AGREEMENT. X. ACTS OF GOD AND OTIWR EXIGENT. CIRCUbOTANCES BEYOND THE CONTROL OF THR SCHOOL BOARD The COUNTY and the MUNICIPALITIES acknowledge that the SCHOOL DISTRICT, in its operation of the public school system, is subject to events, circumstances, and external forces and authorities beyond its control. Examples are hurricanes or other natural disasters which destroy school facilities, other emergency situations affecting the operation of the public school system, state court judgments concerning the SCHOOL DISTRICT's State Constitutional or Statutory obligation to provide a uniform system-of free public schools, and school desegregation orders or compliance agreements sidnvolving Federal Courts or the Office of Civil Rights, United States Department of Education. Such events or actions may prevent the SCHOOL DISTRICT from complying with the provisions of this AGREEMENT and may require the SCHOOL DISTRICT to deviate from or modify the SCHOOL DISTRICT's Five -Year Capital Facilities Plan agreed to and approved by the COUNTY, the MUNICIPALTIIES and the SCHOOL DISTRICT. The COUNTY and the MUNICIPALITIES hereby agree that such noncompliance, deviations, or modifications wilt not be Page .57 of ,71 , �, 4W deemed a violation of this AGREEMENT and that the provisions of suspension will pertain to those occurrences. XI. STANDING AND TIMM PARTY BENEFICIARY RIGHTS The PARTIES hereby acknowledge and agree that it is not the intent of any party to this AGREEMENT to confer any rights on any persons or entities other than the PARTIES to this AGREEMENT. No person or entity not a party to this AGREEMENT shall have any claim or cause of action against either the COUNTY, the MUNICIPALITIES or the SCHOOL DISTRICT for the failure of any party to perform in accordance with the provisions of this AGREEMENT except as may be provided by law. XIL AMENDMENT, WITHDRAWAL AND TERMINATION A. Amending the AGREEMENT This AGREEMENT may be amended only by written agreement of 51% of the PARTIES. B. Withdrawal from AGREEMENT Any PARTY that is no longer required by law to be a party to this AGREEMENT may withdraw from the AGREEMENT by sending written notice to the other PARTIES to the AGREEMENT and the Department of Community Affairs (or its successor agency) at least sixty (60) days prior to the effective date of the withdrawal. Page :58'of '714_ C. Additional Participants Any MUNICIPALITY that-becomes a required party after the effective date of this agreement may become a party to this agreement upon execution of a Unilateral Participation Agreement in such form as the agreement attached hereto as Exhibit C. D. Termination of AGREEMENT Ibis AGR_NT may be terminated by 75% of the PARTIES filing a written notice of termination with the other PARTIES -v*hin any ninety (90) day period. The AGRFF.MENT shall immediately be terminated upon-the filin¢ of the written notice by the last required party. XII1. TERM OF TFW- AGREEMENT This AGREEMENT shall be for a term of (5) years and will automatically be renewed for an additional five (5) year term as long as no required PARTY objects in wrung to the renewal. Any objection, by any PARTY to this AGREEMENT, to the renewal must be sent to the other PARTIES no sooner'ilian 90 days prior to the end of the term. XIV. INDEMNIFICATION OF PARTIES A. Hold Harmless The SCHOOL DISTRICT agrees to hold harmless and indemnify the other PARTIES to this AGREEMENT against any third pity claim_ liability, lawsuit,-and damage award arising out of the performance of this AGREEMENT for any acts, failure to -act, or decisions of the SCHOOL Pagc 59 of�71. : ; - DISTRICT that are totally within the purview of the SCHOOL DISTRICT or are the responsibility of the SCHOOL DISTRICT under this AGREEMENT_ Acts or decisions of the SCHOOL DISTRICT include, but are not limited to, items relating to school attendance boundaries, providing adequate capacity for new students in the SCHOOL DISTRICT's Five -Year Capital Facilities Plan, constructing and moderni7ina schools consistent with the adopted SCHOOL DISTRICT's Five -Year Capital Facilities Plan, decisions on whether to accept or reject mitigation, and decisions on available capacity in the review process. B. Third Party Claims The COUNTY and each individual MUNICIPALITY that is a PARTY to this AGREEMENT agrees to hold harmless and indemnify all other PARTIES to the AGREEMENT against any third party claim, liability, lawsuit, and damage award arising out of the performance of this AGREEMENT for any acts, failure to act, or decisions of that PARTY that are totally within the purview of that party or are the responsibility of that party under this AGREEMENT. Acts or decisions of the COUNTY or an individual municipality include, but are not limited to, the denial of an application for development approval based on school impacts after the SCHOOL DISTRICT has informed that party that adequate school capacity exists for the development. XV. MULTIPLE ORIGINALS This AGREEMENT may be executed in one or more counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original, but all of which together shall constitute one and the same instrument. Page 60 of 71 XVI. EFFECTIVE DATE OF AGREEMENT A_ Effective Immediately Upon this AGREEMENT being signed by the last required PARTY, the AGRFRUIENT shall be filed with the Clerk of the Circuit Court. This AGREEMENT shall rake effect immediately on the date filed with the Clerk of the Circuit Court and shall continue until B. Nullification of AGREEMENT If this AGREEMENT is not signed by all required PARTIES by July 1, 2001, this AGREEMENT shall be null and void and all PARTIES that sign this agreement are released from any obligation imposed by the AGREEMENT. IN WrrNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned PARTIES have executed this Interlocal AGREEMENT on the day and year indicated_ ATTEST: PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA, BY �•'``• +. ITS BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS Oro thy H, Wilke 46, •� "• o a County � @ o�• i By + 5�! By: Na 2e 0/ c . NTY • p�YClerk • Commissioner Maude Ford Lee, Chair '•. .••'��+ R 2 0 0 0 0808 ♦ ♦••s ♦ Approved as to Form and • • .... • • •` Date: JUN _ 6 Z�OQ ciency } County Attorney a rG�.k Page 61 of 71 ATTEST: B : ,MIL? Approved as to Form and Legal Sufficiency for chool Board SCHOOL BOARD OF PALM BEACH COUNTY By�.NU 4,kP-( (A.Ui Dr.-Sandra Richmond, Chairman Date: 61114100 Page 62 `of 71 ATTEST: By: City Clerk ATTEST: By: City Clerk ATTEST: By: City Clerk MUNICIPALITIES CITY OF ATLANTIS By: William Howell, Mayor DATE: CITY OF BELLE GLADE By: Harma Miller, Mayor DATE: CITY OF BOCA RATON By: Carol Hanson, Mayor DATE: Pagc,63..pf 71 , ATTEST: By: City Clerk ATTEST: By: City Clerk ATTEST: By: City Clerk MUNICIPALITIES CITY OF BOYNTON BEACH By: Gerald Broening, Mayor DATE: CITY OF DELRAY BEACH By: David Schmidt, Mayor DATE: CITY OF GREENACRES By: Samuel Ferreri, Mayor DATE: Page 64 of 71 ATTEST: By: Town Cleric ATTEST: By: Town Clerk ATTEST: By: Town Clerk MUNICIPALITIES TOWN OF HAVERHILL By: Charles Stoddard, Mayor DATE: TOWN OF HYPOLUXO By: Kenneth Schultz, Mayor DATE: TOWN OF JUNO BEACH By: Robert Blomquist, Mayor DATE: Page 65:of_ MUNICIPALITIES ATTEST: TOWN OF JUPITER By: By: Town Clerk Karen Golonka, Mayor DATE: ATTEST: TOWN OF LAKE CLARKE SHORES - By: = By: Town Clerk Malcolm Lewis, Mayor ATTEST: By: Town Clerk DATE: TOWN OF LAKE PARK By: William Wagner, Mayor DATE: Page 60 of `71•' ATTEST: By: City-Clerk ATTEST: By: Town Clerk ATTEST: By: Village Clerk MUNICIPALITIES CITY OF LAKE WORTH By: Tom R_Amiccio, Mayor DATE: TOWN OF LANtANA By: David Stuart, Mayor DATE: VILLAGE OF NORTH PALM BEACH By: Joseph Tringali, Mayor DATE: Page 67 MUMCIPALITIES ATTEST: CITY OF PAHOKEE By: By: City Clerk Alvis Davis, Mayor DATE: ATTEST: TOWN OF PALM BEACH By: By: Town Clerk Lesly Smith, Mayor DATE: ATTEST: CITY OF PALM BEACH GARDENS By: By: City Clerk Joseph Russo, Mayor DATE: Page 68 of: "71,a=`'= ATTEST: By: Town Clerk ATTEST: By: Village Clerk ATTEST: By: City Clerk MUNICIPALITIES TOWN OF PALM BEACH SHORES an Thomas Mills, Mayor DATE: VILLAGE OF PALM SPRINGS By: John Davis, Mayor DATE: CITY OF RIVIERA BEACH By: Michael Brown, Mayor DATE: Page 6 ?.of 71 „.,,.4 . - -. a ATTEST: By:_ Village Clerk ATTEST: By: City Clerk ATTEST: By: Village Clerk MUNICIPALITIES VILLAGE OF ROYAL PALM BEACH By: David Lodwick, Mayor DATE: CITY OF SOUTH BAY By: Clarence Anthony, Mayor DATE: VILLAGE OF TEQUESTA By: Carl Hansen, Mayor DATE: Page 70 of 11 MUNICIPALITIES ATTEST: VILLAGE OF WELLINGTON By: By: Village Clerk Carmine Priore, Mayor ATTEST'- M City Clerk Final 6106M 0 CITY OF WEST PALM BEACH Joel Daves, Mayor DATE: Page 71,of ..7,1. ;1. J EXHIBIT A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT COORDINATED REVIEW INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT This Interlocal Agreement, dated the 1st day of Oci�ober, 1993, _ntered into by and among the various parties executing this ygreement, each one constituting a public agency as defined in Part I of Chapter 163, Florida Statutes; W I T N E S S E T H: WHEREAS, Part I of Chapter 163, Florida Statutes, permits public agencies as defined therein to enter into interlocal ' agreements with each other to jointly exercise any- power, privilege, or authority which such agencies share in common and which each might exercise separately; and WHE23MB, Part II of Chapter 163, Florida Statutes, requires the coordination of local comprehensive plans with -the comprehensive plans of adjacent local governments and the plans of school' boards and other units of local government providing services but not having regulatory authority over the use of land.;_ and Wn-r-pp?LS, the participants to, this Agreement desire to establish an intergovernmental coor-a??natton program for reviewing proposed changes to adopted comprehensive plans which fully utilizes the existing Chapter 163 comprehensive planning process with minimal bureaucracy and expense for the participants; and W ?v s, participation . in . this. pro Casa shall not di cinish any existing local government • s or service provider 4 s process-or• power;. and WHEREAS, the participants'desire to enter. into -this Agreement F,I,ti.tr A Pape 1 of 35 to provide countywide coordination amendment process- in the comprehensive plan NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants contained herein, it is mutually agreed and understood,. by and among the undersigned agencies that now or may hereafter- execute this Agreement, as follows: ARTICLE I. TITLE This Agreement shall be known and may be cited as the "Comprehensive Plan • AmenAment Coordinated Review Interlocal Agreement"- ARTICLE_II_ PURPOSE The purpose cf this Agreement is to establish a countlywide Comprehensive Plan Amendment Coordinated Review Process_ This process is designed to provide- coordination of proposed plan amenel"ents, cooperation between affected local governments and service providers, and opportunities to resolve potential di_sputos only within the Plan Amendment Process with the least amount of infringement upon processes,-.without undue processing delays and without 'the necessity of significant staffing or consultant costs_ Specifically, the Comprehensive Plan Amendment Coordinated Review Process will accomplish the following: A. Proposed Plan Amendments shall have sufficient distribution' and " ; ssem nation • to 'Insure that• initial transmittal and final.- approval will not occur without adequate notice to focal governments and service providerG.,d +ho.mayp lie- adversely affected by the action_ Exhibit A Page 2 of 35 g_ An avenue for discussion and evaluation of the proposed Plan Amendments is created so that the governiny body is aware of objections, the basis for them, and the reasonableness of the objection_ C. An opportunity is created for conflict resolution of an item which, if approved, may result in a potential problem for another local government or service provide= _ D_ The Comprehensive Plan Amendment Coordinated Review Process does not diminish or transfer existing authority with respect to planning and impl— entation decisions of the participants _ ARTICLE_I1I_ DEFINITIONS The following definitions shall apply to this Agreement: "Act" means Part I of Chapter 163, Florida Statutes_ "Agreement" means this Interlocal•Agreement, including any amendments or supplements hereto, executed and delivered in accordance with the terms hereof_ "Clearinghouse" means -the agency that provides the logistic support services for the Comprehensive Plan Amendment Coordinated Review Process_ "Comprehensive Plan" means the plan adopted by a local government pursuant to Chapter 163, Part II, Florida Statutes, meeting the requirements of Chapter 163, Part III Florida Statutes and its A!mpl— entinq rules •"Conflict Resolution. Panel ": means :--a subgroup. of the %te:rlocal, Plan Amendmenta •Review Committee. Fxhibit A PAOO I of IS "Days" means calendar days. LI "Executive Committee" means the representative body of the local governments and service providers responsible for the oversight and administration of this Agreement- "Fact-finding Panel" means a subgroup of the Interlocal Plan Amendnent-Review Committee_ "Governing Body" means the board of county commissioners of a county, the co—isslon or council of an incorporated -municipality, the Palm Beach County School Board, the Governing Board of the South Florida Water Management District, or the governing body of a special_ district_ "rrterlocal Plan A2n^nA t Review Co*++ Ittee" means tiie- body comprised of full-time_ plenning directors or other =sbai la - position, from any -local govezmment participant_ This group chairged with the major technical role in the Comprehensive.- Plan Am.dhdment .Coordinated Review Process- "Local Government" means the i rcorporated cities, . villages Land .towns within Palm Beach County-and the County of Palm Beach. : "Participants" means those local governments and-' service - providers who have entered into the Comprehensive Plan Amendment Coordinated Review Process through this Agre -meat acid have paid the annual participation fee as required in this Agreement. "Plan Amendment" means any change - or modificationo:�'+an�• :i adopted comprehensive -plan -that di o considered -a= comprehensimee %plan amendment pursuant to Chapter 163 ; Part .II, Florida Statutes, .or,.,., its implementing rules. -service Providers" means the Palm Beach County School Board, the South Florida Water Management District, and all independent special districts located in whole or in part in Palm Beach County which provide services required to be addressed in comprehensive plans by Chapter 163, Part II, Florida Statutes. ARTICLE IV_ PARTICIPATION. Section 1_ All local governments and service providers located in whole or in part in Palm Beach County are eligible to participate in this Agreement_ Only the parties who execute this Agreement and who have paid their annual participation fee are considered participants under this Agreement - Any local government or service provider who is not a participant by October 1, 1993, may become a participant upon execution of a unilateral Participation Agre —ent, in such form as the agreement attached hereto as Exhibit. "A". Section 2. Part�Lcjpant General Oblicat.,ions A. All participants shall be obliged to pay an annual participation fee_ ' (1) The initial participation fee shall be $500.00 per participant_ This - fee shall cover participation from October 1, 1993 to September 30, 1994 and shall be due and payable by October 31, 1993. (2 ) The participation fee shall be $500.00 per year for each subsequent,, .:year , -unless this :amount -- is modified as. author1zed .. in Article, .V , Section : 2. F. - No modif ication shall increase'the fee by moire than - 251; of the past year's fee amount_ The annual participation fee shall be due and payable by October 1 of each succeeding year_ (3) Non - payment of the fee shall result in the suspension of participation in this Agreement pursuant to Article XI, Section 7_ (4) A fee paid pursuant to this section shall not be returned in. full or prorata amount upon a participant's withdrawal from this Agreement_ Participants entering into this Agreement after October 1, 1993, or during any period subsequent to September 30 of each year thereafter, shall be obliged to remit the entire fee amount. B_ The local governments employing full -time planning directors or other siv++i_lar positions are required to appoint that person to, the Interlocal Plan Amendment Review Committee. C_ The local governments and service providers who become participants agree to provide technical assistance- requested by a Fact - finding Panel or Conflict Resolution Panel established pursuant to this Agreement. ARTICLE V. EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE Section 1. Creation /Purpose There shall be -created - -an= .Executive Committee to provide oversight.-and direct:lbn• ' •to-"+-he-'- Comprehensive" --Plan I Amendment Coordinated:_ - )teview ., process established,., this�Agreement, in accordance with and pursuant Co the duties and responsibilities F`.v1,il.ir A Pave 6 of IS expressed herein_ Section 2. Duties and Powers The Executive Committee shall have the following duties, powers and responsibilities: A. Prepare an annual budget_ B. oversee the collection and expenditure of funds. C_ Prepare an annual report to the participants detailing the activities and results from the comprehensive plan amendments processed pursuant to this Agreement. D. Oversee the operations of the various _panels, committees, and the Clearinghouse established pursuant to this Agreement_ E. make reco- nendations to the participants on ways to - improve the coordination process. F. Modify the annual. participation fee in accordance with this Agreement. G. By majority vote of the entire membership of the Committee, =modify the time fr—es set forth in Article VIII. H_ Propose amendments to this Agreement pursuant to Article XI, Section 4. I. Select the Clearinghouse from interested participants_ No en+l?neration of duties, powers, and responsibilities herein shall be deemed exclusive or restrictive, but shall be deemed to Exhibit A page 7 of 35 s incorporate all implied powers necessary or incident to carrying out the purposes of this Agreement_ section 3_ Membership A_ The Executive Committee shall consist of nine members, selected from the following five categories in -the manner specified, and shall meet the following criteria- (1) Four elected municipal officials, selected by the Palm Beach County Municipal League. (2) Two Patin Beach County Commissioners, selected by the Palm Beach County Commission. (3) One member of the Palm Beach County School Board, = selected by the Palm Beach County School Board_ (4) One member of the South Florida Water ManAgement District Governing Board, selected by the South Florida Water Management District Governing Board. (5) One 'Special District Representative, who shall reside in Palm Beach County and represent a District in' Palm Beach County, appointed by the Regional Chair of the Florida Association of Special Districts. B. Except for the Special District Representative, all a—hers of the Executive Co*n+++ittee shall be a representative of a participant. Each member shall have one vote on the Committee. C. Each category as set fo Lh in Paragraph A shall be entitled to appoint one (1) alternate. The alternate from Exhibit A Page 8 of 35 i W. categories 1 - 3 must be an elected official- If no other member of the South Florida Water Management District Governing Board resides in Palm Beach County, the Executive Director or his designee shall be the South Florida Water Management District alternate. The Regional Chair of the Florida Association of Special Districts shall appoint as the Special District alternate a person who resides in Palm Beach County and represents a district in Palm Beach County. The alternate may act in place of any mPmher from the same category. D. In the event there are no participants in a designated category set forth in paragraph A, that category shall lie deemed deleted and all remaining categories shall constitute the Executive Committee accordingly_ Sect;.on 4. Executive Committee Action A. The affairs, actions and duties of the Executive Co,6-i is Lee shall be undertaken at duly called meetings pursuant to Section 9 hereof. B. For any meeting of the Executive Committee at which any of f icial action is to be taken, a maj ority of the committee me -hers shall constitute a quorum, and a majority vote of the members present shall be the act of the Executive Committee. C. A certificate, resolution, or instrument signed by the Chair, Vice -chair or such other designated person of the Committee as may be hereafter selected by . the Co*_ m__ittee shall be evidence of the action of the Committee. Section 5. ElectXdn of Officers Exhibit A Page 9 of 35 Once a year, and at such other time as may be necessary to fill a vacancy, at a meeting of the Executive Committee called for the purpose thereof, the Committee members shall elect a Chair, a Vice - chair, and a Secretary - Treasurer to conduct meetings-of the committee and to perform such other functions..as " herein -_prov-ided. Said Chair, Vice-chair -and Secretary - Treasurer shall serve one (1) year terms unless they resign sooner pursuant to Section 7 hereof_ Section 6. Authority of officers A. The Chair and the-Vice-chair shall take such action and sign such documents on behalf of the Executive Committee --and in furtherance of the purposes of this Agreement as shall be approved by resolution of the Committee_ B_ The Secretary- Treasurer, or his or her designee, shall keep minutes of all meetings, proceedings and acts of the Executive 0cm- iLLee but such minutes need not be verbatim. Copies of all minutes of the meetings of the Committee shall be sent by the Secretary - Treasurer, or designee, to all Co—i ttee n—hers and to such other parties as requested. Section 7. Resignation A. Any member may resign from all duties and responsibilities hereunder by giving at least seven (7) days prior written notice sent to the Chair. Such notice shall state the date said resignation shall take effect and such resignation shall take effect on such date. • r B. In the event any.- ,.member shall resign as the representative of a participating group such participating group .. . .. 1 • Paoc1 in „c ac shall appoint a new representative as expeditiously as possible" C_ Any member, upon leaving office, shall forthwith turn over and deliver to the Chair or Vice -chair any and all records, books, documents, or other property in his or her possession or under his or her control which belongs to the Executive Committee and /or relates to this Agreement. Section 8. Liability No = --rher of the Executive Co*n -ittee shall be liable for any action taken pursuant to this Agreement in good faith, or for any omission, except gross negligence, or for any act of omission or commission by any other member of the Con!+?t!ittee. Section 9. Meetings A:= The Executive Committee shall convene at a meeting called by either a majority of the members or at the request of the Chair_ Meetings shall be conducted at such locations as may be acceptable to the majority of the Committee. The Chair shall set forth the date, time, location and purpose of each meeting and notice thereof, unless otherwise waived, shall be furnished to each member by the Secretary- Treasurer, or his or her designee, not less than seven. (7) days prior. to the date of such meeting_ The Chair may direct the Secretary- Treasurer to send the prerequisite notice for any meeting of the Committee otherwise called in accordance with the provisions hereof- B. During October 1993, the duly appointed members of the- Committee shall hold an organizational weeting to elect off icers and perform such other duties as shall be provided under this Exhibit A Page 11 of 35 _ Agreement_ ARTICLE VI. INTERLOCAL PLAN AMENDMENT REVIEW COMMITTEE A. Participant local governments employing full -time planning directors or other similar position are required to appoint that person as a member of the Inter local. Plan -Amendment Review Committee. B_ The functions of this Committee are as follows: (1) To provide participants, on a rotating basis, for a Fact - finding Panel_ (2) To provide participants, on a rotating basis -for a Conflict Resolution Panel_ - (3) To call for technical assistance from `service providers and other agencies which participate in this coordination activity_ (4) To meet, at least quarterly, for the purposes of administration, consideration of referrals, reports f of subcommittees, . general coordination and consultation, and the forwarding of reports of actions to the participants_ C_ The Committee shall establish its own organization and rules of procedure consistent with the provisions of this Agreement. ARTILCLE V11. CLEAR?N';GHOUSE ' A. The Clearinghouse sha•11- be a�-participant public • agency:.- : 8. The Clearinghouse shall•be responsible for: 1. The establishment of an account into which the Exhibit A Page 12 of 35 participation fees required herein shall be deposited_ 2. The deposit and disbursement of funds in accordance with generally accepted accounting standards. 3_ Securing and storing all adopted local government comprehensive - plans, and all amendments thereto_ 4_ Coordinating the Comprehensive Plan Amendment Coordinated Review Process, as specified in Article VIII, Section 3- ARTICLE VIII_ COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT COORDINATED REVIEW PROCESS -- Section 1_ Local Government specific Obliarations A. All participant local governments are obligated to do the following: (1) Inforiu the Clearinghouse of :the notice of plan amendments proposed by other participants that it desires to receive. (2) Designate to the Clearinghouse the position or individual who can file a written notice of intent to object and a formal objection. (3) Inform the Clearinghouse whether a formal governing body action is required prior to filing a written objection. (4) Provide the Clearinghouse with'a full copy of the local government's adopted Comprehensive Plan within thirty.