Loading...
10-23-2025 VC REG-A with attachments VILLAGE OF NORTH PALM BEACH REGULAR SESSION AGENDA VILLAGE HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS THURSDAY, OCTOBER 23, 2025 501 U.S. HIGHWAY 1 6:00 PM Deborah Searcy Lisa Interlandi Kristin Garrison Susan Bickel Orlando Puyol Mayor Vice Mayor President Pro Tem Councilmember Councilmember Chuck Huff Leonard G. Rubin Jessica Green Village Manager Village Attorney Village Clerk INSTRUCTIONS FOR “WATCH LIVE” MEETING To watch the meeting live please go to our website page (link provided below) and click the “Watch Live” link provided on the webpage: https://www.village-npb.org/995/16543/Watch-Meetings-Live?activeLiveTab=widgets ROLL CALL PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ADDITIONS, DELETIONS, AND MODIFICATIONS TO THE AGENDA APPROVAL OF MINUTES 1. Minutes of the Regular Session held October 9, 2025 COUNCIL BUSINESS MATTERS STATEMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC, PETITIONS AND COMMUNICATIONS Members of the public may address the Council concerning items on the Consent Agenda or any non agenda item under Statements from the Public. Time Limit: 3 minutes Members of the public who wish to speak on any item listed on the Regular Session or Workshop Session Agenda will be called on when the issue comes up for discussion. Time Limit: 3 minutes Anyone wishing to speak should complete a Public Comment Card (on the table at back of Council Chambers) and submit it to the Village Clerk prior to the beginning of the meeting. REPORTS (SPECIAL COMMITTEES AND ADVISORY BOARDS) CONSENT AGENDA The Consent Agenda is for the purpose of expediting issues of a routine or pro -forma nature. Councilmembers may remove any item from the Consent Agenda, which would automatically convey that item to the Regular Agenda for separate discussion and vote. 2. RESOLUTION – Approving the submission of an application for State Aid to Libraries Grant Funding; and authorizing execution of the Grant Agreement. Regular Session Agenda, October 23, 2025 Page 2 of 2 3. RESOLUTION – Amending the Comprehensive Pay Plan adopted as part of the Fiscal Year 2026 Budget to create one Full-Time Director of Planning and Economic Development and rename and restructure the Building and Zoning Department to the Community Developm ent Department, reclassify one Full-Time Code Compliance Officer to one Full-Time Code Compliance Supervisor, add one Part-Time Senior Building Construction Inspector position and add one Part-Time Recreation Assistant position. 4. Receive for file Minutes of the Country Club Advisory Board meeting held 5/12/25. 5. Receive for file Minutes of the Planning, Zoning, and Adjustment Board meeting held 8/5/25. 6. Receive for file Minutes of the Environmental Committee meeting held 9/8/25. 7. Receive for file Minutes of the Recreation Advisory Board meeting held 9/9/25. DECLARATION OF EX PARTE COMMUNICATIONS PUBLIC HEARINGS AND QUASI-JUDICIAL MATTERS 8. 1ST READING OF ORDINANCE 2025-16 - CODE AMENDMENT - PENSION AND CERTAIN OTHER BENEFITS FOR FIRE AND POLICE EMPLOYEES Consider at motion to adopt on first reading Ordinance 2025-16 amending Division 4, "Pension and Certain Other Benefits for Fire and Police Employees," of Article V, Pensions and Retirements Systems," of Chapter 2, "Administration," of the Village Code of Ordinances by Amending Section 2-170.1 to implement changes to the Deferred Retirement Option Plan resulting from Memorandums of Understanding with the Collective Bargaining Agents representing Police Officer and Firefighter employees. OTHER VILLAGE BUSINESS MATTERS 9. PRESENTATION – Vulnerability Assessment Results COUNCIL AND ADMINISTRATION MATTERS MAYOR AND COUNCIL MATTERS/REPORTS VILLAGE MANAGER MATTERS/REPORTS ADJOURNMENT If a person decides to appeal any decision by the Village Council with respect to any matter considered at the Village Counci l meeting, he will need a record of the proceedings, and for such purpose he 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 (F.S. 286.0105). In accordance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, any person who may require special accommodation to participate in this meeting should contact the Village Clerk’s office at 841-3355 at least 72 hours prior to the meeting date. This agenda represents the tentative agenda for the scheduled meeting of the Village Council. Due to the nature of governmental duties and responsibilities, the Village Council reserves the right to make additions to, or deletions from, the items contained in this agenda. DRAFT MINUTES OF THE REGULAR SESSION VILLAGE COUNCIL OF NORTH PALM BEACH, FLORIDA OCTOBER 9, 2025 Present: Deborah Searcy, Mayor Lisa Interlandi, Vice Mayor Kristin Garrison, President Pro Tem Susan Bickel, Councilmember Orlando Puyol, Councilmember Chuck Huff, Village Manager Len Rubin, Village Attorney Jessica Green, Village Clerk ROLL CALL Mayor Searcy called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. All members of Council were present. All members of staff were present. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Vice Mayor Interlandi led the public in the Pledge. AWARDS AND RECOGNITION Mayor Searcy read a Commendation for Louis Giarusso commending Mr. Giarusso for his 35 years of volunteer service as Volunteer Deputy Chief in the North Palm Beach Fire Rescue Department. Mr. Giarusso accepted the Commendation and thanked Council. Representatives from Ranger Construction presented the 2025 District 4 Roads and Streets Building of the Year Award that they received for their work on the milling and resurfacing project they did for the Village. An award plaque was also presented to Assistant Public Works Director Jamie Mount for his engineering services work on the project. Council thanked Ranger Construction for presenting them with the awards. Mayor Searcy read a Proclamation for Florida City Week. Mayor Searcy thanked everyone for participating in Florida City Government. APPROVAL OF MINUTES The Minutes of the Regular Session held September 25, 2025 were approved as written. Draft Minutes of Village Council Meeting held October 9, 2025 Page 2 of 7 STATEMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC Chris Ryder, 118 Dory Road S., expressed his concerns regarding the Country Club’s budget and finances and made suggestions for the proposal of additional Country Club parking. Mike Morris, 751 Jacana Way, expressed his concerns regarding the proposed Village Place Project and concerns regarding additional employees added to the payroll over the past seven (7) years. Councilmember Puyol addressed Mr. Ryder’s comments and stated that the Country Club Finances needed to be reviewed and the correct information given to residents. Councilmember Puyol stated that when residents ask questions, staff and Council should address and not ignore their questions. Mr. Huff clarified information that was presented by Mr. Ryder stating that employees who make repairs to the Country Club are paid their salaries out of the General Fund since the Country Club building is considered a Village facility. Mr. Huff stated that the majority of the employees that have been hired over the past few years were part-time and seasonal part-time employees for the Country Club and the Recreation Department. Councilmember Bickel recommended having a workshop to discuss the Country Club’s budget and finances. Discussion ensued between Councilmembers regarding the Country Club’s budget and finances and how to address comments and answer questions from residents. Deputy Village Manager Samia Janjua gave an update on the year end financials process and stated that the final numbers would be available in March. INTRODUCTION OF AUDIT COMMITTEE APPLICANTS The following applicants were introduced to the Village Council: John T. Campbell Francine Mantyh Rich Pizzolato David B. Rendina William J. Zanke RESOLUTION 2025-50 – APPOINTING MEMBERS TO THE AUDIT COMMITTEE By written ballots, the originals of which are attached to the minutes of record, the Council appointed members to the Audit Committee as follows: Audit Committee: John T. Campbell and Francine Mantyh A motion was made by Councilmember Bickel and seconded by Vice Mayor Interlandi to adopt Resolution 2025-50 entitled: A RESOLUTION OF THE VILLAGE COUNCIL OF THE VILLAGE OF NORTH PALM BEACH, FLORIDA, APPOINTING MEMBERS TO THE AUDIT COMMITTEE; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. The Council thanked everyone who applied. Draft Minutes of the Village Council Regular Session held October 9, 2025 Page 3 of 7 RESOLUTION 2025-50 – APPOINTING MEMBERS TO THE AUDIT COMMITTEE continued Thereafter, the motion to adopt Resolution 2025-50 passed unanimously. Mr. Huff introduced Kate Pokorny as the newest Communications Specialist hired by the Village. Councilmembers welcomed Ms. Pokorny. CONSENT AGENDA APPROVED Councilmember Bickel moved to approve the Consent Agenda. Councilmember Puyol seconded the motion, which passed with all present voting aye. The following item was approved: Receive for file Minutes of the Waterways Board meeting held 7/22/25. RESOLUTION 2025-51 – INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT WITH SEACOAST UTILITY AUTHORITY A motion was made by Councilmember Bickel and seconded by Councilmember Puyol to adopt Resolution 2025-51 entitled: A RESOLUTION OF THE VILLAGE COUNCIL OF THE VILLAGE OF NORTH PALM BEACH, FLORIDA, APPROVING AN INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT WITH SEACOAST UTILITY AUTHORITY FOR JOINT PARTICIPATION AND PROJECT FUNDING FOR THE MARINA DRIVE INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND VILLAGE CLERK TO EXECUTE THE AGREEMENT; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. Public Works Director Chad Girard explained that the project was originally a Village initiated project that focused on roadway and drainage improvements along Marina Drive, with minimal subsurface construction requirements planned. Seacoast Utility Authority (SUA) identified an opportunity to replace a significant portion of their aging water and force main infrastructure along the same corridor. Mr. Girard explained that since the removal and replacement of the aging SUA utility infrastructure constituted the primary scope of work the Village and SUA agreed that it would be beneficial for SUA to take the lead role in managing construction. SUA proposed to replace aging water and force mains along Marina Drive, from Yacht Club Drive to the northern cul-de-sac. Mr. Girard stated that the Village’s total price for the work with contingency would be $266,859.61. Mayor Searcy asked how much of the project cost was Seacoast Utility Authority covering. Mr. Girard stated that SUA would be covering about three-quarters of the total project cost. The total project cost was approximately $900,000 and SUA would be covering $733,000. Discussion ensued between Councilmembers and Mr. Girard regarding the project’s scope of work and the Village’s scope of work versus Seacoast Utility Authority’s scope of work. Thereafter the motion to adopt Resolution 2025-51 passed unanimously. Draft Minutes of the Village Council Regular Session held October 9, 2025 Page 4 of 7 RESOLUTION 2025-52 – POLICE VEHICLES PURCHASE A motion was made by Councilmember Bickel and seconded by Councilmember Puyol to adopt Resolution 2025-52 entitled: A RESOLUTION OF THE VILLAGE COUNCIL OF THE VILLAGE OF NORTH PALM BEACH, FLORIDA APPROVING THE PURCHASE OF SEVEN VEHICLES FOR THE VILLAGE POLICE DEPARTMENT; AUTHORIZING THE PURCHASE OF FIVE 2025 CHEVROLET TAHOE PATROL VEHICLES FROM BRANNEN MOTOR COMPANY AND WAIVING THE VILLAGE’S PURCHASING POLICIES AND PROCEDURES; AUTHORIZING THE PURCHASE OF ONE 2026 CHEVROLET TAHOE DETECTIVE VEHICLE FROM GARBER CHEVROLET AND ONE 2026 TOYOTA SEQUOIA DETECTIVE VEHICLE FROM SEMINOLE TOYOTA PURSUANT TO PRICING ESTABLISHED IN AN EXISTING FLORIDA SHERIFF’S ASSOCIATION CONTRACT; AUTHORIZING THE OUTFITTING OF THE VEHICLES BY DANA SAFETY SUPPLY PURSUANT TO PRICING ESTABLISHED IN AN EXISTING CITY OF MIAMI CONTRACT; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. Mr. Girard explained that the purpose of the resolution was to purchase seven (7) Police Department patrol and detective vehicles. Five (5) Chevrolet Tahoe patrol units would be purchased from Brannen Motor Company and two (2) detective vehicles, one Chevrolet Tahoe LS would be purchased from Garber Chevrolet and one Toyota Sequoia Hybrid would be purchased from Seminole Toyota. All vehicles would be outfitted by Dana Safety Supply. Discussion ensued between Mr. Girard, Chief Coliskey and Councilmembers regarding the colors and painting of the police vehicles. Mayor Searcy asked why the vehicles were being purchased and not leased. Mrs. Janjua explained that the interest rates for leasing had increased and it was more feasible for the Village to purchase rather than lease. Mr. Girard provided a timeline for the purchase, delivery and outfitting of the police vehicles. Thereafter the motion to adopt Resolution 2025-51 passed unanimously. VILLAGE MANAGER MATTERS/REPORTS Discussion – Country Club Parking Mr. Huff began a presentation regarding a proposal to expand the parking at the Country Club. Mr. Huff discussed and explained the reasons for the discussion which were that the parking was identified as the Club’s #1 weakness, was the #1 threat on the Village’s SWOT Analysis, and there was not enough parking during busy times especially during season (Oct-May). Mr. Huff discussed and explained the current parking challenges. Mr. Huff showed a conceptual rendering provided by Peacock & Lewis that showed the tennis courts and parking lots at the Country Club. Mr. Huff proposed taking tennis courts 1 & 2 and shifting them to the north end and use the location for parking. Mr. Huff discussed the areas on the rendering that were currently being used for parking. Draft Minutes of the Village Council Regular Session held October 9, 2025 Page 5 of 7 Discussion – Country Club Parking continued Mr. Huff continued the presentation by discussing Staff’s initial conceptual design revision and next steps which would be professional design and engineering which would refine details such as circulation, drainage, lighting, landscaping, fencing, parking building, & ADA compliance. Policy needed to fund the project and final design would ensure that parking and the facility was functional, safe and sustainable. Mr. Huff stated that moving the tennis courts 1 & 2 to the north side would cost approximately $200,000 and another $250,000 to $300,000 would be needed to build the new parking lot. Mr. Huff asked for Council direction on how to proceed. Discussion ensued between Councilmembers, Mr. Huff and Mr. Bowman on how to proceed with adding parking to the Country Club. Mr. Huff asked if he could take the presentation and Council’s suggestions to the Country Club Advisory Board and the Audit Committee for their input. Discussion ensued. Council agreed for Mr. Huff to get feedback from the Country Club Advisory Board and the Audit Committee on the proposed addition of parking at the Country Club. Discussion ensued between Council, Mr. Huff and Mr. Bowman regarding trees that have been removed and added to the Country Club. Mr. Huff thanked Council and stated that he would bring all feedback regarding the proposed addition of parking at the Country Club from the Country Club Advisory Board and the Audit Committee. MAYOR AND COUNCIL MATTERS/REPORTS Mr. Huff announced “Boo Village” at the Community Center on October 25th and reviewed the festivities and events of the evening. Recreation Department Director Ashley Shipman gave an update on the Village’s recreation activities, leagues, sporting events and upcoming Halloween and holiday events. Mr. Rubin began discussion regarding the proposal to shift the Village’s Ad-Valorem Assessment to Non-Ad Valorem Assessment in the event that the legislature eliminates property taxes. Mr. Rubin explained that the two services that can be shifted to Non-Ad Valorem were Fire Rescue and Solid Waste. If the Village decides to move forward with switching those two services to a Non-Ad Valorem Assessment for the FY 2027 Budget, the Council would need to adopt a resolution signifying its intent by the end of the current year. The resolution would not commit the Village to the Non-Ad Valorem Assessment but would be a placeholder if it is decided to move forward with the Non-Ad Valorem Assessment for the FY 2027 Budget. The resolution would have to be noticed for four (4) consecutive weeks before adoption and would have to be adopted before January 1, 2026. Draft Minutes of the Village Council Regular Session held October 9, 2025 Page 6 of 7 MAYOR AND COUNCIL MATTERS/REPORTS continued Mr. Huff began discussion on whether Council would like to move forward with adopting the resolution for the Non-Ad Valorem Assessment. Mayor Searcy stated that she was in favor of adopting a resolution for the Non -Ad Valorem Assessment before the end of the year. Discussion ensued between Mr. Huff, Mr. Rubin and Councilmembers regarding the proposal to adopt a resolution for Non-Ad Valorem Assessment and the process that it would entail and implications it may have. Councilmember Bickel stated that she wanted to gather more information and speak with residents and employees before making a decision on whether to move forward with adopting a resolution for the Non-Ad Valorem Assessment and would prefer that Council waited until the next Council meeting to decide whether or not to move forward. Council agreed to discuss the item further at the next Council meeting on October 23rd. Councilmember Bickel recommended that the Village have scholarship awards for Village residents. Discussion ensued between Councilmembers on what type of scholarships to offer and who they would be offered to. Councilmember Puyol stated that commercial properties should be allowed to install artificial turf and recommended that Council adopt a policy to allow it. Mr. Rubin explained what the Village’s current ordinance allowed for artificial turf stating that it was only allowed for single-family residential and not any other zoning districts within the Village. Discussion ensued between Mr. Rubin and Councilmembers regarding a request by Austin Republic restaurant for artificial turf brought to the Planning, Zoning and Adjustment Board. Discussion continued regarding allowing artificial turf in other zoning districts besides single- family residential and the waiver process. Mr. Rubin stated that staff would discuss with the Planning Department and bring something back for Council to consider. Councilmember Puyol stated that he was riding his bike on Anchorage Drive and Lakeside when he came upon street dividers on the turn. Councilmember Puyol asked if the Village was using the street dividers. Mr. Girard stated that the dividers were installed to mitigate damage that was occurring to a resident’s lawn from construction and other factors. Council asked Mr. Girard to remove the dividers as they were not consistent with rest of the Village’s roadways. Draft Minutes of the Village Council Regular Session held October 9, 2025 Page 7 of 7 MAYOR AND COUNCIL MATTERS/REPORTS continued Councilmember Puyol discussed expansion from neighboring municipalities from the south and north side of the Village. Councilmember Puyol discussed the potential to encourage developers to bring expansion and height to the Village particularly to the condominiums located behind the Brass Ring Pub. Vice Mayor Interlandi stated that Council needed to establish parameters and guidelines for any developers that were interested in building developments within the Village. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business to come before the Council, the meeting was adjourned at 8:00 p.m. Jessica Green, MMC, Village Clerk VILLAGE OF NORTH PALM BEACH Public Library TO: Honorable Mayor and Council THRU: Chuck Huff, Village Manager FROM: Julie Morrell, Director of Library DATE: October 14th, 2025 SUBJECT: RESOLUTION – FY 2026 State Aid to Libraries Grant Funding Application The North Palm Beach Public Library has been a member of the Library Cooperative of the Palm Beaches since 2007. It is now time to submit the Village’s application for State Aid for FY 2025-2026. State Aid was successfully applied for and received during this current fiscal year with an award of $15,839. State Aid is based on the amount the Village expended for library services two fiscal years prior to the fiscal year the grant is distributed – in this case, FY 2023-2024. Erica Ramirez, Finance Director, provided the relevant fiscal information. There are no spending restrictions for this money; it is considered Library revenue. An appropriate budget revenue line will be used to reflect receipt of these funds. The State will issue the aid as an electronic funds transfer (EFT) payment paid directly to the Village by June 30, 2026. Village Administration is requesting that Council provide the required certifications and approve the filing of the State Aid to Libraries Grant Funding Application. Administration is also seeking Council approval of the State Aid to Libraries Grant Agreement and the FY 2025-2026 library plan of services (Exhibit “A”) in support of the Village’s application. The attached Resolution has been prepared and/or reviewed for legal sufficiency by the Village Attorney. Account Information (Revenue): Fund Department Account Number Account Description Amount General Fund Library A2127-03111 Cooperative Member State Aid $14,089 State Estimate Recommendation: Village Administration recommends Council consideration and approval of the attached Resolution authorizing the filing of a State Aid to Libraries Grant funding application, including authorizing members of Village Administration to take all steps necessary to apply for and receive such funding, and approving the execution of the State Aid to Libraries Grant Agreement and annual plan of services with Village policies and procedures. RESOLUTION 2025- A RESOLUTION OF THE VILLAGE COUNCIL OF THE VILLAGE OF NORTH PALM BEACH, FLORIDA, APPROVING THE SUBMISSION OF AN APPLICATION FOR STATE AID TO LIBRARIES GRANT FUNDING; PROVIDING THE REQUIRED ASSURANCES AND CERTIFICATIONS; AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF A GRANT AGREEMENT; APPROVING AN ANNUAL PLAN OF SERVICES; PROVIDING FOR CONFLICTS; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, Chapter 257, Florida Statutes, authorizes municipalities to file applications for State Aid to Libraries Grant Funding; and WHEREAS, the Village Council wishes to authorize the filing of an application for State Aid to Libraries Grant Funding, provide the required certifications necessary for the receipt of such funding; and approve the annual plan of services required as part of the application process; and WHEREAS, the Village Council determines that the adoption of this Resolution benefits the public health, safety, and welfare. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE VILLAGE COUNCIL OF THE VILLAGE OF NORTH PALM BEACH, FLORIDA, as follows: Section 1. The foregoing recitals are ratified and incorporated herein. Section 2. The Village Council authorizes members of Village Administration and the appropriate Village Officials to take all steps necessary to apply for and receive State Aid to Libraries Grant Funding, including the filing of all required application forms, preparing the required supporting documentation, and executing the State Aid to Libraries Grant Agreement, a copy of which is attached hereto and incorporated herein. The Village Council further authorizes the Mayor to execute the Certification of Hours, Free Library Service and Access to Materials. Section 3. The Village Council hereby approves the annual plan of services attached hereto as Exhibit “A,” which is incorporated herein by reference, and authorizes the submission of this document in support of the Village’s State Aid to Libraries Grant Funding Application. Section 4. All resolutions or parts of resolutions in conflict with this Resolution are hereby repealed to the extent of such conflict. Section 5. This Resolution shall be effective immediately upon adoption. PASSED AND ADOPTED THIS ____ DAY OF__________, 2025. (Village Seal) MAYOR ATTEST: VILLAGE CLERK Library Plan of Services FY 2025-2026 Exhibit A Goals and Objectives In the coming year, the Library plans to achieve the following goals and objectives: Strategic Goal: Quality of Life Department Goal: Make our services and collection more accessible to our patrons Objectives: a. Bring more awareness of our programs and services to the community through social media and informational booths at Village-sponsored events. b. Partner with Parks and Recreation to offer more programming throughout the Village. c. Offer new and advertise current resources for homeschool families. d. Install and manage Little Libraries at each of the Village’s playgrounds, providing easy access to diverse reading materials, and refreshing them with new and engaging resources. Department Goal: Promote health and well-being through library programming and materials Objectives: a. Offer wellness workshops and seminars on topics such as mental health, stress management, nutrition, and physical fitness to support patrons in leading healthy lives. b. Create a collection of health-related materials, including books, DVDs, and online resources, to empower community members to take charge of their health. c. Partner with healthcare providers and local wellness centers to offer educational programs within the library. Department Goal: Implement services that meet the needs of the community Objectives: a. Develop a comprehensive STEM program for children and teens, fostering interest, skill development, and interactive learning experiences. b. Continue to host author talks and adult speakers on a wide range of topics. c. Continue partnership with schools and daycare in the area to include library card sign up, class visits, summer reading and volunteer opportunities for teens. d. Continue participation in community activities such as Heritage Day Parade, Halloween, Veterans Day Ceremony, Trolley Rides, and Holiday Tree Lighting. Strategic Goal: People and Organizational Excellence Department Goal: Continuously improve the way the Library operates Objectives: a. Increase Friends of the Library revenues by spreading awareness of who they are and what they do for the Library. b. Continue updated policies and procedures. c. Continue recruiting teen volunteers for afterschool activities and summer reading . Estimated State Aid to Libraries Awards for FY 2025-2026 County/Municipality Operating Grant Equalization Grant Total Grant Alachua County $272,027 $0 $272,027 Baker County $2,303 $41,383 $43,686 Bay County $38,587 $0 $38,587 Bradford County $5,585 $200,895 $206,480 Brevard County $324,535 $0 $324,535 Broward County $1,037,392 $0 $1,037,392 Calhoun County $6,026 $218,725 $224,751 Charlotte County $75,899 $0 $75,899 Citrus County $65,477 $0 $65,477 Clay County $48,338 $0 $48,338 Collier County $120,354 $0 $120,354 Columbia County $18,579 $436,494 $455,073 Desoto County $3,995 $71,012 $75,007 Dixie County $3,003 $108,770 $111,773 Duval County $493,625 $0 $493,625 Escambia County $106,819 $0 $106,819 Flagler County $23,871 $0 $23,871 Franklin County $4,839 $85,394 $90,233 Gadsden County $7,425 $265,239 $272,664 Gilchrist County $3,532 $63,616 $67,148 Glades County $1,191 $21,514 $22,705 Gulf County $2,951 $51,971 $54,922 Hamilton County $8,113 $292,646 $300,759 Hardee County $2,151 $38,241 $40,392 Hendry County $9,081 $158,485 $167,566 Hernando County $39,924 $436,494 $476,418 Highlands County $10,438 $174,745 $185,183 Hillsborough County $691,871 $0 $691,871 Holmes County $2,186 $79,387 $81,573 Indian River County $60,413 $0 $60,413 Jackson County $5,695 $101,481 $107,176 Jefferson County $5,791 $209,118 $214,909 Lafayette County $1,510 $54,968 $56,478 Lake County $145,722 $0 $145,722 Lee County $421,737 $0 $421,737 Leon County $93,640 $0 $93,640 Levy County $3,188 $56,319 $59,507 Liberty County $1,175 $42,763 $43,938 Madison County $8,643 $311,841 $320,484 Manatee County $102,743 $0 $102,743 Marion County $119,649 $0 $119,649 Martin County $85,005 $0 $85,005 Miami-Dade County $1,244,085 $0 $1,244,085 Monroe County $45,873 $0 $45,873 Nassau County $23,894 $0 $23,894 August 2025 Estimated State Aid to Libraries Awards for FY 2025-2026 Okaloosa County $53,695 $0 $53,695 Okeechobee County $7,172 $125,144 $132,316 Orange County $687,560 $0 $687,560 Osceola County $108,058 $0 $108,058 Palm Beach County $730,499 $0 $730,499 Pasco County $150,230 $0 $150,230 Pinellas County $509,885 $0 $509,885 Polk County $225,595 $0 $225,595 Putnam County $11,073 $187,013 $198,086 Saint Johns County $90,867 $0 $90,867 Saint Lucie County $75,542 $0 $75,542 Santa Rosa County $35,405 $0 $35,405 Sarasota County $182,121 $0 $182,121 Seminole County $119,684 $0 $119,684 Sumter County $40,110 $0 $40,110 Suwannee County $24,796 $436,494 $461,290 Taylor County $3,377 $60,423 $63,800 Union County $2,559 $93,099 $95,658 Volusia County $292,729 $0 $292,729 Wakulla County $6,359 $113,287 $119,646 Walton County $14,531 $0 $14,531 Washington County $7,314 $263,443 $270,757 Altamonte Springs $6,382 $6,382 Apalachicola $2,109 $2,109 Boynton Beach $37,844 $37,844 Delray Beach $36,068 $36,068 Fort Myers Beach $16,101 $16,101 Hialeah $31,017 $31,017 Lake Park $5,408 $5,408 Lake Worth Beach $6,978 $6,978 Lantana $2,477 $2,477 Maitland $11,057 $11,057 New Port Richey $14,305 $14,305 North Miami $17,354 $17,354 North Miami Beach $23,995 $23,995 North Palm Beach $14,089 $14,089 Oakland Park $12,586 $12,586 Riviera Beach $13,798 $13,798 Sanibel $32,443 $32,443 West Palm Beach $79,852 $79,852 Wilton Manors $11,680 $11,680 Winter Park $45,143 $45,143 Total $9,598,727 $4,800,404 $14,399,131 Multicounty Grants Heartland Library Cooperative $450,000 New River Public Library Cooperative $327,624 August 2025 Estimated State Aid to Libraries Awards for FY 2025-2026 Northwest Regional Library System $350,000 PAL Public Library Cooperative $350,000 Panhandle Public Library Cooperative System $350,000 Suwannee River Regional Library System $350,000 Three Rivers Regional Library System $377,317 Wilderness Coast Public Libraries $350,000 Total $2,904,941 Grand Total $17,304,072 August 2025 a) b ) 26-ST-62 North Palm Beach P ublic Lib rary STATE AID TO LIBRARIES GRANT AGREEM ENT BETWEEN TH E STATE O F F LO RIDA, DE P ARTM ENT O F STATE AND Nor th P alm Beac h P ubl ic L ibr ar y for and on behalf of Nor th P alm B eac h P ublic Libr ar y This Agreement is by and between the State of Florida, Department of State, Division of Library and Information Services, hereinafter referred to as the “Division," and the North Palm Beach Public Libraryfor and on behalf of North Palm Beach Public Library, hereinafter referred to as the "Grantee." The Grantee has submitted an application and has met all eligibility requirements and has been awarded a State Aid to Libraries Grant (CSFA 45.030) by the Division in the amount specified on the “Fiscal Year 2025-26 State Aid to Libraries Final Grants” document (which is incorporated as part of this Agreement and entitled Attachment B). The Division has the authority to administer this grant in accordance with Section 257, Florida Statutes. By reference, the application and any approved revisions are hereby made a part of this agreement. In consideration of the mutual covenants and promises contained herein, the parties agree as follows: 1.Grant Purpose. This grant shall be used exclusively for the “State Aid to Libraries Grant,” the public purpose for which these funds were appropriated. The Grantee shall perform the following Scope of Work: In accordance with Sections 257.17-257.18, Florida Statutes, the Grantee shall receive a grant amount that is calculated and based upon local funds expended during the second preceding fiscal year for the operation and maintenance of the library. For this grant, the local expenditures shall have been made during the period October 1, 2023 - September 30, 2024. In order to be eligible to receive the grant funding, the Grantee shall manage or coordinate free library service to the residents of its legal service area for the period October 1, 2023 through June 30, 2026. The Grantee shall: Have a single administrative head employed full time by the library’s governing body; Provide free library service, including loaning materials available for circulation free of charge and providing reference and information services free of charge; Provide access to materials, information and services for all residents of the area served; and Have at least one library, branch library or member library open 40 hours or more each week (excluding holidays or emergencies; between Sunday through Saturday, on a schedule determined by the library system) during the length of the agreement. The Grantee agrees to provide the following Deliverables related to the Scope of Work for payments to be awarded. Page: 1 State Aid to Libraries Grant Agreement (Form DLIS/SA02) Chapter 1B-2.011(2)(a), Florida Administrative Code, Effective 09-2025 c) Payment 1, Deliverable/Task : Payment will be a fixed price in the amount of 100% of the grant award for the period October 1, 2023 through June 30, 2026. The Grantee will: Have expended funds to provide free library service during the period October 1, 2023 - September 30, 2024; Provide an Expenditure Report and certification of Local Operating Expenditures for the period October 1, 2023 - September 30, 2024 only; Provide documentation showing that at least one library, branch library or member library is open 40 hours or more each week (excluding holidays or emergencies; between Sunday through Saturday, on a schedule determined by the library system) during the length of the agreement; Provide the Certification of Credentials for the Single Administrative Head; and Provide a Certification of Hours, Free Library Service and Access to Materials. Grant funds shall be used for the operation and maintenance of the library. The allowable budget categories are: Personnel Services (salaries, wages, and related employee benefits provided for all persons employed by the reporting entity whether on full- time, part-time, temporary, or seasonal basis); Operating Expenses (expenditures for goods and services which primarily benefit the current period and are not defined as personal services or capital outlays); Non-Fixed Capital Outlay (outlays for the acquisition of or addition to fixed assets); and Other (other operating expenditure categories in the library budget). 2.Length of Agreement. This Agreement covers the period of October 1, 2023 to June 30, 2026, unless terminated in accordance with the provisions of Section 30 of this Agreement. This period begins with the start of the Grantee’s second preceding fiscal year (October 1, 2023) and concludes with the end of the State of Florida’s current fiscal year (June 30, 2026). 