The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutAgenda Council Agenda 082098All those wishing to address the City Council need to complete the necessary form (supply located in back of Council Chambers) and submit same• to the City Clerk prior to the meeting being called to order. CITY COUNCIL CITY OF PALM BEACH GARDENS AUGUST 20, 1998 7:30 P.M. I. PLEDGE OF ,ALLEGIANCE aAOAI- 11. ROLL CALL: Mayor Joseph R. Russo, Vice Mayor Lauren Furtado, Councilman Eric Jablin Councilman David Clark and Councilman Carl Sabatello. III. ANNOUNCEMENTS: Tuesday, 9/25/98, 6:30 P.M., Planning & Zoning Commission IV. CITY MANAGER REPORT; 1. Fire Station Relocation VI. AWARDING OF BIDS: 1. Health, Dental and Long Term Disability Insurance aa� 2. Golf Course Management Contract Or-, ��l --fie q -3-• Z�� 3. Stationery Generator - 70 Kw 4. Portable Generator - 110 Kw �6 4IA4 5. Purchase of Vehicle �, L/ -O 6. Paving Contract SII � � Clao VII. ITEMS-BY MAYOR AND G 4 7Q t �`l f D OF VIII. COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC: (For Items Not on the Agenda) (Please submit request card to Clerk prior to this Item) L044"-�t Cm4-cUlu o2 AA01v-" IX. CONSENT AGENDA: . Approval of 8/3/98 City Council Special Regular Meeting Minute . 1 �--�� LW Approval of 8/6/98 City Council Regular Meeting Minutes -�1'- t�. �-" . Resolution 85, 1998 - Consideration of Approval of RePlat of RCA Park, Lots 1 and 2, CCA� Boulevard Center. Resolution 86, 1998 - Consideration of Approval to Declare Items for Surplus and Authorizing Sale Thereof. Resolution 90,1998 - Consideration of Approval to Amend the Northlake Boulevard Task ee. 5. Force Interlocal Agreement by Extending Date of Expiration. 1 . X. PUBLIC FWARINCr$: Resolution 82, 1998 - Consideration of Approval of Conditional Use to Create a T.I.P.'s at 4279 Lilac Street. (Public Hearing, adv. 8/5/98 XI. RESOLUTIONS: Resolution 63, 1998 - Consideration of Approval of a Site Plan for the Construction of a Hotel Building on 2.755 Acres on Lot 1 of RCA Center Within the NorthCorp Planned Community District. �d 5 Resolution 72, 1998 - Consideration of Approval of a Relocation Agreement inding Upon the Village Square r fessionpl Park Property � � s Association. Resolution 83, 1,49 - Consi eratio}� of App % ao nt etijionsr 3 olf�ig�ta�.c' Resolution 87, 1(,;9198 - Consideration of Approval of an Amendment two the Site Plan for PGA National Mobil Station. ��= 't � Resolution 88, 1998 - Consideration of Approval of a Site Plan Ballesl s Pa cel b. Resolution 89, 1998 - Consideration of Approval of Reimt'irsement of Expenses for the Tennis Center and Environmental Remedia ion. 04t4l'4%� XII. ORDINANCES: (For Consideration of First Reading) Ordinance 17, 1998 - Providing for Amendment to Chapter 2 -294 of the Code of Ordinance Entitled "Finance" by Establishing o14 for Bidding. (Workshop /Consideration of First Reading) XIII. ITEMS FOR COUNCIL ACTIQN: 1. a Microsur®facing (i Gvod .2 -- 7261 1. Golf Digest Campus Site Plan 2. Northlake Boulevard Task Force/Eastward Ho U.S. 1 Study XV. CITY ATTORNEY REPORT: 1. School Concurrency Report --- 6�v/ XVI. ADJOURNMENT. // - 3 d 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 James Waldron, Jr., no later than 5 days prior to the proceeding at telephone number (407) 775 -8255 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. All those wishing to address the City Council need to complete the necessary form (supply located in back of Council Chambers) and submit same to the City Clerk prior to the meeting being called to order. CITY COUNCIL CITY OF PALM BEACH GARDENS WORKSHOP MEETING AUGUST 20,1998 6:00 P.M. Joint Meeting with the Recreation Advisory Board I. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE II. ROLL CALL: Mayor Joseph R. Russo, Vice Mayor Lauren Furtado, Councilman Eric Jablin Councilman David Clark and Councilman Carl Sabatello. III. PRESENTATIONS 1. Parks Master Plan ILi\ Ia-91QtQ1u I W11 Il! 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 James Waldron, Jr., no later than 5 days prior to the proceeding at telephone number (407) 775 -8255 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. t PARKS AND RECREATION MEMORANDUM TO: PBG City Council Parks and Recreation Advisory Board Neighborhood Initiative Task Force FROM: Susan Miller, Director DATE: August 3, 1998 RE: Notification of Workshop The next meeting of the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board will be a special workshop for park master planning. This meeting will be Thursday, August 20th, in Council Chambers, from 6:00 p.m. - 7:30 p.m., before the scheduled City Council meeting. The master site plan for parks will be discussed. The regular meeting of the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board will be on Tuesday, September 29th, Council Chambers, at 7:00 p.m. cc: Beth Ingold, Public Information Officer Ruth Catt, Administration Cindy Harvey, City Administrative Assistant CITY OF PALM BEACH GARDENS PARKS AND RECREATION ADVISORY BOARD MEETING COUNCIL CHAMBERS 10500 N. M ,ITARY TRAIL AGENDA AUGUST 20, 1998 6:00 P.M. - 7:30 P.M. I INTRODUCTION *Glatting Jackson Kercher Anglin Lopez Rinehart Community Planning II PRESENTATION *Parks Master Plan III CONCERNS AND RECOMMENDATIONS IV ADJOURNMENT CITY OF PALM BEACH GARDENS CITY COUNCIL Agenda Cover Memorandum Date: 08/12/9$ Subject/Agenda Item Health, dental and long -term disability insurance contract awards Recommendation /Motion: Staff recommends awarding health and dental contract to Blue Cross /Blue Shield and long- term disability contract to Fortis. Reviewed by: Originating Dept.: Costs: $ 0 Council Action: City Attorney Finance Total [ ]Approved Finance $ 0 [ ] Approved w /condibms Current FY ACM [ ] Denied Advertised: Human Res. Funding Source: [ ] Continued to: Attachments: Other Date: [ x] Operating Paper. [ ]Other Memorandum Submitted by: [X ] Not Required Kent R. Olson Department Director Affected parties [ ] Notified Budget Acct. #: Several throughout the [ ] None Approved by: Budget in each department. City Manager [ X ] Not required i i i t e i i i Parks &Recreation Master Plan MAY 51 1998 PALM BEACH GARDENS WORKSHOP SUMMARY J'& :I =A !1:4 D Glatting Jackson Kercher Anglin Lopez Rinehart Inc. W_'T"�t ( +��te\ . „` ��^�'�� `yA i a rP'i� . • r � - Y Glatting Jackson Kercher Anglin Lopez Rinehart Inc. PALM BEACH GARDENS PARKS AND RECREATION MASTER PLAN KICK_ -OFF /CHARRETTE MAY 59 1998 AGENDA Introduction Presentation of Existing System Sue Miller Visioning Exercise(s) • Backcasting —the ideal park system • Checklist Nomenclature and Standards Assets/Needs Inventory Implementation: • Roles/Partnerships • Funding • Actions Presentations /Consensus Review Next Steps/Wrap Up • What don't you know Participants Sue Miller Brian McLughlin Louise Jordan Katie Bielecky Bob Glancy Lucy Keshavarz Christy Murphy Kathy Speckler Rick Smoliak Kimberly Glas Holly Luzader David Barth Julie Scofield INTRODUCTION Director Assistant Director Specialized Programs Special Events Facilities, grounds Gardens Arts Specialist Programs Aquatics Athletics Planning (Bikeways) Assistant Finance Director Glatting Jackson Glatting Jackson Parks and Recreation staff as well as, Planning and Finance department representatives participated in a day -long workshop on May 5, 1998 to kick -off the Parks and Recreation System Master Plan. The day was spent working together in an abbreviated planning process to build the foundation for vision and provide preliminary findings of needs, as well as work through general implementation strategies. This report summarizes these activities. 1 t t i W O °' o .� ,_ 0� .a .= O m x = Z ■- C W 0 '- _ .� Q V (A O > 'i L 4) _ (A C E- ._ _ V m V fC ._ V O Lm L > 41 _ •_ O L L - .�.i CL CL im = L L = _ a IM a a M E CC O Q C ® 0 M c� > — ._ a 4w 41 V L _ _ .w W � � � (A E (D Q 1 VISIONING EXERCISES Backcasting Participants were asked to adopt a "Palm Beach Gardens Resident" and respond to a series of questions about the future parks and recreation system. Palm Beach Gardens Resident Interview Questions The residents of Osceola County have an ideal park system that has been in place for about 5 years. Respond to the following questions from the point of view of the "resident" you have adopted: 1. What do you enjoy most about the Neighborhood/school park closest to your home? 2. The community centers budget might be cut back this year and you are preparing a statement of support for the public meeting. What are the highlights of your speech? 3. Why do you think Palm Beach Garden's Park system should be a model for other communities? 4. What do you tell friends from out of town about the special use recreation facilities provided in Palm Beach Gardens? 5. In which recreational and educational programs do you, your friends and family most often participate? 6. If you were helping to produce a brochure to describe Palm Beach Garden's greenways, bikeways and trails facilities, what would you highlight? 7 What are the quality amenities and special touches that make your parks unique and special places? Resident Profiles: Elaine Elaine and her family have moved to Palm Beach Gardens in the past year, when her husband's company transferred him here. Elaine is busy at home with her two little girls, ages 1 and 3, and she spends as much time as she can in her art studio each evening. Both she and her husband are looking forward to the time when their daughters are old enough to play soccer, which they are both passionate about. Elaine volunteered to coach a youth soccer team, and is grateful that she has met other young families in this way. lii. Bob and his wife Jenny have been married for 20 years. He is an attorneX, and his wife Jenny teaches 2 "d grade at a private school where her daughter Emily attends 4 grade. Their oldest child, Anthony is confined to a wheel chair, but is very active in various middle school activities. This family is always busy, but looks forward to time spent with family and friends. Beverly and Jake Beverly and her husband Jake are both in their early 60s and took early retirement from their factory jobs in Ohio to move to Florida to be close to their grown children. Beverly baby -sits her grandchildren once or twice a week (she refuses to do more, after all she has a life of her own!) She enjoys reading, gardening, and she and her friend Millie walk together every evening. Jake was just too bored being retired and started a part time lawn care business. Owen Owen is in his mid - twenties and works in his mother's agency as a real estate broker. He is single, and for the time being is happily married to his work -- he was one of the top sales persons in the County last year. He loves Palm Beach Gardens and is a dedicated booster, particularly enjoying activities with the Chamber of Commerce. He is athletic and enjoys most sports. He is also active in several civic and charitable organizations organizing fund- raising and special events. Beth Beth is a single parent of two sons, ages 8 and 14. She works full -time as a travel agent and loves her job, but she finds it stressful to constantly juggle and coordinate after school and summer activities for Henry and Brad. Her parents live only a few blocks away from her, but their health is declining and Beth finds she is helping them more and more, and that they are no longer able to help out as much with the boys, although her dad still supervises their homework time. Beth doesn't get much time to herself, so she looks forward to any quiet time outdoors she can find. Matthew Matthew is a junior in high school, eager to get a job so that he can buy a car. In the meantime, his means of transportation is limited to his skateboard and bike. His parents are health care workers and are not available to be chauffeurs. He is hopeful that he may get a summer job at the Community Park down the street. He's been going to summer and after school programs there since he was in 3`d grade and the staff all know that he likes little kids and would be a good counselor. Besides, he's responsible for his younger sister who is 9 for part of the time his parents are at the hospital, and she could come to work with him. Interview Summary 1. What do you enjoy most about the Neighborhood /school park closest to your home? • Connected to community center and pool /sheltered picnic pavilion, playground, art studio /programs (kids and adults) (Elaine) • Easy access, sidewalks, ADA equipment, picnic (Bob) • Intergenerational, walking, kids play, purpose (Beverly and Jake) 3 • Location, pick up basketball, freedom, hang out with friends and meet new kids (Owen) • Easy access, safe, terrific playground— supervised (Beth) 1 • Always stuff to do; walk and ride bikes to get there (Matthew) 2. The community centers budget might be cut back this year and you are preparing a statement of support for the public meeting. What are the highlights of your speech? • Spend family time here, central meeting place — within our community; might move away if the center closed down (Elaine) • Park and recreation attracts people to community and brings in money (Bob) • Services, active lifestyle needs (Beverly and Jake) • Benefits of center to kids (positive focus); vandalism deterrent, good programs and facilities equate with good business (Owen) • Only way to have programs— affordable —keep kids off street (Beth) • Teen center and pool —safe place to go (no drugs, alcohol) —Mom lets us go there without worry (Matthew) 5. In which recreational and educational programs do you, your friends and family most often participate? Soccer, art, pre- school and early childhood programs, concerts and art shows, - Swgmming (Elaine) 4 3. Why do you think Palm Beach Garden's Park system should be a model for other communities? • Family - oriented, ease of access, diverse activities (Elaine) • Clean, up to date amenities, beautiful landscape, protected natural resources, unique facilities (Bob) • All ages, active — physically, mentally, arts and cultural, bingo, senior programs (Beverly and Jake) • Biggest bang for buck (Owen) • Well supervised, safe, affordable, meets needs of all people, hours support work - • schedules (Beth) Skateboard connected to bike trail /paths & mountain bike trail (Matthew) park 4. What do you tell friends from out of town about the special use recreation facilities provided in Palm Beach Gardens? • Affordable, diverse /variety— something for everyone (Elaine) • ADA accessible, user - friendly; staff concerned about integration of all (including special) populations in programs and facilities (Bob) • High quality, safe, easy access /multi -modal transportation, affordable (Beverly and Jake) • Something for all groups /arts and culture, facilities well designed and maintained, linked with all modes of transportation (Owen) • • Staff concerned, clubs and social programs, everyday senior program (Beth) Aqua — affordable, something for (Matthew) park everyone 5. In which recreational and educational programs do you, your friends and family most often participate? Soccer, art, pre- school and early childhood programs, concerts and art shows, - Swgmming (Elaine) 4 1 • Outdoor, cultural events (concerts, art shows), cultural classes and camps, athletic programs, teen center and programs (Bob) • Seniors, young adults, early childhood, "snack with Santa " — affordable (Beverly and Jake) • Adult sports, physical conditioning, arts, special events (charitable activities) (Owen) • Camps, schools day out, after school (homework assistance), athletic leagues, teen center (Beth) • Pool, bike night, dance, gymnastics -fun, cool people (Matthew) 6. If you were helping to produce a brochure to describe Palm Beach Garden's greenways, bikeways and trails facilities, what would you highlight? • Linked facilities, easy access (Elaine) • ADA access, short distance to parks, variety of native plants, beautiful walking trails (Bob) • Track/at school only (Beverly and Jake) • Interconnected — shopping, schools, city- wide —get to "downtown" gathering place (Owen) • Safety, access, passive parks (Beth) • Great hang out, all my friends are there, affordable (Matthew) 7. What are the quality amenities and special touches that make your parks unique and special places? • Clean, shady, flowers, birds, waterways, safe, "natural" (Elaine) • Trees, ADA access walks, well lighted, secure, "well designed", professional staff, sculpture, bridges (Bob) • Customer service, safety, number of amenities, arts programs, aesthetics (Beverly and Jake) • New things, not afraid to fail, inclusive, well maintained, all hours, clean (Owen) • Safety, peaceful areas, whole family welfare (Beth) • Easy access, cheap "kids aren't hassled" (Matthew) E CHECKLISUCONCENSUS The second component of the visioning exercise included discussion and amendment for the ideal parks and recreation system checklist. The "adopted" checklist for this meeting follows. CHECKLIST FOR PALM BEACH GARDENS PARKS & RECREATION SYSTEMS Palm Beach Gardens Parks and Recreation System is comprised of the following five (5) major components: • Park Lands and Facilities • Connecting /Access Facilities (sidewalks, bikeways, transit) • Recreation Programs • Administration, Operations and Maintenance • Implementation Resources (funding, partnerships and other resources that for the four provide other components) 7 Parks Lands and Facilities j/ 2. Shade trees (50' O.C. minimum) planted along typical sidewalks I. Open plazas or "pocket parks" within a five minute walk of ✓ 3. Interconnecting system of 4' wide bike lanes along each side of urban offices, commercial areas major collector /arterial roads 2. Neighborhood or School Park within a five minute walk of every ✓ 4. Curb cuts, mid -block crossings, crosswalks and signals (where resident needed) at major intersections 3. School Parks accessible to residents in the afternoons and on L/ '* City bus /trolley stop at each Community Center, Community Park weekends and Special Use Facility 4. Community Park within easy bicycling or driving distance (say 2 -3 ✓ 6. Bike racks on all transit vehicles miles /distances vary by density) of every resident ✓ 1, low cost/no cost bus fares S. Only 40 -60% of each park developed for facilities or active recre- ✓ 8. Development of a community -wide Bikeways, Trails and Greenways ation; other areas in native vegetation (not exotics) or multi -pur- Master Plan pose open space V 9. Incorporation of top priority facilities into the community's V 6. Community Center within easy bicycling or driving distance of Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) every resident (2.5 miles) V 1. Interconnecting system of Greenways and Linear Parks, with both Recreation Programs paved and unpaved trails, within easy walking, bicycling and /or V I. Programs based on the specific needs of each neighborhood/com - r driving distance of every resident munity within the city/county as identified through individual V 8. Adequate Special Use Facilities (Sports Complexes, Aquatics Centers, park advisory boards, user surveys and public workshops Tennis Complex, Gymnasium, Cultural Arts Center, Skateboard Park, etc.) to meet the community's needs. 2. Programs addressing community's social, health and (environmen- tal) educational needs through recreation V 9. Special Use facilities located and designed to minimize impacts to V 3. Annual workshop with elected officials and senior staff to discuss adjacent neighborhoods, e.g. regional parks I program objectives and fee policies - retreat with senior staff V 10. Natural Areas within easy walking, bicycling and /or driving dis- V 4. Monitoring program (user surveys, evaluation forms' etc) to find tance of every resident out how the programs could be improved, and /or if they should 11. flexible individual park Master Plans to protect each park's resources and to direct long term development ✓ be continued 5. Marketing /promotional program to reach as many residents as 12. Community -wide minimum Design Standards to insure quality, safe- possible through homeowner association newsletters, media cover - ty, maintenance and aesthetic variety throughout the Parks System age, posters in business locations and other techniques ✓ 13. Regular surveys of park users and service area residents to deter- V 6. Partnerships with other agencies to provide /trade needed staff, mine the types of facilities they would prefer at "their" park? expertise or facilities in order to offer a wider array of programs 14. Park lands and facilities owned by other agencies (School Board, without incurring additional staff costs Municipalities, Counties, etc) available to residents 1. Outreach program to either take programs into the neighborhoods 15. Privately owned /operated club houses, residential ameities, etc. (e.g. daily after school activities in Neighborhood and Community Parks) or to bring residents to the programs through transit Connecting /Access Facilities passes or shuttle vans I. Interconnecting system of sidewalks /trails (5' minimum) from neighborhoods and commercial areas to parks and schools, espe- cially along the primary access road leading to each park/school facility 7!■ r7ii�[ ��: ��[' �HFti� =FT�;�'t�li�► «�1i7�'i:ri�Jfli� � � _��iT�iFTi7f� 33 East Pine Street, Orlando FL 32801 PH(407) 843 -6552 FAX(407) 839 -1789 I 7 1 Administration, Operations and Maintenance I. Parks and Recreation System directed by a single adminis- trator or delegate who: • Is actively involved in the community • Speaks regularly at service dub and professional functions • Promotes and markets the Parks and Recreation System • Keeps local government administration and elected officials informed and up to date • Meets regularly with other department heads to exchange information, coordinate Capital Improvement Programs and request assistance in implementing the Parks and Recreation System • Is a "hands -on" manager, working directly with staff responsible for developing and maintaining parks, and imple- menting programs • Maximizes existing community resources, including volun- teer groups, homeowner associations, businesses and other recreation providers • Is responsible for fundraising for specific needs through grants, sponsorships and donations • Participates in the community's development review 2. ✓ 3. ✓ 4. ✓ S. 6. 7. process Park Supervisors and Community Center Directors trained in: • Human /public relations /customer service • Entrepreneurship • Team building Parks and Recreation staff who are: • Well trained in their respective jobs; easily identifiable • Given as much responsibility - and authority - as possible to make their own decisions regarding day -to -day operations • Cross- trained in a variety of areas, including public rela- tions, grounds maintenance, and recreation programs. (Present staff shortage limits hours) of operation at each park and community center set according to the needs of local constituents, including evenings, weekends, and holidays in addition to regular day- time hours - need to consider surrounding neighboorhoods Parks and facilities maintained to be clean, safe, well - lighted, attractive, comfortable, and uniform in appearance (following the community's design standard) Regular staff tours of comparable parks and facilities main- tained by other cities /counties/homeowner associations to observe different levels of maintenance, to discuss mainte- nance issues, and to establish models for an acceptable level of maintenance Consideration /use of operation /management alternatives, including: • Privatization of all or part of grounds maintenance • Coordination of local volunteer /service groups for specific facility maintenance (litter pick -up, painting, etc) • Use of part -time labor during the summer growing season • Partnership/ concession agreements (tennis pros, swimming teams, soccer clubs) with specific maintenance responsibilities . V 8. Additional Staff as new facilities are developed Implementation Resources I. long range capital funding sources (special taxing district (s) for sales tax, bonds, property sales, impact fees for bikeways, trails, landscaping 2. Meaningful joint use agreements with other public agencies, including cities, counties and school boards 3. Maximum use of existing community resources, including vol- unteer groups, homeowner associations, businesses and other recreation providers - need to discuss implications for impact fees 4. Policies requiring new land developments to provide ade- quate Neighborhood Parks to serve new residents, and allo- cation of land /funds toward the development of new Community Parks and Centers V S. Policies requiring the development of sidewalks and bikeways in conjunction with major roadway improvements 6. Non - profit City foundation or friends organization to lead fundraising efforts, accept donations and build community support for the development of the Parks and Recreation System (Go Parc) 7. Codification of Parks System components, objectives in com- munity Comprehensive Plan, future Land Use Plan, Zoning Code, Building Code, and Land Development Regulations 8. Active solicitation of funds through grants and donations with dedicated staff NEEDS. ASSESSMENT Participants were asked to identify -and prioritize needs in relation to the current parks and recreation system and the future parks and recreation system: • Neighborhood Parks in older sections of town ( #1 Council/NAC) • Renovation of Current Facilities (9) • District Park Development (7) • Greenways & Bikeways Trails System Master Plan (S) • Special Use Facilities: Aquatic Center (Water Park) (S) Gymnasium/Fitness Center (2) Cultural Center /Auditorium (1) Nature Center (1) Teen Center (1) Roller Hockey Skate Park (funded) • Long range funding source(s) (4) • Training for staff (1) • Build Bikeways, Sidewalks, Trails • Street Trees (residential tree program) • City Trolley system • Expanded program hours • Design Standards • Annual Workshop, retreats • Regular surveys of residents • Recreational component of gathering place W IMPLEMENTATION Four working groups were formed to develop a strategic work plan to accomplish primary needs. Each group presented and then refined the plans as presented in the following pages. 10 1 Parks, Open Space, and Pathways Classifications Table Parks and Open Space Classifications Classification General Description Location Criteria Size Criteria Application Mini of LOS -Park Used to address limited, isolated Less than a 1/4 Between 2500 Yes or unique recreational needs. mile distance in sq. ft. and one residential setting. acre in size - Neighborhood Park Neighborhood park remains the basic unit 1/4 to 1/2 mile distance 5 acres is Yes ' of the park system and serves as the recreational and social focus of the i and ininterrupted by non - residential roads considered minimum size.. neighborhood. Focus is on informal active and other physical 5 to 10 acres and passive recreation. barriers. is optimal. School -Park Depending on circumstances, combining Determined by location Variable -- depends Yes - but parks with school sites can fulfill the space of school district on function should not requirements for other classes of parks, property. count school such as neighborhood, community, only uses. sports complex, and special use. Community Park Serves broader purpose than neighborhood Determined by the As needed to Yes park. Focus is on meeting community-based quality and suitability accommodate recreation needs, as well as preserving of the site. Usually desired uses. unique landscapes and open spaces. serves two or more Usually between neighborhoods and 30 and 50 acres. 1/2 to 3 mile distance. Large Urban Park Large urban parks serve a broader purpose Determined by the As needed to Yes than community parks and are used when quality and suitability accommodate community and neighborhood parks are not of the site. Usually desired uses. adequate to serve the needs of the community. serves the entire Usually a minimum Focus is on meeting community-based community. of 50 acres, with 75 recreational needs, as well as preserving or more acres being unique landscapes and open spaces. optimal. . Natural Resource Lands set aside for preservation of significant Resource availability Variable. No Areas natural resources, remnant landscapes, and opportunity. open space, and visual aesthetics/buffering. Greenways Effectively tie park system components Resource availability Variable. No together to form a continuous park and opportunity. environment. Sports Complex Consolidates heavily programmed athletic Strategically located Determined by Yes fields and associated facilities to larger and community-wide projected demand. fewer sites strategically located throughout the community. facilities. Usually a minimum of 25 acres, with 40 to 80 acres being optimal. Special Use Covers a broad range of parks and Variable— dependent Variable. Depends on recreation facilities oriented toward on specific use. -- _ type of use. single- purpose use. Private Park 1 Parks and recreation facilities that are Variable— dependent Variable. Depends on Recreation Facility privately owned yet contribute to the on specific use. type of use. public park and recreation system. � � i SCHOOL PARK Joint use relationship so that both school district and park system benefits for shared use of facilities and land. Location: • Determined in conjunction with school/neighborhood needs. • Service area depends on type of use Size: • Criteria used for Neighborhood and Community Park classifications are appropriate - 5 to 50 acres Recreation Program • Same as neighborhood and community parks • Athletic fields - youth oriented • Joint use plan / agreement 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 MINI PARK SITE PLAN SOLUTION 1 II EXISTING SHOPS I Z LU Uj Z IN . :. ARFA law GREEN STREET SITE PLAN SOLUTION 2 e -® eoMOEXISTINB SHOPS :sews w u Q ranee 7 Z O Z �+ , GIMIM GREEN STREET Metropolitan Dade County Park and Recreation Department Used to address limited or isolated recreational needs: • Concentrated or limited populations • Isolated development areas • Unique recreational opportunities Location: • Less than 1/2 mile radius in residential setting • Connections by trails, sidewalks or low- volume residential streets an important consideration. Size: • Typically between 2500 square feet and 1 acre • Technically any park less than 5 acres is a mini -park Recreational Program: • Since the service area is very small or specialized, the "customers" should determine the program • Parking typically not required • Site lighting for security and safety TOT 900 S.F. §HEL NEIGHBORHOOD PARK TOWNHOUSES ACCESS CONTROL POAC TABLES 900 S.F. SHELTER VITA I BILE PATH WUL71PURPOSE COURTS M N.W. 32nd AVENUE Metropolitan Dade County Park Recreation Department Basic unit of the park system • Both active and passive activities • Sense of place /reflect character of the neighborhood • Serve a variety of age and user groups Location: • Centrally located within its service area of 1/2 to 1 mile Ease of access and walking distance critical factors • Frequently developed adjacent to elementary school Size: • 5 acre minimum • 7 to 10 acres optimal Recreation Program- Balance active and passive uses Active uses intended in an informal and unstructured manner: • Play structures • Court games • Multi - purpose fields and open space • Tennis courts (not programmed) • Shuffleboard courts • Volleyball courts • Horseshoe courts • Skating area • Activity room. Passive recreation facilities: • Internal trailsPicnic/sitting areas • General open space • People watching areas • Active recreation facilities 50% of site • Remaining 50 % passive, reserve, conservation • 7 to 10 off - street parking spaces • T.imited lii!htine t 0 0 f r C C C 7 C f r c C r t c c r n COMMUNITY PARK Larger and broader purpose than neighborhood parks - . • Meet recreatioanl needs of several neighborhoods or large sections of the community • Preserve unique landscapes and open spaces Location: • Service area - -.5 to 3.0 miles in radius • Quality of natural resource base significant factor in site selection Size: • Optimal size 20 to 50 acres Recreation Program - Neighborhood and Community Impact should determine program Balance of Active and Passive Uses: Active facilities: • Play structures or creative play • Game courts attractions • Multi - purpose fields and open. • Tennis courts space (not programmed) • Volleyball courts • Shuffleboard, courts • Horseshoe courts • Skating area • Swimming pools • Swimming beaches • Archery range • Activity room. Passive recreation facilities: • Internal trails • Picnic /sitting areas • General open space • People watching areas • Nature study areas • Not intended to be used extensively for programmed athletic use and tournaments • Facilities for cultural activities, such as plays and concerts . • Parking, Lighting SPORTS COMPLEX Consolidates heavily programmed athletic fields and associated faciliteis at larger and few sites strategically located to allow for: • Economies of scale and higher quality features • Improved management/scheduling • Improved control of facility use • Greater control of negative impacts to neighborhhod and community parks (noise, traffic congestion, etc.) Location: • As community -wide facilities location should provide reasonable and equal driving distance. • Location adjacent to non - residential land use is preferred. • Major thoroughfare access Size: • Space requirements are facility driven • Minimum 40 acres, with 80 to 150 acres optimal • Reserve 20% of total acreage for unforeseen space needs Development Program • Ballftelds • Soccer fields • Football fields • Tennis courts • Outdoor and indoor skating rinks • Play strctures • Hard courts • Volleyball courts • Group picnic areas /shelters • Restrooms • Common Space • Parking • Lighting s i 1 RENOVATION OF CURRENT FACILITIES Burns Road • Expand and upgrade auditorium • New gym floor • Upgrade bathrooms (additional) • New roof • Expand dance room for aerobics and Expand art room • New office space • Art gallery & lobby renovation • Computers, new phones, tech support PGA National • Irrigation system • Upgrade storage facility • Power upgrade for special events Gardens Park *Part of Current Bond Issue Oaks Park • Restrooms • Total lighting for jogging trail Plant Drive • New Teen Center • Skate Board Park Riverside Community Center • Upgrade bathrooms • New roof • New flooring • Resealable walls, lighting for GA • Lobby furniture • Expand classrooms /offices • Computers, phone system, etc. 17 2 -3 years $500,000 $75,000 $40,000 $100,000 $250,000 $35 -$45 sq. ft. 1998 -2001 $200,000 $100,000 $40,000 $50,000 $100,000 $350,000 as allocated $50,000 - $100,000 $50,000 $10,000 $5,000 $200,000 $50,000 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i WATER PARK What Who When 1. Identify area Staff Now 2. Assess utilization & maximization of existing facility Staff Now 3. Survey— assess need & demographics Staff Summer 1998 4. Research other facilities Staff Aug.- Dec. '98 5. Decide what is wanted & needed Staff Aug. – Dec.'98 6. Presentation by Sue & Brian Staff March '99 7. Funding Source Sue April `99 8. RFP (Design/build) May '99. 