-(30) days of the effective date of this Agreevnent_ If a. local government becomes a participant after October 1, 1993, the Exhibit A Page 13 of 35 participant shall provide the Clearinghouse with a full copy of its adopted Comprehensive Plan within thirty (30) days of the effective date of the Participation Agreement_ B_ When processing a proposed plan amendment to its own Comprehensive Plan, the local government shall do the following: 41) Submit all proposed plan amendment documents required by Section 3 A. to the Clearinghouse at least thirty (30) days prior to the local _ government 's "transmittal hearing_ (2) Meet with any objectors at least one time prior to the transmittal hearing on the proposed plan - amendment_ (3) Participate in fact - finding as described in Section 3. (4) Include in the proposed plan amendment transmittal to the Depa_T-tment of Co—unity Affairs, or within five (5) days of receipt if received after transmittal, all written notices of intent to object and written objections received pursuant to Section 3, the status of that objection, a fact - finding report prepared pursuant to Section 3, and any report from a Conflict Resolution Panel prepared pursuant to Section 3. (5) Consider participating in any Conflict Resolution Panel ..=equested by an objector. The local government initiating the proposed plan amendment Exhibit A Page 14 of 35 is under no- obligation to participate in the Conflict Resolution Panel process_ (6) For all proposed plan amendments, provide the Clearinghouse with a copy of the full proposed plan amendment; all background materials, including the supporting data and analysis; the objections, recommendation and comments report prepared by the Department of Community Affairs for the amenei-ment upon its receipt; the response to the objection, recommendation and comment report prepared by the local government; and, if adopted, the amendment to the local government's comprehensive plan; the notice of intent issued by the Department of Community Affairs; and any final orders or compliance agreements dealing.with the amendment_ (7) When it becomes available, provide the .Clearing- house with a revised copy of the local government's Comprehensive Plan including all amendments. C_ If the local government desires to object to another local government's -proposed plan amendment, the objecting local government shall do the following: (1) Submit a written notice of_ intent to object to the Clearinghouse and the local government initiating the proposed plan amendment pursuiant to Section 3. (2) Meet with the local government transmitting the proposed plan amendment at least one -time- prior to_. Exhibit A 'Page 15 of 35 that local government's transmittal hearing_ (3) File a written objection with the Clearinghouse pursuant to Section 3. (4) Participate in fact - finding as described in Section 3 if the local government files a written objection - (5) Consider participating in any Conflict Resolution Panel requested by the initiating local government or other objector- An objector - is under no obligation to participate in the Conflict Resolution Panel process- (6) If the objection is to be withdrawn, file a written notice withdrawing - the objection with the - Clearinghouse and the local government proposing the plan ;%, mendment. Section 2 _ All Other Par :icivants Specif �c .ObXigations All participants who. are not local governments must comply with the regnSrPments of Article VIII; Section 1 A. (1) , (2) , and (3). A non -local government desiring to object to a proposed Plan amendment has the same _obligations as an objecting local government detailed in Article VIII, Section 1 C_ Section 3. Plan Amendment Review process A. A plan amendment is prepared pursuant to policies and procedure's• of the: initiating local government. At least thirty (30) days prior to _ the:-••governing - body_!s .transmittal hearing, an Executive Sty* -ary along•twith a copy . of. the proposed plan amendment and supporting material, and the date,. time, and place of the 8 -� Pa a 16 of 35 - Exhibit A - - transmittal hearing, shall he furnished to the Clearinghouse- g_ Within five (5) days, the Clearinghouse shall distribute the Executive Summary and hearing information to the participants in the Agreement who have requested copies of the initiating local government's amendments. C_ A written notice of .intent to object may be filed by any participant- (1) A written notice of intent to object must be filed no later than fifteen (15)- days before the transmittal hearing. (2) If a proposed. plan amendment is substantially modified between the submittal to the Clearinghouse _and the transmittal of the amendment, a written notice of intent tb object may be filed within ten (10) days of transmittal. D_ The Clearinghouse shall immediately notify the initiating- local government of all written notices of intent to object - -- received by the Clearinghouse. E. The initiating local government shall meet with all objectors prior to the transmittal hearing unless the written notice of intent to obj ect was filed pursuant to Section 3.C.(2) above. In that instance, the parties shall meet within fifteen (15) days of the submittal of the written notice of intent to object to the Clearinghouse. F. No later than fifteen (15) days after transmittal of the proposed plan amendi -ent, a participant who filed a written notice of intent to object prior to transmittal may file a written objection to the proposed plan amendment with the Clearinghouse. Exhibit A Page 17 of 35 If a written notice of intent to object was filed after transmittal pursuant to Section 3 C _ (2) above, a written objection may be f iled by that participant no later than thirty (30) days after the filing of the written notice of intent to object. G_ upon receipt of a written objection�--the -Clearinghouse shall notify the initiating local government and the Interlocal Plan Amendment Review Committee of the written objection and transmit a copy of the objection to the initiating local government and the Interlocal Plan Amendment Review Co-- ittee. H. The Interlocal Plan Amendment Review Committee -shall convene a Fact - finding Panel within ten (10) days of receipt-of the _ written :objection. The Fact- finding Panel shall review the objection pursuant "to Article IX and sha71-1- issue its opinion letter no later than twenty (20) days after the submittal of the written " objection to the Clearinghouse_. I. After the Fact- finding Panel issues its opinion letter, any party (the initiating local government and any participant objector) to the fact -f inding may request conflict resolution pursuant to. Article X. The request shall be submitted in writing to the Clearinghouse no later than ten (10) days after transmittal of the Department of Community Affairs Objection, Recommendation and Comments Report. The Clearinghouse shall i_n+*++ediately notify the other •parties of this request-, Mithin ten (10) days of receipt- of notification-- from the -- Clearinghouse, - the. other parties . shall notify "the Clearinghouse of their 'decision on whether or not to agree to.conflict resolution. If the initiating local government Exhibit A - PAge' 18 of 35 ind any objector agree to conflict resolution, the Clearinghouse Shall notify the Interlocal Plan Amendment Review Committee, which shall convene the appropriate Conflict Resolution Panel pursuant to Article X_ Section 4. Modification of Time - Frames By majority vote of the entire membership of the Executive Committee, the Executive Committee may modify the time- frames set forth for any activity as specified in Article VIII. ARTICLE IX. FACT- FINDING PANEL A_ The three person fact - finding panel shall consist of members of the Interlocal Plan Amendment Review Co-- ittee. The Chair shall be selected by the panel. B_ = The Clearinghouse shall provide the panel with the following information prior to the meeting: (1) that portion of the Plan Amendment which is under --- consideration; and (2) the written objection. C. The Chair shall ai-Lange for testimony and technical assistance from participants as is appropriate. D. At the meeting, only the initiating local government, the participant objector, property owner for a site specific plan amendment, and any participant who has been requested to provide technical assistance shall be allowed to present testimony. The initiating local government shall present the item being objected to, the reason for the proposed amendment, and its supporting data, analysis, and documentation. This presentation may be supplemented o_.LSIL :. A V,ft- IQ of 15 by the affected property owner. The objecting party(ies) shall- make a presentation on the basis for its objection. Technical assistance testimony as requested by the Chair may be presented at any time The panel may ask questions. The Chair shall close discussion with the participants and thereafter confine -- discussion to panel =--hers- E. The panel shall specifically identify each objection and -� shall issue an opinion letter including, but not limited to, the following on each objection which is filed: (1) The objection appears to be one of Miscommunication and that it appears to be resolved_ (2) There is insufficient data and analysis upon which to support either the amenri -ent or the objection or - both_ (3) Sufficient data and analysis has been provided and a conflict appears to exist. The conflict should be resolved either: (a) through-_ the normal Department of Community Affairs review process; or (b) in a conflict resolution forum such as provided in Article X, mediating services of the Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council, or other mediation forum_ F_ Within two (2) working days, the Chair shall fax an opinion letter to the involved parties. If warranted, minority opinion may be prepared by other members of the panel and provided Exhibit A P88e 20 of 35 - 4 concurrently with the Chair's opinion letter. ARTICLE X_ CONFLICT RESOLUTION PANEL A• The Conflict Resolution Panel shall consist of three members when performing facilitation services or five members when performing mediation services. The panel shall be composed of individuals who are members of the Interlocal Plan Amendment Review Committee. The Chair shall be selected by the panel. 8_ The Chair shall arrange for testimony and technical assistance from participants as is appropriate. Testimony shall be provided only through participants who are parties to the objection unless technical assistance testimony has been requested by the Chair. C� Two types of service may be provided. These are: (1) Facilitation - a. A facilitation panel shall consist of three members_ When the facilitation panel convenes to review the objection, it shall seek to have the parties reach a mutually agreeable position on the proposed amendment and the objection to it_ b_ The facilitation panel shall declare when its work has been finished or an impasse has been reached. At that time, the Chair shall write a letter documenting the meetings wh i_c-h were held, the evidence and testimony received, points of - agreement, and points of Exhibit A Page 21 of 35 r disagreement_ The letter shall be transmitted to participating parties and the Department of Community Affairs. (2) Mediation a_ A mediation panel shall -consist of five members. In addition to functioning as a facilitation panel, the mediation panel shall provide a statement reco?++n+ending a method of resolving any remaining points of disagreement_ If there is not urlanimous consent among panel me?nhers, a -minority = opinion may be issued. It shall accompany the majority position. - b. As with the facilitation panel, the Chair shall write a letter documenting the meetings - which were held, the evidence and testimony received, points of agreement, points of disagreement, and recommendation. The letter and any minority opinion shall be transmitted to participating parties and the Department of Community Affairs_ ARTICLE 2'I. HISCELLAHEOQS Section 1_ Delegation of Duty Nothing contained herein shall be deemed to authorize the delegation of the constitutional or statutory duties of the state, county, or city officers. Exhibit A Page 22 of 35 Section 2. Filinq - A copy of this Agreement shall be filed with the Clerk of the Circuit Court in and for Palm Beach County. Section 3. Limited Liability No participant shall in any manner be obligated to pay any debts, obligations or liabilities arising as a result of any actions of the Executive Committee. The Executive Committee members have no authority or power to obligate the participants in any , manner. Section 4. Ainendments This Agreement may be amended in writing at any time by the concux.i:ence of a two- thirds vote of the entire membership of the Executive Committee and subsequent ratification by all of the participants in this Agreement and any Participation Agreement. Section 5. Controlling Law -- This Agreement shall be construed by and governed by the laws of the State of Florida. Section 6. Effective Date /TeLm This Agreement shall be effective on October 1, 1993, and shall. continue in full force and effect unless all the participants withdraw in accordance with Section 7. Section 7. Withdrawal Any participant may withdraw as a party to this Agreement after October 1, 1994, upon sixty (60) days Written notice to the Chair of the Executive Co?+*n+ittee. Any participation fees paid will not be returned and the participant will cease activities. in the Exhibit A Page 23 of 35 - ' program outlined in this Agreement. Suspension of participation in this Agreement will occur upon the nonpayment of the fee prescribed herein or for the nonperformance of any of the terms and conditions of this Agreement by any participant. The suspension will be effective thirty (3 0) days _ after date • of - notice -- from the Clearinghouse that noncompliance has occurred_ Any participant receiving such notice shall have an opportunity to cure its noncompliance in a reasonable time- Upon compliance, the participant shall be notif ied by the Clearinghouse of its reinstatement as a participant. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Agreement has been executed-7-by the participeants as of the date and year indicated above. ATTEST: CITY OF ATLAITTIS By:: By: - Ci �C1LY Clyde F_ Farmer, Mayor *BFr T.E GLADE I ' ity Clerk r ill Bailey, Mayor V *Nothing in this agreement wi 17 auyAorize the ATTEST: By: en�- . City Clerk delegation of an CITY _ Ox PTO / r tive authority - 'z 'A/ — X. Exhibit A Page 24 of 35 - ATTEST: City Clerk ATTEST: By: �LAIN .Cr• I Town Clfk CITY OW BEACH BY: E. F. Harmening,/xTayor TOWN OF BRINY BREEZES Y: ';/. �� David, Mayor A EST: TOWN OF CLOUD LAKE By . :Xc j By. - Town Cl e k Robert R. Reynolds, III, Council Chairman ATTEST:: City Clerk ATTEST: Village Clerk ATTEST: By: ity Clerk ... CITY OF DELRAY BEACH By: Trx&as E ch , Mayor VILLAGE OF GOLF Y: - Donald H- Gustafson, Mayor CITY OF GREENACRES By: mu erreri, Mayor Exhibit A page 25 of 35 ATTEST: By: I a Cle_ ��'t4� Y`3c Town /� TOWN OF GULF STREAM By: 1 U+illiam Koch, Jr', Mayor ATTEST: TOWN OF HIGHLAND BEACH BY I. � - c��•44.,,'I$Y : l �' Town Clerk Arlin - Voress, Mayor ATTEST: TOWN OF HYPOLUXO - _dp TowB Clerk Al Merion, Mayor ATTEST: - Town Clerk ( p 'ATTEST: By: Tomb Cler'6 ATTEST: . By: Town Clerk TOWN OF JUNO BEACH By: ira ri . �iu,Q Frank W. Harris, Mayor TOWN OF JUPITER By: Karen o Golo'ka, r TOWN OF JUPITER INLET COLONY By: CEJOSE 14= 'M PAKrj-t?z'ATE AT Tats TJM Nicholas F. Porto, Mayor - Exhibit A Page 26 of 35 ATTEST: Toldli Clerk TOWN OF LAKE CLARKE SHORES By: Gregor as`ey, May ATTEST: CITY OF LAKE WORTH i- (SEAL) By: !/ .l .� By: bars A. Fors e, y Rbdne� ,4- Vdmano, Mayor C�ky Clerk • - - . DATE: �/, J� ATTEST; Town- Clerk i- e ATTEST: By: /J Charles H. Helm, Town Clerk TOWN OF A By:. Robert---,A- McDonald, Mayor TOWN OF MANALAPAN By: .�G. Kent Shortz, M -D., Mayor ATTEST: TOWN OF NIA PARK Y Town Clerk -") J) Ga -re yM. English, Mayor ATTEST: - _ TO OCEAN t E j -- By By : - -� ` 1-100' Town Clerk Daniel J.` `'b' Connell, -I&yor �w Exhibit A Page 27 of 35 ATTEST_ City Clerk CITY OF PAEOKEE By c. -�-��1 •� Ramon Horta, Jr., Mayor ATTEST: TOWN OF PALM BEACH To Clerif , " M..- William Wainb , Town Council_ Prudent ATTEST: DATE: PATa4 BEACH COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS DOROTHY ' H. WII.KEN , Clerk By �, i� By: clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEG SCY By: Cofo y y Maryi.McCa /tty, Chair / R93 802 -- C• ATTEST: CITY OF PALM $ACH ENS By, • ' By: f - j. 1,*_ h R. `Russo, Mayor - ` cr :!E 0F FL OM OA. COUNTY. OF PALM BEACH 1. R-3ROTY.Y H. YYxxal. ex owlido cawk of via o � � ]Vspt,: � ^...'�'� vi «a:' 3`.'IrL^.'.� _/` -�`'t 7i ^l{ �'`•iC'_ - � �: ' i- �� it 1••. ri„�C_� - %.�'.���:)�•V =' .Exhibit A ATTEST: By: �Q))�� T. Town Clerk - TOWN OF PALM BEACH SHORES nJ� By: .lilt fvti ate✓ Lac Thomas Chilcote, Mayor EXECUTED on v,ol, -13 by authority of the Village Council as provided "in- Reso lift ion R93 -19_ ,ATTEST: VILLAGE COUNCIL OF THE VILLAGE OF PALM SPRIN =e ���= x1�i/� �•� «<' ¢� Y By Irene L_ Burrou _qkfs, Richard H. Jette;/,Mayor Village Clerk i )/ _ ATTEST: '-BY: (SEAL) CITY O RIVIERA BEACH 'Clara K. Williams ��✓0 QPH Mayor, Cit y of Riviera Beach •� ��•_ L� r- :Z ✓/ _ice+ s r _ ATTEST: ���� VILLAGE OF ROYAL PAJ M BEACH : . BY' _ D.��%�L l_ By: Vi/llag Clerk ' Tony Masgotti, Mayor �- 7 ATTEST: CITY OF SOUTH BAY Y: Cit Clerk r `G� "nce An Ma r Baz i Andefs9h , Vie Mayor L Exhibit A Page 29 of 35 ATTEST: TOWN OF SOUTH PALM BEACH Tow lerk Marge i� -.—Roberts, Mayor ATTEST: ..VILLAGE-OF TEQUESTA- •$Y- By: _ j:.- . j v • �oa-n cierica Ror( T"- Mackail, May r - .ATTEST: CITY OF T PALM BEACH Bye% BY: 'Agnes Hayhuar'$t, Nancy/M_- Graham, Mayor- -City Clerk VV (INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK) s_ Exhibit A Page 30 of 35 M ATTEST: BOCA RATON AIRPORT AUTHORITY (�:✓c C%� By: By : /C% eo W _ Blank, Chairman ATTEST: Y William G inters, Secretar� APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGAL SUFFICIENCY F e �t rney for Worth D inage District ATT f B . t Y ' Rl-ck Dent, Executive Director ATTESTS f: U By Gal_ M. English, General Manag r G: \geagovt \dmd \cuggtxt_mep LAKE WORTH DRAINAGE YSTRICT By: 'John I. Whitworth, III, President LOXAHATCHEE RIVER ENVIRONMENTAL_ CONTROL DISTRICT By: George G. Gentile, Chairman SOUTH INDIAN WATER CONTROL DISTRICT By: tT mas H. Powell, President c ubavid J. BearaOe, Vice- President Exhibit A Page 31 of 35 ATTEST: NORTHERN PALM BEACH C WATE NTROL DIST FU By. By: Pete Pimcntel, District Secretary William Kerslake, President APPROVED AS TO FORM - AND AL S CY j r ' By. Km Edwards, Legal Counsel � :j AZi'FST: SCHOOL BOARD OF PALM BEACH'- •_ COUNTY ' By- Monica Uhlhorti, Superimendent 'Crul Bjork, Orman - (INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK) Exhibit A page 32 of 35 ATTEST: LOXAHATCHEE GROVES WATER CONTROL DISTRICT / Y. c =o William H. Thrasher, Distn'�t Diruxor Meredibi Fox, Chairman of the Board of Supervisors (INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK) A page 33 of 35 r PARTICIPATION AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT dated this 1993, entered into by and among day of a (local government or service provider) hereinafter "New Participant ", and the various parties executing the Interlocal Agreement dated October 1, 1993, hereinafter "Master Agreement "; W I T N E S" S E T H: WHEREAS, an intergovernmental coordination program for reviewing proposed changes to adopted comprehensive plans_ which fully utilizes the existing Chapter 163 comprehensive p-ranning process with minimal bureaucracy and expense for local governments and service providers has been established as evidenced by that certain Interlocal Agre -inent dated October 1, 1993; and WHEREAS, _desires to become a participant under said agreement; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Article IV, Section 1 of the Master Agreement, participation is authorized upon the execution of this unilateral Participation Agreement. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants contained herein, it is agreed and understood by -and among the undersigned New Participant and the participants in the Master Agreement as follows= 1. Upon execution of this Agreement and upon payment of the annual participation fee prescribed in Article IV, Section!L of the Master Agreement, New Participant will become a {participant in the Exhibit A EXHIBIT Page 34 of 35 i s . Master Agreement recorded in the official Records at Book No_ Page - 2. The New Participant shall enjoy all the privileges of, and shall be bound by all the terms and conditions of, the Master Agreement_ 3_ The participants in the Master Agreement agree to the inclusion of New Participan` in accordance with Article IV, Section 1 of the Master Agreement as it is acknowledged that the inclusion of an additional participant furthers the intent and spirit of the Master Agreement and the ultimate goal of providing planning coordination among all local governments and service providers. 4. A copy of this Participation Agreement shall bi filed with the Clerk of the Court in and for Palm Beach County and with the Clearinghouse_. _ S. This. Participation Agreement shall be effective upon execution and filing pursuant to Paragraph 4 and shall continue in full force and effect unless New Member withdraws pursuant to Article XI, Section 7 of the Master Agreement. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, xhis Agreement has- been executed by 0 as of the date and year indicated below. By: Its.: Date: C: \g�agovt \dmd \particip g IS-4 ATEU:- 1— UMIUA, W-UN `! O^ PALM. SEA::': . n t ` ��saaaaaa 00P.O T WI, 9 WiLKEN. ;r-rYcio V.- f:.! }-(- a:3 a: Ti:.4 ."i`a�'1 EXHIBIT B Implementing Ordinance Elements SCHOOL CONCURRENCY ORDINANCE BASIC FRAMEWORK See Interlocal Agreement A. Applicability (required concurrency determination) L Applies to: a. All new residential development orders b. Amendment to existing development orders which increase the number of residential units 2. Does not apply to: a. Project with no impact on school attendance, i.e. non - residential or elderly restricted housing, or single family platted lots B. Establish Level of Service Standard and Application of Standard 1. Level of Service standards 110% and 120% a. How measured b. Test for Level of Service 2. Concurrency Service areas (CSAs) a. Application of CSA b. Amendment of CSA 3. Assured construction - definition (budgeted, adopted, and scheduled school construction) 4. Standards for mitigation 5. Procedures for residential development phasing to assured school construction or mitigation C. Procedure for Reviewing Development Applications 1. Documents which must be submitted for review 2. The point in the process at which evaluation must occur. Generally, before any development order is issued. 3. Transmittal to School District (process, time frames) 4. Evaluation and comments of School District (time frame) 5. Incorporation of conditions of approval into development order 6. Appeals of School District decisions D. Procedure for School District Review 1. Transmittal to School District for review 2. Time frames for review and comment 3. Effect of comments H:IDATA%WPS IWOC1iCONMCY%S B EXHIBIT C PARTICIPATION AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT dated this day of . entered into by and among the a municipal government, hereinafter "New Participant ", and the various parties executing the Public School Concurrency Interlocal Agreement dated , Hereinafter "School Concurrency Agreement "; WITNESSETH: VIF EREAS, a public school concurreacy program has been established as evidenced by that certain Interlocal Agreement dated ;and WHEREAS, _ desires to become a participant under said agreement; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Article XII, Section C of the School Concurrency Agreement, participation is authorized upon the execution of this unilateral Participation Agreement. NOW, T MREFORE,, in consideration of the mutual covenants contained herein, it is agreed and understood by and among the undersigned New Participant and the participants in the - School Concurrency Agreement as follows: i . -Upon execution of this Agarecment. New Participant will become a participant in the School Concurrency Agreement_ 2. The New Participant Ghall enjoy all the privileges of, and shall be bound by all the terms and conditions of, the School Concurrency Agreement. The New Participant shall adopt the required comprehensive plan amendments pursuant to Article II, Section B as soon as possible after execution of this Participation Agreement- 3. The participants in the School Concurredey Agreement agree to the inclusion of New Participant in accordance with Article MI. Section B of the School Concurrency Agreement as it is acknowledged that the inclusion of an additional participant furthers the intent and spirit of the School Concurrency Agreement. 4. A copy of this Participation'Agreement shall be filed with the Clerk of the Court in and for Palnt Beach County and with the Technical Advisory Committee established 1 - by Article VI, Section A of the School Concurrency Agreement- 5. This Participation Agreement shall be effective upon execution and filing pursuant to Paragraph 4 and shall continue in full force and effect unless New Mernber withdraws pursuant to Article )QI, Section B of the School Concurrency Agreement or the School Concurrency Agreement is otherwise terminated. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Agreement has been executed by as of the date and year indicated below. By: Its: Date: • ;2 EXHIBIT D Student Generation Multiplier Table TOTAI- PUBLIC PUBLIC PUBLIC PUBLIC SAMPLE SCHOOL SCHOOL SCHOOL SCHOOL SIZE t, -1? K -5 6 -8 9 -12 ALL HOUSE TYPES 1 BEDR 70 0. _ 4 0-04 0 _ 00 0-00 2 BEDR 252 0 _ 12 0-08 0.02 CI-01 Z BEDR 245 0 _ 50 0- 15 0. 12 3-f- BEDR 76 0-6? O ..38 0-15 0. 15 SING_ FAMILY DETACHED AND ATTACHED 2 OR LESS 12z O _ 19 0- 14 0-03 0.00 3 BEDR 217 O _ S 0-17 O. 12 0-23 3-i- BEDR 70 72 0-40 O. 17 0- 15 LO(4 RISE MULTI- FAMILY 1 BEDR 28 0.00 0_00 0.00 0-00 BEDR o7 0$- 10 0-06 0.03 0-01 3 BEDR 18 0.3e 0_05 0.16 0.16 3{ BEDR 3 0.66 0_33 0.00 O_33 MID RISE MULTI _ FAMILY 1 BEDR 13 0_00 0.00 0.00 0_00 2 BEDR 23 0.00 0_00 0_00 0_00 3 BEDR 1 0_00 0_00 0_00 0.00 3-4- BEDR O 0.00 0_00 0_00 0_00 HIGH RISE MULTI- FAMILY C4 'plus S�or tcS> 1 BEDR 8 0_00 0_00 O.•00 0_00 2 BEDR 19 O_10 0_00 0.00 0_10 3 BEOR 6 0_00 0_00 0_00 0_00 3i- BEOR _ O_OQ 0_00 0.00 0_00 MOBILE HOME ~ i SEOR i 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2 aeon 10 0.00 0_00 0.00 0_00 3 SEOR 3 0_00 0.00 0.00 0.00 34- GEOR 1 0.00 0.00. .0.00 0.00 W M r- - w Q- M Q O O to N r t• M R to O N Q 8 W 9-f`N�OO V) (0 NN NM N (0 M N c CD O } WO c O N V M W CO � O W Cl) to .N-- O N W M Q O O O N CD O mo to Cl) '4T Co ONOOOM r- M to 0) M W(O to to M m otn(O V(OONt- (0tnOCOMOnrOQ) O M N M N N N N Q M Q V (0 r- O � l0 tt) M O O N '7 N M- N Q O W to W c0 to to N O O to W CO M V O O M CO M CO W M- to CO O- N �- O _n W - I` N N - r- .- M M Q r- M O M r` t` N c W O 3 QO c O N O Q- N 'If CO Q r t` N O •- W O N O r- t- Q to N CO O t0 co O fl- O O O O N O (0 fl- Q r (D f__ (0 M o N fl- (D (3) N n W N W n N to (0 Q 1.0 to CO c7 V o c) (O M (0 (7) N f- to Q O r M O- (0 O W M O � M N N N Cl N N Q' M � R - R (0 O r tO ,-T e-W OO (0 MW. -M W(0MO(0 WMN O W f�W -MOOt7 t�O W qrO)N tnN N cl) cq Q f- Cl) 0 0 r- t._ N c - W O ; M N O (D N Q N O V 0) N CO to Co to CO T Q N (0 W (0 N t0 (0 O _ N M- f- to - O O � M to O O W to 'V f_ o W O O Q r"-- to t- tn! W V O W O O (0 "I - M r� oM(ONWONltnMOrcmwPn"IO�NO N C4 M N N N N N N tt M- �T Q (O N M . WC4W to C-- CO 0)tn M tnW W Mtn W0 o N C) Wfl- V)ONMO V) W O(01�C0 M M M Q W N N (D M W r f- r- - co r- M Q r-- M O O f- r- C's CO � O 3 N C W O �-- N OWM�- Nt�0)Otnt-MMN m W f- %nin to ONgfO(0 (ONQCDNOMONQO C> C4 W oO W NtOOMWf�(00t- Qf"Nt- (OtoQ M O m o(ri tO N(O ciN t- to N CO W to Mw M- Q NM N N N NNN Q M - '[f "W W O E- co W V d C14 NO)ONNNto -CM cn - Nn(O - 0)tn(O O NOW 40MW'at W 0NNO C -W t- Mf _ N W N O �+ O - '.T - N- W- Q N Q to W M W W f r t. N - W a o o� 0 N W to to O O M Q to to O O (0 r_ W Q O W N Cl) M to 0) NT (O CO W f- to -to (D WOWO W elM )(D- 'vO)QfO WONvQWtoW M M oN")--to to - r- tt) O(O N CD W QOi to O CDC vi N M N N N N N N Q M- Q q W O f` r to N to O 4n QN(7D NO W to - O(ON W MO) O p (V Mfl- IT 40 in to 0)N O O)NN WO) - W'V - N C4 - CO e- Q- V to WMMW^ r- N c .- W 0 ; O C O O N (D m m co f- Co N N N M r� to 0 W W M Q Of 0 co r to Q Cl to � N O) to V) � O fn O N WNO W ar QO)0)Q40Mm0m"' W w40t -WMN W o rinOtp0) Ito tA.°OCO Nr.:46cYtAQO)P: (O NM N N N NNNQM - V QtnO W to V w C- C40)Q4040404M40 N gW4n4Df+ao0)0r Ex d nIZ s aL. .J 5 QL ctl G O b .o m C m w i. V b 4, C 3 m E m c L p c m 0 m 0 o a - o a o c � LL L LL o O O � m N C 'cm 4Ln a 4D4 e E v j E c c ov � � B C N O a m m m 0 N — m m C N O G. 7Z O 7 :3 O m A m Q {L M L � m 7 m r ° ... n 7 Z 7 C m m z h n m m E Q 3m m _m o U o c m m m n c o E w Z o 0. o o 3 o a gm Z YO c L D p ~ O N c A T O d m W e m m m u Ed r o m o o C c o c Ul r Q � • p • p • a E E N 1xj O N h ° m 8 Q C m F��DD F-�N' 0Q C m E a � e i E r r 9= a° r • E u = e • W • w o r Y _• • E iru V b 4, H T ° a a e u C C 7 v E a c M ° v � E E j a I. r c 4 .• o r y j h h x 40 O O O r �i a�0 00 CD co co 00 r b 4 N N a J m.p m t aD 0�0 O O r r 7 � to-* � .I• CD W m m V M ti a _ 00 N LL ti E Q �y iT_ W �.. •)J.v. O � � 4b ru E H T ° a a e u C C 7 v E a c M ° v � E E j a I. r c 4 M ppr t�i Y. O _ W II � W •J•:.v I v� Y tl I .D m O c O O 4•1 m p mN N r h mdo 400 40 �. 40 co 40 O tl .O, Pf •- �f O vm N O tl A m m `" eo i e•► on m o c E 40 ab f Pyf N A N L_ t_ M o n o m 8 E N o tl a0 N !9 ao 00 N Q A O L N a0 .o m co N .-- r eV m r E c E O m O L O o > Q m Q S M N tl j m 'm m N N 40 go N O A ea co: 0r 0 V) I� o � ,p n o .0 d p c H H 0 tl l"f a0 m e0 40 00 O m O �- m tl tl eN9 o o O 40 W O N r ~ N C c S m w � M ND N a ;;tl O 4t00� o m h n tl O O v aq N J D u W c 3 C. e- e a m 4-3 440 m � W ll o o m l ti .0 V e o W o w '- N m v O A 4 r Q O it p QO tl A N N N E se JR O to q C4 40 m r 0, r co I to I � A -MI' OD m Y'. o O m O N e- �' m e• ''.. N' I i I I sp r O O e°a N J = a • O m m N n IN o x Co 8 8 8 ; • �� tl Q m tl crT V ° m co W m —� n m E r- E b em0 O H {p9 0 0�0 e A O O O .°.. 7° o so tl o eN0 �°, O1/ <i V U r w c a c v ° jo w pp !f p-W E E E u law h C! m N F N N to O C q —0 U O 'Is = c w2 ° OE j w ` M N 0 O O 0 w0t ° — Q 3 3 cv� a` 8 c r IE t c se a � •"1 C 7 �Q O V m v 0 G W } O N O m N a m E e m Mm W r b co co r r r f. a N N c .� �a N N � 'A w O co In go N N et o N N r r. �m1M r N N � O N N r r cm ca O N N X I H N r � ca P O 0 h N o � o c ag c C C O V LL � O O � m t_ n g o N CO) m O c _ v V N E W 7 ID � r m Q L U m > n n � m $ 4m 3 1 2Z a c Y a 3 J x m r m _ c m Y L O c F. A or °7 Nv �p D (I 3 C r S v m � F N Q �U N W m a_ W _ vc$ � L S p 0 (� Q ScQO N o. o �o C� n _O a 0 N d E a moo m C 46 N ~ O O N T .. 7 m O LL m c = o 0 m O O O m E H w a o�`o c p E a m M O O C m „ « E am � d rz E Q r�•�o E��Iz 45 ..Allis F C O m a m m m m L W m W c d c C 10 C V c L L Lc L O .O C C c N =O W a00 a ca ay W W W w o W a a aoo a CL U U U c O L L L L U co V U U U U T r N C C C C E o E EE E E E $ EO p b O O v m r a E r d r r c c Ul i E • °e yj Y/ L m r E � _ r C « d E a moo m C 46 N ~ O O N T .. 7 m O LL m c = o 0 m O O O m E H w a o�`o c p E a m M O O C m „ « E am � d rz E Q r�•�o E��Iz 45 ..Allis F 2 O O V O Z C a W V W C . c C ° os B Q N O L S C c B E E ay to < W W = b W N q Q O to s a) W L N ►- to $ 3 � m Ct Q Z' P C to L t C, n Q p W .J p o - m W� Q J. C h C W m r .!C-! v c m r m � m W m W E L CL Q c L L ai o m o , W Q C c= m T L F > C N U � P :a c° o m Q c v m Q' m d 3 =� K-3 mo :t ' aD to O A O v c c O N IS A t7 O1 N cm O N -0 . .ah J• • � n v A Q n Awl > S A N O O V �W V O d ci E $ V N cm M V p7 S CO fjj •" O Qo L_ - ar0 W 0 Tamer: F E o2 m N Y t0 Q p ' Yf O A, O N tD v � a 0 W � r W r r r e r St r 3 r �E E E e to t- A 0 0 0 O N O us O �QQ' r r r e r v ;i' r u E O- v` -0 m oA v orn N r w� A v� O rn M V N b e�f N N V _ W M m v vo O t0 A b O m r< r r .M- N N a .° • O ° � N W N h M N N O < � w o Q O C21 $ ' A M '1 O A n A A Y 4 r- t7 Q to N to O N N O M A oD g Ot N N Q to H O N< to Q A f- 8a A r W t0 A Q V, r co t"l N fZ N t. co m ao O N N N^ N r O a0 N a h ob QO C., A N ao H eq O 01 o en to M N A O Q « N ^ Yo1 N Q W N O N h • to tq � m ao � W W N H axD ^ N � q r Sr- m o C. O; O A A A A 0 co N N �•:. A to eo A O A Y O N o b °o N to at O iD ^ O O i.. 15 x X W a �/� • - aD m b m A r p N N t. t0 Hf O H q l0 A to A r A ^ to h ^ Q N N w, W " • .:. at" I Jill C ° os B Q N O L S C c B E E ay to < W W = b W N q Q O to s a) W L N ►- to $ 3 � m Ct Q Z' P C to L t C, n Q p W .J p o - m W� Q J. C h C W m o .!C-! v c m o a m � m W m W E L CL Q c L L ai o m o , W Q C c= m T L F > C N U � P :a c° o m Q c v m Q' m d 3 =� K-3 mo m mm °z� N C 4 Q 21 U Q L _O _ W W � °i C, n O m W .J m m m m m OZ O E m � m . °Z Q. N C 4 21 U Q U z Q Z O a °i C, n C OZ . °Z n CL E o v Z $ H N v c c O IS O N -0 � v Q n > O V �W V O d ci E $ V N O M V p7 S CO fjj •" O Qo L_ - ar0 W 0 0 E o2 m a A SL q p W C E a 0 W � r W r e r r r 3 r �E E E e us �QQ' St1 o ~ e v ;i' W u E 0 c 1 Y� N C 4 j L N O b H co m E C m e W -tan O tit°Ju3 •IAII g •deo s x 0 N I A O I O im I� N r Imo) O N m n ti m N e W I O r N r N iN0 b N 0 N N O N aO m - m N N N A YD N to m m m CM n Ob N N n re N N h M r0 r Ido N N 0 T T m T N W T e m T b T co T at A T T m T T b T N 0 T T m T T I� a ,a R m m C O ~ �Ll!� m t V w 3 .' t: > a a r A c p E aJ a L H a C E w V u E o C E ?JW. < -A . o m Zu w A c E tu W63 a c. c a o °OS-o V u �_ C • U - �` mOo �. tea• Of N 0 N N O N aO m - m N N N A YD N to m m m CM n Ob N N n re N N h M r0 r Ido N N 0 T T m T N W T e m T b T co T at A T T m T T b T N 0 T T m T T I� a b c ,a R m m C O ~ m t V w 3 .' LL > a a r u O c p E aJ a L c a C E w V u E o C E a U m Zu w A c E aE�o -c a c. c a o °OS-o V u �_ C • E r Lu �` mOo b c lei' �Y sQ Li y r � `'��•' W tr Vy/ V gg VA o Ob w 40 o N o m a* Q C C mv cis O � O C,4 A O O n n n O Y oD of O O A A O m O O O C4 p M N N C W Q C W cc p p A p r o 8 m 00 O t7 A O A O NN O t- oo m co m to N N PD N 04 G N Gc Q O a 0 0 0 O W W Go O O Q a Q O Q 4 _o c-D oD o Co cq fn t0 m to E L E b A tc�tG °o, o O O U o W ^ V n A m m m Gf N w !'� ch O � O Q 40 PD N N Cl o O m co m O o O O jp t> N N N j£ � Q N tn 4D C C C W Q C m ao n O m coo ° 'n b N (AV � N N N w oa n O O cL N h ta0 b N N Go tr tr r N O ° O O Co GD O OD im r A O O al O 40 tq N H 3 O E v � o E m m ? a A co v oD m 0 0o d O m o? N ao to N A O o o Q m U to Q o 'Q a Q m ti° a°O .w•- ° b N N N co C%l N m G o m m to a w m a a a e e x a o a m 3 o a m m a= oo 0 0 o m o o w A o N m m m m m m m m 3 z w z w z w U 3 z e N O O_ O° l-D O O m N A b O< N N A n ° m O AN Ip O O m N m O m c c c t I° -o° n �0 PD N N d w w w . c O ocxor n a �I m m io 0 0 3 3 3 oc c m I m m j L L L L O O N m A ° em O Y w N C C N C N C C aC g 000 p C _ f C4 N in to on O 8 40 C p G o N O N O 1po al to b me O < L� �� �4 N O b w N N N LC N O t_ 8 L_ 8 L_N w w 5 js < 1x0 O N 1 M h� N pC 0 Q 0 U a V) O `�.•' ; c4 N 1 e- O e- CD oD p a m m m m � w 11j P w C G G m E mo .,m rt N o° m m ° V)� Er Eo �° �°t o m m o o f 4D w eYi v c- Poo Qtu Qw Pw E A A m N N 04 N orb P o0 oo oo Q a el in to h c,'n a co us °c C14 04 r4 1 � e a s s a t c c a Q� n �E Y! W 0 t �� w D u a v Y.. W II} U Z' n: V Z K a m I1 01 �� r xxxx29 Pf m xx r ;; tE z 0 0 l7 !1 0 0 O N! 8 0 N N N (V W 40 v I on - f9 ;.— v I as I 1° 44 In N am � 4 O Cy a YI W 10 h N . co V) f- 101 b m 0 A N O CO N O O M IM O O O n v X01 cm b N jO' O O O O C, to N N c) I� M O 0 O 0j a m I1 01 �� r N N N Pf m N r r a` a I r, ' at 0 0 x. e p m m Q 01 1 W m m n �- ao l'7 M m CO N (V W 40 v o O m< W N Y a) a1 � '�, "I O 'co, "' (mV N � M r C I r I I M O N N O O N to N m m m A a�i N r V r I x r- r O O ON Q m n I < w O 0 O N N M as j C CD N 01 N O O O t W O M 0 0 ap ''CO go O m V N m t- M O O N�y 11 10 h m M m r N N w oaf' O 'N N .- S E �- i xx xx: 8 Q C I ema as COI O CD Ub X a p o m m l No a1M'Im N O m A C4 Q fV l 0 a l tmVV Vb 8 C4 O COI $ N W in l C4 .°- xxxxx a oN 0 O m N l'f Cf O r I n��nn� ° t M N N N $; CM M M N r j r r I Im mm am, 1 a1 a 1 N N r r N I 1 I 0 .. I1. ry s C u a o C E e = c e E a f • W E o a u ri O aq 4 C n m E O m C m Z m 40 v o O N O C dj v m m c m V CL c i i 0 j c o O L N u m C CD ca O O m V V m M t m �.• O E E S E 8 a 8 Q C Q c r CC8 O m V `o U �p O ri 0°1 4 is co m CL s�s66 O 40 v m Z Z Z Z C> i i CV j ° n n n S u m m O m m �.• E E E E E 8 8 8 8 Q O O CC8 O m V �p m Cf O m a E rto A C =a 'o 0 .. C u a o C E e = c e E a f • W E o a u • a m` d 3 00 4 Z 0 V v V 0 V y fi O m Q rz ca m } O N 0 U- 0 m m c m w pvr V � 4 � ; t• i~j _ �4s P0, Ul V a{� av 4 O O 4 i 8 O Z; 40 0 O I O• C4 a 4 8 9 O A 111 qD Vf N b 0 C1 h n N 0 A N m N 0 A 7 h 41 1 on s l7 II N M in M A Ii. N A V O N M O A T e O ti v co v N M 'Q A T 0 O r 'f a r N t- 40 r e M r v b T f0 r A T N dI b r N W co x n r to r to a r r�a r x O 8 N N A O 0 0 h N lam`) N ° S i co N X O r O O N e- N 1+ A 0 0 a N N O O N N O N O N ac if list- <5 g O O N W n W U ai O O N C I O Q m 3 C O m v v 3 t m z z W a W p c H (n U O a�N _tae O Fv o m m a N o� g O C °W O o s oTil o{-� o U C O r 9 r � o d _ v ic r N u 0 0 a p O V O c C W v E w � ca a cg E Ile a v 40 a a 7 v H i 7 �© I two � v! O 0 m m N 0 O m Co m E c m e W 191 n w A m P 0 A m 0 M m o m Q OOi �n + aNA M O 'm° m m N �a ao 0 AM A b m Nm n o O O b s b 1 o m 2IN W w I 'taaa i r O m f M b b b CD b b aD O' O w r r O .D W A n O b O W Co A b O O b b N e f r Qp 1 e A O N m o v2 o N D A aOD b ]IN O ] M W O r 1 O I^ I b oi$�to A C7 . Let I'm I b O O O p V,ra YY p� N l� lV m l07 C, N l! !7 N O N f '"I`N'1NI I�INfY eo M m so f N o O N O 0 0 0 r r r m o N m o Il- e m o f a7 co A NY NOi 0�0 h M co O Q O f m M w N r M N h N e'1 -V m l'f M m m f X7R A �x T !f N O ao N r r N h tc/V AM r N ti in m m lM9 0 0 f Ogle � O O w N N rl M lV m W O �f �p � N a l'! .dF a Ul ° m = = t m c 3 34C{ = Yo y 3 O Y J a O N c W 3 f C C Z O E O �W O a Q N L_ m N U W 3 m C 4 _ O Q c r O m f M b b b CD b b aD O' O w r r O .D W A n O b O W Co A b O O b b N e f r Qp 1 e A O N m o v2 o N D A aOD b ]IN O ] M W O r 1 O I^ I b oi$�to A C7 . Let I'm I b O O O p V,ra YY p� N l� lV m l07 C, N l! !7 N O N f '"I`N'1NI I�INfY eo M m so f N o O N O 0 0 0 r r r m o N m o Il- e m o f a7 co A NY NOi 0�0 h M co O Q O f m M w N r M N h N e'1 -V m l'f M m m f X7R A �x T !f N O ao N r r N h tc/V AM r N ti in m m lM9 0 0 f Ogle � O O w N N rl M lV m W O �f � N a l'! > m ° m = = t m c 3 34C{ = Yo y 3 O Y J a O N c W 3 f C C 11214F- c; U m a � m � a o > m ° m = = t m c 3 34C{ = Yo y 3 O Y J a O N c W 3 f C C Z O E O �W O a Q N L_ m N U W 3 m C 4 _ O Q c n m y E n E Z c o $ om O p N m m N O m m C m m C E m< > a E m o f 3 N U O Q Q1 9 c Q m U m a � m � L > O t m = = t c 0 c 3 34C{ = Yo y 3 O Y J U m co p E C w a n N O 3 m m U O G G Q Q C !� O Z z N O � L N E t ON N T c n n o a LN o o Q a 0W r N O b F� pm O B O O e E ai E r a aa C o r r o us OE C • e W e o f E ° s r t ° a £ c d q 0 d d .0, . 0 1 7 v t or 0 ILLO N A C O m H C m E a c m e W r, o � O O 3 S ° � c c m m c SC a m I m E Y L O m N N Q d d O H N g' C-) r_ U ° N N m N w Q C m e c a O m O N N Q N 40 N W > m r m to L m C p C m m Vo e•1 co 04 N r m n m 40 E cr3 _L U 3 N co .- N Q m O m ., 8 Mm O E C-2 m N b � A ° ?2 a S o N N X h V N N 10- O o r, o � O O 3 r � m m O N O m m c SC a N N Y L O m N N Q d d O C C O O � N b m m c N N m E U m e L m N N m Y Q m m r m to N N m m Vo e•1 mCO 04 N r m V N N Mm A C-2 W � A P r 0 iD 40 V N N r to D O O' ci t$ Z c o — o a$ N Om L_ m S � W O m O W a C m >m > 7 � C m H U m � L 9 07 a � m Q � C � O d J 3 m W L m Z E a O � � 3 mgc CL O O N O cm CL U Z U c c SC a Y L O O O O N N Q d d O C C O O O E W c E U N n c C c tY � 7C o Q E E C O r E 7 CL M , O i E v c C A 8 O 8 c � �Q' E m C n c 4 C O r E 7 CL M , O i E v c C A 8 O 8 c � �Q' E m C n c 4 �I ^II n m, �le o N CD r- n, lvlC4i°I° to i O O N O 1q Ol h A n ti o w h O A Q r 3 0 o n , 0 < N ap aD O O NiO Ob A Ci C) C4 3 Co do 1 M h h O I' ap O m r f� A 01 Oa m 40 0 0 O tq do w m O h W h i� .w b O O m z. 1 ! I r r C 0 0 a 0 A ro 0 la O •0 g W m � d C, V N a O 3 `4 N N m z a t o go .0 c O N N O p N Y N n i N N � Q m C ° CL O as O e a, M W ao m m $ Q N N N m m C m g � m m d so r ti' QN t Q W N N N c m C on O e e e e e m U a- m ON m 0 t0 m D N r' r PS O M M Cl) O N N to N a 0 c In eM0 C3� to L cm H N C-4 qq J S e c 0 0 a r C O c n0 go O C, M _ M O M NOY M r " N N N 01 O O N to H � N M r lMr! M W N N O cm .L "MQ h b O N N N c C C ep n go so 40 r O O 0 O N A .t.. N N 7§ x ob eo N Q U c o M M M r C3. 40 4.0 N p r! p C4 Rx >Q C M � W N l7 f~`9 ~ C C O E � E � C O V 2 w c L C O 6 Z Z7 •0 g dgkld, - nom; r n m IM < C1 N eb i 0 OD T m A e e e OD O d0 co 43 a to O O m n m m N r r n CD "'r F- 1O1 :iI m n w m e O e e e °D � r Q! r O) r 4m m N r n n m So I, 'm m � b le7 b O O n A m co 10 10 40 h � W to f OOf e Onf O W 0 ti C! N O O Im N e; O r N� M e N I I co N h m dp N O m r W N N b b O I� m � C W I e � b W � b � � abo w N � b M N 7 O 3 N _ N °T o � O •- r � N r' N pA 40 N b u C d O � O C N c o = O « y O _ O m t N = u m E m a Q L V c � ' m 1O o m a j m N m C C I°- m O O e E W N N co O! m O1 co H N b co H tr m u m N N N Z cq co m Ol Gi Q � O < co M o N N IN(1 O N r w co 4m C e e e pQ O O O b p O N N O C O c cao C 400 E N N 01 O G O C 4 p O p W mo O m E eJ OD r p • N ac m N N b O m a a b o r C �oIo' I I co m co n > co •� c C d O � O C N c o = O « y O _ O m t N = u m E m a Q L V c � ' m 1O o m a j m N m C C I°- m O a O E W N N co O! m O1 Q N co T m u m N N N m a cq co m Ol Gi Q � O � A b a u f�f O e N C _� O _ r w co 4m cV C O O co _ N Z a co m cOD N O Obo O m m Q N co T m N N�-Vy N Cl Q � A b f�f O C ;; cV C O O co _ m O Obo C O ~O N N C FL C Q G C « C 4 p O p W pC O c N O r a G O m C-. « -- • N ac m a b o r C ° o co m co n > co •� c N m a w O CO' we a o N .5 E c W E $ Es Q >. T � .0 r = N 2 N o O E' a o C b o e £$ 0 A o1!1 tiW F 0 b Z F� a co m m m Q T Q f�f O ;; cV C O O 'C& _ m C O m 7 C Q G C « C 4 p O p W pC O c N O m « a G O m C-. « -- • N ac a� aSo o r o ° o _mE nm > !=1 lV a w O CO' we a o N .5 E c o E $ Es Q >. 5 =n � ° o ~a N 2 N 0 O E' a o C o e £$ 0 A o1!1 tiW F 0 b p 7 O a E r� V C 4 o c o < c o E o E ul W O.. Eg E a n Z r IL C C a a a m t C 1 L Q1 } �r h O O r O O C 0 m m E e m e, e W v M v r t+ r r e r � r r l7 V b m 40 r � r r r r l'7 � Y r r 0 U) 40 m 40 r as .° v 0 0 V ro st e O O Q r 1 N b N b � r r � x °0 0 o eo A � r � � I` N H to on o 6 E i11 , Q .� m N a� � U g o C N N m Q C � � C N O C O 7 Q O _O Y O C C N m C m Q S m U � C m O V ~ 7 C O Q N 0 N m C 7 E E 0 U N r C N 0 0 d C m t O N Ch O C C H G C L_ L O o E o !1 to c m m o EQ o T O � O � � o 0 0 c � 0 CD s S c 0 E 1Y 9 E Y1 0 m N 7 T m V m Z a m V m C c E N 7 m � E rr A� 7 R M � o E a C 1 V a a, O h W m 'C _T 0 U m C CL p m G o U E c Q N t O C N O O C 4 w m o c m C ; r m °a O o O rn c onp N C N - c = c J t0 m o _ Z y m 5 L 88 0 g • 2 iii 9L 43 m m co 40 E 10 m o m U d c Q c l0 0 m T O m m m O m m m Q N C > N U C C J ID C m m U O m O H m 2 . O h W m 'C _T 0 U m C CL p m G o U E c Q N t O C N O O C 4 w m � a C T 7 E m Q O O to O1 W c = a oOi m m m c O h W m 'C _T 0 U m C CL p m G o U E c Q N t O C N O O C 4 m N 7 T u O r a m C m E a • E a c ° w c � a o a� a Q r d d � r E O i T. p � $ • E• W C • 2 iii 9L m N 7 T u O r a m C m E a • E a c ° w c � a o a� a Q r A L h m E C Q W N 6 {i. W W Z cc oc :3 Z IF O _: �o �m mm mN c m � E m Qa m T 0 9 0 I.- m W M v m 2 " U N T 0 a a m V L r C m p O +E " c V " 8" E _ C np CL u • a a, of 0 W r T O :5 H m � e W e n E r i W r o O Y! ICL W n c p �p co U ]C m on Y o am � CA O � T O N 00 " 0 o c-0 V � a L a OB �4 CD- N m m " " V S v c > v j a Z $ o O Q W u a0 m pip C a C Q C SO F � � N T 0 a a m V L r C m p O +E " c V " 8" E _ C np CL u • a a, r r r o W o � V e W e n E r i W r o O Y! ICL us E 9 < d N T 0 a a m V L r C m p O +E " c V " 8" E _ C np CL u • a a, Q .7 C E e qr— N Q' NWN {.L Q /W VN I.L. w V Z W Z r O oo A A N m o o, ,°� N o gn N O+ r Ge iD A A Of N O N r Y t0 < A A A A I A r A � aD OI CP C4 40 1 m r m al�'m olaNO N�n Jo 1 o o_ 110 ems° o o o V m O 1m OOi T O CI i im O Of r r N O M h co (O r r OI N N A Q r A A r c0 Ol Q1 N N f N r�0 e0 m N,N m O m������mmm�lA� Im d gki 4 N N N ID C4 taNpp �p N IV (V pOp e N r- .0 r co Cc o co N N V) K � a on N r N }N VI a N N N A N N N � o 0 0 o n 60 99 V in N N N t- W Q ah f O d v o C,4 .�- 0 N l7 N ap ZZ> e 0 CD b 4n O J �- LL gD m n CO O o a era o• C) N N N 40 tll Z V) .0 o N Z r C-3 c O U O m N O r m n co N N N m l7 N N N N 03 N 7 T W p > r V m _ m m N sh�yy g M N N a a AA m CD w co N O d E e 4 E w G V w C � 4 Z t G t1 t w Ov rE CL - 3 4 � � v T, N W � � W V � W � } U Z W w � � V Ae 2 2_ } \ K k ) / 0 7 ] {/ k c s k{ �/ I f. g �R i� ^ 3 !a %§ ! \ c z } �\ \J �i }/ ■ k� ;) t £7 92 £ § >k )k k� 0 { 1f - §/ k ! . k\ j k �2 \ / 3 2_ \ ! k ) 0 7 4P/ Cl {/ w r s k{ �/ I u E §E r 3 $ 2 \ c } �\ \J § @� ■ � ! _) $\ / ' § )7 )k )\ 0 { 1f /kk 3 2_ z k ) 0 7 ` 7 r ? s a f I u E §E r 3 $ 2 ■ c } ƒ § § ■ � ! _) k� k ' § 4 § k 0 { - { « \ k ! . [ w \ / « a 2 a V i ) 8 - ` \ r ? k k k k u E | r E $ k ■ c � § § § ■ � 1 8 � k § « § k 0 { R « e v a m ■ 1 \ / /§ �_® /� \ 2 �k {/ �K # %28 �a %K k� k{ kt k2 A2 kk ® $§ $& ¥■ 'E y ; t7 &I i `e 0 E `@ `£ ¥ of |f $ } $ 7 } @ { § 2§§kk \� e& ae an 19 co � � \ � o 2 �B r» c k� \ c 8 - ` \ § ? f r lu u E r E $ k ■ I c e ■ § j CL ■ � 1 8 1 k $ § § $ S « e v a m ■ 1 � � \ � o 2 �B r» c k� \ c 0 O V C z 4 QN W a W ,W,A YI } V z M U N 1 .p 1 � I m N to 1 0 m n � m 1 f` 1 033 It do m�f�d a ems° e Oi h O N m A N .A O O M H n A m Q Nr o e o h .m0 r O In o] O n r to mJpjQ x o m q W m Mf O O I,- M O O. Q m .D d O N CO N a1 in < O M A A h .011 r- at v>f m O A N p � W o p I�I x m N 0 M O 0 n to O m O 0 n O l0 O O O +jI d°� I �v I'ir W 0 m O' O tl lr! r x xl tl NI r i d 0 OI N O b N N e W Q N W M M N 0 M co 'Q O O N M O N m Go O O N .p A N a O O! N �o N 43 go 0 N b b N 7 V m O C O C Q O W to Q O T p V m d m z cp a ° O. C a g m v no w p W N $ m W i c b Au U Y r e W 0 L w m T m 0 a u m C .g C d E S m e E q C C p 7 0 ;o E '^ CL a a u • a Q, School Concurrency Fact Sheet EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Since 1998 the School District has been working with Palm Beach County and the Municipalities of Palm Beach County to develop an Interlocal Agreement that would provide for a coordinated planning effort between the agencies, to ensure that the plans for the construction and opening of public educational facilities are coordinated in time and place with plans for growth in new students from both existing communities and new residential development. The Public School Concurrency Interlocal Agreement establishes a process for a coordinated planning effort; the requirement for a financially feasible public school capital facilities program; and establishment of level of service standards for public schools. By entering into the Interiocal Agreement, the School District is agreeing to: • prepare, implement, and annually update a financially feasible Five Year Capital Facilities Plan containing enough capacity each year to meet projected growth in demand for student stations so as not to exceed the adopted level of service for each year; (p 14) • institute program and/or boundary adjustments as necessary to maximize utilization of capacity; provide the County and municipalities with required data and analysis to support their comprehensive plans and amendments relating to school Concurrency; (p. 13) ➢ adopt a 10 and 20 year work program consistent with the requirements of this Agreement; prepare reports on enrollment and capacity; (p.16) • review applications for new residential development for compliance with concurrency standards; maintain and publish data as required for the review of proposed new residential developments; review mitigation proposals; (p. 27) • provide secretarial staff support for meetings of the Technical Advisory Group (TAG); (p. 14) • coordinate planning with the County and municipalities regarding population projections, school siting, projections of development and redevelopment for the coming year, infrastructure required to support public school facilities, and amendments to future land use plan elements. (p. 45) By entering into the Interlocal Agreement, the County and each municipality are agreeing to: • adopt an implementing ordinance consistent with the requirements of the Agreement :and their comprehensive plans; (p. 26) • not issue any site specific development orders for new residential units until the School District has reported that there is school capacity available to serve the development being approved consistent with the requirements of the Agreement; (p. 12) • coordinate planning with the School District regarding population projections, school siting, projections of development and redevelopment for the coming year, infrastructure required to support public school facilities; and (p. 45) ➢ Amend the Future Land Use Element and Capital Improvement Element. (p`26) 2 Particulars of the Plan The Board of County Commissioners on June 6, 2000 unanimously approved the Intedocal Agreement. The School Board of Palm Beach County and The League of Cities Board of Directors unanimously approved the Interiocal Agreement on June 14, 2000. In addition, the Interlocal Agreement has been revised subsequent to the December 13th County transmittal hearing to include the following modifications: Definitions and clarifications to the document have been added to the meanings of terms in the agreement. For example: 1. TAG recommendation and 51% support (see p. 23) may modify the Level of Service — adopted LOS. 2. Maximum utilization of capacity (Maximum Utilization Table in the Public School Facilities Element) 3. Required modernization 4. All schools of each type and each individual school - This was added to address the concurrency requirement for measuring the LOS at both the CSA and individual school levels. ■ The Exemption section has been modified to further clarify the previously approved residential developments which are not subject to concurrency- review; specifically including previously approved site specific developments and those developments in a Transportation Concurrency Exemption Area (TCEA) with residential components. (see p.25) ■ The geographic Concurrency Service Areas - CSA - have been amended to 21 from 23 to allow for maximum utilization of school capacity. ■ Prior to 2004, a Tiered Level of Service (graduated) will be in effect. Individual schools of each type may exceed the Tiered LOS during this period in which Tiered LOS are in effect if it does not exceed the LOS for that CSNs school type as shown in the Maximum Utilization Table. Both Tables are located in the Public School Facilities Element. (see p.23) ■ The Intedocal Agreement allows any party to the agreement to request a School Capacity Study. The School Capacity Study (SCS) will determine if the school can operate at a LOS up to 120 %. (see p. 25) ■ The Plan allows a Program Evaluation Report be requested at any time by any party to the Agreement. (see p. 42) ■ The Development Review Process compares the projected students from proposed residential developments to the CSAs planned growth, enrollment, capacity and utilization (LOS) over the five year period. (see p. 27) .. 