3.Expenditure of Grant Funds. Grant funds will be used to reimburse a portion of local funds expended by the Grantee during their second preceding fiscal year (October 1, 2023 – September 30, 2024) for the operation and maintenance of a library and shall not exceed the amount specified in Attachment B. 4.Contract Administration. The parties are legally bound by the requirements of this agreement. Each party's contract manager, named below, will be responsible for monitoring its performance under this Agreement and will be the official contact for each party. Any notice(s) or other communications regarding this agreement shall be directed to or delivered to the other party's contract manager by utilizing the information below. Any change in the contact information below should be submitted in writing to the contract manager within 10 days of the change. For the Division of Library and Information Services: Tom Peña, Grant Programs Supervisor Florida Department of State R.A. Gray Building Mail Station # 9D 500 South Bronough Street Tallahassee, FL 32399-0250 Phone: 850.245.6620 Email: Thomas.Pena@dos.fl.gov Page: 2 State Aid to Libraries Grant Agreement (Form DLIS/SA02) Chapter 1B-2.011(2)(a), Florida Administrative Code, Effective 09-2025 For the Grantee: Julie Morrell North Palm Beach Public Library 303 Ancho rage Drive No rth Palm Beach F lo rid a 33408 Phone: 561.841.3373 Email: jmorrell@village-npb.org 5.Grant Payments. The total grant award shall not exceed the amount specified on the “Fiscal Year 2025-26 State Aid to Libraries Final Grants” document (Attachment B), which shall be paid by the Division in consideration for the Grantee’s minimum performance as set forth by the terms and conditions of this Agreement. Payment will be a fixed price in the amount of 100% of the grant award as specified in Attachment B. Payment will be made in accordance with the completion of the Deliverables. 6.Electronic Payments. The Grantee can choose to use electronic funds transfer (EFT) to receive grant payments. All grantees wishing to receive their award through EFT must submit a Vendor Direct Deposit Authorization Form (form number DFS-AI-26E, rev 3/2022), incorporated by reference, to the Florida Department of Financial Services. If EFT has already been set up for your organization, you do not need to submit another authorization form unless you have changed bank accounts. To download this form visit myfloridacfo.com/docs-sf/accounting-and-auditing-libraries/vendors/vendor-relations/dfs-a1-26e-direct-deposit-vendors.pdf? sfvrsn=eff728cf_16. The form also includes tools and information that allow you to check on payments. 7.Florida Substitute Form W-9. A completed Substitute Form W-9 is required from any entity that receives a payment from the State of Florida that may be subject to 1099 reporting. The Department of Financial Services (DFS) must have the correct Taxpayer Identification Number (TIN) and other related information in order to report accurate tax information to the Internal Revenue Service (IRS). To register or access a Florida Substitute Form W-9 visit flvendor.myfloridacfo.com. A copy of the Grante e ’s Florida Substitute Form W-9 must be submitted by the Grante e to the Division with the executed Agreement. 8.Financial Consequences. The Department shall apply the following financial consequences for failure to perform the minimum level of services required by this Agreement in accordance with Sections 215.971 and 287.058, Florida Statutes: The Department shall require the return of the award in a prorated amount based upon the percentage of time that the library failed to perform the minimum level of services. The prorated reduction will be in the same percentage as the percentage of time that the library was not providing minimum level of services. 9.Credit Line(s) to Acknowledge Grant Funding. The Division requires public acknowledgement of State Aid to Libraries Grant funding for activities and publications supported by grant funds. Any announcements, information, press releases, publications, brochures, videos, webpages, programs, etc., created as part of a State Aid to Libraries Grant project must include an acknowledgment that State Aid to Libraries Grant funds were used to create them. Use the following text: “This project has been funded under the provisions of the State Aid to Libraries Grant program, which is administered by the Florida Department of State’s Division of Library and Information Services.” 10.Grant Expenditures. The Grantee agrees to expend all grant funds received under this agreement solely for the purposes for which they were authorized and appropriated. Expenditures shall be in compliance with the state guidelines for allowable project costs as outlined in Page: 3 State Aid to Libraries Grant Agreement (Form DLIS/SA02) Chapter 1B-2.011(2)(a), Florida Administrative Code, Effective 09-2025 the Department of Financial Services’ Reference Guide for State Expenditures (as of October 2022), incorporated by reference, which are available online at myfloridacfo.com/docs-sf/accounting-and-auditing-libraries/state-agencies/reference-guide-for-state- expenditures.pdf?sfvrsn=b4cc3337_2. Grant funds may not be used for the purchase or construction of a library building or library quarters. 11.Travel Expenses. The Grantee must pay any travel expenses, from grant or local matching funds, in accordance to the provisions of Section 112.061, Florida Statutes. 12.Unobligated and Unearned Funds and Allowable Costs. In accordance with Section 215.971, Florida Statutes, the Grantee shall refund to the State of Florida any balance of unobligated funds which has been advanced or paid to the Grantee. In addition, funds paid in excess of the amount to which the recipient is entitled under the terms and conditions of the agreement must be refunded to the state agency. Further, the recipient may expend funds only for allowable costs resulting from obligations incurred during the specified agreement period. Expenditures of state financial assistance must be in compliance with the laws, rules and regulations applicable to expenditures of State funds as outlined in the Department of Financial Service’s Reference Guide for State Expenditures (as of October 2022) myfloridacfo.com/docs-sf/accounting-and-auditing-libraries/state-agencies/reference-guide-for-state-expenditures.pdf? sfvrsn=b4cc3337_2, incorporated by reference. 13.Repayment. All refunds or repayments to be made to the Department under this agreement are to be made payable to the order of “Department of State” and mailed directly to the following address: Florida Department of State, Attention: Thomas Peña, Division of Library and Information Services, 500 South Bronough Street, Mail Station #9D, Tallahassee, Florida 32399. In accordance with Section 215.34(2), Florida Statutes, if a check or other draft is returned to the Department for collection, Recipient shall pay to the Department a service fee of $15.00 or five percent (5%) of the face amount of the returned check or draft, whichever is greater. 14.Single Audit Act. Each Grantee, other than a Grantee that is a State agency, shall submit to an audit pursuant to Section 215.97, Florida Statutes. See Attachment A for additional information regarding this requirement. If a Grantee is not required by law to conduct an audit in accordance with the Florida Single Audit Act because it did not expend at least $750,000 in state financial assistance, it must submit a Financial Report on its operations pursuant to Section 218.39, Florida Statutes within nine months of the close of its fiscal year. Audits must be submitted on the DOS Grants System at dosgrants.com. 15.Retention of GrantRecords. Financial records, supporting documents, statistical records and all other records, including electronic storage media pertinent to the Project, shall be retained for a period of five (5) fiscal years after the closeout of the grant and release of the audit. If any litigation or audit is initiated or claim made before the expiration of the five-year period, the records shall be retained for five fiscal years after the litigation, audit or claim has been resolved. 16.Obligation to Provide State Acce ss to Grant Records. The Grantee must make all grant records of expenditures, copies of reports, books, and related documentation available to the Division or a duly authorized representative of the State of Florida for inspection at reasonable times for the purpose of making audits, examinations, excerpts and transcripts. 17.Obligation to Provide Public Access to Grant Records. The Division reserves the right to unilaterally cancel this Agreement in the event that the Grantee refuses public access to all documents or other materials made or received by the Grantee that are subject to the provisions of Chapter 119, Florida Statutes, known as the Florida Public Records Act. The Grantee must immediately contact the Division's Contract Manager for assistance if it receives a public records request related to this Agreement. Page: 4 State Aid to Libraries Grant Agreement (Form DLIS/SA02) Chapter 1B-2.011(2)(a), Florida Administrative Code, Effective 09-2025 a) b ) c) d ) e) f) 18.Noncompliance. Any Grantee that is not following Florida statutes or rules, the terms of the grant agreement, Florida Department of State (DOS) policies and guidance, local policies, or other applicable law or that has not submitted required reports or satisfied other administrative requirements for other Division of Library and Information Services grants or grants from any other DOS Division will be in noncompliance status and subject to the DOS Grants Compliance Procedure. DOS Divisions include the Division of Arts and Culture, the Division of Elections, the Division of Historical Resources and the Division of Library and Information Services. Grant compliance issues must be resolved before a grant award agreement may be executed and before grant payments for any DOS grant may be released. 19.Accounting Requirements. The Grantee must maintain an accounting system that provides a complete record of the use of all grant funds as follows: The accounting system must be able to specifically identify and provide audit trails that trace the receipt, maintenance and expenditure of state funds. Accounting records must adequately identify the sources and application of funds for all grant activities and must classify and identify grant funds by using the same budget categories that were approved in the grant application. If the Grantee’s accounting system accumulates data in a different format than the one in the grant application, subsidiary records must document and reconcile the amounts shown in the Grantee’s accounting records to those amounts reported to the Division. An interest-bearing checking account or accounts in a state or federally chartered institution may be used for revenues and expenses described in the Scope of Work and detailed in the Estimated Project Budget. The name of the account(s) must include the grant award number. The Grantee's accounting records must have effective control over and accountability for all funds, property and other assets. Accounting records must be supported by source documentation and be in sufficient detail to allow for a proper pre-audit and post-audit (such as invoices, bills and canceled checks). 20.Availability of State Funds. The State of Florida’s performance and obligation to pay under this Agreement are contingent upon an annual appropriation by the Florida Legislature. In the event that the state funds upon which this Agreement is dependent are withdrawn, this Agreement will be automatically terminated and the Division shall have no further liability to the Grantee beyond those amounts already expended prior to the termination date. Such termination will not affect the responsibility of the Grantee under this Agreement as to those funds previously distributed. In the event of a state revenue shortfall, the total grant may be reduced accordingly. 21.Lobbying. The Grantee will not use any grant funds for lobbying the state legislature, the state judicial branch or any state agency. 22.Independent Contractor Status of Grante e . The Grantee, if not a state agency, agrees that its officers, agents and employees, in performance of this Agreement, shall act in the capacity of independent contractors and not as officers, agents or employees of the state. The Grantee is not entitled to accrue any benefits of state employment, including retirement benefits and any other rights or privileges connected with employment by the State of Florida. 23.Grantee's Subcontractors.The Grantee shall be responsible for all work performed and all expenses incurred in connection with this Agreement. The Grantee may subcontract, as necessary, to perform the services and to provide commodities required by this Agreement. The Division shall not be liable to any subcontractor(s) for any expenses or liabilities incurred under the Grantee’s subcontract(s), and the Grantee shall be solely liable to its subcontractor(s) for all expenses and liabilities incurred under its subcontract(s). The Grantee must take the necessary steps to ensure that each of its subcontractors will be deemed to be independent contractors and will not be considered or Page: 5 State Aid to Libraries Grant Agreement (Form DLIS/SA02) Chapter 1B-2.011(2)(a), Florida Administrative Code, Effective 09-2025 a) b ) c) d ) permitted to be agents, servants, joint venturers or partners of the Division. 24.Liability. The Division will not assume any liability for the acts, omissions to act or negligence of the Grantee, its agents, servants or employees; nor may the Grantee exclude liability for its own acts, omissions to act or negligence to the Division. The Grantee shall be responsible for claims of any nature, including but not limited to injury, death and property damage arising out of activities related to this Agreement by the Grantee, its agents, servants, employees and subcontractors. The Grantee shall indemnify and hold the Division harmless from any and all claims of any nature and shall investigate all such claims at its own expense. If the Grantee is governed by Section 768.28, Florida Statutes, it shall only be obligated in accordance with this Section. Neither the state nor any agency or subdivision of the state waives any defense of sovereign immunity or increases the limits of its liability by entering into this Agreement. The Division shall not be liable for attorney fees, interest, late charges or service fees, or cost of collection related to this Agreement. The Grantee shall be responsible for all work performed and all expenses incurred in connection with the project. The Grantee may subcontract as necessary to perform the services set forth in this Agreement, including entering into subcontracts with vendors for services and commodities, provided that such subcontract has been approved in writing by the Department prior to its execution and provided that it is understood by the Grantee that the Department shall not be liable to the subcontractor for any expenses or liabilities incurred under the subcontract and that the Grantee shall be solely liable to the subcontractor for all expenses and liabilities incurred under the subcontract. 25.Strict Compliance with Laws. The Grantee shall perform all acts required by this Agreement in strict conformity with all applicable laws and regulations of the local, state and federal law. For consequences of noncompliance, see Section 18, Noncompliance. 26.Prohibition of Expenditures to a Library Association. Expenditure of project funds (grant funds and local match funds) must not be used for an activity related to a library association. This prohibition does not apply to expenditure of project funds related to a library cooperative that receives state moneys under sections 257.40-257.42, Florida Statutes. The Grantee shall perform all acts required by this Agreement in strict conformity with all applicable local, state and federal laws and regulations. The Grantee shall during the term of this Agreement be in strict conformity with all applicable local, state and federal laws and regulations. 27.Total Compensation Paid to Non-Profit Pe rsonnel. Per Section 216.1366, Florida Statutes, all non-profit organizations as defined in Section 215.97(2)(m), Florida Statutes, shall complete and return to the division within 30 days of the execution of this grant agreement the “Total Compensation Paid to Non-Profit Personnel Using State Funds” report, incorporated by reference, which shall satisfy the requirement to provide documentation that indicates the amount of state funds: a) Allocated to be used during the full term of the agreement for remuneration to any member of the board of directors or an officer of the contractor. b) Allocated under each payment by the public agency to be used for remuneration of any member of the board of directors or an officer of the contractor. The documentation must indicate the amounts and recipients of the remuneration. Non-Profit organization grantees shall complete a Total Compensation Paid to Non-Profit report for each required filer for the invoice period covered by the Payment Request. Page: 6 State Aid to Libraries Grant Agreement (Form DLIS/SA02) Chapter 1B-2.011(2)(a), Florida Administrative Code, Effective 09-2025 a) The grantee shall also post their reports on their website, and the public agency shall make the reports available to the public on the internet. 28.No Discrimination. The Grantee may not discriminate against any employee employed under this Agreement or against any applicant for employment because of race, color, religion, gender, national origin, age, handicap, pregnancy or marital status. The Grantee shall insert a similar provision in all of its subcontracts for services under this Agreement. 29.Breach of Agreement. The Division shall demand the return of grant funds already received, shall withhold subsequent payments and/or shall terminate this agreement if the Grantee improperly expends and manages grant funds; fails to prepare, preserve or surrender records required by this Agreement; or otherwise violates this Agreement. 30.Termination of Agreement. The Division will terminate or end this Agreement if the Grantee fails to fulfill its obligations herein. In such event, the Division will provide the Grantee a notice of its violation by letter and shall give the Grantee fifteen (15) calendar days from the date of receipt to cure its violation. If the violation is not cured within the stated period, the Division shall terminate this Agreement. The notice of violation letter shall be delivered to the Grantee's Contract Manager, personally, or mailed to his/her specified address by a method that provides proof of receipt. In the event that the Division terminates this Agreement, the Grantee shall be compensated for any work completed in accordance with this Agreement prior to the notification of termination if the Division deems this reasonable under the circumstances. Grant funds previously advanced and not expended on work completed in accordance with this Agreement shall be returned to the Division, with interest, within thirty (30) days after termination of this Agreement. The Division does not waive any of its rights to additional damages if grant funds are returned under this Section. 31.Preservation of Remedies. No delay or omission to exercise any right, power or remedy accruing to either party upon breach or violation by either party under this Agreement shall impair any such right, power or remedy of either party; nor shall such delay or omission be construed as a waiver of any such breach or default or any similar breach or default. 32.Non-Assignment of Agreement. The Grantee may not assign, sublicense or otherwise transfer its rights, duties or obligations under this Agreement without the prior written consent of the Division, which shall not unreasonably be withheld. The agreement transferee must demonstrate compliance with the requirements of the project. If the Division approves a transfer of the Grantee’s obligations, the Grantee shall remain liable for all work performed and all expenses incurred in connection with this Agreement. In the event the Legislature transfers the rights, duties and obligations of the Division to another governmental entity, pursuant to Section 20.06, Florida Statutes or otherwise, the rights, duties and obligations under this Agreement shall be transferred to the succeeding governmental agency as if it was the original party to this Agreement. 33.Required Procurement Procedure s for Obtaining Goods and Services. The Grantee shall provide maximum open competition when procuring goods and services related to the grant-assisted project in accordance with Section 287.057, Florida Statutes. Procurement of Goods and Services Not Exceeding $35,000. The Grantee must use the applicable procurement method described below: 1. Purchases Up to $2,500: Procurement of goods and services where individual purchases do not exceed $2,500 do not require competition and may be conducted at the Grantee’s discretion. 2. Purchases or Contract Amounts Between $2,500 and $35,000: Goods and services costing between $2,500 and $35,000 require informal competition and may be procured by purchase order, acceptance of vendor proposals or other appropriate procurement document. Page: 7 State Aid to Libraries Grant Agreement (Form DLIS/SA02) Chapter 1B-2.011(2)(a), Florida Administrative Code, Effective 09-2025 b ) a) b ) c) Procurement of Goods and Services Exceeding $35,000. Goods and services costing over $35,000 must follow all formal procurement processes as outlined in Section 287.057, Florida Statutes. 34.Conflicts of Interest. The Grantee hereby certifies that it is cognizant of the prohibition of conflicts of interest described in Sections 112.311 through 112.326, Florida Statutes and affirms that it will not enter into or maintain a business or other relationship with any employee of the Department of State that would violate those provisions. The Grantee further agrees to seek authorization from the General Counsel for the Department of State prior to entering into any business or other relationship with a Department of State Employee to avoid a potential violation of those statutes. 35.Binding of Successors. This Agreement shall bind the successors, assigns and legal representatives of the Grantee and of any legal entity that succeeds to the obligations of the Division of Library and Information Services. 36.Employment of Unauthorized Alie ns. The employment of unauthorized aliens by the Grantee is considered a violation of Section 274A (a) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 USC 1324(a) (as of January 2023)), incorporated by reference. If the Grantee knowingly employs unauthorized aliens, such violation shall be cause for unilateral cancellation of this Agreement. 37.Severability. If any term or provision of the Agreement is found to be illegal and unenforceable, the remainder will remain in full force and effect, and such term or provision shall be deemed stricken. 38.Americans with Disabilities Act. All programs and facilities related to this Agreement must meet the standards of Sections 553.501- 553.513, Florida Statutes and the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ada.gov (as of January 2024)), incorporated by reference). 39.Governing Law. This Agreement shall be construed, performed and enforced in all respects in accordance with the laws and rules of Florida. Venue or location for any legal action arising under this Agreement will be in Leon County, Florida. 40.Entire Agreement. The entire Agreement of the parties consists of the following documents: This Agreement Florida Single Audit Act Requirements (Attachment A) Fiscal Year 2025-26 State Aid to Libraries Final Grants (Attachment B) Page: 8 State Aid to Libraries Grant Agreement (Form DLIS/SA02) Chapter 1B-2.011(2)(a), Florida Administrative Code, Effective 09-2025 The Grantee hereby certifies that they have read this entire Agreement and will comply with all of its requirements. Grantee:Department of State By: _________________________________ Chair of Governing Body or Chief Executive Officer By: _________________________________ _____________________________________ Typ ed name and title Amy L. Jo hns o n, Directo r Division of Library and Info rmatio n Services Dep artment o f S tate, State o f Florida _____________________________________ _____________________________________ Date _____________________________________ Date _____________________________________ Clerk or Chief Financial Officer _____________________________________ Witness _____________________________________ Date _____________________________________ Date Page: 9 State Aid to Libraries Grant Agreement (Form DLIS/SA02) Chapter 1B-2.011(2)(a), Florida Administrative Code, Effective 09-2025 ATTACH M E NT A F LO RIDA SINGLE AUDIT ACT REQ UIREM ENTS AUDIT REQUIREMENTS The administration of resources awarded by the Department of State to the Grantee may be subject to audits and/or monitoring by the Department of State as described in this Addendum to the Grant Award Agreement. Monitoring In addition to reviews of audits conducted in accordance with 2 CFR 200, Subpart F - Audit Requirements, and section 215.97, Florida Statutes (F.S.), as revised (see Audits below), monitoring procedures may include, but not be limited to, on-site visits by Department of State staff, limited scope audits as defined by 2 CFR 2 §200.425, or other procedures. By entering into this agreement, the recipient agrees to comply and cooperate with any monitoring procedures/processes deemed appropriate by the Department of State. In the event the Department of State determines that a limited scope audit of the recipient is appropriate, the recipient agrees to comply with any additional instructions provided by the Department of State staff to the recipient regarding such audit. The recipient further agrees to comply and cooperate with any inspections, reviews, investigations or audits deemed necessary by the Chief Financial Officer (CFO) or Auditor General. Audits Part I: Federally Funded This part is applicable if the recipient is a state or local government or a nonprofit organization as defined in 2 CFR §200.90, §200.64, and §200.70. 1. A recipient that expends $750,000 or more in federal awards in its fiscal year must have a single or program-specific audit conducted in accordance with the provisions of 2 CFR 200, Subpart F - Audit Requirements. Exhibit 1 to this agreement lists the federal resources awarded through the Department of State by this agreement. In determining the federal awards expended in its fiscal year, the recipient shall consider all sources of federal awards, including federal resources received from the Department of State. The determination of amounts of federal awards expended should be in accordance with the guidelines established by 2 CFR 200.502-503. An audit of the recipient conducted by the Auditor General in accordance with the provisions of 2 CFR 200.514, will meet the requirement of this Part. 2. For the audit requirements addressed in Part I, paragraph 1, the recipient shall fulfill the requirements relative to auditee responsibilities as provided in 2 CFR 200.508-512. 3. A recipient that expends less than $750,000 in federal awards in its fiscal year is not required to have an audit conducted in accordance with the provisions of 2 CFR 200, subpart F - Audit Requirements. If the recipient expends less than $750,000 in federal awards in its fiscal year and elects to have an audit conducted in accordance with the provisions of 2 CFR 200, subpart F - Audit Requirements, the cost of the audit must be paid from non-federal resources (i.e., the cost of such an audit must be paid from recipient resources obtained from other than federal entities). Part II: State Funded Page: 10 State Aid to Libraries Grant Agreement (Form DLIS/SA02) Chapter 1B-2.011(2)(a), Florida Administrative Code, Effective 09-2025 This part is applicable if the recipient is a nonstate entity as defined by section 215.97(2) F.S. 1. In the event that the recipient expends a total amount of state financial assistance equal to or in excess of $750,000 in any fiscal year of such recipient (for fiscal years ending June 30, 2017 and thereafter), the recipient must have a state single or project-specific audit for such fiscal year in accordance with Section 215.97, F.S.; Rule Chapter 69I-5 F.A.C., State Financial Assistance; and Chapters 10.550 (local governmental entities) and 10.650 (nonprofit and for-profit organizations), Rules of the Auditor General. EXHIBIT 1 to this agreement indicates state financial assistance awarded through the Department of State by this agreement. In determining the state financial assistance expended in its fiscal year, the recipient shall consider all sources of state financial assistance, including state financial assistance received from the Department of State, other state agencies, and other nonstate entities. State financial assistance does not include federal direct or pass-through awards and resources received by a nonstate entity for federal program matching requirements. 2. For the audit requirements addressed in Part II, paragraph 1, the recipient shall ensure that the audit complies with the requirements of Section 215.97(8), F.S. This includes submission of a financial reporting package as defined by Section 215.97(2) F.S., and Chapters 10.550 (local governmental entities) and 10.650 (nonprofit and for-profit organizations), Rules of the Auditor General. 3. If the recipient expends less than $750,000 in state financial assistance in its fiscal year (for fiscal years ending June 30, 2017 and thereafter), an audit conducted in accordance with the provisions of Section 215.97, F.S., is not required. In the event that the recipient expends less than $750,000 in state financial assistance in its fiscal year and elects to have an audit conducted in accordance with the provisions of Section 215.97, F.S., the cost of the audit must be paid from the nonstate entity’s resources (i.e., the cost of such an audit must be paid from the recipient’s resources obtained from other than State entities). The Internet web addresses listed below will assist recipients in locating documents referenced in the text of this agreement and the interpretation of compliance issues. State of Florida Department Financial Services (Chief Financial Officer) http://www.myfloridacfo.com/ State of Florida Legislature (Statutes, Legislation relating to the Florida Single Audit Act) http://www.leg.state.fl.us/ Part III: Report Submission 1. Copies of reporting packages for audits conducted in accordance with 2 CFR 200, Subpart F - Audit Requirements, and required by PART I of this agreement shall be submitted, when required by 2 CFR 200.512, by or on behalf of the recipient directly to each of the following: A. The Department of State via the DOS Grants System at https:///dosgrants.com. B. The Federal Audit Clearinghouse (FAC) as provided in 2 CFR 200.6 and section 200.512 The FAC's website prides a data entry system and required forms for submitting the single audit reporting package. Updates to the location of the FAC and data entry system may be found at the OMB website. 2. Copies of financial reporting packages required by PART II of this agreement shall be submitted by or on behalf of the recipient directly to each of the following: A. The Department of State via the DOS Grants System at https:///dosgrants.com. Page: 11 State Aid to Libraries Grant Agreement (Form DLIS/SA02) Chapter 1B-2.011(2)(a), Florida Administrative Code, Effective 09-2025 B. The Auditor General’s Office at the following address: Auditor General Local Government Audits/342 Claude Pepper Building, Room 401 111 West Madison Street Tallahassee, Florida 32399-1450 3. Any reports, management letter, or other information required to be submitted to the Department of State pursuant to this agreement shall be submitted timely in accordance with 2 CFR 200.512, section 215.97 F.S. and Chapters 10.550 (local governmental entities) and 10.650 (nonprofit and for-profit organizations), Rules of the Auditor General, as applicable. 4. Recipients, when submitting financial reporting packages to the Department of State for audits done in accordance with 2 CFR 200, Subpart F - Audit Requirements or Chapters 10.550 (local governmental entities) and 10.650 (nonprofit and for-profit organizations), Rules of the Auditor General, should indicate the date that the reporting package was delivered to the recipient in corres p o ndence acc o mp anying the rep o rting pac kage. Part IV: Record Retention 1. The recipient shall retain sufficient records demonstrating its compliance with the terms of the award(s) and this agreement for a period of five years from the date the audit report is issued, and shall allow the Department of State, or its designee, the CFO, or Auditor General access to such records upon request. The recipient shall ensure that audit working papers are made available to the Department of State, or its designee, the CFO, or Auditor General upon request for a period of at least three years from the date the audit report is issued, unless extended in writing by the Department of State. Page: 12 State Aid to Libraries Grant Agreement (Form DLIS/SA02) Chapter 1B-2.011(2)(a), Florida Administrative Code, Effective 09-2025 EXH IB IT – 1 FEDERAL RESOURCES AWARDED TO THE RECIPIENT PURSUANT TO THIS AGREEMENT CONSIST OF THE FOLLOWING: Not applic ab le. COMPLIANCE REQUIREMENTS APPLICABLE TO THE FEDERAL RESOURCES AWARDED PURSUANT TO THIS AGREEMENT ARE AS FOLLOWS: Not applic ab le. STATE RESOURCES AWARDED TO THE RECIPIENT PURSUANT TO THIS AGREEMENT CONSIST OF THE FOLLOWING: MATCHING RESOURCES FOR FEDERAL PROGRAMS: Not applic ab le. SUBJECT TO SECTION 215.97, FLORIDA STATUTES: Florida Department of State, State Aid to Libraries ; CS FA Number. 