9. Award contract June '99 10. Begin Construction Oct. 2000 11. Open for business May 2000 Current Renovation/New Facility Needs: Next 10 years $10 –20 Million— renovation $10 –20 Million —New construction Total $20 –40 Million 18 Funding $210,000 DISTRICT PARK What Who When 1. Designate Site City Spring '98 2. Conceptual Plan City/MacArthur Spring '98 3. Approval of Site City/MacArthur Spring '98 4. Establish Partner City /County Spring '98 5. Negotiate Funding City Summer '98 6. Negotiate Contract City Fall '98 7. Acquire Property City /County Spring '99 8. Master Plan CD's, Permits City/LA Spring '99 9. Referendum City Spring '01 10. Bid/Award City Spring '02 11. Begin Construction City /Contractor Summer'02 12. Completion City /Contractor Winter '03 Program Tennis Center Community Center Gymnasium Fitness Center Water Park Amphitheater /Open Even 4 Ball fields 2 Soccer Fields Small Lake Jogging /walking paths Picnic Sand volleyball Dog Park Playground/Tot lot (fenced) Basketball Courts Racquetball /Handball 19 Funding General fund County City City City Bond Bond t Bikeways, Greenways, Trails What Who When 1. Parkway System Multi Use Path: Planned Implementation: * Link by Link With Dev. * City Improvements City -Wide Sidewalk Inventory Prioritize Missing Links/ Construct Funding GM/PW Currently Link By Link Private GM/PW ? GM/PW Current; Complete Sept. '98 GM/Public Annual General/ Gas Tax/ Develop Tree Planting Program GM/PW Annual 2. Greenways Master Plan (Preservation) Connecting Large Natural Areas GM Arrange Landowner Set -asides GM ID Trail Component GM 3. Bikeways, Trails (Sidewalks) MP GM * Retrofit * New Connection * Canal Crossing - Park/School Priorities 20 Dec. 2000 Jan. 2001 Jan. 2001 By End 1998 1999 -2005 Annual ISTEA General/ Gas Tax/ ISTEA General Private General General Combination 4. ID Rec. Trail /Linear Park GM/ * Explore — Location (Canal), Parks Funding, Partners * Expand Parkway System 5. Bike Lanes on Burns Road GM State /Co. Rds. Improved or Widened - Will Have Lanes) 21 %113 Impact Fees Combination ' WRAP UP ' Participants voted the following questions they would like to be answered during this process: What Don't We Know? 1. If the Council, public, senior staff agree with needs, priorities 2. How will new facilities be operated and maintained? 3. Does Council agree on "standard of maintenance "? 4. Staffing needed to operate /maintain future system? 5. Where will funding come from? 6. Role of parks /recreation in community services? MISSION? ' 7. How is parks and recreation perceived? • By public • By council • By senior staff 8. What is senior staff /council's vision for next 20 years? 9. Do we want to do a telephone survey? ' 10. What are current CIP needs (renovation)? 22 MEMORANDUM TO Bobbie Herakovich, City Manager FROM Kent R. Olson, Finance Director K[� SUBJECT DATE INTRODUCTION Health, Dental and Long -term Disability Insurance Renewal August 12, 1998 Attached please find a summary compiled by our health insurance broker, Kurt Gehring of The Gehring Group. As noted on page 3, the City sent out 30 requests for proposal to provide health, dental and long -term disability insurance coverage for the City's employees and received 13 responses. Our current contract expires September 30, 1998. SUMMARY OF HEALTH INSURANCE PROPOSAL$ Our current plan with Humana provides for an HMO /Point- of- Service(POS) /PPO program. The most competitive proposal was from Blue Cross /Blue Shield for an HMO/ PPO plan. Blue Cross' proposal would entail an increase of 7.9 %, much less than Humana's renewal offer of a 24.7% increase(see "Health Insurance Rate Comparison" on p. 7). As noted above, Blue Cross offers an HMO /PPO option but not a Point -of- Service which we currently have. However, Blue Cross has established a - strong, network in Palm Beach and the surrounding counties, which is evident in the greater number of physician matches compared to Humana. EMPLOYEE CONTRIBUTIONS The City currently requires employees with family coverage to pay $80 per month for employees in the HMO or POS and $100 for employees enrolled in the PPO. The PPO family cost is increasing by $75 per month. Given the greater cost and the better benefits offered by Blue Cross, I recommend we increase the employee contribution for family coverage to $120 per month for those choosing PPO family---.Z'1_. coverage. _ . SUMMARY OF DENTAL AND LONG -TERM DISABILITY INSURANCE PROPOSAV The dental insurance proposals are discussed beginning on page 27 of the report. Our current dental insurance provider, MetLife, proposed an increase of $39,000 annually (35 %). The Blue Cross /Blue Shield plan that duplicates the current benefit plan would provide an increase of $25,000 annual ly(22.5 %). No other plan was lower with the same schedule of benefits. I recommend the City accept the dental insurance proposal from Blue Cross. The long -term disability insurance proposals are discussed on beginning on page 33. Fortis and Provident both offered to reduce the premium by $2,000 annually(19 %), but Fortis offered to guarantee the rate for a two -year period. I recommend we renew with Fortis for a two year period at the new lower rate of $.29 per thousand of coverage, a savings of $.07 per thousand over our current contract. RECOMMENDATION I recommend that the City accept the health and. dental insurance proposals from Blue Cross /Blue Shield and the long -term disability insurance proposal from Fortis beginning October 1, 1998. City of Palm Beach Gardens Medical, Dental & LTD Evaluation Effective Date: October 1, 1998 Presented by: Kurt Gehring Agent of Record The Gehring Group 1645 Palm Beach Lakes Blvd., Suite 300 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 Table of Contents Executive Summary of Recommendations ............................................. ............................... 3 TotalCost Analysis ........................................................................... ..............................4 Summary of Benefit Changes .......................................................... ............................... 5 Overview & Background Information ........................................................ ..............................6 RateHistory ...................................................................................... ..............................7 Health Insurance Claims Experience History .................................... ..............................8 MedicalEvaluation .................................................................................... ..............................9 Health Insurance Recommendation ........................................................ .............................10 Health Insurance Rate Comparison ................................................ .............................13 PPO Rate and Benefit Comparison ................................................ .............................15 POS Rate and Benefit Comparison ................................................ .............................17 HMO Rate and Benefit Comparison ................................................ .............................19 RequestedPhysician Match .................................................................... .............................20 Dental Insurance Evaluation ..................................................................... .............................26 Dental Insurance Recommendation ......................................................... .............................27 Dental PPO Rate and Benefit Comparison ...................................... .............................29 Self- Funded Dental Evaluation ...................................................... ............................... 31 Long -Term Disability Evaluation ............................................................. .............................32 Long -Term Disability Recommendation .................................................. .............................33 Long -Term Disability Rate and Benefit Comparison ........................ .............................34 Voluntary Long -Term Disability Rate Comparison ........................... .............................36 (2) Executive Summary Recommendations Upon our review of the proposals received in response to the RFP for health, life and dental insurance, The Gehring Group submits the following recommendations for consideration: Health Insurance: Upon review of the of the spreadsheets herein, it is apparent that Blue Cross & Blue Shield has proposed the most comprehensive benefits package at the most competitive cost. The employees will benefit from BC &BS's extensive provider network while maintaining a health plan with benefits comparable or better than the current. Dental Insurance: The most competitive dental plan proposed that duplicated the benefits of the current MetLife plan was received from Blue Cross & Blue Shield. MetLife's renewal quote was 35% above the current while Blue Cross & Blue Shield's proposal generated only a 22% cost increase. Other options quoted either reduced employee benefits or were not dental PPO programs as requested in the RFP. Long -Terra Disability lnsurance: Fortis Benefits has proposed a 19% reduction in premium effective on the renewal date of October 1, 1998; therefore, The Gehring Group recommends that the City renew its LTD coverage with Fortis. (3) Executive Summary Total Cost Analysis Health Insurance Enrollment Humana Enrollment BC8►BS PPO Plan620 PPO Single 57 $186.55 68 $218.26 Family 58 $436.93 70 $511.20 HMO Option 2 $112,334.64 Single 34 $143.75 Family 81 $400.87 POS Plan 1406 HMO Single 22 $150.21 45 $141.35 Family 25 $420.39 94 $393.69 MONTHLY TOTAL $87,147.63 $93,993.29 ANNUAL TOTAL $1,045,771.56 $1,127,919.48 $ Increase $82,147.92 % Increase 7.9% Dental Insurance Enrollment MetLife Encolli�ent BCBBS Single 115 $18.54 115 $22.71 Family 164 $44.08 164 $54.02 MONTHLY TOTAL $9,361.22 $11,470.93 ANNUAL TOTAL $112,334.64 $137,651.16 $ Increase $25,316.52 % Increase 22.5% LTD Insurance Fortis Benefits Fortis Benefits Ratel$100 Monthly Payroll $0.36 $0.29 Estimated Volume 275,430 275,430 MONTHLY TOTAL $991.55 $798.75 ANNUAL TOTAL $11,898.58 $9,584.96 $ Increase - $2,313.61 % Increase -19.4% TOTAL MONTHLY PREMIUM $97,500.40: �, ' $106,262.97 TOTAL ANNUAL PREMIUM _ $1,170,004.78 $1,275,155.60 $ Increase $105,150.83 %increase 9.0% *The above health insurance total monthly and annual premiums assume that 50% of the current POS participants enroll in the PPO and the other 50% enroll in the HMO. (4) Executive Summary Benefit Changes _¢ 4 a��,yt $ �. ,� �� .. �r�"�b;.�`� � �` � N ��s�� .. .,xt ra _5 ♦�k,L�a a-nr ^n�.,� � t�� 'r �-. Q'eK�p ��rt s <3 v'��r. -. •n' �r a ! THrTI�TST °RAN(:,'EL�yA�k�x PPQ Non - Participating Hospital Deductible $500 $200 1 % Prescription Drug Card Generic $10 $5 3% Brand Name $10 + Difference $10 Physician Office Visit Copay $10 $15 -2% NON PPO Physician Services 80% 60% -2% Chiropractic Visits $25 copay $15 copay 0.5% Supplemental Accident Benefit $300 $500 1% Mental & Nervous Inpatient $25 /day + 20% (days Deductible lus p Participating Hospital 1 -15) $50 /day + 20% 20% 1 % (days 16 -31) Mental & Nervious Outpatient Participating Provider $10 /visit plus 20% $15 copay /visit 1% POS POS Plan Eliminated POS Plan Eliminated N/A HM Specialist Office Visit $0 $5 -1% Hospital Inpatient per admission Copa $100 $0 2% Prescription Drug Card Generic $10 $5 3% Brand Name $10 + Difference $10 Mental & Nervous Inpatient $100 copay $0 copay 1% . Mental & Nervous Outpatient $5 /visit $30 /visit -1 % 'Alcohol &Drug Outpatient Plan pays up to only inpatient detou -1% $35 /visit is covered No plan changes No plan changes 0% No plan changes II No plan changes 0% Benefit Loss /Gain due to Plan Changes 6.5% Blue: Benefit Enhancements Red: Benefit Reductions (5) Overview & Back��ound Info ation The City of Palm Beach Gardens recently requested proposals for medical, dental, and long -term disability coverage for the effective date of October 1, 1998. Motivations for this bid process were as follows: 1. To verify that the current program provides the best quality of care for the premium paid. 2. To determine whether there is another carrier that is able to provide benefits specifically requested by the City. Requests for Proposals were sent to the following insurance carriers and were due in the City Clerk's Office on Tuesday, June 23, 1998: :;Aetna` 11S °Healthcare ; ;Fortis Benefits;;- : Pr ident Life &Accident AIG Life w, Guarantee Life Reliastar Bankers °;American Dental "Plan , t -HIP Health PlanStandard , Life" &'Accident AvMed Health Plans Humana, Inc. Stoner Organization .Blue "Cross &'Blue Shield `, ITT Hanford _t Declned to quote ,Sun Life'of Canada Canada Life The Guardian John Alden No response The Gaurdian uCIGNA°HealfFi Care" 4j MetLife The Prudential „ No response Declined Ito quote:' °_ beka Dental .__ a. _ Oral Health Services United Healthcare FlondaCornbined Life w Preferred Ch "nice ' Unum ... _. _. ." .., Foundation Healthcare Principal Healthcare Well Care HMO The RFP requested that carriers quote plans comparable to the current schedule of benefits for the health, dental and long -term disability coverage. Proposals were received from the following carriers: Amencan Dental Plan Fortis Benefits :., gral.Healtti'Services:, AvMed Health Plans Foundation Healthcare Provident Life & Accident u &° Blue Sti'ield '.' �, Humana, Inc :.;Ston`er Organization CIGNA Health Care MetLife United Healthcare Florida Combined .Life r The following responses were received from those carriers who did not submit a proposal: Aetna US HealthCare AIG Life :,Canada Life Delta Dental Guarantee Life HIP Health Plan �'ITT Hartford := John Alden .Preferred Choice. , _;:, Declingd•to quot Principal'-,.. al' - p ;Declined to quote Declined to quote Prudential Declined to quote Dechned'fo quote;, Reliastar;Bankers , Declined to q "uote Declined to quote Standard Life No response Dec hned o quote; Sun `l_ifeof Canada ` Declned to quote Declined to quote The Guardian No response IVo response U n u m $' . # „ -1Vo response Declined to quote Well Care HMO No response Declined Ito quote:' °_ �, .__ a. _ (6) City of Palm Beach Gardens Rate History (7) Anthem Health Humana 1/96-9196 7/93 -- 9195 10195 - 9/96 10x96 = 9197 10197 - 9198 'HEALTH INSURANCE 40% Plan -$.38 per $100 of me. Benefit Non - Bargaining Employees $.36 per $100 of $.36 per $100 of 60% Plan -step Rated PPO monthly benefit Bargaining Employees a0% Plan - $338 per $100 of me. Benefd g g p y ees Contributory Contributory Single $156.39 $161.08 $175.96 $186.55 Family $366.45 $377.44 $411.79 $436.93 I HMO Single $156.39 $161.08 $135.01 $143.75 Family $366.45 $377.44 $378.03 $400.87 POS Single N/A N/A $139.13 $150.21 Family N/A N/A $389.54 $420.39 Anthem Health MetLife 7193 - 9/95 10195-9/96 10196,- 9197 10197-9198 DENTAL INSURANCE Single $15.46 $16.88 $16.27 I $18.54 Family $36.75 $40.13 $38.68 $44.08 Anthem Health ITT Hartford Sun Life of Canada 7193-9195 10/95-9196 110196- 9197 10197-9/99 LIFE AND AD &D Life per $1,000 ($15,000) $0.28 $0.28 $0.25 $0.18 i AD &D per $1,000 ($15,000) $0.06 $0.06 $0.04 $0.04 Dependent Life per unit $1.32 $1.32 $0.96 $1.55 Retiree Life per $1,000 ? ? $2.78 $2.78 (7) Fortis 1/96-9196 10196 -12/97 1/98-12198 LONG TERM DISABILITY Contributory 40% Plan -$.38 per $100 of me. Benefit Non - Bargaining Employees $.36 per $100 of $.36 per $100 of 60% Plan -step Rated monthly benefit monthly benefit Bargaining Employees a0% Plan - $338 per $100 of me. Benefd g g p y ees Contributory Contributory 60% Plan - Step Rated (7) CV u co (61.r- 0) ,- co gi� g �Cgl g Lr)�: �(')l cn 'IT., co 00'., 00 OD- W :0)�� 00 00� OD CD "..OD OD 00 aD OD qR o M 00 m LO IT M cl)�� I OD a) ve 't 0 - - * . 0 : *.-, ae : -�k -�' * : W - Ln _� 0) (0,:: (D C47' C) lim� cq m U) C'I in m M co 0) oo;-- U') 1-- 00 �cq 00 �P 00 J�' In o (01)) (,D) Iv) n I 1'- 00 t, oD o o 0) 00 t N N C-4 •C%4 N Mf^1 M C N 4 X! U.) V) �co Lf) AD- (D ca". rl- CO OD (D U), (1) pQ C" C14 cr) Lf) co co 0 VY 0 r` (n oo� CD N J r', �t C'4 V)7 3) cr). to (D :u� co C'A!� v. d)� r, C'4 "e co �cv 0) , M o qt�� 'z LI) C-4 f'-L 'o co Lf) Go Y c D r (),D (0 • 60 en 60' 69 w. .64. 1 Lf) 16- Ln Lf) _J 4 '�CO)�:: ce) o tm� jap, c) R. C14 Cl*' C14 'ClIC C14 CN'. V) OW, C14 cn Pit,, 6-* 69 69 fiO2 (» lw % 0 0) (o (D t.� C14 E3, Gn -Po LI) co (D tf) �- tA Ln ul)`� tn co X pi Z cy) 00 Lf) U) In Lf) ;Lfy Lf) to,- Ln Fne U) v CIC C-4 . �41.'i It OD (D Lf) An,. W . to. a M.i -R C) N OD r- Q.: IN 1 (7) )z� a) 8R (r) (D (6� OD At� co r. CN co (3) C5 (D A W Am o izl� rl- CCO, u) C4 (N (N co CN NN I'w z". 613, �6T:l 613� 64 vi-. 643, �i4. 64 409- V9� V> In ' CD Ln CN CD N 110 ()o (N r 11 CD (D m �o C6 w CO co: 649, 6R, .. ... .. .. ...... CD 00 go C, C, CD 00 co c .4 CD z C4 ...... . . 40 CD A N. 40 e e a) C* A C-4 Z 44, iz C'4 cn ca CD X J, a) C) CD A. -03 pp V! 0), C) N OD C,4 A Cl) Go 0 Lf) & — .00 co pQ C" C14 cr) Lf) co co 0 VY 0 r` (n oo� CD N J r', �t C'4 V)7 3) cr). to (D :u� co C'A!� v. d)� r, C'4 "e co �cv 0) , M o qt�� 'z LI) C-4 f'-L 'o co Lf) Go Y c D r (),D (0 • 60 en 60' 69 w. .64. 1 Lf) 16- Ln Lf) _J 4 '�CO)�:: ce) o tm� jap, c) R. C14 Cl*' C14 'ClIC C14 CN'. V) OW, C14 cn Pit,, 6-* 69 69 fiO2 (» lw % 0 0) (o (D t.� C14 E3, Gn -Po LI) co (D tf) �- tA Ln ul)`� tn co X pi Z cy) 00 Lf) U) In Lf) ;Lfy Lf) to,- Ln Fne U) v CIC C-4 . �41.'i It OD (D Lf) An,. W . to. a M.i -R C) N OD r- Q.: IN 1 (7) )z� a) 8R (r) (D (6� OD At� co r. CN co (3) C5 (D A W Am o izl� rl- CCO, u) C4 (N (N co CN NN I'w z". 613, �6T:l 613� 64 vi-. 643, �i4. 64 409- V9� V> In ' CD Ln CN CD N 110 ()o (N r 11 CD (D m �o C6 w CO co: 649, 6R, .. ... .. .. ...... CD 00 go C, C, CD 00 co c .4 CD z C4 ...... . . 40 CD A N. 40 e e a) C* A C-4 Z 44, iz C'4 cn ca CD X J, a) C) CD a M.i -R C) N OD r- Q.: IN 1 (7) )z� a) 8R (r) (D (6� OD At� co r. CN co (3) C5 (D A W Am o izl� rl- CCO, u) C4 (N (N co CN NN I'w z". 613, �6T:l 613� 64 vi-. 643, �i4. 64 409- V9� V> In ' CD Ln CN CD N 110 ()o (N r 11 CD (D m �o C6 w CO co: 649, 6R, .. ... .. .. ...... CD 00 go C, C, CD 00 co c .4 CD z C4 ...... . . 40 CD A N. 40 e e a) C* A C-4 Z 44, iz C'4 cn ca CD X J, a) C) CD z C4 ...... . . 40 CD A N. 40 e e a) C* A C-4 Z 44, iz C'4 cn ca CD X J, a) C) CD e e a) C* A C-4 Z 44, iz C'4 cn ca CD X J, a) C) CD Medical Evaluation RECOMMENDATION Blue Cross & Blue Shield The Gehring Group recommends that the City of Palm Beach Gardens switch its health insurance program from Humana's triple option PPO/POS/HMO to Blue Cross & Blue Shield's dual option PPO/HMO. This change will be to the City's advantage by enhancing the health insurance schedule of benefits as follows: PPO Benefit Enhancements ➢ The copay for prescriptions will decrease from $10 for generic drugs to $5, and from $10 + difference to $10 for brand name drugs. ➢ The Out -of- Network per admission deductible will decrease from $500 to $200. ➢ The Supplemental Accident benefit will increase from $300 to $500. ➢ The benefit for inpatient mental & nervous treatment will be enhanced by charging the patient only their calendar year deductible plus 20% instead of Humana's $25 copay per day plus 20% for days 1 -15, then $50 copay per day plus 20% for days 16- 31 of inpatient treatment. HMO Benefit Enhancements ➢ The per admission copay for inpatient hospital stays will be reduced from $100 per admission to $0. ➢ The Office Visit copay remains $5. ➢ The copay for prescriptions will decrease from $10 for generic drugs to $5, and from $10 + difference to $10 for brand name drugs. ➢ The copay for inpatient mental & nervous treatment will be reduced from $100 per admission to $0. The above benefits are a significant enhancement to the current schedule of benefits; however, the BC &BS proposal did contain a few plan changes which resulted in a reduction in benefits. (10) The PPO Office Visit copay will increase from $10 per visit to $15 per visit, and the coinsurance for Out -of- Network physician services will decrease from 80% to 60 %; however, employees visiting In- Network physicians can avoid this loss in coverage. Furthermore, since BC &BS matched 163 of the 184 physician requests made by the City's employees (a 25% increase over the 118 requests matched by Humana) utilizing a PPO participating provider should not be an issue. The Outpatient mental & nervous office visit copay will increase from $5 per visit to $30 per visit to a participating provider under the HMO program. Although these plan changes do reduce some of the plan benefits, they are not substantial in comparison to the enhancements previously outlined due to the frequency of utilization. Overall, the plan proposed by Blue Cross & Blue Shield results in an approximate 6.5% increase in benefits over the current health plan. Implementing Blue Cross & Blue Shield's dual option program will eliminate the POS option currently offered by Humana. This may be viewed as a reduction in benefits; however, since only 17% of the City's employees are currently enrolled in this plan, we do not anticipate significant employee dissatisfaction. The perception by the general employee population of most of the clients of The Gehring Group is that BC &BS is a quality company providing quality service; therefore, BC &BS should have a positive effect on the morale of the majority of employees of the City. BC &BS proposal generates an approximate 7.9% increase ($82,147 annually) in premium over the upcoming plan year assuming that half of those currently enrolled in the POS option migrate to the PPO and the other half enroll in the HMO. Humana's renewal quotation generated a 24.7% increase ($258,385 annually), and was therefore not a competitive option in comparison to the plans and rates proposed by BC &BS. In addition to Humana's renewal and the proposal submitted by Blue Cross & Blue Shield, health insurance proposals were also received from CIGNA Healthcare, United HealthCare, Foundation HealthCare and AvMed Health Plans. The proposal submitted by CIGNA included a dual option PPO/H N4O health plan with benefits that, in general, mirrored the current PPO and HMO options. The rates proposed, however, generated a 30.1% increase in premium ($314,334 annually) which proved to be uncompetitive in comparison to the proposal received from BC &BS. (11) United HealthCare proposed a dual option POS/HMO, eliminating the PPO option altogether. This may have been a viable option if not for the significant increase proposed since members are not required to select a Primary Care Physician and are able to visit any physician or specialist in the provider directory. The rates proposed generated a 24% rate increase ($251,414 annually) which eliminated United as a competitive option in comparison to the recommended BC&BS proposal. Foundation HealthCare proposed a triple option PPO/POS/HMO program which is comparable to the current health plan options but at an increase of 9.6% ($100,264 annually), 1.7% above the rates proposed by BC &BS. In addition, BC &BS's provider networks are significantly more extensive than Foundation's provider networks in the North Palm Beach County and Martin County areas (Foundation has no participating providers in Martin County). Therefore, Foundation is not the best choice for the City of Palm Beach Gardens at this time. The rates proposed by AvMed were the most competitive of all the proposals received; however, the plans proposed were not comparable to the current options. The program proposed is a dual option POS/HMO, eliminating the PPO option and requiring all employees to select a Primary Care Physician to coordinate all medical care. This is not a viable option for the City at this time since 42% of the City's employees (115 employees) are currently enrolled in the PPO option. In addition, AvMed does not have a physician network to service the employee population residing in Martin and St. Lucie Counties. The inconvenience posed to these employees would negatively affect employee morale. In summary, The Gehring Group's recommendation is to switch the City's health coverage from Humana to Blue Cross & Blue Shield due to the competitiveness of the rates proposed and the benefit enhancements included in comparison to all proposals received. (12) U t? N O 1_n co Go - N 43D - t(1- -� -.. .. p tC0� (h N 1NA O m s vi v O t` ! M v (d N (�O pppp a (A� prp � M f'7 N u� N V. N e ( M N o a CpQJJI N ' G T N �. 01 ,N Np r- t9 - (O a dl 49 di 60, p . _ 60 (A c r- (14- LO N N n (f> 699 Gf> IN V> M - 0) t? N O 1_n co Go - N 43D - t(1- -� -.. .. p tC0� (h N 1NA O m i O t` ! M fV O R 6asr '* , . % 00), •- to " a�f (o a (A� prp � M f'7 N u� N co �- co of ( 1� T CpQJJI N ' - T N �. r N. � O (h fi (f> (A 619� -40 M (H, EA Ffi N ' ff> ff> n 00 N 1n - (14- LO N N n (f> 699 d' r •(h co LL N NCI i Ci (0 aO N In (P. T N (O F, PI N� N co tc0 - Q� App to i0 0�0� e O T- mi o (� T d p Q e � 0 h C to e C n n 6 .M O 10 — N D CL 1 O N N N a C2, t4 to T b> d> IA t? r � co Go - N 43D d N U) pp i i �..� {a� ilgi N to C 00 CD VA OO C U) eft Q M g F� a. 1� T b cs 40 .N a T fi ufi cF z ltA �'. � N 40 n (f> 699 v> LL ��' F, PI N� • d N Q e � 0 h C e C n n 6 .M O 10 — N D CL 1 O N N N a C2, t4 to T ft PLt O C C C O O C tl- 00 C C14 LO C C 11001 �_ 4 t(j 0 _11 N (i x m4aie O O 0 . m C U o A^ � ° Q w LO M N to r> N c o� n:L v' a' T ms eA (s> Ef> u9 (s a (s> (s> N co NN M OD t? i LL � EI cF LL 1 •� (m •E 'A s C F A PLt O C C C O O C t� C C O C C C 11001 �_ _11 2Qv>o x m4aie (13) N_ Qt a r� V U V (14) 0) w 0 U h cq c A L cs M O Ol O _ N d � Q o� v ,s Y" w �3 �0 Ei O O 0, u 4 w y ti v O w� � v v v 0 o w 'w o o °o I� e O N O) N a (O r n . -. V1 (o co C - Pf� .- V� 00 OOD6 c) _ a(oc� L N. 4 ^ N � � 0 C4 o LU r• . c c O Lo U) (n (dpi to fA GH 6A tR v� N: Q s m a. co U- 0) M � m '� �. 'q* Cl) m v� P CF) -.Cl) c c o N .: i # ��A e c c y (D .. N a to �T _ co O (H ,A. a p N O (s eH M U) (Lf) - N N (1) CD Z Z', m to N N m co lh m "d ¢ Q 0.' ;j Z Z Z vs � a7 0 � r (N to 00 a •� C O m co l0 M M Q Q -R C) W. d N Z Z a O.0 pp (/J 6 t0 (+^ i.'f ;I C; N In M �sd: to to M t9 r Go M a0 (14) 0) w 0 U h cq c A L cs M O Ol O _ N d � Q o� v ,s Y" w �3 �0 Ei O O 0, u 4 w y ti v O w� � v v v 0 o w 'w o o °o I� e O N O) N a -p m r C N N� 00 Pf� .- V� 00 OOD6 N u d (o CO N. 4 ^ N N LU r• . lu IL Lo U) C14 C14 M OD Q s m a. co U- oo t� '� �. eo N 'o O O c c c (n t C R. c c .� i' N a ap t � C t0 Cl) - N O (H ,A. 60 eii c c (s eH a 6(H 64 U) (Lf) - N N (1) CD (14) 0) w 0 U h cq c A L cs M O Ol O _ N d � Q o� v ,s Y" w �3 �0 Ei O O 0, u 4 w y ti v O w� � v v v 0 o w 'w o o °o I� e O N O) N a j LU lu Q s m a. co U- oo t� '� �. eo N 'o O O c c c (n c c u c ''O c c 5 c W a c O c c c c (14) 0) w 0 U h cq c A L cs M O Ol O _ N d � Q o� v ,s Y" w �3 �0 Ei O O 0, u 4 w y ti v O w� � v v v 0 o w 'w o o °o I� e O N O) N a City of Palm Beach Gardens PPO Benefit Comparison Humana. Plan 620 (Current) Lifetime Maximum $1,000,000 T $1,000,000 $1,000,000 Deductible Individual $200 $200 $200 Family $600 $600 $600 Non -Par Hospital Deductible $500 $500 $200 Maximum Out -of - Pocket PPO $1,000' $1,000* $1,000 Non -PPO $3,000* $3,000* $3,000 Prescription Drug Card Generic $10 $10 $5 Brand Name $10 + difference $10 + difference $10 Mail Order 90 day. supply for 2Xcopay 90 day supply for 2Xcopay 90 day supply- $10(G)/$20(B) Physician Office Visit Copay $10 then 100°% $10 then 100% $15 then 100% Coinsurance - Physician Services PPO Non -PPO 80°% 80% 80°% 80% 80°% 60% Coinsurance - Hospital Services PPO 80°% 80°% 80°% Non -PPO 60°% + $500 PAD 60°% + $500 PAD 60% + $200 PAD Emergency Room Visit $10 per visit plus 20°% (plan covers $10 per visit plus (plan covers $15 copay per visit Participating Hospital $25 then 80% $25 then 80% CYD then 80°% Non - Participation Hospital $25 then 60°% $25 then 60°% CYD then 60% benefit limited to $25 per visit with benefit limited to $25 per visit with $15 copay for PPC providers limited Chiropractic Benefit no limit as to the number of visits no limit as to the number of visits to 50 visits per calendar year Alcohol and Drug - subject to medical necessity subject to medical necessity OP - $15 for PPC Mental and Nervous - Inpatient Limited to 31 days per CY Limited to 31 days per CY Limited to 31 days per CY Days 1 -13 - $25 per day plus Days 1 -16 - $25 per day plus combination), Participating Hospital 20% (plan covers 80%) 20% (plan covers 80%) CYD plus 20% RATES Days 16 -31 - $50 per day plus Days 16 -31 - $50 per day plus (plan covers 80 %) Single 20% (plan covers 80 %) 20% (plan covers 80 %) ............................... ......................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... Daovs 1 -15 - $50 per day plus Days 1 -15 - $50 per day plus Non - Participating Hospital 20% (plan covers 80 %) 20% (plan covers 80%) $200 PAD, CYD plus 40% Days 16-31 - $75 per day plus Days 16.3' - $75 per day plus (plan covers 60 %) 20°% (plan covers 80 %) 20% (plan covers 80 %) ............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................ Participating Physician' $10 per visit plus 20% (plan covers $10 per visit plus 20% (plan covers ............................... $15 per visit 80 %) 80 %) ............................... .......................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... Non - Participating Physician $35 per visit plus 20% (plan covers $35 per visit plus 20% (plan covers CYD then 40°% (plan covers 60 %) 80 %) 80 %) Mental and Nervous - Outpatient Limited to $1,100 per CY Limited to $1,100 per CY Not to exceed 20 visits per CY Individual and Grouo Sessions Participating Provider $10 per visit plus 20°% (plan covers $10 per visit plus (plan covers $15 copay per visit 80 %) o20°% 80%) Non - Participating Provider $35 per visit plus (plan covers $35 per visit plus (plan covers CYD then 40°% (plan covers 60 %) o20% 80%) o20% 80%) covered at 80% up to a Lifetime covered at 80% up to a Lifetime IP - CYD plus coinsurance Alcohol and Drug - benefit of $2,000. Lifetime benefit of $2,000. Lifetime OP - $15 for PPC Inpatient & Outpatient outpatient visits limited to 44 not to outpatient visits limited to 44 not to Lifetime Max $2,000 (IP,OP or exceed $35 per visit. exceed $35 per visit. combination), Supplemental Accident $300 $300 $500 RATES Single $186.55 $232.75 $218.26 Family $436.93 $544.85 $511.20 *There is a separate maximum out of pocket limit of $2,000/$6,000 for non participating hospitals c:321ex11301 PGB EvaluationlPPO (Page 1 of 2) City of Palm Beach Gardens PPO Benefit Comparison Humana Plan 620 (Current) CICN'A= 1' ' { ©trato�► (" Lifetime Maximum $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 Deductible Individual $200 $200 $250 Family $600 $600 $750 Non -Par Hospital Deductible $500 $500 $250 Max out -of- pocket is calculated as a % of Maximum Out -0f - Pocket $35 per visit plus 20% (plan covers 60% subject to deductible and the stop loss PPO $1,000* $1,000 $10,000 Individual stop loss Non -PPO $3,000* $3,000 $20,000 Family stop loss Prescription Drug Card benefit of $2,000. Lifetime In- network - 80% I - 80 ° % /60 °% Generic $10 $10 $10 Brand Name $10 + difference $10 + difference $10 + difference ` Mail Order 90 day supply for 2Xcopay 90 day supply- $20 /RX not stated Physician Office Visit Copay $10 then 100% $10 then 100% $15 then 100% Coinsurance - Physician Services PPO I 80% 80% 80% Non -PPO 80% 60% 60% Coinsurance - Hospital Services PPO 80% 80% 80% Non -PPO 60% + $500 PAD 60% 80°% Emergency Room Visit Participating Hospital $25 then 80°% CYD then 80% 50% Non- Participation Hospital $254hen 60°% CYD then 60% 50°% benefit limited to $25 per visit with $10 copay subject to medical 80°% - PPO Chiropractic Benefit no limit as to the number of visits necessity 60% - Non -PPO subject to medical necessity Mental and Nervous - Inpatient Limited to 31 days per CY Limited to 30 days per CY Limited to 30 days per CY Days 1 -16 - $25 per day plus CYD plus 20% Participating Hospital 20% (plan covers 80 %) (plan covers 80%) Days 1631 - $50 per day plus does not accumulate toward Out -of- 80% 20°% (plan covers 80 %) Pocket max. ............................... ................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... Da°vs 1 -15 - $50 per day plus CYD plus 40% Non - Participating Hospital 20% (plan covers 80 %) (plan covers 60%) Days 1631 - $75 per day plus does not accumulate toward Out -of- 60% 20% (plan covers 80 %) .. ............................... ... ..... . ............. Pocket max. ............................................................... ................................ ............................... .................................... ............................... Participating Physician ............ $10 per visit plus 20% (plan covers CYD then 20% 800% 80 %) (plan covers 80%) ............................... .................................................................,................................................................................................................................................................. $35 per visit plus 20% (plan covers CYD then 40% Non - Participating Physician 80 %) (plan covers 60%) 60°% Mental and Nervous - Outpatient Limited to $1,100 per CY Limited to $1,000 per CY Individual and Grout) Sessions Participating Provider $10:per visit pl 80%) (plan covers $10 copay per visit 80% Non - Participating Provider $35 per visit plus 20% (plan covers 60% subject to deductible and ° 60 % 80 %) coinsurance covered at 80°% up to a Lifetime P - max 44 VISItS ($35 max benefit) Alcohol and Drug benefit of $2,000. Lifetime In- network - 80% I - 80 ° % /60 °% Inpatient & Outpatient outpatient visits limited to 44 not to Out -of- network - 60°% $ ( 2000 combined lifetime max) ($ exceed $35 per visit. _Supplemental Accident T $300 _ N/A N/A RATES Single $186.55 $225.83 $236.51 Family $436.93 $654.91 1 $553.94 *There is a separate maximum out of pocket limit of $2,000/86,000 for non participating hospitals c:321ex11301 PGB EvaluationtPPO (Page 2 of 2) � O rA V •fl O U d � d7 m U a (17) n c C R El *� O 0 0 d 3 O Cl 0 0 0 0 O CQ 0 0 0 0 0 > o o O -.R 0 0 0 0 0 a p 0 0 M co 0 0 0 0 0 Il n h r 0 U O O U n t` p O I'- O O n I- O O O . <i. N YO C O M f0 O M co ` f6 CL � 64 S ° U D > O y d, v n •m m ' °O v a o m o U a > m aFA o E ° O Z Z Z Z bC c U O In O O o c w C >O . d O n . Z N Z V U z� I p O O Op N O o 0 -O 0 0 N > a -O W Q O 7;, O o 69 co N L r- r- 0 0 0 U 0 0 r- -0 Z O I- O . �, �, 64 I� I� fh N f� c a0 N In . mow' T c ff► EH ..�. O W >. N N X« M .