3 ■ Letter of determination (response to developer) of compliance issued within 15 days; if not in compliance a 90 day negotiation period is offered. (see p. 32) ■ Development order (DO) information used for detenmination of concurrency (see p.26) ■ Certificates of occupancy (CO's) will be received twice per year for actual student projections for the 5 Yr Plan.(see p. 47) ■ The Technical Advisory Group (TAG) consists of 5 members, including a planner, a G.C., a demographer, a CPA and a business person. (see p.38) ■ Mediation of disputes — 20 day informal resolution period; or PBC Issues Forum protocols (1993); arbitration through PBC Issues Forum; or petition the court. (see p. 44) ■ Population projections will be based on BEBR and municipal information. (see p.45) ■ The Agreement takes into account the inclusion of new parties to the agreement through a Unilateral Participation Agreement form that has been attached in the exhibits. (see p. 59) ■ A term for nullification of the agreement has been added if all parties do not sign the agreement in a time certain. (see p. 61) The basic plan presented on November 30, 1998 has not changed. It requires the parties to work together to plan, construct, and modernize schools when arid where needed to accommodate expected growth in new students, regardless of when the growth occurs in existing areas or new developments and to modernize our older schools. There is no legal requirement for any party to participate. There are 26 municipalities that must approve the plan for this to become a reality in our county. It is a local option and must be voluntarily entered into_ For More Information: 1) Specific Responsibilities of the Parties. Section II-C, pages 12 -16 2) Capital Improvement Plan. Section III, pages 14 -18 3) School District Review of Residential Development Proposals. Section V -E, pages 27 -35 4) Suspension of Concurrency. Section V-G, pages 35 -37 5) Monitoring — Technical Advisory Group. Section VI, pages 37-42 4 SUMMARY There are four significant components to public school concurrency ❑ The first and foremost requirement is to set forth a financially feasible plan. The five, ten, and twenty -year capital facilities plan is required as shown in Section III of the Interlocal Agreement. This addresses not only the need for permanent student stations for expected growth in students from new residential development but also modernization of our older schools. On September 8, 1999, The School Board of Palm Beach County adopted a financially feasible Five -Year Capital Facilities Plan that addresses the requirements of the Interlocal Agreement. ❑ The second important component of the plan describes how the Level of Service (LOS) is measured. The LOS in the plan is measured in Concurrency Service Areas (CSAs) and requires maximum utilization of capacity within each CSA. Maximum utilization is the balancing of enrollments so that one school will not be over capacity and a neighboring school under capacity. ❑ The third component is intergovernmental coordination and collaborative planning among the School District, the County, and municipalities as outlined in Section VIII. This includes population projections, school siting, and publication of data and additional planning necessary to support the annual update of the Five -Year Capital Facilities Plan. o The fourth component, outlined in Section V, is the regulatory portion in which the determination of concurrency for new residential development, including mitigation options is made. H/ ...Factsht.doc 'rior to the approval of a mitigation plan, the local ;overnment shall have the opportunity to review the mitigation options. -kny party to the agreement may request a School Capacity I tudy at anytime. kny party to the agreement may request a Program Sivaluation Report at any time. . Anguage that defines exempt properties has been -=larified. The Development Review Process is understandable and greatly simplified. School District shall provide concurrency determination within 15 working days of receipt of development application based on its CSA and adjacent CSAs' capacities. School District provides permanent seats for municipalities' students by eliminating existing deficits. Local governments have input into future school siting based on land uses. Local governments may prohibit school sites where a site is inconsistent with land use categories; and may impose reasonable development standards in accordance with state statutes. Annually, the School District will update its financially feasible capital plan to meet projected growth. Ability for municipalities to have a role in the School District's decision- making process. Planning for new schools will be able to begin at the earliest possible point in the development process. School facilities are planned for and available at the time of the residential development impacts. Additional staff time for coordinated review with school planning staff H: \DATA \WPS 1 \DOC\CONCRNCY\BASICS\PROCON.WPD t/ 1'a / CITY OF PALM BEACH GARDENS CITY COUNCIL . Agenda Cover Memorandum , Meeting Date: December 21, 2000 Date Prepared: December 4, 2000 SUBJECT /AGENDA ITEM First Reading: Ordinance 32, 2000, a request to amend and expand the previously approved St. Mark's Church and School Planned Unit Development (PUD). RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of Ordinance 32, 2000, which contains conditions of approval. Reviewed by: Originating Dept.: Costs: $ Council Action: Total City Attorney Growth Management [ ] Approved Finance NA $ [ ] Approved w/ C) Current FY conditions ACM [ ] Denied Human Res. NA Funding Source: [ ] Continued to: Advertised: Other NA Date: [ ] Operating Attachments: Paper: [X] Not Required [ ]Other *Ordinance 32, 2000 1 e y: h nag ment Affected parties Budget Acct. #:: Directo ] Notified [ ] None Appr by: City age [X] Not required REQUEST Fanning /Howey Associates, Inc., agent for St. Mark's Church, Inc., is requesting a planned unit development amendment to expand the previously approved St. Mark's Playing Fields PUD to include the St. Mark's Church and School site on the east side of Gardens East Drive, add an additional school building of approximately 14,000 square feet in size, and expand the church building by 945 square feet. This petition also includes a time extension for the portable trailer on the eastern section of the site that is City Council Meeting Date: December 21, 2000 Date Prepared: December 4, 2000 Petition PUD -00-02 to be removed after the construction of the school addition. The 11 -acre site is located on the northeast and northwest corners of Burns Road and Gardens East Drive. (7- 42S -43E) BACKGROUND St. Mark's Episcopal Church and School, on the northeast corner of Burns Road and Gardens East Drive, was approved on March 19, 1992 with Resolution 21, 1992. The private school playing fields on the northwest corner of Burns Road and Gardens East Drive, includes a structure with an open -air pavilion for physical education, concession booth, restrooms, custodian room, storage area, and a room for use by the physical education teacher. On July 1, 1993, a conditional use for a temporary classroom trailer was approved with the passage of Resolution 71, 1993 (see attached). Because of a poorly written resolution, it is unclear if the temporary use of the trailer was to expire in July of 1994 or 1995; nonetheless the temporary classroom trailer was never removed. Resolution 119, 1994 (see attached) confused matters further with condition #6: "No time extension shall be granted for the use of the portable classroom structure on the site as approved by Resolution 71, 1993, until July 31, 1999. After July 31, 1999 the applicant submitted a time extension application for the temporary classroom trailer (which should have been removed at least 4 years prior). The time extension petition was subsequently withdrawn, and the request for the time extension for the temporary classroom trailer was incorporated into this petition. The applicant wishes to remove the trailer when the additional classroom building is completed, or after two (2) years of the approval date, which ever occurs first. The northwest corner was approved as a PUD on June 3, 1999 with Ordinance 24, 1999. The subject property is bound to the north by The Oaks (residential and ROS — Recreation Open Space) and Catalina Lakes (residential). To the west of the site is the Catalina Lakes townhome project. To the south is Gardens East Apartments (residential), Cedar Gardens Office (9,867 square feet of PO - professional office), and Palm Beach Gardens Medical Center (hospital). To the east of the site is Plaza North Medical Centre (a medical office building). LAND USE & ZONING The western section of the subject site is zoned Residential — Medium Density (RM) with a Planned Unit Development (PUD) overlay, has a future land -use designation of Residential — Medium (RM), and is listed as Residential — High (RH) on the Vision Plan. The eastern section of the subject site is zoned Residential — Low Density 3 (RL -3), has a future land -use designation of Residential — Low (RL), and is listed as Professional Office (PO) on the Vision Plan. For a complete listing of adjacent uses, land -use `a City Council Meeting Date: December 21, 2000 Date Prepared: December 4, 2000 Petition PUD -00 -02 designations and zoning districts, see Table 1 on page four (4). Table 2 on page five (5) examines how consistent the proposed project is with the City Code and future land - use designation for the site. The following is the key for Table 1 and Table 2: PUD overlay = Planned Unit Development overlay PCD = Planned Community District RL -3 = Residential — Low Density 3 RL = Residential — Low Density RM = Residential — Medium Density PO = Professional Office P = Public CU = Conditional Use CONCURRENCY The proposed project received concurrency certification on August 17, 2000, which included concurrency for traffic, drainage, solid waste, sewer and water. PROCEDURE This is a request to amend and expand a PUD. The request is reviewed by City Staff and the Development Review Committee, who forward comments and recommendations to the Planning and Zoning Commission. Acting in an advisory role, the Commission considers the recommendations of the DRC and City Staff and makes a recommendation to the City Council. The City Council reviews the request for amending and expanding the PUD, and makes a final determination of approval, approval with conditions, or denial. PROJECT DETAILS Buildinq Site The 11 -acre site is located on the northeast (4.9 acres) and northwest (6.1 acres) corners of Burns Road and Gardens East Drive. The northwest corner is the site of the playing fields, multipurpose courts, and the ancillary building /pavilion. The northeast corner contains the church and school. The applicant wishes to add an additional school building (approximately 14,000 square feet in size) and expand the church building by 945 square feet; these additions will occur on the eastern section of the site. The school addition would enable the school to increase in size from 490 students to 570 students (from pre - kindergarten through eighth grade). It should be noted, 3 City Council Meeting Date: December 21, 2000 Date Prepared: December 4, 2000 Petition PUD -00 -02 Subject Property West = Playing Fields RM w/ PUD overlay RM East = Church & School RL -3 with CU for church RL and school North Catalina Lakes RM w/ PUD overlay RM The Oaks RM w/ PUD overlay RL South Cedar Gardens Office PO PO Gardens East Apartments PCD with RM underlying RM zoning Palm Beach Gardens PO w/ PUD overlay P Medical Center West Catalina Lakes RM w/ PUD overlay RM East Plaza North Medical PO with CU for clinic and PO Centre sale of artificial limbs 4 City Council Meeting Date: December 21, 2000 Date Prepared: December 4, 2000 Petition PUD -00 -02 5 City Council Meeting Date: December 21, 2000 Date Prepared: December 4, 2000 Petition PUD -00 -02 however, that condition #1 of Resolution 119, 1994 limited the maximum number of students to 460. Site Access Access to both quadrants of the site occurs along Gardens East Drive. Signacie The site has two (2) existing ground signs; one sign is on the western section of the site (playing fields) and the other sign is located on the eastern section of the site (church and school). Phasinq The phasing schedule for this petition incorporates the construction of the recently approved playing fields, multipurpose courts, and ancillary building to be located on the western section of the site; this part of the phasing makes up phases 1 and 2. Phase 3 will contain the building of the 14,000 square -foot classroom, and phase 4 will contain the 945 square -foot church addition. The build -out date for this project is the fall of 2001. Waivers The applicant is requesting a waiver for exceeding the required parking by more than 10 %. The applicant is also requesting a waiver for the proposed eight -foot rear setback when code requires 10 feet. The rear setback waiver was a result of the Planning and Zoning Commission's request for more articulation along the north elevation of the proposed school building addition. Legal Nonconformities The front setback on the eastern section of the site is only 13 feet (code requires 25 feet), however, this is an existing building (the church sanctuary). COMMENTS FROM THE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW COMMITTEE (DRC) Planninq & Zoninq Division The Planning and Zoning Staff have stated that the entire site will have to be platted prior to the issuance of a building permit, the school will not be able to have more than 570 students, and the temporary classroom trailer shall be removed from the site within two (2) years of the adoption of the ordinance for this petition, or when the 14,000 square -foot classroom building receives its final certificate of occupancy, which ever occurs first. 6 City Council Meeting Date: December 21, 2000 Date Prepared: December 4, 2000 Petition PUD -00 -02 City Forester Mark Hendrickson stated in his October 4, 2000 memorandum that the following condition of approval should be included in the approval for the proposed project: • The applicant shall maintain the Gardens East Drive landscaping from their east campus to their western recreational property from the north boundary to Burns Road. City Engineering City Engineer Sean Donahue stated in a memorandum dated October 5, 2000 (see attached) that prior to construction plan approval, the applicant shall certify that this project meets the SFWMD water quality requirements. Public Works Jonathan Iles reviewed this petition and has submitted comments (see attached). Mr. Iles' comments reflect the same comment City Forester Mark Hendrickson made regarding the maintenance of the road shoulders along Gardens East Drive abutting the site. To date, no objections have been received from the following departments and agencies: Building Division, Fire Department, Police Department, Parks & Recreation Department, City Legal, Seacoast Utility Authority, Palm Beach County School District, Northern Palm Beach County Improvement District, South Florida Water Management District, Waste Management, and Florida Power & Light. OUTSTANDING ISSUES To date, there are no major outstanding issues regarding this petition. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION The Planning and Zoning Commission heard this petition as a workshop on August 22, 2000. The Commission had the following comments: 1. The architecture is too plain and utilitarian; elevations should be revised. 2. The code numbers in the key identifying the colors and materials for sheets A3.1 and A3.2 are incorrect and need to be revised. 3. Pictures of the existing buildings need to be provided. 4. The downspouts should be removed and replaced with interior roofers. 5. More foundation landscaping should be provided. 6. The arch and gable entry feature is odd and should be reworked. 7 City Council Meeting Date: December 21, 2000 Date Prepared: December 4, 2000 Petition PUD -00 -02 7. More information regarding the walkways should be provided. 8. A condition limiting the maximum number of students to 570 should be included in any approval for this petition. The applicant responded to these comments by submitting revised color renderings and a photographic survey of the existing site. These items were given to the Planning and Zoning Commission members at their September 26, 2000 meeting. Because Commissioner Craig Kunkle would be unable to attend the October 10, 2000 meeting, he faxed his comments regarding the revised rendering and photographic survey to the Planning and Zoning Division (see attached). Mr. Kunkle stated that the hedge material planted on the inside of the fence should be relocated to the outside of the fence, and should extend the full length of the fence. However, Staff does not support this because the hedge would then be in City owned land, and the City would be required to maintain the hedge. Mr. Kunkle also stated that the completion date for the parking lot next to the playing fields should be agreed upon. The Planning and Zoning Commission heard this petition as a second workshop on August 8, 2000. The Commission recommended approval of petition PUD -00 -02 with Staff's recommendations and the 2 waivers needed by the applicant. The Commission also wanted more articulation along the north and west elevations of the school addition, so that the addition more closely resembles the existing buildings on the site. Finally, the Commission wanted the downspouts on the north elevation of the school addition to be removed. The applicant has satisfactorily addressed all the comments raised by the Planning and Zoning Commission, including the architectural revisions on the north and west elevations of the school addition. CITY COUNCIL City Council heard this petition as a first reading at their November 2, 2000. Council instructed the applicant that they would not pass the petition on first reading, and that the applicant would have to revise the pick -up /drop -off configuration so that any stacking of vehicles would occur internally to the site. Council also wanted to know why the temporary trailer had not been removed. The applicant revised the site plan to show two pick -up /drop -offs; one on the west side of the site and the other on the east side. Both are shown with two lanes of stacking on site. Furthermore, the east pick -up /drop -off loop has been extended northward so that more stacking of vehicles can occur on site. City Council Meeting Date: December 21, 2000 Date Prepared: December 4, 2000 Petition PUD -00 -02 In regard to the temporary trailer, Staff has determined that the applicant was supposed to remove the trailer when the previous building addition was completed (a "media center /laboratory classroom building "), or by July 31, 1995, which ever occurred first. For reasons unknown to Staff, the trailer was never removed, and no one from the City followed up to see if the trailer had been removed. Staff can only speculate that the applicant was confused by the poor wording of the resolution that approved the "classroom /media center building" (Resolution 119, 1994), condition #6 in particular; and therefore mistakenly believed that the trailer could exist on site until July 31, 1999. RECOMMENDATION Based on the recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission, Staff recommends approval of SP -00 -06 with the following conditions: 1. Prior to construction plan approval, the applicant shall certify that this project meets the SFWMD water quality requirements. (City Engineer) 2. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the entire site shall be platted. (City Engineering) 3. The school shall not have more than 570 students. The applicant, its successors or assigns shall have to submit to the City (each August) a letter certifying the number of students that are enrolled for that particular school year. (Code Enforcement & Development Compliance) 4. The temporary classroom trailer shall be removed from the site within two (2) years of the adoption of this ordinance or when the 14,000 square -foot classroom building receives its final certificate of occupancy, which ever occurs first. (Planning & Zoning) 5. The applicant shall maintain the Gardens East Drive landscaping from its east campus to its western recreational property from the north boundary to Burns Road. (City Forester) 6. The buildout date for this project (including the playing fields and parking lot on the west side of Gardens East Drive) is December 31, 2001. (Planning & Zoning) And approval of the following waivers: 1. Maximum amount of on -site parking to equal or exceed 110% of required parking — Section 180(d)(1), which requires that the amount of parking on -site does not exceed 10% of the required parking for the site, to allow for parking on -site to exceed the required amount by 27.6 %. 2. Minimum rear setback — Section 71(c) and Section 75, which require a minimum rear setback of 10 feet, to allow for an eight -foot rear setback. g /john: pud0002.cc2 /jI 9 October 16, 2000 December 4, 2000 ORDINANCE 32, 2000 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM BEACH GARDENS, FLORIDA, PROVIDING FOR THE APPROVAL OF AN APPLICATION FROM ST. MARK'S CHURCH, INC. FOR AN AMENDMENT AND EXPANSION OF A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT BY APPROVING THE CONSTRUCTION OF A 14,000 SQUARE -FOOT SCHOOL BUILDING, A 945 SQUARE -FOOT CHURCH ADDITION, AND A TWO (2) YEAR TIME EXTENSION FOR A TRAILER ON AN 11 ACRE SITE, LOCATED AT THE NORTHEAST AND NORTHWEST CORNERS OF BURNS ROAD AND GARDENS EAST DRIVE, AS MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED HEREIN; PROVIDING FOR CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL; PROVIDING FOR WAIVERS; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; PROVIDING FOR CONFLICTS; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, the City of Palm Beach Gardens received an application from St. Mark's Church, Inc. for approval of an amendment to a planned unit development located at the northeast and northwest corners of Burns Road and Gardens East Drive, in order to construct a 14,000 square -foot school building, a 945 square -foot church addition, and permit a two (2) year time extension for a trailer on the 11 -acre site, as more particularly described in Exhibit "A" attached hereto; and WHEREAS, the 11 -acre "St. Mark's Church and School" site is currently zoned RL -3 - Residential Low Density District on the eastern section of the site, and RM — Residential Medium Density District on the western section of the site; and WHEREAS, the applicant is requesting that the Planned Unit Development (PUD) overlay currently located on the eastern section of the site be extended to incorporate the western section of the site (the area at the northwest corner of Burns Road and Gardens East Drive); and WHEREAS, the Growth Management Department has reviewed said application and determined that it is sufficient; and WHEREAS, the Growth Management Department has reviewed said application and determined that it is consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan and Land Development Regulations; and Ordinance 32, 2000 Meeting Date: December 21, 2000 Date Prepared: December 4, 2000 Petition PUD -00 -02 WHEREAS, the Growth Management Department has recommended approval of the amendment to the planned unit development (PUD) known as the "St. Mark's Church and School "; and WHEREAS, the City's Planning and Zoning Commission has reviewed said application and recommended that it be approved with the requested waivers and subject to certain conditions stated herein. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM BEACH GARDENS, FLORIDA: SECTION 1. The City Council of the City of Palm Beach Gardens, Florida hereby approves an amendment to the "St. Mark's Church and School" PUD at the northeast and northwest corners of Burns Road and Gardens East Drive, as more particularly described in Exhibit "A" attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference, to permit the construction of a 14,000 square -foot school building, the construction of a 945 square -foot church addition, and the approval of a two (2) year time extension for a trailer (on the northeast corner of Burns Road). SECTION 2. Said Planned Unit Development is approved subject to the following conditions, which shall be the responsibility of the applicant, its successors or assigns: 1. Prior to construction plan approval, the applicant shall certify that this project meets the SFWMD water quality requirements. (City Engineer) 2. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the entire site shall be platted. (City Engineering) 3. The school shall not have more than 570 students. The applicant, its successors or assigns shall have to submit to the City (each August) a letter certifying the number of students that are enrolled for that particular school year. (Code Enforcement & Development Compliance) 4. The temporary classroom trailer shall be removed from the site within two (2) years of the adoption of this ordinance or when the 14,000 square -foot classroom building receives its final certificate of occupancy, which ever occurs first. (Planning & Zoning) 5. The applicant shall maintain the Gardens East Drive landscaping from its east campus to its western recreational property from the north 2 Ordinance 32, 2000 Meeting Date: December 21, 2000 Date Prepared: December 4, 2000 Petition PUD -00 -02 boundary to Burns Road. (City Forester) 6. The buildout date for this project (including the playing fields and parking lot on the west side of Gardens East Drive) is December 31, 2001. (Planning & Zoning) SECTION 3. The following waivers are hereby granted with this approval: 1. Maximum amount of on -site parking to equal or exceed 110% of required parking — Section 180(d)(1), which requires that the amount of parking on -site does not exceed 10% of the required parking for the site, to allow for parking on -site to exceed the required amount by 27.6 %. 