45.030 Award Amo unt: See Attac hment B. COMPLIANCE REQUIREMENTS APPLICABLE TO STATE RESOURCES AWARDED PURSUANT TO THIS AGREEMENT ARE AS FOLLOWS: T he compliance req uirements o f this s tate p ro ject may be fo und in P art Four (State Projec t Compliance Requirements ) of the State Pro jects Compliance Sup p lement loc ated at https://apps .fldfs .c om/fs aa/. Page: 13 State Aid to Libraries Grant Agreement (Form DLIS/SA02) Chapter 1B-2.011(2)(a), Florida Administrative Code, Effective 09-2025 ATTACH M ENT B F iscal Ye ar 2025-26 State Ai d to Libr aries Final Gr ants Page: 14 State Aid to Libraries Grant Agreement (Form DLIS/SA02) Chapter 1B-2.011(2)(a), Florida Administrative Code, Effective 09-2025 Florida Administrative Code 1B-2.011 Library Grant Programs. (1) This rule provides procedures for library grant programs adminis tered by the Divis ion of Library and Information Services (Divis ion). Each program s hall be governed by guidelines which contain information on eligibility requirements , application review procedures , evaluation and funding criteria, grant adminis tration procedures , if applicable, and application forms. All grant awards s hall be s ubject to final approval by the Secretary of State. (2) Applicants for grants s hall meet the eligibility and application requirements as s et forth in the following guidelines for each grant program: (a) State Aid to Libraries Grant Guidelines, http://www.flrules .org/Gateway/reference.as p?No=Ref-xxxxx, effective xx-xxxx, which contain guidelines and ins tructions ; Certification of Credentials – Single Library Adminis trative Head (Form DLIS/SA01), effective xx-xxxx; Grant Agreement (Form DLIS/SA02), effective xx-xxxx; Annual Statis tical Report Form for Public Libraries (Form DLIS/SA03), http://www.flrules.org/Gateway/reference.as p?No=Ref-xxxxx, xx-xxxx; Certification of Hours , Free Library Service and Acces s to Materials (Form DLIS/SA04), http://www.flrules .org/Gateway/reference.as p?No=Ref-xxxxx, effective xx-xxxx. (b) Public Library Cons truction Grants Guidelines , http://www.flrules .org/Gateway/reference.as p?No=Ref-xxxxx, effective xx-xxxx, which contains guidelines and ins tructions ; and Public Library Construction Grant Agreement (Form DLIS/PLC01), http://www.flrules .org/Gateway/reference.as p?No=Ref-xxxxx, effective xx- xxxx. (c) Library Cooperative Grant Guidelines , http://www.flrules .org/Gateway/reference.as p?No=Ref-xxxxx, effective xx-xxxx, which contains guidelines and ins tructions ; Annual Statis tical Report Form for Multitype Library Cooperatives (Form DLIS/LCG01), effective xx-xxxx; Grant Agreement (Form DLIS/LCG02), http://www.flrules .org/Gateway/reference.as p?No=Ref-xxxxx, effective xx-xxxx; and the Florida Library Information Network Manual http://www.flrules .org/Gateway/reference.as p?No=Ref-xxxxx, effective xx-xxxx. (d) The Library Services and Technology Act Grant Guidelines , http://www.flrules .org/Gateway/reference.asp?No=Ref-xxxxx, effective xx-xxxx, which contains guidelines and ins tructions , Library Services and Technology Act Grant Agreement (Form DLIS/LSTA01) http://www.flrules .org/Gateway/reference.as p? No=Ref-xxxxx, effective xx-xxxx, MLS Certification (Form DLIS/LSTA02), http://www.flrules .org/Gateway/reference.as p?No=Ref-xxxxx, effective xx-xxxx, and Certification Regarding Trafficking in Persons (Form DLIS/LSTA03). (e) The Community Libraries in Caring Program Application, http://www.flrules .org/Gateway/reference.asp?No=Ref-xxxxx, effective 04-10-12; which contains ins tructions and application (Form DLIS/CLIC01), effective 04-10-12; Annual Report (Form DLIS/CLIC02), effective 04-10-12; and Grant Agreement (Form DLIS/CLIC03), http://www.flrules .org/Gateway/reference.as p?No=Ref-xxxxx, effective 04-10-12. (3) Guidelines and forms in this rule are incorporated by reference and may be obtained from the Director of the Divis ion, Florida Department of State, Divis ion of Library and Information Services , R.A. Gray Building, 500 South Bronough Street, Tallahas s ee, Florida 32399-0250. (4) The Divis ion of Library and Information Services will waive the financial matching requirements on grants for rural communities that have been des ignated in accordance with Sections 288.0656 and 288.06561, F.S. Eligible communities applying for Library Services and Technology Act grants and Library Cons truction grants mus t reques t waiver of matching requirements at the time of grant application. Rulemaking Authority 257.14, 257.191, 257.192, 257.24, 257.41(2) FS. Law Implemented 257.12, 257.15, 257.16, 257.17, 257.171, 257.172, 257.18, 257.191, 257.192, 257.195, 257.21, 257.22, 257.23, 257.24, 257.25, 257.40, 257.41, 257.42 FS. His tory–New 1-25-93, Amended 7-17-96, 4-1-98, 2-14-99, 4-4-00, 12-18-00, 11-20-01, 3-20-02, 1-9-03, 12- 28-03, 11-16-04, 2-21-06, 2-21-07, 1-24-08, 4-1-10, 4-21-10, 4-10-12, 12-25-13, 7-8-14, 4-7-15, 7-12-16, 7-6-17, 4-30-18, 11-19-18, 7-1-19, 3-17-20, 2-27-22, 5-4-23, 12-22-24, 09- 10-2025. Page: 15 State Aid to Libraries Grant Agreement (Form DLIS/SA02) Chapter 1B-2.011(2)(a), Florida Administrative Code, Effective 09-2025 Certification of Hours, Free Library Service and Access to Materials (Form DLIS/SA04) Page 1 of 1 Chapter 1B-2.011(2)(a), Florida Administrative Code, Effective 09-2025 FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF STATE DIVISION OF LIBRARY AND INFORMATION SERVICES STATE AID TO LIBRARIES GRANT APPLICATION Certification of Hours, Free Library Service and Access to Materials The __________________________________________________________________, (Name of library governing body) governing body for the _____________________________________________________________________, (Name of library) hereby certifies that the following statements are true for the time period October 1, 2023 through June 30, 2026:  Provides free library service, including loaning materials available for circulation free of charge and providing reference and information services free of charge.  Provides access to materials, information and services for all residents of the area served.  Has at least one library, branch library or member library open 40 hours or more each week (excluding holidays or emergencies; between Sunday through Saturday, on a schedule determined by the library system). Signature ______________________________________________ __________________ Chair, Library Governing Body Date _____________________________________________ Name (Typed) VILLAGE OF NORTH PALM BEACH HUMAN RESOURCES DEPARTMENT TO: THRU: Honorable Mayor and Members of the Village Council Chuck Huff, Village Manager FROM: Jennifer Cain, Director of Human Resources DATE: October 23rd, 2025 SUBJECT: RESOLUTION – Amendment to the FY2025-2026 Comprehensive Pay Plan Village Staff is recommending Village Council adoption of a Resolution amending the FY2025-2026 Comprehensive Pay Plan with the following revisions to be effective on 10/27/2025: create of one Full- Time Director of Planning & Economic Development position and rename and restructure the Building & Zoning Department to the Community Development Department; reclassify one Full-Time Code Compliance Officer position to one Full-Time Code Compliance Supervisor position; add one Part-Time Senior Building Construction Inspector position; and add one Part-Time Recreation Assistant position. Background: The following Comprehensive Pay Plan changes will result in an increase of one full-time position and two part-time positions in the budget and pay plan. 1) Create one Full-Time Director of Planning & Economic Development position and rename and restructure the Building & Zoning Department to the Community Development Department. The Building & Zoning Department was restructured in April of 2025. After evaluation of the new structure, it has been determined that an additional Director-level position is needed to oversee the Planning and Code Compliance functions of the Department, as well as focus on strategic growth, economic development, environmental protection, and support of our local businesses. The Building & Zoning Department currently consists of 13 full-time and 2 part-time staff members in the areas of Building (Building Inspectors and Permit & License Technicians), Code Compliance, and Planning. This Amendment would rename the Department to the Community Development and create a Planning & Economic Development Division that oversees 6 full-time staff members in the Planning and Code Compliance Divisions and a Building Division that oversees 7 full-time and 3 part-time staff members (Building Inspectors and Permit & License Technicians). Human Resources completed a compensation and title study and recommends the title of Director of Planning & Economic Development at pay grade 128 ($116,518.78 - $186,430.05 annually) to align with our current structure for Director level positions. Survey Data: Entity Position Title Annual (Min) Annual (Max) Village of Tequesta Community Development Director $103,508.00 $155,263.00 City of Stuart CRA Executive Director $84,968.00 $135,928.00 Town of Palm Beach Deputy Town Manager - Business Enterprise and Culture $139,841.04 $223,854.78 City of Palm Beach Gardens Deputy City Manager $159,325.81 $254,921.29 City of West Palm Beach Executive Director of Economic Development $106,882.00 $160,323.00 City of Greenacres Director of Economic Development $130,800.00 $211,826.00 City of Delray Beach Economic Development Director $92,227.20 $147,534.40 City of Boca Raton Deputy City Manager $169,436.00 $250,702.00 Town of Jupiter Senior Director - Business Community Liaison $135,249.90 $223,163.19 2) Reclassify one Full-Time Code Compliance Officer to one Full-Time Code Compliance Supervisor. With the restructuring of the Building & Zoning Department to the Community Development Department, the Village Manager has identified the need to create a supervisory position to directly oversee the day to day activities of the Code Compliance Officers, allowing the Director of Planning & Economic Development the opportunity to focus on strategic growth, economic development, environmental protection, and support of our local businesses with high level support to the Code Compliance Supervisor rather than day to day operational support. We are able to offset the additional position by promoting, with a 10% salary increase per the pay plan, and reclassifying a current Full-Time Code Compliance Officer position. Human Resources completed a compensation and title study and recommends the title of Code Compliance Supervisor at pay grade 116. Position Title Grade Annual (Min) Annual (Max) Code Compliance Supervisor 116 $64,882.08 $103,811.23 Code Compliance Officer 111 $50,836.76 $81,338.81 Survey Data: Entity Position Title Annual (Min) Annual (Max) Village of Tequesta Code Compliance Officer II $56,967.00 $87,823.00 Town of Palm Beach Lead Code Enforcement Officer $46,716.80 $74,796.80 City of Palm Beach Gardens Operations Manager (Code) $84,493.88 $135,190.20 City of West Palm Beach Code Enforcement Supervisor $64,827.00 $97,253.00 City of Greenacres Code Enforcement Supervisor $62,504.00 $94,910.40 City of Delray Beach Code Enforcement Officer Supervisor $53,934.40 $86,257.60 City of Boca Raton Code Compliance Supervisor $64,958.40 $108,492.80 Town of Jupiter Code Compliance Supervisor $73,788.00 $121,750.89 Following the compensation study methodology, at the 60th percentile, the range would be $64,879.56 - $101,748.92. Slotting into our current pay plan, we would put it at pay grade 116, with a range of $64,882.08 – $103,811.23 annually. 3) Add one Part-Time Senior Building Construction Inspector position. The Building Director has identified the need to add an additional part-time Senior Building Construction Inspector position to the pay plan. Based on the average number of inspections needed weekly, the addition of a part-time Senior Building Construction Inspector with multiple license types (Structural, Plumbing, Electrical, etc.) will eliminate the need for regular contracted services, saving the Village from paying a premium to contractors to perform required inspections and ensuring consistency in ins pection practices for the Village. The Part-Time Senior Building Construction Inspector position is already established in the pay plan at Pay Grade 119. Excerpt from the Pay Plan: Position Title Grade Hourly (Min) Hourly (Max) Senior Building Construction Inspector 119 $36.11 $57.78 4) Add one Part-Time Recreation Assistant position. The Director of Parks and Recreation has identified the need to add an additional part-time Recreation Assistant position to the pay plan. This position is needed to provide adequate staffing coverage for the Community Center during operational hours and support current and future recreational programming at the Community Center to ensure safety and customer service for program participants. The Part -Time Recreation Assistant position is already established in the pay plan at a Pay Grade 103. Excerpt from the Pay Plan: Position Title Grade Hourly (Min) Hourly (Max) Recreation Assistant (PT) 103 $16.54 $26.47 The Comprehensive Pay Plan is anticipated to be absorbed within the overall Village Budget for Fiscal Year 2026, as approved by the Village Council through the adoption of Ordinance No. 2023-15, without the need for a budget amendment. Section 5 of Ordinance No. 2025-15 specifically authorizes the Village Council to revise the Comprehensive Pay Plan by Resolution during the Fiscal Year without need to amend the Ordinance. The attached Resolution has been prepared and/or reviewed for legal sufficiency by the Village Attorney. Recommendation: Village Staff Requests Council consideration and approval of the attached Resolution amending the Fiscal Year 2026 Comprehensive Pay Plan by creating one Full-Time Director of Planning & Economic Development position and renaming and restructuring the Building & Zoning Department to the Community Development Department; reclassifying one Full-Time Code Compliance Officer position to one Full-Time Code Compliance Supervisor position; adding one Part-Time Senior Building Construction Inspector position; and adding one Part-Time Recreation Assistant position effective October 27th, 2025 in accordance with Village policies and procedures. RESOLUTION 2025- A RESOLUTION OF THE VILLAGE COUNCIL OF THE VILLAGE OF NORTH PALM BEACH, FLORIDA AMENDING THE COMPREHENSIVE PAY PLAN ADOPTED AS PART OF THE FISCAL YEAR 2026 BUDGET TO CREATE ONE FULL-TIME DIRECTOR OF PLANNING AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND RENAME AND RESTRUCTURE THE BUILDING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT TO THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, RECLASSIFY ONE FULL-TIME CODE COMPLIANCE OFFICER TO ONE FULL-TIME CODE COMPLIANCE SUPERVISOR, ADD ONE PART-TIME SENIOR BUILDING CONSTRUCTION INSPECTOR POSITION, AND ADD ONE PART-TIME RECREATION ASSISTANT POSITION; PROVIDING FOR CONFLICTS; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, through the adoption of Ordinance No. 2025-15 (“Budget Ordinance”) on September 25, 2025, the Village Council adopted a Comprehensive Pay Plan as part of the annual budget for Fiscal Year 2026; and WHEREAS, Section 5 of the Budget Ordinance authorizes the Village Council to revise the Comprehensive Pay Plan by Resolution during the course of the Fiscal Year; and WHEREAS, at the recommendation of Village Staff, the Village Council wishes to create one full-time Director of Planning & Economic Development position and rename and restructure the Building & Zoning Department to the Community Development Department, reclassify one full-time Code Compliance Officer position to one full-time Code Compliance Supervisor position, add one part-time Senior Building Construction Inspector position, and add one Part-Time Recreation Assistant position; and WHEREAS, the Village Council determines that the adoption of this Resolution is in the best interests of the Village and its residents. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE VILLAGE COUNCIL OF THE VILLAGE OF NORTH PALM BEACH, FLORIDA as follows: Section 1. The foregoing recitals are ratified as true and incorporated herein. Section 2. The Village Council hereby amends the Comprehensive Pay Plan for Fiscal Year 2026 as follows: A. Create one full-time Director of Planning and Economic Development position at existing Pay Grade 128 ($116,518.78 to 186,430.05 annually) and rename the Building and Zoning Department to the Community Development Department with the two divisions: Planning and Economic Development Division (including six full-time positions in planning and code compliance) and Building Division (including seven full-time and three part-time positions for building inspectors and permit and license technicians); B. Reclassify on full-time Code Compliance Officer to one full-time Code Compliance Supervisor at existing Pay Grade 116 (64,882.08 to $103,811.23 annually); C. Add one part-time Senior Building Inspector position at Pay Grade 119 ($36.11 to $57.78 hourly); and D. Add one part-time Recreation Assistant position at Pay Grade 103 ($16.54 to $26.47 hourly). Section 3. All other provisions of the Comprehensive Pay Plan, to the extent not specifically modified herein, shall remain in full force and effect. Section 4. This Resolution shall take effect immediately upon its adoption. PASSED AND ADOPTED THIS ____ DAY OF ____________, 2025. (Village Seal) MAYOR ATTEST: VILLAGE CLERK Community Development Department Planning & Economic Development Division Description FY 2026 Change Full-Time 6 +1 FT Part-Time 0 0 Director, Planning & Economic Development 1 FT (+1 FT) Planning Planner 1 FT Code Compliance Code Compliance Supervisor 1 FT (+1 FT) Marine Code Compliance Officer 1 FT Code Compliance Officer 2 FT (-1 FT) Executive Assistant (shared with Building) Community Development Department Building Division Description FY 2026 Change Full-Time 8 0 Part-Time 3 +1 PT Building Director 1 FT Executive Assistant 1 FT (shared with Growth Management) Chief Building Inspector 1 FT Senior Building Construction Inspector 1 FT 1 PT (+1 PT) Building Construction Inspector 1 PT Permit & Licensing Coordinator 1 FT Permit & Licensing Technician 3 FT 1 PT VILLAGE OF NORTH PALM BEACH COUNTRY CLUB ADVISORY BOARD MEETING MINUTES DATE: MAY 12, 2025 Village Hall Council Chambers I.CALL TO ORDER: The meeting was called to order by General Manager Beth Davis at 6:00 p.m. II.ROLL CALL Board Member Present: Staff Member Present: David Norris Beth Davis CCM, General Manager Sandra Felis Joy Groover, Exec Asst. GM Michelle Wallace Donna Tollefsen, Tennis Manager Kathy Lancaster Marc Lefco Landon Wells Board Member Absent: Council Member Present: Karen O’Connell Dr. Deborah Searcy, Mayor III.CALL FOR NOMINATION OF OFFICER RESULTS: a.David Norris, Chairman b.Landon Wells, Vice Chairman c.Kathy Lancaster, Secretary IV.APPROVAL OF MINUTES: NA V.PUBLIC COMMENTS: NA VI.NEW BUSINESS: a.Item #1: Beth Davis, CCM, General Manager gave a Board Orientation presentation discussing the Terms of Service, Mission Statement, Communication, Dates of Future Meetings, Rules & Conduct, and Support Staff as it relates to the CC Advisory Board. Next CCAB meeting is scheduled for Monday, July 14, 2025 at 6 pm in Chambers. Communication will be sent via email. b.Item #2: Preparation of Budgets and Financials i.July 14th Meeting, Beth will report on Q3 (Quarter 3) Financials ii. July 24th Village Council Meeting. Village Manager to present proposed budget and tentative mileage rate. iii. August- Budget Workshops will be held iv. September - (2 public hearings) Budget Finalized c. Item# 3: A country club campus tour will be conducted by Beth Davis, GM, and Allan Bowman, Head Golf Professional, date to be determined. Executive Assistant to the GM, Joy Groover will follow up with date and time. VII. OLD BUSINESS: NA VIII. STAFF REPORT/COMMENTS: CCAB’s first meeting, no official report given. Beth Davis, GM, explained fiscal year schedule is October 1 to September 30, and answered various questions about the country club, restaurant and community events. IX. BOARD MEMBER COMMENTS: General discussion and suggestions ensued about the country club, restaurant, pool parties, and community events. X. ADJOURNMENT: Motion to adjourn at 6:43 pm by David Norris, Chairman; seconded by Landon Wells. Minutes Prepared by: Kathy Lancaster, Secretary Date: 5/14/2025 Village of North Palm Beach Planning, Zoning and Adjustment Board MINUTES Tuesday, August 5, 2025, at 6:30 pm Village Hall Council Chambers CALL TO ORDER Chair Solodar called the meeting to order at 6:30 PM. Roll Call BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT: Donald Solodar, Chair Jonathan Haigh, Vice-Chair Thomas Hogarth, Member Cory Cross, Member Scott Hicks, Member Mark Michels, Member BOARD MEMBER(S) ABSENT: Claudia Visconti, Member VILLAGE STAFF: Building Director, Valentino Perez, Attorney, Len Rubin, Planner, Alondra Lopez-Mojica Planning Consultant: Lance Lilly II. Deletions, Additions or Modifications to the Agenda: III. Public Comment (Non-Agenda Items): NONE IV. Approval of Minutes July 1, 2025: Motion to approve made by Vice-Chair Haigh, seconded by Member Hicks in a 6- 0 vote. Chair Solodar commented on a spelling error found in page 3, paragraph 3 and asked to change the attorney’s name from “Lubin” to “Rubin”. V. Declaration of Ex-Parte Communications: NONE VI. Quasi-Judicial Matters / Public Hearings The Village Attorney swore all persons speaking. A. Site Plan & Appearance Reviews 1. 110 Shore Court – Shore Club “B” Condominiums Virgil Alonso, the Applicant, provided a presentation requested approval to repaint the proposed buildings, changing the existing white color of the main building to “Topsail”, and to modify the natural brick on the front façade. The Village of North Palm Beach August 5, 2025 Planning, Zoning and Adjustment Board Agenda Page 2 of 3 Mr. Lilly provided additional context regarding the request, including its relationship to surrounding buildings and details of the proposed color. Member Hogarth expressed support for the proposed color with no objections. Vice-Chair Haigh inquired whether the roof color was changing from grey to red; Mr. Lilly confirmed there would be no change, after which Vice-Chair Haigh stated no objections. Members Cross, Hicks, Michels, and Chair Solodar also had no objections. Public Comment: There were no public comments. Motion: Motion to approve made by Member Hogarth, seconded by Member Michels. Motion passed unanimously by 6-0 vote. 2. 1037 Marina Drive – Safe Harbor Marina Vice-Chair Haigh recused himself from voting due to a conflict. Mr. Lilly provided a staff presentation explaining the Applicant’s proposal to renovate the deteriorating south seawall due to structural concerns requiring prompt attention. He noted that the proposal also included reducing the number of previously approved boat slips from 129 to 124, resurfacing, repaving, and restriping the southern parking lot adjacent to the seawall and updating the dumpster enclosure with new fencing material. Additionally, the Applicant requested to convert a previously approved egress area on the north side of the property into a parking area and to incorporate terminal landscape islands in the southern parking lot and other areas of the property. Mr. Lilly stated that Staff recommended approval of the application. Lentzy Jean-Louis, the Applicant from Urban Design Studio, gave a presentation providing additional details. He clarified that the previously approved egress shown on the site plan was never constructed and that the revision would better reflect current property conditions. Member Michels requested clarification regarding the intent and locations for the proposed slip removals and also inquired about the turbidity barrier. Morgan Biddle of Kimley Horn explained that the turbidity barrier is used for erosion control and serves to protect the waterways during construction activities. Member Hicks requested clarification on whether the red boxes on the plan indicated where the slips were to remain the same, and whether the boat lifts were to remain or be removed. Joshua Steib, representing Safe Harbor, stated that while 18 boat lifts were originally planned, the seawall will now be finished using a technique involving steel sheet piles, which will provide an additional 18 inches of water depth. In addition, the property would like to add a marginal dock. Member Hogarth questioned where changes in the parking count would occur. Rob Dinsmoore, with Urban Design Studios, explained the proposed landscape modifications, including the widening of landscape islands, the retention of existing trees within those islands, and other proposed improvements. Chair Solodar sought confirmation that, if approved, the project would be quickly resolved. The Applicant stated their intention to complete the project within this year. Motion: Motion to approve by Member Hicks, seconded by Member Hogarth in a 5-0 vote, with Vice- Chair Haigh recusing. Motion passed unanimously by 5-0 vote. The Village of North Palm Beach August 5, 2025 Planning, Zoning and Adjustment Board Agenda Page 3 of 3 Commission Member Comments Chair Solodar noted that at the July 10th Village Council meeting, an agenda item was discussed regarding the existing rules prohibiting the renomination and reelection of a Board Chair for a second consecutive term. Following public and Board discussion, the Council approved a change to the regulations. Attorney Rubin stated that this change would apply to all committees and that the current regulations would be amended at the Village Council meeting following the PZAB meeting. Chair Solodar also inquired about the anticipated opening date for Matteo’s restaurant. Vice-Chair Haigh asked whether an ordinance had been passed establishing a time limit on site plan approvals. Attorney Rubin confirmed that the time limit is two years, with the option of a one-year extension. Member Hogarth inquired whether Austin Republic had opened. Mr. Lilly confirmed that the business currently has a temporary Certificate of Occupancy and that Village Staff is working with the Applicant to provide the information previously requested by the Board. He added that he is awaiting additional information from the Applicant to conduct a review. Member Hogarth also asked about the use of outdoor smokers and whether cooking outside was planned. Mr. Lilly responded that the issue had been raised with the Applicant and it was recommended that any smokers be screened. Member Hogarth further commented on the deteriorating condition of the landscaping at the site and emphasized the need for proper maintenance. Staff Updates Next Meeting: September 9, 2025 (Originally on September 2, 2025. However, due to the fact that it falls on the day after Labor Day, it was moved to September 9, 2025). Mr. Lilly has received an item from Lake Park and they are asking the Board for a joint meeting with the Town of Lake Park. Alondra Lopez-Mojica was introduced at the new Planner. Adjournment Meeting adjourned at 7:06 PM All members of the public are invited to appear at the public hearing, which may be continued from time to time, and be heard with respect to this matter. If a person decides to appeal any decision made with respect to any matter considered at the subject meeting, he or she will need to ensure that a verbatim record of the proceedings is made, which shall include the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is to be based (F.S. 286.0105). In accordance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, any person who may require speci al accommodation to participate in this meeting should contact the Village Clerk’s Office at 841-3355 at least 72 hours prior to the meeting date. This agenda represents the tentative agenda for the scheduled meeting of the Planning Zoning and Adjustment Board. Due to the nature of governmental duties and responsibilities, the Planning Zoning and Adjustment Board reserves the right to make additions to, or deletions from, the items contained in this agenda. 1 THE VILLAGE OF NORTH PALM BEACH Village Manager’s Office “THE BEST PLACE TO LIVE UNDER THE SUN” Environmental Committee Meeting MINUTES Anchorage Park Monday, Sept 8, 2025 6:00pm 1. Call to Order: Karen Marcus called the meeting to order at 6:04pm. 2. Roll Call: Present: Karen Marcus, Kendra Zellner, Mary Phillips, Ellen Allen, Elizabeth Rivera, Juliette Desfeux and Brian Bartels Absent: Also Present: Julie Morrell Village Staff, and Councilwoman Debra Searcy 3. The Minutes of the Aug 11, 2025, regular meeting was approved. 4. Public Comments – a. 5. Community Garden Update- Sally from the Community Garden advised that tomorrow night they will attempt to elect officers. September 21st is their first garden meeting. She said they have their first volunteer. Planting season is happening now but better if you wait until October or November. 6. Mangrove Seeding- Keith Rossin from MANG came to the meeting to educate the committee on their mangrove initiative. They have a collection campaign with Blueline in Jupiter and they have a mangrove farm in West Palm Beach. He recommended a mangrove restoration project at Lakeside Park since mangroves are the number one natural erosion preventative solution. They are designing a mangrove solution that attaches to a concrete seawall. Keith said he is interested starting a mangrove garden at the community garden. 7. Tree Preservation Permit- The tree preservation application has been created. Any trees to be removed, even in the swale, goes through community development. A consultant for the Village provided a residential landscape code example for our committee to review. 2 8. Swale Grass- Chad from Public Works provided information on grass being planted in the swale and how it impacts drainage. Chad said he will work with code enforcement so they are better educated on the needs of the swale. 9. Golf Course Pesticides- Alan will come to the next meeting. 10. Artificial Turf Proposal at Lakeside Park- Mary advised that there was an artificial turf salesman asking for information and interested in planting it in North Palm Beach. The committee asked Julie to advise Ashley that our committee recommends against artificial turf. 11. Environmental Report at Anchorage Park- Mary advised that at the Aug 12th recreation meeting there was a discussion about and environmental report. The committee requested that our committee participate in the environmental report review process. 12. Tree Preservation at Parks- Julie advised that there are no rain sensors in the swale on US1. 13. Volunteer board request- Julie spoke about a new link getting added to the website so the public can submit their questions and comments. These questions will get added to public comment on the agenda to review monthly. 14. Oyster Project- During the last meeting Orlando committed to handing out the leftover VOGs across 3-4 streets, but the VOGs are still at Anchorage Park. Karen met with Old Port Cove to distribute VOGs. She will follow up. Kendra, Mary, Karen, and Liz went to the site where oysters were being stored at MacArthur Beach State Park. Logan is not available in October for a VOG building event so we will investigate November. 15. Lakeside Park erosion proposal- There is no update. This is currently with council. The committee agreed that a living shoreline is the best long-term option for Lakeside Park. Keith from MANG advised that he could assist with the plan for stabilizing Lakeside Park. 16. Wind and Heat Vulnerability Assessment- No update. 17. Residential landscape code- No update. 18. Lead By Example- Karen will speak with Chuck about a setting a standard for consumables. 19. Environmental Letter to Businesses- Kendra provided this letter to Julie at a previous meeting. Julie is waiting for a response from the Business Advisory Board. 20. Speaker Series: The Green Hour at the Clubhouse- Tom Twyford will be the next speaker on October 4th and the speaker for November might be Veronica from MacArthur Beach State Park. Possibly MANG in January. 3 21. Previous newsletter was about the Tree Preservation permit. The next newsletter about plastic grass. 22. Member Comment- a. Karen advised that Seacoast is working on converting some homes in the Village to sewer. b. Karen advised that trees were removed after the tree preservation permit was passed. 23. Staff Comment- a. 24. Next meeting- The next meeting will be on Oct 6th, 2025 at 6:00 pm at Anchorage Park. 25. Adjournment- the meeting adjourned at 7:47pm. Village of North Palm Beach Recreation Advisory Board Meeting AGENDA September 9, 2025 at 6:00 pm Village Hall Council Chambers 1) Call to Order: Chair Frogge Rita Budnyk, Vice Chair 2) Roll Call: Jason Frogge, Chair Rita Budnyk, Vice Chair Brigid Misselhorn, Secretary Stephen Heiman Jonathan Sorensen Village Council Representative- Debbie Searcy, Mayor Jennifer Gold Dumas Francesca Wernisch, Recreation Manager Emily Bales Ashley Shipman, Director of Parks & Rec 3) Vote for new Chair and Vice Chair ● Jason Frogge has stepped down due to personal reasons ● Board member Heiman made a motion for Rita Budnyk as Chair and Board member Gold Dumas seconded. Board member Heiman nominated Board member Gold Dumas as Vice Chair and Chair Budnyk seconded 4) Approval of Minutes: ● August 12, 2025 5) Public Comments: none 6) Director’s Report: ● Special Projects i. Community Center Parking Lot- only main parking lot 1. Chair Budnyk recommended some use of compact spots a. Board member Heiman seconds 2. Trying to not lose any spaces 3. Construction over the summer ii. Trails, Kayak Launch, and Fitness stations 1. To start directly after Heritage Day 2. Plans will be shared from Engenuity and Kompan 3. Looking into a “Heart Healthy Trail” concept a. Board member Gold Dumas mentioned that used to be in place b. Board member Heiman suggested historical information signage, and Mayor Searcy mentioned that the Golf Course is turning 100 and that would also work great there. ● Additional Projects i. Stephen looking into steps to get down to the beach at Lakeside ii. The bowl project has a lot of aspects in process. ● Special Events i. Touch a Truck 1. Board member Heiman will be reaching out to a helicopter pilot 2. Board member Sorensen suggested the Army Reserve and Recruiters a. Was a Tank Commander and possibly has connections for additional vehicles ii. Pickleball 1. Patrick, Recreation Assistant, is overseeing this event. It’s his first time putting a program together like this. ● Athletic Programs i. Flag Football 1. Don Stephens is running the program 2. Considering a 12-16 Flag football for the Spring instead a. Board member Sorensen recommended discontinuing the 12-14 age group in Fall due to tackle falling at that time. And instead make Spring not only 12-16 but younger also b. Director Shipman explained the sports programs are currently in opposite seasons from the norm by design but looking at options to make it all work ii. Adult Soccer and Kickball 1. Two separate soccer leagues - co-ed and adult 2. Kickball will be happening at the same time with the use of Field Marshalls 3. Sign ups go thru the organization group 4. They also help maintain the fields iii. Adult basketball 1. Don has all the teams set- 6 so far 2. 8 week season goes into the first week of December 3. 