-. ^ ... .O-1 m A CL CL 'O z o U o i° CL 0 7 �,31r !.: O N O IA O + m N p 00 N • :R z fA p m J •O to tH rn 0 0 0 oC) uno o 0 0 0 > e"e o o ., y. p o co N N 000OO n n r- X r- o o 0 0 O � Efi 0 o t` " EA El4 0 + O CD .. N M O O T N l cc CL 6 FA r O E m m> X E 0 ¢¢ Q Q O O O o 0 16 O O iY l0 m '!d O aCA ) a y> `pO ;O o z o 0 C o oz a E O O O 'ass 603, Z ffi p A J 64 J `� ii? fA 69 m W 6 > >. W .2 Z a 5 .. v a) O 0 CL V y � c O � U � a W > a,;,r, =;; E c c I-° a) g a c O (D 0 m E T o� tl1 r m In H Uw a�i mm dQ °o C C E o x x °�U Ucn> X �a o c �Z z '� j O W C a) U Z 'O_ 9 9 a c m A O T w w T wL m lO m •� m o m m a a`� a a� O m m o m m g m E o E O n a° 5 E c c° s e t aN r JE N IL w !n LL T d N a` a '. y C O w N O m 2 c r3G O a a x v a g Q (17) n c C R El m G H E i� d M W U a 0 O T R V v v E N R u� p X a V to � m otl E o o 0 00 o 0 m N T T m ea T m 00000� o o N ¢ � to 4) ° LnLn LOu°) 000000 a n 3 0 n 0 o o Q¢ o a T O O U C y U U R 'a R Z O z to 0 4469 -7 v� nt- r- r- n� x x ^ r- r r I O G O C C � � O 0 O o � � c � o o a 0 O T R N p O E N R u� R X a V to I E Z. � E o o 0 0 2) o 0 m N 0 C C) Q¢ N N 00000� o o N ¢ � to 4) Z Z LQLr > Z O a 0 O O G9 f/9 49 vi >, 0 fA i . T O O U C y U U R 'a R Z O V� to U C 49 U + O 00) O O C I O G O C C � � O 0 O T R N p O E N fA U a 0 U i") o l0 ,Ul p Q Q X a V to U C z Z us 69 e9 49 49 O E R E z If) N N N N d pCL 0 0 0 Cl 0 0 * o o O o o oe > > > R > > p O O 0 0 0 0 0 N 0 0 0 O O U C y U U p � 0 00 O OD OD co E9 C3 c0 to U C U + O bl). v O C O C O G O C C O C O 0 O O c co a I \ E � U d Z" c oa O Q Q O O 0 0 0 0 0 N 0 p N N O C >, w Z Z N� 4A iA iA if? iA 49 Z to E 0 49 + > ' 7 Q N � C E Z om Y U US > N V R Z o_ o v c y Z 6A N c9 E o e N c c°'i :°. w c w Eft 0 O N p O E N fA U a 0 U i") o l0 ,Ul p Q Q 2) ¢ Q 0 0 0 0 00 R L � to U C z Z us 69 e9 49 49 O_ E O If) O + > O O O v O O O O o w p v v 'D fH b9 Cl 49 O O) O 0 0 0 0 U O O '�, C, 0 4009 fH a U + 0 O 0 0 0) m m E C) 0 T R O i 49 ' d O U O C 00 D) O LO 0 r R a U O Z r O i N M � a EA V► 'i i E � .i R � 0 N � 49 r w N p O E N fA U a 0 U i") o l0 ,Ul p Q Q 2) ¢ Q 0 0 0 0 00 R L O to U 0 Z Z z Z us 69 e9 49 49 O_ E O If) O + > O O O v Z to w p v v 'D fH b9 49 O O) 0 0 0) m m E C) 0 T R O i 49 ' d O U O C 00 D) O LO 0 r R a U O Z r O i N M � a EA V► 'i i E � .i R � 0 N � 49 r w R += N v R r o to C36 o a c o a3; w Z E d 0 2 9 U O v c a a d Z" Ci 17 C K y L E 'a E 0 4. 7 Q N Y U US > N V R Z o_ o v c y Z Z o e N c c°'i :°. w c w w o z c c w °—) a �+ > ea io R ` c io m '� a a aei v O R R x a) 2- o E w c E ;'v_ E a E 0 E !? = n 5 E o aci E 'm I R �a r �aci w O1 6 dA LL 4 m)i �,�cn� �a �.�SO w = yC7 m�Ic c u o U) LL (18) F C C, Q C Q _ A2 T N ' O U ` y O Z' •t011 o. .y m O• . a) d 0 m m a`� E m E b E v N co F1 �6 O O •m rL r ., � C U U c C Z C N O dO f643, Z n fl N - N v N O O N loll � In O Ga O GO O 60 L b9 O O fig fA C) N N .O N 'd - �'+ a) r M CL O O U > d fR 3 b o o • >• _ E 61). GO fix), 6q, T O N V (O n• O b N c O O 0. O N >.. Cw m v) f9 z 0 S:6 a� S a6 o o.a O O d O 3 U> -1 LO 34 O) O T c0 N O (V N ff) a o O. fU N :r �, m y $ O O C m •`� O CL d g ri`:2 N a� d d - O m o q �o N N M 0 > Z I o o NC O CL 'O -.. x U -m f+ � 69 O O n f0 y z z z A a fn 69 o, a x N ° m a m Zl 619. w V p � z N I Fil -t4 a CA riii, 0) cl a I B ;11 0� b) rlCt Ri °�"�.• V k' W..3 c C K N aai v N co ° .S u .9 > a ODD la a o a a ,E In o u) In o� o O U m a C fH 6,31 fR 64 6% 09 T9 + ffi O Q 'O d N w FL 'd a b CL C g7 w Q �i fR W O m '05 a CN Ea a°i o aoi v k�i fR f» y �b E d o x 0 0 > °) mac° a0w °v Z v o 0 0 a c cmi 0 o o E 0. a 'a fA 7 .> W N y= ln f» a Q f f> ff f° s `y nD • 6 > o O 0), •a om a Em b 'y ^ o. � ), tolnnnoN oo v t a �o A fA � d maG9 N9 09i O O_ >, _ • >, cc ° 0 a o N T � v� 8 y � ° ,� •m E E ID o x CL �� a�w °v �aa 5 a c :m m U) to _ f c O 1 V C O'y O '•- in j t to c 1m�l� T w C C U N d .r, O O Q O d w r... O > _ m m O T V m a C O T d rn o ID N v c O o (n CD 3 v rU) rn rn j m CL U 7 N W H H C O N Y' E ayl a 0 w ate) w °' ° °o l c °f o o r m� 8 wE 0 �•�m ¢ m 0 m Z c Z E m p m >> F� °) '' °° ° z z > ° o N r€ g X 0 V y V to d u o U e m y c y g 5 .2 a ` -2 c m y c a c c x w m X E .0 fu i t Q E 0 y !? = n 5 E o Q d a�oi L o 'E . �Ln U) CL cwt o50w = `C7 m d m O u� 0- -0 fn u. UA �a ax 0 a g � a (19) , �' a o m c a s ;, > E c ° ° ° a m a ° > ° m m2 `A CD 0 of o^o 2. ,'E C l0 (0 p• C. N .g- O- E O to eq c° �' o .ai 7 N U L M to `m '�. b9 a m .° w w V X d w m of ns Y [ C >` a 5 i� p, .> `n m Y L N O N co 0 CD +�- N to O to N LO O O N to U') ° n- o 0 w > m N 17 k H �Ea�eH�VH �us� v► fA c E 5 0 c°v o 3 a in Z a" a N E o is O T fIY m o v 5 Mk a s o r» o o a .� a O 'n .' m o waa .. ur mL U °n °w' d '�i a N U am N fl °3 = •� U U, ' a .E > c °> n o wc N N N LD N LD O O U O N O 619, b9 61, H9 to fA :fl o O = ° fu� V N In p ' c o o + Z Z N Uar 4 X m 04 _ N O O'. O o to V In G ♦+ Cl) m �a d W o FA a a co c o H do y o J V= d dc E E»<» m o ° 0 C E �0 N o m F/iC Vm a l t o :3 Ma d ac) N VN C y . ^v n ao F»ES�o ° o N N O ti) N° O : (03, o O � ° ) CL b `r( + " H t1 O � � L 0 H ° n m E � O iN _ m ER : E v El 0 .U. o :.l v c " a 5D 0 m o m:m a cmi S o MO In in > _ % umi Z •fir U O d C fl. •a+ w O O O n O 4) a7 m C 8 O T U a N T c C V C a _ m dd SR N C a O m L y 11 �� E ayi (L v w ari u, w v o c O1 c 'o rn E ��s U 0 U >> y c> m C Z Z > O o � c U) to Z a v v z ea tl) N m m W N c m y O v Z v 9 C a d `w v O m E 0 v= n w a aci c `m io m > E SL o m yLa`U))a`.9 o50w t `c9 CO d O �o dv cn ii a x i (20) City of Palm Beach Gardens Physician Match Humana BC /BS � ; �A�i�2 �`+W; a \,`i�y Vl•t�`.^! ti i Yi4��`'{if 'f �i ..� :� 4 ��} � /., ,t I_�� f A`�'. 7 7 7 7 Houss, Carolyn Family Practice N.P. Childrens Phy. Pediatricians Palm Beach Gardens 561 - 626 -4000 10 10 10 ' Custureri, Frank Internal Medicine Palm Beach Gardens 561- 627 -3818 7 7 7 7 Houss, Carolyn Family Practice Palm Beach Gardens 561- 622 -2022 5 5 5 Surowitz, Ron General Practice Jupiter 561- 746 -7826 5 i � 5 Swyers, Jerry OB /GYN Palm Beach Gardens 1 561 - 827 -3791 4 4 4 4 4 Garcia, Pedro Pediatrician Juno Beach 561 - 624 -1770 3 Greer. Robert Familv Practice Lake Park 561 -844 -2464 3 3 ' 3 Inwood, Kevin Internal Medicine Jupiter 561- 745 -9711 3 3 3 3 3 Milstein, Michael Family Practice West Palm Beach 561- 793 -5755 3 3 3 3 3 Pomeranz, Holly Family Practice Lake Park 1 561- 842 -5900 3 3 3 Trehan, Narindar Internal Medicine Palm Beach Gardens 561 - 626-7929 3 3 Bayron, Harry Pediatrician West Palm Beach 561 - 844 -9858 2 2 2 2 2 Bone, Melanie OB /GYN West Palm Beach 561- 655 -3331 2 2 2 2 2 Booher, James OB /GYN Jupiter 561- 626 -3385 2 2 2 2 2 Green, Howard Dermatology Palm Beach Gardens 561- 622 -6976 2 2 2 2 2 Kent, Sebastian OB /GYN West Palm Beach 561- 655 -2164 2 1 1 1 1 y Krantz, Barbara Family Practice North Palm Beach 561 - 842 -1583 2 2 2 2 Levy, Andrew Podiatry Palm Beach Gardens 561- 624 -4800 2 2 2 2 Litt, Jeffrey OB /GYN West Palm Beach 561 - 689 -8780 2 2 2 2 Marks, Mitchell Geriatrics Palm Beach Gardens 561 - 622 -2022 2 2 2 2 Migdal, Lynn Chiropractor Delray Beach 561- 278 -5370 2 2 Ozer, Neil Internal Medicine Palm Beach Gardens 561- 626 -3355 2 2 2 2 Ross, Sharon OB /GYN Palm Beach Gardens 561 -827 -3714 2 2 2 2 2 Siegal, Mitchell Chiropractor Palm Beach Gardens 561- 624 -3003 2 Stafford, James Neurology Jupiter 561-743 -0200 2 2 'Stein, Mark Allergy North Palm Beach 561 - 626 -2006 2 2 2 2 2 Steiner, Michael Pediatrician Palm Beach Gardens 561 - 626 -4000 2 2 2 2 2 Syed, Baqirs Internal Medicine Palm Beach Gardens 561 -626 -7604 2 2 2 Warsett, Douglas Pediatrician Jupiter 561 - 575 -4577 2 2 2 2 2 Abovich, Edgar Cardiology Palm Beach Gardens 561- 624 -3303 1 1 1 1 Adler, Moshe Pediatrician Lake Worth 561 -585 -7544 1 1 1 1 1 Apicerno, Steven Chiropractor Lake Worth 561 - 968 -2440 1 Avello, Waldo Gastroenterology Palm Beach Gardens 561- 622 -5500, 1 1 1 1 1 Baynham, Bret Orthopedic Surger Palm Beach Gardens 561 -694 -7776 1 1 Beattie, James Pediatrician West Palm Beach 561 -832 -7555 1 1 1 1 1 Beaver, Brian Cardiology West Palm Beach 561 - 840 -4600 1 1 1 1 Beer, Kenneth Dermatology West Palm Beach 561 - 655 -9055 1 1 Bell, Timothy Pediatrician West Palm Beach 561- 471 -1144' 1 1 1 1 Bentz, Robert Ophthalmology West Palm Beach 561 -689 -5500 1 1 1 Bideau, Lynda Pediatrician Palm Beach Gardens 561- 626 -4000 1 1 1 1 1 Brock, Derek General Surgery Palm Beach Gardens 561 -627 -5333 1 1 Brown, Jeffrey Neurology Palm Beach Gardens 561- 694 -1010 1 1 Castellanos, Agustin Neurology Palm Beach Gardens 561 -694 -1010 1 1 1 1 Castriz, Jorge Cardiology Palm Beach Gardens 561 -622 -3875 1 1 1 1 1 Chidester, Michael Internal Medicine West Palm Beach 561 -844 -6975 1 1 1 1 iChoy, Albert Pulmonary Palm Beach Gardens 561 - 626 -9696 1 1 1 1 Cook, Frank Orthopedic Sumer West Palm Beach 561- 694 -7776 1 1 *Contract Pending (Page 1 of 3) City of Palm Beach Gardens Physician Match Humana BC /BS Drummond, Donald Pediatrician West Palm Beach 561 - 8442233 1 1 Dudan, Ronald Gynecology Palm Beach Gardens 561 - 626 -5761 1 1 1 1 Eastridge, R. Urology Palm Beach Gardens 561 -622 -4900 1 1 1 Englander, Glenn Gastroenterology West Palm Beach 561- 832 -2465 1 1 1 1 Espina, Dario Cardiology Palm Beach Gardens 561- 624 -1660 1 1 1 Higgins, Daniel Fayne, Scott Dermatology Palm Beach Gardens 561 -622 -3555 1 1 1 1 ,Fishbane, Bruce Orthopaedic Surgery West Palm Beach 561- 659 -9000 1 Johnson, James Family Practice 1 Flack, Charles Urology Boynton Beach 561-737 -9191 1 1 1 1 1 Goldfinger, Sue Pediatrician West Palm Beach 561 - 844 -6300 1 1 1 1 Grabel, Jordan Neurosurgery West Palm Beach 561- 833 -6388 1 1 1 1 1 Haft, Brian Ophthalmology Royal Palm Beach 561 - 798 -2020 1 1 Magana, Ignacio 1 Hampton, Bridgette Internal Medicine Palm Beach Gardens 561- 691 -6020 1 1 1 1 1 Hander, Richard OB /GYN Lantana 561- 969 -7811 1 1 1 Hanson, William Chiropractor Lake Worth 561- 965 -6522 1 1 Harland, Martin Family Practice Loxahatchee 561 - 791 -7969 1 1 1 1 1 Heaton. W. ENT West Palm Beach 561 - 659 -2266 1 1 1 1 1 Herbst, Seth OB /GYN West Palm Beach 561 -683 -1331 1 1 1 1 Herman, Rodney Internal Medicine Palm Beach Gardens 561 -622 -3364 1 1 1 Higgins, Daniel General Surgery West Palm Beach 561 - 840 -4600 1 1 1 1 1 Hirsch, Julian Chiropractor Jupiter 561 -575 -2444 1 Physical Therapy North Palm Beach Johnson, James Family Practice North Palm Beach 561 - 626 -1000 1 1 1 Kaufman Marc OB /GYN West Palm Beach 561 - 689 -8780 1 1 1 1 Koch Ronald OB /GYN West Palm Beach 561- 655 -3331 561 -622 -9591 1 1 Kraft, Daniel Pediatrician Royal Palm Beach 561- 798 -2468 1 1 1 1 Landman, Michael Family Practice West Palm Beach 561- 969 -7900 1 Leroy, Alan OB /GYN West Palm Beach 561- 881 -5454 1 1 1 1 Levin, John Podiatry Loxahatchee 561 - 967 -6500 1 1 1 Lichtblau, Craig Physical Therapy North Palm Beach 561 -842 -3694 1 1 1 Livingston, Stephen OB /GYN Palm Beach Gardens 561 -626 -7500 1 1 1 1 Lopez, Berto OB /GYN Palm Beach Gardens 561 -622 -9591 1 1 1 1 1 Lowe, Peter Ophthalmology West Palm Beach 561 -844 -8880 1 1 1 1 1 Magana, Ignacio Neurosurgery Palm Beach Gardens 561 -627 -7855 1 1 1 1 1 Margolies, Richard Ophthalmology Palm Beach Gardens 561- 626 -3937 1 1 1 1 Marks, Virginius OB /GYN Palm Beach Gardens 561 - 626-7500 1 1 1 1 Mathis, Elizabeth Psychotherapy West Palm Beach 561 -840 -0313 1 McPoland, Patric Dermatology West Palm Beach 561 - 840-4661 1 1 Molina, Victor Internal Medicine West Palm Beach 561- 840 -4664 1 1 1 1 1 Mullen, James Internal Medicine West Palm Beach 561 -833 -7600 1 1 1 1 1 Novoa, Elio Internal Medicine Jupiter 561- 746 -1210 1 1 1 Nuchovich, Daniel Internal Medicine Jupiter 561- 852 -7676 1 1 Pas, Linda Neurology Jupiter 561- 743 -0200 1 1 1 1 1 Papa, Michael Chiropractor Jupiter 561- 744 -7373 1 1 1 Patipa, Michael West Palm Beach 561 -832 -1448 1 1 1 1 1 Pauley, John OB /GYN West Palm Beach 561 - 881 -5454 1 1 Pineiro, Luis Pediatrician Palm Beach Gardens 561- 626 -4000 1 1 1 1 1 Rasmussen, Jana Plastic Surgery West Palm Beach 561 -833 -6688 1 1 Rodriquez, Frank OB /GYN West Palm Beach 561 - 686 -3666 1 1 Rodriquez, Rolando Endocrinology West Palm Beach 561 - 840 -4600 1 1 1 1 Rosenblum, Paul Ophthalmology North Palm Beach 561- 627 -6333 1 1 1 *Contract Pending (Page 2 of 3) City of Palm Beach Gardens Physician Match Humana BOBS a��t'.� .: ��''r� IF�'lr f ,.: s t G.' t/' Sallent, Jorge Pediatrician West Palm Beach 561 - 863 -0105 1 1 1 1 1 SanJorge, Maria Pediatrician Palm Beach Gardens 561 -626 -5790 1 1 Saslow, Steven Orthopaedic Surgery North Palm Beach 561 - 635 -3900 1 1 1 Schilero, John Podiatry West Palm Beach 561- 471 -1178 1 1 Schoenman, Daniel Chiropractor Palm Beach Gardens 561 - 627 -2821 1 1 1 Schwartz, Michael Internal Medicine West Palm Beach 561 - 845 -6228 1 1 Schweitz, Michael Rheumatology West Palm Beach 561 - 659 -4242 1 1 1 1 1 Schwimmer, Burton Pediatrician West Palm Beach 561 -844 -2233 1 1 Seltzer, Paul Orthopaedic Surgery West Palm Beach 561 -848 -0330 1 1 1 1 Seminario, Rafael Psychiatry West Palm Beach 561 -848 -2011 1 1 1 Siegel, Victor OB /GYN Jupiter 561- 747 -3777 1 1 1 1 1 Slavin, Andrew Oral Surgery West Palm Beach 561 -833 -6880 1 1 1 1 1 Sokoloff, Daniel Dermatology West Palm Beach 561 -863 -1000 1 1 Spektor, Zorik ENT West Palm Beach 561- 881 -5236 1 1 1 1 1 Thayer, Kristine General Surgery Palm Beach Gardens 561- 776 -7303 1 Thornton, Nancy OB /GYN Palm Beach Gardens 561- 747 -3777 1 1 1 1 1 Toia, Thomas Chiropractor Palm Beach Gardens 561- 622 -4311 1 1 1 Trabin, Jay OB /GYN West Palm Beach 561 - 687 -5000 1 1 Trejo, Rudy Family Practice Lantana 561- 969 -1777 1 1 1 1 1 Verma, Anil Cardiology Boynton Beach 561- 369 -7865 1 1 Viralam, Prabhavathi Family Practice Palm Beach Gardens 561- 627 -7433 1 1 1 1 1 Warshaw, Ira Family Practice Palm Beach Gardens 561- 691 -6030 1 1 1 1 Weiner, Richard Orthopaedic Surgery North Palm Beach 561- 625 -4511 1 1 1 Weiss, Robert Nephrology West Palm Beach 561- 659 -4004 1 1 1 Whelton, John Rheumatology West Palm Beach 561 - 684 -2030 1 1 Widick, Mark Otolaryncology West Palm Beach 561- 655 -5562 1 Wiita, Bruce Urology Jupiter 561- 747 -5885 1 1 1 1 Winner, Paul Neurology West Palm Beach 561 -845 -0500 1 1 1 1 Yetz, Jeannie Psychiatry Jupiter 561- 840 -1698 1 1 1 Zighelboim, Jamie Gastroenterology Palm Beach Gardens 561 -622 -5290 1 Total Number of Requests Matched 1t$4 11t$ 91 163 tt3, % of Requests Matched 64% 49% 89% 45% *Contract Pending (Page 3 of 3) Dental Evaluation Blue Cross & Blue Shield The Gehring Group recommends that the City of Palm Beach Gardens switch its dental insurance coverage from MetLife to Blue Cross & Blue Shield. The renewal proposal received from MetLife generated a 35.1% rate increase ($39,428 annually), therefore is not the best option for the City. The most competitive plan proposed that duplicated the current program was the BC &BS option at an increase of 22.5% ($25,316 annually). BC &BS's dental directory boasts over 35 General Dentists in the North Palm Beach County area alone and 17 General Dentists practicing in Martin County. CIGNA also duplicated the current plan but at a 61.3% increase ($68,850 annually) and was therefore not competitive. Oral Health Services and American Dental Plan submitted proposals for dental PPO and Indemnity programs, but only offered in conjunction with their Managed Dental plan. OHS's dental PPO was proposed at rates 41.1% over the current, and ADP's Indemnity option generated rates 94.3% over the current. The implementation of a Managed Dental plan is an option to consider in the future, however, the rate increases associated with the PPO and Indemnity options make these proposals uncompetitive in comparison to the plan proposed by BC &BS. Humana proposed a dental PPO at rates 4.6% above the current. However, this minimal increase also brings significant benefit reductions. The coverage for all out -of- network services is reduced. Preventive Services will be covered at 80% instead of 100% applying the deductible, Basic Services will be covered at 50% instead of 80 %, and Major Services will be covered at 30% instead of 50 %. The competitive rates proposed by Humana stem from this substantial reduction in benefits. In addition, Humana's dental directory lists only one General Dentist in the North Palm Beach County area and one in Martin County; therefore, most employees would be forced to receive services from non - participating providers. For the reasons outlined above, Humana is not the best dental option for the City. (27) Provident proposed an alternate dental option which, on the surface, appears to be the most competitive since the increase generated is 4.4 %. The plan proposed increases the in- network coinsurance for Basic Services from 80% to 100% (see Dental PPO Rate & Benefit Comparison); however, Provident's dental directory lists only five dentists in the North Palm Beach County area and only one dentist in Martin County. This means that most employees would be receiving treatment from a non - participating provider and, therefore, would not benefit from this plan enhancement. This plan also reduces benefits as follows: ➢ The out -of- network deductible is $50 per person with no aggregate total per family. The current deductible maximum is three per family ($150). ➢ The out -of- network annual benefit maximum is reduced from $1,500 to $1,000. Since most of the employees will be receiving services from out -of- network dentists, this significant reduction in benefits will affect the majority of the City's employees. ➢ The deductible is not waived for Preventive Services, whether in- network or out -of- network. The current plan, as well as the plan proposed by BC &BS, waives the deductible for all Preventive Services received from both in- network and out -of- network providers. Provident also proposed a dental PPO option that duplicated the current plan but at a 42.6% increase over the current rates and 20% over the rates proposed by BC &BS. The City also received a dental proposal from the Stoner Organization for a self - funded dental plan. However, due to the competitiveness of the BC &BS plan in comparison the self - funded dental option, self - funding the dental program is not the best option for the City at this time. Due to the plan and rates proposed as well as BC &BS having the most extensive dental PPO network, The Gehring Group recommends switching the City's dental to BC &BS. This will also prove to be an administrative benefit since the health and dental coverage will be listed on one bill from the same carrier. (28) V i 0 a O O 3Q II oe C 3Q O 6 o) co � z LQ Z A N U) L O 'D a) O O O O S:xti44F a i�f a d4 0 O ao In z (n 4 00 cz to •O r} C14 U) N M o IL C) o O 0 0 o a w f O Lf) a 69 ° `p° ° a) 0 0 0 0 U) h lv. =.nfl. 0 69 w N YMat Z t 19 u) (o O O CL _ I'..." cr O ? O saw, C) Cl O o `2 O o Cl a tto iH C7 to O e N r U) 69 68, r _ in Cl _ o o C o 4 00 cz to •O r} C14 U) N M o F 4 0 O �, O 0 0 o a o o O Lf) � 69 d M 00 N In M .N IA C-4 sr; c 69 w N YMat Z t u) (o O O CL _ I'..." cr O ? O saw, C) O Lo a tto iH C7 to O e N r U) 69 Oj r in Cl M o o C o (09. o N_ M I(') p co - N O 'a 4: ic L N C O O m O O N O t° CL CL Z o ao u) O z u) O z CL Io f F de ,, a a 0 z N C) 0 °0 0 0 Z 0 'n =`� ` � 1r 2'k' a 00 cz to � r} C14 U) N M o N � O N (O � U'1 � a co o o � 7 d M Cj 669• 6. M co N C-4 sr; c 69 w N YMat Z 2'k' a 00 N N � r} C14 U) N M o OD O (O m U'1 rn a coo o o E9 7 d M , 669• 6. O �y N C-4 sr; c 69 N YMat Z t 2'k' a 00 N N � r} C14 U) N M o OD O (O m U'1 rn a coo o o E9 0 p d 0 ° (n O r N sr; c 69 69 YMat Z t 2'k' a N �O � W o N O (O ve a mr a C) (°n o o E9 0 p d 0 ° (° fl u9 sr; c 09 (a YMat Z z 2'k' a O �O � o a mr a C) (°n o o E9 0 p d 0 ° (° fl u9 sr; c 09 (a YMat Z z u) (o O O N _ cr O ? 1- rt: Z co tto C7 to O e N r 69 Oj r in Cl M o o C o (09. U) N_ M I(') p co - N O 'a o o C o CL CL z SO F de a a O �O °O LQ y jYlr;° 'C t;.�- E9 0 p 0°0 0 O Z (° fl u9 N (moo YMat Z O N cr co 69 Oj r 51. O Cl N o o C o (» I(') In O O co - (f) z (n r9 F de 1r cm 0 W CL tu rsy;:a:,.r:, ggg m N O 7 y O Q X 7 x (A v v a z (o 2 (n v E ;:.., g 0 d N w R W > T l0 d u" c a) L 7 C u C ar.:..,.. d D ` Q d A 00 'L - O ¢ (A LL- O 2 C Q (H e N O a� rn m CL ii 9 A w' m a N U U (30) O N fU m m a CD 9 a m W m a m N U (u a� C4 N O tsa 7 75 co 75 7 Q Q Q L t L Q t m Q N L CO C. Z Z Z IUII fUd IU/1 Z full (L� fll O N ^ l (70 Y gami Z fU) ((0 N Z fell fUp U) a N Oj O f0 « g N ami N a01i N m am) N ami N (D �co�� ur �Tl.— —v— —.o —. �}:AyN93.4i �y,K�f, "•�� v •a v N •� v v i O—oO N v v v v N v v N v �i v v a v v vvvvvvvv 7 7 7 7 7 �r Z U U N 4) ^ a SO 64 N N N N C o O (u . S 0 o ro° (NIl U) U) a) a) (n t� — — v — — . — . s - - -- v - - - - - v v - - - N — — — — v v U e — — — — co to — QNl N Z O .C.. L O (h C U) b9 U) O ° -p O O O O co U) fN W O Of 0 p a0 N N !H W n Cl) co N O O (30) O N fU m m a CD 9 a m W m a m N U O tsa 7 75 75 7 O O O U) e m Q Q Q L L L Q L L gyp} '• N N 00 ° fA O f0 N Il C Z Z Z fU) ((0 N Z fell fUp N a N Oj O f0 « g m w m w (D ur �}:AyN93.4i �y,K�f, "•�� v •a v N •� v v N v N v v v v N v v N v �i v v a v v vvvvvvvv �: �J'.:_y i v v v v �r s a o � (u 0 0 0 o ro° wi. i�Yy -- C FA p co U) Z U) O Z .C.. O O O) CA) co O Of f0 r fA ENO' ff) C6 r �l'g Wi d O N O a L LQ O O O O O 74 ad Ot'u'9YJ.:i3? IL a f(fl n 00 ° C o O '? Al ' o ) p O Up ) fA N O (OG 2. z N p0 co e N r� ° °° r. N fA co ffi• C6 w V .5 k�. a O LO 00 O rn o o v o o o o C O o O O N ?03�,, d t x't.` 11 !H fl9 ° O m u) z N N� P,i O rn: 4 11Y 0 U7 .. 0 O -O (u Cl �_ h 7 u5 C. � 0 O co O O O TM'di6e3 % z 613� 00 C14 N to Gil OD to m } OW f7 O O U c ( o N o O U_ ) a d u9 LI) 69 p O 00 u) o z r lu ,.S;y st;,i:T v (A o0 1 J 1 1 ..,� a i > C O VO`l c `o O fU a WE a E m (u CD n N y w O O E „ p g E = C N U x O co u a ro co w aEi fu o T m c G E a IL o �J '> > •E is c N N a O N T >. A y oyC C C d N l0 J C O C C C a' a � o (30) O N fU m m a CD 9 a m W m a m N U City of Palm Beach Gardens Self- Funded Dental Options Office Visit copay - Participating Dentist $5 - Non -Part. Dentist $10 Stop Loss Included In premiums? YES Dental Decisions - Option A Plan pays: of. Employee Pays: Benefit 100% first $100 $0.00 $100.00 50% next $2,800 $1,400.00 $1,400.00 Annual Benefit Maximum (Including servicesjorOrtho) $1,500.00 Lifetime Ortho Max. $1,500.00 RATES Single 115 $20.76 Family 164 $50.18 Monthly Premium $10,616.92 Annual Premium $127,403.04 $ Increase $15,068.40 % Increase over current Dental Premium 13% Dental Decisions -Option C Plan pays of. Employee Pays: Benefit 100% first $100 $0.00 $100.00 60% next $2,333 $933.33 $1,400.00 Annual Benefit Maximum (Including services for Oilho) $1,500.00 Lifetime Ortho Max. $1,500.00 RATES Single 115 $26.81 Family 164 $64.38 Monthly Premium $13,641.47 Annual Premium $163,697.64 $ Increase $51,363.00 % Increase over current Dental Premium 46% Dental Decisions - Option E Plan pays: of Employee Pays: Benefit 100% first $200 $0.00 $200.00 70% next $1,857 $557.14 $1,300.00 Annual Benefit Maximum (Including servicesjorOrtho) $1,500.00 Lifetime Ortho Max. $1,500.00 RATES Single 115 $31.94 Family 164 $76.45 Monthly Premium $16,210.90 Annual Premium $194,530.80 $ Increase $82,196.16 Increase over current Dental Premium 73% (31) Long -Term Disability Evaluation Provident Life & Accident The Gehring Group recommends that the City of Palm Beach Gardens renew its long -term disability coverage with Fortis Benefits for the upcoming plan year. Our initial evaluation of the proposals received revealed that Provident Life & Accident and Fortis Benefits, the incumbent carrier, proposed the most competitive rates. However, upon further review, Fortis provided a quote that matched the Provident proposal and guaranteed those rates for two years. With the upcoming change in both the health and dental carriers, the additional inconvenience of having all the employees re- enroll in a new LTD plan is unnecessary. Renewing the LTD contract with Fortis at the new reduced rates will benefit the City by reducing the annual premium by 19.4% ($2,313 annually). Long -term disability proposals were also received from Florida Combined Life and MetLife; however, the rates proposed were higher than the current rates and were uncompetitive in comparison to the Fortis and Provident proposals. (33) rA IE v ti a U b CL o N N N N m W $, g o o.o.. U •r�. Vi >+ 3 e c d E o in L L L L t L L L m o m E o O E d m c c 0 0 c 0 c c 0 0 c c 0 0 c 0 t C y .w�,, pC y H w Ix O '� m EE E EE EE E �vv c.LnA S O m L Oi T �. L '� p V �_• k , w ' 1 G k aGi s°. N tD V M O M N N GO In !� .2 --a -0 N cd w a N m r E R E E � i fH i a v v p, N N C E +r. ;' ' ..+ _ ..� m N OC i p 3 •= U U O O cn Or l lb l0 M N G Z I L 7 3 c,,sm C C G CM cq t o �; O 7+ ��.' 00. t O - IL Cl) L u u ° °' FA V - M d z O a M L c to O O O C C C N d! i3: O N o o C O O > `o c m °= O ap, 3 0 N O ; i •p w O ^� eT co Cl cD o V co In co co co I- co co co O co co (O c0 W • C, a6 m N n N o co 1 0 0 .O-. l00 H w m v ccoo v ccoo v co o v O n A r a .5 co ... OE, a o LL ri co '- . P. O N m Ol C� N N 4) N N N N •Q, .Ly-. C U •O >- N m Q.. m W Z- w E O O O O co k 'Y m o >o + p a O J d a O M t t = :E N pi1"{ •g 'b" 0 '.. ° e Y°si' m L '� m . o a o E 0 E 0 E 0 E h `,Ma, w u°E r a ° a O aJ t d m 0) W •o a in m M a dN C6 [ :°' . . �z m o0i . C N r a N co ,a:G# a a �«� w E o E c C c ;� rnocOi c� � o� Ci cg e: , r;�s �^6 a LL x E - �01, _ o L - .y M V) o 0 0 � It) OD ° cli v �i r» N co N co n 9. �' 3 o 0 o CL m Io- ��,j w v v c°o v m v coo v °n n • .5 %�•g co ii . q Z x 0 m H c c c m r n a N O N N a N N N N $, g o m 4) QQ o o 0 E N n a co TM r C r C r C t C y w co O m � � T N l0 O O O O k , w ' 1 G k aGi ..L. T p !� .2 v OI a° m Y Ol N m r E R E a0 E � E � a v v p, N N C o u1 co M 1i( Cd +r. ;' ' ..+ _ ..� m N OC i p 3 /O �_` lb l0 N 7 3 m �q pip c,,sm E o E L u u ° °' FA V d z co M L O Z l6 u- C C C N d! O °O C O O LL E M .. ; i •p w E O CD O co (O c0 W O I- N n N 1 0 0 .O-. l00 H w m v ccoo v ccoo v co o v O n A r a .5 co LL ri co AN ci U a0 K .O h a b Im x .y v o CL m m c c c c m r n a s w E o IS 0 2 r c. c o = C 2 `o c E E o p4 to o d c o o d „ m E o >> W w0 z' C Q d. c a d m ° w m a °° o ° m /Ei cn O d o c d c E E v ° a a r a E o O R � > c. _ w u c A c 3 o w ro o c mi5m — q o 13 n o3a w- Mcy ac e . N O N N a rrC� V u a U Q O 0 (35) O N 0) l0 a R m 5 ° o .2 'o N d a N co Ln CO e '. +> . °. w0 C i5 m Q O^ �. N j C Z m _ 6 NM fA 0 co ~off' > O m ° m d yC3y'r'� v m Oo oAE>, m �vO a o E £ t y N w t C O M s s ° o c LL p (n CO 3 N c o N co Cl ro e a (s s 01 N ao N N N p # N v D4 (V W (O Lo Zi S; a¢ p LL 'tE6 = z bq a O o 0. Q O„ IL > C-4 b% a o d QQ (D 8m N u) a {s. _ y y L 0 @ m 'O O co 00f 'y0 O_ O (MO N N 7 (° h ^O N £ Fc2� X�x l6 lo V s b°o a00 O M N o LL m c O O C_ O e9 cli ;; C CO oil w 3 00 (L m co 4 . C0 3 N '0 o c m c E AE O .0. LL f o 0. 0) 0 m c tJ 1sc is eu A m 3 o N m O. C O ul y y y y y y y y y IA £ L L L L L t t L L L (4 a 5 m O m u m m c c c c c c c c c c Y V' a m ppp a e � (D N V O .fn y 0 o o o o o o o o o O E E E £ £ £ £ £ £ E L � N p C� � � y o° £ y T t C 7 0 �' � � O 00 N (° O R GD N N r w V R M M N N d— � -° N � C, N n ep 01 e 01 ,O o j x �E( 0 _ £ ._+ L C N M O V l6 0) N LL C O Q O— U C yf n N M N N fA b% ..' z o > O O v c N aL-. .Ly-. O £ Z C N > o O m C O LL O O M (n (i! O 01 C C m r- e £ r (COo (°o (OO (00 (U (N° (MO (� (moo ((O° (D (D ro £ o Z w' LL o Ol ., ik ar, C N M � 3 (i c ° G C m O 25211' E °-o ;`:.. ul Q a m e a . O ro 3 2 Z jy o m c= o � m o o w ° E s m m c a E E ° C d m o ° CL E p f p O A ' > w v c. H L A m o m w i m 'x o �. 'v c? �+ w d m r U c c m o o v,cjr�a� R d 5 c a o w 3 o u1�3 o a m o c a or Sato (35) O N 0) l0 a i9£) VO + W V O + O yi W O (No N to N O J N ccoo O 4n A N O O .Np. N N ,,pp C� ,p (O W ,,pp O .p A co co O co N (w0 A O N OO O ? N (o O � co A O v A t y M. EQ x...•77777 69 69 69 69 (A 69 Wf 69 69 69 g i^ »t� OD A OD A (NO N A N (Nic N (Nil ". V 0 o Cl) o cp 0 + (NO co N A (w0 A (NO A v n 69 69 69 fo 69 6) EA 69 69 69 1 3 OD OD N A OD A w N IV N A A 0 N A N A N N N V O O N O N iw rt p 69 69 E E4 69 69 69 6F) 69 69 O w w o O O O O o? ;r aw; i O A A 0 00 w N (o - N A m 0 0 cNn N� 5n o 5n v k CD + U) (NO (NO (AO (wo (No rbyr�z, � '2+ > 69 0 69 0 63 E!9 69 t>9 4!9 69 O bi fA �►' ��; rn rn 0 0) 0 rn o rn O c) o m rn o rn o 0) �sr •� V 0 O N O N O (wn w + co to " (AO (wo (NO M4 Aw. O� _ rypar ^= 69 (i9 69 69 69 69 69 69 69 69 Nt. W V m V a) V (D V 0) V m V m V 01 V N V O V "- 74titi';f TOTAL TOTAL COUNT: 374 PERCENTAGE RESPONDING ® DATATRON® 6/98 Inquiries 800 - 694 -0089 TOTAL TOTAL COUNT: 374 PERCENTAGE RESPONDING 3. Which of the following types of Recreational Programs are needed in Palm Beach Gardens? Is there an extreme need for the program, a moderate need or is it not needed at all? 3a. Adult Programs (Yoga, Art, Dance, etc.) Extreme Need 22% Not Needed 31%1 ti MM111111�1'1"1�11` law Refusal 0% 3b. Adult Sports Leagues (Softball, Basketball, Soccer, etc.) Extreme Need 31% Moderate Need 35'Y& Not Needed 16%1 ...... ... a Refusal 0% 3c. Aquatic Programs/Swimming Lessons & Teams Extreme Need 16% Moderate Need `� Not Needed 20%1 19OWN00 Refusal 0% 3d. Special Events Extreme Need 20% Moderate Need ' . 0 51 %: Not Needed 16%1 Refusal 0 % 3e. Youth Programs (Dance, Gymnastics, Karate, etc.) Extreme Need 3 3% Moderate NOW", I Needed o"; 22%1 I..__ ... .... ... 1111,ol g O 9W Refusal 2% 3f. Youth Sports Leagues Extreme Need 33% ....... - - - , --- -- -------- ---- Moderate Need M Not Needed 22%1 No Refusal 2% 3g. Senior Programs Extreme Need 24% Not Needed 10% II . .. . .... . ", . .. . .. OpekNt, . . . . ...... . .... No .............. ...... . . ........... ...... ... ..... . . . ..... . . . .......... . ............ .. ... ...... ...... . .... . .. .. 1 RPfueal I 0%1 3h. Special Need Programs Extreme Need Not Needed No .. ...... . "Plo Refusal ODATATRONOD6/98 Inquiries 800-694-0089 31% 94% 2% 0% 10% 1% 1% TOTAL TOTAL COUNT: 374 ® DATATRON® 6/98 Inquiries 800 -694 -0089 AGE: UNDER 30 Total Count: 69 PERCENTAGE RESPONDING O DATATRON® 6/98 Inquiries 800 - 694 -0089 AGE: UNDER 30 Total Count: 69 Which of the following types of Recreational Programs are -ded in Palm Beach Gardens? Is there an extreme need for the ,gram, a moderate need or is it not needed at all? 3a. Adult Programs (Yoga, Art, Dance, etc.) Extreme Need Moderate Need ., Not Needed 0 OOj Refusal 3b. Adult Sports Leagues (Softball, Basketball, Soccer, etc.) Extreme Need 22%1 3$Olvj 220. 0%1 45%1 43% 1 0%1 2;'W?,,.] 0%1 3c. Aquatic Programs/Swimming Lessons & Teams Extreme Need 12 Moderate Need w 55 °lq Not Needed 22%] .......... Refusal 0% 3d. Special Events Extreme Need 33% Not Needed 12%1 -N 0 to . .. . . .. . Refusal 0% 3e. Youth Programs (Dance, Gymnastics, Karate, etc.) Extreme Need 12% Not Needed 33%1 Refusal 0% 3f. Youth Sports Leagues Extreme Need 33% Not Needed 33%1 .......... .. ... . ....... . ...... "g g . ...... . . .. .... .. Refusal 0% 3g. Senior Programs Extreme Need 22% Not Needed 12%1 NO Opinw-l"1111, Refusal 0% 3h. Special Need Programs Extreme Need 22% wg Not Needed 0%1 Refusal 0% 3i. Any others you feel strongly should be provided? Parades 0% Creative Classes I 1%1 F1 Tackle Football for 'Kids" 0 DATATRONO 6/98 Inquiries 800-694-0089 How should future Recreational Dollars and Efforts be focused? New, Small Walk -To Neighborhood Parks . „New.Large,Gommuntty Parks �MLlbpte Else) arid: nistrtCt. Upgrade Existing Facilities Or Another Way? (go to 4a) ;Refy�al 4a. What is the other way you would recommend? Keeping up with growth Would you be willing to pay increased user fees for usage of of the needed facilities or programs listed above? `Yes Depends on Amount Would you be willing to pay increased taxes for the development i /or maintenance of any of the needed facilities or programs ad above? Yes Depends on Amount Now some questions for classification purposes. 7a. Are there children in your home under the age of 18? Yes 7b. How many are Under 5 is Efeneatarq- School . In Middle School ttt #i�fi'ScfloQt , ,' 7c. Do these children use parks or participate in Recreational Programs? Yes Respondent's Gender Male AGE: UNDER 30 Total Count: 69 PERCENTAGE RESPONDING 0 DATATRONO 6/98 Inquiries 800 -694 -0089 33% 123'% 22% 22% 12% A^ 12% 0% 45% 2206 33% 0% 33, 67 % 45% 45°!0 12% 22% 33% 0% 55% AGE: 3049 Total Count: 214 PERCENTAGE RESPONDING 1. What age group are you in? Under 18 M 18 24 AM 25-29 40-49 60-69 0% 0% 0% 32% 0% w 0% 2. Which of the following types of parks and/or recreational facilties are needed the most in Palm Beach Gardens? Is there an extreme need for the facility, a moderate need or is it not needed at all? 2a. Athletic Fields (Football, Soccer, Softball, Baseball, etc) Extreme Need 29% Not Needed 29% 1 4,9 Refusal 4% 2b. Court Sports (Basketball, Tennis, Racquetball, etc) Extreme Need 50% Not Needed 18% I Refusal 0% 2c. Indoor Recreational Centers Extreme Need 36% Not Needed 29%1 ....... . . . Refusal 'MOMMOMAM. 0%1 2d. Picnic Areas/Open Spaces Extreme Need 14% Not Needed 25%1 ikin Refusal 0% 2e. Playgrounds Extreme Need 43% Not Needed 100X '0 Refusal 0% 2f. Swimming Pools and Water Playgrounds Extreme Need 43% Moderaifs Need "M Not Needed 21% Poo off Refusal 0% 2g. Trails Extreme Need 36% & Not Needed . ..... ... Refusal 0% 2h. Wildlife Areas and Nature Centers Extreme Need 25% 'at 0 R Not Needed 25%1 -3-h6 .. . . . .. ..... MU --N-. .... ..... ... Refusal 0% 2i. Any other Recreational Facilities you feel strongly are needed? Bowling Alleys 1% WM" 'h n ME',- Learning Centers 0%1 I Teen Centers I 1%1 0 DATATRONO 6/98 Inquiries 800-694-0089 AGE: 30-49 Total Count: 214 3. Which of the following types of Recreational Programs are needed in Palm Beach Gardens? Is there an extreme need for the program, a moderate need or is it not needed at all? 3a. Adult Programs (Yoga, Art, Dance, etc.) Extreme Need 21% Not Needed l 43% Refusal 0% 3b. Adult Sports Leagues (Softball, Basketball, Soccer, etc.) Extreme Need 29% Not Needed 25% 1 Refusal 0% 3c. Aquatic Programs/Swimming Lessons & Teams Extreme Need 14% MOM 53 °l0 Not Needed 25% In, �:, _ � _ _, _ „To�i'1 Refusal 0% 3d. Special Events Extreme Need 18% I Not Needed 18% Refusal 0% 3e. Youth Programs (Dance, Gymnastics, Karate, etc.) Extreme Need 32% Need y 3 `, : , I„ .. *,r. < . ,. ,4 ii ;,32941;; Not Needed 25 %� Refusal 4% 3f. Youth Sports Leagues Extreme Need 32% Not Needed 29% Refusal 4% 3g. Senior Programs Extreme Need 21% `, , Moderate Need Not Needed 11% Refusal 0% 3h. Special Need Programs Extreme Need 32% y, 1 _:, ]W WMeri1161�R0{34 ,%'�_. „ ;'�',�„ r' .,' „ ,,, ,,:. .. ,c „� rho?,, .� �'"r �`^•`o'1'n°., v 24°%/0 Not Needed Refusal 0% 3i. Any others you feel strongly should be provided? Parades 14% Creative Classes I1 0 %1I 1, 1 Tackle Football for Kids I 0%1 O DATATRON® 6/98 Inquiries 800 -694 -0089 AGE: 30-49 Total Count: 214 PERCENTAGE RESPONDING How should future Recreational Dollars and Efforts be focused? New, Small Walk -To Neighborhood Parks ,.,, New: L,arge,Obmmuriity Parls'�AAultipie tJse) arutDistrlGt' Upgrade Existing Facilities Or Another Way? (go to 4a) 4a. What is the other way you would recommend? Keeoina uD with arowth 7c. Do these children use parks or participate in Recreational Programs? Yes Refusal Respondent's Gender Male ® DATATRON® 6/98 Inquiries 800 - 694 -0089 39% 29% 46% 32°}F 29% 7% 0% 50% 21% 39° 39% 64% asst 7% 43% 2590 18 %0 43% 46% AGE: 50 AND OVER Total Count: 84 PERCENTAGE RESPONDING 1. What age group are you in? Under 18 25-29 0 40-49 0%1 % 60-69 27°0 .. , . Refusal; fio °/ 2. Which of the following types of parks and /or recreational facilties are needed the most in Palm Beach Gardens? Is there an extreme need for the facility, a moderate need or is it not needed at all? 2a. Athletic Fields (Football, Soccer, Softball, Baseball, etc) Extreme Need 45% = Moderate Need � �7°` Not Needed w 1 80/0 Refusal 0% 2b. Court Sports (Basketball, Tennis, Racquetball, etc) Extreme Need 27% Mbderata Need „ 55 % >: Not Needed 1° I ^.NE:Opitton Refusal 0%1 2c. Indoor Recreational Centers Extreme Need 37% Not Needed o/ 0 Refusal 0% 2d. Picnic Areas /Open Spaces Extreme Need 27% Moderate Need $ k ; Not Needed t 7% ,?l Refusal 0% 2e. Playgrounds Extreme Need 45% Moderate Need s w 275°; Not Needed w . . 