2. Minimum rear setback — Section 71(c) and Section 75, which require a minimum rear setback of 10 feet, to allow for an eight -foot rear setback. SECTION 4. Construction of the Planned Unit Development shall be in compliance with the following plans on file with the City's Growth Management Department: Exhibits (dates represent date received and stamped in): 1. November 21, 2000 Index/Abbreviations, Fanning /Howey Associates, Inc., Sheet T1.2 (1 sheet total). 2. November 21, 2000 Master Site Plan, Fanning /Howey Associates, Inc., Sheet G1.1 (1 sheet total). 3. November 21, 2000 Phased Site Plans, Fanning /Howey Associates, Inc., Sheet G1.2 (1 sheet total). 4. November 21, 2000 Phase 3 — Site Plan, Fanning /Howey Associates, Inc., Sheet G1.3 (1 sheet total). 5. November 21, 2000 Floor Plan — 1St Floor, Fanning /Howey Associates, Inc., Sheet Al. 1 (1 sheet total. 6. November 21, 2000 Floor Plan — 2n Floor, Fanning /Howey Associates, Inc., Sheet A1.2 (1 sheet total). 7. May 31, 2000 Roof Plan, Fanning /Howey Associates, Inc., Sheet A2.1 (1 sheet total). 8. November 21, 2000 North & South Elevations, Fanning /Howey Associates, Inc., Sheet A3.1 (1 sheet total). 9. November 21, 2000 East & West Elevations, Fanning /Howey 3 Ordinance 32, 2000 Meeting Date: December 21, 2000 Date Prepared: December 4, 2000 Petition PUD -00 -02 Associates, Inc., Sheet A3.2 (1 sheet total). 10. November 21, 2000 Section 1, Fanning /Howey Associates, Inc., Sheet A4.1 (1 sheet total). 11. November 21, 2000 Phase #3 /Building #9 Landscape Plan, Roy — Fisher Associates, Inc., (1 sheet total). 12. November 21, 2000 Landscape Details & Notes, Roy — Fisher Associates, Inc., (1 sheet total). 13. July 19, 2000 Sketch of Boundary Survey, Lawson, Noble & Webb, Inc., Sheet A375 (1 sheet total). 14. September 22, 2000 Sketch of Boundary Survey, Lawson, Noble & Webb, Inc., Sheet A502 (1 sheet total). SECTION 5. The approval expressly incorporates and is contingent upon all representations made by the applicant or applicant's agents at any workshop or public hearing. SECTION 6. If any section, paragraph, sentence, clause, phrase, or word of this Ordinance is for any reason held by a court of competent jurisdiction to be unconstitutional, inoperative or void, such holding shall not affect the remainder of the Ordinance. SECTION 7. All ordinances or parts of ordinances of the City of Palm Beach Gardens, Florida, which are in conflict with this Ordinance are hereby repealed. SECTION 8. This Ordinance shall be effective upon adoption. PLACED ON FIRST READING THIS 21St DAY OF DECEMBER 2000. PLACED ON SECOND READING THIS DAY OF 2000. PASSED AND ADOPTED THIS DAY OF 2000. 4 MAYOR JOSEPH R. RUSSO VICE MAYOR ERIC JABLIN COUNCILWOMAN LAUREN FURTADO COUNCILMAN DAVID CLARK COUNCILMAN CARL SABATELLO ATTEST BY: CAROL GOLD CITY CLERK APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM AND SUFFICIENCY BY: CITY ATTORNEY VOTE: AYE MAYOR RUSSO VICE MAYOR JABLIN COUNCILWOMAN FURTADO COUNCILMAN CLARK COUNCILMAN SABATELLO g /john: pud0002.or2 41 Ordinance 32, 2000 Meeting Date: December 21, 2000 Date Prepared: December 4, 2000 Petition PUD -00 -02 NAY ABSENT Ordinance 32, 2000 Meeting Date: December 21, 2000 Date Prepared: December 4, 2000 Petition PUD -00 -02 EXHIBIT "A" LEGAL DESCRIPTION: A PARCEL OF LAND IN SECTION 7, TOWNSHIP 42 SOUTH. RANGE 43 EAST. TO WIT FROM THE POINT OF INTERSECTION OF THE CENTERLINE OF THE FLORIDA EAST COAST RAILWAY RIGHT -OF -WAY AND THE EAST -WEST QUARTER SECTION LINE OF SECTION T. TOWNSHIP 42 SOUTH, RANGE 43 EAST, PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA, RUN SOUTH 88 °38'15" EAST, ALONG SAID EAST -WEST QUARTER SECTION LINE A DISTANCE OF 51.86 FEET (ACCORDING TO THE RIGHT -OF -WAY AND TRACT MAP OF THE FLORIDA EAST COAST RAILWAY CO., SAID CENTERLINE OF THE FLORIDA EAST COAST RAILWAY RIGHT -OF -WAY BEARS NORTH 14.01'00" WEST AT THIS POINT AND ALL OTHER BEARINGS STATED HEREIN ARE RELATIVE THERETO) THENCE NORTH 75'59'01" EAST, A DISTANCE OF 131.00 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A CURVE CONCAVE TO THE SOUTH, HAVING A RADIUS OF 283.37 FEET AND A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 15'22'45 "; THENCE EASTERLY, ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE, A DISTANCE OF 76.06 FEET TO THE END OF SAID CURVE; THENCE SOUTH 88'38'15' EAST, ALONG THE TANGENT TO SAID CURVE A DISTANCE OF 616.56 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A CURVE CONCAVE TO THE NORTH, HAVING A RADIUS OF 1682.15 FEET AND A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 6'48'15 "; THENCE EASTERLY, ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE, A DISTANCE OF 199.76 FEET TO THE END OF SAID CURVE; THENCE NORTH 84 °33'30" EAST, ALONG THE TANGENT TO SAID CURVE, A DISTANCE OF 642.21 FEET; THENCE NORTH 14'01'00" WEST, A DISTANCE OF 30.34 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING AND THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF THE HEREINAFTER DESCRIBED PARCEL OF LAND; THENCE CONTINUE NORTH 14'01'00" WEST, A DISTANCE OF 500 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 84'33'30" WEST, A DISTANCE OF 440.71 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 14'01'00" EAST, A DISTANCE OF 478.49 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A CURVE CONCAVE TO THE NORTHEAST, HAVING A RADIUS OF 25 FEET AND A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 81'25'30 "; THENCE SOUTHEASTERLY, ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE, A DISTANCE OF 35.53 FEET TO THE END OF SAID CURVE; THENCE NORTH 84'33'30" EAST, ALONG THE TANGENT TO SAID CURVE, A DISTANCE OF 419.20 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. LESS AND EXCEPT, THE FOLLOWING DESCRIBED PARCEL: PARCEL 110.1 A PARCEL OF LAND LYING IN THE NORTHEAST 1/4 OF SECTION 7, TOWNSHIP 42 SOUTH, RANGE 43 EAST, PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA, BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCE AT THE FOUND PALM BEACH COUNTY BRASS DISC MARKING THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF THE SOUTHWEST 1/4 OF SAID SECTION 7; THENCE SOUTH 88'43'16" EAST ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF SOUTH 1/2 OF SAID SECTION 7, A DISTANCE OF 3474.71 FEET; THENCE NORTH 01'16'44" EAST, A DISTANCE OF 161.50 FEET TO A POINT ON THE NORTH RIGHT -OF -WAY LINE OF BURNS ROAD, AS RECORDED IN OFFICIAL RECORD BOOK 1241, PAGE 259, PUBLIC RECORDS OF PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA AND THE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE NORTH 84.30'43" WEST ALONG THE NORTH RIGHT -OF -WAY LINE, A DISTANCE OF 419.20 FEET TO THE POINT OF CURVATURE OF A CURVE CONCAVE TO THE NORTH, HAVING A RADIUS OF 25.00 FEET; THENCE WESTERLY AND NORTHERLY ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 81'25'03 ", A DISTANCE OF 35.52 FEET TO THE POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE NORTH 14'03'47" WEST, A DISTANCE OF 13.16 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 54.46'32" EAST, A DISTANCE OF 32.61 FEET; THENCE NORTH 84.30'43" EAST, A DISTANCE OF 352.85 FEET TO THE POINT OF CURVATURE OF A CURVE CONCAVE TO THE SOUTH, HAVING A RADIUS OF 2136.50 FEET; THENCE EASTERLY ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 01.47'02 ", A DISTANCE OF 66.52 FEET TO A POINT ON THE EAST PROPERTY LINE OF A PARCEL OF LAND RECORDED IN OFFICIAL RECORD BOOK 1853, PAGE 992, PUBLIC RECORDS OF PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA; THENCE SOUTH 14'03'47" EAST ALONG SAID PROPERTY LINE, A DISTANCE OF 12.10 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. Ordinance 32, 2000 Meeting Date: December 21, 2000 Date Prepared: December 4, 2000 Petition PUD -00 -02 LEGAL DESCRIPTION: A PARCEL OF LAND LYING IN SECTION 7, TOWNSHIP 42 SOUTH, RANGE 43 EAST, CITY OF PALM BEACH GARDENS, PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA, BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCE AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF THE PLAT OF THE OAKS -SUN TERRACE PLAT 3, AS RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 68, PAGES 70 THROUGH 73 OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF SAID PALM BEACH COUNTY; THENCE NORTH 88 °34'14" WEST, ALONG THE WESTERLY EXTENTION OF THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID THE OAKS -SUN TERRACE PLAT 3, A DISTANCE OF 90.00 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING OF THE HEREIN DESCRIBED PARCEL; THENCE, CONTINUE ALONG SAID WESTERLY EXTENTION, NORTH 88 °34'14" WEST, A DISTANCE OF 167.45 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 14 °05'37" EAST, A DISTANCE OF 411.80 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 06 °34'58" EAST, A DISTANCE OF 370.43 FEET TO A POINT ON THE NORTHERLY RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF BURNS ROAD AS DESCRIBED IN OFFICIAL RECORDS BOOK 6438, PAGE 668 OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF SAID PALM BEACH COUNTY; THENCE EASTERLY ALONG SAID NORTHERLY RIGHT OF WAY LINE, THROUGH THE FOLLOWING THREE COURSES, SOUTH 88°43'15" EAST, A DISTANCE OF 80.45 FEET, TO THE POINT OF CURVATURE OF A CURVE, CONCAVE NORTHERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 1,617.15 FEET; THENCE EASTERLY, ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 06048'15". A DISTANCE OF 192.04 FEET, TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE NORTH 84 028'30" EAST, A DISTANCE OF 78.18 FEET TO A POINT ON THE WESTERLY RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF GARDENS EAST DRIVE, AS DESCRIBED IN OFFICIAL RECORDS BOOK 6709, PAGE 1410 OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF SAID PALM BEACH COUNTY; THENCE NORTHERLY ALONG SAID WESTERLY RIGHT OF WAY LINE, THROUGH THE FOLLOWING FOUR COURSES, NORTH 35 °12'27" EAST, A DISTANCE OF 17.01 FEET; THENCE NORTH 14 °05'44" WEST, A DISTANCE OF 136.85 FEET; THENCE NORTH 10 °25'21" WEST, A DISTANCE OF 325.01 FEET, TO THE POINT OF CURVATURE OF A CURVE, CONCAVE EASTERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 400.00 FEET; THENCE NORTHERLY, ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 29°27'01 ", A DISTANCE OF 205.60 FEET, TO A POINT OF INTERSECTION WITH A NON - TANGENT LINE; THENCE NORTH 14 °05'44" WEST, ALONG A LINE PARALLEL WITH AND 15.00 FEET WEST OF THE WESTERLY LINE OF SAID PLAT OF THE OAKS -SUN TERRACE PLAT 3, A DISTANCE OF 62.13 FEET; THENCE NORTH 88°34'14" WEST, ALONG A LINE PARALLEL WITH AND 15.00 FEET SOUTH OF THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID PLAT OF THE OAKS -SUN TERRACE PLAT 3, A DISTANCE OF 243.65 FEET; THENCE NORTH 01 °25'46" EAST, A DISTANCE OF 15.00 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. CONTAINING 6.10 ACRES, MORE OR LESS. 7 I June 29, 1993 July 1, 1993 RESOLUTION 71, 1993 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM BEACH GARDENS, FLORIDA, AUTHORIZING THE TEMPORARY CONDITIONAL USE OF A TRAILER AS A CLASSROOM ON THE ST. MARK'S EPISCOPAL SCHOOL /CHURCH SITE; AND, PROVIDING FOR THE REPEAL OF ALL RESOLUTIONS OR PARTS THEREOF IN CONFLICT HEREWITH; AND, PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM BEACH GARDENS, FLORIDA: Section 1. The City Council of Palm Beach Gardens hereby authorizes the temporary conditional use of a trailer for a classroom on the St. Mark's Episcopal Church /School site at the corner of Campus Drive and Burns Road. NO igrary. use'eln - .;continue until a permanent media IFter. /iabora +_oryclassroom. building is constructed and occupied . or' q�2�,xyear, until :7 /31194,-depending which event shall first_. Octir.;. The temporary building shall be located and landscaped in accordance with the following plans: June 24, 1993 Site Plan prepared by Stephen Boruff, AIA, consisting of 1 sheet. June 24, 1993 Landscape Plan prepared by Stephen Boruff, AIA, consisting of 1 sheet. June 2, 1993 Elevation Plan prepared by King's Custom Builders, Inc, Sheet 1 of 4. May 26, 1993, Floor Plan prepared by King's Custom Builders, Inc. Sheet 2 of 4. June 3, 1993 Typical Foundation Plan prepared by King's Custom Builder's Inc. Sheet 3 of 4. June 3, 1993 Cross - Section Plan prepared by King's Custom Builder's Inc. Sheet 4 of 4. $ectjon 2. The following conditions are hereby approved: 1. The shrub material shall be thirty (30) inches in height at planting per City Landscape Code. 2. The temporary trail has been located where there would be no trees removed. The one (1) Maple tree proposed to be relocated is not large enough to be classified as a tree, however, if any trees die due to construction or construction practices the following schedule shall be used to repli.ce the trees on ,ite: For every inch of tree caliper lost, three inches of new tree caliper shall be replaced with like specie. The minimum replacement tree shall be three inches in diameter. Palms shall be replaced with like specie one for one with a minimum 10' height. 3. Prior to setti • the trailer, trees designated preservation /rC,_.:ation shall be tagged, and the developer shall erect and maintain protective barriers around the drip line of the trees to be protected. All work shall be inspected and approved by the Architect of Record and City Forester prior to the issuance of any Building Department permits. Section 153.20 (Minimum Tree and Plant Installation Standards) shall also be enforced during construction. 4. All tree protection /relocation and landscape work shall be performed using current professional landscaping standards. The Architect of Record shall monitor all tree protection efforts, all tree relocation work, all landscaping work, and any work that affects the outcome of the approved landscaping plans. The Architect of Record shall notify the City prior to any modification to the approved landscape plan. 5. Prior to the issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy the Architect of Record shall certify in writing to the City that the landscaping has been completed per the approved landscape plans. Any major changes to the approved landscape plans shall be approved by the Planning and Zoning Commission or City Council. Once the City has the certified letter from the Architect, the City Forester shall inspect the site for compliance. Once compliance has been confirmed by the City Forester, the City Building Department shall be notified. Section 3. The aforesaid time period may be extended by subsequent resolution of the City Council. Section 4. Upon termination of use the trailer shall forthwith be removed from the location site. Section 5. All Ordinances or Resolutions, or parts thereof, in conflict herewith are hereby repealed. Section 6. This Resolution shall be effective upon date of passage. INTRODUCED, PASSED AND ADOPTED THIS THE D�iY�pF,'J�UL�t, 1993. ATTEST: Imo'. t�D . V. KOSIER; CITY CLERK VOTE: AYE MAYOR RUSSO VICE MAYOR MONROE COUNCILMAN JABLIN COUNCILWOMAN FURTADO V COUNCILMAN CLARK Ae AAYO1;C!MABiyft'R. RUSSO NAY ABSENT August 26, 1994 RESOLUTION 119, 1994 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM BEACH GARDENS, FLORIDA, APPROVING AN AMENDMENT TO ST. MARK'S EPISCOPAL CHURCH CONDITIONAL USE, BY APPROVING A SITE PLAN FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A 13,775 SQUARE FOOT CLASSROOM/MEDIA CENTER BUH,DING; PROVIDING FOR CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL; AND, PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM BEACH GARDENS, FLORIDA; Section 1. The City Council of the City of Palm Beach Gardens, Florida, hereby approves an Amendment to St. Mark's Episcopal Church Conditional Use, by approving a site plan for construction of a 13,775 square foot classroom/media center on the Site of St. Mark's Episcopal Church, located at the northeast comer of Burns Road and Gardens East Drive. Section 2. The site plan approval for the construction shall be in accordance with and subject to the following plans on file in the City Planning and Zoning Department: 1. Site Plan, dated August 1, 1994, by Fanning/Howey Associates, Inc. (One Sheet). 2. Conceptual Planting, dated August 1, 1994, Plan A by Fanning/Howey Associates, Inc. (One Sheet). 3. Building Planting Plan, dated May 22, 1994, by Fanning/Howey Associates, Inc. (One Sheet). 4. Site Planting Plan, dated May 22, 1994, by Fanning/Howey Associates, Inc. (One Sheet). 5. Exterior Elevations Plan, dated May 19, 1994, by Fanning/Howey Associates, Inc. (One Sheet). 6. First and Second Floor Plans Plan, dated May 19, 1994, by Fanning/Howey Associates, Inc. (Two Sheets). 7. Schematic Site Engineering Plan, dated May 23, 1994, by Janes E. Neuhaus, Inc. (One Sheet). Section 3. The petitioner shall comply with the following: I. The St. Mark's Episcopal Church School shall not exceed a 460 student population without verification from the City that the increase complies with the City's Concurrency Management Systems Ordinance. 2. Prior to issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy, the Landscape Architect of record shall certify in writing to the City that the landscaping has been completed per the approved landscape plans. Any major changes to the approved landscape plans shall be approved by the City Council. Once the City has the certified letter from the Landscape Architect, the City Forester shall inspect the site for compliance. Once compliance has been confirmed by the City Forester, the City Building Department shall be notified. 3. All landscape work shall be performed using current professional landscaping standards. The Landscape Architect of Record shall monitor all landscaping work, and any work that affects the outcome of the approved landscape plans. The Landscape Architect of Record shall notify the City prior to any modification to the approved landscape plan. 4. Prior to cleaning or construction, trees, or native areas designated for preservation shall be tagged or roped —off. Prior to land clearing, the developer shall erect and maintain protective barriers around the drip line of the trees to be protected. All work shall be inspected and approved by the Landscape Architect of Record and the City Forester prior to the issuance of any Building Department permit requiring land clearing. Section 153.20 shall also be enforced during construction. 5. All trees or plants designed for preservation/relocation that die during construction or because of construction practices shall be replaced using the following schedule: For every inch of tree caliper lost, three inches of new tree caliper shall be replaced with like specie. The minimum replacement tree shall be three inches in diameter. Palms shall be replaced with like specie one for one with a minimum 10' height. Shrubs shall be replaced with like specie one for one with a minimum 30" height. If the site can not support the total number of replacement trees as required above, City Council may permit the developer to donate excess trees to the City for planting on public lands. 12MM- 61t ,Werigj* n aU1*t04t6d-for ft use.of: the portable. ciassrdbni structure MI " U'``approved by fttWution 7L.1 7July ;31� i999:i Section 4. The City Council finds that the amendment provided herein is minor in nature and does not require intervention of the Planning and Zoning Commission or a newspaper publicized notice of hearing. Section 5. This Resolution shall be effective upon adoption. INTRODUCED, PASSED AND ADOPTED THIS DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 1994. ATTEST: LINDA V. KOSIER, CMC, CITY CLERK by / %2! APPROVED AS TO THE LEGAL FORM AND SUFFICIENCY Ass, CITY ATTORNEY OCT -23 -00 02:27PN FROWFANNING HONEY ASSOC, [ `JJ a�tes Inc. Architects Engineers Consultants October 19, 2000 Mr. John Lindgren, City Planner City of Palm Beach Gardens Parks and Recreation Department 10500 N. Military Trail Palm Beach Gardens, Florida 33410 5616844516 T -347 P.02/02 F -869 Re: Planned Unit Development Application (PUD 00 -02) St. Mark's Episcopal School Palm Beach Gardens, Florida Architect's Project No. 99012.02 Dear Mr. Lindgren: This letter is intended to serve as a formal request for a variance on the required parking at St. Mark's Episcopal Church and School. Currently, there are 162 parking spaces provided. The code - required parking is 127 spaces. The 22% overage is generated by the need for special event parking for the church, such as Easter Service, Christmas Service, etc. Additionally, the parking on the west parcel was provided for proximity to the school playfields to accommodate event parking for sporting events. We respectfully request approval of this needed request to provide maximum functionality of the site without negatively imposing on the surrounding properties. Sincerely, ;FANNI OW ce P. Courtemanche ject Consultant Ic /lo TES, INC. CITY OF PALM BEACH GARDENS OCT 2 3 2000 PLMMING & ZONING DEPT. 222 Lakeview Avenue, Suite 148 q Went Palm Beach, Florida 33401 (561) 697 -3660 m Fax (561) 684 -4516 m http✓ /www.fhai.com OCT -23 -00 02:26PM FROM- FANNING HOWEY ASSOC, ���annuzg/Howey Associates, Inc. Architects Engineers Consultants October 19, 2000 Mr. John Lindgren, City Planner City of Palm Beach Gardens Parks and Recreation Department 10500 N. Military Trail Palm Beach Gardens, Florida 33410 5616844516 T -347 P -01/02 F -869 Re: Planned Unit Development Application (PUD 00 -02) St. Mark's Episcopal School Palm Beach Gardens, Florida Architect's Project No. 99012.02 Dear Mr. Lindgren: This letter is intended to serve as a formal request for a variance on the required rear setback (North property line) at the St. Mark's Episcopal School. This request was generated pursuant to aesthetic projections requested by The Planning and Zoning Commission on the North elevation of the proposed new classroom building, at the October 10, 2000 Board Meeting. The projections protrude two feet into the required ten foot setback. Therefore, the request would be to allow an eight foot rear setback to accommodate this change. We respectfully request approval of this needed request to provide maximum functionality of this site without imposing unwanted parking on the surrounding properties. Sincerely, F Consultant IcAo .TES, INC. B�c�GPR�ENS to QF? �M oC� � 3 2pp0 N�NG &ZpN \NG��� Q� 222 Lakeview Avenue, Suite 148 'N West Palm Beach, Florida 33401 (561) 697 -3660 % Fax (561) 684 -4516 '4 http: / /www.fhai.com Memo to File From: Mark Hendrickson, City Forester A J Subject: PUD- 00 -02, St. Mark's School Expansion Date: October 4, 2000 I have reviewed the revised landscape plans submitted September 22, 2000 for the above - referenced petition. All of my previous comments have been addressed. I have no further concerns. I recommend the following condition for the Planning & Zoning Commission consideration at the October 10, 2000 meeting: • The applicant shall maintain the Gardens East Drive landscaping from their east campus to their western recreational property from the north boundary to Burns Road. Lbkf INC. (, ()NS( fI IIN(. CIVIL ENGWI LKS, SURVEYORS K MAITI:RS CIVIL AGRICULTURAL WATER RESOURCES WATER & WASTEWATER TRANSPORTATION SURVEYING & MAPPING GIs "Partners For Results Value by Design" 3550 S.W. Corporate Pkwy. Palm City, FL 34990 (561) 286 -3883 Fax: (561) 286 -3925 www.lbfh.com MEMORANDUM TO: John Lindgren FROM: Sean C. Donahue, P.E!