18+ and considering a 40+ 7) New Business: ● Discussion of the 2026 Florida Recreational Development Assistance Program (FRDAP) grant application in the amount of $140,500 for improvements to the Community Center Park outdoor basketball courts and back parking lot. o Going thru the application process o New surfacing and lines o Fencing around the outdoor courts o 50K has no requirement from the Village but anything above that would be a 50/50 funding match o Chair Budnyk inquired about the bleachers, there is a set for spectators o May have insight in March or late March if funding will be provided o Board member Bales asked if Anchorage Park fencing could be included but grant is location specific and limited to one park o Grant writer Ryan Ruskay is handling details for the FRDAP grant request for the Lakeside Park Playground project. He has been contracted with the Village since 2013 o If no grant funding, Village will have to decide how the project can move forward ● Community Center Sand Volleyball Courts – improvements- pavilion, picnic area o Chair Budnyk suggests adding a cover for spectators and families 8) Old Business: ● Board member Heiman asked for an update on the dry storage empty spots since he hears a lot in the community about frustrations with waitlist issues. Wondering if all the contracts have been completed ▪ Director Shipman confirmed ● that they are not all completed ● Contracts are due Oct 1. If the contract is not signed and paid by Oct 15th (extension provided as a courtesy due to fee increase), their spot will be forfeited o Three attempts will be made: mail, phone, email ● Face to face conversations and contract signing to confirm residents who rent understand the rules ● Exceptions will not be made ● Parks team does inspections during random times so spots can be verified o Rec will handle phone calls to correct issues o At one point Village contracted a tow company ● Beautification of dry storage is not at the top of the list but is on the list since irrigation has not been done and was not part of the original plan o Chair Budnyk recommends xeriscaping and making it a higher priority o Landscaping was removed from original plan to fund the project o South side of the park needs to be completed first o Board member Heiman suggested at least the portion that faces Anchorage o Board member Heiman and Bales commend the new lights and safety ● Board member Bales inquired about the survey on the Anchorage park fence o Director Shipman will speak with Olivia to create signage with a QR code, showing fencing options for residents to ‘vote’ on 9) Member Comments: ● Chair Budnyk spoke with Mo who is compiling the Run/Walk club survey results to report back and look at start date ● Board member Misselhorn inquired on pest control due to the red ants on baseball diamond and Director Shipman will have area treated 10) Staff Comments: 11) Board Comments/Recommendations to be presented to Council ● Board member Heiman inquired to when our next Council meeting obligation needs to completed ● Chair Budnyk clarified that we can email when planning to attend meetings 12) Adjournment: Board member Gold Dumas had a motion to adjourn and Board member Heiman seconded VILLAGE OF NORTH PALM BEACH HUMAN RESOURCES DEPARTMENT TO: THRU: Honorable Mayor and Members of the Village Council Chuck Huff, Village Manager FROM: Jennifer Cain, Human Resources Director Leonard G. Rubin, Village Attorney DATE: October 23, 2025 SUBJECT: ORDINANCE 1ST Reading – Amending Division 4 of Article V of Chapter 2 of the Village Code to extend the Deferred Option Benefit Plan (DROP) for police officer and firefighter employees At its September 24th, 2025, meeting, the Village Council approved and ratified Memorandums of Understanding with the Palm Beach County Police Benevolent Association, Inc. and the Professional Firefighters/Paramedics of Palm Beach County, Local 2928, IAFF, Inc. to extend the Deferred Option Retirement Plan (DROP) from five years to eight years. Section 2-170.1 of the Village Code currently limits the DROP period to five years. The attached Ordinance proposes the following revisions to Division 4, Article V, Chapter 2 of the Village Code of Ordinances to implement the approved Memorandums of Understanding (deleted language stricken through and additional language underlined): Sec. 2-170.1. Deferred option benefit plan (DROP). (a) Effective October 24, 2019 upon the adoption of the Ordinance from which this section derived, a Deferred Retirement Option Plan ("DROP") benefit is created and added to the Plan and shall be available to employees upon reaching their normal retirement date. * * * (e) Effective [insert effective date of Ordinance], an employee who elects to participate in the DROP may participate in the plan for a maximum of ninety-six (96) months. An employee who entered the DROP before [insert effective date] elects to participate could participate in the DROP may participate in the plan for a maximum of sixty (60) months. The application to enter into the DROP shall include an irrevocable letter of resignation effective upon the last day of DROP participation. Employees who participate in the DROP may elect to terminate their participation prior to ninety-six (96) sixty (60) months of participation, but may not continue participation beyond ninety-six (96) sixty (60) months from the date of entry into the DROP. All DROP participants who are actively employed and in the DROP on [insert effective date of Ordinance], can elect into the ninety-six (96) month DROP by completing and filing a form with the Board making that election within 90 days of the adoption of the Ordinance creating the ninety-six (96) month DROP. * * * (k) At the conclusion of the employee's participation in the DROP, and as a condition of participating in such plan, the employee will terminate Village employment. The retiree will thereafter receive a normal monthly retirement benefit as previously calculated upon entry into the DROP, but the monthly amount will be paid to the retiree and no longer accounted for in the DROP account. If the employee does not terminate participation in the DROP at the end of the sixty (60) month employee’s maximum participation period (sixty (60) or ninety-six (96) months, as applicable), no earnings shall be credited on the DROP balance and no further DROP deposits shall be made. * * * (p) Any form of payment selected by the employee must comply with the minimum distribution requirements of the IRC 401(A)(9), i.e., payments must commence by age seventy-two (72). The attached Ordinance has been prepared and/or reviewed for legal sufficiency by the Village Attorney. As previously discussed, the Pension Plan actuary (Foster & Foster) has determined that the extension of the DROP as set forth in the Ordinance will have no impact on the funding requirements of the plan. The Police and Fire Pension Board has not yet reviewed the proposed Ordinance; consequently, Staff will not bring the Ordinance forward for adoption on second reading until the Board has an opportunity to provide comments. Recommendation: Village Staff requests Council consideration and adoption on first reading of the attached Ordinance amending Division 4, Article V, Chapter 2 of the Village Code of Ordinances by amending Section 2-170.1 to extend the Deferred Option Benefit Plan for police officer and firefighter employees in accordance with Village policies and procedures. Page 1 of 4 ORDINANCE NO. _____ 1 2 AN ORDINANCE OF THE VILLAGE COUNCIL OF THE VILLAGE OF 3 NORTH PALM BEACH, FLORIDA AMENDING DIVISION 4, “PENSION 4 AND CERTAIN OTHER BENEFITS FOR FIRE AND POLICE EMPLOYEES,” 5 OF ARTICLE V, “PENSIONS AND RETIREMENTS SYSTEMS,” OF 6 CHAPTER 2, “ADMINISTRATION,” OF THE VILLAGE CODE OF 7 ORDINANCES BY AMENDING SECTION 2-170.1 TO IMPLEMENT 8 CHANGES TO THE DEFERRED RETIREMENT OPTION PLAN RESULTING 9 FROM MEMORANDUMS OF UNDERSTANDING WITH THE COLLECTIVE 10 BARGAINING AGENTS REPRESENTING POLICE OFFICER AND 11 FIREFIGHTER EMPLOYEES; PROVIDING FOR CODIFICATION; 12 PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; PROVIDING FOR CONFLICTS; AND 13 PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. 14 15 WHEREAS, the Village sponsors a retirement plan for its police officer and firefighter employees 16 known as the Village of North Palm Beach Fire and Police Retirement Fund, which is administered 17 by a Board of Trustees; and 18 19 WHEREAS, the Village and the collective bargaining agents representing the police officer and 20 firefighter employees (Palm Beach County Police Benevolent Association, Inc. and the 21 Professional Firefighters/Paramedics of Palm Beach County, Local 2928, IAFF, respectively) have 22 each agreed to a memorandum of understanding to extend the Deferred Option Benefit Plan from 23 five to eight years; and 24 25 WHEREAS, the Village Council wishes to amend the Plan to incorporate this change and 26 determines that the adoption of this Ordinance is in the interest of the public health, safety and 27 welfare of the Village and its residents. 28 29 NOW, THEREFORE BE IT ORDAINED BY THE VILLAGE COUNCIL OF THE VILLAGE 30 OF NORTH PALM BEACH, FLORIDA as follows: 31 32 Section 1. The foregoing “Whereas” clauses are ratified as true and incorporated herein. 33 34 Section 2. The Village Council hereby amends Chapter 2, “Administration,” Article V, 35 “Pensions and Retirement Systems,” Division 4, “Pension and Certain Other Benefits for Fire and 36 Police Employees,” of the Village Code of Ordinances by amending Section 2-170.1 to read as 37 follows (additional language is underlined and deleted language is stricken through): 38 39 * * * 40 41 Sec. 2-170.1. Deferred option benefit plan (DROP). 42 43 (a) Effective October 24, 2019 upon the adoption of the Ordinance from which 44 this section derived, a Deferred Retirement Option Plan ("DROP") benefit 45 Page 2 of 4 is created and added to the Plan and shall be available to employees upon 1 reaching their normal retirement date. 2 3 (b) Upon entry into the DROP, an employee is considered retired for pension 4 plan purposes. 5 6 (c) An employee may elect to participate in the DROP provided the employee 7 makes the election no later than thirty (30) days after reaching the 8 employee's latest normal retirement date. Notwithstanding the foregoing, 9 effective April 1, 2025, members must make their initial election to 10 participate in the DROP by the later of: 11 12 (1) Thirty (30) days after reaching their latest normal retirement date; 13 or 14 15 (2) Ninety (90) days after April 1, 2025. 16 17 (d) An election to participate in the DROP must be made in writing and shall 18 become irrevocable thirty (30) days following the date it is received by the 19 Pension Administrator and the Village's Director of Human Resources. 20 21 (e) Effective [insert effective date of Ordinance], an employee who elects to 22 participate in the DROP may participate in the plan for a maximum of 23 ninety-six (96) months. An employee who entered the DROP before [insert 24 effective date] elects to participate could participate in the DROP may 25 participate in the plan for a maximum of sixty (60) months. The application 26 to enter into the DROP shall include an irrevocable letter of resignation 27 effective upon the last day of DROP participation. Employees who 28 participate in the DROP may elect to terminate their participation prior to 29 ninety-six (96) sixty (60) months of participation, but may not continue 30 participation beyond ninety-six (96) sixty (60) months from the date of entry 31 into the DROP. All DROP participants who are actively employed and in 32 the DROP on [insert effective date of Ordinance] can elect into the ninety-33 six (96) month DROP by completing and filing a form with the Board 34 making that election within 90 days of the adoption of the Ordinance 35 creating the ninety-six (96) month DROP. 36 37 (f) An eligible employee who elects to participate in the DROP shall have the 38 employee's benefit calculated based on credited service, multiplier, and 39 average monthly earnings determined as of the effective date of the 40 employee's election to participate in the DROP. No further credited service, 41 benefit changes, or changes in earnings shall be considered for pension 42 purposes. 43 44 (g) After entering the DROP, a participant shall not be eligible for disability or 45 pre-retirement death benefits under the Plan. This provision is not intended 46 Page 3 of 4 to limit entitlement to any statutory line of duty death benefit under state or 1 federal law. 2 3 (h) A DROP account shall be established for each employee who elects to 4 participate. These are not actual accounts; rather they are nominal accounts 5 and balances kept as a bookkeeping process. 6 7 (i) During the period of the employee's participation in the DROP, the 8 employee's normal retirement benefit shall be accounted for in the 9 employee's DROP account. 10 11 (j) The employee's DROP account shall be invested with the retirement plan 12 assets and credited with the overall net (earnings less costs) investment rate 13 of return on the retirement plan assets during the period of the employee's 14 participation in the DROP and the crediting rate will be no less than zero 15 (0) percent and no more than 6.40 percent. 16 17 (k) At the conclusion of the employee's participation in the DROP, and as a 18 condition of participating in such plan, the employee will terminate Village 19 employment. The retiree will thereafter receive a normal monthly 20 retirement benefit as previously calculated upon entry into the DROP, but 21 the monthly amount will be paid to the retiree and no longer accounted for 22 in the DROP account. If the employee does not terminate participation in 23 the DROP at the end of the sixty (60) month employee’s maximum 24 participation period (sixty (60) or ninety-six (96) months, as applicable), no 25 earnings shall be credited on the DROP balance and no further DROP 26 deposits shall be made. 27 28 (l) No amount can be paid from the retirement plan until the DROP employee 29 terminates employment. 30 31 (m) Upon termination, the retiree's DROP account will be distributed to the 32 retiree in a lump sum, which can be rolled over or paid in cash at the retiree's 33 discretion. Direct rollover may be accomplished by any reasonable means 34 determined by the Board. 35 36 (n) If a retiree dies before distribution of the retiree's DROP account 37 commences, the account balance shall be distributed to the retiree's 38 designated beneficiary in a lump sum, which can be rolled over or paid in 39 cash at the beneficiary's discretion. 40 41 (o) Distribution of an employee's DROP account shall begin as soon as 42 administratively practicable following the employee's termination of 43 employment. The employee must elect the distribution within forty-five 44 (45) days following the employee's termination date. If the employee does 45 Page 4 of 4 not timely request the withdrawal of the asset in the DROP, no further 1 earnings shall be credited on the DROP balance. 2 3 (p) Any form of payment selected by the employee must comply with the 4 minimum distribution requirements of the IRC 401(A)(9), i.e., payments 5 must commence by age seventy-two (72). 6 7 Section 3. All other provisions of Division 4 of Article V of Chapter 2 of the Village Code of 8 Ordinances not expressly amended as set forth above shall remain unchanged by the adoption of 9 this Ordinance. 10 11 Section 4. The provisions of this Ordinance shall become and be made part of the Code of the 12 Village of North Palm Beach, Florida. 13 14 Section 5. If any action, paragraph, sentence, clause, phrase, or word of this Ordinance is for 15 any reason held be a court of competent jurisdiction to be unconstitutional, inoperative, or void, 16 such holding shall not affect the remainder of this Ordinance. 17 18 Section 6. This Ordinance shall be effective immediately upon adoption. 19 20 PLACED ON FIRST READING THIS ___ DAY OF _________, 2025. 21 22 PLACED ON SECOND, FINAL READING AND PASSED THIS _____ DAY OF ___________, 23 2025 24 25 26 (Village Seal) ________________________________ 27 MAYOR 28 29 30 ATTEST: 31 32 _______________________________ 33 VILLAGE CLERK 34 35 36 APPROVED AS TO FORM AND 37 LEGAL SUFFICIENCY: 38 39 _______________________________ 40 VILLAGE ATTORNEY 41 Village of North Palm Beach Vulnerability Assessment August 2025 Submitted to: Village of North Palm Beach 501 US Highway One North Palm Beach, FL 33408 Submitted by: Aptim Environmental & Infrastructure, LLC (APTIM) 6401 Congress Avenue, Suite 140 Boca Raton, FL 33487 Task 7_Village of North Palm Beach Vulnerability Assessment 2025_FINAL 2 Acknowledgements This Vulnerability Assessment for the Village of North Palm Beach was funded through a grant provided by the Resilient Florida Program, part of the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP). This work was funded in part through a grant agreement from the Florida Department of Environmental Protection’s Office of Resilience and Coastal Protection Resilient Florida Program. The views, statements, findings, conclusions, and recommendations expressed herein are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the State of Florida or any of its subagencies. Publication Date: August 2025 Suggested Citation: Village of North Palm Beach. (2025). Village of North Palm Beach Vulnerability Assessment. Prepared with funding from the Resilient Florida Program, Florida Department of Environmental Protection. Task 7_Village of North Palm Beach Vulnerability Assessment 2025_FINAL 3 Table of Contents Acknowledgements ................................................................................................................... 2 Table of Contents ...................................................................................................................... 3 List of Figures ............................................................................................................................ 4 List of Tables ............................................................................................................................. 5 Glossary .................................................................................................................................... 8 Executive Summary ................................................................................................................... 9 Introduction .............................................................................................................................. 14 Vulnerability Assessment ..................................................................................................... 14 Study Area Conditions ......................................................................................................... 15 Social Vulnerability ........................................................................................................... 16 Government Planning ....................................................................................................... 17 Flood Insurance ................................................................................................................ 18 Hazards and Stressors ......................................................................................................... 19 Community Priorities ............................................................................................................ 20 Available Data ...................................................................................................................... 21 Exposure Analysis ................................................................................................................... 28 Hazard Scenarios and Methodology .................................................................................... 28 Study Area and Parcel Exposure ......................................................................................... 33 Current Hazards ............................................................................................................... 35 Future Hazards ................................................................................................................. 39 Summary of Findings for Study Area and Parcel Exposure .............................................. 42 Critical Asset Exposure ........................................................................................................ 42 Current Hazards ............................................................................................................... 43 Future Hazards ................................................................................................................. 58 Summary of Findings – Critical Asset Exposure ............................................................... 67 Flood Sensitivity Analysis ........................................................................................................ 67 Methodology ........................................................................................................................ 67 Parcel Sensitivity .................................................................................................................. 70 Critical Asset Sensitivity ....................................................................................................... 72 Roadways and Transportation Assets .............................................................................. 76 Stormwater Infrastructure ................................................................................................. 81 Wastewater Infrastructure ................................................................................................ 85 Water Utility Conveyance Systems................................................................................... 85 Task 7_Village of North Palm Beach Vulnerability Assessment 2025_FINAL 4 Natural Resources ............................................................................................................ 87 Schools ............................................................................................................................. 91 Summary of Findings – Critical Asset Sensitivity .............................................................. 91 Non-Flood Hazard Sensitivity Analysis .................................................................................... 93 Methodology ........................................................................................................................ 93 Heat .................................................................................................................................. 93 Wind ................................................................................................................................. 95 Summary of Findings – Non-Flood Hazard Sensitivity Analysis ........................................... 98 Adaptive Capacity .................................................................................................................... 99 Urban Tree Canopy Review .................................................................................................. 100 Identification of Focus Areas ................................................................................................. 102 Critical Assets in Each Focus Area .................................................................................... 104 Distribution of Top 50 Most Vulnerable Assets .................................................................. 105 Focus Area 1 .................................................................................................................. 106 Focus Area 2 .................................................................................................................. 107 Focus Area 3 .................................................................................................................. 109 Focus Area 4 .................................................................................................................. 110 Conclusions ........................................................................................................................... 112 Appendix A: Prioritized List of Critical Assets ........................................................................ 114 Appendix B: Geospatial Database and Metadata .................................................................. 117 Appendix C: Vulnerability Assessment Compliance Checklist ............................................... 119 Appendix D: Sensitivity Maps for All Statutory Scenarios Across Four Asset Classes .......... 122 List of Figures Figure 1 Number of Projected High Tide Flooding Days.......................................................... 24 Figure 2 a, b, c: Flood event comparison of the 100 -year flood event (FEMA Flood Map) and a Category 4 storm surge. The Category 4 storm surge flooding scenario exceeds a 100 -year storm event. ............................................................................................................................. 26 Figure 3 Flood and Non-Flood Scenarios Utilized for the Vulnerability Assessment ............... 30 Figure 4 Differences Between BFEs in 100- Year Effective (2017) and Preliminary (2024) FEMA Flood Insurance Maps (FIRMs). ................................................................................... 32 Figure 5 Differences Between SWELs in 500- Year Effective (2017) and Preliminary (2024) FIRMs. ..................................................................................................................................... 32 Figure 6 Village of North Palm Beach Storm Surge Exposure. ................................................ 35 Figure 7 Village of North Palm Beach Category 4 Storm Surge Exposure and Flood Depths. 36 Figure 8 Village of North Palm Beach Category 5 Storm Surge Exposure and Flood Depths. 36 Figure 9 Village of North Palm Beach Tidal Flooding Exposure. ............................................. 37 Task 7_Village of North Palm Beach Vulnerability Assessment 2025_FINAL 5 Figure 10 10-Year/24-Hour and 25-Year/24-Hour Rainfall Event Exposure. ........................... 37 Figure 11 Village of North Palm Beach 100- and 500-Year Flood Event Exposure ................. 38 Figure 12 Village of North Palm Beach Heat Exposure. .......................................................... 38 Figure 13 Village of North Palm Beach Sea Level Rise Exposure ........................................... 40 Figure 14 Future Storm Surge Exposure Extents and Flood Depths (Category 4 Surge + 2050 Intermediate SLR) ................................................................................................................... 40 Figure 15 Future Storm Surge Exposure Extents and Flood Depths (Category 4 Surge + 2080 Intermediate SLR) ................................................................................................................... 41 Figure 16 Village of North Palm Beach Future Compound Flooding Exposure. ...................... 42 Figure 17 Category 4 and 5 Storm Surge Critical Asset Exposure. ......................................... 45 Figure 18 100- and 500-Year Flood Critical Asset Exposure. .................................................. 46 Figure 19 Tidal Flooding and 10 Year 24 Hour Rainfall Event Critical Asset Exposure. .......... 46 Figure 20 Category 5 Storm Surge and 10 Year 24 Hour Rainfall Event Road Exposure. ...... 52 Figure 21 Swale Exposure Under a 25 Year/ 24 Hour Event. .................................................. 56 Figure 22 Village of North Palm Beach Communal Outdoor Asset Heat Exposure. ................ 57 Figure 23 25-Year 24-Hour Event +2070 Intermediate-Low Critical Asset Exposure. ............. 59 Figure 24 2050 and 2080 Intermediate SLR Critical Asset Exposure. ..................................... 59 Figure 25 Assets Exposed to Future Flood Hazards at the Greatest Flood Depths. ............... 62 Figure 26 Future Storm Surge Asset Sensitivity (Category 4 + 2050 (left) and 2080 (right) Intermediate SLR ..................................................................................................................... 72 Figure 27 At Risk Critical Assets Under Various Flood Scenarios. .......................................... 73 Figure 28 10 Year 24 Hour Event Medium Risk Roads. .......................................................... 80 Figure 29 Category 4 Surge Medium Risk Roads. .................................................................. 80 Figure 30 Future 10 Year 24 Hour Event +Sea Level Rise Medium and High Risk RoadsFigure 31 Future 10 Year 24 Hour Event +Sea Level Rise Medium and High Risk Roads. ............... 80 Figure 32 Tidal Flooding Shoreline Risk .................................................................................. 89 Figure 33 10 Year 24 Hour Rainfall Event Shoreline Risk. ...................................................... 90 Figure 34 Medium and High Heat Risk Bus Stops ................................................................... 93 Figure 35 Residential Parcel Heat Risk ................................................................................... 95 Figure 36 Building Wind Risk ................................................................................................... 96 Figure 37 Adaptive Capacity for Buildings in the Village of North Palm Beach........................ 99 Figure 38 North Palm Beach Urban Tree Canopy. ................................................................ 101 Figure 39 Focus Areas .......................................................................................................... 103 Figure 40 Critical Assets within Focus Area 1 ....................................................................... 106 Figure 41 Critical Assets within Focus Area 2 ....................................................................... 108 Figure 42 Critical Assets within Focus Area 3 ....................................................................... 109 Figure 43 Critical Assets within Focus Area 4 ....................................................................... 111 List of Tables Table 1 Sea Level Rise Scenario Water Elevations at Mean Higher High Water (MHHW) in feet, North American Vertical Datum 1988. ............................................................................. 23 Table 2 Current Hazard Scenarios Maximum Depth and Percentage of Area Impacted ......... 35 Table 3 Future Flood Scenarios Maximum Depth and Percentage of Area Impacted (all SLR scenarios represent high tide condition) .................................................................................. 39 Table 4 Current Hazard Asset Exposure ................................................................................. 43 Task 7_Village of North Palm Beach Vulnerability Assessment 2025_FINAL 6 Table 5 Percentage of Asset Class Impacted Under Current Flood Hazards (SS: Storm Surge) ................................................................................................................................................ 47 Table 6 Maximum Flood Depths for Key Current Flood Hazards (SS: Storm Surge) .............. 47 Table 7 Minimum, Maximum, and Average Flood Depths for Critical Infrastructure under Cat 5 Storm Surge, a 10-Year/24-Hour Rainfall Event, and a 100-Year Flood Event ....................... 48 Table 8 Key Critical Asset Exposure Under Major Current Flood Hazards (Village Owned) ... 49 Table 9 Key Critical Asset Exposure Under Major Current Flood Hazards (Private, State, or Utility Owned Assets) (SS: Storm Surge) ................................................................................ 50 Table 10 Key Critical Roads Exposed to Current Flood Hazards ............................................ 52 Table 11 Percentage of Asset Types (Points) Impacted by Flood Depths Greater than Zero under Current Flood Hazards with Additional Note of Percentage of Major Flooding .............. 53 Table 12 Percentage of Asset Types (Lines) Impacted by Flood Depths Greater than Zero under Current Flood Hazards with Additional Note of Percentage of Major Flooding .............. 54 Table 13 Percentage of Asset Types (Areas) Impacted by Flood Depths Greater than Zero under Current Flood Hazards with Additional Note of Percentage of Major Flooding .............. 54 Table 14 Percentage of Parcel Types Impacted by Flood Depths Greater than Zero under Current Flood Hazards ............................................................................................................ 55 Table 15 Percentage of Parcel Types Impacted by Severe Heat ............................................ 57 Table 16 Future Hazard Asset Exposure ................................................................................. 58 Table 17 Future Maximum Flood Depth Per Asset Class ........................................................ 60 Table 18 Minimum, Maximum, and Average Flood Depths for Critical Infrastructure under the 2050 and 2080 Intermediate Sea Level Rise Scenarios and the 10 Year 24 Hour Event + 2070 Intermediate-Low Sea Level Rise Scenario ............................................................................. 60 Table 19 Ten Village-Owned Asset Points and Parks with the Greatest Flood Depths Under the 10 Year 24 Hour Event +2070 Intermediate-Low Scenario ............................................... 61 Table 20 Key Critical Asset Exposure Under 10 Year 24 Hour Event + 2070 Int (Utility and Privately Owned)) .................................................................................................................... 61 Table 21 Key Critical Roads Exposed to Current Flood Hazards with an Average Flood Depth Greater than 2.5 Feet .............................................................................................................. 63 Table 22 Percentage of Asset Types (Points) Impacted by Flood Depths Greater than Zero under Future Flood Hazards with Additional Note of Percentage of Major Flooding ............... 65 Table 23 Percentage of Asset Types (Lines) Impacted by Flood Depths Greater than Zero under Future Flood Hazards with Additional Note of Percentage of Major Flooding ............... 66 Table 24 Percentage of Asset Types (Areas) Impacted by Flood Depths Greater than Zero under Future Flood Hazards with Additional Note of Percentage of Major Flooding ............... 66 Table 25 Impact Score per Inundation Depth Range ............................................................... 68 Table 26 Risk Score Equation ................................................................................................. 68 Table 27 Risk Matrix ................................................................................................................ 69 Table 28 Current Residential and Commercial Parcel Risk ..................................................... 70 Table 29 Future Residential and Commercial Parcel Risk....................................................... 71 Table 30 Point Assets at Current Risk by Asset Class ............................................................ 75 Table 31 Point Assets at Future Risk by Asset Class .............................................................. 76 Table 32 Road Risk to Current Flood Hazards ........................................................................ 78 Table 33 Road Risk to Future Flood Hazards .......................................................................... 78 Table 34 Stormwater Assets at Current Risk ........................................................................... 81 Table 35 At Risk Stormwater Assets Under Various Flood Hazards (SS: Storm Surge) ......... 81 Task 7_Village of North Palm Beach Vulnerability Assessment 2025_FINAL 7 Table 36 Stormwater Assets at Future Risk ............................................................................ 82 Table 37 High Risk Stormwater Asset Points Under a 10 Year 24 Hour Rainfall Event with Above Average Flood Depths .................................................................................................. 83 Table 38 Wastewater Assets at Current Risk .......................................................................... 85 Table 39 Water Utility Conveyance System Assets at Current Risk ........................................ 86 Table 40 Water Utility Conveyance System Assets at Future Risk .......................................... 87 Table 41 Medium Risk Water Utility Asset Points Under a 10 Year 24 Hour Rainfall Event with Above Average Flood Depths .................................................................................................. 87 Table 42 Current and Future Park Flood Risk ......................................................................... 88 Table 43 Current Shoreline Flood Risk .................................................................................... 90 Table 44 Future Shoreline Flood Risk ..................................................................................... 90 Table 45 Current and Future School Flood Risk ...................................................................... 91 Table 46 Parcel Risk Levels .................................................................................................... 94 Table 47 Building Footprint Wind Risk ..................................................................................... 97 Table 48 Critical Asset Risk Distribution Across Focus Areas by Flood Scenario ................. 