10 I »N Q10 Refusal 0% 2f. Swimming Pools and Water Playgrounds Extreme Need 45% Madera% Need q Not Needed I Refusal 0% 2g. Trails Extreme Need 37% '`` Moderate Neal 27%.: Not Needed 18% II Refusal 0% 2h. Wildlife Areas and Nature Centers Extreme Need 18% Moderate Need w S5% eeded Not N 0% l l E No Opinion „ , .:: ` t8'Yo Refusal 0% 2i. Any other Recreational Facilities you feel strongly are needed? Bowling Alleys 10% Skatmg;f3itks � . 5 1 °/; I Learni ng Centers ° Wa 1/o Centers I 0%1 0 DATATRON® 6/98 Inquiries 800 -694 -0089 AGE: 50 AND OVER Total Count: 84 PERCENTAGE RESPONDING Which of the following types of Recreational Programs are !ded in Palm Beach Gardens? Is there an extreme need for the gram, a moderate need or is it not needed at all? 3a. Adult Programs (Yoga, Art, Dance, etc.) Extreme Need Not Needed 27% 4$ 10% 1'8% 0 % 3b Adult Sports Leagues (Softball Basketball Soccer, etc.) Extreme Need 27% Moderate Need ~ , 45'Ya; Not Needed 10% Refusal 0% 3c. Aquatic Programs /Swimming Lessons &Teams Extreme Need 27% Not Needed 10 %I LMM�WOpinid fl .. , I -k; „ 4 , , , 19 %`1 Refusal 0% 3d. Special Events Extreme Need 18% Moiieta #e 1Veed 37% Not Needed 18% Refusal 0% 3e. Youth Programs (Dance, Gymnastics, Karate, etc.) Extreme Need 55% Moderate Need 28Q�r. Not Needed 10% k Refusal 0% 3f. Youth Sports Leagues Extreme Need 36% Moderate Neod � � � X55% Not Needed 0% Refusal 0% 3g. Senior Programs Extreme Need 37% Moderate Need 4536; Not Needed 10% Refusal 0% 3h. Special Need Programs Extreme Need 37% Not Needed o , .... , l % Refusal 0% 3i. Any others you feel strongly should be provided? Parades 10% h 7eeer Prbglam5 w' ,� ; 0% Creative Classes 00X Tackle Football for Kids 0 DATATRONO 6/98 Inquiries 800 - 694 -0089 AGE: 50 AND OVER Total Count: 84 PERCENTAGE RESPONDING 5. Would you be willing to pay increased user fees for usage of any of the needed facilities or programs listed above? 55% 10°T 45% 64% 27% 10% 10% 1% Yes Depends on Amount 37% 6. Would you be willing to pay increased taxes for the development and /or maintenance of any of the needed facilities or programs listed above? Yes 18% .,. Depends on Amount 45% 7. Now some questions for classification purposes. 7a. Are there children in your home under the age of 18? Yes 10% Refusal 0% 7b. How many are Under 5 10% En Elementary achool In Middle School u 7c. Do these children use parks or participate in Recreational Programs? Yes 10% 4 Refusal /o 0% 8. Respondent's Gender Male 55% O DATATRON0 6/98 Inquiries 800 - 694 -0089 WITH KIDS TOTAL COUNT: 176 PERCENTAGE RESPONDING 1. What age group are you in? Under 18 25-29 40-49 60-69 5% 5% $60/0 22% 0% A% 0% 2i. Any other Recreational Facilities you feel strongly are needed? Learning Centers Teen Centers ODATATRONOD6/98 Inquiries 800-694-0089 0% 1% 1,% 1% Which of the following types of Recreational Programs are -ded in Palm Beach Gardens? Is there an extreme need for the gram, a moderate need or is it not needed at all? 3a. Adult Programs (Yoga, Art, Dance, etc.) Extreme Need 3b. Adult Sports Leagues (Softball, Basketball, Soccer, etc.) Extreme Need "Wdirate, Not Needed 3e. Youth Programs (Dance, Gymnastics, Karate, etc.) Extreme Need Not Needed Creative Classes Tackle Football for Kids WITH KIDS TOTAL COUNT: 176 PERCENTAGE RESPONDING (DDATATRON06/98 Inquiries 800-694-0089 26% 35% "92%, 0% 30% 4M 13% �gm 0% 18% 0% 13% 0% 13% 01W 13% 0% 39% 90* '22: g j 5% 30 N 0, 0%1 18% 3 35% 0% '40* 0% 13% 1% A% 1% WITH KIDS TOTAL COUNT: 176 PERCENTAGE RESPONDING How should future Recreational Dollars and Efforts be focused? New Small Walk -To Neighborhood Parks 52% New: "tart}e,Commumty P.af(s {Muitipie Use) andArstnct =: �, ,,,,.�, . "s22a/c Upgrade Existing Facilities 39% ftimpiyrovetl:Mt�ifitertancd cf Eisting FBCltty g 26°l0 Expanded Programming 22% ,,;: „ Acqu�stion.of Waterfront P8t1c Land :- , , , .a ,,; Or Another Way? (go to 4a) I 13 % 4a. What is the other way you would recommend? Keeping up with growth 1 0% Would you be willing to pay increased user fees for usage of r of the needed facilities or programs listed above? Yes 39% .., 22RQ w Depends on Amount 39% Would you be willing to pay increased taxes for the development i/or maintenance of any of the needed facilities or programs Bd above? Yes 18% Depends on Amount 43 % Now some questions for classification purposes. 7a. Are there children in your home under the age of 18? Yes 99% Refusal I 0% 7b How many are Under 5 61% In Middle School I 30% 7c. Do these children use parks or participate in Recreational Programs? Yes 69% NOW x 26?Jo Refusal 5% Respondent's Gender Male 39% 0 DATATRON® 6/98 Inquiries 800 - 694 -0089 WITHOUT KIDS TOTAL COUNT: 177 PERCENTAGE RESPONDING 0 DATATRON® 6/98 Inquiries 800 - 694 -0089 WITHOUT KIDS TOTAL COUNT: 177 0 DATATRON® 6198 Inquiries 800 - 694 -0089 SORTED BY QUESTION NUMBER TOTAL Total Count: 374 WEIGHTED IMPORTANCE Extreme Need =2 pts Moderate Need =1 pts Not Needed =0 pts C DATATRONO 6/98 Inquires 800 - 694 -0089 SORTED BY QUESTION NUMBER AGE: UNDER 30 Total Count: 69 WEIGHTED IMPORTANCE Extreme Need =2 pts Moderate Need =1 pts Not Needed =0 pts © DATATRONO 6/98 Inquires 800 - 694 -0089 AGE: 30-49 Total Count: 214 WEIGHTED IMPORTANCE Extreme Need =2 pts SORTED BY QUESTION NUMBER Moderate Need =1 pts Not Needed =0 pts © DATATRONO 6/98 Inquires 800 - 694 -0089 SORTED BY QUESTION NUMBER AGE: 50 AND OVER Total Count: 84 WEIGHTED IMPORTANCE Extreme Need =2 pts Moderate Need =1 pts Not Needed =0 pts C DATATRONO 6/98 Inquires 800 - 694 -0089 WITH KIDS Total Count: 176 WEIGHTED IMPORTANCE Extreme Need =2 pts SORTED BY QUESTION NUMBER Moderate Need =1 pts Not Needed =0 pts © DATATRONO 6/98 Inquires 800 - 694 -0089 SORTED BY QUESTION NUMBER WITHOUT KIDS Total Count: 177 WEIGHTED IMPORTANCE Extreme Need =2 pts Moderate Need =1 pts Not Needed =0 pts 2a. Athletic Fields (Football, Soccer, Softball, Baseball, etc) 1.25 2c. Indoor Recreational Centers 1.30 2e. Playgrounds 1.21 2g. Trails 1.21 3a. Adult Programs (Yoga, Art, Dance, etc.) 0.82 3b AdultS�arts�eagues (Sotit?a�1,;Baskelball Soccer'e #c � °�t� � � 4 � ��' 9,Ot3 a 3c. Aquatic Programs /Swimming Lessons & Teams 0.82 3e. Youth Programs (Dance, Gymnastics, Karate, etc.) 0.99 3g. Senior Programs 0.94 © DATATRONO 6/98 Inquires 800 - 694 -0089 SORTED FROM HIGHEST TO LOWEST WITHIN QUESTION TYPE Senior TOTAL Total Count: 374 WEIGHTED IMPORTANCE Extreme Need =2 pts Moderate Need =1 pts Not Needed =0 pts © DATATRONO 6/98 Inquires 800 - 694 -0089 1.25 1 �0? 1.17 1.06 1.001 1.02 Q 9$`; 0.96 Q„92 0.86 0 84% 0.821 SORTED FROM HIGHEST TO LOWEST WITHIN QUESTION TYPE AGE: UNDER 30 Total Count: 69 WEIGHTED IMPORTANCE Extreme Need =2 pts Moderate Need =1 pts Not Needed =0 pts 3b Adult Sports Leagues (Softball Basketball Soccer, etc) 1.23 3f. Youth Sports Leagues 0.88 3 Aqu��ic PfogramstSwimrn�ng Lessbrts? Teams . , ; , ' t � � w , 0 78, 3a. Adult Programs (Yoga, Art, Dance, etc.) 0.77 ,,..,3e Youth; Programs (Dar►ce, ,Gymnastics, i<ara�e =,etc._) � , � ;. t . ,,,,, � ,,,,, `,,,,: 0 68 3h. Special Need Programs I 0.65 © DATATRONO 6/98 Inquires 800 - 694 -0089 SORTED FROM HIGHEST TO LOWEST WITHIN QUESTION TYPE AGE: 30-49 Total Count: 214 WEIGHTED IMPORTANCE Extreme Need =2 pts Moderate Need =1 pts Not Needed =0 pts C DATATRON® 6/98 Inquires 800 - 694 -0089 SORTED FROM HIGHEST TO LOWEST WITHIN QUESTION TYPE , Karate, etc.) (Softball, Basketball, Soccer, etc.) t immjng Lessons &Teams ; Art, Dance, etc.) AGE: 50 AND OVER Total Count: 84 WEIGHTED IMPORTANCE Extreme Need =2 pts Moderate Need =1 pts Not Needed =0 pts © DATATRON® 6/98 Inquires 800 - 694 -0089 1.36 1.18 1 1 Q; 1.10 S 1.001 1 36 1 26' 1.19 1..01 1.00 1:00; 1.001 WITH KIDS Total Count: 176 WEIGHTED IMPORTANCE Extreme Need =2 pts SORTED FROM HIGHEST TO LOWEST Moderate Need =1 pts WITHIN QUESTION TYPE Not Needed =0 pts 1.39 1.13 1.49 1.04 0.95 © DATATRONO 6/98 Inquires 800 - 694 -0089 SORTED FROM HIGHEST TO LOWEST WITHIN QUESTION TYPE WITHOUT KIDS Total Count: 177 WEIGHTED IMPORTANCE Extreme Need =2 pts Moderate Need =1 pts Not Needed =0 pts 2c. Indoor Recreational Centers 1.30 2b Sports (Basketball Ter►rtrs, t�ac uetbailY etc ;, '�4q�`" 29` ;Court, „ �4, „ , „ , ,,, ,. ,......,� ;,,1, 2a. Athletic Fields (Football, Soccer, Softball, Baseball, etc) 1.25 2e. Playgrounds 1.21 2f SWt(11Ctltrl itS. 0(d- 2h. Wildlife Areas and Nature Centers 1.04 2c P►cn�c Areas/O ,..:Spaces;.. 4 g. < ,� ,w ,,,,� : k , , ,,, �, � 0 74 3f. Youth Sports Leagues 1.12 08" 3e. Youth Programs (Dance, Gymnastics, Karate, etc.) 0.99 ,'.+ h �y/� �t�y �'`' ♦gyp 3g. Senior Programs 0.94 3a. Adult Programs (Yoga, Art, Dance, etc.) 0.82 © DATATRONO 6/98 Inquires 800 - 694 -0089 To: CITY OF PALM BEACH GARDENS 10500 N. MILITARY TRAIL • PALM BEACH GARDENS, FLORIDA 334144698 Greg Dunham, Assistant City Manager Front: Bob Patty, Director of Public Works Date: 08/10/98 Re: Proposal Review for the Liquid Cooled Gas Generator An Evaluation Committee was formed to evaluate the RFP applicants for the 70 HZ Liquid Cooled Gas Engine Generator. The Committee members were Dick Holliday, Special Projects Coordinator, Jim Ballengee, Assistant Director of Public Works and me. Each committee member reviewed the two (2) proposals for the 70 HZ Liquid Cooled Gas Engine Generator as indicated on the bid tabulation sheet. The proposals were evaluated with respect to the bid price, support services and specifications. I have attached the memo sent to me from Jim & Dick addressing their findings. The lowest bid for the 70 HZ Liquid Cooled Gas Engine Generator was received from R.B. Grove, Inc. for $15,961.00. The Emergency Generator Grant will pay 74% of the capital outlay or $11,811.00 and the City will be responsible for 26% or $4,150.00. (Account # 1- 245.00 has $38,126.00 encumbered for the Emergency Generators). Recommendations: At this time, the Public Works Department is requesting Council consider a motion to award the 70 HZ Liquid Cooled Gas Engine Generator to R.B. Groves, Inc. for $15,961.00. The generator meets and/or exceeds the bid specifications and support requirements. Should you have any questions regarding the recommendation, please contact me. I will make myself available for the next Council Meeting to answer any questions. cc: Bogie Herakovich, City Manager Jim Ballen -cc, Assistant Director of Public Works Dick Holliday, Special Projects Coordinator file CITY OF PALM BEACH GARDENS CITY COUNCIL Agenda Cover Memorandum Date: August 7, 1998 Subject/Agenda Item Awarding of liquid cooled gas generator Recommendation/Motion: Award the 70 HZ Liquid Cooled Gas Engine Generator to 12-.B. Groves 4:-- 41S_g61_00 Reviewed by: Originating Dept: Costs: $1 R; q F 1 .00 Council Action: City Attorney C i t y : Tol , 150 - 0 0 [ ] Approved Public Works Grant : 11 , 811 .00 Finance $ (] Approved w is a ., Current FY ACM [ J Denied Advertised: Funding Source: (] Continued to: Human Res. Date: [X] Operating Attachments: Other Paper: [ ]Not Required JX]Other Grant Memo, grant for and bid tab she Submitted by: Depaob renF&rectOr Affected parties H Notified Budget Acct.#:: 1- 245.00 ( ] None Approved by: City Manager ( j Not required BACKGROUND: n et .j Memo To: Bob Patty, Director of Public Works From: Dick Holliday, Special Projects Coordinator and Jim Ballengee, Assistant Director of Public Work Date: 08/07/98 Re: Proposal Reviews for Diesel and Liquid Cooled Gas Generators As per your request, the following is a summary of findings from Dick Holliday and Jim Ballengee. On June 26, 1998, a Request for Proposal was issued for the 110 KW 137 KVA Generator Set and Trailer and a 70 HZ Liquid Cooled Gas Engine Generator. The bid was closed on July 23, 1998 and four (4) bids were received on the 110 KW Generator and two (2) bids were received on the 70 HZ Generator as indicated on the bid tabulation sheet (attachment 1). The lowest bid for the 110 KW 137 KVA Generator Set and Trailer was from Hertz Equipment Rental Corp. for $30,744.00. The lowest bid for the 70 HZ Liquid Cooled Gas Engine Generator was received from R.B. Grove, Inc. for $15,961.00. The Emergency Generator Grant will pay for 62% and the City will be responsible for 38% (attachment #2). Both of the low bids for the generators meet and /or exceed the bid specifications and support requirements. Staff recommends that Hertz Equipment Rental Corp. be awarded the bid for the 110 KW 137 KVA Generator Set and Trailer for $30,744.00 and that R.B. Groves, Inc. be awarded the bid for the 70 HZ Liquid Cooled Gas Engine Generator for $15,961.00. cc: file BID TABULATION SIFT The following are the bids received for the 110 KW 137 KVA Generator Set & Trailer and 70 KW 60 Rz Liquid Cooled Gas Engine Generator: 110 KW 137 KVA 70 KW 60 HZ Liquid Cooled Generator Set & Trailer Gas Engine Generator US Rental $36,545.00 Hertz Equipment Rental $30,744.00 Florida Detroit Diesel $49,374.00 R.B. Grove Inc. $33,973.00 $32,677.00 $15,961.00 Exhibit D4 City of Palm Beach Gardens Emergency Generator Project Proposed Budget EXPENDITURE Cash In -Kind Total EMPA Total CA,TEGORrFS Match Services Grantee Award Project Match Cost Cost A B A +B =C D C +D =E Salary and Benefits Other Personal/Contractual Services Installation Labor $10,000 $10,000 $10,000 Administrative Expenses Expenses One -Year Maintenance Contract $ 1,400 $ 1,400 70KW Generator $ 1,400 $ 1,400 $ 2,800 110KW Generator Operating Capital Outlay 70KW Natural Gas Generator $ 6,100 $ 6,100 $23,900 110KW Diesel Generator $11,000 $11,000 $25,000 $66,000 Fixed Capital Outlay — w Total Expenditures $29,900 $29,900 $483,900 $78,800 Percentages 38% 38% 62 % 100% Narrative Explanation and Justification of Line Items: The RFP for this project will be written to include the generators, installation of the permanent generator, training and one -year maintenance. Costs are specified by expenditure category for the purposes otthe budget. ' ' ' * Any administrative costs, including salaried and benefits, will be assumed by the City . to be part of the employees' assignments and daily responsibilities and will not be defined as a project cost. 19 Cc 0 uN/- jl� I,2q 0 d CITY OF PALM GARDENS BID FORM The undersigned agrees to furnish and install one (1) Liquid cooled gas engine generator set as described in the Specifications and should be fully operational upon delivery and set -up. Delivery and Set -up: 70 KW Generator Set -up Option 1: Option 2: Option 3: TOTAL COST: $1,600.00 $9,772.00.. $2,51f .00 $1.752.00 .e $319.00 $15,961.00 Delivery must be F.O.B. Palm Beach Gardens, Florida. Addenda received: Manufacturer Proposed: Model Proposed: Warranty: Terms: Delivery: None Generac SG070 One (1) Year Net 30 Days Eight (8) to Ten (10) Weeks after Accepted Purchase Order Manufacturer's Literature and Specifications must be submitted with Bid. Company Name: R.B. Grove, Inc A Florida Corpotation By: Raul E. Arrondo, "President Address: 261 South West 6th Street Miami, FL 33130 Telephone: (305) 854 -5420 Fax: (305) 854 -0532 . Date :; July 22,119998 X12'etv Signature: egg!. Y / — _ Title: President. e s i d e n t E CITY OF PALM BEACH GARDENS CITY COUNCIL -_ Agenda Cover Memorandum Date: August 7, 1998 Subject/Agenda Item Awarding of diesel generator Recommendation/Motion: Award the 11OKW 137KVA generator set and trailor to Hertz Equipment Ramat fnr $ln.744_nn Reviewed by: Originating Dept: Costs: $ -0. 744.00 Council Action: Total City Attorney city: 7, 993 . OC ( ] Approved- Finance " Public Public Works Grant: 22,751.0 $ Current FY [ ] Approved w ACM [ ] Denied. Advertised: Human Res. Funding Source: [ ] Continued to: Attachments: Other Date: 6/26/98 [X] Operating Paper.P.B. post ]Not [ ] Not Required [)]Other t Memo, grant for and bid tab she S�u�bmitted by: Department Oit�cfor Affected parties [ }] Notified Budget Acct. #:: 1- 245.00 [ ] None Approved by: City Manager [ ] Not required BACKGROUND: I a .E CITY OF PALM BEACH GARDENS 10500 N. MILITARY TRAIL • PALM BEACH GARDENS, FLORIDA 33410 -4698 To: Greg Dunham, Assistant City Manager From: Bob Patty, Director of Public Works C<a? DIrMe: 08/10/98 Re: Proposal Review for Diesel Generator An Evaluation Committee was formed to evaluate the RFP applicants for the 110 KW 137 KVA Generator Set & Trailer Generator. The Committee members were Dick Holliday, Special Projects Coordinator, Jim Ballengee, Assistant Director of Public Works and me. Each committee member reviewed the four (4) proposals for the 110 KW 137 KVA Generator Set & Trailer as indicated on the bid tabulation sheet The proposals were evaluated with respect to the bid price, support services and specifications. I have attached the memo sent to me from Jim & Dick addressing their findings. The lowest bid for the 110 KW 137 KVA Generator Set and Trailer was reoeh ed from Hertz Equipment Rental Corp. for $30,744.00. The Emergency Generator Grant will pay 74% of the capital outlay or $22,751.00 and the City will be responsible for 26% or $7,993.00. (Account # 1- 245.00 has $38,126.00 encumbered for the Emergency Generators). Recommendations: At this time, the Public Works Department is requesting Council consider a motion to award the 110 KW 137 KVA Diesel Generator Set and Trailer to Hertz Equipment Rental for $30,744.00. The generator meets and/or exceeds the bid specifications and support requirements. Should you have any questions regarding the recommendation, please contact me. I will make myself available for the next Council Meeting to answer any questions. cc: Bobbie Herakovich, City Manager Jim Ballengee, Assistant Director of Public Works Dick Holliday, Special Projects Coordinator file Memo To: Bob Patty, Director of Public Works From: Dick Holliday, Special Projects Coordinator and Jim Ballengee, Assistant Director of Public Work Date: 08/07/98 Re: Proposal Reviews for Diesel and Liquid Cooled Gas Generators As per your request, the following is a summary of findings from Dick Holliday and Jim Ballengee. On June 26, 1998, a Request for Proposal was issued for the 110 KW 137 KVA Generator Set and Trailer and a 70 HZ Liquid Cooled Gas 'Engine Generator. The bid was closed on July 23, 1998 and four (4) bids were received on the 110 KW Generator and two (2) bids were received on the 70 HZ Generator as indicated on the bid tabulation sheet (attachment 1). The lowest bid for the 110 KW 137 KVA Generator Set and Trailer was from Hertz Equipment Rental Corp. for $30,744.00. The lowest bid for the 70 HZ Liquid Cooled Gas Engine Generator was received from R.B. Grove, Inc. for $15,961.00. The Emergency Generator Grant will pay for 62% and the City will be responsible for 38% (attachment #2). Both of the low bids for the generators meet and /or exceed the bid specifications and support requirements. Staff recommends that Hertz Equipment Rental Corp. be awarded the bid for the 110 KW 137 KVA Generator Set and Trailer for $30,744.00 and that R.B. Groves, Inc. be awarded the bid for the 70 HZ Liquid Cooled Gas Engine Generator for $15,961.00. cc: file BID TABULATION SNFFT The following are the (bids received for the 110 KW 137 KVA Generator Set & Bailer and 70 KW 60 Hz Liquid Cooled Gas Engine Generator: US Rental Hertz Equipment Rental Florida Detroit Diesel R.B. Grove Inc. 110 KW 137 KVA 70 KW 60 Az Liquid Cooled. Generator Set & Trailer Gas Engine Generator $36,545.00 $30,744.00 $49,374.00 $33,973.00 $32,677.00 $15,961.00 Exhibit D4 ��. City of Palm Beach Gardens Emergency Generator Project Proposed Budget EXPENDITURE Cash In -Kind Total IEMPA Total CATEGORIES Match Services Grantee Award Project ' Match Cost Cost A B I A +B =C D C +D =E Salary and Benefits * -- Other Personal/Contractual Services Installation Labor $10,000 $10,000 $10,000 Administrative * — Expenses Expenses One -Year Maintenance Contract $ 1,400 $ 1,400 i 70KW Generator $ 1,400 $ 1,400 $ 2,800 110KW Generator Operating Capital Outlay 70KW Natural Gas Generaor $ 6,100 $ 6,100 $23,900 110Kw Diesel Generator $11,000 $11,000 $25,000 $66,000 1 Fixed Capital Outlay -- -- -- Total Expenditures $29,900 $29,900 $48,900 $78,800 Percentages 38 °to 38% 62% 100% Narrative Explanation and Justification of Line Items: The RFP for this project will be written to include the generators, installation of the permanent generator, training and one -year maintenance. Costs are specified by expenditure category for the purposes of the budget ' * Any administrative costs, including salaried and benefits, will be assumed by the City to be part of the employees' assignments and daily responsibilities and will not be defined as a project cost. �}ec 0 uN� ► �a'i�'• o� JUL 21 '98 07:Z6AM HERTZ 9204 P.11 6 K CITY OF PALM GARDENS BID FORM The undersigned agrees to furnish and install one (1) 110 KW 137 KVA Generator Set and Trailer, in accordance witty the Specifications contained herein and ahall be fully operational upon delivery and set -up. TOTAL COST: $30,744.00 Delivery must be F.O.B. Palm Beach Gardens, Florida. Addenda received: Manufacturer Proposed: Model Proposed: warranty: Terms: Delivery: Coleman CJ6T -110SQ I'll (Please see att -r-W ) Net 10 _ g120o.00 Mamdaetur er's Literature and Specifications must be submitted with Bid. Company Name: Hertz Equipment Rental Corporation By: J. Kurk Walton Address: 3849 W. Blue Heron Blvd. Riviera Be nh, FL 33404 • Telephone: (561) 848 -4336 pax: (561) 848 -2761 Date: 7/2i Sigaate: Title: _ VP Sales Operations 10 ��i^ my �orltic�r.sriv.� � i i� /�'�� /�o /. �/,j �✓� �u /f 7'3, /�� 8 GG 4eo" /tea Is9 Pl9...•s n�/l CITY OF PALM BEACH GARDENS CITY COUNCIL Agenda Cover Memorandum Date: August 7, 1998 Subject/Agenda Item Purchase of vehicle RecommendationlMotion: Purchase vehicle from Ed Morse Fleet Sales at $18,682.32 per Broward Sheriff's ottice bid # 97- B- 01 -07 -ys - Reviewed by: Originating Dept: Costs: $18,682.32 Council Action: Total City Attorney Growth Management [ J Approved Finance $, 25 ,000.00 [ J Approved wm„�„ Current FY ACM [ ] Denied Human Res. Advertised: Funding Source: [ J Continued to: Other Date: Operating Attachments: Ye S Paper. ; ' ] Other(- =; - - - Memo, letter, Submitted by: 9.V [ )] Not Required option sheet Public Works Department Director Affected panties Budget Acct#:: Approved by: [ ] Notified 01- 1450515.6410 [ ] None City Manager [ ] Not required BACKGROUND: U CITY OF PALM BEACH GARDENS 10500 N. MILITARY TRAIL • PALM BEACH GARDENS, FLORIDA 334104698 TO: Greg Dunham, Assistant City Manager FROM: Bob Patty, Director of Public Works DATE: August 7, 1998 SUBJECT: Purchase of Vehicle In reviewing the FY 97 -98 budget, the only remaining vehicle needed to be purchased is for Growth Management. Growth Management Department has budgeted $25,000.00 (account # 01- 1450 - 515.6410) for anew vehicle. Public Works has explored several options, and believes the City's best option is to piggyback off the Broward Sheriff s Office bid # 97- B -01 -07 -YS. This bid offers a 1998 Chevrolet Lumina 4 -door, V-0 engine, automatic transmission with rear window defogger for $18,682.32 and is available now. The Lumina will fulfill the needs for administration and is below the budget amount. At this time, I am recommending Council consider a motion to piggyback off the current Broward Sheriffs Office contract, and purchase the 1998 Chevrolet Lumina. The vehicle will cost $18,682.32, and it will be purchased from Ed Morse Fleet Sales in Fort Lauderdale. We have done business with this company many times, and find them reliable and competent. Should you have any questions regarding the attached information, please call me. am available to the Council, at the next available agenda, if there are any questions regarding the proposal. cc: Bobby Herakovich, City Manager Roxanne Manning, Growth Management Director Art Chesson, Supervisor of Vehicle and Equipment Maint. file AUG-06 -98 03:17 AM P.01 6363 N.W. 61h Way • Suite 410 • Fon Lauderdale, Florida 33309 ` ua Lis (954) 492 -8545 • 1-800-ED MORSE August 5, 1998 Mark or Art Palm Beach Gardens 10500 N Military Trl Palm Bch Gardens FL 33410 Dear Mark or Art, Thank you for the opportunity to be of service to Palm Beach Gardens. Enclosed please find quote on the unit we discussed earlier. 1WL69 Per Unit Base Quote .................... .......$18682.32 Less trade ....................... Sales Tax ....... ...................0400612.1360 Tags /Title ..........................MSO Total Quote .... ......................$18682.32 If you have any questions, contact me at, 954 777 7755. Until then, may I wish you continued success. Cordially, Patti Manning Fleet Account Executive Crevroiet • Geo • Cady 'ac • ;;MC • i oyota • Mazda • Honda Buick • Pontiac • Sa:urr • Oidsmob +le • Plymouth • Chrys!er • Dodge AUC-06 -58 03:17 AM Year Make Model: Style: Effective Date: 1998 Chevy Cars Lumina 1WL69 4dr Sdn LS 04/06/98 P.02 R50? Q'I A r FACTUKY UelIVINO * * * + + + + + + + + ++ + +x + +x + + +x +xx +ttx OPTION CODES DESCRIPTION 1WL69 4dr Sdn LS FE9 FEDERAL EMISSION EQUIPMENT L82 3.1L (191) SFI V6 3100 ENGINE (STD) MX0 4 -SPEED ELECTRONICALLY - CONTROLLED AUTOMATIC TRANSMISSION W /OD (STD) 1SD PREFERRED EQUIPMENT GROUP 1 -inc: front /rear color -keyed carpeted floor mats, pwr trunk opener, remote keyless entry, driver/ passenger -side temperature controls, elect speed control w /resume speed *NET* P225/60R16 SBR BSW TOURING TIRES (STD) AM6 60/40 SPLIT BENCH SEAT (STD) C CUSTOM CLOTH SEAT TRIM (STD) SOLID PAINT (STD) C49 ELECTRIC REAR WINDOW DEFOGGER B34 FRONT COLOR -KEYED CARPETED FLOOR MATS B35 REAR COLOR -KEYED CARPETED FLOOR MATS WG1 6 -WAY PWR DRIVER SEAT K34 ELECTRONIC SPEED CONTROL W /RESUME SPEED Regional Advertising Destination Charge Total MSRP 19395.00 0.00 0.00 1 •M Invoice 17746.43 0.00 0.00 relw1ri 645.00 574.05 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 170.00 151.30 (No Charge w /1SD) (No Charge w /1SD) 305.00 271.45 (No Charge w /1SD) 205.15 550.00 550.00 21065.00 19498.38 COLOR SELECTIONS ------------------------------------------------------------------------ 30 Medium Blue Interior 16 Bright White Exterior #1 August 1998 Au 03/07/98 CAREFUL ATTENTION IS GIVEN TO ENSURE DATA ACCURACY. CHROME ASSUMES NO RESPONS- IBILITY FOR ERRORS /OMISSIONS. ALL INFORMATION SUBJECT TO CHANGE WITHOUT NOTICE Copyright 1986 -97 Chrome Data Corporation. All rights reserved. Page 1 CITY OF PALM BEACH GARDENS CITY COUNCIL Agenda Cover Memorandum Date: 8/17/98 Type.Ill Asphalt 1" overlay annual paving contract Subject/Agenda Item Ramer Construction Inc. County Contract #R97 -1524D Recommendation /Motion: Rai Reviewed by: Originating Dept: Costs: $ 17q, 010 Council Action: Total City Attorney Public Works [ ] Approved Finance $ 462,000 j l Approved wmi4a;-v Current FY ACM j ] Denied Advertised: Funding Source: [ ] Continued to: Human Res. Date: ( ] Operating Attachments: Y05 Othe r_ _ _ Paper Tax MUM01 pi "Sm, [X] Not Required [X] Other Gas Submitted by:. Rv' Public Works Department Director Affected parties [X] Notified Budget Acct #:: 16- 3000 - 539.6310 ( ] None Approved by: City Manager [ ] Not required BACKGROUND: _F CITY OF PALM BEACH GARDENS TO: FROM: DATE: RE: 10500 N. MILITARY TRAIL • PALM BEACH GARDENS, FLORIDA 33410-4698 ��ri►T[i : � r i�� i Greg Dunham, Assistant City Manager Bob Patty, Director of Public Works ? , August 14, 1998 Annual Road Resurfacing As you know, I have been trying to satisfy the needs of the City as well as address the concerns of the Council to complete this year's road resurfacing contract. Some of the Council members had concerns over micro surfacing in lieu of 1" overlay of SIII asphalt. In order to finalize this work to satisfy the State's share of the FEMA funds, Public Works is proposing that we micro surface the roads designated in my July 201' memo to you, a copy of which is attached hereto. I would suggest that we add Town Oaks Development to the list since the City is in the process of re -doing the curbs in this subdivision. This would bring the Florida Highway Products ( "FHP ") micro surface work to 59,780 square yards or $74, 127.20. I have received a quote from Ranger Construction Co. ( "Ranger ") who has the current County Contract for asphalt overlay. Ranger has agreed to honor the County price of $30.00 per ton for type III asphalt. I am attaching for your review the proposal received from Ranger. To complete all of the roads scheduled for this budget year, the City has budgeted $220,000.00. The roads that are finished with an overlay of 1" type III asphalt will increase the amount beyond the $220,000.00 budget. The total amount needed to repair this year's roads will now be $245,037.20. The additional $25,037.20 could be taken out of Gas Tax and possibly be replaced with the State share of the FEMA money which is $80,000.00. As always, I will make myself available for the next Council meeting to answer any questions or concerns on these matter. cc: Bobbie Herakovich, City Manager file attachments 79113%33 07:21 RANGER CONSTRUCTION , 561775327' Ranger Construction Industries, Inc. 101 Sansburym Way West Palm Beach, FL 33411 Quotation N0.731 P001 Phone: (561)793 -9400 Fax: (561)790 -4332 Submitted To: Address: City Of Palm Beach Gardens 3704 Bums Rd. Palm Beach Gardens, FL 33410 Dat ®: Phone: s Job Name: Estimate 0: 1126 8/12/98 1 (561)775 -8274 Fax: (561)77$ -8279 ; 1898 StrW Resurfacing Contact: Bob Patty Job Location: Prop, Owned By: Palm Beach Gardens, FL City Of Palm Beach Gardens County Contract 1. ASPHALT PAVING - Roadway, work to include: installation of Bituminous Concrete in 1 course(s), of $30,00/TN Type S1II. (The approximate tonnage required to perform the work in this item is 792.) Streets - Golfees $23,760.00 Cit -Dr., Spruce, Seagrape 2. ASPHALT PAVING - Roadway, work to include: installation of Bituminous Concrete in 1 course(s), of $30.00fm Type SM. (The approximate tonnage required to perform the work in this item is 1,328.) Streets - Hickory, 9391840.00 Larch, etc..(6 streets total) 3. ASPHALT PAVNG - Roadway, work to include: installation of Bituminous Concrete in 1 course(s), of $30.001TN Type SM. (The approximate tonnage required to perform the work in this item is 2,777,) Streets -Ash, $83,310.00 Banyan,etc...(18 streets total) 4. ASPHALT PAVING - Roadway work to include: installation of Bituminous Concrete in 1 course(s), of S30.00lTN Type SM. (The approximate tonnage required to perform the work in this item is 800.) Streets -Pine Hill $24,000.00 Trail, etc ... (6 streets total) The total price for the County Contract items is: $170,910.00 Page t of 3 03'13•'93 0- -1 ZPri1 E CONSTRUCTION . 5017-.55 -77q Ranger Construction Industries, Inc. 101 Sansbuty*s Way West Palm Beach, FL 33411 Submi(3ed To: City Of Palm Beach Gardens Address: 3704 Bums Rd. Palm Beach Gardens, FL 33410 Contact: Bob Patty Quotattan Date No. 731 P002 Phone: (561)793 -9400 Fax: (561)790 -4332 .- ---- ___ EsUrn ab M 1126 8/12/96 Phone: (561)775 -8274 Fax: (561)775 -8279 Job Name: 1998 Street Resurfacing .lob Location: Palm Beach Gardens, FL Prop. Owned By: City Of Palm Beach Gardens The total bid price is: 5170,910.00 Special Notes: 1) It is expressly agreed that there are no promises, agreements, or understandings not set out in this contract. Any subsequent cancellatores or modifications must be mutually agreed upon In writing. 2) Unless a lump sum price is to be paid for the foregoing work and is dearly so stated. it is understood and agreed that the quantities referred to herein are eadmates onty and that payment shall be made at the stated unit price for the actual quentfties of materials utilized and work performed by hanger as determined upon completion of the work. 3) Changes in labor dassifecatans or assignment of work by anyone other than Ranger WM establish a basis for regmgutration of prices set forth in this contract. At the We option of Ranger, this contract may be cancelled in the event that said changes or assignments occur or in the event that said renegotiation Is deemed unsatisfactory by Ranger. 4) In tha event that any work is done by Ranger under Ilk agreement, or any side amendment, which work is on public property, the Customer / Owner agrees and understands that the project property which If owns shag be charged with all indebtedness hereunder_ 5) Unless specifically stated in a bid item, this quotation does nvt include any coat for engineering layout, testing, as -built drawings, permits, fees or bonds. 6) Due to the voliotty in the price of petroleum products, the Oct cf asphaltic concrete herein is qualified as follows: if at the time of performance of the work, the cost of liquid asphalt exceeds that used in this quotation by 10 %, Ranger, at its sole option, may request payment for the differential in excess of the 10%, plus a reasonable overhead and profit. Ranger will provide documentation With such request for compensation. 7) Unless otherwise stated, guarantee period for an work performed under this proposal is one (1) year. Guarantee does not extend to the emergence of grass or other plant materials through the asphalt layer. It does not cover damage to the asphalt layer caused by pre - existing conditions or sub-surface failures. 0) Unless otherwise agreed, Customer will bear any additional expense not covered by this quotation and Inwred by Ranger as a result of performance of work under conditions adverse to the expedient prosecution of Rangers work w%ch are beyond Rangers control, Including adverse weather and delays by others. 9) If. for causes beyond Rangers control, the work covered by this proposal is not completed whin twelve (12) months after the date of acceptance of this proposal, Ranger may cancel this agreement at any time thereafter on ten (10) days wntten notice. 10) In the event of a misunderstanding or conflict between the terms and conditions stated In the plans and specifications, this contract shall govern. 11) Ranger shag be provided with suitable access to the work area. If Rangers work is dependent upon, or roust be undertaken in conjunction with the work of others, such work shag be performed and completed so as to permit Ranger ftA access to its work hereunder in an unirtterupted single shift operation. Any deviation from said access shall be cause for claim for additional compensation. Page 2 of 3 Ranger Construction Industries, Inc. 101 Sansbury s Way West Palm Beach, FL 33411 Quotation Phone: (561)793 -9400 Fax: (561)7904332 1' Subn> ; ted To: City Of Palm Beach Gardens Date: 8/12/98 Address: 3704 3704 Bums Rd. Phone: (561)775 -8274 Fax: (561)775$279 Palm Beach Gardens, FL 33410 Job Name: 1998 Street Resurfacing i Job Location: Palm Beach Gardens, FL . LContact: Bob Patty prop, Owned By: City Of Palm Beach: Gardens 12) Unless a specific Ome for performance of Rangers work is stated. Ranger shall undertake this work In rite course if its normal operafng schedule_ Ranger shad not be dable for any failure to undertake or complete work due to causes beyond its control, including. but not limited to misinformation supplied by the Customer or its agents, failure of aubgrade, and failure or inadequacy of any labor or materials not fumished and in W8ed by Ranger. Customer further agrees to pay any legal fees incurred by Ranger in defending against such liability. 