�D DATE: August 17, 2000 FILE NO. 99 -4099 SUBJECT: St. Mark's School Expansion We have reviewed the City's traffic consultant's comments regarding the referenced project received on August 17, 2000. The City's traffic consultant has determined that this project is in compliance with both Palm Beach County and the City of Palm Beach Gardens Traffic Performance Standards. It should be noted that Gardens East Drive and Campus Drive are not included in the analysis since these roads are not required to be evaluated by TPS. However, they may need to be addressed during the site plan review to assure there is available capacity to handle the additional traffic of the proposed school expansion. A copy of the City's traffic consultant's memorandum is attached. SCD/ cc: Roxanne Manning Jim Norquest Talal Benothman P:\PROJECTS\PBGMEMO\4099A4099i 0 P-16-200 5:09PM FROM MTP GROUP INC WPB FL +1 S61 7950230 P.2 MTP Group, Inc. 12M &rest HN Boulevard, Suite 303 1 West Palm Stech, R 23414 -4704 Phone: 15611 795 -0675 TWO= [561/ 795 -0230 August 16, 2000 Sean C. Donahue, P.E. ° Assistant City Engineer City of Palm Beach Gardens 10500 North Military Trail - Palm Beach'Gardens, Florida 33410 Re: St. Mark's School > _, .Traffic Performance Standards Review Dear Mr. Donahue: MTP Group, Inc. has completed a review of the traffic impact analysis prepared by Kiraley -Horn and Associates, Inc. (dated July 7, 2000) for the project entitled St. Mark's School pursuant to Palm Beach County and City of Palm Beach Gardens Traffic Performance Standards. The project is summarized as follows: Location: Northeast quadrant of the. intersection -of Gardens East Drive and Burns Road Proposed Use: School with a total of 570 students' and 945 square feet of church sanctuary expansion New Trips: 249.daily trips (for radius of development influence consideration: 759 daily trips) Buildout: 2001 ' Existing - 490 students; Approved prior to 1995 = 320 students We find this project in compliance with both Palm Beach County and City of Palm Beach Gardens Traffic Performance Standards (M). It should be noted that Gardens East Drive and Campus Drive are not included in the analysis since these roads are not required to be evaluated by TPS. However, they may need to be addressed during site plan review to assure there is available capacity to handle the additional traffic impact of the proposed school expansion. Should you hate any questions or comments about this letter, do not hesitate to give me a call. Sincerely; MTP GrbzW Inc. Maria M. Tejerd, P.E. President Q%- V%TcatCW1 cG%S" •Avn�r .d CITY OF PALM BEACH GARDENS MEMORANDUM TO: John Lindgren, Senior Planner DATE: July 24, 2000 APPROVED: FROM: Jonathan Iles, Supervisor SUBJECT: St. Mark's School Expansion The following comments are forwarded as part of my review of the plans received with your memo dated 7/20/00 for the above named project The Department of Public Works has but one comment regarding this PUD. There is a portion of sodded area on the western side of Gardens East Drive that is currently irrigated by pumps located on RCA Blvd., as part of the approval process for The Oaks PUD. This irrigated strip runs in front of the parcel now owned by St. Marks. The Department requests as part of this approval, clarification of the maintenance responsibilities for the portion of- property, including irrigation, from the property line to the edge of Gardens East Drive in the area directly abutting the property owned by St. Marks. If there are any questions concerning this memo, please contact me as soon as possible. incergly, 101� Jonathan Iles R. a CC: DRC file %j �R Jlji CITY OF PALM BEACH GARDENS CITY COUNCIL Agenda Cover Memorandum Date: 10/23/00 Meeting Date: 11/02/00 Subject/Agenda Item Appraisal of Preserve Lands. Recommendation /Motion: Consider a motion to approve utilizing highest and best use as the appraisal method for appraising preserve lands. Reviewed by: Originating Dept.: Costs: $ Council Action: (Total) City Attorney Finance [ ] Approved $ [ ] Approved w/ Finance Current FY conditions [ ] Denied ACM Advertised: Funding Source: [ ] Continued to: Other Date: [ ] Operating Attachments: Paper: [ ] Not Required [ ] Other Memorandum Submitted by: Kent R. Olson kko Steve B. Cramer Affected parties [ J Notified Budget Acct. #: [ ] None Approved by: City Manage [ X ] Not required BACKGROUND: See attached memorandum. TO: Mayor and City Council DATE: tober 23, 2000 APPROVED: Ronald M. Ferris, Interim City Manag n FROM: Kent R. Olson, Finance Director by Steven B. Cramer, Principal Planner SUBJECT: Appraisals of Preserve Lands BACKGROUND The City of Palm Beach Gardens Land Development Regulations (LDRs) Section 118 provides for alternative forms of mitigation. The intent of allowing these alternative forms is "to provide a public benefit to the city that equals or exceeds the expected benefit that would have been derived from on -site preservation." These forms include off -site mitigation and payment in lieu of preservation. For payment in lieu of preservation, the payment amount shall be established by averaging two appraisals (one paid by the developer, one by the City) conducted by members of the appraisal institute (MAI). Section 118 further states that "cash payments in lieu of preservation of environmentally significant land, based on appraised land value and as determined by the city council, shall be made to a city fund established for the acquisition of land containing similar native vegetation, other environmentally significant lands, or any ecological or environmental improvements to public lands." DISCUSSION On September 28, several members of the staff held a meeting to discuss the issue of appraisal methodology. The several appraisals the City has conducted over the years have utilized the highest and best use approach to determine the property's value. Given that if the preserve is removed the developer conceivably would develop that section of the property, it would be appropriate to value the property on a highest and best use approach. In addition, were we to purchase preserve to replace preserve destroyed under this provision of the LDRs, we would be paying someone else for their property based upon "highest and best use." We spoke by phone with Ralph Monticello of Palm Beach County's Property and Real Estate Management Division. Mr. Monticello stated that the County has this same provision in their Land Development Regulations, and that the methodology used is the "highest and best use" for determining the property's value. Mr. Monticello also stated that the County uses "highest and best use" for appraisals conducted by the County for the purchase of environmentally sensitive lands. We also spoke to an appraiser who has done appraisal work for the City in the past regarding appraisal methodologies for preserves. He recommended that the best method to be utilized for this process is the highest and best use method noted above. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends the City utilize the highest and best use method for appraising properties under Section 118 of the Land Development Regulations. Att. (4) Density transfer. Utilization of the density transfer provisions in section 1 1 S to allow retention of preserve areas in an undisturbed manner, provided suitable means for maintenance and protection of such areas are established. (5) Retention by owners. Retention of the preserve area by a homeowners' or property owners' association subject to the restrictions listed below. a. Such preserve area shall remain undivided, and a lot unit owner or any other person shall not be able to bring any action for partition or division of any part thereof. Each lot or unit owner's undivided interest shall be preserved, protected, and maintained through recorded covenants running with the land or a developer's agreement. Title of such area shall be encumbered for the perpetual benefit of the public generally, and all future use shall be consistent with the intent and purpose of the preservation of open space, as provided in the city's comprehensive plan and herein. b. A stated obligation on behalf of the association to pay for the cost of care and maintenance of all preserve areas; and C. A management plan, approved by the city, shall be incorporated into the association documents prior to final approval of construction drawings or commencement of land alteration, whichever occurs first. Sec. 118. Alternative forms of mitigation. (a) Purpose and intent. The purpose and intent of allowing the approval of an alternative form of mitigation is to provide a public benefit to the city that equals or exceeds the expected benefit that would have been derived from on -site preservation. (b) Alternative mitigation programs. Altemative forms of mitigation that may be approved by the city include, but shall not be limited to, the programs listed below. (1) Off -site preservation. Cff -site preservation of environmentally significant habitat equal to or greater in size than the requirement stated in section 116. (2) Payment in lieu of preservation. a. Cash payments in lieu of preservation of environmentally significant land, based on appraised land value and as determined by the city council, shall be made to a city fund established for the acquisition of land containing similar native vegetation, other environmentally significant lands, or any ecological or environmental improvements to public lands. b. The beautification and environmental committee shall provide recommendations to City of Palm Beach Gardens/Land Development Regulations Adopted July 20, 2000 217 the city council for use of funds obtained in lieu of preservation of environmentally significant lands. C. The total sum of money required in lieu of preservation of environmentally significant lands shall be determined by the amount of land normally required for preservation and the location thereof. The value thereof shall be determined by two property appraisers, who are members of the appraisal institute (MAI). One appraiser is to be appointed by the city and the other by the developer. Each party shall bear the expense of the respective appraiser appointed. Both appraisals shall meet appropriate city standards. The amount of money determined by averaging the two appraisals shall be paid by the developer to the city at the time of final development order approval by the city council or as the city council may authorize. (3) Environmental restoration or creation. Restoration, reestablishment, or creation of artificial environments which may occur within or outside the limits of a proposed development. The applicant shall provide evidence that such mitigation will be beneficial to species designated as endangered, threatened, or species of special concern. The applicant also must demonstrate the area to be improved is equal to at least one hundred percent (100 %) of the preservation area required by these land development regulations. Sec. 119. Removal of invasive nonnative plants and vegetation relocation. Nonnative plants and vegetation relocation. The standards listed below shall apply to invasive nonnative plant species and to vegetation relocation. (1) Nonnative species prohibited. The installation of invasive nonnative species into any preserve area in the city is prohibited. (2) Removal. Prior to the issuance of the first certificate of occupancy, all invasive nonnative plant species, as defined in section 159, shall be removed from the entire site, including the preserve area. (3) Verification of removal. A certificate of occupancy or other official acceptance of completed work shall not be issued until all required removal of invasive species has been completed and is in accordance with the approved development order or management plan. (4) Removal of native vegetation. Removal of native vegetation shall be minimized in the land development process. When feasible, native material shall be relocated on site. Native vegetation which cannot be transplanted or relocated on -site is encouraged to be offered for donation or to be sold by the applicant. City of Palm Beach Gardens/Land Development Regulations Adopted July 20, 2000 218 CITY OF PALM BEACH GARDENS MEMORANDUM Mayor /Council DATE: Decem lb6r 7, 2000 Ronald M. Ferris, Interim City Manag r Mary L. Smith, Interim Human Resources ire or Committee Report - Bid Review for Executive Search Firm Attached is a copy of the summary of the evaluation scores for the two bids received in response to the City's Request for Proposal for an executive search firm to fill the open City Manager position. The committee met on Tuesday, December 5th and discussed the merits of each proposal. The summary of the evaluation scores is submitted for your review and consideration. We will await your direction. MLS:mis Attachment cc: Bid Review Committee Members: Beth Ingold -Love, Assistant to the City Manager Carol Gold, City Clerk Kent Olson, Finance Director Sue Miller, Parks & Recreation Director Bid Review Evaluation Form Executive Search Firm Proposals Criteria/Weight Rachlin Cohen & Holtz LaRue Mgmt. Services Approach 35% 32.6% 21% Thoroughness of process Quality control measures Follow up guarantees Price 35% 26% 31% li Experience of Firm 25% 19.8% 14.4% Qualifications of staff References 5% 4.6% 3% Total Score: 83.0% 69.4% Comments: The proposal submitted by this Their price seemed to leave firm seemed to be very many add on costs that were comprehensive and thorough undefined. and included quality control measures. For example, a Their references seemed to partner in the firm will review consist of more counties and the work performed by the smaller cities. representative assigned to the City. Further, the firm will provide what amounts to a "money- back" guarantee if the selection process is not suitable for the City within the first year after the selection. The process outlined for the selection includes a proactive approach to recruiting candidates, rather than simply places ads in strategic locations. The process outlined was also very specific and provided a detailed timeline. The price was easily defined, and carried a guarantee for satisfaction. The proposal was thorough and well defined at each step of the process, and included a check and balance system. CITY OF PALM BEACH GARDENS CITY COUNCIL Agenda Cover Memorandum Meeting Date: December 21, 2000 Date Prepared: December 11, 2000 SUBJECT /AGENDA ITEM Workshop: Ordinance 35, 2000, a request to amend the Palm Beach Gardens Medical Center Planned Unit Development (PUD). RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of Ordinance 35, 2000, which contains six conditions of approval and five waiver requests. Reviewed by: Originating Dept.: Costs: $ Total Council Action: City Attorne Growth Management [ ] Approved Finance NA $ [ ] Approved w/ ACM FT Current FY conditions Human Res. NA [ ] Denied Other NA Funding Source: [ ] Continued to: Advertised: Attachments: Date: [ ] Operating Paper: [ ] Other • Ordinance 35, 2000 [X] Not Required • Legal Description MhMa Affected pa rties Budget Acct. #:: � tified [ ] None App rov Y. City n [X] Not required Gifu Clerk's Office 01 City Council Meeting Date: December 21, 2000 Date Prepared: December 11, 2000 Petition: PUD -99 -07 I. REQUEST Oliver — Glidden & Partners, agent for TENET Health Systems of Florida, is requesting an amendment to the Palm Beach Gardens Medical Center Planned Unit Development. The petitioner is proposing to amend the existing approved expansion, of which 81,600 square feet has yet to be built, to revise hospital and medical office building uses. The petitioner proposes no square footage increase beyond the unbuilt 81,600 square feet. The subject site is located at the southeast corner of Burns Road and Gardens East Drive. (7- 42S -43E) II.BACKGROUND A. History The Palm Beach Gardens Medical Center began as the Palm Beach Gardens Community Hospital, which was opened in the 1960s. The site was approved as a Planned Unit Development by City Council by Ordinance 28, 1991. The PUD has been subsequently amended by the passage of Resolution 92, 1992, Resolution 3, 1995 and Ordinance 26, 1995. The PUD approval and subsequent amendments has provided for a total approved build -out of 324,000 square feet. At the time of the initial PUD approval in 1991, the medical center consisted of 226,000 square feet, including the medical office building. Since this time, 16,400 square feet of the approved expansion square footage has been constructed. The balance of 81,600 square feet is to be constructed in the future. The petitioner is not proposing additional square footage on -site with this amendment. However, the petitioner is proposing changes in uses within the 324,000 square feet proposed which will increase intensity of use on the site. Therefore, the petitioner has undergone a concurrency review. B. Land Use and Zoning The subject site is zoned Planned Unit Development overlay zoning with an underlying zoning of Public /Institutional, has a future land -use designation of Public, and is listed as Professional Office on the Vision Plan. For a complete listing of adjacent uses, land - use designations and zoning districts, see Table 1 below. Table 2 on page four (4) examines how consistent the proposed project is with the City Code and future land -use designation for the site. 2 Subject Property I PUD Vacant/Wooded Underlying Institutional Zone of Public City Council Meeting Date: December 21, 2000 Date Prepared: December 11, 2000 Petition: PUD -99 -07 P- Public RM- Residential Medium West PCD /RM Gardens East Apartments South RM — Residential Medium Meridian Condominium RM East: Sandalwood Estates RM RM — Residential Medium North : St. Mark's Church I Conditional Use /RL C. Concurrency RL — Residential Low The City Engineering Office has reviewed the concurrency application and has determined that the proposed development has conditional concurrency. Concurrency has been granted with the following conditions: (1) Within six months of the issuance of a development order for this project and prior to the issuance of the first building permit, the applicant shall enter into a Public Facilities Agreement (PFA) with Palm Beach County. The PFA will be for the widening of Alternate Al from RCA Boulevard to the new Loop Road (south of PGA Boulevard) from four lanes to six lanes. (2) The project will be phased and limited to total developments generating no more than 904 new daily trips, prior to the commencement of construction of: • Widening (to six lanes) of Alternate A1A from RCA Boulevard to the new Loop Road. • PGA Boulevard /Alternate Al interchange. (3) Prior to the issuance of the Development Order, the applicant shall demonstrate that the lane geometry at the intersections between the existing and /or proposed driveways and the external streets are adequate. (4) Prior to the issuance of the Development Order, the applicant shall provide an analysis of the intersection of Burns Road and Gardens East Drive. D. Development Review Committee The Development Review Committee members, representing public and private agencies affected by the proposed development reviewed this petition on July 27, 2000. 3 City Council Meeting Date: December 21, 2000 Date Prepared: December 11, 2000 Petition: PUD -99 -07 The applicant has submitted revised plans and other documents in response to DRC comments. This project has received DRC certification. E. Procedure This is a request to approve an amendment to a PUD. City Staff and the Development Review Committee, who forward comments and recommendations to the Planning and Zoning Commission, review the request. Acting in an advisory role, the Commission considers the recommendations of the DRC and City Staff and makes a recommendation to the City Council. The City Council reviews the request for an amendment to a PUD, and makes a final determination of approval, approval with conditions, or denial. III. PROJECT DETAILS A. Site Location and Existing Conditions The Palm Beach Gardens Medical Center is located at the southeast corner of Burns Road and Gardens East Drive. The Medical Center site currently contains one, three -story structure containing 242,400 square feet of Hospital and Medical Office Building use. The site currently has a large wooded area along the eastern boundary of the site, and an open bermed area along the southern edge of the property. 4 City Council Meeting Date: December 21, 2000 Date Prepared: December 11, 2000 Petition PUD -99 -07 B. Waiver Requests The developer is requesting the following waivers: C. Proposed Building The architectural style proposed for this facility is consistent with the existing architecture of the building for the Hospital Building Expansion. The petitioner is proposing a new three story Medical Office Building, which will be consistent in color with the existing building. However, the new building will have a barrel tile Mansard, while the existing building will maintain a flat parapet. The proposed Medical Office Building will also have cornice detailing which the existing structure lacks. Staff has noted that the approved PUD and subsequent amendment contained architectural elevations, which included architectural upgrades to the existing Hospital Building, including arched windows and barrel the roofing. Renderings submitted with the original PUD application indicated a complete architectural renovation to a Mediterranean style of architecture. The current proposal is not consistent with previous 5 cess Number Hospital = 2 spaces per u!remet .. (43) spaces Number of Parking Spaces Section 180 Required: room plus medical 30 Hospital Beds laboratory, clinic or 12,000 sf Hospital Laboratory office = 37,500 sf Medical Office Building 298 spaces 3,300 Warehouse 255 provided Parking stall dimensions: Section 179 Standard parking stall 1 foot less in width. 9 foot wide parking stalls dimension = 18.5 feet X 10 feet Number of Wall Signs: Section 136 One wall sign per 4 wall signs on Hospital Seven principal tenant. Building. 1 wall sign on Medical Office Buildin . Number of Ground Signs: Section 136 2,020 linear feet of 12 ground signs ROW = three ground 15 ground and directory signs signs permitted. Seven entrances = seven enter /exit signs permitted. Three buildings = three directory signs permitted. Building Height: 49 feet Section 78 Maximum Building Medical Office Building: Medical Office Building Height of 45 feet 4 feet. C. Proposed Building The architectural style proposed for this facility is consistent with the existing architecture of the building for the Hospital Building Expansion. The petitioner is proposing a new three story Medical Office Building, which will be consistent in color with the existing building. However, the new building will have a barrel tile Mansard, while the existing building will maintain a flat parapet. The proposed Medical Office Building will also have cornice detailing which the existing structure lacks. Staff has noted that the approved PUD and subsequent amendment contained architectural elevations, which included architectural upgrades to the existing Hospital Building, including arched windows and barrel the roofing. Renderings submitted with the original PUD application indicated a complete architectural renovation to a Mediterranean style of architecture. The current proposal is not consistent with previous 5 City Council Meeting Date: December 21, 2000 Date Prepared: December 11, 2000 Petition PUD -99 -07 approved elevations. The current proposal is consistent with existing architecture. Should the amendment be approved, this proposal would supersede previously approved elevations. E. Signage The applicant is proposing to maintain existing signage and incorporate new signage into the master site plan. Due to life safety issues, it is imperative that the facility has adequate signage to direct traffic to life safety locations. The code allows for three ground signs on this site based on right -of -way frontage. The code also allows for seven exit/entrance signs based on number of driveways. The code allows for three building directory signs based on the number of buildings proposed in the master plan. This is a total of thirteen signs permitted. The petitioner is proposing fifteen signs, however, twelve of the fifteen signs do not meet language requirements. Therefore, the petitioner must request twelve waivers from code requirements for ground signs. The petitioner is proposing five wall signs for the Hospital Building. The code allows for one sign. The petitioner is requesting a waiver for four signs. The petitioner is also requesting a waiver to allow for two wall signs on the proposed Medical Office Building. This is one more than is permitted by code. F. Landscaping and Buffering The petitioner is proposing to add new vegetation to the existing landscaping on site. New landscaping shall occur predominantly along the southeastern and southern boundaries of the site, where the new parking area is proposed. The petitioner is also proposing new landscaping within the existing and future parking areas, as required by code. The petitioner is proposing new landscaping around the proposed medical office building as well. The proposed landscape buffer along the southern and southeastern property lines will help to screen this use from adjacent residential uses. The eastern portion of the site currently contains a large wooded area of approximately 2 acres. The petitioner is proposing to preserve a small (approximately 1/2 acre) portion of this predominantly pine area within the expanded parking area. The petitioner has not provided for a points count of the proposed vegetation. City Forester Mark Hendrickson has reviewed the landscape plan and has accepted this presentation of the landscape plan due to the amount of existing landscaping to be incorporated into the plan. L City Council Meeting Date: December 21, 2000 Date Prepared: December 11, 2000 Petition PUD -99 -07 G. Parking Of the 81,600 square feet yet to be built, the petitioner is proposing the following uses, as determined by Section 180 of the LDRs, Number of parking spaces required: 37,500 square feet Medical Office Building 3,300 square feet Warehouse 12,000 square feet Medical Laboratory 24,300 square feet Hospital (to be used for 30 bed expansion) 4,500 square feet mechanical equipment 30 Hospital Beds Total Square Footage: 81,600 1 space per 200 = 188 spaces 1 space per 2000 = 2 spaces 1 space per 250 = 48 spaces 0 spaces required 0 spaces required 60 spaces required Total Number of Spaces Required: 298 Number of Spaces Provided: 255 The petitioner has requested a waiver from the LDRs to allow for a deficit of 43 spaces. The petitioner has indicated on the site plan the ability to add the 43 spaces along the southern edge of the site, at the expense of open green space. The petitioner is justifying the waiver from required parking spaces based on the ability to provide additional buffering along the southern boundary of the site from the adjacent residential community. H. Site Access and Circulation This site is located at the corner of Burns Road and Gardens East Drive. The site currently has five egress points accessing the site, three along Gardens East Drive and two along Burns Road. The petitioner is proposing to relocate one entrance drive and add two more, for a total of seven entrance drives. To accommodate the proposed Medical Office Building, the petitioner must relocate existing parking to the southeast corner of the site. Other existing parking areas on the eastern end of the site will be reconfigured to accommodate a new staff entrance at the far eastern edge of the site. The City Engineer has reviewed the site plan and has determined that the additional and relocated entrances meet code requirements. I. Drainage Drainage outfall from this site will be accomplished by drainage into inlets and culverts, 7 City Council Meeting Date: December 21, 2000 Date Prepared: December 11, 2000 Petition PUD -99 -07 outfalling into a canal adjacent to the subject site, bordering on the south. This canal eventually drains into the Earman River. The petitioner is proposing to expand the parking lot and exfiltration system and use on -site detention swales and an existing outfall culvert to drain the site. J. Lighting The petitioner is