104 Table 49 Distribution of Top 50 Most Vulnerable Assets Across Focus Areas by Risk Level 105 Task 7_Village of North Palm Beach Vulnerability Assessment 2025_FINAL 8 Glossary Adaptive Capacity: The ability of a community, system, or asset to adjust, respond, or recover from adverse events such as natural disasters or climate change impacts. Asset Inventory: A comprehensive list of all critical infrastructure, community facilities, and natural resources within the study area, used to assess vulnerability and plan resilience measures. Compound Flooding: Flooding caused by a combination of multiple sources, such as storm surge, sea level rise, and heavy rainfall, occurring simultaneously or in close succession. Critical Assets: Infrastructure and services that are essential to the functioning and safety of a community, such as hospitals, fire stations, and water treatment facilities. Exposure Analysis: The process of assessing the potential impact of different flood scenarios on assets and infrastructure by overlaying flood models with the locations of these assets. FEMA Risk Rating 2.0: A framework introduced by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) for calculating flood insurance premiums based on individual property risk rather than generalized categories. Flood (or Inundation) Depth: The height of floodwaters above ground level, often measured in feet, used to assess the severity of flooding in each area. Focus Areas: Specific regions within the study area identified as high priority for resilience and mitigation projects due to their high vulnerability, low adaptive capacity, and presence of critical assets. GIS (Geographic Information Systems): A technology used to capture, store, manipulate, analyze, and present spatial or geographic data, essential for creating maps and conducting exposure analysis. Resilience: The ability of a system, community, or asset to withstand, recover from, and adapt to adverse events such as natural disasters. Sensitivity Analysis: An assessment of how different assets and infrastructure respond to various flood depths, used to evaluate the potential damage or disruption they might face. Storm Surge: The abnormal rise of water generated by a storm, over and above the predicted astronomical tides, which can cause coastal flooding. Vulnerability: The degree to which a community, system, or asset is susceptible to damage or disruption from hazards like flooding or climate change. Vulnerability Assessment (VA): A systematic process to identify and evaluate the vulnerabilities posed by natural hazards to a community, with the goal of informing resilience planning and mitigation strategies. Task 7_Village of North Palm Beach Vulnerability Assessment 2025_FINAL 9 Executive Summary The purpose of this project is to conduct a thorough vulnerability assessment to support the identification and prioritization of resilience measures for the Village of North Palm Beach (Village). This assessment aims to guide future funding initiatives and project planning to bolster community and coastal resilience. Conducted in alignment with state guidelines and legislative requirements, this assessment addresses: Key Findings: • Overall, North Palm Beach has moderate exposure to flood hazards. Exposure to high frequency, lower impact events is minimal, while exposure to infrequent, extreme events would potentially impact less than half of the critical assets in the community. • High Vulnerability Areas: The highest levels of vulnerability in the study area are due to impacts of rainfall and severe storm events, rather than sea level rise or tidal flooding. • Asset Types Facing Greatest Increased Future Exposure: Stormwater treatment facilities and pump stations, schools, wastewater treatment facilities and lift stations, water utility conveyance systems, and parks. • Infrastructure Vulnerability to Extreme Storm Surge and Severe Events: o Category 4 storm surge assessed in this study equals a 100-year storm surge, and Category 5 storm surge exceeds a 100-year storm surge. o Forty-seven (47%) percent of assets may be subject to Category 5 storm surge, 19% subject to a 100-year Flood Event, and 33% subject to a 500-year Flood Event. Bridges, wastewater treatment facilities and lift stations, water utility conveyance systems, and stormwater treatment facilities and pump stations, have the highest percentage of exposure- 20%, 52%, 46%, and 55% impacted by a Category 5 surge event, respectively. • Infrastructure Vulnerability to Rainfall Events: Nearly half of the assets are subject to a 10-year and 25-year and 24-hour rainfall event. A 10-year 24-hour rainfall event causes water depths of just over 4 feet, affecting 9% of the village, and the 25-year event reaches depths of 4.5 feet impacting 10% of the area. • Tidal Flooding: Five (5%) percent of the assets, mostly stormwater outfalls distributed across middle and east portion of the Village (along Country Club Dr, near Kittyhawk Way, Marina Dr, Lakeside Dr and Earman River shorelines) are subject to tidal flooding today. In the future, nearly 7% of the assets including stormwater outfalls and lift stations will be subject to tidal flooding. Inundation depths during high tides may reach 3.5 feet by 2050 and 4.7 feet by 2080 . The majority of impacts will occur to stormwater assets. • Sea Level Rise (SLR): Based on Intermediate sea level rise projections, 4% of assets (mainly stormwater outfalls along mid-Village canals, and two water hydrants in the John D. MacArthur State Park) are anticipated to be inundated by 2050, increasing to 6% by 2080. • Compound Flooding: A current compound flooding scenario (Tidal flooding + Category 4 storm surge) and three future compound flooding scenarios (10-year 24-hour Event + 2070 Intermediate-Low, 25-year 24-hour Event + 2070 Intermediate-Low, and 100-year Flood + 2080 Intermediate SLR) were assessed in this study. Task 7_Village of North Palm Beach Vulnerability Assessment 2025_FINAL 10 • Maximum Flood Depths Estimated Under Key Current Flood Hazards: For a Category 4 and Category 5 storm surge event, it would be 7 and 8 feet, respectively. It would be 2.4 feet under existing tidal flooding, 8.4 feet under compound flooding, 4.2 feet under a 10-year flood event, and 10 feet under a 100-year flood event. • Maximum Flood Depths Estimated Under Key Future Flood Hazards: o Future Storm Surge: In 2050, flood depths up to 8 feet are expected to occur under Category 4 storm surge with Intermediate sea level rise conditions, inundating 18% of the Village. These numbers raise up to 9 feet of flood depth (mainly at the stormwater outfalls that have low elevations) and 25% inundation when a Category 5 storm surge is combined with Intermediate sea level rise conditions. By 2080, Categories 4 and 5 flood depths can reach up to 9 and 10 feet, respectively with the impact of Intermediate and Intermediate-Low sea level rise conditions. While the flood depths mentioned represent the maximums that generally occur at the stormwater outfalls near shorelines, the average flood depths that are observed under future storm surge scenarios remain between 4 to 5 feet for any most other assets and areas. o For various future compound flooding scenarios observed by 2080, the flood depth would be 11.7-12.7 feet. • Residential Properties: Nearly 54% of residential properties in the Village are partially or fully exposed to Storm Surge from a Category 5 storm, 29% of which were built before floodplain requirements were in place or outside the recognized floodplain where elevation requirements do not apply. Fifty-five (55%) percent of residential properties can experience flood depths of 0.5 to 2 feet under 10-year Flood Event within their parcel limits including driveways or backyards. 21% of which were built before floodplain requirements. o Under the 10-year 24-hour flood event: ▪ 32 residential properties along Honey Road can experience flooding up to 3 feet around the houses, as well as driveways and backyards. ▪ 14 properties between Conroy Drive and Lorraine Court can experience up to 1.5 feet of flooding mostly on the backyards, encroaching towards the structures. ▪ 6 properties along Fairhaven Drive near the Cul de sac can get inundated by flood waters reaching up to 1.5 feet. ▪ Nearly 90 properties along Shore Drive, Pelican Way, Osprey Way, and Nighthawk Way can get fully inundated with flood depths up to 1.5 feet, fully inundating the roadways, driveways, and structures in the parcel. • Road Access: Approximately 50% of roads within the Village may become inaccessible to emergency response during severe storm events, with an average flood depth of 2.2 feet and a maximum depth of up to 7 feet. Of these roads, 64% are maintained by the Village. Without mitigation, road flooding in the Village is projected to increase substantially, with impacts during a 10-year storm rising from 29% today to 51% by 2050 (with sea level rise). • Severe Heat: The Village's exposure to severe heat is a critical concern, as it poses risks to both residents and infrastructure. Analysis reveals that 79% of residential parcels are exposed to heat conditions of varying severity. Similarly, 92-97% of parcels Task 7_Village of North Palm Beach Vulnerability Assessment 2025_FINAL 11 categorized as Commercial and Services, Institutional, and Recreational face exposure to heat. • Wind: Wind vulnerability analysis focuses on building footprints, categorizing structures into risk vulnerability tiers based on the year built and associated wind mitigation features. Because this methodology differs from the analyses of other hazards, wind risk vulnerability will not be covered within the exposure analysis section but rather will be explored within the sensitivity analysis section. • Some of the most vulnerable assets per Sensitivity Analysis include: o Transportation: ▪ US Highway 1 – High flood risk under Category 5 storm surge and future compound flood scenarios, with flood depths exceeding 5 feet. ▪ Waterway Drive – Moderate to high risk under Category 5 storm surge and future 10-year/24-hour Rainfall Event + Sea Level Rise scenario, with depths nearing 2.5 feet. ▪ Lagoon Drive – Consistently at medium risk under storm surge and rainfall-driven scenarios, with flood depths around 2.3 feet. ▪ Nighthawk Way – Medium risk under current rainfall and storm surge scenarios, with anticipated higher flood depths in future scenarios. ▪ Lighthouse Drive & Country Club Drive – Medium risk to future storm surge (Category 5 + 2050 Intermediate SLR conditions). ▪ Bus Stops – Eight (8) bus stops are at medium risk under future storm surge conditions. o Vulnerable Outfalls | The Village’s stormwater outfalls, with surveyed elevations as low as -4 feet NAVD88 (underwater), are susceptible to being overwhelmed even under current low tide conditions. The following outfalls represent some of the highest-risk locations across several flood scenarios assessed: ▪ Outfall 1069 (East of Westwind Drive) – High risk under a total of 9 current and future flood scenarios with depths exceeding 13 ft under compound flooding, and 4 ft under 2080 Intermediate sea level rise. ▪ Outfall 1039 & 1040 (East of Marina Drive) – Significant exposure, with flood depths reaching 8.9 feet under the 10-year/24-hour Event + Sea Level Rise scenario. High flood depths at the some of the outfalls are caused by low invert elevations of down to -4 feet NAVD88, making them vulnerable to even low tide conditions. ▪ Outfall 1018 (West of Waterway Drive) – Among the highest flood depths under Category 5 storm surge and future flood scenarios, reaching up to 8 feet. o Wastewater Treatment Facilities & Lift Stations: ▪ 12 Seacoast Utility Authority (SUA) lift stations are at medium risk under future storm surge (Category 5 + 2050 Intermediate SLR conditions). o Water Utility: ▪ SUA Fire Hydrant 3-0139 (East of Country Club Drive) – Medium risk under Category 5 storm surge and rainfall events, with increasing vulnerability under future scenarios. Task 7_Village of North Palm Beach Vulnerability Assessment 2025_FINAL 12 ▪ SUA Lift Station 030 (West of Marina Drive) – Future flood depth projected at 3.2 feet, placing it at medium risk under future compound scenarios. o Community Facilities and Schools: ▪ The Benjamin School – This school faces a high risk of flooding under future 10-year and 25-year rainfall scenarios. Even during relatively frequent events such as the 10-year rainfall, the combined effects of rainfall and sea level rise are projected to produce flood depths of up to 3.0 feet. ▪ Baldwin Prep School – No medium or high risk under any scenarios. At low risk under Category 5 storm surge and future rainfall-driven scenarios, with flood depths projected up to 1 foot. At Medium risk to Future Storm Surge (Category 5 + 2050 Intermediate and Intermediate-Low SLR conditions, and Category 5 + 2080 Intermediate-Low). o Natural Resources: ▪ John D. MacArthur State Park – High risk under current and future storm surge scenarios, with flood depths exceeding 4 feet. • Key community and emergency facilities NOT expected to experience impacts under current hazards, and that can remain operational during storm events include: o The North Palm Beach Fire Department and Emergency Medical Services (EMS) o The North Palm Beach Emergency Operations Center/ Police Department/ Public Safety Facility o The North Palm Beach Town Hall o The North Palm Beach Public Safety Facility o The North Palm Beach Community Center o The Palm Beach Memory Care Facility o Various schools including the Academy of North Palm Beach School, the Conservatory School, and North Palm Beach Elementary School • Urban Tree Canopy: An urban tree canopy screening was conducted to evaluate spatial correlation between canopy cover and the assessed flood and heat hazard layers, and to identify where nature-based strategies could provide co-benefits for risk reduction. The analysis found that low canopy coverage tends to coincide with hotter microclimates and areas prone to rainfall-driven ponding, while mature canopy areas generally correspond with lower heat exposure. o Tree cover varies between neighborhoods/response zones: Core residential blocks near US 1 and Anchorage Park have less than 25% tree canopy coverage, while the Country Club area exceeds 80% coverage. o Heat hotspot = low canopy: The same low-canopy blocks coincide with Level 4–5 heat severity, affecting 79% of residential parcels overall. o Runoff amplifier: Limited canopy plus high imperviousness drives the Village’s most frequent rainfall-induced flooding. o Swale conflicts: Trees planted inside drainage swales can impede flow; adopt “right-tree, right-place” guidance. Task 7_Village of North Palm Beach Vulnerability Assessment 2025_FINAL 13 o Nature-based strategies: Target low-canopy, high-heat sub-basins along US 1, the Earman River, and Anchorage Park with street trees and right-of-way green infrastructure outside swales; pair canopy expansion with bioswales, rain gardens, permeable surfaces, and riparian or living shoreline buffers. • Focus Areas: Based on the findings of sensitivity analysis, four main action areas are identified. These areas align with the Village’s “Response Zones ” used by Village staff. Note the entire Village is included in the four focus areas. o Focus Area 1 (Honey Road and Buttonwood Road, Cinnamon Road, Gumtree Road): Primarily at risk from rainfall-driven flooding, with 57% of assets at risk during a 25-year rainfall event. Eight (8) of the Village’s 50 most vulnerable assets are located here, all eight being stormwater outfalls. Future compound flood scenarios show increasing sensitivity. o Focus Area 2 (Shore Drive, Lagoon Drive, Waterway Drive): The area with the highest risk from Category 5 storm surge (75%) and preliminary 100-year Flood conditions (66%). It contains the Village’s single most vulnerable asset (OF 1069, near Teal Way and East of Westwind Drive) and three of the top four. This area also includes key bridges, lift stations, and the North Palm Beach Community Center, and is situated along the Intracoastal Waterway. o Focus Area 3 (Eastwind Drive Area): Features the most functionally diverse infrastructure, including emergency water access, schools, and Village Hall. It also contains 12 of the top 50 most vulnerable assets. Rainfall-driven flooding is the primary hazard, with more than half of assets at risk during 10- and 25-year events. Anchorage Park Boat Ramp in this focus area is vulnerable to tidal flooding, storm surge, and compound flooding. o Focus Area 4 (Lakeside Drive Area): Contains the highest number of top- ranked vulnerable assets (19 of 50), including critical stormwater and utility infrastructure. The area includes the Primary Emergency Operations Center, Fire/EMS station, and two marinas. Approximately 53% of assets are at risk under Preliminary 100-year Flood conditions. • A list of critical and regionally significant assets that are impacted by flooding is compiled based on the results of exposure and sensitivity analyses and attached as an appendix to this report. Task 7_Village of North Palm Beach Vulnerability Assessment 2025_FINAL 14 Introduction The Village of North Palm Beach (Village), located in Palm Beach County and situated along Florida’s southeastern coast, faces multiple flood-related vulnerabilities, including impacts from rainfall, storm surge, sea level rise, and compound flooding. In compliance with Section 380.093 of the Florida Statues (F.S.), this Vulnerability Assessment (VA) provides a comprehensive exposure and sensitivity analysis to evaluate the Village’s susceptibility and vulnerability across various flooding scenarios. The analysis incorporates data from multiple sources to assess the potential impacts of sea level rise, current and future tidal flooding, rainfall-induced flooding, current and future storm surge, and future compound flooding on North Palm Beach’s infrastructure, critical assets, and community facilities. The Village has previously focused on enhancing infrastructure resilience, emergency preparedness, and community engagement to address these emerging challenges. Understanding the extent of flood exposure and asset sensitivity is essential for developing effective mitigation and adaptation strategies. This report begins with a methodology overview for data collection and analysis, followed by detailed findings on the percentage of the Village area and assets impacted under various flood scenarios. In addition to these flooding scenarios, impacts of extreme heat and wind were also assessed. The results highlight specific vulnerabilities and areas of concern, guiding future resilience planning efforts to protect North Palm Beach’s residents and infrastructure. By identifying and quantifying the potential vulnerabilities and impacts of different flood types, this VA aims to provide a robust foundation for strategic planning and resource allocation. The findings emphasize the importance of proactive adaptation measures to strengthen the Village’s resilience against flooding, ensuring the safety and well-being of the community in the face of evolving climatic conditions. Key contents of this assessment include: • Introduction to the Village of North Palm’s composition and key hazards and stressors • Data availability and collection for the analyses • Exposure Analysis methodology and results with maps and tables • Sensitivity Analysis methodology and results with maps and tables • Prioritized list of critical and regionally significant assets impacted by flooding (Appendix A and Deliverable 7.2) • Focus Area Identification • Geospatial database and metadata (electronic file) (Appendix B and Deliverable 7.3) • Vulnerability Assessment Compliance Checklist (Appendix C and Deliverable 7.4) Vulnerability Assessment A VA is an essential tool for identifying and evaluating the potential impacts that natural hazards pose to a community. In Florida, legislation has established criteria for assessments funded by the Resilient Florida program. Given Florida’s exposure to climate threats such as hurricanes, storm surge, and sea level rise flooding, these assessments are critical for municipalities to plan effectively and respond to the challenges associated with climate change. Task 7_Village of North Palm Beach Vulnerability Assessment 2025_FINAL 15 The primary goal of a VA is to systematically analyze the community assets, infrastructure, and populations that may be exposed to hazards like storm surge, flooding, and extreme rainfall. This process provides a detailed view of where vulnerabilities exist and how future conditions or events, including sea level rise and evolving weather patterns, may result in impacts. By integrating geospatial data, predictive models, and hazard mapping, vulnerability assessments enable communities to evaluate the sensitivity of essential systems and identify which areas and assets are most at vulnerable. For the Village, this VA fulfills state requirements while also serving as a foundational document for guiding adaptation and mitigation strategies. Drawing from federal, state, and local studies, as well as modeling and geospatial analyses, the assessment offers a comprehensive evaluation of the Village’s exposure to natural hazards. It informs decision- makers about the most pressing threats, such as storm surge and rainfall flooding, while also outlining potential future scenarios, ensuring resilience mea sures are targeted and data-driven. These assessments are also crucial for securing state and federal funding for adaptation projects by demonstrating a clear understanding of the Village’s vulnerabilities and the necessary actions to address them. Study Area Conditions The Village of North Palm Beach, with a population of approximately 13,000 1, is a coastal community characterized by scenic waterways and residential neighborhoods. Its proximity to the Atlantic Ocean and Intracoastal Waterway makes it vulnerable to climate -related hazards such as sea level rise, storm surge, and coastal flooding in addition to rainfall and storms. To mitigate hazards, North Palm Beach has prioritized infrastructure and resilience planning, including updates to the Stormwater Management Plan (2024) and Stormwater Utility Study (2021), which aim to enhance stormwater infrastructure and improve drainage in low-lying areas. Specific areas identified for improvement include the intersections of Westwind Drive and Osprey Drive, Knighthawk Way and Lagoon Drive, and Cinnamon Road and Dogwood Road. These areas were identified for stormwater pipe repairs, infrastructure upgrades, and drainage enhancements to address localized flooding concerns. Maintaining outfall systems and increasing capacity to handle heavy rainfall events were also emphasi zed in the plan2. These recommendations will directly inform the VA, ensuring flood mitigation strategies are tailored to the Village’s unique challenges. The Stormwater Utility Study complements these efforts by outlining sustainable funding mechanisms to support ongoing stormwater infrastructure maintenance and upgrades3. The Village also benefits from the broader Palm Beach North Resilience Action Plan, which addresses shared regional vulnerabilities through long-term adaptation strategies4. The plan highlights critical infrastructure and high-risk areas across northern Palm Beach County, including parts of North Palm Beach, and recommends 1 U.S. Census Bureau, North Palm Beach Community Data: https://data.census.gov 2 Village of North Palm Beach Stormwater Management Plan: https://village- npb.org/DocumentCenter/View/12029/2024-04-VNPB_SWMP_Draft_Council 3 North Palm Beach Stormwater Utility Study: https://village-npb.org/DocumentCenter/View/8923/North-Palm-Beach- Stormwater-Management-Study-Final 4 Palm Beach North Resilience Action Plan: https://www.pbnchamber.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/06/PBN-Disaster- Resiliency-Action-Plan.pdf Task 7_Village of North Palm Beach Vulnerability Assessment 2025_FINAL 16 adaptive strategies such as enhanced drainage systems, natural shoreline restoration, and transportation network resilience improvements. Local and regional projects, such as the C-51 Reservoir Project and Lake Worth Lagoon Restoration Initiative, further bolster the Village’s resilience. The C-51 Reservoir Project, managed by the South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD), enhances regional water storage to mitigate flood risks and combat saltwater intrusion, which is vital for protecting freshwater resources in coastal communities5. Meanwhile, the Lake Worth Lagoon Restoration Initiative focuses on improving water quality and restoring critical habitats, such as seagrass beds and mangroves, which provide natural flood protection and ecological benefits6. These projects are supportive for North Palm Beach’s ongoing adaptation efforts, strengthening the village’s ability to recover from environmental stressors. Social Vulnerability The Village has a demographic profile with both resilience strengths and areas of vulnerability. Compared to the state average of 34.9%, the Village enjoys a high level of educational attainment, with 38.8%, and a high owner-occupancy rate of 77.6%, reflecting stability and engagement7. According to the Climate and Economic Justice Screening Tool8, none of North Palm Beach’s census tracts meet federal thresholds for economic or climate vulnerability, positioning the Village relatively well compared to other areas. The population includes a higher than average senior population, with 32.8% aged 65 and older compared to the Florida state average of 21.7%9. This notable senior demographic underscores the need for resilience strategies tailored to older adults, who may be more affected by extreme weather impacts. Income and housing data reveal potential challenges for a portion of the population. While the median home value is $418,10010, around 23% of households are cost-burdened, spending over 30% of their income on housing11, which may limit resources for resilience investments like floodproofing. The Village’s Gini coefficient of 0.4512 suggests moderate income inequality, indicating that while many households are financially stable, lower-income households may struggle more to recover from climate-related events. Environmental health concerns identified based on data from the EPA's Environmental Justice Screening Tool include moderate levels of airborne pollutants, such as PM2.5 and ozone, which pose respiratory risks for vulnerable groups, especially older adults, and children13. The 5 C-51 Reservoir Overview: https://discover.pbcgov.org/wrtf/PDF/Presentations/011515-C- 51%20Reservoir_Summary.pdf 6 Lake Worth Lagoon Restoration Initiative: https://discover.pbc.gov/erm/Pages/Lake-Worth-Lagoon-Initiative.aspx 7 Florida Population 2024 (Demographics, Maps, Graphs):https://worldpopulationreview.com/states/florida 8 EPA Environmental Justice Screening Tool (EJ Screen): https://ejscreen.epa.gov/mapper/ 9 U.S. Census Bureau, ACS Demographic Profile 2022: https://data.census.gov 10 Florida Population 2024 (Demographics, Maps, Graphs):https://worldpopulationreview.com/states/florida. 11 North Palm Beach Stormwater Utility Study: https://village-npb.org/DocumentCenter/View/8923 12 Gini Coefficient Overview: https://www.census.gov/topics/income-poverty/income-inequality/about/metrics/gini- index.html 13 EPA Environmental Justice Screening Tool (EJ Screen): https://ejscreen.epa.gov/mapper/ Task 7_Village of North Palm Beach Vulnerability Assessment 2025_FINAL 17 Village’s proximity to Trans Circuits, Inc,14 a former Superfund and hazardous waste sites in the Lake Park area of Palm Beach poses only a moderate risk, putting the Village in the 50- 80th percentile for Superfund site proximity in the state. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has mitigated significant soil and groundwater contamination at the site from previous industrial activities through bioremediation and soil removal. Ongoing groundwater monitoring and institutional controls ensure the community remains protected from any potential exposure. Despite these vulnerabilities, the social vulnerability metrics indicate the community is resilient. Government Planning North Palm Beach’s strategic planning emphasizes resilience through a comprehensive Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) and a series of guiding documents that collectively strengthen the Village’s defense against climate-related challenges such as sea level rise, flooding, and extreme weather events. Key CIP projects include a $5 million bridge replacement on Lighthouse Drive and a $2.5 million stormwater repair program for enhancing resilience to flooding and maintaining infrastructure integrity. Additional initiatives, such as the Marina Drive Roadway and Drainage Improvements and the Anchorage Park Seawall Replacement, focus on reducing flood risks in particularly vulnerable areas15. The Village’s CIP approach aims to preserve infrastructure resilience by categorizing most projects as maintenance or replacement, enhances fiscal prudence by focusing on the maintenance and replacement of existing infrastructure rather than new construction. Several planning documents reinforce these resilience efforts by establishing a foundation for sustainable growth, infrastructure resilience, and climate adaptation. The Comprehensive Plan, North Palm Beach’s central planning framework, emphasizes development and land use policies that protect against environmental hazards16. In alignment with these priorities, the Stormwater Management Plan (April 2024) outlines critical upgrades to stormwater infrastructure, focusing on improving drainage systems in low-lying areas, maintaining outfall structures, and enhancing the capacity of key stormwater systems to handle extreme rainfall events17. These targeted measures will mitigate localized flooding and improve the Village's ability to adapt to future climate stressors. Complementing this, the Stormwater Utility Study (August 2021)18 evaluates funding mechanisms to maintain financial sustainability for stormwater management, supporting the resilience of essential infrastructure. As part of the Comprehensive Plan, the Utilities Element outlines policies to ensure the resilience of potable water and wastewater systems19. This element emphasizes water 14 EPA Superfund Site - Trans Circuits, Inc. Lake Park, FL Cleanup Activities: https://cumulis.epa.gov/supercpad/SiteProfiles/index.cfm?fuseaction=second.cleanup&id=0400785 15 North Palm Beach Economic Vulnerability Assessment: Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) Details, Lighthouse Drive, and Anchorage Park. 16 North Palm Beach Comprehensive Plan – All Elements: https://discover.pbcgov.org/pzb/planning/PDF/ComprehensivePlan/ComprehensivePlan.pdf 17 North Palm Beach Stormwater Management Plan (2024): https://village-npb.org/DocumentCenter/View/12029 18 North Palm Beach Stormwater Utility Study: https://village-npb.org/DocumentCenter/View/8923/North-Palm-Beach- Stormwater-Management-Study-Final 19 North Palm Beach Comprehensive Plan – Utility Element: https://discover.pbcgov.org/pzb/planning/PDF/ComprehensivePlan/ComprehensivePlan.pdf Task 7_Village of North Palm Beach Vulnerability Assessment 2025_FINAL 18 conservation, infrastructure rehabilitation, and water quality protection, all vital for sustaining public health and environmental integrity amid changing climate conditions. The Village Master Plan (October 2016) provides a long-term vision for North Palm Beach, integrating resilience through considerations for transportation, housing, and public spaces 20. This plan promotes designs and policies that enhance the Village’s capacity to withstand and adapt to environmental stressors. The Village’s commitment to resilience is also evident in its Annual Budgets for FY2022-2025, which prioritize resources for critical infrastructure projects and resilience-building activities21. Funding allocations target stormwater improvements, utility upgrades, and other projects aimed at reducing vulnerability to climate hazards. The Village also actively participates in regional resilience efforts through its involvement in the Palm Beach North Resilience Action Plan (2022), collaborating with neighboring municipalities and county agencies to address shared vulnerabilities and promote coordinated adaptation strategies across the region22. The 2024 Palm Beach County Local Mitigation Strategy prioritized project list does not include any projects within the Village. Flood Insurance Flood insurance is a critical safeguard for protecting North Palm Beach residents from the financial risks posed by climate-related hazards. Within the 33480 ZIP Code, which includes parts of Palm Beach County, FEMA’s Risk Rating 2.0 framework23 analyzed 9,147 flood insurance policies. Of these, 27.4% of policyholders experienced premium decreases, while 72.6% saw increases (between 2021 and 2023). Among those with increases, the majority (60.7%) faced modest adjustments of $0-$10 per month, with 5.8% seeing increases of $10- $20, and 6.1% experiencing increases of over $20. These premium adjustments reflect FEMA’s updated methodology, which uses a more granular, property-specific evaluation of flood risk to calculate rates. This approach better accounts for individual property characteristics, such as elevation, flood history, and proximity to water bodies. According to the National Risk Index24, the census tracts across North Palm Beach were rated as “Relatively Moderate to High” for climate risk, with an overall risk score of 80 to 88 out of 100. Palm Beach County is in the top 3% of counties nationwide for climate-related vulnerability. Hurricanes pose the largest threat to the area, with an estimated annual loss of up to $2.5 million locally, further compounded by risks from tornadoes and wildfires. While these hazards emphasize the importance of flood insurance, the increase in premiums for 20 Village Master Plan (2016): https://files.tcrpc.org/portfolio%20of%20work/urban%20design/Village%20Of%20North%20Palm%20Beach%20Master %20Plan/NPB-Village-Master-Plan_10-20-16.pdf. 21 Annual Budget FY2022-2025: https://www.village-npb.org/834/ANNUAL-BUDGETS-FY-2022-2025. 22 Palm Beach North Resilience Action Plan (2022): https://www.pbnchamber.