13) Unless otherwise stated herein, payment terms are net cash upcn receipt of Rangers invoice. Al monies not paid when due shall bear interest at the maximum raft allowed by law at the project. 14) If an agent andfor attorney Is employed by Ranger for coliecton of any delinquent payment, Customer agrees to pay in addition to any service charge, ad fees for the services of such agent and/or attorney (including, but not limited to all fees and costs incident to arty appeals) together with all costs, charges and expenses, regardless of whether or not suit be brought. 1 S) This quotation and agreement shalt be governed by the laws of the State of Florida without regard to principles of conflicts of laws. Venue of all proceedings shall be in Palm Beach County, FL and Customer waives whatever rights it may have in the selectcn of venue and herby consents to )urlsdiction. 16)Renger Construction is not responsible for any tire tracking on existing roads, concrete, or paver bricks. 17)Ranger Consbvction wig edge grass back 3 inches and leave a windrow to be removed by City of Palm Beach Gardens maintenance crews. MOBILIZATIONS: Price based on a 1 mobrTizadon(s). SALES TAX: Prices indude the applicable Florida sates tax on materials and other related taxable items to be used on this project ACCEPTED: — - -__ The above prxw apedslagwo ana ernNpSmn are wboaeb q and an herby aceoaad. i Buyer Signature Date of Acceptance Page 3 of 3 CONFIRMED: Ranger cons n In usWas, n Authorised Signature - Title Chad Slade Estimator 08/11/1998 08:45 4077751014 PSG PLANNING ZONING CITY OF PALM BEACH GARDENS CITY COUNCIL Agenda Cover Memorandum PAGE 02 Meeting Date: August 20.1998 Subject/Agenda Item: Resolution 82, 1998 Public Hearing: Conditional Use Approval - Truancy Interdiction Program Recommendation/Motion: Staff recommends annroval of the conditional use. RevMMed by: ` $� 1\ City AtbmayG Origina" OepL: Planning Division Cods:: Totsl Council Action: [ I Approved $ 0 [ l Approved -i mm- other NIA ' Current FY ( � Denied Advertised: Funding 8oures: (] Continued to: Attachments: Date: August Sth I ? opereling Paper: The Palm Bch Post (] Not Required (] other NIA Neighborhood Survey Resolution 82, 1998 SutrrnliW by: O Director Affected parties ( I Notified Budget AcatA,. I l None Approved by: city MWNK r ( x ] Not required BACKGROUND: The Police Department's T.I.P.'s program is a school - misted use which is allowed within residential zoning districts with conditional use approval. A conditional use requires a public hearing before the City Council. A conditional use must be determined to be harmonious with the character of the surrounding neighborhood, and may have conditions of approval. Staff has prepared Resolution 82, 1998 for City Council consideration. The Police Department has conducted a survey of residents adjacent to the subject unit. The results of the neighborhood survey are attached. July 30, 1998 August 10, 1998 RESOLUTION 82, 1998 August 11, 1998 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM BEACH GARDENS, FLORIDA, APPROVING A CONDITIONAL USE FOR THE USE OF A RESIDENTIAL APARTMENT LOCATED AT 4279 LILAC STREET AS A TRUANCY INTERDICTION PROGRAM OFFICE; PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, the City of Palm Beach Gardens desires to assist the School Board address truancy problems; WHEREAS, the Palm Beach Gardens Police Department has acquired a federal grant to fund a Truancy Interdiction Program ( "TIPs "); WHEREAS, the TIPs office will be located in a residential zoning district; WHEREAS, the operation of a TIPs office in a residential district is consistent with the City's Comprehensive Land Use Plan; WHEREAS, the Land Development Regulations require conditional use approval for school - related uses within residential zoning districts; WHEREAS, the Growth Management Department staff has determined that said TIPs use is consistent with a school - related conditional use. 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 conditional use for the use of a residential apartment located at 4279 Lilac Street as a Truancy Interdiction Program office. SECTION 2. Said use shall comply with the following condition: (1) The conditional use approval shall be effective for no more than 24 months from its effective date. SECTION 3. The Mayor is hereby authorized to enter into a lease agreement for 4279 Lilac Street. SECTION 4. This Resolution shall be effective upon adoption. INTRODUCED, PASSED AND ADOPTED THIS DAY OF AUGUST, 1998. ATTEST: LINDA V. KOSIER VOTE: MAYOR RUSSO VICE MAYOR FURTADO COUNCILMAN JABLIN COUNCILMAN CLARK COUNCILMAN SABATELLO Resolution 82, 1998 Page 2 MAYOR JOSEPH R. RUSSO APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM AND SUFFICIENCY. CITY ATTORNEY AYE NAY ABSENT DATE: JULY 15, 1998 TO: ASSISTANT CHIEF O'ROURKE FROM: CECIL C. WAGNER :CA,) SUBJECT: T.I.P. CENTER AND FIELD OFFICE THV SURVEY IS COMPLETED FOR PALM BEACH GARDENS NEW T.I.P. CENTER. AS YOU CAN SEE EVERY HOME OWNER OR RENTAL PERSON IS EXCITED OVER THE CONCEPT OF OPENING A T.I.P. CENTER FOR OUR YOUTH, AND MAKING THE 'SITE A FIELD Okm tCL FOR OFFICERS TWENTY FOUR HOURS A DAY. I FEEL TmS NEW SITE WT-i- NOT ONLY REDUCE TRV CRIMNAL ACTIVITY IN TSE ARV Ag BUT CONTINUE TO STAY ON TRACK WITH OUR C.O.P. GOALS IN THE CObBlUNITY. AS SOON AS POSSIBLE I THINK IT WOULD BENEFIT THE T.LP. PROGRAM TO OBTAIN PHONE NUMBERS (AT LEAST TRREE LINES) AND THV NEW ADDRESS. THE NEED FOR THESE ITEMS , IS TO PROVIDE OTFW.R AGENCIES AND OUR SCHOOLS WITH THIS INFORMATION PRIOR TO THE NEW SCHOOL YEAR. NAIME ADDRESS !HONE YES NO GISELE FOSTER 4330 LILAC ST. 775-8232 X VACANT 4231 LILAC ST. 624 -4097 X BARBRA EASTWOOD 4241 #A LILAC ST. 6254076 X DAVE & ARIEL MARINO 4241 #B LILAC ST. 625 -3582 X ANNAMAE STONEBRINK 4253 #N LILAC ST. 626 -3992 X SHAWN ALLEN 4253 #S MAC ST. 691 -9613 X JULO SUCCESS 4269 LILAC ST. 694-8224 X DEBRA NICHOLSJMOVING 4269 LILAC ST. 625 -0217 X VACANT 4279 LILAC ST. 694 -9634 X - - CINDY HARVEY 4281 LILAC Sr. 624 -4097 X BARBRA EASTWOOD 4289 LILAC Sr. 6254076 X MICHAEL ROBDMON 4293 LILAC ST. 776-5976 X KATHY TAYLOR 4299 i -n-AC ST. 622 -1122 X DEBRA NICHOLSJMOVING 4303 LILAC ST. 625 -0217 X ALMS RUSSO 4311 LILAC ST. - 694 -9634 X - - TERRY HUL17-VK 4315 LILAC ST. 775 -0614 X BERTHA WH I JAMS 4323 LT LAC ST. 624 -5214 X WALDIR DEFREITAS 4327 LILAC ST. 627 -3270 X VACANT 4335 LILAC ST. GREG FENER j 4339 LII.AC ST. 625 -5983 X The Palm Beach Gardens Police Department is looking into establishing a field office in one of the duplexes along Lilac Street. This office will be used for the Truancy Interdiction Program (TIPS) and will also be available for use by patrol officers. The benefit to the residents in this area will be immeasurable in that there will be a constant monitoring of truancy activity throughout the day and there will be a police presence at various times of the day and night. Please sign this petition acknowledging your support for the establishment of a field office. Name Address Phone Number C3.iu (yct _915 }. �6 ,)ean46# s yo LL /0 a I �v i Q y4 4-ivG Mi LIle gpm c 4 A13,3o ��30 ,�✓L� e S� � �_ �,�- Y330 - iq 27- �r�� 6 -G � � ,� ��7- 369S' a:lsupport 3ervice8Vi1W -wpd Juy 17, 1998 CITY OF PALM BEACH GARDENS CITY COUNCIL Agenda Cover Memorandum Date: August 6, 1998 Subiect/Aaenda Item: Date Prenared: July_ 13.1998 Public Hearing: Petition SP- 98 -03: RCA Lot 1, Hampton Inn George F. White, agent for Palm Beach Gardens Hospitality, Inc., is requesting site plan approval for a 117 unit Hampton Inn Hotel on Lot 1 of the Plat of RCA Boulevard Center. The four -story hotel will be approximately 73,480 square feet in size. The site area is approximately 2.75 acres in area. RCA Center Lot 1 is located at the northeast corner of State Access Road (RCA Blvd.) /Northcorp Parkway and RCA Blvd. (1-42S-43E,6-42S- 43E) Recommendation /Motion: Staff recommends that Resolution 63. 1998 be aooroved with eight (8) conditions. Reviewed by: Originating Dept.: Costs: $_0 Council Action: (A City Attorney j�CO Growth Management Total [ ] Approved Finance N/A % $ 0 [ ] Approved wcwwfiom Current FY ACM [ ] Denied Human Res. N/A Funding Source: [ ] Continued to: Advertised: Other N/A Date: [ ] Operating Attachments: Paper: [ ] Other N/A Resolution, 1998 [ x ] Not Required site plan landscape plan Submitted by: Principal Planner Affected parties Budget Acct. #: Comments: city engineer fire department seacoast utilities [ ] Notified police department [ ] None Approved by: City Manager [ x ] Not required BACKGROUND: Location, Zoning and Land Use The proposed 73,480 square foot hotel is to be built on a portion of the previously platted Lot 1 of the RCA Center Plat within the Northcorp PCD. The Northcorp PCD was approved by Ordinance 1, 1990. The plat for RCA Boulevard Center was approved by Resolution 8, 1991. In additional amendment to the Northcorp PCD which affects this site includes Resolution 65, 1992, which provides for a streetscaping program along RCA Boulevard. Agenda Cover Memorandum August 6, 1998 Petition SP -98 -03 Page 2 EXISTING ZONING AND LAND USE DESIGNATIONS AND SITE ANALYSIS: PETITION SP -9843 Subject Property : PCD - Planned Community District I - Industrial North : M 1 - Research and Light Industrial MXD - Mixed Use South : PCD- Planned Community District I - Industrial East : PCD - Planned Community District I - Industrial West • PCD - Planned Community District I - Industrial ftinj9 PCD Northcorp PCD Required/Allowed Provided Compliance Land Use: I Requirements Floor .-I rea Ratio Maximum FAR not to PCD FAR at yes exceed 38% at buildout 20.1% of entire PCD including proposed project Front Yard Setbacks 1 + 1 25 l for 3 every o eve 1 q 92 4 y es additional f eet o f building height above O 25 1 3 1.6 feet Height Restrictions S 8 stories 4 stories Y es .. bnrmum Open Space 28 / 34.4 / yes >` Lot Coverage L 0 0 40 /o maximum - 2.5 /o for 0 15.3 /o Y es eve ry floor above 2 floors oors _ o — 35 /o maximum Hotel Use One allowed in PCD a 17 r 1 guest rooms b'u Y es maximum of 120 guest rooms Building and Materials The petitioner has indicated that the building will be stucco on Concrete Masonry Unit construction and that the main building color will "Rich Cream" #6637 with "Buckwheat" #6860 -2 accents. The rear canopy will be a Patio 500 Dark Green # 510. The petitioner is proposing a dark blue glazed ceramic barrel tile above the porte- cochere. SiQnacre Wall signs and monument signs meet the requirements of the sign code. Building Official Jack Hanson has signed off. Agenda Cover Memorandum August 6, 1998 Petition SP -98 -03 Page 3 Parking The petitioner has met the minimum requirement of 122 spaces. The petitioner is requesting a deviation from the number of loading zones requirement. The petitioner is proposing one (1) space while the code requires three (3). Staff is supporting the reduction of loading spaces to below code standards due to the fact that the hotel will not include a full service restaurant, lounge or convention room facilities. The petitioner has indicated to staff that loading vehicles will consist primarily of box type trucks which will make a maximum of one delivery a week for mostly laundry and toiletry item. Landscaping The petitioner is proposing 4,860 points of landscaping. The minimum requirement for this site is 3,630 points. The Site Plan and Appearance Review Committee requested additional landscaping and berming to screen the parking area. The petitioner has revised the landscape plan accordingly. Traffic Traffic concurrency has been met through the Northcorp Planned Community District approval. Drainage City Engineer Tammy Jacobs has placed a condition on approval based on the petitioner demonstrating that the surface water management plan shall be designed in accordance with Northcorp Drainage Deficit Solution and Northcorp Undeveloped Lot Development Standards. Staff Comments Planning and Zoning The petitioner has indicated that a remaining eastern portion (44.7 feet wide) of Lot 1 will not be purchased for this development. Instead it will be utilized for a 60 foot right -of -way running north from RCA Boulevard to provide access to the MacArthur Foundation properties to the north. The petitioner has provided a 15 foot landscape buffer along the eastern property boundary in anticipation of the proposed right -of -way, consistent with the comprehensive plan. In addition, staff is requesting that the future right -of -way along the eastern boundary of Parcel 1 also include the streetscaping program as approved by Agenda Cover Memorandum Petition SP -98 -03 Page 4 August 6, 1998 Resolution 65, 1992. This action would maintain consistency with the rest of the roadways within the Northcorp PCD. Resolution 65, 1992 approved a streetscaping program for Northcorp, including the portion of RCA Boulevard within the Northcorp PCD. The approved program includes design criteria for landscaping, sidewalks and lighting. Staff is requesting that this program be fully implemented along RCA Boulevard which would include filling the drainage swale along the north side of RCA Boulevard, installing a sidewalks within the RCA Boulevard/State Access Road boundary, and replacing the existing overhead utility poles and lighting with the lighting program approved as part of Resolution 65, 1992. City Engineer The petitioner has provided the 100 foot stacking distances requested by the City Engineer. In order to provide for both the required stacking distance and the required parking on -site, the petitioner was forced to eliminate two of the three loading zones required by the City's LDRs. The petitioner has requested a waiver from the code requirement to allow for just one loading space. Staff supports this waiver request. Assistant City Engineer Tammy Jacobs has reviewed the revised site plan and has noted that the following conditions of approval are needed to address outstanding issues: (1) The 8.5 "X11" FDOT standard guardrail detail submitted by the petitioner shall be added to the construction detail sheet prior to Construction Plan approval. (2) As a condition of construction plan approval, the applicant will need to provide a letter of authorization from the Seacoast Utilities Authority allowing landscaping and pavement within the existing 12 foot and 22 foot utility easements. (3) As a condition of construction plan approval, the surface water management plan shall be designed in accordance with Northcorp Drainage Deficit Solution and Northcorp Undeveloped Lot Development Standards. (4) Prior to construction plan approval, the applicant shall provide storm water quantity and quality calculations. The applicant will also need to show that storm water runoff from the buildings roof is pre- treated prior to being discharged off -site. Seacoast Utilities Will comment on detailed water and sewer plans as part of the construction plan review. Agenda Cover Memorandum August 6, 1998 Petition SP -98 -03 Page 5 Fire Department No adverse comments. Police Department See attached. Please note Police Department's general concern regarding hotels and security against robbery and theft. Northern PBC Improvement District No comments. At its June 9, 1998 meeting, the Site Plan and Appearance Review Committee unanimously recommended approval of this petition with the following six (6) conditions: (1) The petitioner shall install sidewalks and lighting, consistent with the Northcorp streetscaping program, within the RCA Boulevard and State Road Department Access Road right -of -way. (Public Works, Growth Management) (2) If at any time in the future, a public road is constructed between Lot 1 and Lot 2 of RCA Boulevard Center, the section of this roadway within the Northcorp PCD shall comply with the Northcorp streetscaping program, as approved by Resolution 65, 1992. The maintenance of this section shall be in accordance with the current streetscaping maintenance program within the Northcorp PCD. (Public Works, Growth Management) (3) The 8.5 "X11" FDOT standard guardrail detail submitted by the petitioner shall be added to the construction detail sheet prior to Construction Plan approval. (Engineering) (4) As a condition of construction plan approval, the applicant will need to provide a letter of authorization from the Seacoast Utilities Authority allowing landscaping and pavement within the existing 12 foot and 22 foot utility easements. (Growth Management) (5) As a condition of construction plan approval, the surface water management plan shall be designed in accordance with Northcorp Drainage Deficit Solution and Northcorp Undeveloped Lot Development Standards. (Engineering) Agenda Cover Memorandum Petition SP -98 -03 Page 6 August 6, 1998 (6) Prior to construction plan approval, the applicant shall provide storm water quantity and quality calculations. The applicant will also need to show that storm water runoff from the buildings roof is pre- treated prior to being discharged off -site. (Engineering) At its July 2, 1998 meeting, the City Council reviewed this petition and has the following concerns (1) There should be no discoteques, lounges, restaurants or convention meeting rooms located on site. (2) The architectural detailing provided for the front (south) elevation should be extended to all building elevations. (3) All construction traffic to this site should utilize the Alternate A1A/RCA Boulevard intersection. (4) The petitioner should provide a line -of -sight study from the proposed PGA Boulevard flyover to the proposed hotel location. (5) How many trips remain available within the Northcorp PCD, per the PCD concurrency approval? (6) The petitioner should cluster additional palms along the building elevations. Staff has provided a trips analysis which indicated the number of available trips left within the Northcorp PCD. (see attached) In sum, 1,892 trips of the 6,063 total trips allocated for the Northcorp PCD remain available for use. The petitioner has revised the landscape plan to indicate the additional palm trees. The petitioner will also provide the requested line -of -sight analysis. The petitioner has revised the architectural elevations to indicate additional detailing on all four elevations. Staff recommends the following additional conditions of approval to address Council's concerns: (7) There shall be no discoteques, lounges, restaurants or convention meeting rooms located on site. (8) All construction traffic to this site should utilize the Alternate A1A/RCA Boulevard intersection. SP -9 8-03: RCA CENTER LOT 1, HAMPTON INN NORTHCORP PCD TRAFFIC TRIPS, ALLOCATED WS. IN USE Northcorp Parcel 3.34 Parcel Trips Trips Excess trips used South Park Center Lot 9 3.01 Acreage Allocated 10 use West Park Center 1.34 7.7 502 1,241 i 739 RCA Center Lot 1 4.68 3 196 1,009 813 Hampton Inn RCA Center Lot 2 3.17 207 0 0 South Park Center Lot 1 1.81 3.02 197 0 0 South Park Center Lot 2 3.01 196 238 42 South Park Center Lot 3 3 3.08 201 410 209 South Park Center Lot 4 3.01 196 0 0 South Park Center Lot 5 3 196 0 0 South Park Center Lot 6 3.01 196 176 -20 South Park Center Lot 7 3.25 212 176 -36 TOTAL TRIPS 3,418 3,418 South Park Center Lot 8 3.34 218 0 0 South Park Center Lot 9 3.01 19 6 0 0 South Pazk e C nter Lot 10 1.34 87 0 0 South S Park Center Lot 11 4.68 3 OS 709 404 South Park Center Lot 12 1.81 118 0 0 -" South Park Center n Lot 13 3 196 1214 18 TOTAL TRIPS ALLOCATED 6,063 (per ordinance 1,1990)= TOTAL TRIPS IN USE 4,171 4,171 TOTAL TRIPS 3,418 3,418 ALLOCATED (minimum development standards)' EXCESS TRIPS ALLOCATED 4: 2,645 EXCESS TRIPS IN USE 2,169 2,169 EXCESS TRIPS 476 REMAINING Average number excess trips remaining per undeveloped lot: 68 1. South Park Center Lot 10 no longer meets the minimum lot size requirements of the PCD. Will most likely be joined to lot 9. 2. Based on Condition 22(I)(1) of Ordinance 1. 1990, approving the Northcorp PCD, 6,063 trips. Includes both 'minumum development standards' trips (3,418) and "excess' trips (2,645). 3. 'Total trips allocated: minimum development standards' is based on a calculation of 65.2 trips per acre. 4. 'Excess trips allocated" are to "be available to apply to development on any lot(s) within the plat of South Park Center, West Park Center, and RCA Boulevard Center. (Resolution 1, 1990, Condition 2(c)) RESOLUTION 63, 1998 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM BEACH GARDENS, FLORIDA, PROVIDING FOR APPROVAL OF A SITE PLAN FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A HOTEL BUILDING ON 2.755 ACRES ON LOT 1 OF RCA CENTER WITHIN THE NORTHCORP PLANNED COMMUNITY DISTRICT; PROVIDING FOR CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Palm Beach Gardens has received an application from Palm Beach Gardens Hospitality, Inc., to approve a site plan for the construction of a 73,483.68 square -foot hotel building on 2.755 acres on lot I of RCA Center within the Northcorp Planned Community District; and WHEREAS, the City's Growth Management Department has determined that approval of said application is consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan and City Code provisions. 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 hereby approves a site plan for the construction of a 73,483.68 square -foot hotel building on 2.755 acres on lot 1 of RCA Center generally located 1/4 mile south of the intersection of RCA Boulevard and PGA Boulevard, within the Northcorp Planned Community District; Section 2. Construction of said development shall be in accordance with following plans on file with the City's Growth Management Department: 1. July 17, 1998 Site Plan, George F. White and Associates, Sheet A -2 2. July 13, 1998 Landscape Plan and Detail Sheet, A. Grant Thornbrough and Associates, Sheets L -1, L -2 3. May 28, 1998 Landscape Plan, A. Grant Thornbrough and Associates, Sheet L -3 4. July 17, 1998 Architectural Elevations, George F. White and Associates, Sheet A-9 and A -10 5. May 5, 1998 Typical Floor Plan, George F. White and Associates, Sheet A-4 6. April 9, 1998 Roof Plan, George F. White and Associates, Sheet A -6 7. May 28, 1998 Photometric Plan, George F. White and Associates, Sheet ES -1 and ES -2. 8. April 9, 1998 Conceptual Drainage Plan, Keshavarz and Associates, Sheet C -1. Section 3. Said site plan approval shall comply with the applicable conditions of Ordinance 1, 1990 and the following conditions: (1) The applicant shall install sidewalks and lighting, consistent with the Northcorp streetscaping program, within the RCA Boulevard and State Road Department Access Road right -of -way. (2) If at any time in the future, a public road is constructed between Lot 1 and Lot 2 of RCA Boulevard Center, the section of this roadway within the Northcorp PCD shall comply with the Northcorp streetscaping program, as approved by Resolution 65, 1992. The maintenance of the portion of this roadway located within Lot 1 of RCA Boulevard Center shall be in accordance with the current streetscaping maintenance program within the Northcorp PCD and shall be performed by the applicant, its successors, agents and assigns. (3) The 8.5 "X 11 " FDOT standard guardrail detail submitted by the applicant shall be added to the construction detail sheet prior to Construction Plan approval. (4) As a condition of construction plan approval, the applicant shall provide a letter of authorization from the Seacoast Utilities Authority allowing landscaping and pavement within the existing 12 foot and 22 foot utility easements. (5) As a condition of construction plan approval, the surface water management plan shall be designed in accordance with Northcorp Drainage Deficit Solution and Northcorp Undeveloped Lot Development Standards. (6) Prior to construction plan approval, the applicant shall provide storm water quantity and quality calculations. The applicant shall also show that storm water runoff from the building roof is pre- treated prior to being discharged off -site. (7) There shall be no discoteques, lounges, restaurants or convention meeting rooms located on site. (8) All construction traffic to this site shall utilize the Alternate AlA/RCA Boulevard intersection. Section 4. This Resolution shall be effective upon adoption. INTRODUCED, PASSED AND ADOPTED THIS DAY OF AUGUST, 1998. JOSEPH RUSSO, MAYOR ATTEST: LINDA V. KOSIER BY: VOTE: MAYOR RUSSO VICE MAYOR FURTADO COUNCILMAN SABATELLO COUNCILMAN JABLIN COUNCILMAN CLARK APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM AND SUFFICIENCY. CITY ATTORNEY AYE NAY ABSENT CITY OF PALM BEACH GARDENS CITY COUNCIL Agenda Cover Memorandum Date: August 20, 1998 Date Prepared: August 7, 1998 Subject/Agenda Item Consideration of Approval for a Relocation Agreement between the Village Square Professional Park Property Owner's Association and the City of Palm Beach Gardens. The Relocation Agreement requires the Village Square Professional Park POA to pay for the relocation of a proposed wall should the City or Palm Beach County decide to alter the existing drainage ditch. (8- 42S -43E) Recommendation /Motion: Staff recommends that Resolution 72, 1998 be approved. Reviewed by: Originating Dept.: Costs: $ Council Action: City Attorney Growth Management Total [ ] Finance NA $ [ ] Approved W oondifions ACM Current FY [ ]Denied Human Res. NA Other NA Funding Source: [ ] Continued to: Advertised: Date: [ ] Operating Attachments: Paper: [ ] Other Resolution 72 ,1998 [ ] Not Required Exhibit A Submitted by: Principal Planner Affected parties [ ] Notified Budget Acct. #:: ( ] None Approved by: f'; +,, nn—. r t KI—+ 1 -7 llri d BACKGROUND: The Village Square Professional Park Planned Unit Development (f.k.a. as the Damerau Office Park PUD) was approved by City Council on June 20, 1996 through the adoption of Resolution 28, 1996. A time extension for the PUD was approved by City Council on February 19, 1998 by the adoption of Resolution 14, 1998. The PUD granted the development of 33,000 square feet of medical and professional office space. A condition of the PUD called for a bank stabilization plan. Resolution 28, 1996, Section 4, No. 7 "... the construction drawings shall show how the top of the bank will be permanently secured and not subject to erosion or other physical modifications." The plat for the Village Square Professional Park was approved by City Council on May 21, 1998 by the adoption of Resolution 44, 1998. The subject parcel is located on the southwest corner of Prosperity Farms Road and RCA Boulevard. The Village Square Professional Park Property Owner's Association, as part of the ditch stabilization plan, proposes to construct a wall along the northern and eastern portions of the Property. The City is requiring the Association to agree and covenant to relocate the proposed wall to the southern boundary of the drainage easement should the City or Palm Beach County decide to alter the existing drainage ditch. The wall proposed for the northern portion of the Property will lie within the fifteen foot wide drainage easement depicted on the plat. The existing drainage ditch currently lies within the drainage easement, which runs adjacent to R.C.A. Boulevard. The Relocation Agreement binds the Village Square Professional Park POA to pay for the relocation of the wall to the southern boundary of the drainage easement. The resolution submitted to the Council requires Council approval before the Relocation Agreement can be executed. At its July 16, 1998 meeting, City Council requested that staff determine when RCA Boulevard, which is the northern boundary of the subject site, would be widened. According to the Metropolitan Planning Organization's 2015 Thoroughfare Plan, RCA Boulevard is planned to be widened between the years 2006 and 2011. The relocation of the wall would only be necessary if RCA Boulevard is widened and the existing drainage canal is altered. The Growth Management Department recommends approval of this petition for the adoption of the Relocation Agreement. July 9, 1998 RESOLUTION 72,1998 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM BEACH GARDENS, FLORIDA, PROVIDING FOR APPROVAL OF A RELOCATION AGREEMENT BETWEEN VILLAGE SQUARE PROFESSIONAL PARK PROPERTY OWNERS' ASSOCIATION, INC. AND THE CITY OF PALM BEACH GARDENS TO DESIGNATE RESPONSIBILITY TO THE ASSOCIATION FOR RELOCATION OF A PROPOSED WALL SHOULD THE CITY OR PALM BEACH COUNTY DECIDE TO ALTER A DRAINAGE DITCH; PROVIDING FOR AUTHORIZATION TO THE MAYOR TO SIGN SUCH AGREEMENT; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Palm Beach Gardens approved the Village Square Professional Park Planned Unit Development (f.k.a. Damereau Office Park PUD) through the adoption of Resolution 28, 1996, which stipulates as a condition under Section 4, No. 7 the requirement of a bank stabilization plan; WHEREAS, the Village Square Professional Park, Inc. has caused to be surveyed and platted certain real property described in Exhibit A attached hereto ( "the Property"); WHEREAS, the Village Square Professional Park, Inc., as a part of the ditch stabilization plan for the development of the Property, proposes to construct a wall along the northern and eastern portions of the Property; WHEREAS, the City has required, as a condition of approval for the subject plat, that the Association agree and covenant to relocate said wall to the southern boundary of the drainage easement, in the event the City or Palm Beach County elects to relocate or expand the existing drainage ditch in the future; WHEREAS, a proposed Relocation Agreement has been drafted to fulfill said requirement of Resolution 28, 1996; and WHEREAS, the City has received said proposed Relocation Agreement made by and between Village Square Professional Park Property Owners' Association, Inc., a Florida not -for- profit corporation located at 4362 Northlake Boulevard, Suite 114, Palm Beach Gardens, Florida and the City of Palm Beach Gardens; 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 Relocation Agreement between the Village Square Professional Park, Inc. and the City to relocate the subject wall to the southern boundary of said drainage easement, at its sole cost and expense as set forth in the copy of the Relocation Agreement which is attached to this Resolution. Section 2. The Mayor is hereby authorized to execute the Relocation Agreement on behalf of the City. Section 3, This Resolution shall be effective upon adoption. INTRODUCED, PASSED AND ADOPTED ON THIS OF JULY 1998 ATTEST: LINDA V. KOSIER BY: VOTE: MAYOR RUSSO VICE MAYOR FURTADO COUNCILMAN SABATELLO COUNCILMAN JABLIN COUNCILMAN CLARK JOSEPH RUSSO, MAYOR APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM AND SUFFICIENCY. CITY ATTORNEY AYE NAY ABSENT EXHIBIT "A" LEGAL DESCRIPTION A parcel of land being a portion of the Northwest quarter of Section 8, Township 42 South, Range 43 East, Palen Beach County, Florida, said parcel being more specifically described as follows: BEGIN at the NORTH Quarter corner of said Section 8; THENCE, bear South 02 06, 08" West along the East line of said Northwest Quarter, a distance of 393.65 feet to the intersection thereof with the South line of that certain utility, ingress and egress easement recorded in Official Records Book 7754, Page 1570. SAID public records; THENCE, NORTH 88 321 08" West, departing said East line and along said easement line, a distance of 28.47 feet to the point of curvature of a curve to the right, having a radius of 200.00 feet and whose radius point bears North 01 27, S2" East; THENCE Westerly, along said curve departing said easement line, through a central angle of 23 071 24 ", a distance of 80.72 feet to the point of reverse curvature of a curve to the Left, having a radius of 67.00 feet and whose radius point bears South 24 35' 16" West; THENCE Westerly, along said curve, through a Central Angle of 23 071 24 ", a distance of 27.04 feet to the point of tangency; THENCE, North 88 32' 08" West, a distance of 202.38 feet to the intersection thereof with the West line of the East half of the Northeast Quarter of said Northwest Quarter of Section 8; THENCE, North 02 03' 14" East, along said West line, a distance of 372.19 feet to the intersection thereof with the North line of said Northwest Quarter; THENCE South 88 32' 08" East, along said North line, a distance of 336.25 feet to the point of BEGINNING. dan \10095 \exhibit.a Prepared By: Richard K. Barra, Esq. Scott, Royce, Harris, Bryan, Barra & Jorgensen, P.A. 4400 PGA Blvd., Suite 800 Palm Beach Gardens, FL 33410 Return To: RELOCATION AGREEMENT THIS RELOCATION AGREEMENT ( "Agreement') is made and entered into this day of May, 1998, by and between VILLAGE SQUARE PROFESSIONAL PARK PROPERTY OWNERS' ASSOCIATION, INC., a Florida not - for -profit corporation having its principal place of business at 4362 Northlake Boulevard, Suite 114, Palm Beach Gardens, Florida 33410 ( "Association') and the CITY OF PALM BEACH GARDENS, a political subdivision of the State of Florida, having an address at 10500 North Military Trail, Palm Beach Gardens, Florida 33410 ( "City'l. RECITALS A. Village Square Professional Park, Inc., a Florida corporation ("Village') has caused to be surveyed and platted certain real property located in Palm Beach County, Florida, as such property is more particularly described in Exhibit "A" attached hereto and made a part hereof ( "Property'), as the plat of Village Square Professional Park ( "Plat'). Village has submitted the Plat to the City for approval and, upon approval, recording in the Public Records of Palm Beach County, Florida. B. As a part of the ditch stabilization plan for the development of the Property, Village proposes to construct a wall along the northern and .eastern portions of the Property. The wall proposed for the northern portion of the Property will lie within the fifteen (15) foot wide drainage easement depicted on the Plat. C. As a condition to the approval of the Plat, the City has required that the Association agree and covenant to relocate said wall to the southern boundary of said drainage easement, in the event the City or Palm Beach County ("County"} elects to relocate or expand the existing drainage ditch currently located within the portion of said drainage easement which rune adjacent to R.C.A. Boulevard. NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of Ten Dollars and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and adequacy of which are hereby acknowledged, and in further consideration of the approval of the Plat by the City, the parties hereto, intending to be legally bound, hereby agree as follows: 1. Recitals. The above Recitals labeled A through C (inclusive) are true and correct and are incorporated into the body of this Agreement as if fully set forth herein. 