proposing to utilize existing and new lighting standards within the parking area. The petitioner is proposing new lighting within the expanded parking area along the eastern side of the property. The petitioner has provided a photometric plan which indicates that lighting levels from the parking area do not spill over into the adjacent residential community at greater than 0.5 footcandles, as is required by the LDRs. K. Legal Non - Conformities The site currently contains 9 foot wide parking spaces. The petitioner is proposing to retail the existing spaces. All additional spaces are also proposed to be at 9 foot widths. The petitioner has requested a waiver from the code requirement. The site currently contains directional signs which do not meet code requirement. The petitioner has requested to retain these signs and add additional directional signs at new entrances because they contain life safety information. The petitioner has requested a waiver from the code requirements. In addition, the site currently contains wall signage beyond the number of signs permitted. The petitioner is proposing to retain this signage because they contain life safety information. The petitioner has requested a waiver from the code requirements. L. Platting The petitioner shall be required to plat the subject site and record with Palm Beach County prior to issuance of a building permit. IV. COMMENTS FROM THE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW COMMITTEE (DRC) This petition has received DRC certification. DRC certification indicates that all major outstanding issues have been resolved. Planning and Zoning Division 8 City Council Meeting Date: December 21, 2000 Date Prepared: December 11, 2000 Petition PUD -99 -07 • The Planning and Zoning Division has reviewed the history of the PUD approval and notes that the elevations have changed substantially from previous approvals. Staff has a concern that the proposed building elevation for the Hospital Building are not consistent with previous approvals, which indicated an upgrade to Mediterranean Style architectural features, including barrel tile mansard and arched window treatments. The current proposal is to continue the existing architecture. This style is inconsistent with the proposed new Medical Office Building architecture, which will detract from creating an aesthetically unified medical campus. The City Forester has reviewed the landscape plans and has commented that Condition 5 of Ordinance 28, 1991 and Condition 4 of Ordinance 26, 1995 be satisfied as part of this approval. (memo dated November 8, 2000) To address unsatisfied conditions of approval from previous approvals and amendments, Planning and Zoning staff recommends the following condition of approval: All previous unsatisfied conditions from Ordinance 28, 1991 and Ordinance 29, 1995 remain in effect. City Engineer The City Engineer has granted conditional concurrency, with four conditions of approval. The City Engineer has also provided conditions of approval based on the review of the site plan. Buildinq Division No concerns at this time. Police Department The Police Department has reviewed the petition and submitted their recommendations to the petitioner (memo dated July 24, 2000). Fire Department The Fire Department has reviewed the revisions and has commented that "they do not support the waiver request to allow for the total number of parking spaces to be less D City Council Meeting Date: December 21, 2000 Date Prepared: December 11, 2000 Petition PUD -99 -07 than the code requires. The facility has historically had parking issues and will likely to continue to be a problem during the winter season." (memo dated September 25, 2000) Public Works The Public Works Department has reviewed the petition and has one concern. The area of Gardens East Drive and Burns Road frequently floods as a result of a dry detention area located adjacent to the intersection. Public Works anticipates working with engineering to ensure that additional exfiltration and detention areas will increase storage capacity on site and remedy this problem. (memo dated August 1, 2000) Seacoast Utilities Seacoast Utilities has reviewed the revised plans and has no comments at this time. (memo dated July 25, 2000) Northern Palm Beach County Improvement District No concerns at this time. (Memo: July 31, 2000) V. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION The Planning and Zoning Commission held a public hearing on this petition on November 14, 2000 and recommended approval of this petition by a vote of 4 -0 with conditions of approval recommended by staff. The Planning and Zoning Commission also recommended approval for all five waiver requests. VI. CITY COUNCIL At its December 7, 2000 meeting, City Council passed Ordinance 35, 2000 on first reading. Due to time constraints, the City Council requested that the petitioner return for workshop at the December 21, 2000 meeting of City Council. VII. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff is recommending approval of petition PUD -99 -07 with the following conditions of approval, eight of which must be satisfied prior to Council approval: (1) Prior to City Council approval, the applicant shall remove the Parking Detail that specifies 16 -foot stall depth requirement. (City Engineer) 10 City Council Meeting Date: December 21, 2000 Date Prepared: December 11, 2000 Petition PUD -99 -07 (2) Prior to City Council approval, the applicant either needs to provide wheel stops at the seven parking spaces north of the helicopter pad or extend the width of the sidewalk to 7.5 feet. (City Engineer) (3) Prior to Construction Plan approval, the applicant must submit the original SFWMD permit. (City Engineer) (4) Prior to issuance of first building permit, the applicant needs to submit a Boundary Plat of the subject site to the City for review and approval. The plat shall be recorded prior to the issuance of the first building permit. (City Engineer) (5) Prior to City Council approval, the applicant needs to add the note that all trees /landscaping will be field placed to avoid conflict with the drainage system on the Landscape Plan. (City Engineer and City Forester) (6) Prior to City Council approval, the applicant needs to submit a Conceptual Drainage Plan that is consistent with the Site Plan. (City Engineer) (7) Prior to the issuance of first building permit, the applicant shall enter into a Public Facilities Agreement (PFA) with Palm Beach County within six - months of the issuance of the Development Order for this project and prior to the issuance of the first building permit. The PFA will be for the widening of Alternate A1A from RCA Boulevard to the new Loop Road from four - lanes to six - lanes. (City Engineer) (8) Prior to commencement of construction of the widening (to six lanes) of Alternate A1A from RCA Boulevard to the new Loop Road and construction of the PGA Boulevard /Alternate A1A interchange, total developments shall generate no more than 904 new daily trips. (City Engineer) (9) Prior to the issuance of the Development Order, the applicant shall demonstrate that the lane geometry at the intersections between the existing and /or proposed driveways and the external streets are adequate. (City Engineer) (10) Prior to the issuance of Development Order, the applicant shall provide an analysis of the intersection of Burns Road and Gardens East Drive. (City Engineer) ii `I City Council Meeting Date: December 21, 2000 Date Prepared: December 11, 2000 Petition PUD -99 -07 (11) The applicant shall include adequate signage on the site plan, directing traffic to the targeted driveways (emergency, staff and visitors) on Burns Road and Gardens East Drive. (Planning & Zoning, City Engineering) (12) All unsatisfied conditions of approvals deriving from Ordinance 28, 1991 and Ordinance 26, 1995 are hereby still in effect. (Planning & Zoning) (13) The build -out date of this project is December 31, 2010 as referenced in the September 29, 2000 traffic impact analysis. For the purposes of this condition, the project shall be considered built -out if all building permits have been issues and the applicant is actively engaged in the development of the site. (Planning & Zoning) (14) Prior to City Council approval, the petitioner shall submit a revised landscape plan indicating additional buffering along the southern boundary to the satisfaction of the City Forester. (Planning and Zoning) The petitioner has submitted revised plans in response to outstanding concern raised by staff and the Planning and Zoning Commission. Eight of the fourteen conditions of approval are hereby satisfied, pending final staff review. This has been reflected in the conditions included within Ordinance 35, 2000 Staff is recommending approval of the following waiver requests: (1) Number of Parking Spaces Required — Section 180, which requires 298 parking spaces based on 2 spaces per bed (30 beds proposed), I space per 200 s.f.. Medical Office Building (37,500 s.f. proposed), 1 space per 250 s.f. medical laboratory (12,000 s.f. proposed), 1 space per 2,000 s.f. warehouse (3,300 s.f. proposed), to allow for 255 spaces, a deficit of 43 spaces. (2) Minimum width for parking spaces — Section 179, which requires 10 -foot wide parking spaces, to allow for 9 -foot wide parking spaces. (3) Number of Wall Signs — Section 136, which allows for one wall sign per building /principal tenant, to allow for 4 wall signs on Hospital Building and 2 wall signs on Medical Office Building. 12 City Council Meeting Date: December 21, 2000 Date Prepared: December 11, 2000 Petition PUD -99 -07 (4) Number of Ground Signs — Section 136, which allows for 3 monument signs, 7 entrance /exit signs, and three directional signs, to allow for 13 directional signs. (5) Maximum Building Height in Public /Institutional is 45 feet, to allow for 49- foot high Medical Office Building. UILE_SWCOMPROG \Short Range \pud9907cc.doc 13 November 28, 2000 ORDINANCE 35, 2000 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM BEACH GARDENS, FLORIDA, PROVIDING FOR THE APPROVAL OF AN APPLICATION FROM TENET OF SOUTH FLORIDA HEALTH SYSTEMS FOR AN AMENDMENT TO THE PALM BEACH GARDENS MEDICAL CENTER PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT WHICH WAS ORIGINALLY APPROVED BY ORDINANCE 28, 1991 AND WAS SUBEQUENTLY AMENDED BY RESOLUTION 92, 1992, RESOLUTION 3, 1995 AND ORDINANCE 26,1995; APPROVING A CHANGE IN USES OF 81,600 SQUARE - FEET OF PREVIOUSLY APPROVED UNBUILT MEDICAL CENTER USES LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF BURNS ROAD AND GARDENS EAST DRIVE, AS MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED HEREIN; PROVIDING FOR CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL; PROVIDING FOR WAIVERS; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; PROVIDING FOR CONFLICTS; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, the City of Palm Beach Gardens received an application from TENET of South Florida Health Systems for an amendment to the Palm Beach Gardens Medical Center Planned Unit Development which was originally approved by Ordinance 28, 1991 and was subsequently amended by Resolution 92, 1992, Resolution 3, 1995 and Ordinance 26, 1995 in order to change uses within 81,600 square feet of previously approved, yet unbuilt, Medical Center uses; and WHEREAS, the 22.12 acre Palm Beach Gardens Medical Center site, located at the southeast corner of Burns Road and Gardens East Drive, as more particularly described in Exhibit "A ", is currently zoned Professional Office with a Planned Unit Development Overlay Zone; and WHEREAS, the Growth Management Department has reviewed said application and determined that it is sufficient; and WHEREAS, the Growth Management Department has reviewed said application and determined that it is consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan and Land Development Regulations; and WHEREAS, the Growth Management Department has recommended approval of the amendment of the Planned Unit Development (PUD) known as the Palm Beach Gardens Medical Center; and 13 WHEREAS, the City's Planning and Zoning Commission has reviewed said application and recommended that it be approved with the requested waivers and subject to certain conditions stated herein. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM BEACH GARDENS, FLORIDA: SECTION 1. The City Council of the City of Palm Beach Gardens, Florida hereby approves an amendment to the "Palm Beach Gardens Medical Center' PUD, located at the southeast corner of Burns Road and Gardens East Drive, as more particularly described in Exhibit "A" attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference, to permit a change in uses of 81,600 square feet of previously approved, yet unbuilt, medical center uses to allow for the construction of a 37,500 square foot medical office building, the addition of 30 hospital beds, the expansion of operating rooms, the intensive care unit, and the mechanical, storage and service areas. SECTION 2. Said Planned Unit Development is approved subject to the following conditions, which shall be the responsibility of the applicant, its successors or assigns: (1) Prior to Construction Plan approval, the applicant shall submit the original SFWMD permit. (City Engineer) (2) Prior to issuance of first building permit, the applicant shall submit a Boundary Plat of the subject site to the City for review and approval. The plat shall be recorded prior to the issuance of the first building permit. (City Engineer) (3) Prior to the issuance of first building permit and within 6 months of the issuance of the Development Order, the applicant shall enter into a Public Facilities Agreement (PFA) with Palm Beach County. The PFA will be for the widening of Alternate A1A from RCA Boulevard to the new Loop Road from four -lanes to six - lanes. (City Engineer) (4) Prior to commencement of construction of the widening (to six lanes) of Alternate A1A from RCA Boulevard to the new Loop Road and construction of the PGA Boulevard /Alternate A1A interchange, total development shall generate no more than 904 new daily trips. (City Engineer) (5) All unsatisfied conditions of approvals deriving from Ordinance 28, 1991 and Ordinance 26, 1995, to the extent not modified 14 herein, remain in full force and effect. (Planning & Zoning) (6) The build -out date of this project is December 31, 2010 as referenced in the September 29, 2000 traffic impact analysis. For the purposes of this condition, the project shall be considered built -out if all building permits have been issued and the applicant is actively engaged in the development of the site. (Planning & Zoning) SECTION 3. The following waivers are hereby granted with this approval: 1. Number of Parking Spaces Required — Section 180, which requires 298 parking spaces based on 2 spaces per bed (30 beds proposed), I space per 200 s.f.. Medical Office Building (37,500 s.f. proposed), 1 space per 250 s.f. medical laboratory (12,000 s.f. proposed), 1 space per 2,000 s.f. warehouse (3,300 s.f. proposed), to allow for 255 spaces, a deficit of 43 spaces. 2. Minimum width for parking spaces — Section 179, which requires 10 -foot wide parking spaces, to allow for 9 -foot wide parking spaces. 3. Number of Wall Signs — Section 136, which allows for one wall sign per building /principal tenant, to allow for 4 wall signs on Hospital Building and 2 wall signs on Medical Office Building. 4. Number of Ground Signs — Section 136, which allows for 3 monument signs, 7 entrance /exit signs, and three directional signs, to allow for 13 directional signs. 5. Maximum Building Height in Public /Institutional is 45 feet, to allow for 49- foot high Medical Office Building. SECTION 4. Construction of the Planned Unit Development shall be in compliance with the following plans on file with the City's Growth Management Department: Official Exhibits: 1. 9/18/00 Cover Sheet/index of Drawings 2. 11/14/00 Master Plan, Oliver Glidden Partners 3. 11/14/00 Alternate Master Plan, 10' wide hospital use stalls, Sheet A1.0a 4. 11/13/00 Alternate Master Plan (without 43 spaces, Sheet A1.0b 5. 11/13/00 Master Phasing Plan, Sheet A 1.1 6. 11/14/00 Signage Plan, Sheet A1.2 7. 5/1/00 Radiology Addition, Sheet A2.0 8. 5/1/00 Mechanical and Electrical Additions, Sheet A2.1 9. 5/1/00 3rd Story Hospital Addition, Sheet A2.2 15 10. 5/1/00 3rd Story Hospital Addition, Sheet A2.3 11. 11/21/00 Medical Office Building, Sheet A3.0 12. 5/1/00 Medical Office Building, Sheet A3.1 13. 5/1/00 Medical Office Building, 2nd and 3rd Floor Plan, Sheet A3.2 14. 5/1/00 Roof Plan, Sheet A3.3 15. 9/8/00 Building Elevations, Sheet A3.4 16. 11/14/00 Burns Road Street Elevation (M.O.B.), Sheet A3.4a 17. 9/8/00 Building Elevations, Sheet A3.5 18. 9/8/00 Loading /Storage, Material Management, Sheet A4.0 19. 9/8/00 Building Elevation, Sheet 5.0 20. 11/14/00 Lighting Plan, Sheet SPE 21. 11/21/00 Landscape Plans, Environmental Design Group, Sheets 1 -7 22. 11/27/00 Conceptual Drainage Plan, Kimley Horn, Sheet CDP 1 23. 1/21/00 Boundary and Topographic Survey Supportinq Documents: September 29, 2000 Traffic Impact Analysis, Kimley -Horn. SECTION 5. If any section, paragraph, sentence, clause, phrase, or word of this Ordinance is for any reason held by a court of competent jurisdiction to be unconstitutional, inoperative or void, such holding shall not affect the remainder of the Ordinance. SECTION 6. All ordinances or parts of ordinances of the City of Palm Beach Gardens, Florida, which are in conflict with this Ordinance are hereby repealed. SECTION 7. This Ordinance shall be effective upon adoption. PLACED ON FIRST READING THIS DAY OF 2000. PLACED ON SECOND READING THIS DAY OF 2000. PASSED AND ADOPTED THIS DAY OF 2000. MAYOR JOSEPH R. RUSSO VICE MAYOR ERIC JABLIN 16 COUNCILWOMAN LAUREN FURTADO COUNCILMAN DAVID CLARK COUNCILMAN CARL SABATELLO ATTEST BY: CAROL GOLD, CMC CITY CLERK APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM AND SUFFICIENCY BY: CITY ATTORNEY VOTE: MAYOR RUSSO VICE MAYOR JABLIN COUNCILMAN CLARK COUNCILWOMAN FURTADO COUNCILMAN SABATELLO GAShort Range \pud9907or.doc AYE 17 NAY ABSENT EXHIBIT "A" 18 PARCEL A: A PARCEL OF BEACH COUNTY, ORB 6634 P9 10.'221 EXHIBIT A Legal Description of the Property_ LAND LYING IN SECTION 7, TOWNSHIP 42 SOUTH, RANGE. 43 EAST, PALM FLORIDA, BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCING AT THE POINT OF INTERSECTION OF 111E CENTER LINE OF THE FLORIDA EAST COAST RAILWAY RIGHT OF WAY AND THE EAST -WEST QUARTER SECTION LINE OF SECTION 7, TOWNSHIP 42 SOUTH, RANGE 43 EAST, PALM REACH COUNTY, FLORIDA; THENCE SOUTH 88.38'15" EAST, ALONG SAID EAST-WEST QUARTER SECTION LINE, A DISTANCE OF 51.86 FEET TO A POINT (ACCORDING TO THE RIGHT OF WAY AND TRACT MAP OF THE FLORIDA EAST COAST RAILWAY CO., SAID CENTER LINE OF THE FLORIDA EAST COAST RAILWAY RIGHT OF WAY HEARS NORTH 14'01'00" WEST AT 1111S POINT AND ALL OTHER BEARINGS STATED HEREIN ARE RELATIVE 11ILRETO); THENCE NORTH 75'59'01" FAST A DISTANCE OF 131.00 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A CURVE CONCAVE TO THE SOUTH, HAVING A RADIUS OF 183.37 FEET AND A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 15022'45 "; THENCE EASTERLY. ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE A DISTANCE OF 76.06 FEET TO THE END OF SAID CURVE; THENCE SOUTH 88'38' 15" FAST ALONG 711E TANGENT TO SAID CURVE, A DISTANCE OF 616.56 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A CURVE CONCAVE TO THE NORTH, HAVING A RADIUS OF 1682.15 FEET AND A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 6'48'15 "; 711ENCE EASTERLY, A WNG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE, A DISTANCE OF 199.76 FEET TO THE END OF SAID CURVE; 111ENCE NORTH 8433'30" EAST ALONG THE TANGENT TO SAID CURVE, A DISTANCE OF 631.81 FEET TO A POINT; THENCE SOUTH 05'26'30" EAST A DISTANCE OF 30 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING OF 711E HEREIN DESCRIBED PARCEL, SAID POINT BEING ON THE SOUTHERLY RIGHT -OF -WAY LINE OF BURNS ROAD (60 FEET RIGHT -OF -WAY); THENCE CONTINUE SOUTH .05026'30" EAST, DEPARTING FROM SAID SOUTHERLY RIGHT -OF -WAY LINE, A DISTANCE OF 219.16 FEET TO A POINT; THENCE NORTH 84033'30" EAST A DISTANCE OF 37.88 FEET TO A POINT; THENCE SOUTH 50053108" EAST A DISTANCE OF 13.32 FEET TO A POINT; THENCE NORTH 84.33'30" EAST A DISTANCE OF 52.88 FEET TO A POINT; THENCE NURTII 05026'30" WEST A DISTANCE OF 29.75 FEET TO A POINT; THENCE NORTH 84.33'43" FAST A DISTANCE OF 17,43 FEET TO A POINT; THENCE SUU111 49'48'48" EAST A DISTANCE OF 71.82 FEET TO A POINT: THENCE NORTH 84.01'26" EAST A DISTANCE OF 123.89 FEET 1'0 A POINT; THENCE SOUTH 05026'30" EAST A DISTANCE OF 751.93 FEET TO A POINT, SAID POINT BEING ON THE NORTH LINE, OF THE PLAT OF MERIDIAN PARK, AS RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 28, AT PAGE 51, PUHLIC RECORDS OF PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA; TlIENCE SOUTH 75'57'05" WEST, ALONG THE NURTII LINE OF SAID PLAT OF MERIDIAN PARK, A DISTANCE OF 565.68 FEET TO A POINT, SAID POINT BEING THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF SAID PLAT OF MERIDIAN PARK. SAID POINT ALSO BEING ON THE EASTERLY RIGHT -OF -WAY LINE OF GARDEN EAST DRIVE (60' RIGHT -OF -WAY); THENCE NORTH 14.02'55" WEST, ALONG THE EASTERLY RIGHT -OF -WAY LINE OF SAID GARDEN EAST DRIVE AND DEPARTING FROM 711E NORM LINE OF SAID PLAT OF MERIDIAN PARK, A DISTANCE OF 1075.92 FEET 1'0 A MINT OF CURVE CONCAVE TO THE SOUTHEAST, HAVING A RADIUS OF 25.0 FEET AND A CENTRAL ANGLE, OF 98036'25 "; 711ENCE NUR111F.RLY, NORTHEASTERLY AND EASTERLY, ALONG TIIE ARC OF SAID CURVE, A DISTANCE OF 43.01 FEET TO THE END OF SAID CURVE, SAID POINT BEING ON 711E SOU111ERLY RIGHT -OF -WAY LINE OF SAID BURNS ROADS THENCE NORTH 84.33'30" EAST ALONG THE TANGENT TO SAID CURVE AND ALONG THE SOUTHERLY RIGHT -OF -WAY LINE OF SAID BURNS ROAD, A DISTANCE OF 396.69 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. CONTAINING IN ALL 13.91 ACRES. MORE OR LESS. __Palm btAcy I oP 3 \r ORB 6634 P9 10 PARCEL B: A PARCEL OF LAND LYING IN SECTION 7, 1OWIISIIII' 42 SOUTH. RANI ;I; 4.I FAST, fAL'1 BEACII COUNTY. FLURIUA, BEING MORE PARTICULARLY U1,;SC:RIBED AS FOLLOWS. COI-HENCING AT 11117 P(11t11' OF I111r.RSF(:I'piN (IF 1'111' 1'FII -I-FR LINE OF THE FI.(IR1DA FAST COAST P.AII.WAY NIGIll' OF WAY Atli '1111: FAST- WEST 011ARTF:R CI.( "rIUN LINE. OF srcl'ION 1, TUWNsIIiP �,z S011111. RAIICF. r,3 EAST. 1Alrl I%I?A(af C011111Y, FLORIDA; THENCE SUtllll 88 "38' 15" FASF, ALONG SAID F.ASI'- WF,S1' OUARTF.R 1:CTIUN LINE, A DISTANCE OF 51.80 FEET 10 A I'Uftll' (AC;CURUING 'lO THE RIGIIr OF WAY A1411 TRAC MAP OF 1IIC FLOR lUA FAST COA-T RA I I.WAY CO.. SAID C 'INTER LING or TIIE FLORIDA EAST COAST RAILWAY RIGHT OF WAY BEARS NUP,111 140Ul'OU" WEST AT MIS I'UINT Atli) ALL OTIII:R BEARINGS STATED IIF.RE.IN APE. RFLATIVE THERETO); TIIFIICE NORTH 75'59'01" FAST A DISTANCE OF 131 .O() FEEr TO TIIE BF:(:INNIIIG OF A CARVE' CONCAVE TO THE SOUTH, IIAVII)(; A RADIUS OF 283.37 FEET A1411 A CENTRAL ANGLE Or 15'72'45 "; TIIFtICE EASTERLY, ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE A 111 STANCE OF 76.06 FEET TO TIIE END OF SA 11) CURVE; THENCE SOU111 88 "38' 15" FAST ALUM: IHE TAIIGF:NT TO SAID CURVE, A DISTANCE. OF 616.56 FEET TO THE BI:C:INNINC OF A CURVE CONCAVE r0 TIIE NORTH, HAVING A RADIUS OF 1682.15 FEET AND A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 6.48'15 "; THENCE EASTERLY, ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE, A DISTANCE OF 199.76 FEET TO 111F END OF SAID CURVE; THENCE NORI11 84 "333U" FAST ALONG THE TANGENT TO SAID CURVE, A DISTANCE OF 716.71 FEET TO 'I11F BEGINNING OF A CIIRVF COIICAVF, TO T11E SUD I'll, HAS' l i1C: A RADI IIS OF 973.91 FEET AND A CFN I RAL ANf:L.F: OF 11'43'31 TIIENCF, EASTERLY, ALUM: TIIE ARC OF SAID U1RVF. A DISTAIWE OF 199.30 FEET TO 111E F,ND OF SAID CUM.; THENCE SOUTH 83 °43'00" EAST AI,Otlr: IIIE TANGENT TO SAID CURVE, A DISTANCE OF 248.55 FEET TO A POINT; 1IIE.N( :f SOI1111 14 "()2'55" EAST A DISTANCE. OF 31.99 FEET TO 1IIE PU1Nr OF BEGINNING OF 111E HEREIN DESCRIBED PARCEL, SAID . rOINT BEING ON THE SOUTHERLY RIGHT -(1F -WAY LINE OF BURNS ROAD (60 FEET RICIIT -OF -WAY), SAID rUlt('r ALSO BEING 111r•, NOR'1IIWFS,r CORNF,R OF THE PLAT OF SANI1ALt;1100 FSTAIES, AS RECORI11FI) III PLAT il(u1A 32, AT rA(:FC 167 11IRf)IiGll 171 , rUBl.IC FECII II; Cr VAI)I BFACII G01111I-Y. FLnRIUA: '111HIC17. C0111 "INUF SOUTH 14402'5r)" FACT AI.