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/06/PBN- Disaster-Resiliency-Action-Plan.pdf 23 FEMA Risk Rating 2.0. (2024). ArcGIS Dashboards. Www.arcgis.com. https://www.arcgis.com/apps/dashboards/ad25fc43b31e46e6a66a4c632d6746f6 24 National Risk Index. (n.d.). Map | National Risk Index. Hazards.fema.gov. https://hazards.fema.gov/nri/map#:~:text=The%20National%20Risk%20Index%20is%20a%20dataset%20and Task 7_Village of North Palm Beach Vulnerability Assessment 2025_FINAL 19 many residents underscores the need for proactive measures to reduce property-specific risks and maintain insurance affordability. Targeted resilience strategies, such as improving stormwater management infrastructure, implementing property-level floodproofing, and reducing vulnerabilities through adaptation planning, will be key to addressing these challenges. These interventions could help mitigate flood risk, stabilize premiums, and strengthen North Palm Beach’s long-term resilience to climate-related hazards. Hazards and Stressors The Village is susceptible to a variety of environmental hazards, including both flooding and non-flooding-related events. Its vulnerability is largely driven by extreme weather events, such as intense rainfall, extreme storm surges, and compound flooding events. Rainfall-induced flooding occurs when the volume of rain exceeds the system's capacity to drain effectively. In such instances, water depths can reach levels that inconvenience or disrupt residential areas, businesses, and transportation corridors, potentially causing damage and requiring recovery efforts. The Village's location along the Lake Worth Lagoon and various tidal waterways further influences its drainage challenges. Rising sea levels elevate the groundwater table, which can reduce the efficiency of the stormwater drainage system, particularly during high tides. This dynamic exacerbates the potential of flooding during heavy rainfall events, as the capacity for effective drainage is reduced. A portion of the Village falls within the 100-year FEMA flood zone, which corresponds to areas with a 1% annual chance of flooding annually. Structures within the flood zone and at an elevation below the base flood elevation are required to have flood insurance according to the National Flood Insurance Program. Additionally, parts of the John D. MacArthur Beach State Park are within FEMA flood zone ‘VE,’ which represents areas with a 1% or greater annual chance of flooding, coupled with additional impacts from waves during storms. The VE zone reflects the potential impacts of severe storm surge events where waves may also cause damage, and includes areas primarily along the coast and the Lake Worth Lagoon. Historically, North Palm Beach has experienced various hazards. Hurricanes remain a frequent threat – the area sees tropical storm or hurricane (of various intensities) conditions on average every couple of years25, with notable spikes in activity during the early 2000s (Frances, Jeanne and Wilma). On record, there has been 4 Category 4 and 5 hurricanes affected the area. Extreme rainfall events have struck periodically, resulting in at least one flooding incident per year on average and several record-breaking deluges (such as 1994’s 15-17 inches in 29 hours and 2012’s 16-18 inches of rain in 48 hours) that overwhelmed local drainage26. Meanwhile, tidal flooding has become an emerging issue in recent decades due to sea -level 25 discover.pbcgov.org 26 discover.pbcgov.org Task 7_Village of North Palm Beach Vulnerability Assessment 2025_FINAL 20 rise, with minor king tide floods now observed multiple times a year in low-lying parts of the community27. Each hazard shows its own patterns: a long-term increase in Atlantic hurricane activity since the 1990s, a propensity for heavier downpours especially in the warm wet season, and steadily rising high-tide water levels leading to more nuisance floods. Major singular events, such as the 2004 hurricanes or the 1947 and 1994 floods, serve as benchmark events that shaped local awareness and infrastructure improvements. Community Priorities As part of Village’s VA, a resident survey was conducted to gather community input on key concerns and areas for improvement. The results of this survey provide valuable insight into the residents' priorities, which help shape the focus of the Village's resilience planning efforts. The consensus from respondents is an interest for the Village to address flooding, improve drainage infrastructure, and invest in community resources. Several residents have highlighted key areas of observed flooding such as Northlake Boulevard, particularly around parking lots, and Buoy Road, where water levels during severe storms have reportedly reached knee depth. Additionally, Honey Road, Lighthouse Drive to Ebbtide Drive, Fathom Road West and Lakeside Drive intersections, and 500 Kingfish Road and southwest corner of Kingfish Road were highlighted as frequently flooded areas. This recurring flooding disrupts both residential and commercial activities, posing substantial threat to property and access in these areas. Some residents also noted that swales may not have enough capacity to route surface runoff, highlighting a need for more robust drainage solutions. Beyond flood mitigation, residents expressed interest in preserving essential community assets and infrastructure. The Village’s bridges, named frequently in responses, are vital for connectivity and safety, yet require maintenance to handle increased strain from high water levels. The ongoing US 1 Earman Bridge Replacement Project, with the expected construction date of summer 2027, aims to upgrade the aging infrastructure and improve draining and prevent potential overtopping during severe storms. Country Club Drive was noted for its frequent traffic congestion, while residents requested improved lighting along residential sidewalks to enhance nighttime safety. Local landmarks such as Osborne Park and the Country Club were underscored as areas of community pride and activity, where resilience upgrades would protect both the Village’s character and its social hubs. Additionally, survey responses reflected heightened interests in the broader impacts of climate change, including extreme heat and severe storms. Many residents supported proactive solutions like increased tree planting to provide shade and cool communal spaces, along with infrastructure upgrades to ease environmental stresses. Enhanced lighting and traffic-calming measures were also noted as necessary for improving both safety and resilience. This community feedback will guide the Village’s resilience efforts, aligning targeted projects with residents' firsthand experiences and future adaptation needs. 27 discover.pbcgov.org Task 7_Village of North Palm Beach Vulnerability Assessment 2025_FINAL 21 Available Data The data compilation for the Village’s VA adhered to a systematic approach, integrating diverse data sources to evaluate the Village’s resilience to flooding, heat, and other climate- related hazards. Initiating with the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) statewide database and supplementing it with detailed local data, this comprehensive methodology ensures a robust evaluation of exposure and vulnerability. Detailed data on critical infrastructure, community facilities, and flood scenarios were analyzed for completeness. The review process includes identifying gaps and addressing them through additional data collection and validation. This process resulted in an accurate and reliable foundation for subsequent resilience planning and mitigation strategies. Data collection tasks for the Village’s VA adhered to requirements outlined in Section 380.093, F.S. This included an inventory of critical and regionally significant assets, topographic data, and flood scenario-related data the subsequent subsections detail the compiled data, sources utilized, and methodologies employed to address identified data gaps across four principal categories: Critical and Regionally Significant Asset Inventory, Topographic Data, Flood Scenario-Related Data, and Heat and Wind-Related Data. The approach outlined in this report ensures the accuracy and comprehensiveness of the VA , laying the groundwork for subsequent analysis and planning phases. Critical and Regionally Significant Asset Inventory Transportation and Evacuation Routes The inventory of critical and regionally significant assets includes transportation assets and evacuation routes vital to the Village. Data on major roadways was sourced from Palm Beach County Online GIS Portal (“Road Centerlines”)28 and data on bridges was sourced from the U.S. Department of Transportation (FDOT) National Bridge Inventory online dataset29. Marina locations were sourced from the Village of North Palm Stormwater Master Plan (SWMP), and rail facilities were sourced from the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) Florida Statewide Resilience Dataset30. Bus stops were sourced from the Palm Beach County Online GIS Portal (“Bus Stops”)31. It is noteworthy that the Village does not have airports or ports, rendering these asset types non-applicable and thus excluded from inventory. Critical Infrastructure The Village provided KMZ data files of stormwater infrastructure that was compiled and utilized in its SWMP, which was digitized to include within the assessment data inventory. Surveyed 28 Palm Beach County Online GIS Portal (“Road Centerlines”): https://opendata2- pbcgov.opendata.arcgis.com/datasets/PBCGOV::road-centerlines/about 29 U.S Department of Transportation (FDOT) National Bridge Inventory online dataset: https://geodata.bts.gov/datasets/usdot::national-bridge-inventory/explore?location=30.411837%2C- 87.233708%2C12.04=30.411837%2C-87.233708%2C12.04 30 Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) Florida Statewide Resilience Dataset - Transportation and Evacuation Routes: https://mapdirect-fdep.opendata.arcgis.com/datasets/FDEP::transportation-and-evacuation- routes?layer=59 31 Palm Beach County Online GIS Portal (“Bus Stops”): https://opendata2- pbcgov.opendata.arcgis.com/datasets/d320dcca0c49494bb0b331578d875396_0/explore?location=26.584461%2C- 80.496600%2C8.84 Task 7_Village of North Palm Beach Vulnerability Assessment 2025_FINAL 22 elevations for outfalls provided by Village staff were utilized in the analysis. For the few outfalls without surveyed elevations, elevations were assigned based on the LiDAR-based digital elevation model, if outfalls were close to land, or were assigned based on elevations of nearby outfalls. Stormwater ponds and reservoirs were sourced from the FDEP Statewide Dataset32 and swales were digitized based on imagery and an interview with the Village staff. Using the Palm Beach County Edge of Pavement33, the swale line was offset between 2-30 feet depending on the road and using the 2023 aerial as a guide to draw a centerline in the swale. The location and elevations of the swales represent approximations. Wastewater lift station and water utility hydrant locations were sourced from online Seacoast Utility Authority (SUA) maps- the SUA Wastewater Map34 and Public Water Map35, respectively. Locations of SUA wastewater treatment plants and drinking facilities were geocoded once confirmed with the Village staff. Data from the FDEP statewide database was used for electric production and supply facilities, solid and hazardous waste facilities, and communication facilities. Additional communication facilities were obtained from Palm Beach County Online GIS Portal (“Communication Towers”)36. There are no military installations or disaster debris sites located within the Village and were thus omitted from the analysis. Critical Community and Emergency Facilities The assessment of critical community and emergency facilities included schools, community centers, fire stations, emergency operations centers, law enforcement facilities, and local government facilities. Data for these facilities was sourced from the FDEP statewide database and supplemented by data sourced from the Village ’s Stormwater Masterplan and Palm Beach County Online GIS Portal for public schools and libraries, and interviews with the Village staff. Logistical staging areas, affordable public housing, state government facilities, correctional facilities, and colleges and universities, are not located within the village boundary and were deemed non-critical by the Village staff. The local hospital and risk shelter, although outside of the village boundary, was identified as critical to the residents of the Village and thus was included in the analysis. Parcel data was retrieved from the Florida Department of Revenue (FDOR)37 and building footprints from Microsoft Maps38. Natural, Cultural, and Historical Resources Data for natural, cultural, and historical resources (conservation lands, parks, shorelines, surface waters, wetlands, seawalls, and historical and cultural assets) were collected from the FDEP Statewide Dataset and Palm Beach County Online GIS Portal (“Natural Areas Land 32 Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) Florida Statewide Resilience Dataset - Critical Infrastructure: https://geodata.dep.state.fl.us/datasets/FDEP::critical-infrastructure?layer=25 33 Palm Beach County Online GIS Portal (“Edge of Pavement”): https://maps.co.palm-beach.fl.us/cwgis/ 34 Seacoast Utility Authority (SUA) Wastewater Map: https://seacoast.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=f08dd72c5a9a4d41bd3997f11bbb01d6 35 Seacoast Utility Authority (SUA) Public Water Map: https://seacoast.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=073e8703b6bc41019edee2c7575220ed 36 Palm Beach County Online GIS Portal (“Communication Towers”): https://opendata2- pbcgov.opendata.arcgis.com/datasets/8b5fad0ebde846878b8df22e8808284a_12/explore 37 Florida Geospatial Open Data Portal Florida Department of Revenue (“Florida Statewide Parcels”): https://geodata.floridagio.gov/datasets/efa909d6b1c841d298b0a649e7f71cf2_1/explore?location=27.450014%2C- 83.704090%2C5.87 38 Microsoft Maps US Building Footprints: https://github.com/microsoft/USBuildingFootprints/tree/master?tab=readme- ov-file Task 7_Village of North Palm Beach Vulnerability Assessment 2025_FINAL 23 Cover,” “Municipal Parks,” and “Water Bodies”). Aerial imagery and shoreline land elevation from 2019 LiDAR39 was utilized to estimate locations and elevations of seawalls. Topographic Data High-resolution LiDAR data, with a minimum 3-meter cell size, was obtained to develop a Digital Elevation Model (DEM) for the Village. The data was sourced from the 2019 US Geological Survey (USGS) Peninsular Lidar Survey DEM. Survey data, including Finished Floor Elevations (FFEs) where available, was acquired from FDEM Elevation Certificates and local municipal surveys. Much of the Village is characterized by moderate elevations generally between about 7 and 11 feet NAVD88, with lower areas in the 3 to 7 foot range occurring along waterfront and canal-adjacent locations. Some higher ground between roughly 11 and 17 feet NAVD88 is present in scattered interior areas, while elevations above 17 feet are limited in extent. Table 1 Sea Level Rise Scenario Water Elevations at Mean Higher High Water (MHHW) in feet, North American Vertical Datum 1988. Flood Scenario-Related Data Flood scenario-related data is indispensable for modeling potential flood events and their impacts, necessitating the integration of multiple data sources. The National Oceanographic & Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)40 provides updated sea level rise projections every 5 years, most recently in 2022. The Resilient Florida program requirements include utilization of the 2022 NOAA sea level rise projections for the Intermediate-Low and Intermediate scenarios for the planning horizons of 2050 and 2080. The tidal datum used, mean higher high water (MHHW) represents a high tide condition. Water elevations for relevant scenarios (Table 1) were determined based on nearest NOAA tide gauges with future sea level projections – Trident Pier and Virginia Key (near Miami). Trident Pier, at Cape Canaveral, is far from the Village and not an accurate representation of local water levels. However, in compliance with state guidance, its data is presented as next closest gauge. Projections are not available from the Lake Worth Pier gauge or other local tide model points. As mandated by the Resilient Florida standards, the threshold for existing tidal flooding is represented by 2 feet above mean higher high water (MHHW). For this analysis, the tidal flooding water elevation will be represented by 2.4 feet NAVD (determined via the NOAA Online Vertical Datum Transformation tool41 local conversion of + 0.4 feet from feet MHHW to NAVD). As an additional note, the NOAA provided inundation areas associated with the sea level rise projections were used to determine which land area was tidally influenced and subject to tidal flooding in the analysis. 39 USGS 2019 Peninsular Lidar Survey DEM:https://geodata.floridagio.gov/datasets/FGIO::florida-peninsular-lidar-las- index/about 40 NOAA Sea Level Rise Viewer: https://coast.noaa.gov/digitalcoast/tools/slr.html 41 NOAA Online Vertical Datum Transformation tool: https://www.vdatum.noaa.gov/vdatumweb/ Scenario MHHW Elevation (ft NAVD) 2050 Intermediate-Low 1.4 2050 Intermediate 1.5 2080 Intermediate-Low 2 2080 Intermediate 2.7 Task 7_Village of North Palm Beach Vulnerability Assessment 2025_FINAL 24 Future tidal flooding was estimated by adding the flood depth increase anticipated under the 2050 Intermediate Sea Level Rise Water Elevation (2050 Tidal Flooding) and under the 2080 Intermediate Sea Level Rise Water Elevation (2080 Tidal Flooding) to the flood depths experienced under existing tidal flooding. The extent for the future tidal flooding scenarios was based on that of the existing tidal flooding scenario. Figure 1 depicts the number of projected high tide flooding days for the two nearest tide gauges to North Palm Beach - Trident Pier and Virginia Key. To estimate the number of days that may be experienced at North Palm Beach, which is a similar distance from both gauges, and average of both gauges is depicted. Storm surge data for Categories 1-5 hurricanes, was collected from NOAA’s Sea, Lake, and Overland Surges from Hurricanes (SLOSH) model42. As a positive note, most of the land in the Village is higher than where storm surge from hurricanes smaller than a Category 3 can reach. Per state guidance for this vulnerability assessment, the analysis includes potential impacts from a 100-year storm surge event. To approximate a 100-year storm surge event, hurricane model data for a Category 4 hurricane was selected. The Category 4 storm surge flooding scenario exceeds a 100-year storm event, as is evident in Figure 2. A 500-year storm surge event was approximated by the Category 5 hurricane storm surge. 42 NOAA’s Sea, Lake, and Overland Surges from Hurricanes (SLOSH) model https://www.nhc.noaa.gov/nationalsurge/ 45 55 145 270 25 35 160 329 35 45 153 300 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 2050 Intermediate Low 2050 Intermediate 2080 Intermediate Low 2080 IntermediateNumber of DaysScenario Number of Projected High Tide Flooding Days Trident Pier Virginia Key North Palm Beach Estimate Figure 1 Number of Projected High Tide Flooding Days. Task 7_Village of North Palm Beach Vulnerability Assessment 2025_FINAL 25 a b Task 7_Village of North Palm Beach Vulnerability Assessment 2025_FINAL 26 Figure 2 a, b, c: Flood event comparison of the 100-year flood event (FEMA Flood Map) and a Category 4 storm surge. The Category 4 storm surge flooding scenario exceeds a 100-year storm event. Future Storm Surge was assessed considering the high tide conditions where the 2050 and 2080 Intermediate and Intermediate-Low sea level rise depths were added to Category 4 and 5 storm surge flood depths in tidally influenced areas. Existing compound flooding was represented by a combination of existing tidal flooding and storm surge from a Category 4 hurricane, as was requested by Village staff. Additional compound flooding scenarios including rainfall and storm surge (no tidal flooding) were sourced from the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Palm Beach County 2017 Effective Flood Insurance Study (FIS) and 2024 Preliminary Flood Insurance Study (FIS)43. Results of both FISs were ran as scenarios but the discussion was focused on 2024 Preliminary FIS results. FEMA provides the 100-year and 500-year floodplain, flood depths and base flood elevations in the Flood Insurance Study. This data was used to represent the 43 FEMA Flood Map Service Center: https://msc.fema.gov/pextremeortal/home c Task 7_Village of North Palm Beach Vulnerability Assessment 2025_FINAL 27 two extreme storm scenarios for the analysis which are useful to include in the assessment for policy planning. The FEMA 100-year floodplain was used to identify the assets that are exposed to a 100-year flood event. Similarly, polygons that delineate the 0.2% annual flood hazard in coastal zone (Zone X) are used to determine assets that are exposed to a 500 -year flood event. Three future compound flooding scenarios were also analyzed. • The first scenario combines the 100-year FEMA flood event (from the preliminary FIS) with the 2080 Intermediate sea level rise projection, as requested by Village staff. • The second scenario represents a future 10-year, 24-hour rainfall event with the 2070 Intermediate-Low sea level rise projection, as outlined in the Village’s SWMP. This was used as a proxy for a 2050 Intermediate scenario, since the two projections differ by only 0.1 ft NAVD. • The third scenario evaluates a 25-year, 24-hour rainfall event. Rainfall induced flooding scenarios were sourced from model results from the Village’s SWMP for 10-year 24-hour rainfall event and 25-year rainfall event. The model result extents do not include John D. MacArthur Beach State Park and do not go beyond the Village boundary. A 10-year 24-hour rainfall event was included to represent a more commonly occurring flood event that can be used for planning and a 25-year rainfall event was included for future level of service evaluation purposes. Heat and Wind -Related Data Data for heat severity was sourced from the Trust for Public Land’s Heat Severity - USA 2023 layer44, accessed through the Climate Resilient Communities platform on ArcGIS. This dataset rates heat severity on a scale of 1 to 5, where lower values indicate relatively mild heat conditions compared to the Village average and higher values reflect more extreme heat zones. During the analysis, assets were assessed for their intersection with the data, and the specific heat severity value at each location was documented. This information allows for evaluating the vulnerability of assets to heat stress based on their placement within mild to severe heat zones. Wind vulnerability data was generated by comparing the construction year of structures to historical and modern design standards established by local building codes. This dataset includes building footprints and categorizes structures into vulnerability tiers based on the year built and associated wind mitigation features. Because this methodology differs from the analyses of other hazards, wind vulnerability will not be covered within the exposure analysis section but rather will be explored within the sensitivity analysis section. 44 Trust for Public Land’s Heat Severity - USA 2023 layer: https://community- climatesolutions.hub.arcgis.com/datasets/TPL::heat-severity-usa-2023/about Task 7_Village of North Palm Beach Vulnerability Assessment 2025_FINAL 28 Addressing Data Gaps To enhance the accuracy and comprehensiveness of the VA, several data gaps were identified and systematically addressed using a combination of local expertise, supplementary datasets, and innovative mapping techniques. For instance, gaps in identifying community assets were bridged through interviews with Village staff, ensuring all critical facilities were accounted for and accurately represented. Historic and natural assets were mapped using Google Earth, enabling the inclusion of a wide range of relevant local features that might have been overlooked in state-level databases. For the Village’s VA, survey data on seawalls and swales was unavailable. To address these gaps, seawall locations and heights were approximated using aerial imagery and 2019 LiDAR data. Swales were digitized using aerial imagery and guidance from Village staff, who indicated that swales are located on both sides of approximately 33 linear miles of Village roadways, with the exception of alleys and Marina Drive. To further address gaps, local supplementary data sources were integrated to provide detailed information on infrastructure and critical assets. These datasets played a vital role in filling voids left by the state database, offering a more nuanced understanding of the Village’s unique vulnerabilities. Additionally, the SWMP was analyzed to refine stormwater elevation data, ensuring greater precision in the topographic modeling and assessments. By leveraging these targeted approaches, the assessment achieve d a more comprehensive and accurate depiction of local risks and needs. Exposure Analysis Vulnerability to flood hazards in the Village is driven by the complex interplay between climate and non-climate stressors. For instance, extreme rainfall events pose a significant threat by causing increased flooding when large volumes of precipitation fa ll within a brief period, especially in areas with substantial impervious surfaces. Non -climate stressors, such as urbanization and extensive impervious surfaces, exacerbate these impacts by increasing runoff and reducing natural drainage. This section focuses on the study area's exposure to various flood scenarios, including tidal flooding, storm surge, sea level rise, and compound flooding, under both current and future conditions, as well as severe heat and wind. The Exposure Analysis evaluates the potential impact of various hazard scenarios on the study area's critical assets. This analysis utilizes flood simulation models and overlays the results with the geospatial inventory of critical assets to identify exposed areas and assets. Hazard Scenarios and Methodology Various flooding events that could impact the Village were evaluated to fully understand the range of potential vulnerabilities and for planning effective mitigation and adaptation strategies. The analysis includes a variety of flood types, such as tidal flooding, storm surge, sea level rise, and compound flooding, to provide a comprehensive assessment of the potential flood hazards. Task 7_Village of North Palm Beach Vulnerability Assessment 2025_FINAL 29 The Exposure Analysis applied a robust methodology to assess the impact of flood scenarios on the Village, integrating diverse and high-resolution data sources as mentioned in the Available Data section. The analysis adhered to the North American Vertical Datum of 1988 (NAVD88), ensuring precise elevation comparisons. Critical asset inventories were drawn from multiple sources, including Palm Beach County GIS, the Village’s SWMP, and the FDEP. Assets analyzed encompassed stormwater infrastructure, wastewater facilities, transportation routes, and community facilities. S pecific data points included locations of wastewater lift stations and drinking water facilities, mapped via Seacoast Utility Authority datasets, and stormwater features derived from the SWMP. Heat vulnerability was also assessed using the Trust for Public Land’s Heat Severity dataset (2023), identifying zones with heightened heat stress risks. Thirty (30) flood scenarios were utilized for this analysis to evaluate the impact that flooding of various kinds poses to the Village (Figure 3). Thirteen (13) of the scenarios represent current flood hazards and 17 represent future flood hazards. This analysis also includes heat severity and wind severity as two non-flood additional hazards. The flood scenarios analyzed in this study are based on historical data, current conditions, and future projections. Each scenario type and its corresponding data source are detailed below to ensure a comprehensive evaluation of potential flood impact. Task 7_Village of North Palm Beach Vulnerability Assessment 2025_FINAL 30 *Represented by adding flood depths experienced under each individual hazard included in the scenario estimate. Scenarios result in flooding only if flooding exists under both individual hazards. Figure 3 Flood and Non-Flood Scenarios Utilized for the Vulnerability Assessment The following details the methodology used to determine flood depths at assets under each flood scenario. This process explains how data, such as storm surge maps, rainfall models, and FEMA flood zones, were utilized to calculate flood depths and assess the exposure of critical assets to various hazards. • Category 1-5 Storm Surge | Assets were assigned flood depths based on their intersection with the NOAA National Storm Surge Risk Maps (Version 3) hurricane category files and surge depth values. • Existing Tidal Flooding | Utilizing the NOAA Sea Level Rise extents, asset data was first filtered to fall within the tidally influenced area of 2 feet MHHW. Once filtered, flood Current Flood Hazards (13 sceanrios) •Category 1 Storm Surge •Category 2 Storm Surge •Category 3 Storm Surge •Category 4 Storm Surge •Category 5 Storm Surge •Tidal Flooding •Compound Flooding [Tidal flooding + Category 4 storm surge]* •10 Year 24 Hour Rainfall Event •25 Year 24 Hour Rainfall Event •Effective 100 Year FEMA Flood •Preliminary 100 Year FEMA Flood •Effective 500 Year FEMA Flood •Preliminary 500 Year FEMA Flood Future Flood Hazards (17 scenarios) •2050 NOAA Intermediate Low Sea Level Rise Scenario •2050 NOAA Intermediate Sea Level Rise Scenario •2080 NOAA Intermediate Low Sea Level Rise Scenario •2080 NOAA Intermediate Sea Level Rise Scenario •2050 Tidal Flooding* •2080 Tidal Flooding* •Future Storm Surge: Category 4 & 5 + 2050 & 2080 Int & IntLow SLR •Future Compound Flooding (10-year 24 hour Event + 2070 Intermediate Low) •Future Compound Flooding (25-year 24 hour Event + 2070 Intermediate Low) •Future Compound Flooding [100-year Flood (Prelim) + 2080 Intermediate]* Non-Flood Hazards •Extreme Heat •Extreme Wind Task 7_Village of North Palm Beach Vulnerability Assessment 2025_FINAL 31 depths were determined by subtracting the land elevation at assets from the water elevation (2.4 feet NAVD). • Existing Compound Flooding (Tidal flooding + Category 4 storm surge) | This scenario focuses on the assets that were determined to be exposed in the tidal flooding scenario. The water depths experienced by assets under the tidal flooding scenario were added to the water depths experienced by assets under a Category 4 storm su rge, to represent compound flooding water depths. For example, if a critical asset was estimated to experience 1.5 feet of flooding under existing tidal flooding conditions, and 3 feet of flooding under a Category 4 storm surge, then it would be estimated to experience 4.5 feet of flooding (1.5 feet + 3 feet) under the existing compound flooding scenario. Existing compound flooding depths were only calculated if both columns had values. • Rainfall Induced Flooding Events o The Village of North Palm Beach SWMP Model Simulation Scenarios | Utilizing the SWMP provided rainfall 10-year-24-hour and 25-year-24-hour model results, assets were assigned water depths based on intersection with, and values of, the model output. • Severe Storm Events o 100 Year Flood | Utilizing the Effective and Preliminary FEMA 100-year floodplains with established Base Flood Elevations (BFE), water elevations were assigned to assets based on intersection. The land elevations of assets were then subtracted from the water elevation to estimate water depths. o 500 Year Flood | Utilizing the Effective and Preliminary FEMA 500-year floodplains (the 0.2% annual flood hazard in coastal zone) are used to determine assets that are exposed to a 500-year flood event. Stillwater elevations (SWELs) were assigned to the 500-year floodplain polygons based on the FIS study (Table 16 of the 2024 Preliminary FIS and Table 10 of the 2017 Effective FIS). The SWELs are assigned to each asset based on intersection with these polygons, and the land elevations are subtracted from the SWELs to estimate water depths. ▪ FEMA’s 500-year floodplain encompasses the 100-year floodplain. In this study, the impacts of the 500-year flood are evaluated independently of the 100-year floodplain. Specifically, 500-year flood depths are calculated only for assets located exclusively within the 500-year floodplain, excluding those already within the 100-year floodplain. ▪ This approach enables the identification of assets outside the Special Flood Hazard Area (100-year floodplain) that may still be at risk during a 500-year flood— one of the most severe flooding events. It is important to note that any assets vulnerable to a 100-year flood are inherently vulnerable to a 500-year flood as well. Task 7_Village of North Palm Beach Vulnerability Assessment 2025_FINAL 32 o The study assessed both the effective (2017) and preliminary (2024) FEMA Flood Insurance Maps (FIRMs) and evaluated their differences. Figure 4 and Figure 5 reveal that the Preliminary FIRMs (covering 52% and 58% of the study area for 100-year and 500-year floodplains, respectively) has a broader coverage than the Effective FIRMs (covering 63% and 77% of the study area, for 100-year and 500-year floodplains, respectively). These maps also illustrate the difference in Base Flood Elevations (BFEs) and Stillwater Elevations (SWELs) between the effective and preliminary FIRMs. BFEs in preliminary FIRMS are 1-3 ft higher than the effective, and SWELs are 0.5-1 ft higher than effective. Assuming the PFIRMS will become effective soon, this study focuses on the results of Preliminary FIRM 100-year and 500-year flood scenarios for the asset exposure, utilizing the most up-to-date flood layers. Figure 4 Differences Between BFEs in 100- Year Effective (2017) and Preliminary (2024) FEMA Flood Insurance Maps (FIRMs). Figure 5 Differences Between SWELs in 500- Year Effective (2017) and Preliminary (2024) FIRMs. Task 7_Village of North Palm Beach Vulnerability Assessment 2025_FINAL 33 • Sea Level Rise | Utilizing the NOAA Sea Level Rise extents, asset data was first filtered to fall within the tidally influenced areas relevant to each scenario water elevation. Once filtered, flood depths were determined by subtracting the land elevation at assets from the water elevation. • Future Storm Surge is assessed by adding the sea level rise values for 2050 and 2080, planning horizons, for Intermediate and Intermediate-Low scenarios to Category 4 and 5 storm surge depths. Since Category 1 to Category 3 storm surge impact on the Village’s assets is not prominent, this assessment focused on Category 4 and 5 storm surge depths under four sea level rise conditions. • Future Compound Flooding o The Village of North Palm Beach SWMP Model Simulation Scenarios | Utilizing the SWMP provided rainfall 10-year-24-hour/ 2070 Intermediate-Low and 25-year-24-hour/ 2070 Intermediate-Low model results, assets were assigned water depths based on intersection with, and values of, the model results. o 100 Year Flood (Preliminary) + 2080 Intermediate | This scenario focuses on the assets that were determined to be exposed in 100-year preliminary scenario. The water depths experienced by assets under 100-year preliminary scenario were added to the water depths experienced by assets under the 2080 Intermediate sea level rise scenario, to represent future compound flooding water depths. Future compound flooding depths were only calculated if both columns had values. Study Area and Parcel Exposure The exposure analysis included a detailed examination of the percentage of the study area exposed under each flood and non-flood scenario. The following figures and tables clearly show the progression and variation of exposure, illustrating the increasing extents as extreme weather events become more intense or frequent. Maximum depths depicted within tables are representative for above ground assets and do not include depths experienced by underwater stormwater assets. Village landmarks identified by community members were included within subsequent figures for points of reference and include the Community Center, Fire Department, North Palm Beach Country Club, Lakeside Park, Anchorage Park, John D . MacArthur Beach State Park, the Earman River, and US Highway 1. The findings of the initial exposure assessment for the Village indicate the Villages’ vulnerability to different types of flooding and hazards. This section provides information on how tidal flooding, storm surge, and rainfall-driven flooding affect the Village of North Palm Beach under current and future conditions. Each hazard presents a different type and scale of risk for the Village. • Tidal flooding: Under current conditions, tidal flooding is relatively limited. Most modeled depths are less than 1 foot, which are considered nuisance-level (yard and roadway flooding) rather than structurally damaging. By 2070 and 2080, with sea level rise incorporated, tidal flooding expands significantly, particularly around waterfront neighborhoods and low-lying roadways. For example, parcels near U.S. Highway 1 and waterfront canal systems show frequent tidal flooding depths of 1–2 feet, which could limit access but still generally remain below finished floor elevations. Task 7_Village of North Palm Beach Vulnerability Assessment 2025_FINAL 34 • Storm surge: This hazard poses the greatest structural risk. In a Category 3 storm event, large areas of the Village experience inundation depths greater than 3 feet, which is sufficient to cause structural damage to buildings and critical infrastructure. Key examples include exposure of The Benjamin School, several lift stations, and residential parcels along the Intracoastal Waterway. Unlike tidal flooding, these depths exceed thresholds for nuisance flooding and would likely damage structures, utilities, and vehicles. • Rainfall flooding: Heavy rainfall is already the most frequent hazard for the Village, with the stormwater system being overwhelmed by 10- and 25-year 24-hour flood events. For instance, rainfall-only scenarios project flood depths up to 3 feet on several roadways, including sections near Prosperity Farms Road and Lighthouse Drive. These depths are not just nuisance flooding; they would restrict mobility, impact emergency access, and, in some cases, threaten interior flooding for low-lying structures. With sea level rise factored in, rainfall-driven flooding worsens, as outfalls are increasingly overwhelmed by higher base water levels. The analysis results in the following sections are presented in two primary ways: 1. Parcel Exposure Tables – summarizing the number and percentage of parcels exposed to each hazard under current and future conditions. 