2. Relocation of the Wall. (a) In the event that the City or County at any time in the future elects to relocate or expand the existing drainage ditch currently located within the fifteen (15) foot wide drainage easement lying along the northern boundary of the Property (as such drainage easement is depicted on the Plat), the Association agrees and covenants, at its sole cost and expense, to relocate the subject wall to the southern boundary of said drainage easement. (b) Within thirty (30) days of receipt of written notification from the City or County requesting the relocation of said wall and which notice makes reference to this Agreement, the Association shall commence the relocation process as contemplated herein and shall complete such relocation within ninety (90) days of receipt of the above notice. (c) All relocation efforts on behalf of the Association shall be accomplished in accordance with all applicable governmental approval and requirements. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the City agrees and acknowledges that the relocation of said wall in accordance with this Agreement shall not be deemed to violate the restrictions set forth on the Plat relative to Tract C, the wetlands preservation tract. (d) In the event the Association becomes obligated to relocate the subject wall as contemplated in this Agreement, the Association shall only be obligated to relocate the portion of said wall located in the northern portion of the Property (i.e. within the fifteen (15). foot wide drainage easement shown on the Plat which runs adjacent to the northern boundary of the Property and R.C.A_ Boulevard, not the portion of the wall which lies within the drainage easement shown on the Plat which runs adjacent to the eastern portion of the Property and Prosperity Farms Road). Additionally, the Association shall only be obligated to relocate said portion of the wall and shall not be required to perform any other activities associated with the City's or County's reworking or relocation of said drainage ditch. 3. Entire Agreement. This Agreement represents the entire understanding and agreement between the parties as to the subject matter hereof and supersedes all other negotiations, understandings and representations (if any) made by and between the parties. 4. Amendments. The provisions of this Agreement may not be amended, supplemented, waived or changed orally, but only by a writing signed by the party as to whom enforcement of any amendment, supplement, waiver or modification is sought and making specific reference to this Agreement. 5. further Assurances. The parties will from time to time execute and deliver any documents and do all matters and things which are convenient or necessary to more effectively and completely carry out this Agreement's intentions. 6. Bindine Effect. All of the terms and provisions of this Agreement are binding upon, inure to the benefit of, and are enforceable by the parties and their respective representatives, successors and permitted assigns. 7. Notices. All notices, requests, consents and other communications required or permitted to be given under this Agreement will be in writing (including telefax or telecopy) and shall be sent by certified mail, postage prepaid, return receipt requested, or shall be hand delivered or delivered by a recognized national overnight courier service, or shall be sent by electronic communication (whether by telefax, or telecopy), addressed as follows: If to Association: Village Square Professional Park Property Owners' Association, Inc. 4362 Northlake Boulevard, Suite 114 Palm Beach Gardens, FL 33410 Fax #: If to City: City of Palm Beach Gardens 10500 North Military Trail Palm Beach Gardens, FL 33410 Attn: Greg Dunham, Assistant City Manager Fax # (561) 775 -8244 or to any other address or addresses as any party may designate from time to time by notice given in accordance with this Section. Any such notice will be deemed delivered: (a) on the date upon which the return receipt is signed or delivery is refused or the notice is designated by the postal authority as not deliverable, as the case may be if mailed, (b) on the date delivered by personal delivery, (c) on the date of delivery by a recogniT -ed national overnight courier service, or (d) on the date of transmission if sent by electronic communication. 8. Headings. The headings contained in this Agreement are for convenience of 3 reference only, and do not limit or otherwise affect in any way the meaning or interpretation of this Agreement. 9. $everability. If any provision of this Agreement or any provision of any other Agreement entered into pursuant to this Agreement is contrary to, prohibited by or deemed invalid under applicable law or regulation, only that provision will be inapplicable and deemed omitted to the extent it is contrary, prohibited or invalid, but the remainder will not be invalidated and will be given full force and effect so far as possible. 10. Pronouns. In this Agreement, the use of any gender will be deemed to include all genders, and the use of the singular will include the plural, and vice versa, wherever it appears appropriate from the context. 11. Survival. All covenants, agreements, representations and warranties made in this Agreement or otherwise made in writing by any party pursuant to this Agreement will survive the execution and delivery of this Agreement and the consummation of the transactions contemplated. 12. Waivers. The failure or delay of any party at any time to require performance by another party of any provision of this Agreement, even if known, will not affect the right of that party to require performance of that provision or to exercise any right, power or remedy, and any waiver by any party of any breach of any provision of this Agreement should not be construed as a waiver of any continuing or succeeding breach of provision, a waiver of the provision itself, or a waiver of any right, power or remedy under this Agreement. No notice to or demand on any party in any case will, of itself, entitle a party to any other or further notice or demand in similar or other circumstances. 13. $pecific Performance. Each of the parties acknowledges that damages at law would be an inadequate remedy if this Agreement is not specifically enforced by the City. Therefore, in the event of a breach or threatened breach by the Association of any provision of this Agreement, then the City will be entitled, in addition to all other rights or remedies, to injunctions restraining such breach, without being required to show any actual damage, and/or to a decree for specific performance of the provisions of this Agreement. 14. Jurisdiction and Venue. The parties acknowledge that a substantial portion of negotiations, anticipated performance and execution of this Agreement occurred or will occur in Pahn Beach County, Florida, and, therefore, without limiting the jurisdiction or venue of any other federal or state courts, each of the parties irrevocably and unconditionally (a) agrees that any suit, action or legal proceeding arising out of or relating to this Agreement will be brought in the courts of record of the State of Florida in Palm Beach County or the court of the United States, Southern District of Florida; (b) consents to the jurisdiction of each court in any suit, action or proceeding; and (c) waives any objection which it may have to the laying of venue of any suit, action or proceeding in any of the courts. 4 IS. Enforcement Costs. If any legal action or other proceeding is brought for the enforcement of this Agreement, or because of an alleged dispute, breach, default or misrepresentation in connection with any provisions of this Agreement, the successful or prevailing party will be entitled to recover reasonable attorneys fees, court costs and all expenses even if not taxable as court costs (including, without limitation, all such fees, costs and expenses incident to appeals), incurred in that action or proceeding, in addition to any other relief to which such party or parties may be entitled. 16. Remedies Cumulative. No remedy in this Agreement conferred upon any party is intended to be exclusive of any other remedy, and each and every remedy will be cumulative and will be in addition to every other remedy given here or now or existing in the future at law or in equity or by statute or otherwise. No single or partial exercise by any party of any right, power or remedy will preclude any other. 17. Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed in one or more counterparts, each of which will be deemed an original, but all of which together will constitute one and the same instrument. 18. Qpverning Law. This Agreement and all transactions contemplated by this Agreement will be governed by, and construed and enforced in accordance with, the internal laws of the State of Florida without regard to principles of conflicts of laws. 19. Independent Counsel. The parties hereto have received independent advice and counseling regarding the preparation and subject matter of this Agreement and all the tuts and conditions it contains. This Agreement shall not be construed more strongly for or against any party, regardless of which party is deemed to have drafted the Agreement. 20. THE IS OF THE ESSENCE. THE PARTIES AGREE AND ACKNOWLEDGE THAT TINE SHALL BE OF THE ESSENCE UNDER THIS t� 21. If the date of expiration of any period of time or the date for the performance of any act or the satisfaction of any condition, whether specified or determined by formula or calculation, under this Agreement occurs on a Saturday, Sunday or legal holiday in the State of Florida, then such date shall automatically be extended to the next following business day in Florida. 5 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Agreement as of the day and year first above written. WITNESSES: nt ame of Witn ) (Typenhint Name of Witness) (Print(rype Name of Witness) (Printrrype Name of witness) N "Association" VILLAGE SQUARE PROFESSIONAL PARK PROPERTY OWNERS' ASSOCIATION, INC., a Florida not - for -profit corpo 'on By: �..._ �.✓i MXRK T. DAMERAU, _ 'dent (CORPORATE SEAL) "City" City of Palm Beach Gardens, a political subdivision of the State of Florida By: JOSEPH K RUSSO, Mayor Attest: LINDA V. KOISER, Clerk Approved as to Legal Sufficiency: City Attorney STATE OF FLORIDA COUNTY OF PALM BEACH The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this _day of A 1998, by MARK T. DAMERAU, as President of VILLAGE SQUARE PROFESSIONAL ' PARK PROPERTY OWNERS' ASSOCIATION, a Florida not - for - profit corporation, on behalf of the corporation. (tAR:Y PUBLIC I "� (SEAL) ��ggNp (Print Name) skam My commicon expires: ��„reuu Commit-.ion No. Personally Known OR Produced Identification Type of identification Produced STATE OF FLORIDA COUNTY OF PALM BEACH The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of , 1998, by JOSEPH R. RUSSO, as Mayor of City of Palm Beach Gardens, a political subdivision of the State of Florida. (SEAL) NOTARY PUBLIC (Print Name) My commission expires: Commission No. Personally Known OR Produced Identification Type of identification Produced 1c:%UW0AN136s ocx - aV-m—Lv4pd fi EXHIBIT "A" LEGAL DESCRIPTION A parcel of land being a portion of the Northwest quarter of Section 8, Township 42 South, Range 43 East, Palm Beach County, Florida, said parcel being more specifically described as follows: BEGIN at the NORTH Quarter corner of said Section 8; THENCE, bear South 02 06' 08" West along the East line of said Northwest Quarter, a distance of 393.65 feet to the intersection thereof with the South line of that certain utility, ingress and egress easement recorded in Official Records Book 7754, Page 1570. SAID public records; THENCE, NORTH 88 32' 08" West, departing said East line and along said easement line, a distance of 28.47 feet to the point of curvature of a curve to the right, having a radius of 200.00 feet and whose radius point bears North 01 27' 52" East; THENCE Westerly, along said curve departing, said easement line, through a central angle of 23 071 240, a distance of 80.72 feet to the point of reverse curvature of a curve to the Left, having a radius of 67.00 feet and whose radius point bears South 24 35' 16" West; THENCE Westerly, along said curve, through a Central Angle of 23 071 2411, a distance of 27.04 feet to the point of tangency; THENCE, North 88 321 08" West, a distance of 202.38 feet to the intersection thereof with the West line of the East half of the Northeast Quarter of said Northwest Quarter of Section 8; THENCE, North 02 03' 14" East, along said West line, a distance of 372.19 feet to the intersection thereof with the North line of said Northwest Quarter; THENCE South 88 321 08" East, along said North line, a distance of 336.25 feet to the point of BEGINNING. daa \10095 \exhibit.a CITY OF PALM BEACH GARDENS CITY COUNCIL _ Agenda Cover Memorandum Meeting Date: Auoust20. 1998 Date Preo_ ared: July 27, 19911: Subject/Agenda Item: Consent Agenda T Resolution 83, 1998: Approval of Concurrent Processing - "Golf Digest PCD /Goff Campus" Recommendation/Motion: Staff recommends approval which allows consideration of a site plan application concurrently with Planned Community District rezoning application. Reviewed by:,, CK C�� City Attorney Originating Dept: Planning D' ision Costs: t 0 Total Council Action: [ I Approved ACM $ Q ( ] Approved wlc«Wkfa,. Current FY Other WA [ ] Denied Advertised: Funding Source: ( ] Continued to: Attachments: Date: [ ] Operating Paper I x ] Not Required [ ] Other N/A Resolution, 1998 Submitted by: Growth Mgt. Director Affected parties ( ] Notified Budget Acct#: [ ] None Approved by: City Manager ( x ] Not required BACKGROUND: This is a request for concurrent processing of a site plan application and a Planned Community District rezoning application for the Golf Digest PCD and Golf Campus site plan. Resolution 80, 1997 provided for the concurrent processing of the Golf Digest PCD rezoning application and the Golf Digest Campus site plan. Section 5 of the resolution provided for a one year time period for the processing of the concurrent application. Due to the fact that this one year period has expired (7 /17/98), staff is recommending the approval of Resolution 83, 1998 to allow for the completion of the concurrent applications processing. Both the PCD rezoning and site plan applications have been recommended to the City Council for approval by the Planning and Zoning Commission and the Site Plan and Appearance Review Committee. Staff has determined that the petition meets all the criteria set forth in the concurrent petitions ordinance (Ordinance 7, 1998) based on the following: (1) The Planned Community District rezoning application proposes a land use pattern which is consistent with the Comprehensive Land Use Plan. (2) The proposed Planned Community District and Golf Campus site plan is consistent with the land uses designated in the "Our Vision" strategic plan. (3) Staff finds that the proposed Golf Digest Planned Community District conditionally meets the Level of Services standards. Based on this analysis, the Growth Management Director recommends approval of a concurrent processing. agreement for the Golf Digest PCD rezoning application and the Golf Campus site plan petitions. /eat GAI -ong Range \concgd.st.wpd RESOLUTION 83,1998 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM BEACH GARDENS, FLORIDA, PROVIDING FOR APPROVAL OF CONCURRENT PROCESSING OF A PCD REZONING APPLICATION AND A SITE PLAN APPLICATION FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED NORTH OF PGA BOULEVARD AND WEST OF THE FLORIDA TURNPIKE, KNOWN AS "GOLF DIGEST "; PROVIDING FOR A CONCURRENT PROCESSING AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY, MORGAN STANLEY REAL ESTATE FUND, III L.P., AND JCB GOLF VENTURES CONCERNING LANDS OWNED BY THE MACARTHUR FOUNDATION; PROVIDING FOR AUTHORIZATION FOR THE MAYOR AND CITY CLERK TO EXECUTE SUCH AGREEMENT; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, the Growth Management Department has received an application from Morgan Stanley Real Estate Fund and JCB Golf Ventures for approval of a PCD (rezoning) and an application for site plan approval; WHEREAS, Ordinance 7, 1998 prohibits the Growth Management Department from accepting or processing applications for site plan development orders concurrent with or prior to a comprehensive plan amendment; WHEREAS, Ordinance 7, 1998 also provides an exception whereby City Council may approve the acceptance and processing of such applications according to the conditions of Ordinance 7, 1998; WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that the concurrent review of the PCD rezoning application and the site plan application will result in a more comprehensively planned project in this instance. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM BEACH GARDENS, FLORIDA: Section 1. The City Council hereby consents to the concurrent review of the PCD rezoning application and the site plan application. Section 2. The Concurrent Processing Agreement between the City of Palm Beach Gardens, Morgan Stanley Real Estate Fund, III L.P., and JCB Golf Ventures, Inc., concerning lands owned by the MacArthur Foundation located north of PGA Boulevard and west of the Florida Turnpike known as "Golf Digest ", a copy of which is attached hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit "A ", is hereby approved. Section 3. The Mayor and City Clerk are hereby authorized and directed to execute said Development Agreement on behalf of the City of Palm Beach Gardens. Section 4. This Resolution shall be effective upon adoption. INTRODUCED, PASSED AND ADOPTED THIS ATTEST: LINDA V. KOSIER I I.Va VOTE: MAYOR RUSSO VICE MAYOR FURTADO COUNCILMAN JABLIN COUNCILMAN CLARK COUNCILMAN SABATELLO \eat GALong Range \concurrentgd.re.wpd DAY OF AUGUST, 1998. JOSEPH RUSSO, MAYOR APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM AND SUFFICIENCY. CITY ATTORNEY AYE NAY ABSENT CITY OF PALM BEACH GARDENS CITY COUNCIL Agenda Cover Memorandum Subject/Agenda Item Date: August 20, 1998 Date Prepared: July 27,199R Consideration of approval for petition SP- 98 -11, a request by Michael Houston, agent for Hasan Allgayer, for a site plan amendment for the redesign and renovation of the current PGA National Mobil Station to include a car wash and to eliminate the service center. The total land area consists of 1 acre and is located at the southeast comer of the intersection of PGA Boulevard and Fairway Drive. (10- 42S -42E) Recommendation /Motion: Staff recommends that Resolution87f 1998 be approved. Reviewed by. Originating Dept.: Costs: $ Council Action: Total City Attorney' i Growth Growth Management [ ] Finance NA $ [ ] Approved ,/conditions ACM Current FY [ ] Denied Human Res. NA Other NA Advertised: Funding Source: [ ] Continued to: Date: [ ] Operating Attachments: Paper: [ ] Other Resolution , 1998 Site Plan Landscape Plan Elevations [ ] Not Required Engineering Comments Property Owner's Assoc. Submitted by: Letter Growl ana ement Affected parties Budget Acct. #:: Director [ ] Notified [ ] None Approved by: City Manager [ ] Not required BACKGROUND: The PGA National Mobil Station was originally approved under Resolution 44, 1983 as a Commercial Planned Unit Development (PUD). The subject parcel is located in the northeast comer of the PGA National development, which is an approved Planned Community District (PCD) with a master plan on file. The Mobil Station is considered part of this PCD and is currently zoned 1 Agenda Cover Memorandum Date: August 20, 1998 Page 2 as PCD. The future land use designation is Commercial. The PGA Boulevard Corridor Overlay, which requires a 55' front setback, applies to this site. The subject property consists of 1 acre and is located on the southeast comer of the intersection of PGA Boulevard and Fairway Drive. The site is surrounded on the north by the Florida's Turnpike interchange, on the east by the Palm Beach Gardens Fire Station, on the west by Shoppes on the Green, and on the south by Community Savings Bank. Procedure: This is a request for an amendment to a site plan within a PCD. The site plan request is reviewed by the Development Review Committee, who forwards comments and recommendations to the Site Plan and Appearance Review Committee. Acting in an advisory role, the Committee makes a recommendation on the proposed request to the City Council. The City Council reviews the request for site plan amendment approval for consideration of approval, approval with conditions, or denial. Project Details: The project will be developed in a single phase. Currently, the site is being used for a Mobil Gas Station with ten fueling stations. Below is a chart of existing and proposed uses. The applicant is proposing to reorient the ten fueling stations from an east -west to a north -south orientation and to add a 648 square foot car wash. They are also planning to install a sidewalk within the right -of -way for Fairway Drive to improve the connection of the Shoppes on the Green with PGA Boulevard. The sidewalk will be dedicated to the city. Fairway Drive is a City -owned road. The underground storage tanks currently encroach on the 55' PGA Boulevard Corridor buffer and the applicant does not plan to relocate them. In addition, the convenience store exceeds the maximum square footage allowed for motor vehicle fuel sales without service. Section 118 - 290(f)(8)(a) allows 500 square feet of convenience item sales while the applicant is proposing 1,045 square feet, which is 545 square feet over the maximum. Since this issue is governed under Supplementary Regulations, Chapter 118, Article V, it will require a waiver. The storage space in the proposed building also exceeds the total percentage (30 %) of floor area allowed under Section 118- 206(h)(1). They are proposing 646 square feet of storage within the building, which is (646/1872) 34.5 %. This will not require a waiver, but is a deviation from code. 2 Total Convenienc Service Storage Office Square a Store Area Feet Existing 2,310 s.f. 690 s.f. 1,620 s.f. N/A N/A Proposed 1,872 s.f. 1045 s.f. N/A 646 s.f. 75 s.f. The applicant is proposing to reorient the ten fueling stations from an east -west to a north -south orientation and to add a 648 square foot car wash. They are also planning to install a sidewalk within the right -of -way for Fairway Drive to improve the connection of the Shoppes on the Green with PGA Boulevard. The sidewalk will be dedicated to the city. Fairway Drive is a City -owned road. The underground storage tanks currently encroach on the 55' PGA Boulevard Corridor buffer and the applicant does not plan to relocate them. In addition, the convenience store exceeds the maximum square footage allowed for motor vehicle fuel sales without service. Section 118 - 290(f)(8)(a) allows 500 square feet of convenience item sales while the applicant is proposing 1,045 square feet, which is 545 square feet over the maximum. Since this issue is governed under Supplementary Regulations, Chapter 118, Article V, it will require a waiver. The storage space in the proposed building also exceeds the total percentage (30 %) of floor area allowed under Section 118- 206(h)(1). They are proposing 646 square feet of storage within the building, which is (646/1872) 34.5 %. This will not require a waiver, but is a deviation from code. 2 Agenda Cover Memorandum Page 3 Date: August 20, 1998 In addition, they are proposing to encroach upon the 55' PGA Boulevard Corridor buffer with 2,583 square feet of pavement, which is 1,347 square feet less than the existing encroachment. This encroachment contains the existing entry to the site from Fairway Drive. The Growth Management staff does not have a problem with this since the applicant has satisfied the intent of the PGA Boulevard by shifting the convenience store south and providing additional landscaping off -site. In order to accomplish this, the applicant has decreased the side setback of the car wash on the south side of the parcel from the standard 15 feet to 13.5 feet. This does not require a waiver, but is a deviation from code. Code Compliance: :........:...::: ::i.'i:::: :..; ;.,. ....! .iii: ^::4: ^: ^: ^::i: ^::4::v:i: .. . ::: :: : ................::::.. . .�:.. ..::: ii:i:::iii: iJ:.'::::::::; w::::; w::::.: ....... .........::......:........:::.: .::.::.�:::. �:::::::::.:.: .......................................................................................... :: :: in l;i:i:: ?.::'i:::: . : . Yi[::: i.' -::' }: is�.':'isviii'�i Y ii::j_' _> �.....:.::... •.:::.:...: n......:. ............................::. �:::::. �:::::::::........... \..... n................................. {: }i (: �{ :::�:�: :i:':? :ijij'iiii' .. ':: ...... : ............................... Z onin 9 • P CD wired/ Required/ Prov- ed ce Compliance Ilan Requirements Allowed Zoning PCD Planned Community Yes Development - Commercial F Front Setback 50 138.6 Y Yes Side Setback 15 13.5' No Side Corner 40 90.8 Yes ` > Setback Se Rear Setback 15 44.8 Yes N: Parkin 9 1/200 sf = 10 10 Yes e Spaces P 7 1872/200=9.36 Parking kin 10'x 18.5 10'x 18.5 Yes Dimensions Parallel 9'x 23 Parallel 9 x 2 3 ' =Oace S P e P Open 0 35% Min. 0 37 /o Yes Building 36 Max. 19.6 Yes H - er ht 9 ��» i din Lot Bu I L t 9 0 /o Max. 0 / 6 0 Ys Yes `= Coverage 9 The applicant plans to provide landscaping consistent with PGA National standards and the PGA Boulevard Corridor Overlay. The applicant will provide landscaping along the PGA Boulevard Corridor, including behind the proposed city entrance sign. The applicant has been in contact with the PGA Property Owners Association. Their conditions 3 Agenda Cover Memorandum Page 4 Date: August 20, 1998 are attached in this report. The applicant has addressed all of the POA's condions. Access and Signage: Access to the site will be from Fairway Drive and Fairview Lane. As mentioned earlier, a 5 foot sidewalk will be added along Fairway Drive. There is an existing ground sign displaying the Mobil logo and gasoline prices. The applicant plans to add the. "On the Run" logo to this sign adjacent to "Mobil" while keeping the height at the maximum of 10 feet. The canopy will have "Mobil" on both the North and West side. The convenience store will have a fascia "On the Run" sign of 33.8 square feet. The applicant had proposed this sign with 5 colors, but has agreed to reduce the number of colors to two; teal and white per Site Plan and Appearance Review Committee request. DEPARTMENTAL COMMENTS: Assistant City Engineer Tammy Jacobs has reviewed the applicant's revised plans. There are two items that remain unsatisfied. These items are to be conditions of approval. The first is the Traffic Impact Analysis Report, which has been revised and is currently being reviewed. The second is that they need to revise the Lighting plan to show existing and proposed light fixtures and to show existing and proposed lighting levels. City Forester Mark Hendrickson has no concerns and is satisfied with the revisions to the landscape plans. Jack Hanson, City Building Official, pointed out that the proposed signs were in excess of maximum square footage allowed by code. The applicant has reduced the square footage to 33.8, which is allowed by code. He has no further concerns and recommends approval. At its July 14, 1998 meeting, the Site Plan and Appearance Review Committee approved the petition with conditions of staff and that both "On the Run" signs shall consist of the colors teal and white only. The applicant has submitted new plans that reflect the restrictions on colors. The petition passed with a 4 -1 vote. Mr. Nedvins recommended denial based on the 3 colors of the corporate Mobil logo. RECOMMENDATION The Growth Management Department recommends approval of this petition with the following conditions: Prior to construction plan approval, the Lighting Plan shall be revised to show existing and proposed light fixtures and lighting levels. 2. The approval of this petition is contingent upon the approval of the following waiver. Waiver of Section 118- 290(8)(a) which allows 500 square feet of convenience store space for motor vehicle fuel sales without service. The applicant plans to have 1,045 square feet. n Agenda Cover Memorandum Date: August 20, 1998 Page 5 3. Food and Drink provided within the food mart shall be limited to self- service items only, including (but not limited to) such items as hot dogs, doughnuts, coffee, or fountain soft drinks, which customers may select and purchase without assistance, preparation, or assembly by the employees of the service station. One microwave oven, for self - service heating or reheating of food and drink item, shall be allowed. The sale of convenience items shall be accessory and incidental to the principal operation of the sales of gasoline. 4. As a condition of construction plan approval, the applicant shall submit drainage calculations including the exfiltration trench design, and results of the soil hydraulic conductivity tests. The scale of the conceptual drainage plan shall be changed to 1" = 20'. R 1561 - 460272 _BF&H JLP I TER 613 002,�'213 J ;JL 29 '99 16:4^ - LINDAHL, BROWNING, FERRARI & HELLSTROM, INC. CONSULTING INGINEERS, SURVEYaRS a MAPPERS MEMORANDUM I Iro.. Marty Minor iI, � `' ROM: Tammy Jacobs 1)ATE: July 2;8, 1998 iWBJECT: PGA'National Mobil Station (UFH F'de No. 9 9-4003) We have reviewed the revised Landscape Plan prepared by Houston Cuouo Group, Inc. and the jvvbed Conceptual Drainage Plan prepared by Jeff H. Imvani, Inc. received July 17, 1998 and the revised Site Plan and revised Landscape Plan prepared by Houston Cuouo Group, Inc received jluly 24 and the revised Traffic Analysis prepared by Kimely Horn and Associates, Inc. received July 16. We offer the following comments: I) Previously Satisfied. .2) Previously Satisfied. 3) The City's Traffic Engineer is currently reviewing the revised Traffic Impact Analysis. We will issue gomments once the review is complete. 4) Conditionally Satisfied. We have reviewed the Lighting Plan prepared by LSI Industries. As a condition of construction plan approval, we recommend the applicant revise the Lighting Plan to indicate the existing 'and proposed tight fixtures. We also reco«,mend the applicant submit an additional lighting plan, showing J111nnination levels as they currently exist prior to the proposed improvements. S) Previously Satisfied. 6) Previously Satisfied. 7) Previously Satisfied. 8) Previously Satisfied. 9) Previously Satisfied. POST OFFICE BOX 727 1UPITER, rLOk117A 1 AM -0727 210 JUPITER LAXCS RQULEVARD. OUI (SING S000, SUITF 104 (5611746-9148 FAX t561) :46.0171 WEST PALM BEACH JUPITER STUART FORT PIERCE OXEECMOSEE 1561 7467272 LBF3H JUPITER NASOW Mobil SOAOn ct No. 98 -4003 313 °73/73 JUL 29 138 15:48 PW 2 0) Previously Satisfied, 1) Previously So*nod. ' 2) CondJdOU Uy Sxddied. The applicant has provided a conceptual drainage plan. ; j' However, as a condition of construction plan approval the applicant will need to submit d calculatiOUS incl I wage uding the ex$ltration trench design. and results of the Boil i hydraulic conductivity teats. Also, the scale for the dridn4ge plan will need to be changed to 1 "-20r so that we may clearly read the elevations. k3) Previously Sxdsfted. 14) Previously Satisfied. -• lo) Previously Sathrod. ',Cho applicant is requested to return a copy of our comments with the applicant's !acknowledgment of each comment and the respooae. Compliance will expedite the imbsequent review. aU �r.�lplwaw��003J Is: Greg Dunham Roxanne Manning PGA PROPERTY OWNERS ASSOCIATION, INC. Shoppes On The Green 7100 Fairway Drive, Suite 29 Palm Beach Gardens, Florida 33418 TELEPHONE (561) 627 -2800 July 3. 1998 Nit. n -lai)y h1111cr, I'iincipal I'lanuel CITY OI: PALM 13F.AC11 GARDENS 105(1() North Military 'frail Palm Beach Gardens, FL 33418 4 ` Cb Of F s.r ,11T i 1998 FL4Ftr,1t;C R Re: Architectural Review Status - - PRELIMINARY PLANS _ REDESIGN OF h10131L STATION ON FAIRWAY DRIVE Dear Marty, FACSIMILE (561) 622.6324 The PGA Architectural Review Committee, at its meeting of June 4, 1998, reviewed the referenced request. It was the decision of the Committee to approve the request with the following conditions: I . Roof the must match color and size of tile used on Shoppes on the Green. The tile band around the building is to be the same sire and teal color as Shoppes on the .Green. ?. Dumpster enclosure is to be constructed ol'cedar or pressure treated wood, painted to match the' building. 3. Show.on the elevations that the monument sign is to be a maximum height of ten feet above the adjacent road. 4. Mobil Oil shall assume the responsibility of striping the crosswalks across Fairview Lane and the entrance at Fairway Drive, per FDOT specifications. 5. Submit a sample of the roof tile when final working drawings, landscape, building, civil engineering and site plans are submitted for review. 6. Civil engineering plans need to show how run -off water from the embankment of PGA Boulevard will be accommodated by the drainage system for this site. I'lease Icel Free to call 11' you have any questions. Sincerely yours, MaryAnn Morris Community Relations Manager RESOLUTION 87, 1998 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM BEACH GARDENS, FLORIDA, PROVIDING FOR AN AMENDMENT TO RESOLUTION 44, 1983 BY AMENDING THE SITE PLAN FOR THE REDESIGN AND RENOVATION OF THE CURRENT PGA NATIONAL MOBIL STATION GENERALLY LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF PGA BOULEVARD AND FAIRWAY DRIVE; PROVIDING ADDITIONAL CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, PGA National Mobil Station was originally approved under Resolution 44, 1983 as a Planned Unit Development, and C WHEREAS, the City has received a petition from Mobil Oil Corporation to approve a site plan amendment for the redesign and renovation of the PGA National Mobil Corporation located at the southeast corner of the intersection of PGA Boulevard and Fairway Drive, to include a car wash and to eliminate the service center; and WHEREAS, the City's Growth Management Department has recommended approval of the PGA National Mobil Station site plan amendment; and WHEREAS, the City's Growth Management Department has determined that approval of said application is consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan. 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 an amendment to Resolution 44, 1983 approving a site plan for the redesign and renovation of the PGA National Mobil Corporation located at the southeast corner of the intersection of PGA Boulevard and Fairway Drive. SECTION 2. Approval of the site plan amendment is based upon compliance with the following conditions of approval. Such conditions of approval shall supersede the conditions of Resolution 44, 1983: (1) Prior to construction plan approval, the Lighting Plan shall be revised to show existing and proposed light fixtures and lighting levels. (2) Food and Drink provided within the food mart shall be limited to self- service items only, including (but not limited to) such items as hot dogs, doughnuts, coffee, or fountain soft drinks, which customers may select and purchase without assistance, preparation, or assembly by the employees of the service station. One microwave oven, for self - service heating or reheating of food and drink item, shall be allowed. The sale of convenience items shall be accessory and incidental to the principal operation of the sales of gasoline. (3) As a condition of construction plan approval, the applicant shall submit drainage calculations including the exfiltration trench design, and results of the soil hydraulic conductivity tests. The scale of the conceptual drainage plan shall be changed to 1 " = 20'. SECTION 3. The following waiver is approved Waiver of Section 11 &290(8)(a) which allows no more than 500 square feet of convenience store space for motor vehicle fuel sales without service. The petitioner plans to have 1,045 square feet. SECTION 4. Said approval shall be consistent with plans filed with the City's Growth Management Department as follows: 1. July 21, 1998 Site Plan, Houston Cuozzo Group, Inc., Sheet 1 of 4. 