(1NG 1111: wr ."r LINE OF SAID I'LAT OF FAIIIIALWOCOD FS I A 1 FS; A DISTANCE OF 888.66 FEET TO A fU111 r, SAID fO1 NT PEI NG '111F. NOR I III'A', I' CORNER OF 711E PLAT OF HERIDIA(I rAPK, AS P('CORDFD IN PLAT BOOK 28, AT PA1:F: 51, PUBLIC RECORDS OF PALA BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA: TIIENCE SOUTH 75 °57'05" WFSr, AI.011(: 111E NORTH LINE OF SA I n PLAT OF MERIDIAN PARK AND UFrART1 NC; F RUtl THE WFC r Li fir OF SAID PLAT OF SANDALWOOD FSTATF.C, A DISTANCE OF 379.32 FEET 11) A MIN 'Ir: 1IIENCF. NORTH 05"26'30" WEST, DFI'ARTI III: FR0t1 111E NORTH 1,111F. OF CAM r1.A r OF FIF.R I IIIAN PARK, A DISTANCE OF 751.91 FEET TO A rUINr: 1'IIFN(. :r•. SOIIIII 84'(11'20" WEST A DISTANCE OF 123.89 FEET 111 A POINT: THENCE NORTH 49 "48' 49" WEST A III S I'AIIC:F OF 71.82 FEET TO A POINT; 111ENCE SOU'111 84.33'43" WEST A DISTANCE; (IF 17.43 FEET TO A POINT; TIIENCF, NORTH OS 26 3U WEST A DISTANCE OF 205.69 FE.I:I' TO A roitur LYING ON 111E ARC OF A CURVE CONCAVE TO 111E SOUTH, HAVING A RADIUS OF 9/.1.91 FEET. A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 10'59'03" AND A RADIAL BEARINU AT 1IIIC I'01111' OF SUUTII U061'03" WFST. SAID POINT AISO REIN(; ON 111F. SOUTHERLY RI(:ill' -OF -WAY LINE OF SAID lllIR14S ROAD: 1111.N(:F: F.A "TEPLY, AMU(; IIIE ARC OF SAID CIIRVr. Atli) Tiff. SOUTHERLY RIGHT -UF -WAY LINE OF SAID BURNS ROAD, A UISTAIICF OF 11111.69 FT.1:1 TO TIIE END OF SAID CURVE,; 1111'N(:E SO)UIII 83 *43'00" FACT ALONG 1111: TAII(411I' 'ICS SAID CURVE AND CONTINUIIIG ALONG THE S()UIIIEPLY RIGIII' -1)F -WAY L1111: (►F SAID BURNS ROAD, A DISTANCE OF 259.67 FEET 'lU 111E POINT OF BEGINNING. CONTAINING IN ALL 7.65 ACRES, MORE OR LESS. FXIITRTT A calm -5rl-e-'e 'aF3 ORB 6634 P9 1023 h-RA A PARCEL OF LAND LYING IN SECTION 7, TOWNSHIP 42 SOUTH, RANGE 43 EAST, PALM BEACH COUNTY. FLORIDA. BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCING AT THE POINT OF INTERSECTION OF THE CENTER LINE OF THE FLORIDA EAST COAST RAILWAY RIGHT OF WAY AND THE EAST-WEST QUARTER SECTION LINE OF SECTION 7, TOWNSHIP 42 SOUTH, RANGE 43 EAST, PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA; THENCE SOUTH 88'38'13' EAST, ALONG SAID EAST WEST QUARTER SECTION LINE A DISTANCE OF 51.86 FEET TO A POINT (ACCORDING TO THE RIGHT OF WAY AND TRACT MAP OF THE FLORIDA EAST COAST RAILWAY CO., SAID CENTER LINE OF THE FLORIDA EAST COAST RAILWAY RIGHT OF WAY BEARS NORTH 14.01'00' WEST AT THIS POINT AND ALL OTTER BEARINOS STATED HEREIN ARE RELATIVE T TIREM); THENCE NORTH 75'59"01' EAST A DISTANCE OF 131.00 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A CURVE CONCAVE TO THE SOUTH, HAVING A RADIUS OF 283.37 FEET AND A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 15'22'45'; THENCE EASTERLY, ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE A DISTANCE OF 76.06 FEET TO THE END OF SAID CURVE; THENCE SOUTH 88'38'15' EAST ALONG THE TANGENT TO SAID CURVE, A DISTANCE OF 61656 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A CURVE CONCAVE TO THE NORTH, HAVING A RADIUS OF 1682.15 FEET AND A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 6'48'15'; THENCE EASTERLY, ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE, A DISTANCE OF 199.76 FEET TO THE END OF SAID CURVE, THENCE NORTH 84'33'30' EAST ALONG THE TANGENT TO SAID CURVE, A DISTANCE OF 631.81 FEET TO A POINT: THENCE SOUTH 03026'30' EAST A DISTANCE OF 30 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING OF THE HEREIN DESCRIBED PARCEL, SAID POINT SEItiG ON THF. SOUTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF BURNS ROAD (60 FEET RIGHT. OF-WAY); THENCE CONTINUE SOUTH 05'26'30' EAST, DEPARTING FROM SAID SOUTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE. A DISTANCE OF 219.16 FEET TO A POINT, THENCE NORTH 84'3330' EAST A DISTANCE OF 37.88 FEET TO A POINT THENCE SOUTH 50.53'08' EAST A DISTANCE OF 23.32 FEET TO A POINT. THENCE NORTH 8403330' EAST A DISTANCE OF 52.98 FEET TO A POM THENCE NORTH 45026'30' WEST A DISTANCE OF 235.44 FEET TO A POINT, SAID POINT BEING ON THE SOUTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF SAID BURNS ROAD AND LYING ON THE ARC OF A CURVE CONCAVE TO THE SOUTH, HAVING A RADIUS OF 943.91 FEET, A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 00045 -T AND A RADIUS BEARING AT THIS POINT OF SOUTH 04'41'03' EAST; THENCE WESTERLY. ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE AND ALONG THE SOUTHERLY RIGHT OF•WAY LINE OF SAID BURNS ROAD, A DISTANCE OF 12.48 FEET TO THE FOINT OF TANGENT OF SAID CURVE; THENCE SOUTH 84'33'30' WEST, CONTINUING ALONG THE SOUTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF SAID BURNS ROAD. A DISTANCE OF 94.90 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNI NO. PARCEL 'C' AREA 0.56 ACRES, MORE OR LESS. TOTAL NET AREA OF PARCELS 'A', 'B', AND 'CO: 2212 ACRES, MORE OR LESS. SUBJECT TO RIGHTS-OF-WAY, EASEMENTS AND OTHER MATTERS OF RECORD. EXHIBITPALM BEACH COUNTY.. FLA _ JOHN S. OUNKLE City of Palm Beach Gardens Council Agenda December 21, 2000 Council Chambers 10500 N. Military Trail Palm Beach Gardens, FL 33410 Mayor Russo' Vice Mayor Jablin Council Member Clark -X Council Member Furtado ---' Council Member Sabatello " I CITY OF PALM BEACH GARDENS CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING DECEMBER 21, 2000 7:00 P.M. I. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE II. ROLL CALL III. ANNOUNCEMENTS: IV. PRESENTATIONS: V. CITY MANAGER REPORT: a. Status of Building Permit- Veridian Office Building. t>aw b. Customer Service Report. 314 t, - D a 9e.6 «+ 14A y" C. Municipal Clerk Designation. VI. COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC: (For Items Not on the Aaenda) (Please submit request card to Clerk prior to this Item) VII. CONSENT AGENDA: Do, %>-c ^ L ?, (c 5-- 0 a. Consideration of approving Minutes from the November 13, 2000 Workshop City Council Meeting. b. Consideration of approving Minutes from the November 14, 2000 Workshop City Council Meeting. C. Consideration of approving Minutes from the November 30, 2000 Special City Council Meeting. ki d. Consideration of approving Minutes from the December 5, 2000 Special City Council Meeting. e. Roller Hockey Rink. Consideration of awarding bid for dasher boards and l surface coating. 4 f. Cancer Survivor Park - Letter of Intent. Consideration of authorizing the Mayor to sign the Letter of Intent for the Cancer Survivor Park. 24 g. Fire Department Vehicles. Consideration of replacing one Suburban and one Caprice. h. Resolution 127, 2000 - Mirasol Plat — Spine Road (a.k.a. Plat Two). Consideration of approving Mirasol Plat — Spine Road (aka Plat Two). i. Resolution 128, 2000 - Mirasol Plat — Parcel 1. Consideration of approving Mirasol Plat Parcel 1. j. Resolution 129, 2000 - Mirasol Plat — Parcel 2. Consideration of approving Mirasol Plat Parcel 2. k. Resolution 130, 2000 - Mirasol Plat — Parcel 3. Consideration of approving Mirasol Plat Parcel 3. 1. Resolution 131, 2000 - Mirasol Plat — Parcel 4. Consideration of approving Mirasol Plat Parcel 4. M. Resolution 132, 2000 - Mirasol Plat — Parcel 5. Consideration of approving Mirasol Plat Parcel 5. n. Long -term Disability Insurance. Consideration of awarding the long -term disability insurance proposal to Sun Life of Canada. o. Funding North Palm Beach Transportation Forum. Consideration of approving the expenditure of $5,000.00 to fund the North Palm Beach County Transportation Forum. i P G ,� p. Consideration of awarding contract for Design/Build of Park Storage ` Facility. VIII. PUBLIC HEARINGS: a. Ordinance 30, 2000 — The Benjamin School. Consideration of an Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Palm Beach Gardens, Florida, providing for the approval of the application of the Benjamin Private School, Inc., for rezoning of 50 acres of land, located at the Northwest corner of the intersection of Central Boulevard and an unnamed future East -West Road as more particularly described herein, from Planned Development Area (PDA) to Public /Institutional (PI) with a Planned Unit Development (PUD) overlay, in order to construct a 187,671 square foot private high school campus; providing for waivers; providing for conditions of approval; providing for severability; providing for conflicts; and providing for an effective date. — (Continued from December 7, 20000) IX. RESOLUTIONS: a. / Resolution 97. 2000 — Removal of Exotic Vegetation & Establishing 1l ,,Lrc9,w— Upland Set Aside for Parcels 4.03 and 4.06. Consideration of approving an application from Communities Finance Company requesting approval for removal of exotic vegetation and conceptual upland preserve set aside for Parcels 4.03 and 4.06 located at the southwest corner of Alternate AIA and Donald Ross Road' providing for conditions. b. Resolution 105, 2000 — La Posada. Consideration of approving a site plan for a senior assisted living facility (La Posada) located within the Regional Center Development of Regional Impact (DRI) consisting of 301 units, as more particularly described herein; providing for six waivers to allow the addition of 209 covered parking spaces, the location of covered parking spaces within the required 100 -foot setback, the elimination of two sidewalks, a reduction in the 15 foot landscape buffer, the reduction in the street side setback along the eastern perimeter, and the encroachment of structures within the lake maintenance easement tract; providing for an amendment to the Master Signage Program for the DRI as adopted in Resolution 64, 1998 to modify the design and location of the permitted signs and add two directional and two directory signs to the Master Signage Program; providing for conditions of approval. C. Resolution 126, 2000 — School Concurrency. Consideration of adopting R �m b(,e the Interlocal Agreement with the municipalities of Palm Beach County, Lam` JLVo Palm Beach County and the Palm Beach County School District to fir,,, iN cii establish a county -wide public school concurrency; authorizing the Mayor and City Clerk to execute the Interlocal Agreement. , t44Q_V o0, 4r- c�..s,,,�, � X. ORDINANCES: (For Consideration on First Reading) eta. Ordinance 32, 2000 — St. Mark's School Expansion. Consideration of C-Awo approving an application from St. Mark's Church, Inc. for an amendment ".9 and expansion of a Planned Unit Development by approving the construction of a 14,000 square -foot school building, a 945 square -foot church addition, and a two year time extension for a trailer on an 11 acre site, located at the Northeast and Northwest corners of Burns Road and (#1", 0 4^A 4. Hardens East Drive, as more particularly described herein; providing for conditions of approval; providing for waivers. * Request motion to re -order Agenda to place Items XI and XII at the beginning of the meeting* XI. ITEMS FOR COUNCIL ACTION: ©LT*.) a. Appraisal of Preserve Lands. Consideration of a motion to approve rmAr.,c 14"Deicrcs -,4 utilizing highest and best use as the appraisal method for appraising preserve lands. b. Executive Search Firm — City Manager. Consideration of selections for an executive search Col, , 8 _ wv-, - C -d 1' 11�'(O(t WO'.W �C �C�C/F F� E� T•! S - Lit ��.. ! -�V2�U o�%L XII. ITEMS FOR DISCUSSION: � W -o C� XIII. XIV. 144 j je2 ri - 7A k-s 1�Pq rrIe-- XV. a. Ordinance 35, 2000 — Palm Beach Gardens Medical Center. Consideration of an Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Palm Beach Gardens, Florida, providing for the approval of an application from Tenet of South Florida Health Systems for an amendment to the Palm Beach Gardens Medical Center Planned Unit Development which was originally approved by Ordinance 28, 1991 and subsequently amended by Resolution 92, 1992, Resolution 3, 1995 and Ordinance 25, 1995; approving a change in uses of 81,600 square -feet of previously approved unbuilt medical center uses located at the southeast corner of Burns Road and Gardens East Drive, as more particularly described herein; providing for conditions of approval; providing for waivers; providing for severability; providing for conflicts; and providing for an effective date. ITEMS & REPORTS BY MAYOR AND COUNCIL: - t�` CITY ATTORNEY REPORT: YeR .+w • V/ l4'1a 7 e rsr . ADJOURNMENT. _ lC�•cod �� In accordance with the Americans with Disabilities Act and Florida Statute 86.26, persons with disabilities needing special accommodations to participate in this proceeding should contact the City Clerk's Department, no later than 5 days prior to the proceeding at telephone number (561) 799 -4120 for assistance, if hearing impaired, telephone the Florida Relay Service Numbers (800) 955 -8771 (TDD) or (800) 955 -8700 (VOICE), for assistance. If a person decides to appeal any decision made by the Council, with respect to any matter considered at such meeting or hearing, they will need a record of the proceedings, and for such purpose, they may need to ensure that a verbatim record of the proceedings is made, which record includes the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is to be based. r i` • j' --'� ��e r a v — �•e �� ea,s t i R It — FIA - -.� COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC Request to Address City Council Please Print Name: / �!� IZ Address. / �' = �f1 1 C) City: Subject: 1' E E 5 �' c� /C . Members of the public may address the City Council during the "Comments by the Public" portion of the agenda and during "Public Hearings ". This Request to Address the City Council must be delivered to the City Clerk prior to the commencement of the meeting. The time limit for each speaker is limited to three (3) minutes. COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC Request to Address City Council Please Print Name: fL��/ C. -%t-ey" L/ b-ly Y pl c` -ti x -1 Address: City: Subject: r Members of the public may address the City Council during the "Comments by the Public" portion of the agenda and during "Public Hearings ". This Request to Address the City Council must be delivered to the City Clerk prior to the commencement of the meeting. The time limit for each speaker is limited to three (3) minutes. Please Print Name: J Address: . City: Subject: COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC Request to Address City Council 1 6 DO✓ Tt7ji-,� 06W W,, / s.,4 t- o f-- Mr,5 Ex k/F Gimps Members of the public may address the City Council during the "Comments by the Public" portion of the agenda and during "Public Hearings ". This Request to Address the City Council must be delivered to the City Clerk prior to the commencement of the meeting. The time limit for each speaker is limited to three (3) minutes. COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC Request to Address City Council Please Print Name: Yam A (20 Nz Q I Address: 3 f Z0 a c City: Subject: Members of the public may address the City Council during the "Comments by the Public" portion of the agenda and during "Public Hearings ". This Request to Address the City Council must be delivered to the City Clerk prior to the commencement of the meeting. The time limit for each speaker is limited to three (3) minutes. Please Print Name: COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC Request to Address City Council Address: .491, Ye's T4 ��/SOD /°6.f QS ly 1, I City: .,P. &, G Subject. x-r. a,, G'��i�iJq /.S e 17 /0ie.s0 r v c /a ^ /.S Members of the public may address the City Council during the "Comments by the Public" portion of the agenda and during "Public Hearings ". This Request to Address the City Council must be delivered to the City Clerk prior to the commencement of the meeting. The time limit for each speaker is limited to three (3) minutes. Please Print Name: Address: COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC Request to Address City Council � k�� ) City: Subject: Members of the public may address the City Council during the "Comments by the Public" portion of the agenda and during "Public Hearings ". This Request to Address the City Council must be delivered to the City Clerk prior to the commencement of the meeting. The time limit for each speaker is limited to three (3) minutes. Please Print Name: COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC Request to Address City Council Address: City: 5 6R Subject: Members of the public may address the City Council during the "Comments by the Public" portion of the agenda and during "Public Hearings ". This Request to Address the City Council must be delivered to the City Clerk prior to the commencement of the meeting. The time limit for each speaker is limited to three (3) minutes. i Please Print Name: Address: City: Subj( COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC Request to Address City Council L W14 Sa, i Members of the public may address the City Council during the "Comments by the Public" portion of the agenda and during "Public Hearings ". This Request to Address the City Council must be delivered to the City Clerk prior to the commencement of the meeting. The time limit for each speaker is limited to three (3) minutes. Please Print Name: COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC Request to Address City Council Address: City: Subject: ✓���Jl 1 ��/ `mil 1�C Members of the public may address the City Council during the "Comments by the Public" portion of the agenda and during "Public Hearings ". This Request to Address the City Council must be delivered to the City Clerk prior to the commencement of the meeting. The time limit for each speaker is limited to three (3) minutes. COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC Request to Address City Council Please Print j Name: A, Address: City: +: Subject: Members of the public may address the City Council during the "Comments by the Public" portion of the agenda and during "Public Hearings ". This Request to Address the City Council must be delivered to the City Clerk prior to the commencement of the meeting. The time limit for each speaker is limited to three (3) minutes. Please Print Name: Address: City: Subject: f; COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC Request to Address City Council Members of the public may address the City Council during the "Comments by the Public" portion of the agenda and during "Public Hearings ". This Request to Address the City Council must be delivered to the City Clerk prior to the commencement of the meeting. The time limit for each speaker is limited to three (3) minutes. Please Print Name:Sa+'� Address: I Z-'X" City: Subject: COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC Request to Address City Council AgAe -vim DaAlc -�5 � C, . 3 Members of the public may address the City Council during the "Comments by the Public" portion of the agenda and during "Public Hearings ". This Request to Address the City Council must be delivered to the City Clerk prior to the commencement of the meeting. The time limit for each speaker is limited to three (3) minutes. Please Print Name: COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC Request to Address City Council Address: // ?— 4- �� R � �--- City: ke, -! -3C -ff Subject: A ✓�i'/�� -1 �t °T10 �,1 - �o i ff E�c�,s��+ �- Y�t�- ZLL f, ,� � .r � mac•• • Members of the public may address the City Council during the "Comments by the Public" portion of the agenda and during "Public Hearings ". This Request to Address the City Council must be delivered to the City Clerk prior to the commencement of the meeting. The time limit for each speaker is limited to three (3) minutes. COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC Request to Address City Council Please Print i S Name: / /-7 R y Address: Cam. V 4> Subject: /� C{ /C S �. 'r 4 J Members of the public may address the City Council during the "Comments by the Public" portion of the agenda and during "Public Hearings ". This Request to Address the City Council must be delivered to the City Clerk prior to the commencement of the meeting. The time limit for each speaker is limited to three (3) minutes. Please Print Name: 10 Address: 4 City: 4r COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC Request to Address City Council Members of the public may address the City Council during the "Comments by the Public" portion of the agenda and during "Public Hearings ". This Request to Address the City Council must be delivered to the City Clerk prior to the commencement of the meeting. The time limit for each speaker is limited to three (3) minutes. Pleas int Name: Address: City: Subject: COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC Request to Address City Council I Members of the public may address the City Council during the "Comments by the Public" portion of the agenda and during "Public Hearings ". This Request to Address the City Council must be delivered to the City Clerk prior to the commencement of the meeting. The time limit for each speaker is limited to three (3) minutes. COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC Request to Address City Council Please Print Name: 1Kc N 5 -AT-K Address: (4300 6A -TA-L P'Um C) w te-( city: jai -r^ Ai�AA- G- )A-gwNs 334to Subject: _ OZD -- NAjN6E 33 . ,200o Members of the public may address the City Council during the "Comments by the Public" portion of the agenda and during "Public Hearings ". This Request to Address the City Council must be delivered to the City Clerk prior to the commencement of the meeting. The time limit for each speaker is limited to three (3) minutes. COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC Request to Address City Council Please Print Name: Address: Ze City: Subject: Members of the public may address the City Council during the "Comments by the Public" portion of the agenda and during "Public Hearings ". This Request to Address the City Council must be delivered to the City Clerk prior to the commencement of the meeting. The time limit for each speaker is limited to three (3) minutes. COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC Request to Address City Council Please Print LAEfM 5MIT Name: Address: City: Subject: Members of the public may address the City Council during the "Comments by the Public" portion of the agenda and during "Public Hearings ". This Request to Address the City Council must be delivered to the City Clerk prior to the commencement of the meeting. The time limit for each speaker is limited to three (3) minutes. Please Print Name: Address: COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC Request to Address City Council Y City: Subject: Members of the public may address the City Council during the "Comments by the Public" portion of the agenda and during "Public Hearings ". This Request to Address the City Council must be delivered to the City Clerk prior to the commencement of the meeting. The time limit for each speaker is limited to three (3) minutes. COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC Request to Address City Council Please Print Name: Address: City: Subject: ,,Y�I LAh/ Members of the public may address the City Council during the "Comments by the Public" portion of the agenda and during "Public Hearings ". This Request to Address the City Council must be delivered to the City Clerk prior to the commencement of the meeting. The time limit for each speaker is limited to three (3) minutes. CITY OF PALM BEACH GARDENS Parks & Recreation Department Parks Division Richard and Annette Bloch — Cancer Survivor's Park Projected Maintenance Plan Assumption of Design The following items were assumed to be constructed for the basis of maintenance projections. It is not reflection of actual facilities to be built but a conceptual review. Restroom (2) complete facilities (mens/womens) with two stalls each Shuffle Board Courts (4) Raised Lawn Area Bermuda Grass Survivor Pavilion/Entrance Kiosk Metal roof structure with electrical components Sculptures Limited maintenance necessary Trail through sculptures to pavilion Concrete Trail through ark Red Clay Irrigation Pumping stem from canal Fountains/ is Chlorine treated system/connection to city water Landscaping Existing pines to remain, addition of various palms and hedges Park Amenities (10) trashcans, (6) picnic tables, (6) benches General grounds Existing turf to remain Parking facilities I Paved Estimated Costs: Turf Care: Additional Herbicide and Pesticides Facility Care: Repairs and materials and supplies, for fountains, trails, etc Contractual Repairs and services Total Estimated Costs $ 700.00 $ 3,600.00 $ 3,050.00 $ 7,350.00 0 4 Summary of St. Mark's School Traffic Circulation Analysis Existing Conditions Presently the school has 490 students. Forty are PK 4 year olds who split time — twenty in the morning and twenty in the afternoon. So there are no more than 470 students on campus at any one time. Drop off and pick up occur on both the east and west sides of the school. ■ 365 feet of storage is provided on the east side. ■ 300 feet of storage is provided on the west side. Morning drop off does not seem to be a traffic problem because unloading goes faster than loading in the afternoon. Teachers help children from the cars and parents are not allowed to leave their car. Four cars can be unloaded at a time on each side. Infrequently, the peak arrival of parents picking children up after school will spill off site, onto either Burns Road or Gardens Drive East. This usually occurs when a parent arrives before the assigned time for their children's dismissal. They must wait, usually only a few minutes, and this creates a potential back up. Short term changes Certain changes to the site can be implemented soon. These include: ■ Requiring teachers and staff to park west of Gardens Drive East in the new-parking lot at Robb Field. ■ Eliminating parking on school days on the east side of both parking lots. ■ Stationing a monitor at the entrance to both sides to ensure cars do not over flow onto adjacent streets. Clearing the parking lot of teachers and staff and eliminating parking along the entrance will allow a staging area for parents arriving early to wait to pick up their children. The result will be: ■ 505 feet of storage will be provided on the east side. ■ 520 feet of storage will be provided on the west side. These minor operational changes increase significantly the ability to store cars on site (a 54 percent increase in total storage length) and minimize the potential to spill onto Burns Road or Gardens Drive East. ,. Changes with the 700 Building The new building will increase maximum enrollment to 570 students. This is a 16 percent increase in maximum enrollment. As before, twenty PK 4 year olds will split time, so only 550 students will be on campus at any one time. With the construction of the new building, another drop off point and loop will be constructed on the east side, thereby adding another 275 feet of storage. This is equivalent to 27 percent more storage and will more than mitigate the impacts of the added students. Monitoring St. Mark's School agrees to monitor the operation of the drop off, and more particularly the pick up, of students. If cars continue to overflow onto Burns Road, an off duty police officer will be hired to direct traffic, forcing cars queued on the street to move on and circle around and come back. Although this is not expected, the school is prepared to enforce their pick up plan with a police officer, if necessary. 0403/97000/St Mark's/111700 Summary