2. Maps and Figures – showing the geographic spread and depth of flooding across the Village under each hazard scenario, highlighting where nuisance flooding transitions to potentially damaging inundation. These results provide context for how the Village’s vulnerability evolves: tidal flooding is primarily a nuisance today but becomes more disruptive with sea level rise; rainfall flooding is already a recurring issue with increasing structural risk; and storm surge is the primary driver of deep, damaging flood events. Task 7_Village of North Palm Beach Vulnerability Assessment 2025_FINAL 35 Current Hazards Table 2 outlines the current flood and heat hazard scenarios analyzed for the Village, covering current risks, and outlining impact. Table 2 Current Hazard Scenarios Maximum Depth and Percentage of Area Impacted Storm Surge Exposure Storm surge scenarios range from Category 1 to Category 5 hurricanes, with Category 1 inundating 5% of the area at a maximum depth of 3 feet, Category 3 inundating 8% at a maximum depth of 5 feet, and Category 5 inundating 25% of the area at a maximum depth of 8 feet. The storm surge exposure map (Figure 6) highlights the increasing exposure of North Palm Beach to flooding as hurricane intensity rises. Categories 1, 2, and 3 show minimal impacts, with inundation largely confined to low-lying areas near waterways such as the John D. MacArthur Beach State Park. However, exposure increases in Category 4 and 5 scenarios, with widespread flooding affecting critical assets, residential neighborhoods, and Flooding Type Scenario Maximum Flood Depth (ft) Percentage of Area Storm Surge Category 1 3 5% Category 2 4 6% Category 3 5 8% Category 4 7 18% Category 5 8 25% Existing Tidal Flooding 2 feet above MHHW (2.4 ft NAVD) 2.4 5% Existing Compound Flooding Tidal flooding + Category 4 storm surge 8.4 5% Rainfall- Induced Flooding Events 10-year 24-hour Event 4.2 9% 25-year 24-hour Event 4.3 10% Severe Storm Events 100-year Flood Effective/ Preliminary 10/10 52%/ 63% 500-year Flood Effective/ Preliminary 7.1/7.2 58%/ 77% Heat Heat Severity N/A 40% Figure 6 Village of North Palm Beach Storm Surge Exposure. Task 7_Village of North Palm Beach Vulnerability Assessment 2025_FINAL 36 infrastructure along US Highway 1. The depth and extent of storm surge increase noticeably in these higher categories. The Category 4 storm surge map (Figure 7) depicts areas of significant inundation, with flooding intensifying in both depth and extent across the Village. Major flood depth increments are shaded to display the increase in exposure, highlighting areas experiencing flood depths of greater than 2.5 feet. Notable impacts include major flooding along low-lying coastal areas, particularly near John D. MacArthur Beach State Park, which is heavily inundated. Residential areas and critical infrastructure along US Highway 1 also experience significant exposure, with some zones north of the Community Center showing water depths exceeding 4 feet. Key landmarks such as Lakeside Park and the Earman River experience increasing impacts, making accessibility in these areas challenging. Figure 7 Village of North Palm Beach Category 4 Storm Surge Exposure and Flood Depths . Figure 8 Village of North Palm Beach Category 5 Storm Surge Exposure and Flood Depths. Task 7_Village of North Palm Beach Vulnerability Assessment 2025_FINAL 37 The Category 5 storm surge map (Figure 8) highlights widespread flooding across North Palm Beach, with the majority of inland areas experiencing low to moderate inundation levels of 0-2 feet. However, some residential zones, particularly in the northern inland areas north of the Community Center, face disruptive impacts with flood depths reaching 6-8 feet, impacting entire neighborhoods. Similarly, John D. MacArthur Beach State Park experiences extreme inundation, with water depths up to 8 feet, completely inundating the park’s natural areas. Existing Tidal Flooding Existing tidal flooding, modeled at 2 feet above MHHW, impacts 5% of the Village with depths of up to 2.4 feet (Figure 9). Five (5%) percent of the assets, mostly stormwater outfalls distributed across middle to east side of the Village (along Country Club Dr, near Kittyhawk Way, Marina Dr, Lakeside Dr and Earman River shorelines) are subject to tidal flooding today. Compound Flooding Compound flooding, from tidal flooding combined with a Category 4 storm surge produces depths of 8.8 feet and affects 5% of the area. However, the total footprint of the compound flooding scenario is limited to areas where both individual hazards produce flooding. It is important to note that compound flooding is represented by the combination of flood depths experienced Figure 9 Village of North Palm Beach Tidal Flooding Exposure. Figure 10 10-Year/24-Hour and 25-Year/24-Hour Rainfall Event Exposure. Task 7_Village of North Palm Beach Vulnerability Assessment 2025_FINAL 38 under both current tidal flooding and a Category 4 storm surge and thus its exposure extent is not visually representable in a map. Rainfall Induced Flooding Rainfall-induced flooding scenarios further highlight vulnerabilities . The 10-year, 24-hour rainfall event reaches depths of 4.2 feet and affects 9% of the Village, while the 25-year event reaches depths of 4.3 feet and impacts 10% of the area (Figure 10). 25-yr event has slightly higher flood depths within the same extent, therefore 25- yr layer (shown in green) not very prominent in Figure 10. These maximum depths do not account for drainage infrastructure that would help divert water. Severe Storm Events Severe storm scenarios also reveal significant impacts, the 100-year flood event affecting 63% of the Village at a depth of 10 feet and the 500-year event impacting 77% of the area at 7.1 feet, when referencing the PFIRMs (Figure 11). Extreme Heat Figure 12 reveals heat exposure across North Palm Beach, with nearly 40% of the Village impacted by high levels of heat intensity. The most severe heat exposure (levels 4 and 5) is concentrated in densely built environments and areas with limited vegetation, particularly along US Highway 1, near Anchorage Park, and residential zones surrounding the Earman River. These areas are likely to experience higher surface temperatures due to the urban heat island effect. It should be noted that Figures 9, 11, 13, and 16 include layers where flood depths were calculated mathematically at each asset location; therefore, only flood extents are presented, and flood depths are not visualized. Figure 11 Village of North Palm Beach 100- and 500-Year Flood Event Exposure Figure 12 Village of North Palm Beach Heat Exposure. Task 7_Village of North Palm Beach Vulnerability Assessment 2025_FINAL 39 Future Hazards Looking ahead, tidal flooding, storm surge, and rainfall-driven flooding are all projected to increase in extent and severity within the Village of North Palm Beach. The results show that future conditions will shift some hazards from being mostly nuisance-level today to having the potential for structural damage and community-wide impacts. • Tidal flooding: With projected sea level rise by 2070 and 2080, tidal flooding expands beyond nuisance conditions. Water depths increase to 1–2 feet in many waterfront neighborhoods and along low-lying roads such as U.S. Highway 1 and Prosperity Farms Road. While these depths may not typically damage structures, they are disruptive enough to limit access, overwhelm swales, and increase wear on stormwater systems. • Storm surge: Future storm surge events remain the most damaging hazard. Under a Category 3 storm with future sea level rise, large portions of the Village could experience depths greater than 4 feet. This level of inundation would result in widespread structural damage to homes and critical facilities, including lift stations, schools, and sections of the road network. • Rainfall flooding: Rainfall-driven flooding grows significantly worse when compounded with higher sea levels. A 10-year rainfall event in the 2070 Intermediate-Low scenario already produces ponding depths up to 3 feet in several residential and commercial areas. A 25-year event shows even greater extents, with water levels overtopping roadways and approaching thresholds for building damage in some neighborhoods. The results are presented through parcel-level exposure tables and Village-wide flood maps, showing the transition from today’s mostly shallow, nuisance flooding to deeper, more damaging inundation. These findings highlight that while storm surge remains t he driver of catastrophic damage, the Village will also face more frequent and disruptive tidal and rainfall flooding under future conditions. Table 3 summarizes future flood scenarios for the Village, highlighting sea level rise and tidal flooding under 2050 and 2080 conditions and compound flooding projections. As a reminder, maximum depths within tables are representative for above ground assets and do not include depths experienced by underwater stormwater assets. Flooding Type Scenario Max Flood Depth (ft) Percentage of Area Sea Level Rise 2050 Intermediate Low (1.4 ft NAVD) 1.4 4% 2050 Intermediate (1.5 ft NAVD) 1.5 4% 2080 Intermediate-Low (2 ft NAVD) 2.0 5% 2080 Intermediate (2.7 ft NAVD) 2.7 6% Future Storm Surge Cat 4 Surge +2050 & 2080, Int & Int-Low SLR 9 18% Cat 5 Surge +2050 & 2080, Int & Int-Low SLR 10 25% Future Tidal Flooding 2050 Tidal Flooding (3.9 ft NAVD) 3.5 5% 2080 Tidal Flooding (5.1 ft NAVD) 4.7 5% Future Compound Flooding 10-year 24-hour Event + 2070 Intermediate-Low 11.7 18% 25-year 24-hour Event + 2070 Intermediate-Low 11.9 20% 100-year Flood (Prelim) + 2080 Intermediate 12.7 63% Table 3 Future Flood Scenarios Maximum Depth and Percentage of Area Impacted (all SLR scenarios represent high tide condition) Task 7_Village of North Palm Beach Vulnerability Assessment 2025_FINAL 40 Sea Level Rise Sea level rise scenarios show a gradual increase in maximum flood depths, ranging from 1.4 feet under the 2050 Intermediate-Low scenario (1.4 ft NAVD), affecting up to 4% of the Village, to 2.7 feet under the 2080 Intermediate scenario (2.7 ft NAVD) (Figure 13). Future Storm Surge Future storm surge is assessed by adding the sea level rise values for 2050 and 2080 for Intermediate and Intermediate-Low scenarios to Category 4 and Category 5 storm surge depths. In 2050, flood depths up to 8 feet are expected to occur under Category 4 storm surge with Intermediate sea level rise conditions, inundating 18% of the Village. These numbers raise up to 9 feet of flood depth and 25% inundation when Category 5 storm surge is combined with Intermediate sea level rise conditions (Figure 14). By 2080, Category 4 and Category 5 flood depths can reach up to 9 and 10 feet, respectively with the impact of Intermediate and Intermediate-Low sea level rise conditions (Figure 15). Figure 14 Future Storm Surge Exposure Extents and Flood Depths (Category 4 Surge + 2050 Intermediate SLR) Figure 13 Village of North Palm Beach Sea Level Rise Exposure Task 7_Village of North Palm Beach Vulnerability Assessment 2025_FINAL 41 Figure 15 Future Storm Surge Exposure Extents and Flood Depths (Category 4 Surge + 2080 Intermediate SLR) Future Tidal Flooding Future tidal flooding, modeled for 2050 and 2080, demonstrates increased impacts, with maximum depths reaching 3.5 feet by 2050 (3.9 ft NAVD) and 4.7 feet by 2080 (5.1 NAVD), both impacting 5% of the Village. Flood depths for future tidal flooding scenarios, as well as for the Future Compound Flooding scenario [100-year Flood (Preliminary) + 2080 Intermediate] were calculated based on the combination of flood depths of various hazards and thus their exposure extents will not be visually represented. Future Compound Flooding Future compound flooding scenarios reveal greater impacts. A 10 -year rainfall event combined with 2070 Intermediate-Low sea level rise results in a maximum flood depth of 11.7 feet, affecting 18% of the Village. A 25-year rainfall event combined with 2070 Intermediate-Low sea level rise represents a similar hazard footprint, only impacting an additional 2% of the Village (Figure 16), and having a maximum flood depth of an additional 0.2 feet. The most extreme future compound flooding scenario, represented by a 100-year flood event combined with 2080 Intermediate sea level rise, results in depths of 12.7 feet, inundating 63% of the Village. Various future compound flooding scenarios can be observed by 2080 with 11.7 -12.7 feet of flood depths. Task 7_Village of North Palm Beach Vulnerability Assessment 2025_FINAL 42 Summary of Findings for Study Area and Parcel Exposure • Current tidal flooding is mostly shallow and nuisance-level, but it will expand with sea level rise and become more disruptive to roads and neighborhoods. • Rainfall flooding is already a recurring problem, with depths that block roads and strain the stormwater system. Future conditions will worsen these impacts. • Storm surge poses the highest structural risk, with future events capable of flooding homes, schools, utilities, and major roads. • Future hazards shift from mostly nuisance flooding today to more frequent and damaging events, especially when tidal flooding and rainfall combine with higher sea levels. • Planning should address both catastrophic surge events and the everyday impacts of more frequent nuisance and moderate flooding. Critical Asset Exposure The critical asset exposure analysis identified assets within the Village that are susceptible to flooding or heat-related impacts under a variety of scenarios. The methodology involves determining. The analysis incorporates spatial data overlays, modeled flood extents, and asset-specific characteristics to estimate exposure levels. Key outputs of this analysis include Figure 16 Village of North Palm Beach Future Compound Flooding Exposure. Task 7_Village of North Palm Beach Vulnerability Assessment 2025_FINAL 43 the percentage of assets exposed under each hazard scenario, the types and classes of assets affected, and the estimated flood depths at each impacted asset. Furthermore, the assessment highlights specific assets with the highest exposure, providing critic al insights into the potential vulnerabilities of infrastructure, community facilities, and essential services. Figures within this section will highlight exposed assets under various flood hazards and will depict the remaining present assets that are “not exposed.” Current Hazards Under current conditions, most of the Village’s critical facilities remain outside of direct flood impacts from tidal flooding and minor surge events. Tidal flooding today is limited to nuisance - level depths (less than 1 foot), generally affecting roadways and swales rather than buildings themselves. However, rainfall-driven flooding already presents challenges, with several pump stations, roadways, and stormwater outfalls showing ponding depths up to 2 –3 feet during 10- and 25-year rainfall events. These depths are disruptive enough to limit emergency access, stress drainage systems, and potentially impact low-lying lift stations. During hurricane events, storm surge becomes the dominant hazard, with portions of the Village’s utilities, schools, and transportation routes exposed to damaging flood depths greater than 3 feet. Current hazards assessed under this section describes the current conditions and the assets that are exposed to them. Current hazard scenarios include tidal and rainfall flooding, storm surge inundation, and severe storms (FEMA 100-year and 500-year flood events). Table 4 displays the percentage of assets exposed under each current scenario, highlighting key vulnerabilities. For instance, 8% of assets are exposed under a Category 1 storm surge and 33% of assets are exposed under a Category 4 storm surge, including significant infrastructure like stormwater treatment facilities and wastewater lift stations (Figure 17). While much of the inland assets, including critical facilities, remain at relatively lower exposure levels with inundation levels of up to 2 feet, isolated residential areas in towards the west experience flooding up to 3 feet. Exposure increases to 47% under a Category 5 storm surge, emphasizing the severe risks posed by high-intensity storms. Rainfall-induced flooding also impacts a substantial portion of assets, with 47% exposed under a 10-year 24-hour rainfall event and 48% under a 25-year 24-hour event (Figure 19). Extreme events, such as the 500- year flood, affect up to 25% of assets (Figure 18). Flooding Type Scenario Percentage of Total Assets Exposed Asset Count (Points) Storm Surge Category 1 1% 13 Category 2 2% 22 Category 3 8% 77 Category 4 33% 306 Category 5 47% 441 Existing Tidal Flooding 2 feet above MHHW (2.4 ft NAVD) 5% 43 Table 4 Current Hazard Asset Exposure Task 7_Village of North Palm Beach Vulnerability Assessment 2025_FINAL 44 Flooding Type Scenario Percentage of Total Assets Exposed Asset Count (Points) Existing Compound Flooding Tidal flooding + Category 4 storm surge 1% 9 Rainfall- Induced Flooding Events 10-year 24-hour Event 47% 436 25-year 24-hour Event 48% 445 Severe Storm Events 100-year Flood Effective/ Preliminary 19%/ 41% 178/380 500-year Flood Effective/ Preliminary 33%/ 66% 127/232 Heat Heat Severity 84% 782 While the exposure analysis was conducted for every asset under every flood scenario listed in Table 4, for the purpose of the analysis review in this section, the discussion will focus on a few tipping point scenarios. These scenarios represent both extreme flood events as well as more likely lower intensity and higher frequency events. As mentioned previously, it is also important to note, that while both the effective and preliminary floodplain exposures were incorporated into the analysis for the 100- and 500-year events, the tables in subsequent sections represent results for the preliminary floodplain exposure . Task 7_Village of North Palm Beach Vulnerability Assessment 2025_FINAL 45 Figure 17 Category 4 and 5 Storm Surge Critical Asset Exposure. Task 7_Village of North Palm Beach Vulnerability Assessment 2025_FINAL 46 Figure 19 Tidal Flooding and 10 Year 24 Hour Rainfall Event Critical Asset Exposure. Figure 18 100- and 500-Year Flood Critical Asset Exposure. Task 7_Village of North Palm Beach Vulnerability Assessment 2025_FINAL 47 Table 5 outlines the percentage of asset classes exposed under each current flood hazard and Table 6 outlines maximum flood depths for each asset class for the key current hazards. It is important to note that only three critical community and emergency facilities are impacted under current flood hazards and these impacts represent the maximum flood dept hs included in Table 6. Baldwin Prep School may experience one foot of flooding under a Category 5 storm surge event. The Benjamin School is expected to experience 0.4 feet of flooding under both a 10-year 24-hour storm and a 25-year 24-hour storm, as well as 7.7 ft of flooding under 500-year flood event. No flooding is anticipated under the remaining current flood hazards. Lastly, St. Claire Catholic School is expected to experience 0.2 feet of flooding under a 500 - year flood event. Table 5 Percentage of Asset Class Impacted Under Current Flood Hazards (SS: Storm Surge) Percentage of Asset Class Impacted SS Cat 4 SS Cat 5 Tidal Flood 10 Yr 24 Hr Rainfall 100 Yr FEMA 500 Yr FEMA Critical Community and Emergency Facilities - 1 (7%) - 1 (7% ) - 1(7%) Critical Infrastructure 297 (35%) 426 (50%) 43 (5%) 430 (51% ) 372 (44% ) 222 (26%) Natural, Cultural, and Historical Resource - - - - - - Transportation and Evacuation Routes 9 (13%) 14 (21%) - 5 (7%) 8 (12% ) 9 (13%) Table 6 Maximum Flood Depths for Key Current Flood Hazards (SS: Storm Surge) Maximum Flood Depth (feet) SS Cat 4 SS Cat 5 Tidal Flood 10 Yr 24 Hr Rainfall Event 100 Yr FEMA 500 Yr FEMA Critical Community and Emergency Facilities 0 1 0 0.4 0 0.2* Critical Infrastructure 7 8 2.4 4.2 9.5 6.7* Task 7_Village of North Palm Beach Vulnerability Assessment 2025_FINAL 48 Natural, Cultural, and Historical Resource 5.3 6.1 2.3 3.2 9.0 7.1* Transportation and Evacuation Routes 6 7 2.1 2.5 7.7 3.0* *Note FEMA 500-year event results are in excess of 100-year event. That is why the 500-year results are smaller than 100-year. Critical infrastructure faces the most significant impacts under various current hazards, subject to a maximum flood depth of 4.2 feet under a 10-year event, 8 feet under Category 5 storm surge, and nearly 10 feet under a 100-year event. Table 7 provides a breakdown of flood depths for critical infrastructure, detailing depth ranges for multiple key critical infrastructure asset types. Solid and hazardous waste facilities face consistent inundation at two feet during Category 5 events but minimal to no impact during rainfall-induced flooding. Stormwater treatment facilities are highly vulnerable, with flood depths of up to 7.6 feet during a 100 -year flood. Wastewater treatment facilities experience depths of approximately 3 feet during the same event and under a Category 5 storm surge. Natural, cultural, and historical resources also experience up to 6 feet of inundation during a Category 5 surge event (Table 6). Transportation assets also experience high flood depths under current flood hazards, with maximum flood depths ranging from 2.5 feet under a 10-year and 7 feet under Category 5 storm surge to nearly 7.7 feet under a 100-year flood event. Such depths can be extremely disruptive to residents’ mobility and can limit accessibility to critical locations. Table 7 Minimum, Maximum, and Average Flood Depths for Critical Infrastructure under Cat 5 Storm Surge, a 10 -Year/24-Hour Rainfall Event, and a 100-Year Flood Event Flood Depth (feet) SS Cat 5 10 Yr 24 Hr 100 Yr Asset Type Average Min Max Average Min Max Average Min Max Solid and Hazardous Waste Facilities 2 2 2 0.4 0.4 0.4 - - - Stormwater Treatment Facilities and Pump Stations 2.7 1 8 0.6 <0.1 4.2 2.1 <0.1 7.6 Wastewater Treatment Facilities and Lift Stations 2 1 3 0.2 <0.1 1.4 1.2 0.1 3.1 Water Utility Conveyance Systems 2.1 1 4 0.2 <0.1 2.3 1.8 <0.1 5.6 Task 7_Village of North Palm Beach Vulnerability Assessment 2025_FINAL 49 Examining exposure and flood depths across asset classes and asset types helps to identify trends and major vulnerabilities at a grand scale and helps to identify key sectors exposed. To better understand these trends, it was important to begin to identify which specifics assets are contributing to these maximum flood depths within various classes and types and across the major scenario tipping points for the Village. The results of this initial review are outlined in Table 8 (Village owned assets),Table 9 (private, state, or utility owned assets), and Table 10 (roads), which highlight the top most exposed assets under severe storm surge. The majority of impacts to infrastructure are to Stormwater treatment facilities, with 38% and 55% of facilities impacted by a Category 4 and Category 5 surge event, respectively. Twenty- seven (27%) percent of impacted facilities under a Category 5 surge event may experience flood depths of greater than 2.5 feet, representing disruptive impacts. Rainfall events also pose significant stress to stormwater treatment facilities- 71% are subject to flooding under a 10- year 24-hour rainfall event and 48% are subject to a 100-year flood event. Stormwater facilities expected to experience the greatest impacts are identified in Table 8, along with other Village- owned key critical assets exposed under current flood hazards. Table 8 Key Critical Asset Exposure Under Major Current Flood Hazards (Village Owned) Flood Depth (feet) Key Critical Assets SS Cat 4 SS Cat 5 Tidal Flood 10 Yr 24 Hr 100 Yr Outfall 1018 (West of Waterway Drive) 7 8 1.8 - 6.4 Outfall 1078 (South of Anchorage Park) - 7 6.2 5.1 10.8 Outfall 1021 (North of Robin Way) 6 7 - 5.2 8.9 Outfall 1022 (South of Sandpiper Way) 5 6 1.5 - 6.1 Outfall 1000 (Southwest NPB Country Club) 5 6 - - 5.5 Outfall 1040 (North NPB Yacht Club Marina) 5 6 3.2 - 8.8 Outfall 1069 (East of Westwind Drive) 5 6 4.3 9 8.9 Anchorage Park 2.1 1.9 - 0.1 < 0.1 Lakeside Park 2.7 1.8 - 0.4 1.8 North Palm Beach Community Park 1.2 1.4 - 0.03 - Osborne Park 1 1 - 0.06 - Seacoast Utility Authority (SUA) owns and maintains a variety of water and wastewater utilities and infrastructure within the Village, including fire hydrants, lift stations, and waste facilities. Fifty-two (52%) percent of Wastewater Treatment Facilities and Lift Stations and 46% of Water Utility Conveyance Systems are exposed under a Category 5 Storm Surge Event. Assets exposed to the greatest flood depths are displayed in Table 9. Table 9 also contains the private schools discussed previously, as well as one state owned park (John D. Macarthur State Park). Task 7_Village of North Palm Beach Vulnerability Assessment 2025_FINAL 50 Table 9 Key Critical Asset Exposure Under Major Current Flood Hazards (Private, State, or Utility Owned Assets) (SS: Storm Surge) Flood Depth (feet) Key Critical Assets SS Cat 4 SS Cat 5 Tidal Flood 10 Yr 24 Hr 100 Yr SUA Fire Hydrant 3-0055 (Southwind Circle) 3 4 - - 1.4 SUA Fire Hydrant 3-0074 (East of Waterway Drive) 3 4 - 1.5 2.9 SUA Fire Hydrant 3-0076 (East of Lagoon Drive) 3 4 - 1.8 3 SUA Fire Hydrant 3-0078 (South of Nighthawk Way) 3 4 - 1.9 3.1 SUA Fire Hydrant 3-0082 (West of Shore Drive) 3 4 - 1.9 3 SUA Fire Hydrant 3-0084 (South of Sandpiper Way) 3 4 - 1.7 3 SUA Fire Hydrant 3-0139 (East of Country Club Drive) 3 4 - 2 3.4 SUA Fire Hydrant 3-0146 (West of North Palm beach Country Club Pond) 3 4 - 1.8 3.3 SUA Lift Station 024 (South of Pelican Way) 2 3 - - 1.2 SUA Lift Station 028 (North of Fathom Road) 2 3 - 1.4 3.1 SUA Lift Station 069 (East of Cable Beach Lane) 1 2 - - 1.2 SUA Lift Station 035 (North of Pepperwood Circle North) - 2 - 0.8 - SUA Lift Station 031 (East of Country Club Drive) 1 2 - - 0.7 SUA Lift Station 054 (South Anchorage Park) 1 2 - - - SUA Lift Station 022 (East of Northlake Drive) 2 2 - 0.4 1 SUA Lift Station 027 (Lakehouse Drive) 1 2 - - 1.4 SUA Lift Station 029 (Southeast of Yacht Club Drive) 1 2 - - 1.6 SUA Lift Station 030 (West of Marina Drive) 1 2 - - 1.6 SUA Solid and Hazardous Waste Facility - 2 - 0.4 - John D. MacArthur State Park 3.5 4 - 0 3.8 Baldwin Prep School - 1 - - - The Benjamin School - - - 0.4 - St. Claire Catholic School - - - - - It is important to note that aside from the three schools mentioned previously, the remainder of critical community and emergency facilities are not expected to experience flooding under current hazards. Task 7_Village of North Palm Beach Vulnerability Assessment 2025_FINAL 51 Key community and emergency facilities NOT expected to experience impacts under current hazards include: • The North Palm Beach Fire Department and EMS • The North Palm Beach Emergency Operations Center/ Police Department/ Public Safety Facility • The North Palm Beach Town Hall • The North Palm Beach Public Safety Facility • The North Palm Beach Community Center • The Palm Beach Memory Care Facility • Various schools including the Academy of North Palm Beach School, the Conservatory School, and North Palm Beach Elementary School. Additional key critical assets that are not expected to experience flood impacts under current hazards include both SUA Wastewater Treatment Plant and Drinking Facilities. Detailed depictions of all impacted assets across all current flood scenarios are displayed in Table 11 (asset points), Table 12 (asset lines), and Table 13 (asset areas). These tables highlight the percentage of specific asset types impacted under all current flood hazards. As depicted in Table 10 and Figure 20, 50% of roads that are exposed under a Category 5 storm surge event, with an average flood depth of 2.2 depth and a maximum flood depth of 7 feet. Twenty-nine (29%) percent of roads are impacted under a 10-year 24-hour rainfall event and 40% are impacted under a 100-year flood event (with a maximum depth of 10 feet). Road vulnerability will be explored in the sensitivity analysis, the exposure analysis helps to identify roads exposed to the highest flood depths. Task 7_Village of North Palm Beach Vulnerability Assessment 2025_FINAL 52 Table 10 outlines the Village roads that are expected to experience an average flood depth of greater than 2.5 feet under a Category 5 storm surge event and outlines the anticipated flood depths during a 10-year rainfall event on these roads. Table 10 Key Critical Roads Exposed to Current Flood Hazards with an Average Flood Depth Greater than 2.5 Feet (mapped in Figure 20) Average Flood Depth (ft) Key Critical Roads SS Cat 5 10 Yr 24 Hr Rainfall US Highway 1 5.3 0.1 Canal Road 4.1 0.8 Mallard Way 3.8 1.7 Sandpiper Way 3.7 1.7 Waterway Drive 3.7 1.5 Shore Drive 3.7 1.5 Robin Way 3.6 1.6 Waterway Circle 3.5 1.3 Lagoon Drive 3.4 1.3 Osprey Way 3.4 1.6 Nighthawk Way 3.3 1.6 Pelican Way 3.3 1.3 Country Club Ct 3.2 1.1 Harbour Isles Pl 3.1 - Country Club Dr 3.1 0.8 Tradewind Drive 3.0 0.7 Lakeside Court 3.0 1.6 Teal Way 3.0 1.1 Country Club Cir 2.9 0.9 Fathom Road 2.9 1.2 Harbour Isles Ct 2.9 - Marina Drive 2.7 - Southwind Circle 2.7 - Monet Road 2.7 - Lakeside Drive 2.7 - Westwind Drive 2.6 0.7 Lake Circle 2.6 - Dory Road S 2.6 1.0 Jack Nicklaus Dr 2.5 0.6 Harbour Isles Dr 2.5 0.1 Figure 20 Category 5 Storm Surge and 10 Year 24 Hour Rainfall Event Road Exposure. Task 7_Village of North Palm Beach Vulnerability Assessment 2025_FINAL 53 Table 11 Percentage of Asset Types (Points) Impacted by Flood Depths Greater than Zero under Current Flood Hazards with Additional Note of Percentage of Major Flooding Asset Class Asset Types Total Tidal Flood SS Cat1 SS Cat2 SS Cat3 SS Cat4 SS Cat5 Eff 100 Year Flood Prelim 100 Year Flood Eff 500 Year Flood Prelim 500 Year Flood 10 Yr 24 Hr 25 Yr 24 Hr Comp Flood Critical Community and Emergency Facilities Fire Stations 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Emergency Operation Centers 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Local Government Facilities 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Community Centers 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Schools 6 0 0 0 0 0 17 0 0 17 17 17 17 0 Health Care Facilities 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Critical Infrastructure Electric Production and Supply Facilities 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Bridges 10 0 10 10/ 10 10 / 10 20 / 10 20 / 20 10 30 0 10 10 10 0 Airports 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Wastewater Treatment Facilities and Lift Stations 23 0 0 0 0 39 52 / 9 13 48 / 4 22 17 13 13 0 Water Utility Conveyance Systems 337 0 0.3 0.9 5 32 / 4 46 / 13 12 / 1 39 / 8 15 / 2 17 / 1 26 28 0 Solid and Hazardous Waste Facilities 12 0 0 0 0 0 8 0 0 0 8 8 8 0 Communications Facilities 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Stormwater Treatment Facilities and Pump Stations 474 9 / 3 2 / 0.4 3 / 0.6 12 / 2 38 / 12 55 / 27 27 / 17 48 / 33 15 / 9 34 / 11 71 / 14 72 / 15 2 / 2 Natural, Cultural, and Historical Historical and Cultural Assets 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Transportation and Evacuation Routes Bus Stops 53 0 0 0 0 6 15 / 4 0 2 2 15 6 6 0 Marinas 4 0 25 50 75 100 / 75 100 / 100 100 / 25 100 / 50 0 0 25 25 0 *Orange text in table indicates the percentage of the asset type that is exposed to major flooding, flood depths of 2.5 ft or greater. Cells without orange text represent asset type/ hazard combinations that do not result in flood depths greater than 2.5 ft. Task 7_Village of North Palm Beach Vulnerability Assessment 2025_FINAL 54 Table 12 Percentage of Asset Types (Lines) Impacted by Flood Depths Greater than Zero under Current Flood Hazards with Additional Note of Percentage of Major Flooding Table 13 Percentage of Asset Types (Areas) Impacted by Flood Depths Greater than Zero under Current Flood Hazards with Additional Note of Percentage of Major Flooding % of Asset Type Impacted Asset Type Total Mileage Tidal Flood SS Cat1 SS Cat2 SS Cat3 SS Cat4 SS Cat5 Eff 100 Year Flood Prelim 100 Year Flood Eff 500 Year Flood Prelim 500 Year Flood 10 Yr 24 Hr 25 Yr 24 Hr Comp Flood Major Roadways 46.9 0 0 1 8 38/ 5 50/ 18 17/ 2 40/ 13 13/ 1 19 29 30 0 Rail Facilities 0.6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Stormwater Treatment Facilities and Pump Stations 10.1 0 1 1 6 34/ 6 51/ 18 12/ 2 32/ 13 15/ 3 36/ 5 54/ 2 55/ 3 0 Shorelines 30.6 23/ 17 9/ 3 12/ 6 15/ 8 23/ 14 28/ 18 31/ 26 39/ 31 1 2 22/ 12 23/ 13 7/ 7 Seawall (Additional Analysis) 18.3 7/ 1 11/ 3 19/ 5 26/ 9 41/ 23 47/ 32 67/ 21 97/ 85 14/ 13 1 63/ 18 65/ 19 4/ 3 Swale (Additional Analysis) 84.3 1 1 2 8 36/ 5 49/ 17 17/ 3 40/ 15 13/ 2 22/ 2 36 37 1 *Orange text in table indicates the percentage of the asset type that is exposed to major flooding, flood depths of 2.5 ft or greater. Cells without orange text represent asset type/ hazard combinations that do not result in flood depths greater than 2.5 ft. % of Asset Type Impacted Asset Type Total Tidal Flood SS Cat1 SS Cat2 SS Cat3 SS Cat4 SS Cat5 Eff 100 Year Flood Prelim 100 Year Flood Eff 500 Year Flood Prelim 500 Year Flood 10 Yr 24 Hr 25 Yr 24 Hr Comp Flood Parks 7 0 43 57 57/14 71/ 29 71/ 14 29/ 14 43/ 14 43/ 14 57/ 29 86 86 0 Wetlands 6 83 100 100/ 50 100/ 100 100/ 100 100/ 100 100/ 100 100/ 100 17/ 17 17/ 17 17/ 17 17/ 17 83/ 83 *Orange text in table indicates the percentage of the asset type that is exposed to major flooding, flood depths of 2.5 ft or greater. Cells without orange text represent asset type/ hazard combinations that do not result in flood depths greater than 2.5 ft. Task 7_Village of North Palm Beach Vulnerability Assessment 2025_FINAL 55 Table 14 depicts the percent of parcels exposed under various current flood scenarios, grouped by parcel type. There are a total of 3,247 parcels within the Village (89% of which are residential), which have an average flood depth of 2 feet and a maximum fl ood depth of 4 feet under both a Category 5 Storm Surge and a 100-Year Flood Event. Nearly 54% of residential properties are currently vulnerable to Storm Surge from a Category 5 storm, 20% of which were built before floodplain requirements were in place or ou tside the recognized floodplain where elevation requirements do not apply. 55% of residential properties can experience flood depth s of 0.5 to 2 feet under 10-year Flood Event within their parcel limits including driveways or backyards. 