2. July 21, 1998 Landscape Plan, Houston Cuozzo Group, Inc., Sheet 2 of 4. 3. July 21, 1998 Elevations, Houston Cuozzo Group, Inc., Sheet 3 of 4. 4. July 21, 1998 Elevations, Houston Cuozzo Group, Inc., Sheet 4 of 4. 5. July 14, 1998 Traffic Impact Analysis, Kimley -Horn and Associates, Inc. 6. July 10, 1998 Conceptual Drainage Plan, Jeff Iravani, Inc., Sheet 1. Resolution 87 1998 Page 2 7. May 29, 1998 Boundary and Topography Survey, Pulice Land Surveyors, Inc., Sheet 1. SECTION 4. This Resolution shall be effective upon adoption. INTRODUCED, PASSED AND ADOPTED THIS THE DAY OF , 1998. ATTEST: LINDA V. KOSIER JOSEPH RUSSO, MAYOR APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM AND SUFFICIENCY. CITY ATTORNEY VOTE: AYE NAY ABSENT MAYOR RUSSO VICE MAYOR FURTADO COUNCILMAN SABATELLO COUNCILMAN JABLIN COUNCILMAN CLARK Resolution 87, 1998 Page 3 CITY OF PALM BEACH GARDENS CITY COUNCIL Agenda Cover Memorandum Date: August 20, 1998 Date Prepared: July 27, 1998 Subject/Agenda Item Consideration of approval for petition SP- 98 -14, a request by Henry Skokowski, agent for Ballenlsles Development Company, for site plan approval for 31 custom single family home lots on Parcel 8B within Ballenlsles Planned Community District (PCD). The total land area is 12.02 acres and is located on Fairwinds Avenue, south of where Fairwinds Avenue ends at the entrance to Parcel 10. (11- 42S -42E) Recommendation /Motion: Staff recommends that Resolution 881998 be approved. Reviewed by: �to Originating Dept: Costs: $ Council Action: G Total City Attorney Growth Management [ ] Finance NA $ [ ] Approved wi=wftm ACM Current FY [ ] Denied Human Res. NA Other NA Funding ource: 9 [ ]Continued to: Advertised: Attachments: Date: [ ] Operating Paper: [ ] Other Resolution , 1998 [ ]Not Required Site Plan Submitted by: Growth Ma r Affected parties [ ] Notified Budget Acct #:: [ )None Approved by: City Manager [ ] Not required BACKGROUND: The Ballenlsles Planned Community District was originally approved by Ordinance 8, 1989. The subject parcel is designated as low density and the proposed plan for 31 custom single family home lots is within the allowable density indicated on the Master Plan. The parcel, with 2.58 dwelling units per acre, is designated Residential Low (RL). The master plan allows a maximum of 4 dwelling units per acre under RL. The subject property is 12.02 acres and is located within Ballenlsles Planned Community District on Fairwinds Avenue, south of where Fairwinds Avenue ends at the entrance to Parcel 10. The site is surrounded by' golf on the north and west, water and Ballenlsles Parcel 6A to the south; and Parcel 8A to the east. The project will be developed in a single phase with a minimum lot width of 70 feet and a minimum lot depth of 116 feet. The applicant has indicated that details for the project entrance signs as well as the entry features will be submitted at a later date for the City Council's review and approval. Procedure: This is a request for site plan approval within a PCD. Because the proposed site is within Ballenlsles PCD, the request is considered a major site plan. The site plan request is reviewed by the Development Review Committee, who forwards comments and recommendations to the Site Plan and Appearance Review Committee. Acting in an advisory role, the Committee makes a recommendation on the proposed request to the City Council. The City Council reviews the request for site plan approval for consideration of approval, approval with conditions, or denial. Access: Access to the site will be from Fairwinds Avenue. The roadway surface will be paved with speciality pavers, which will add visually to the proposed development. Code Compliance: The underlying land use designation for Parcel 8B is Residential Low, which has specific standards for setbacks and lot coverage. Planned Community Developments are given flexibility with these standards to provide incentives for the design of more open space. Staff does not have any objections to the proposed deviations from the code. Previous parcels in Ballenlsles have been approved with less than the required setbacks (see Table 1). Departmental Comments: Building Official Jack Hanson and Fire Marshal Scott Fetterman have reviewed the plans and have no concerns. Seacoast Utility Authority has no concerns at this time. The Police Department has provided a list of safety guidelines which they would like forwarded to the builders. They plan to conduct inspections during construction. Sargent Jay Spencer pointed out that lighting in Lots 21, 27, and 30 are in conflict with the proposed trees. The petitioner has indicated on the site plan that the trees will not interfere with the street lights. City Forester Mark Hendrickson has reviewed the project and recommends approval. Assistant City Engineer Tammy Jacobs has also reviewed the project and had a few minor concerns regarding identifying items that were not labeled on the site plan and the boundary survey. The petitioner has addressed these concerns. At its July 14, 1998 meeting, the Site Plan and Appearance Review Committee voted unanimously to recommend approval of petition SP- 98 -14. 2 �W O� da H~ w� �w v� w Wa a� ao H as � •• U W a H cn 42 � .o 0 col S -o •v cs °' c� a Act a to rA In C to a� a� c c c O ,: R+ Ct� 313 Z n ..� .� oo t� •.� �• t� n ° tn - - 1,0 tn cn 42 � 0 col S 4 ° .b O c t9 c� a Act a to rA In C to C 0 col c� a Act a a4 a UvId GUS qq 190JUd UPPOU 'BUGPJB!D 4oseg weed ---, k ;. M i till i qnlo'Aijunoo solslueleg l 'cl—) - I - - - 11: ftl UJ cc w IML a CL Z 0 0 -j z U) LU C04 co N % Lo N 0 CClq % 1p ell N AO > me 0 41 as us 55 ad F V,3 , 7. 0 Z N C\l LU ass I V-1 F S co uW 00 z 0 a 03 UG, t t le 00 A !Lu of 01 Tczl 5Z.P co E. LL t W3 OR I ON; 00 71M, (n 1-p a�wo I;i., • uj Z m co j 0 W in Z 0 0 -j z U) LU C04 co N % Lo N 0 CClq % 1p ell N AO > me 0 41 as us 55 ad F V,3 , 7. 0 Z N C\l LU ass I V-1 F S co uW RESOLUTION 88, 1998 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM BEACH GARDENS, FLORIDA, PROVIDING FOR APPROVAL OF A SITE PLAN FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF 31 CUSTOM SINGLE FAMILY HOME LOTS ON 12.02 ACRES ON PARCEL 8B IN THE BALLENISLES PLANNED COMMUNITY DISTRICT; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, the City has received an application from BallenIsles Development Company to approve a Site Plan for the construction of 31 custom single family home lots on 12.02 acres on Parcel 8B within the BallenIsles Planned Community District; and WHEREAS, the City's Growth Management Department has determined that approval of said application is consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan. 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, approves a site plan for the construction of 31 custom single family home lots on 12.02 acres on Parcel 8B located within the BallenIsles Planned Community District. Section 2. Said approval shall be consistent with plans filed with the City's Growth Management Department as follows: 1. July 7, 1998 Site Plan, Urban Design Studio, 1 Sheet 2. June 12, 1998 Preliminary Planting Plan, Krent Wieland Design, Inc., 1 Sheet 3. March 7, 1996 Landscaping for the BallenIsles Phase 6 Roadway, Krent Wieland Design, Inc., Sheets 5, 6, 9 and 10. 4. June 2, 1998 Boundary Survey, Lidberg Land Surveying, Inc., 1 Sheet 5. June 12, 1998 Existing Topography, Keshavarz & Associates, Inc., 1 Sheet 6. May 7, 1998 Vegetation Assessment, Urban Design Studio, 1 Sheet with photos Section 3 This Resolution shall be effective upon adoption. INTRODUCED, PASSED AND ADOPTED THIS THE ATTEST: LINDA V. KOSIER 4", VOTE: MAYOR RUSSO VICE MAYOR FURTADO COUNCILMAN SABATELLO COUNCILMAN JABLIN COUNCILMAN CLARK Resolution Page 2 DAY OF AUGUST, 1998. JOSEPH RUSSO, MAYOR APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM AND SUFFICIENCY. CITY ATTORNEY AYE NAY ABSENT CITY OF PALM BEACH GARDENS CITY COUNCIL Agenda Cover Memorandum Date: 08/10/98 Subject/Agenda Item Resolution 89, 1998 - Providing for reimbursement of expenses for the Tennis Center and environmental remediation Recommendation /Motion: Staff recommends approval of Resolution 89, 1998. Reviewed by: Originating Dept.: Costs: $ Q Council Action: Total City Attorney Finance [ )Approved Finance $ Q' [ ] Approved W,condnms Current FY ACM [ ] Denied Advertised: Human Res. Funding Source: [ ] Continued to: Attachments: Other Date: [ ] Operating Paper: [X ] Not Required [ x ] Other None Memorandum Submitted by: Kent R. Olson Department Director Affected parties [ ] Notified Budget Acct #:: [ ] None Approved by: City Manager [ X ] Not required MEMORANDUM TO Bobbie Herakovich, City Manager FROM Kent R. Olson, Finance Director �JDO SUBJECT Reimbursement Resolution DATE August 10, 1998 The City's Proposed Fiscal Year 1998 -99 Budget incorporates the issuance of debt to repay the General Fund's expenditures for the construction of the Tennis Center. In order to issue debt to repay the General Fund, the City needs to adopt a resolution authorizing the reimbursement of costs incurred with the Tennis Center. With the apparent environmental remediation required at the Municipal Complex, we can also include it with this resolution. RECOMMENDATION I recommend that the City adopt Resolution 89, 1998, providing for reimbursement of expenses incurred in the construction of the Tennis Center and certain environmental remediation. RESOLUTION 8 9, 19 9 8 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM BEACH GARDENS, FLORIDA EXPRESSING THE COUNCIL'S DECLARATION OF INTENT TO REIMBURSE CERTAIN ORIGINAL EXPENDITURES WITH PROCEEDS OF CERTAIN TAX - EXEMPT OBLIGATIONS; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Pahn Beach Gardens, Florida: Section-1. This Resolution is adopted for purposes of United States Treasury Regulation Section 1.150 -2. Section 2. The City of Palm Beach Gardens, Florida (the "City ") intends to finance construction of certain recreational facilities including tennis courts and certain environmental remediation. The maximum principal amount of debt expected to be issued for the project is $1,600,000. The City reasonably expects that it will reimburse original expenditures made on the project with proceeds of the debt. Section 3. This Resolution shall take effect immediately upon its adoption. INTRODUCED, PASSED AND ADOPTED this 20th day of August, 1998. ATTEST: LINDA V. KOSIER, CMC, CITY CLERK VOTE: MAYOR RUSSO VICE MAYOR FURTADO COUNCILMAN JABLIN COUNCILMAN CLARK COUNCILMAN SABATELLO GA16299MReimbursem geso,gpd AYE MAYOR JOSEPH R. RUSSO APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM AND SUFFICIENCY. WATTERSON, HYLAND & KLETT, P.A. CITY ATTORNEY NAY ABSENT CITY OF PALM BEACH GARDENS CITY COUNCIL Agenda Cover Memorandum Date: 08/10/9$ Subject/Agenda Item Ordinance 17, 1998 - Establishing a bid threshold amount of $10,000 Recommendation /Motion: Staff recommends placing Ordinance 17, 1998 on second reading. Reviewed by: Originating Dept.: Costs: $ Q Council Action: Total City Attorney Finance [ ] Approved Finance $ Q [ ] Approved wi conditions Current FY ACM [ ] Denied Advertised: Human Res. Funding Source: [ ] Continued to: Attachments: Date: [ ] Operating Other Paper: [X ] Not Required [ x ] Other Ngnp Memorandum Submitted by: Kent R. Olson Department Director Affected parties [ ] Notified Budget Acct. #:: [ ] None Approved by: City Manager [ X ] Not required ORDINANCE 17, 1998 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM BEACH GARDENS, FLORIDA, PROVIDING FOR ADOPTION OF SECTION 2 -294 OF THE CITY CODE OF ORDINANCES, ESTABLISHING A DOLLAR AMOUNT THRESHOLD FOR SEEKING COMPETITIVE SEALED BIDS OR PROPOSALS; PROVIDING FOR THE REPEAL OF ALL ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS IN CONFLICT; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; PROVIDING FOR CODIFICATION; AND, PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, the Charter of the City of Palm Beach Gardens formerly contained provisions concerning competitive bidding in Section 6.3; WHEREAS, Section 6.3 of the Charter of the City was revised by the results of a Referendum Election held September 3, 1996; and WHEREAS, other matters concerning City finance and taxation may be governed by City ordinance, to the extent not already governed by State statutes, for which purpose Sections 2 -291 through 2 -310 of the City Code have been reserved. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM BEACH GARDENS, FLORIDA: SECTION 1. Section 2 -294 of the City Code of Ordinances shall be entitled "Bidding Threshold" and is hereby adopted, as follows: �i Sec. 2-294. Bidding threshold. (a) All contracts for the purchase of commodities or contractual services in exces)of $10,000 shall be awarded by competitive sealed bid. All such awards shall b approved by the City Council. (b) The City Council may wive the competitive sealed bid requirement in the eve one or more of the following: 1.) an emergency has been declared by the City Council. 2.) a bid or proposal has been awarded by another governmental agency pursuant to a competitive sealed bid from which the City can purchase at the same price. ORDINANCE 17, 1998 PAGE 2 OF 3 SECTION 2. All ordinances and resolutions of the City, or any parts thereof, which are in conflict with this ordinance are hereby repealed. SECTION 3. If any section or provision of this ordinance, or any portion, paragraph, sentence, or word thereof, is declared by a court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, such declaration shall not affect the validity of the remainder of this ordinance, but only that part declared to be valid. SECTION 4. The City Clerk is hereby directed to ensure that the contents of this ordinance be codified as part of the City Code of Ordinances. SECTION 5. This ordinance shall be effective upon adoption. PLACED ON FIRST. READING THIS DAY OF , 1998 PLACED ON SECOND READING THIS DAY OF , 1998. PASSED AND ADOPTED THIS DAY OF , 1998. MAYOR JOSEPH R. RUSSO VICE MAYOR LAUREN FURTADO COUNCILMAN ERIC JABLIN COUNCILMAN DAVID CLARK COUNCILMAN CARL SABATELLO ORDINANCE 17, 1998 PAGE 3 OF 3 ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM AND LINDA V. KOSIER, CMC, CITY CLERK SUFFICIENCY. VOTE: MAYOR RUSSO VICE MAYOR FURTADO COUNCILMAN JABLIN COUNCILMAN CLARK COUNCILMAN SABATELLO CITY ATTORNEY AYE NAY ABSENT 3 TO FROM SUBJECT DATE INTRODUCTION MEMORANDUM Bobbie Herakovich, City Manager Kent R. Olson, Finance Director K�D Bid Limit Threshold August 10, 1998 The City's Charter previously contained a provision requiring all commodities and contracts exceeding $7,500 to be publicly bid. Though the referendum held on September 3, 1996 eliminated this provision from our Charter, we still have a $7,500 bid requirement outlined in our purchasing procedure. However, most cities formally adopt by ordinance or resolution a bid threshold amount over which competitive sealed bids are required. Ordinance 17, 1998 will create this threshold in a more formal manner than we have currently. ANALY$IS As noted above, we currently operate under a bid limit of $7,500. In determining an appropriate threshold, or bid limit, to set, we reviewed the bid limits utilized by the State and those in place in other communities of our size. The State recently changed its threshold for purchases which require public bidding from $10,000 to $15,000. As you can see from the table below, most municipalities have a higher limit than we do, with a few communities adopting a bid threshold amount of $15,000 and most of the remaining cities having a bid limit of $10,000. Bid Threshold Citv Amount Boca Raton $10,000 Boynton Beach $10,000 Delray Beach $10,000 Jupiter $ 5,000* Lake Park $10,000 Lake Worth $15,000 Palm Beach $15,000 Riviera Beach $10,000 Royal Palm Beach $10,000 Wellington $15,000 *Jupiter is in the process of revising their bid limit to $10,000 While a $15,000 bid limit may be justifiable, a doubling of the bid threshold does not seem reasonable at this time. Therefore, I recommend the bid limit be raised to $ 10,000 at this time. RECQMMENDATIQN I recommend that the City adopt Ordinance 17, 1998 providing for a bid threshold amount of $10,000. CITY OF PALM BEACH GARDENS TO: FROM: DATE: RE: 10500 N. MILITARY TRAIL • PALM BEACH GARDENS, FLORIDA 334104696 MEMORANDUM Greg Dunham, Assistant City Manager Bob Patty, Director of Public Works �� August 14, 1998 Annual Road Resurfacing As you know, I have been trying to satisfy the needs of the City as well as address the concerns of the Council to complete this year's road resurfacing contract. Some of the Council members had concerns over micro surfacing in lieu of 1" overlay of SIII asphalt In order to finalize this work to satisfy the State's share of the FEMA fiords, Public Works is proposing that we micro surface the roads designated in my July 2e memo to you, a copy of which is attached hereto. I would suggest that we add Town Oaks Development to the list since the City is in the process of re -doing the curbs in this subdivision. This would bring the Florida Highway Products ( "FHP ") micro surface work to 59,780 square yards or $74,127.20. I have received a quote from Ranger Construction Co. ( "Ranger") who has the current County Contract for asphalt overlay. Ranger has agreed to honor the County price of $30.00 per ton for type III asphalt. I am attaching for your review the proposal received from Ranger. To complete all of the roads scheduled for this budget year, the City has budgeted $220,000.00. The roads that are finished with an overlay of 1" type III asphalt will increase the amount beyond the $220,000.00 budget. The total amount needed to repair this year's roads will now be $245,037.20. The additional $25,037.20 could be taken out of Gas Tax and possibly be replaced with the State share of the FEMA money which is $80,000.00. As always, I will make myself available for the next Council meeting to answer any questions or concerns on these matter. cc: Bobbie Herakovich, City Manager file attachments ANNAAAM pwpi� August 6, 1998 Bobbie Herakovich, City Manager City of Palm Beach Gardens 10500 N. Military Trail Palm Beach Gardens, FL 33410 -4698 .__ Florida Highway Products, Inc. P.O. Box 928 - Bartow, FL 33831 3900 US Highway 17 N. - Bartow, FL 33830 (941) 533 -7881 - FAX: (941) 533 -4404 RE: Palm Beach Gardens Micro- Surfacing Contract with Florida Highway Products, Inc. - PO #1197, issued Pursuant to City Commission Action on March 19, 1998 Item X.2. Dear Ms. Herakovich: I am in receipt of your letter dated August 4, 1998 proposing to recommend FHP be authorized to proceed with the micro- surfacing of between 49,746 sq. yds. and 46,667 sq. yds. at the contract price of $1.24 /sq. yd., based on the list of streets provided and the estimated quantities for each. Although FHP principals and I feel very strongly that your City Council and citizens would be very pleased with the finished product, should we be allowed to complete our entire contract, or at least the majority thereof, we will accept your proposal to provide a two (2) year warranty and a performance bond for any amount of work authorized, beginning with the proposed amount or any amount above that square yardage, up to the full contract amount. Upon receiving City Council approval, FHP will immediately provide you with an appropriate valued performance bond and a written two (2) year warranty as desired. We will expect an immediate Purchase Order since we were asked to have the stored aggregate removed from the lot, where it has been stored for about four months, prior to the end of August, 1998. Your cooperation in this regard will be greatly appreciated by all concerned. As a point of information for your City Council, I am attaching a letter previously provided by Charles O'Mielia, P.E., past Director of Public Services (26 years) of your adjoining municipality, the Village of North Palm Beach, relating to their utilization of micro- surfacing since 1988 as their prime maintenance strategy for asphalt roadways within their community. I am confident Dennis Kelly, Village Manager of North Palm Beach, would be happy to vouch for FHP's micro - surfacing professionalism and product performance. Bobbie Herakovich, City Manager City of Palm Beach Gardens August 6, 1998 Page 2 With reference to the August 20, 1998 City Council Meeting, since that is my birthday, I would hope I could be recognized to respond to questions or concerns by your Council, should the need arise. If you require any further information at this time or prior to the August 20, 1998 meeting, please feel free to contact me at (954) 714 -2800 or Fax me at (954) 456 -6020. Thank you for your consideration in this matter. Most sincerely, John . Depp, District a es entative da Highway Products, Inc. Attachment (1) cc: Greg Dunham, Assistant City Manager Bob Patty, Public Works Director John R. Maggard, President, FHP 10'd -kJ10i 147- 7- ,46qAilL---1vT- C14ARLBS 0- O'MRHJA. P.E. 768 LA430ON OR1V5 NORTM PALM MACH, PLORlf?A. 03400 -4234 4071622 -7010 29 April 1996 TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN: in 1972, the Village of Noah Palm Beach. Florida, initiated a asphalt seelirtg "slurry seal" program as a preventive maintenance system to extend " life of residential streets. The program consisted Qt seaing three miles of Viliag6 rasidential� streets each year with an eight yew tyrn -a -round Village wide. Ccilecto' streets wort not iftuded In the program. in 1988, the V'dlage authorized a demonstration project using a micr"UrfaCing type material (en arnutsion with cement MJ W additives). One NO mile of a heavily traveled caliector streets was ra surfVACI. The IwV range goal was to use a material which would result in a ex',srded hen4;round dMe. The result of the orotect has been a surface much improved in Sppaarsnce, wear ability and skid resistance. Meal "bumps" and wear groove* In the asphalt surface are easily treatW with a thin appllcetgn prior to tho finish course. Adhesion of the material to the existing eurfece is considered to be excellent The original surface instWW in 1995 is in exwwt .shape and it appears that the life of the surface will probably be increased tc 14 to 16 years. A major consideration is that the surface will boar road traffic within 30 minutes of Its appNcatlon. In !local 1996 -1997, ali residential streets including, collsctor Streets, will have bean surfaced with tl►* micro- suAece material. The writes recently retired after 26 years Of serelC6 In the Vlgage si the Dlr90W of Publk Services. Sincerely , Charles R. O'Meilla, P I-. W 'A siDnc b6 .' bMHM H dU l dOld Wd2 O : ZT 866T -90 -80 CITY OF PALM BEACH GARDENS August 4, 1998 10500 N. MILITARY TRAIL • PALM BEACH GARDENS, FLORIDA 334104698 Mr. John C. Depp, District Representative Florida Highway Products, Inc. 3900 U.S. Highway 17N Bartow, Fl 33830 Re: Palm Beach Gardens Micro- Surfacing Contract with Florida Highway Products, Inc. —PO #1197, issued Pursuant to City Council Action on March 19, 1998 Item X.2 Dear Mr. Depp: I am in receipt of your letter dated July 23, 1998 regarding the micro surfacing contract with the City of Palm Beach Gardens ( "City") and Florida Highway Products, Inc.( "FHP ") In an effort to expedite the contract issues and complete resurfacing of our needed road repairs, I have discussed a number of issues with the Public Works Director and our City Engineer. As an alternative to your most recent offer, staff and I are recommending FHP offer a 2 year warranty on all work to be completed on this contract and post a performance bond for the amount of work to be completed. I will recommend the original offer from the Public Works Director providing the warranty is increased to 2 years and a performance bond is issued to complete 49,746 square yards of micro - surfacing. Listed on the following page are the roads that have been selected to micro surface reflecting the square footage and cost when figured at your current contract price of $1.24 per square yard. By resurfacing these roads, the Council and residents will have a chance to see the product installed and how it will hold up over the next year for future road maintenance. Map 6 1. Eagle Lake 5,005 sq. yds. 2. Golden Eagle Circle 9,250 sq. yds. Subtotal 14,255 sq. yds. Maps 7, 8, 9,10 and 11 $ 6,206.20 11,470.00 1.7,676.20 1. Applecrest 5,317 sq. yds. 6,593.08 2. Balsam Street 2,973 sq. yds. 3,686.52 3. Daisy Ave. 2,466 sq. yds. 3,057.84 4. Daphne Ave. 3,281 sq. yds. 4,068.44 5. Meridian Way & Meridian Way N & S 12,133 sq. yds. 15,044.92 6. Sandtree Dr. 4,693 sq. yds. 5,819.32 7. Prosperity Oaks Ct. 1,549.sq. yds. 1,920.76 Subtotal 32,412 sq. yds. 40,190.88 TOTAL ROADWAYS 46,667 sq. yds. 57,867.08 Please advise me, in writing, if this proposal is acceptable to FHP so we can place this item on the agenda for the next council meeting on August 20, 1998. Again, thank you for your patience and consideration in this matter. Very truly yours Bobbie Herakovich City Manager City of Palm Beach Gardens cc: Greg Dunham, Assistant City Manager Bob Patty, Director of Public Works file s ■■ ■ ■ ■r Florida Highway Products, Inc. P.O. Box 928 - Bartow, FL 33831 3900 US Highway 17 N. - Bartow, FL 33830 July 23, 1998 (941) 533 -7881 - FAX: (941) 533 -4404 Bobbie Herakovich, City Manager City of Palm Beach Gardens 10500 N. Military Trail Palm Beach Gardens, FL 33410 -4698 RE: Palm Beach Gardens Micro- Surfacing Contract with Florida Highway Products, Inc. - PO #1197, issued pursuant to City Council Action on March 19, 1998 Item X.2. Dear Ms. Herakovich: As the District Representative for Florida Highway Products, Inc. (FHP), I attended your City Council's "Special Regular Meeting" last evening to respond to any questions or concerns any of your Council persons might have relative to micro - surfacing. While we understand that this item had not been scheduled for consideration, it was still very disheartening to have traveled over 60 miles (each way) and not be recognized by the Mayor and Council to respond to the concerns expressed by certain Council members about our product. Prior to my employment with FHP in August 1996, I had spent about 30 years in municipal government work in various capacities ranging from City Manager, City Engineer, Building Official, Zoning Official, Utilities Director and Public Works Director, with my most recent tenure of 15 1/2 ( +) years as Director of Public Works, Utilities and Engineering for the City of Hallandale. I must say that during that 30 -year period I have not been as disappointed at not being allowed to respond to statements being made, which unfortunately were contrary to fact. I consider Mr. Patty to be a very professional and competent Director of Public Works and it seemed quite clear that some of the Council persons were not listening to his responses to their concerns. He had your City's best interest in mind, both initially when he recommended micro - surfacing as the maintenance strategy best suited for the roadways included in the contract and when he asked me to hold off on starting the contract work until after we had completed the new mix design and solved the problem we had experienced in Wellington. The new mix design completely solved the problem and FHP has continued throughout the state to provide our clients with a very reliable roadway maintenance product. We have hundreds of satisfied governmental agencies around the state that year after year continue to utilize our services and product, with Bobbie Herakovich, City Manager City of Palm Beach Gardens July 23, 1998 Page 2 many of them increasing the appropriation in their budget for our services each year. Although FHP has only been in business for seven years, our parent company, New York Bituminous, has been providing micro- surfacing services for over 17 years. Obviously, micro- surfacing is not a new technique that is still in a "trial stage ", as suggested by Councilman Sabatello. Micro - surfacing was developed in Germany well over 30 years ago to perform a function on the Autobahn that hot -mix asphalt had not successfully pro-Oded. Micro - surfacing has been utilized as a maintenance strategy in Florida and numerous other states in this country and is becoming one of the most desirable roadway maintenance applications available today. For considerably less expense, micro- surfacing provides the best available and lasting friction factor and base protection for asphalt pavements that have oxidized and polished after years of wear, leaving the old pavement cracked in many instances which allows moisture to reach the base and produce pot - holes. Our emulsion helps seal those cracks and the latex component in the material helps maintain the material's elasticity to maintain that seal. The Nova Scotia granite, being about 10 times harder than Florida limestone, never polishes and therefore holds its friction factor eliminating the safety factor resulting from slick pavement. In response to Councilman Jablin's and Councilman Clark's questions relative to extending FHP's warranty to two years instead of one and/or providing a performance bond, I will be happy to discuss this with FHP's principals. In this regard, I believe they would give this a favorable consideration if the Council would decide to allow FHP to proceed with our contract as it exists, eliminating further discussion of reducing or canceling our contract. FHP is proud of being selected as Contractor of the Year by the Florida Chapter of the American Public Works Association in 1997. We pride ourselves in the professional services we provide to hundreds of very satisfied governmental and private. agencies throughout the state including Palm Beach County and we have very high hopes of including the City of Palm Beach Gardens in that group of satisfied customers. As with Wellington, we will do "whatever it takes" to provide the type of professional and competent services we are known for throughout the state. Tomorrow we will begin the necessary repair work, costing our company thousands of dollars, to correct the unfortunate problems that occurred in Wellington.. We are confident we will have a satisfied customer in Wellington with the completion of this work. Wit' a an almost unblemished track record for some seven years here in Florida, FHP is being unjustly maligned for this single unfortunate problem in Wellington, especially when it is well known we are correcting the problem. I would welcome the opportunity to meet with you, your staff and your Council and to have an opportunity to reconcile the concerns raised last night by your Council. I'd be happy to do this at a "workshop" meeting or a regular Council meeting at your convenience. Bobbie Herakovich, City Manager City of Palm Beach Gardens July 23, 1998 Page 3 Because of the urgency reiterated by Mr. Patty to the City Council last night, I had planned to move in and start work next week. Unfortunately, since it is my understanding that the City Council took no action last night, I will await further direction from either yourself or your staff in the near future. FHP principals and I still have high hopes of maintaining a positive relationship with your City. Thank you for your consideration in this matter. Sincerely yours, NTOM . ' W tole cc: Greg Dunham, Assistant City Manager ✓f3ob Patty, Public Works Director John R. Maggard, President -FHP TO: FROM: DATE: RE: CITY OF PALM BEACH GARDENS 10500 N. MILITARY TRAIL • PALM BEACH GARDENS, FLORIDA 33410 -4698 MEMORANDUM Greg Dunham, Assistant City Manager Bob Patty, Director of Public Works July 20, 1998 Annual Road Resurfacing Contract Due to the mixed feeling among residents and council members in reference to micro surfacing, I am recommending the following alternative. The City has successfully used micro surfacing in the past for maintenance of roadways. This material's life expectancy is equal to or greater than type III asphalt 1" thick. Micro surfacing emulsifier composition stays more elastic and seals small cracks so moisture cannot penetrate the asphalt and destroy the base material. I am attaching a road resurfacing chart which Public Works has complied to show which roads have been overlaid, micro surfaced or slurry sealed since 1974. You can plainly see from the chart that micro surfacing is not an experimental product and has performed successfully on many roads in the City of Palm Beach Gardens. Two years ago, Garden Lakes Circle was paved by Ranger Construction with 1" of type III asphalt. This existing road had a valley gutter curb along the edge with the existing asphalt flush to this curb. By placing 1" of asphalt over this existing surface, and not feathering the edge to make up for the 1" thickness, the new asphalt formed a 1" to 2" lip along the valley gutter curb. This is a hazardous situation and should be corrected as soon as possible. To eliminate this type of problem, contractors usually will mill down the existing surface so the curb would accept the new surface. To mill a road would cost $.60 per square yard, which would add to the paving contract and reduce the amount of roads to be resurfaced for that annual contract. There are many roads in the City that are in good condition and are only in need of preventative maintenance to extend the life of the road and the base for many years to come. If we choose to continue our success with our annual resurfacing program, a large portion of these roads are prime candidates for micro surfacing. The FEMA monies were awarded to the City for the 1995 flood damage only because of our maintenance records and the procedures used in our annual maintenance contract. Of the $400,000 awarded, 20% or $80,000 was to be paid by the State. To receive this money the City had to complete the work or be under contract to encumber the money. The City accomplished this by entering into a contract with Florida Highway Products ( "FHP ") to complete the roads in question. The work must be completed before the inspection team calls to inspect the work. I anticipate this call some time in August. You can see we are on a very tight schedule to accomplish this work. I would rather not jeopardize our funding by not having this work under contract or completed, therefore I am recommending the City micro surface some of the roads with raised curbs or valley gutter curbs to avoid additional milling and added costs. These roads, plus some polished aggregate roads, would accept this surface and add 10 to 15 years of life to the roads in question. To accomplish this I have made a list of the following roads which would be the best candidates for micro surfacing and the minimum amount of material to satisfy FHP's minimum requirements to reduce the cost of the contract. If the City has the option of paying FHP for costs incurred or having this contractor render a service for the same amount of money, I would recommend micro surfacing. The roads listed below and evaluate them over the next year to determine future use of this material. This list represents 26% of the original contractual obligation and allows the City to meet FEMA obligations. The City will complete the planned annual road resurfacing by contracting for asphalt overlay. Map 6 1. Eagle Lake 5,005 sq. yds. 2. Golden Eagle Circle 9,250 sq. yds. Subtotal 17,334 sq. yds. Maps 7, 8, 9,10 and 11 1. Applecrest 5,317 sq. yds. 2. Balsam Street 2,973 sq. yds. 3. Daisy Ave. 2,466 sq. yds. 4. Daphne Ave. 3,281 sq. yds. 5. Meridian Way & Meridian Way N & S 12,133 sq. yds. 6. Sandtree Dr. 4,693 sq. yds. 7. Prosperity Oaks Ct. , . 1,549.sq. yds. Subtotal _ 32,412 sq. yds. TOTAL ROADWAYS 49,746 sq. yds. Ivs After reviewing FHP's letter to Bobbie Hem Vi'chated July 16, 1998 regarding the "cancellation of the contract, I feel it is in the best interest of the City to, at a minimum, resurface the above roads. We may then be in a position to utilize the remaining funds from this contract to enter into an agreement with Ranger Construction Company. We can piggyback off of the County's existing contract for the resurfacing of the additional roads on the list and can use next year's budget to complete the resurfacing work. I will make myself available to discuss this matter at the council meeting on July 22, 1998 should they have any questions. cc: Bobbie Herakovich file attachments Micro - Surfacing Contractors July 16, 1998 Bobbie Herakovich, City Manager City of Palm Beach Gardens 10500 N. Military Trail Palm Beach Gardens, FL 33410 -4698 Florida Highway Products, Inc. P.O. Box 928 - Bartow, FL 33831 3900 US Highway 17 N. • Bartow, FL 33830 (941) 533 -7881 • FAX: (941) 533 -4404 RE: Palm Beach Gardens Micro- Surfacing Contract with Florida Highway Products, Inc. - PO #1197, issued Pursuant to City Commission Action on March 19, 1998 Item X.2. Dear Ms. Herakovich, Florida Highway Products, Inc. (FHP) principals and I were extremely disappointed and concerned relative to notification, verbally, by Bob Patty, Public Works Director, that your City is considering the cancellation of our subject contract. FHP is a well- established micro- surfacing company, having been incorporated in 1991. FHP's parent company, New York Bituminous has been in this business for over 17 years. FHP is well thought of throughout the State of Florida and was honored by the Florida Chapter, American Public Works Association, as the Contractor of the Year for 1997. We provide hundreds of governmental and private agencies around the state with several million dollars worth of micro - surfacing services each year. FHP, in good faith, pursuant to receipt of the subject purchase order and contract, had approximately 601/6 of the Nova Scotia granite required for this contract delivered to the chosen staging area in Palm Beach Gardens. We have, on site, enough stone to provide approximately 100,000 sq.yds. ($124,000) of micro - surfacing within your community. To have to remove this aggregate and haul it to another project would cost in excess of $25,000. FHP would much rather try to work out a reasonable solution to the position we are being placed in by the City. We would prefer to reach a compromise acceptable to both parties, so as to remain on good terms with the City. I am totally confident your City, like all our other established customers, will learn from the use of this roadway maintenance technology, that micro- surfacing is by far the most cost effective maintenance strategy available today. JUL c1 195 11 :0=AM PALM BEACH GARDENS Bobbie Herakovich, City Manager City of Palm Beach Gardens July 16, 1998 Page 2 P.2 In Palm Beach County alone, numerous agencies have been uti>;>;ng our services for several years. To name a few, Palm Beach, Palm Springs, Lake Worth, North Palm Beach and Pahokie are established customers. More recently, Boynton Beach, Wellington, West Palm Beach, and Palm Beach County, besides your City, have selected FHP to provide micro- surfacing services. As you are aware, we recently had an unfortunate mix design problem in Wellington, but you need to understand that FHP was not happy with the results and we will be returning to Wellington next week to begin the re- micro- surfacing of the unsatisfactory areas to the Village staffs and FHP's satisfaction. FHP stands behind our services and has hundreds of satisfied customers, as previously mentioned. Mr. Patty has done an exemplary job in checking out not only micro- surfacing as a maintenance strategy, but also FHP as a qualified micro- surfacing contractor that can be counted on to provide a professional job. It does not seem appropriate to cancel a contract for micro- surfacing by our company because one of your citizens is complaining that micro - surfacing improperly placed by a prior contractor eight years ago is reflecting some centerline and edge raveling. In addition, he is concerned that the surface is too rough for kids to roller -blade on in the street. Although I have personally seen kids roller- blading on roadways FHP put down less than three months earlier, it is not my recommendation that kids play in the street. I agree our surface texture is designed to be "rougher" than hot mix, rolled asphalt. It was designed over 30 years ago in Germany for use on the Audubon to provide for better traction (friction factor) than a hot mix asphalt surface can provide. The aggregate in our material is Nova Scotia granite, a stone of approximately 10 times the hardness factor of the Florida limestone utilized in most hot mix asphalt surfaces. Our material's friction factor will allow cars to stop far quicker on dry or wet pavement, thus providing a safety factor for your residents. Additionally, it will not polish off and become slicker and white with age. Lastly, by going down in a liquid.form, it seals cracks that are only bridged by a new hot mix overlay, The City of Lakeland's Road Manager, Lary Carroll, told me their City has used FHP to micro- surface roadways for approximately seven years. now and they have never had a pot hole reappear in any roadway they have micro - surfaced. They dontract for approximately $600,000 per year in micro- surfacing. I hope this letter will give you, your staff and your City Commission food for thought before making a final decision relating to our subject contract. In an effort to come to a "friendly" solution, should you still feel you need to reduce the contract, FHP would be willing to reduce the overall contract by eliminating the "Map 3" area where Mr. Roger Blangy lives, as well as any other areas to bring the contract size down to approximately 100,000 sq.yds- ($124,000), the approximate amount of coverage required to utilize the aggregate we already have stored in your City for this contract. If you feel this is unreasonable, as a final suggestion we would consider doing only those roadways as listed in the City JUL c1 S•. 11:03AM PALM BE "-CH GARDENS P.3 Bobbie Herakovich, City Manager City of Palm Beach Gardens July 16, 1998 Page 3 Cammission agenda backup under "Map 6 and Maps 7, 8, 9, 10 & 11" which amount to 17,334 sq.yds. ($21,494.16) and 30,063 sq.yds. ($37,278.12), respectively, for a total of 558,772.28. This would give you and those concerned about prior micro- surfacing the opportunity to study our product and professionalism and would allow FHP to utilize a considerable amount of the stored aggregate and make the removal of the remainder more palletable while allowing us to earn a small profit on the reduced project size. At the same time, the City would save considerable dollars since many of the streets in these areas have concrete valley gutters and to properly overlay them with hot -mix asphalt would first require the old surface be milled to provide for the standard minimum of one inch (1 ") of hot mix. This is one of the many reasons micro- surfacing is becoming the chosen pavement maintenance strategy around the country. Additionally, your City streets are structurally sound; they are only in need of sealing and the provision of a new friction factor for safety. Micro-surfacing provides this maintenance as well or better than a hot -mix overlay. Please understand, contrary to some individuals' thinking, micro- surfacing is not an experimental product but, instead, a well - proven pavement maintenance strategy. Should you have any questions regarding this offer, please feel free to contact me or have your staff contact me at (954)714.2800 or fax me at (954)456 -6020. FIT principals and 1 sincerely hope we can come to a favorable conclusion that will be beneficial to all concerned. Anticipating your positive consideration, I remain, . Sincerely yours, District Represerlfgve iy Products, Inc. cc: Greg Dunham, Assistant City Manager Bob Patty, Public Works Director John R. Maggard, President, RP ,NAME FROM TO LENGTH WIDTH SO YDS MAP # 1 1 Golfers Circle and Drive , E S W f lilac Street Lilic Street 2996 24 7989: 2 Spruce Lane and s Seagrape Way ✓ Holly Drive Holly Drive 2230 24 7847 TOTAL SO YDS MAP # 1 15.836 MAP # 2 3 Hickory Drive J Locus Street PGA Blvd 3460 24 9226 4 Larch Street-/ Hickory Drive Military Trail 1651 24 4402 5 Larch Court ✓ - Larch. Street Cul-de -Sac 347 24 1333 6 Locust Street f Hickory Drive Cul-de -Sac 634 24 2563 7 Magnolia Drive Larch Street Hickory Drive 1355 24 6834 8 Oak Street \/ Locus Street Larch Street 843 24 2194 TOTAL SO YDS MAP # 2 26.552 TOTAL SO YDS MAP 3 55,549 MAP # 3 27 28 J Shady Lakes Circle Cul-de -Sac 748 24 1994 9 Ash Street Butternut Street Linden Avenue 970 24 2587 10 11 Banyan Street / Bayberry Street Hazel Avenue Elm Avenue River Linden Avenue 2049 948 24 24 5464 2528 12 Beech Street j Birch Street Cottonwood Avenue 854 24 2277 13 Birch Street / Beech Avenue Linden Avenue 1571 24 4189 14 Butternut Street-' J Bayberry Street Linden Avenue 925 24 2467 15 Catalpha Aveni j Birch Street Linden Avenue 834' 24 9924 16 Cedar Avenue Birch Street Chestnut Avenue 673 24 1795 17 Chestnut Avenue ✓ Ceder Avenue Birch Street 673 24 1795 18 Cottonwood Avenue Birch Street Beech Street 896 24 1501 19 Elm Avenue `� Birch Street Military Trail 1680 24 6196 20 Ficus Streets Hazel Avenue Hawthon Avenue 957 24 3537 21 Fir Street J Hazel Avenue Hackber y Street 756 24 2043 22 Hackberry Stre et Hazel Avenue Fir Street 620 24 1653 23 Hazel Avenue) Banyan Street Military Trail 1355 24 3613 24 Hemlock Street j Banyan Street Linden Avenue 1650 24 4400 25 Hawthorn Avenu�j Banyan Street Fiscus Street 836 24 2229 26 Linden Avenue v Ash Street Catalpha Avenue 1894 24 5051 TOTAL SO YDS MAP 3 55,549 MAP # 4 27 28 Pine Hill Trail f /, Quail Ridge Shady Lakes Circle Cul-de -Sac 748 24 1994 29 South Quail Ridge North �� Shady Lakes Circle Shady Cul- de-Sac 540 24 1440 Lakes Circle Cul- de-Sac 575 24 1533 30 Shady Lake Circle ./ f Shady Lakes Drive 'Shady Lakes Drive 1945 24 5186 31 Willow Run ✓ Pine Hill Trail Cul- de-Sac 326 24 869 32 Whispering Hollow Shady Lakes Drive Cul-de -Sac 528 24 1409 S�o� 11AQs TOTAL SQ YDS MAP 4 14,923' North Meridian ay Gardens East Drive 4550 24 44 Sandtree Driv Driveway at Home di End 1760 24 TOTAL SO YDS MAP 718.9,10,11 GRAND TOTAL SQUARD YARDS COST: 171,115 SO YDS x $1.24 = ;212182.26 30 TONS LEVELING $ 120 TON = $3,60 GRAND TOTAL ; 215,782.29 ' TOTAL INCLUDE CUL -0E SACS NOT IN LENTHA 12133 4693 30.863 171,115 fAAP 5 _ 33 Raintree Lane/ Raintree Drive Cul -de-Sac 1140 24 3040 34 Raintree Drive Burns Road Cul- de-Sac 1550 24 4149 35 Raintree Court Raintree Drive Raintree Lane 495 24 1320 36 Prosperity Oaks Court Prosperity Farms Ro Cul- de-Sac 515 24 1549 . TOTAL SO YDS MAP 5 101058 MAP 6 37 Eagle Lake Drivel / Golden Eagle Circle Cul- de-Sac 1877 24 5005 38 Golden Eagle Circle ✓ Hood Road Hood Road 3469 24 9250 TOTAL SQ YDS MAP 6 171334' MAPS 7,8,9,10.AN/D 11 39 Applecrest Driv�j-✓ Crestdale Street Arbor Way 1994 24 5317 40 Balsam Street �/ Lighthouse Drive Holly Drive 1338 24 2973 41 42 Daisy Avenue,./ Daphne Avenue, Holly Drive Holly Dahlia Avenue 925 24 2466 Drive Dogwood Avenue 1200 24 3281 43 Meridian Wa� South Garden East Drive Meridiart/Way, and North Meridian ay Gardens East Drive 4550 24 44 Sandtree Driv Driveway at Home di End 1760 24 TOTAL SO YDS MAP 718.9,10,11 GRAND TOTAL SQUARD YARDS COST: 171,115 SO YDS x $1.24 = ;212182.26 30 TONS LEVELING $ 120 TON = $3,60 GRAND TOTAL ; 215,782.29 ' TOTAL INCLUDE CUL -0E SACS NOT IN LENTHA 12133 4693 30.863 171,115 m e •m CDmG� 3 M N a � c °0 2 Q° a m m aJ a m In CD n m m Q a . m m An 10 W tA a N m 10 — --------- CD O Q r Q � v CA < <p <D r- c _ T [V N W O W � A , � � m CD Co r m N !I c • • a O a a a' , m : MAP *1= v i N o C.) N CD Cl) o^+ 'o Q �' CD CD N . CD r �' a • r a r Ob = O O to V tlf O O •G + '� 0 0 CA CD Z CD r ~ CD m + • O r• �! a Ga ��4'.C?' 'µPi��+tLf.:ua•fV• r � 0 T 1R Lb F2 O s'nc� D o go "' 0 g° ca CD ED r Cl) Q N(p,,�� ca - r i m i1. y r u V r a Sr C7 CD 4 • to CA ..� CD ♦ 69 to Z3 tft//!�� Ci o V ra + a A o +s a K a / � 1 ACwTWAL a CA '+i a .H• V / W �t y�.►O A p as h y fir.' :! p. ? as ppN CA to N p Cf m tNn W N -+ a o �, m ` to W C3) W N �' a + + 4 to �. A. t t7f P ?cJ W N� o 4A w to -9 '" c+' N p N po p r. -01 Qyy fl g p to W cm as � •'• A � Q OI V .�+ ar r r a ..► .. �,....r r V C7 rr, r p {�.�J •• Cf v r V a A O N 0 i m O • N , O m N O A 77 .r O tr cs 300 ;•tLSt : L`= �►c�� t��l�a��crcE�, AYE1 � 5 w itsSS 11.e•�3 t � te e, < 19; illfl ; 11440 iLl2S 12940 S19'� 11942 1941 g j 11°=2 10 < 1T: .6 11»'T 11936 11917 �,• 11 =4 Itt9Z7 11324 119"+ • 2.. _ • 119?fl i 192 • • � ° o 1917 119T1 iL9t2�it911 11s7Q 119139 17910 iL °O^.9 11414 119 1t 0 T ' 119222 tts {t1 C } j Z = r � : 4'11_ IW4 III 11"a 11237 I w � I e w ° o t i�7 Z • • • g o C 1884lt7flr t1aa4�886 f 113s t18Ta,tii7 „ E��° • -• 1870'1Ifl7'1 11870�11fl71 � � m � � I � � ° I � � o t � rtP�Si11E -`; 2_ 1I864 1 U 1 tBbi�tl8�ti +. 11868 ' •- 12ES�11L`7 � ' r. � 1"r'J4Fi ;� �-�ir ' ° . �, •::ice' 77af8 11 11848 17fl49 - i_o oc 17x:2 11fl 118:3 �T1Ea? • - I - .� 1844 X AL tiara �� I •i I 1T823 n i 1 AVE -. 11814 'N., F-M - iii I • e M _ ,{ ::3'.i. ' E�,d AYE .r. ° R -d(1 11 �4f• -• • fi ° V rS Y�' 7174 42 {4 1 fl • 4132 � • I ' e7 n I „ R i3 117 °..2117_=2 1. 117« erg . AVE • ° ° • Krr. A : # 12744 11743 t7 11743 IC- 4142 4S 1174 • 1. gall o° r 177.1 f r1724 1 %:3 I • • ` : 11713 w • • f 11716 1T- 11 11712 11722 I = 1L 117.c t2 _ 17621 - 17700 1 tt 11701 t 7 11708 11631 11T i . 1167fl 1767 11937 1 11 i1C2 17 e' 17 � '' 11632 126'03 � 11670 11611 �tgi° .y » :'��:-• �. tt6f ' Ila= : 17603 '+ ° g C 116fi13 iT647 116.,1 41SEw 16'01 s 4157. g+ .r• 4152 � � � y 1rCt ll=—R Ila, 33 11637 1542 • ]1S2C 1762_ 11 11622 4227E -�- 116136 i1S15 :p 75138 11611 11:aZ 116131 X S 222 s TOTAL SO YDS MAP 3 Butternut Street 4427 137 42 , Hazel Avenue River 2049 24 - Elm Avenue MAP # 3 948 9 Ash Street Cottonwood Avenue 10 Banyan Street Beech Avenue 11 Bayberry Street 24 12 Beech Street 925 13 Birch Street j 14 Butternut Street ,,--15 Chestnut Avenue' Catalpha Avenue* / 16 17 Cedar Avenue Chestnut Avenue 673 24 Birch Street Beech Street 18 Cottonwood Avenue ' 19 Elm Avenue = 20 Ficus Street 957 21 Fir Street Hackbeny Street 22 Hackberry Street Hazel Avenue 23 Hazel Avenue 24 24 Hemlock Street 1355 25 Hawthorn Avenue Linden Avenue 26 .Linden Avenue TOTAL SO YDS MAP 3 Butternut Street Linden Avenue 970 24 Hazel Avenue River 2049 24 - Elm Avenue Linden Avenue 948 24 Birch Street Cottonwood Avenue 854 24 Beech Avenue Linden Avenue 1571 24 Bayberry Street Linden Avenue 925 24 Birch Street Linden Avenue 834 24 Birch Street Chestnut Avenue' 673 24 Ceder Avenue Birch Street 673 24 Birch Street Beech Street 896 24 Birch Street Military Trail 1680 24 Hazel Avenue Hawthone Avenue 957 24 Hazel Avenue Hackbeny Street 756 24 Hazel Avenue Fir Street 620 24 Banyan Street Military Trail 1355 24 Banyan Street Linden Avenue 1650 24 Banyan Street Fiscus Street 836 24 Ash Street Catalpha Avenue 1894 24 55.549 2587 5464 2528 2277 4189 t l 246711 92241 1795 1795 1501 6196 3537 2043 1653 3613 4400 9229 5051 M His • N1 Hut - to ,N1 RLZL V , • � ?r'1 E{LE1 J h� tO J r l� 1 !a S . OVHS J V _. ._. WW p w co co coo N G) W LA r �t � /�/ ii Vetetetet� NN 0404CN �W)W)C)m r • a Q m Q U) cl, cc V cc c] V a to fn !n co w cm J o m m m A m G1 cc U U U W U U 0 —mmmm m �� - > UUC�p p Q W m m Q1 Q1 W y J J J_ J� J W ca W m L t C c CO of � LL co . V♦ co CO ZU = CD CD CM a c Q _C � C13 co O coq Q aC�v i�� a NNNc� jcCj i M His • N1 Hut - to ,N1 RLZL V , • � ?r'1 E{LE1 J h� tO J r l� 1 !a S . OVHS ti`/ • bog / dbLY 3'4 N _ V , • i ' wWl S • W W W W CA Cn A W amn�m D _ M C m ,:L pr O H ' n O C • 7. O co CD � v c v � bl �- _ •T ".��111ii�(� � ::'0 � r ff7 � O H p �' 1 Q80I Cho ; I Z t2ol ? not f6Ol O OLDL •' iSo01 L901 Q m w —1 CLCL S2O1{96OL N o C m Cos.-, . d !O! t801 LSOL H C9OL 6OL 0901 rD O O 5901 m y m L. ._ • agog C;c 0i y �{ + J D C V r •. cn C7+ A Cfl .ja • GtIOROCD AAAA O � CT W -L W A W A �A q N FA a Q m O m O ti`/ • bog / dbLY 3'4 s Ally M Ui C N LO C3 1 N N i r.. CO �- cn * n cc a � O 'p v !) o y Z m cr J Z+ O E U m co� C13 m W ° m � ° o �i y v �U m m Co cc W .J C m m C13 O W a 1- ao co cr) s Ally n N 01 � c LU N N Q SRADY LANE .m [lei� AATFLR ST. N . U m � N > A N m C. Vv a _\\ � V C SEE MAP 0139 CS=- -, DALE ST. l6'b 'I e 1 in 4.3 S527I !, 9501 AMOR WAY 921 9201 I • I `� `3 I " I `� 1 19201 9202 !� 9191 • • • • • 8191 91ST . �� I � � � I m r. (' � a 9187 9186 ' 9181 • I fl I e� 9175 $ • } • 1 ' 9173 9179177 9172 SAM= CFL 9164 9155 9160 N O m � N m O 9161 0.1 4442 + I N I � : (,� (= I 1925 914E S14T 914 9251 9148 • 9135 - 9134 9133 9134 9137 9134 9121 3125 9 t22 9121 9120 129 15 15 3 Stm 9106 9105 3108 lt 9104 9025 Sill ' r OSHA ST. _ 9096 n {282�4DIIS�• 914216 � -I* Illy I I I &I If �� I• f!• . CS=- -, DALE ST. l6'b 'I e 1 in 4.3 S527I !, 9501 AMOR WAY 921 9201 I • I `� `3 I " I `� 1 19201 9202 !� 9191 • • • • • 8191 91ST . �� I � � � I m r. (' � a 9187 9186 ' 9181 • I fl I e� 9175 $ • } • 1 ' 9173 9179177 9172 SAM= CFL 9164 9155 9160 N O m � N m O 9161 0.1 4442 + I N I � : (,� (= I 1925 914E S14T 914 9251 9148 • 9135 - 9134 9133 9134 9137 9134 9121 3125 9 t22 9121 9120 129 15 15 3 Stm 9106 9105 3108 lt 9104 9025 Sill ' r OSHA ST. _ 9096 n {282�4DIIS�• 914216 � . loe• ' �srtoFUt -err — ur 0zc tilt 2 M 199 iL96 I �r99 sL tr., itir �� ►� 6z • r Vass r 10 is r r VV — C'aT ttSZ S v 82E C2E 9Q Set t?$ tC[5 N ° • I L" I v° N . P csa srr ax tr! lE! tus is wmco _ z_n !.v•� 661, Q£9 ZEL6 (IM �1 I 5�v� �'Ia s m O LAC ter Zt9 N.a �9 v r !.0 -°EF Q Ll! tfL6 t5L6 v Itl g M w v' u m m w C S 1�1 Q t! 35L5 {.9L6, $ ° ° a' Yi' o I o m SL lr ?f�� 1 LET Olt COs 3916 �6 (b� BAY ASSVQ [� N zz aL •� L tiv Ei-t �a a 4SL6' as • Gy` Iz t =96 i m m° 02 .� =� �7 0 C9d s OZ35 7 X17 tz96 r . LLS f gas 1 r•Q1 "a tsz LSZ t;ls tss LM LC ,yr 6Z ztsz Las is tr fta6 9186 m 113E ZLE L5; 8=S 7 35'S E986 tiS"6 via as 2 6LI •� 6c� SK6 eo Q •L'f',� cm OCC OK YfS 2 SK 6TS Sob mho m C' 6Z5 s Csi �f" Orr am SZS � TLS, � RCS LL66 � OL6S � , O $Z6S SZ66 4" lai LZS ! C'a' US CL5 a `C _ p+ •�' SLS Dis litS • OZS L1S Ga.; L1S C15S 4M L15 VI US ttC 0_533 L5ob CD s l 7 ter =1 � ri oszr . as-zr to A71t71•i z QEit S2S i CIVw W it 00t •i Rao w Lee 6310 I w CA3 SMO L9t me SO= nact :. ��- t Mot el0al - 6100 Btoot lot Beat m li10 , �-, 4 LMMOI lot s1lOL w C''3 steal `- Q sztat not Q gnat — tElot utos rtot slat — t Hot In star '�- t Gnat root sstot to :tot =101 SItOL IQ ZpZOt CfiLO • r .•�.� ►LZOt - or" M SZZ=t LK al,u 77: gC • t0t30 KXLY Dfi 506 sit e m 1Q2]7 CD g6s Q .941 � 1 n Q O 10238 lc= 10125 1021< •, 1C2I Q1 10� 637 9991 2le��'I' 1 CAPRCI et CR M-11TH its n I n M I I I I 10149 10188 10187 10190 tp� 9� 10207 10214 t0I _ 8111'7"72 GiiiruH 10171 e n N e O q T A s a o n° 013 I018g 019! 201 9 10202 ° alai nl�l 10175 161 a 10154 10176 016 lD2 017< mI�I�i��►_� 10161 I01t5 10162 701 379 10171 1179 tal it O1 10144 01 — , 0165 10117 1012E 10129 1011E • 37e' pl M 174 1011 / .10151 10131 10130 10 10138 10136 ° �— d 1016 IstS lo " tDLl 10 < 101, 10117 10114 10115 tolls ID118 1012 ut S toll 10i1r 10121 O 101 CO v 15 10182 rot 10102 < 0102 iQ1 101[ 10105 N N Cr) 10083 10ag 10097 .' lam 13088 1 tp2 as c2 a� I j 2 10081 100E 10087 tDI I < 10071 ]0371 10074 1 °0 w 1006° 100fip I 1M' 10°71 100; v v 006 1°060 1006 N N x0049 10341 1001 10049 ✓ IDM 10046 10046 IDDC LO N IDO 3 I� 00,%'! 0°32 1°031 '� 10032 10021 3� 13612 101'36 GNi U71 3847 10016 10015 ID016 TC017 721 3697 ° w /0. 3fi K= DR LK al,u 77: gC • t0t30 KXLY Dfi 506 sit e m 'e46�h--°30 �i91��'Ta��.�.l =gg' CD g6s Q .941 > 1 n Q O r-5 CWUTCN wt wyAlti io o O�D921 9713 637 9991 2le��'I' j CAPRCI et CR M-11TH 0 n I n M I I I I i 9� _ 8111'7"72 GiiiruH 9875 09801 e n N e O q T A s a o n° C 9787 0 a e n r C 0 ¢ ° alai nl�l < 4) %75 Sul I=i=P:IiStltlir! CL e .V. C.) mI�I�i��►_� LK al,u 77: gC • t0t30 KXLY Dfi 506 sit e m 91'32 675 1 n 9713 637 e N .� I � �.� n 976' 649 3'083 . I I n n :i �i 9011 6e1 s r$ wf 5: i .. q� s • t .• r ' SSE N CROSSROADS • .I IE44Sandtree 3800 - 3tso Drive Driven+ay at Home di End 1760 24 48Q3 N e t 1 � W ycr d/V I y To l 7 TOV70 • ?08 CITY OF PALM BEACH GARDENS CITY COUNCIL Agenda Cover Memorandum Date: August 20, 1998 Subject/Agenda Item: Date Prepared: July 30, 1998 Workshop: Petition SP- 97 -13: Golf Digest Campus Hank Skokowski, agent for WCI Limited Partnership and Golf Digest, is requesting a site plan approval for a 26.15 acre "Golf Campus ", a 4.1 acre golf maintenance facility, and two (2) roadways connecting PGA Boulevard with the golf campus. The site is generally located 3/4 mile north of PGA Boulevard and '/z mile west of the Florida Turnpike. (3 -42S- 42E) Recommendation /Motion: Reviewed by: i, gl to 4v.) ff to City Attorney L-W Originating Dept: Plan Costs: $ O Total Council Action: [ ] Approved ACM r $ Q [ J Approved w/ em,ww Current FY Other N/A [ ] Denied Advertised: Funding Source: [ ] Continued to: Attachments: Date: [ ] Operating Paper. [ ] Other NIA Submitted by: [ x ] Not Required GrovS Mgt Dire6or AfFec rtles Budget Acct#: Approved by: [ ] Notified [ ] None City Manager [ x ] Not required BACKGROUND: Location. Zoning and Land Use The petitioner is proposing a 26.15 acre "golf campus ", including a 25,000 square foot golf clubhouse, a 7,315 square foot teaching facility, and eight platted lots which will be utilized for corporate lodges. In addition, the petitioner is proposing a 4.1 acre "golf maintenance" facility. This site, located to the north of the "golf campus" area, will include 14,570 square feet of maintenance buildings and storage areas. Also included within the limits of the site plan review is the main entry road (North -South Parkway) extending north from PGA Agenda Cover Memorandum Petition SP -97 -13 Page 2 August 20, 1998 Boulevard and "Golf Club Drive" which will extend from North -South Parkway to the "golf campus" area. The petitioner is proposing an intersection of North -South Parkway and PGA Boulevard directly opposite the main entry into PGA Boulevard (Avenue of Champions), creating a four -way intersection. The site plan review area is part of the Golf Digest Planned Community District (PCD) master plan. The PCD will eventually provide for the development of approximately 1,995 dwelling units and 155,000 square feet of office and retail. The north -south parkway under review as part of this site plan approval will eventually be extended to serve the "phase two" development of the PCD, which will include the construction of the 1995 dwelling units. TABLE 1 & 2 EXISTING ZONING AND LAND USE DESIGNATIONS AND SITE ANALYSIS PETITION Subject Property : Planned Development Area (PDA) Residential Low (RL) North : Public/Institutional (P /1) Public (P) South : Planned Development Area (PDA) Residential Low (RL) Planned Community District (PCD) Professional Office (PO) East : Planned Development Area (PDA) Residential Low (RL) Commercial (C) West: Planned Development Area (PDA) Residential Low (RL) Zoning: PCD Required/Allowed Provided Compliance Land Use: RL Zoning (PCD Requirements) Comparison Open Space Minimum open space 40% yes requirement of 10% Conshrient Building Site Area minimum: 126 acres 1 yes 15,000 feet I I Agenda Cover Memorandum Petition SP -97 -13 Page 3 August 20, 1998 Zoning: PCD Required /Allowed Provided compliance Land Use: RL Zoning (PCD Requirements) Comparison Building Site minimum: 1 approx. 1,464 feet yes Width 100 feet Building Lot maximum: 4% yes Coverage 40% Building Height maximum: 25.75 feet: midpoint of yes Limit 45 feet gable Setbacks: Note, setback distances were measured from limits of site plan review not legal property lines. Front 25 feet 265 feet yes Side 15 feet 30 feet yes Side facing street 15 feet N/A yes Rear 15 feet 50 feet yes Nonwmsidendat. : ;ate Ai�rrtenanca , . fact Building Site Area minimum: 174,240 square feet yes 15,000 square feet Building Site minimum: 570 feet yes Width 100 feet Building Lot maximum: 8.3% yes Coverage 60% Building Height maximum: 13 feet yes Limit 50 feet 0 Agenda Cover Memorandum Petition SP -97 -13 Page 4 August 20, 1998 Zoning: PCD Required /Allowed Provided Compliance Land Use: RL Zoning I (PCD Requirements) Comparison Rear 115 feet I 1 57.6 feet [ yes Corporate RL -2 Provided Lodges Residential Use Zoning Comparison " Building Site Area minimum: 14,036 square feet yes 11,000 square feet Building Site Minimum 95 feet yes Width 90 feet Building Lot 35 percent 50% no Coverage Building Height two stories, 40 feet no Limit 36 feet Front 25 feet 20 feet no Side 10 feet or 15 feet yes 10% of lot width Side facing street 20 feet N/A WA Rear 15 feet 10 feet no Buildina and Materials The "golf campus" architectural theme will reflect traditional "country club" architecture found within the eastern United States. The petitioner is proposing the use of "neo- colonial" style architecture, including stone, clapboard siding and wooden shutters and trim to help capture the desired effect. The petitioner is also providing appropriate landscaping, stone walls, and stone and brick signage consistent with the traditional theme. Both the clubhouse facility and the training center will have "dark grey" clapboard siding, with green shutters. The petitioner will submit color and material samples. The clubhouse facility consists of several accessory uses, including a restaurant, bar and snack bar. The petitioner has indicated that the restaurant and bar will cater Agenda Cover Memorandum Petition SP -97 -13 Page 5 August 20, 1998 predominantly to persons utilizing the golfing facility. Staff has requested a parking calculation accommodating all the different uses at the campus. The petitioner has indicated that initial construction will be at the 4.1 acre maintenance facility. This timing will be necessary for the completion of the golf courses. The maintenance facility will consist of three metal buildings, including a main 12,000 square foot structure, an irrigation pump house and a 1,500 square foot storage structure. The entire site will be heavily screened by dense vegetation planting. Traffic Circuletign The petitioner is requesting that access to the site (North -South Parkway and Golf Club Drive) be included as part of the site plan approval request. As part of the site plan approval, the petitioner will install landscaping and a portion of the North -South Parkway, which is part of Palm Beach County's long range thoroughfare plan. The proposed configuration will allow for future expansion to the full 120 foot right -of -way, as required by Palm Beach County. The petitioner has indicate that the proposed landscaping along the roadway is intended to remain in place'should the roadway be expanded. The petitioner has indicated that the proposed "rotary" feature which will intersect with the future "East -West Parkway" will not be constructed at this time. The configuration and landscaping of Golf Club Drive, which is to be completed upon this site plan review, will be permanent. Landscaping/Parkway Theme The site meets the minimum points requirements per LDR chapter 98. The Parkway theme is consistent with PCD requirements. Traffic GoncurrenGy To be approved through the PCD approval process. Sianaae and En #ry Feature A brick entry feature will be placed at the main entrance at PGA Boulevard and North South Parkway. The entry feature will eventually be incorporated into a more elaborate signage program to be constructed at a later date. Staff has requested that the petitioner provide for additional landscaping surrounding the entrance area at this time. Three additional signs will be located within the "golf campus" indicating the location Agenda Cover Memorandum August 20, 1998 Petition SP -97 -13 Page 6 of the clubhouse, training facility and the main campus area. This signage will be incorporated into the brick and stone hardscaping theme. Drainaae To be approved through the PCD approval process Site Plan and Appearance Review Committee Meeting At its July 15, 1998 meeting, the Site Plan and Appearance Review Committee unanimously recommended approval of this petition to City Council with eight (8) conditions. The petitioner has responded with a revised site plan since this time. The petitioner has eliminated an on -site wetland and added an additional lot for corporate lodging. The elimination of the wetland was in response to comments made by the South Florida Water Management District and is part of an overall PCD master plan revision. In addition to this, the petitioner has revised the site plan to comply with most conditions set forth by the Site Plan Committee to be resolved prior to City Council approval. The following three (3) conditions must still be satisfied: (1) Prior to City Council consideration of approval, the petitioner shall submit to the City revised plans that will indicate the lake edge treatment per South Florida Water Management District guidelines. (2) Prior to City Council consideration of approval the site plan and associated cross sections shall be revised to be consistent with the approved conceptual surface water management plan. Said plans shall be submitted and approved by the Growth Management Department prior to City Council consideration of approval. (3) Prior to City Council consideration of approval, the applicant shall submit a revised key map that matches the Golf Digest Master Plan PCD map. /eat G: \Long Range \sp9713.st6.wpd CITY OF PALM BEACH GARDENS CITY COUNCIL Agenda Cover Memorandum Meeting Date: August 20, 1998 Subject/Agenda Item: Item for Discussion - Funding for Intergovernmental Projects: Northlake Corridor Task Force and Eastward Ho! Committee Recommendation /Motion: Staff is seekina Council direction_ Reviewed by: Originating Dept.: Costs: $ 0 Council Action: City Attorney N/A Planning and Zoning Total [ ] Approved Division ACM $ Q [ ] Approved w/ condftiom /J� Current FY Other N/A /'' [ ] Denied Advertised: Funding Source: [ ] Continued to: Attachments: Date: [ ] Operating Paper: [ x ] Not Required [ ] Other N/A Submitted by: Growth Mgt. Director Affected parties [ ] Notified Budget Acct #: [ ] None Approved by: City Manager [ x ] Not required BACKGROUND: The City is a participant in two ongoing intergovernmental projects /committees: the Northlake Corridor Task Force and the Eastward Ho! Committee. Both of these bodies are comprised of our neighboring governments. Also, both have conceptual projects which need funding. Each project/committee is outlined below, as well as the funding request. Staff is seeking direction on how much the City would like to contribute to each of these projects. Page 2 Funding Eastward Ho! - US Hiqhway One Project The Eastward Ho! Committee is comprised of all municipalities along the US1 corridor from Tequesta to Rivieria Beach, as well as Palm Beach County. The committee's first effort is to address the US1 corridor. The respective governments will be requesting the MPO to reduce US1 from a six -lane thoroughfare to a four -lane arterial. Within the excess right -of -way landscaping and streetscape treatments are desired. A US 1 Corridor Plan is being developed with the assistance of Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council ( TCRPC). The Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) and the state Department of Community Affairs (DCA) have committed to partially fund the plan with Eastward Ho! monies. The remainder of the funding is to be collected from the participating governments. Each government is requested to fund $7,000. (This may be in the form of donations from businesses along the corridor or an allocation from the government itself.) At the next meeting each participant is to bring their commitment to fund their share of the project, or bring donations totalling the $7,000. (All monies will be passed through TCRPC who will facilitate the project.) At the August 6' meeting, the City Council directed staff to prepare a resolution authorizing the $7,000 contribution, however, the Northlake project was not discussed. The Council may desire to contribute something less than $7,000 since Palm Beach Gardens has little US1 frontage, and contribute to the Northlake project also. Northlake Boulevard Corridor Task Force At its August 21, 1997 meeting, City Council agreed to enter an interlocal agreement with the Village of North Palm Beach, Town of Lake Park and Palm Beach County for the formation of the Northlake Boulevard Corridor Task Force. The Task Force was given the charge of possibly hiring a consultant to develop a plan which would address "improvement, enhancement, renovation and /or redevelopment" of the Northlake Boulevard corridor from Military Trail to U.S. 1. The interlocal agreement also obligates the City, the Village of North Palm Beach, Town of Lake Park to each provide $5,000 in order to retain the services of a consultant. Palm Beach County agreed to provide at least $5,000 in in -kind services. Currently, the Task Force is finalizing a contract with TeamPlan, Inc., who has been selected by the Task Force to create a landscape /streetscape plan for Northlake Boulevard. In addition, the Task Force will soon be implementing the landscape plan, with the assistance of grants and local governmental funding, and the creation of an overlay district, which would address traffic circulation, land use and signage as well as other land development issues. The possible contribution to be asked of the City for these additional actions could be as much as approximately $45,000. Fundinq Sources A possible source for these funds is the Council contingency fund, line item 1- 1 -511- 5910. 0 0 0 Q� M a O ` pe u as "' �U a �a 2 O a u' 0 cn 0 0 Q� M a O ` pe u as "' �U a �a 2 O a u' 0 J wo rr V s 43 V 'P) "4 so �L014A .r4 to 8 1 41 rev•• bAA i M FA W O N to 0 'OOo.0 bO 40 j b a � M U • A e-4 0 wA 4 NV 0+1a: N C! �q NYI + A ' O b PI • A n uc••l N � � � id b •� J wo rr V s 43 V 'P) "4 so �L014A .r4 to 8 1 41 rev•• bAA i M FA W O N to 0 'OOo.0 bO 40 j b a � M U • A e-4 0 wA 4 NV 0+1a: N C! �q NYI + A ' O b PI • A n uc••l