21% of which were built before floodplain requirements. Under the 10-year 24-hour flood event: • 32 residential properties along Honey Road can experience flooding up to 3 feet around the houses, as well as driveways and backyards. • 14 properties between Conroy Drive and Lorraine Court can experience up to 1.5 feet of flooding mostly on the backyards, encroaching towards the structures. • 6 properties along Fairhaven Drive near the Cul de sac can get inundated by flood waters reaching up to 1.5 feet. • Nearly 90 properties along Shore Drive, Pelican Way, Osprey Way, and Nighthawk Way can get fully inundated with flood depths up to 1.5 feet, fully inundating the roadways, driveways, and structures in the parcel Table 14 Percentage of Parcel Types Impacted by Flood Depths Greater than Zero under Current Flood Hazards % of Parcel Type Impacted Parcel Type Total Tidal Flood SS Cat1 SS Cat2 SS Cat3 SS Cat4 SS Cat5 Eff 100 Year Flood Prelim 100 Year Flood Eff 500 Year Flood Prelim 500 Year Flood 10 Yr 24 Hr 25 Yr 24 Hr Comp Flood Residential 2896 0 4 7 13 40 54 5 35 20 34 55 56 0 Commercial and Services 237 0 6 8 11 27 36 3 14 14 24 41 41 0 Streams and Waterways 57 33 26 32 37 47 54 88 98 16 19 89 89 16 Open Land 15 0 0 0 0 0 60 0 0 0 53 67 67 0 Institutional 13 0 0 8 8 38 54 0 0 0 15 54 54 0 Recreational 12 0 25 33 50 75 92 0 33 33 58 83 83 0 Task 7_Village of North Palm Beach Vulnerability Assessment 2025_FINAL 56 An analysis of swale vulnerability under a 25-year, 24-hour rainfall event reveals that most swales manage water effectively, with an average water depth of 1 ft and a maximum depth of 4.5 ft. The findings show that 19% of swales experience shallow water depths of 1 ft or less, while approximately 18% face moderate depths between 1 and 2.5 ft. As is evident in Figure 21,only a small portion, 0.4%, encounters significant depths exceeding 2.5 ft. Assessing swale vulnerability is important as swales play a key role in managing rainfall runoff by slowing, routing, and infiltrating stormwater. Understanding water depth distribution helps identify areas where swales are functioning effectively and where they may be inundated. Figure 21 Swale Exposure Under a 25 Year/ 24 Hour Event. Task 7_Village of North Palm Beach Vulnerability Assessment 2025_FINAL 57 Beyond flooding, the Village's exposure to severe heat was also studied, as it poses impacts to both residents and infrastructure. The heat exposure analysis prioritized specific asset types that are especially vulnerable to high temperatures, particularly those serving as community gathering spots such as bus stops, parks, and the Community Center. Figure 22 highlights the extent of heat exposure: 94% of bus stops, 71% of parks, and the Community Center are all impacted to varying degrees. Critical assets and landmarks, including the Community Center and Fire Department, are also located within zones of moderate to high heat severity, further emphasizing the need for mitigation strategies to alleviate heat impacts on the community and critical infrastructure. Residential Parcel Heat Exposure Further analysis reveals that 79% of residential parcels are exposed to heat conditions of varying severity. Similarly, 92-97% of parcels categorized as Commercial and Services, Institutional, and Recreational face exposure to heat. The entirety of the parcel exposure analysis to heat can be reviewed in Table 15. Table 15 Percentage of Parcel Types Impacted by Severe Heat Parcel Type Total % of Parcel Type Impacted by Heat Residential 2896 79 Commercial and Services 237 97 Streams and Waterways 57 19 Open Land 15 67 Institutional 13 92 Recreational 12 92 Figure 22 Village of North Palm Beach Communal Outdoor Asset Heat Exposure. Task 7_Village of North Palm Beach Vulnerability Assessment 2025_FINAL 58 Future Hazards Future scenarios show increasing exposure of critical assets to both nuisance and damaging flooding. Rising sea levels expand the footprint of tidal flooding into neighborhoods and roadways that today are rarely affected, introducing more frequent disruptions to access routes and stormwater infrastructure. Rainfall events under future sea level conditions generate greater depths and durations of ponding, with localized flooding reaching 2 –3 feet at key intersections and outfalls, further straining stormwater facilities and lift stations. Storm surge exposure also intensifies: under a Category 3 hurricane with projected 2070–2080 sea levels, several critical assets—including The Benjamin School, wastewater lift stations, and major north–south roadways—are projected to be inundated at depths exceeding 4 feet. These levels would cause structural damage, compromise utilities, and hinder emergency response. Table 16 Future Hazard Asset Exposure Table 16 provides a comprehensive look at how future sea level rise, tidal flooding, and compound flooding scenarios may impact North Palm Beach’s critical assets. By 2050, under an Intermediate sea level rise scenario (1.5 ft NAVD), 3% of total asset points are expected to experience exposure, increasing to 6% under Intermediate conditions by 2080 (2.7 ft NAVD) (Figure 24). As is evident in Table 18, the majority of impacts may be to Stormwater Treatment Facilities and Pump Stations, resulting in an average flood depth of 0.3 feet and maximum flood depth of 1.5 feet by 2050 and an average flood depth of one foot and maximum flood depth of 2.7 feet by 2080. As a note, fifteen village outfalls may technically experience flood depths of greater than 2.7 feet, as they are presently already under water. Flooding Type Scenario Percentage of Total Assets Exposed Sea Level Rise 2050 Intermediate- Low (1.4 ft NAVD) 2% 2050 Intermediate (1.5 ft NAVD) 3% 2080 Intermediate- Low (2 ft NAVD) 4% 2080 Intermediate (2.7 ft NAVD) 6% Future Storm Surge Cat 4 + SLR 33% Cat 5 + SLR 47% Future Tidal Flooding Future Compound Flooding 2050 Tidal Flooding (3.9 ft NAVD) 5% 2080 Tidal Flooding (5.1 ft NAVD) 5% 10-year 24-hour Event + 2070 Intermediate-Low 62% Task 7_Village of North Palm Beach Vulnerability Assessment 2025_FINAL 59 Future tidal flooding scenarios (2050: 3.9 ft NAVD, 2080: 5.1 ft NAVD) show a consistent impact of 5% of total assets across both periods, as the same extent was utilized based on current tidal flooding. Impacts from these scenarios are experienced by Stormwater Treatment Facilities and Pump Stations, with the maximum flood depth resulting in 2050 is 3.5 feet, while in 2080 it is projected to increase to 4.7 feet ( Table 17). The future compound flooding scenarios sourced from the North Palm Beach Stormwater Master Plan result in the greatest impacts to critical assets. As a reminder, these scenarios represent various rainfall events combined with the 2070 sea level rise, which is being used as a proxy for 2050 Intermediate as the scenarios differ by only 0.09 ft (2070 Intermediate-Low: 1.6 ft; 2050 Intermediate: 1.51 ft). Compound flooding due to a 10-year 24-hour rainfall event combined with 2070 sea level rise affects 62% of assets (maximum flood depth of 12 ft), with exposure increasing to 64% under a 25-year event (Figure 23). Again, these impacts are anticipated by 2050 under the Immediate scenario. Figure 24 2050 and 2080 Intermediate SLR Critical Asset Exposure. Figure 23 25-Year 24-Hour Event +2070 Intermediate-Low Critical Asset Exposure. Task 7_Village of North Palm Beach Vulnerability Assessment 2025_FINAL 60 Eighty-three (83%) percent of Stormwater Treatment Facilities and Pump Stations are exposed under the 10-year 24-hour Event +2070 Intermediate-Low future compound flooding scenario, 39% of which at flood depths of 2.5 feet or greater. The average flood depth at Stormwater Treatment Facilities and Pump Stations is anticipated to be 2.7 feet and the maximum flood depth is anticipated to be 12 feet (Table 18). Table 19 depicts the ten Village-owned asset points with the greatest predicted flood depths under this future scenario, along with each asset’s predicted flood depth. Village -owned vulnerable parks are listed. The assets outlined in orange in the table experience a flood depth increase of greater than 0.5 feet by 2050, under a 10 -year 24-hour Event. Table 17 Future Maximum Flood Depth Per Asset Class 2050 Int 2080 Int 2050 Tidal Flood 2080 Tidal Flood Future Surge (Cat 5 + 2080 Int SLR) 10 Year 24 Hour Event + 2070 Int Low Critical Community and Emergency Facilities - - - - 3.4 2.8 Critical Infrastructure 1.5 2.7 3.5 4.7 10.4 12 Natural, Cultural, and Historical Resource 1.5 2.7 3.5 4.7 8.5 12.1 Transportation and Evacuation Routes 1.2 2.4 3.2 4.5 9.4 9.2 Table 18 Minimum, Maximum, and Average Flood Depths for Critical Infrastructure under the 2050 and 2080 Intermediate Sea Level Rise Scenarios and the 10 Year 24 Hour Event + 2070 Intermediate-Low Sea Level Rise Scenario Asset Type 2050 Int 2080 Int 10 Year 24 Hour Event + 2070 Int Low Av Depth (ft) Min Depth (ft) Max Depth (ft) Av Depth (ft) Min Depth (ft) Max Depth (ft) Av Depth (ft) Min Depth (ft) Max Depth (ft) Solid and Hazardous Waste Facilities - - - - - - 1.3 0.7 2.3 Stormwater Treatment Facilities and Pump Stations 0.3 0.0 1.5 1.0 0 2.7 2.7 0.04 12 Wastewater Treatment Facilities and Lift Stations - - - - - - 1.3 0.2 3.2 Water Utility Conveyance Systems - - - 0.13 0 0.3 1.5 0.004 4.2 Task 7_Village of North Palm Beach Vulnerability Assessment 2025_FINAL 61 Table 19 Ten Village-Owned Asset Points and Parks with the Greatest Flood Depths Under the 10 Year 24 Hour Event +2070 Intermediate-Low Scenario Asset Name 10 Year 24 Hour Event + 2070 Int Low Flood Depth (ft) Outfall 1039 12 Outfall 1026 11.4 Outfall 1019 9.3 Outfall 1069 9.3 Outfall 1067 9.2 Outfall 1078 8.9 Outfall 1065 8.9 Outfall 1038 8.8 Outfall 1013 8.7 Outfall 1001 8.2 Village Hall 0.3 Lakeside Park 1.1 Anchorage Park 0.7 Veterans Park 0.7 Community Center Park 0.4 Osborne Park 0.2 Alamanda Park 0.02 Table 20 outlines the utility and private, assets exposed to the greatest flood depths under the 10-year 24-hour Event + 2070 Intermediate-Low scenario and highlights which of the assets are exposed in the future, but not in the present (*). It is important to note that all lift stations flagged within Table 20 are also exposed under a Category 5 storm surge event, expect for Lift Station 15. The assets outlined in Table 19 and Table 20 are visually plotted in Figure 25. Table 20 Key Critical Asset Exposure Under 10 Year 24 Hour Event + 2070 Int (Utility and Privately Owned)) Asset Name 10-year 24-hour Event + 2070 Int Low Flood Depth (ft) SUA Fire Hydrant 3-0291 4.1* SUA Fire Hydrant 3-0192 3.9* SUA Fire Hydrant 3-0196 3.9* SUA Fire Hydrant 4-0171 3.7 SUA Fire Hydrant 3-0297 3.6* SUA Fire Hydrant 3-0108 3.4 SUA Fire Hydrant 3-0055 3* SUA Fire Hydrant 3-0131 2.9 SUA Fire Hydrant 3-0187 2.8* SUA Fire Hydrant 3-0180 2.8* SUA Fire Hydrant 3-0296 2.7* SUA Fire Hydrant 3-0284 2.6 SUA Fire Hydrant 3-0114 2.6 Task 7_Village of North Palm Beach Vulnerability Assessment 2025_FINAL 62 Asset Name 10-year 24-hour Event + 2070 Int Low Flood Depth (ft) SUA Fire Hydrant 3-0136 2.6 SUA Lift Station 030 3.2* SUA Lift Station 028 2.3 SUA Lift Station 054 1.8* SUA Lift Station 035 1.5 SUA Lift Station 022 0.7 SUA Lift Station 015 0.4* SUA Lift Station 027 0.4* SUA Lift Station 024 0.2* North Palm Beach Village Hall 0.3 The Benjamin School 2.7 Baldwin Prep School 0.1 The Conservatory School 0.1 * Asset not exposed under the present day 10 Year 24 Hour Flood Event It is important to note that aside from the few schools and parks and the Village hall, the remainder of critical community and emergency facilities are not expected to experience flooding under future hazards. These facilities include the North Palm Beach Fire Department and EMS, the North Palm Beach Emergency Operations Center/ Police Department/ Public Safety Facility, the North Palm Beach Public Safety Facility, the North Figure 25 Assets Exposed to Future Flood Hazards at the Greatest Flood Depths. Task 7_Village of North Palm Beach Vulnerability Assessment 2025_FINAL 63 Palm Beach Community Center, the Palm Beach Memory Care Facility, and various schools including the Academy of North Palm Beach School, the Conservatory School, and North Palm Beach Elementary School. Additional key critical community assets that are not expected to experience flood impacts under current hazards include both SUA Wastewater Treatment Plant and Drinking Facilities. Fifty-one (51%) percent of roads are expected to be exposed to flooding under the 10-year 24- hour Event + 2070 Intermediate-Low sea level rise scenario. When looking at the roads identified previously with the greatest impacts under a Category 5 storm surge event, most of the roads are anticipated to have impacts in the future under this scenario as well. Table 21 outlines the average and maximum flood depth experienced by key roads under the 10-year 24-hour Event + 2070 Intermediate-Low sea level rise scenario and displays the same statistics for the existing 10 Year 24 Hour Event for comparison purposes. Those roads outlined in orange in the table experience a flood depth increase of greater than 0.5 feet. It is important to note that there are also roads not exposed under Category 5 storm surge that may experience impacts under the future compound scenario, including Southwind Court and Pilot Road with an average flood depth of 2 feet and Prosperity Farms Road, Northlake Drive, and Yacht Club Drive, with maximum flood depths ranging from 4-7 feet. Table 21 Key Critical Roads Exposed to Current Flood Hazards with an Average Flood Depth Greater than 2.5 Feet Average Flood Depth (Maximum Flood Depth) (ft) Key Critical Roads 10-year 24-hour Event 10-year 24-hour Event + 2070 Int Low US Highway 1 0.1 (4.7) 0.5 (9.2) Canal Road 0.8 (1.9) 1.1 (2.2) Mallard Way 1.7 (2) 2 (2.2) Sandpiper Way 1.7 (2) 2 (2.5) Waterway Drive 1.5 (1.8) 1.7 (2.1) Shore Drive 1.5 (2) 1.8 (2.3) Robin Way 1.6(2.1) 1.9 (2.4) Waterway Circle 1.3 (1.5) 1.6 (1.8) Lagoon Drive 1.3 (2.3) 1.6 (2.6) Osprey Way 1.6 (2.1) 1.9 (2.4) Nighthawk Way 1.6 (2.2) 1.9 (2.4) Pelican Way 1.3(2.1) 1.5 (2.4) Country Club Court 1.1 (1.7) 1.3 (2) Country Club Drive 0.8 (2.1) 1 (2.2) Tradewind Drive 0.7 (1.3) 1 (1.6) Lakeside Court 1.6 (1.9) 2.2 (2.4) Teal Way 1.1 (2.3) 1.4 (2.6) Country Club Circle 0.9 (1.5) 1 (1.6) Fathom Road 1.2 (1.7) 2.1 (2.6) Marina Drive - 3.8 (4.5) Southwind Circle - 3.1 (3.4) Monet Road 0.01 (0.3) 0.1 (0.6) Lakeside Drive 1.3 (2) 1.9 (2.7) Westwind Drive 0.7 (1.8) 0.9 (2.7) Lake Circle - 2.9 (3.4) Dory Road S 1.0 (1.9) 1.6 (2.5) Task 7_Village of North Palm Beach Vulnerability Assessment 2025_FINAL 64 Average Flood Depth (Maximum Flood Depth) (ft) Key Critical Roads 10-year 24-hour Event 10-year 24-hour Event + 2070 Int Low Jack Nicklaus Drive 0.6 (1.1) 1.2 (2.1) Harbour Isles Drive 0.1 (3.3) 0.6 (3.9) Table 22-Table 24 delves deeper into asset-specific vulnerabilities under future conditions, identifying percentages of impacted asset types. It is important to note that any cells within the tables without orange text represent asset type/ hazard combinations that do not result in flood depths greater than 2.5 ft. Table 22 evaluates point-based assets under future flood hazards. Critical infrastructure, such as stormwater treatment facilities and pump stations, experiences the highest exposure levels, with 83% affected under the 10-year 24-hour rainfall event combined with 2070 Intermediate-Low sea level rise. Of these, 39% face flood depths of 2.5 feet or greater. Solid and hazardous waste facilities are also highly vulnerable, with 50% exposed under future compound flooding. Water utility conveyance systems face a similar threat, with 45% exposed, including depths exceeding 2.5 feet. Local government facilities and schools experience moderate impacts, with 50% exposure under certain scenarios . Task 7_Village of North Palm Beach Vulnerability Assessment 2025_FINAL 65 Table 22 Percentage of Asset Types (Points) Impacted by Flood Depths Greater than Zero under Future Flood Hazards with Additional Note of Percentage of Major Flooding Asset Class Asset Type Total 2050 Int Low 2050 Int 2080 Int Low 2080 Int 2050 Tidal Flood 2080 Tidal Flood Future Comp Flood (100 Yr) Future Comp Flood (10 Yr 24 Hr) Future Comp Flood (25 Yr 24 Hr) Critical Community and Emergency Facilities Fire Stations 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Emergency Operation Centers 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Local Government Facilities 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 50 50 Community Centers 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Schools 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 50 / 17 67 / 17 Health Care Facilities 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Critical Infrastructure Electric Production and Supply Facilities 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Bridges 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 20 Airports 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Wastewater Treatment Facilities and Lift Stations 23 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 35 35 Water Utility Conveyance Systems 337 0 0 0 0.3 0 0 0.3 45 49 Solid and Hazardous Waste Facilities 12 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 50 50 Communications Facilities 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Stormwater Treatment Facilities and Pump Stations 474 5/ 2 5 / 2 8/ 3 11 / 4 9 / 5 9 / 9 11 / 11 83 / 39 84 / 43 Natural, Cultural, and Historical Historical and Cultural Assets 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Transportation and Evacuation Routes Bus Stops 53 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 23 25 Marinas 4 0 0 0 25 0 0 25 / 25 50 / 25 50 / 25 *Orange text in table indicates the percentage of the asset type that is exposed to major flooding, flood depths of 2.5 ft or greater. Task 7_Village of North Palm Beach Vulnerability Assessment 2025_FINAL 66 Table 23 examines line-based assets like transportation routes under future flooding scenarios. Major roadways experience significant impacts, with 51% exposed under the 10-year 24-hour rainfall event combined with 2070 Intermediate-Low sea level rise. Of these, 3% are subjected to flood depths greater than 2.5 feet. Under the 25 -year 24-hour scenario, exposure increases slightly to 53%, with 4% facing major flooding. Shorelines and seawalls also show vulnerabilities, with exposure reaching 46% under future compound flooding, highlighting the critical need for adaptation measures in transpo rtation and shoreline systems. Table 24 focuses on natural and cultural area-based assets such as parks and wetlands. Parks are universally impacted under future compound flooding scenarios, with 86% exposed. Wetlands face significant challenges as well, with 83% inundated under most future scenarios, and 17% experiencing flood depths of 2.5 feet or more. These findings underscore the critical importance of preserving and protecting natural areas to mitigate future flood vulnerabilities. Table 23 Percentage of Asset Types (Lines) Impacted by Flood Depths Greater than Zero under Future Flood Hazards with Additional Note of Percentage of Major Flooding Table 24 Percentage of Asset Types (Areas) Impacted by Flood Depths Greater than Zero under Future Flood Hazards with Additional Note of Percentage of Major Flooding % of Asset Type Impacted Asset Type Total Mileage 2050 Int Low 2050 Int 2080 Int Low 2080 Int 2050 Tidal Flood 2080 Tidal Flood Future Comp Flood (100 Yr) Future Comp Flood (10 Yr 24 Hr) Future Comp Flood (25 Yr 24 Hr) Major Roadways 46.9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 51/ 3 53/ 4 Rail Facilities 0.6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 6 Stormwater Treatment Facilities and Pump Stations 10.1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 75/ 17 77/ 21 Shorelines 30.6 21/ 11 21/ 12 22/ 14 24/ 18 23/ 21 23/ 23 24/ 24 26/ 18 27/ 18 Seawall (Additional Analysis) 18.3 3 3/ 1 5/ 1 10/ 1 7/ 3 7/ 6 10/ 10 70/ 42 71/ 46 Swale (Additional Analysis) 84.3 0 0 1 1 1 1/ 1 1/ 1 58/ 6 60/ 9 *Orange text in table indicates the percentage of the asset type that is exposed to major flooding, flood depths of 2.5 ft or greater. Asset Type Total 2050 Int Low 2050 Int 2080 Int Low 2080 Int 2050 Tidal Flood 2080 Tidal Flood Future Comp Flood (100 Yr) Future Comp Flood (10 Yr 24 Hr) Future Comp Flood (25 Yr 24 Hr) Parks 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 86 86 Wetlands 6 67 67 83 83/ 17 83/ 67 83/ 83 83/ 83 17/ 17 17/ 17 *Orange text in table indicates the percentage of the asset type that is exposed to major flooding, flood depths of 2.5 ft or greater. Task 7_Village of North Palm Beach Vulnerability Assessment 2025_FINAL 67 Summary of Findings – Critical Asset Exposure • Most critical assets are safe today from tidal flooding, as depths are generally shallow (<1 ft) and considered nuisance-level. • Rainfall flooding already poses risks, with several stormwater pump stations, lift stations, and low-lying roads experiencing ponding up to 2–3 feet during 10- and 25-year rainfall events. • Storm surge is the most damaging current hazard, with depths greater than 3 feet projected for parts of The Benjamin School, wastewater infrastructure, and key transportation routes during major hurricane events. • Future tidal flooding expands into new areas, making roadway access and stormwater system functionality more frequently disrupted. • Future rainfall events produce greater depths and longer ponding, reaching 2–3 feet at key intersections and outfalls, stressing pump stations and threatening some low-lying facilities. • Future storm surge inundates multiple critical assets: Category 3 hurricanes combined with sea level rise project flood depths exceeding 4 feet for schools, lift stations, and major roadways, leading to structural damage and potential loss of function. • Overall trend: Current risks are dominated by storm surge and rainfall flooding, while future conditions increase the frequency of nuisance flooding and the severity of damaging events, particularly for utilities, transportation, and community facilities. Flood Sensitivity Analysis The Exposure Analysis identified which areas and assets within the Village may be exposed to different flood scenarios and how flood depths varied spatially by scenario. Building on this information, the Sensitivity Analysis evaluates the potential impact of flooding on the Village’s critical assets based on their causes of failure, vulnerable components, and interdependencies with other assets and the community. The sensitivity analysis quantified the potential disruption or damage each asset could experience and ranked assets by risk based on a combination of factors, including their exposure to various flood depths and the probability of those events occurring. Methodology The Sensitivity Analysis involved calculating impact scores for each asset based on the inundation experienced during various flood scenarios. This process expands upon the exposure analysis by delving into the flood depth encountered by each critical asse t under varying flood conditions, including storm surge and extreme rainfall events. This detailed analysis was conducted for all scenarios, as all scenarios were based on inundation layers with precise spatial data that could be integrated into the GIS -based analysis, offering accurate depth measurements. For each flood scenario, the depth of Task 7_Village of North Palm Beach Vulnerability Assessment 2025_FINAL 68 water that would impact a given asset was quantified , and the inundation level was then translated into an impact score (Table 25). Table 25 Impact Score per Inundation Depth Range Inundation Depth (feet) Impact Score 0 0 0-1 1 1-2.5 50 >2.5 100 The impact score reflects the severity of flooding on the asset, accounting for the degree of disruption or damage that would occur due to water exposure. By systematically assigning impact scores across all critical assets, the analysis provides a clear measure of how vulnerable each asset is to flooding, which serves as a foundation for further risk evaluation. Determined inundation depths and corresponding impact scores were then utilized to generate a standardized risk score on a scale to help compare vulnerabilities and prioritize risks to assets. Determining the risk of the several types, degrees, and occurrences of flooding helps to qualify the susceptibility of critical assets within the Village. Flood risk was calculated by multiplying the likelihood (or probability) of an event happening and the impact (consequences) if it occurred. Table 26 depicts the equation used for the evaluation of risk per asset. Table 26 Risk Score Equation Likelihood (or probability) of a given flood scenario occurring in a year x Impact Score (based on the anticipated depth of the asset under the given flood scenario) = Risk Score The likelihood of occurrence of each flood scenario was assigned a probability based on annual probability of occurrence determined by historical data and predictive models that outline the frequency and severity of flood events in the Village. As mentioned, each asset was assigned an impact score of 0,1, 50, or 100 based on the inundation depth ranges outlined in Table 25. Risk scores were then categorized into qualitative levels—low, medium, and high— based on predefined thresholds. For example, Category 5 surge has a low probability of occurrence therefore any water depths get a “Low” risk assignment. This categorization helps prioritize assets and areas most vulnerable to flooding and provides actionable insights for planning. A custom risk matrix was developed to visualize the relationship between flood likelihood, inundation depth, and asset risk (Table 27). This matrix serves as a tool for decision-makers to understand the distribution of risk across different scenarios and asset types. Task 7_Village of North Palm Beach Vulnerability Assessment 2025_FINAL 69 Table 27 Risk Matrix Impact Score Water depth <1 ft Water depth 1-2.5 ft Water depth >2.5 ft Scenario 1 50 100 Category 5 surge Low Low Low 500 Year flood Low Low Low 100 Year flood Low Low Medium Category 4 surge Low Low Medium 25 Year 24 Hour Event Low Low Medium 2080 High Tide Flooding Low Low Medium Category 3 surge Low Medium Medium Category 2 surge Low Medium Medium 10 Year 24 Hour Event Low Medium High Future compound flooding (Future 25YR- 24HR storm with 2070 Int Low) Low Medium High 2050 High Tide Flooding Low Medium High Cateogry 1 surge Low Medium High Future compound flooding (100 Yr + 2080 Intermediate SLR) Low Medium High Future compound flooding (Future 10YR- 24HR storm with 2070 int low) Low Medium High Existing High Tide Flooding Low High High Existing Compound Flooding (Cat 4 Surge + tidal flooding) Low High High Sea Level Rise 2080 Intermediate Low Low Low 2080 Intermediate-Low Low Low Medium 2050 Intermediate Medium Medium High 2050 Intermediate-Low Medium High High Future Storm Surge Category 5 + 2080 Intermediate SLR Low Low Low Category 5 + 2080 Intermediate-Low SLR Low Low Medium Category 5 + 2050 Intermediate SLR Low Medium Medium Category 5 + 2050 Intermediate-Low SLR Low Medium High Category 4 + 2080 Intermediate SLR Low Medium High Category 4 + 2080 Intermediate-Low SLR Low Medium High Category 4 + 2050 Intermediate SLR Medium High High Category 4 + 2050 Intermediate-Low SLR Medium High High Task 7_Village of North Palm Beach Vulnerability Assessment 2025_FINAL 70 Please see Appendix D for sensitivity analysis maps covering all statutory scenarios across the four asset classes. Sensitivity results for future tidal flooding and future storm surge scenarios are similar or identical under Intermediate and Intermediate-Low SLR conditions; therefore, only the Intermediate SLR results are mapped to avoid duplication. Parcel Sensitivity Understanding the exposure of residential and commercial parcels to flood hazards is essential for effective resilience planning. Residential properties, in particular, are deeply affected by flooding, with risks to property, personal safety, and community stability. Analyzing risk distribution across various flood scenarios helps identify where vulnerabilities exist, allowing for targeted mitigation strategies and informed decision - making. This assessment evaluates the current and future risk levels of parc els under storm surge, tidal flooding, and rainfall-driven events. By examining these trends, we can better understand the protective role of existing measures and prepare for evolving flood risks. Residential parcels are subject to variability in current risk based on hazard type (Table 28). A majority face no foreseeable risk under current conditions, reflecting the effectiveness of existing protective measures. Sixty (60%) percent of residential parcels (1,729 parcels) face no foreseeable risk from a Category 4 storm surge, and 46% (1,346 parcels) are unaffected by a Category 5 storm surge. This trend is even more pronounced for tidal flooding, where nearly 100% (2,887 parcels) are at no foreseeable risk, and for the 10-year 24-hour rainfall event, where 45% (1,307 parcels) remain unaffected. Table 28 Current Residential and Commercial Parcel Risk Assets at Risk (%) Parcels- By Land Use Type Total # of Parcels SS Cat 4 SS Cat 5 Tidal Flood 10 Yr 24 Hr 100 Yr 500 Yr Residential 2896 No Foreseeable Risk 1729 1346 2887 1307 1896 1272 Low 1097 1550 5 1558 946 1624 Medium 70 0 0 28 54 0 High 0 0 4 3 0 0 Commercial and Services 237 No Foreseeable Risk 173 152 237 140 204 95 Low 60 85 0 96 28 142 Medium 4 0 0 1 5 0 High 0 0 0 0 0 0 Low-risk parcels are more common in some scenarios, accounting for 54% of parcels under both a Category 5 storm surge and a 10-year 24-hour rainfall event. Medium-risk parcels, however, are less common, peaking at just 2% (70 parcels) under a Category 4 storm surge. High-risk parcels are even less common, representing less than 1% of parcels under tidal flooding and a 10-year 24-hour rainfall event. These findings highlight the need to sustain current protections while addressing the smaller number of parcels categorized as medium-risk to enhance overall resilience. Task 7_Village of North Palm Beach Vulnerability Assessment 2025_FINAL 71 Commercial parcels, totaling at 237, follow a similar pattern, with the majority classified as having no foreseeable risk under most scenarios. For instance, 73% of commercial parcels (173 parcels) face no risk from a Category 4 storm surge, 64% (152 parcels) are unaffected by a Category 5 storm surge, and 59% (140 parcels) remain safe under the 10-year 24-hour rainfall event. Low-risk classifications are more prevalent for certain hazards, with 41% (96 parcels) of commercial parcels considered low-risk under the 10- year 24-hour rainfall event and 25% under a Category 4 storm surge. Medium -risk parcels are even fewer, representing only 2% (4 parcels) for a Category 4 storm surge, and there are no high-risk commercial parcels under current conditions. These findings suggest that commercial parcels benefit from robust protections, though addressing low- and medium-risk areas could further reduce vulnerabilities. Both residential and commercial parcels share similar patterns of risk distribution, with the majority facing no foreseeable risk across most flood scenarios. Low-risk classifications are more common for storm surge and rainfall-driven events, while medium- and high-risk parcels are minimal. This distribution underscores the effectiveness of current protective measures while highlighting the importance of targeted interventions for medium-risk areas to strengthen overall resilience. The results emphasize the importance of scenario-specific assessments, as hazards such as the 10-year 24-hour event pose unique challenges. Maintaining existing protective measures and addressing low- and medium-risk areas will help ensure comprehensive resilience for both residential and commercial properties. In future scenarios, most parcels remain unaffected under Intermediate conditions, showcasing the resilience of existing infrastructure, as is evident in Table 29. For residential parcels, 99% (2,887 parcels) face no foreseeable risk under the 2050 and 2080 Intermediate scenarios. However, under the more extreme 10 -year 24-hour Event + 2070 Intermediate scenario, 66% (1,915 parcels) are categorized as low-risk, 5% (142 parcels) as medium-risk, and less than 1% (7 parcels) as high-risk. Commercial parcels show a similar trend, with 100% (237 parcels) facing no foreseeable risk under the 2050 and 2080 Intermediate scenarios. Under the 10-year 24-hour Event + 2070 Intermediate scenario, 63% (149 parcels) are categorized as low-risk, 16% (38 parcels) as medium- risk, and 2% (5 parcels) as high-risk. These findings highlight the shifting risk profiles for parcels under future scenarios. While most parcels remain unaffected under Intermediate conditions, extreme events such as the 2070 scenario result in an increase in parcels classified as low- and medium-risk. Table 29 Future Residential and Commercial Parcel Risk Assets at Risk (%) Parcels- By Land Use Type Total # of Parcels Risk Level 2050 Int 2080 Int 2050 Tidal 2080 Tidal 10 Year 24 Hour Event + 2070 Int Low Residential 2896 No Foreseeable Risk 2891 2887 2887 2887 832 Task 7_Village of North Palm Beach Vulnerability Assessment 2025_FINAL 72 Low 0 9 0 0 1915 Medium 5 0 6 9 142 High 0 0 3 0 7 Commercial and Services 237 No Foreseeable Risk 237 237 237 237 45 Low 0 0 0 0 149 Medium 0 0 0 0 38 High 0 0 0 0 5 Critical Asset Sensitivity The Sensitivity Analysis assesses current and future risks to critical assets within the Village, focusing on storm surge, tidal flooding, and projected extreme weather scenarios. These risks are analyzed to guide adaptation strategies and resilience investments. Figure 26 and Figure 27 and visually displays the composite distribution of risk across parcels, roads, and critical asset points under a Category 5 surge event, Current Tidal flooding, a 10-year/24-hour Event, a 100-year Flood Event, and the future compound flooding 10-year/24-hour Event with sea level rise. The figure includes only those assets that have been classified as vulnerable, meaning they are assigned low, medium, or high risk under each scenario. It illustrates the shifting flood risk across the Village under various weather scenarios. Tables from the analysis provide a detailed breakdown of risk levels by asset class, distinguishing between present and anticipated vulnerabilities under different scenarios. Figure 26 Future Storm Surge Asset Sensitivity (Category 4 + 2050 (left) and 2080 (right) Intermediate SLR Task 7_Village of North Palm Beach Vulnerability Assessment 2025_FINAL 73 Category 5 Storm Surge Tidal Flooding 10 Year 24 Hour Event 100 Year Event 10 Year 24 Hour Event + Sea Level Rise Figure 27 At Risk Critical Assets Under Various Flood Scenarios. Task 7_Village of North Palm Beach Vulnerability Assessment 2025_FINAL 74 Table 30 evaluates the sensitivity of critical assets to various current flood hazards, including Category 4 (SS Cat 4) and Category 5 (SS Cat 5) storm surges, tidal flooding, and a 10-year, 24-hour rainfall event and Table 31 represents future scenarios reveals increasing sensitivity to hazards driven by sea level rise and compound flooding. The analysis highlights the stability of critical community and emergency facilities, which include 15 assets such as fire stations and emergency response centers. Under most current scenarios, these facilities remain unaffected, with all assets classified as having "No Foreseeable Risk" under tidal flooding and Category 4 storm surge scenarios. Under more extreme conditions, such as a Category 5 storm surge and the 10-year rainfall event, one asset shifts to the "Low Risk" category in each scenario, reflecting incremental increases in exposure that merit attention. The Baldwin Prep School is at Low Risk under a Category 5 surge event and The Benjamin School is at low risk under the 10-year rainfall event- both of which are at low risk under a 500-year Flood Event. For critical community and emergency facilities, all 15 assets remain in the "No Foreseeable Risk" category under tidal flooding and sea level for the 2050 and 2080 Intermediate scenarios. Under the 10-year 24-hour Event + 2070 Intermediate scenario, 27% (4 assets) are classified as at risk- The Baldwin Prep School, the North Palm Beach Village Hall, and The Conservatory School are estimated to be at "Low Risk" and The Benjamin School at “High Risk”. These findings highlight growing exposure to short-duration, high-intensity rainfall events that could affect emergency response capabilities. Critical infrastructure encompasses 849 assets essential to water and wastewater systems, energy supply, communication networks, and stormwater management. This asset class experiences notable impacts under storm surge scenarios. For instance, 65% (552 assets) remain in the "No Foreseeable Risk" category under Category 4 storm surge, but this figure decreases to 50% (423 assets) under Category 5. Correspondingly, the number of assets in the "Low Risk" and "Medium Risk" categories increases, indicating areas requiring monitoring and potential upgrades. Three (3%) percent (27 assets) are classified as "High Risk" under tidal flooding, the majority of which are stormwater assets, underscoring sensitivities in essential service networks that must be addressed to reduce future risks. While risk levels remain rather stable for many critical infrastructure assets in the future, the percentage of assets in the "No Foreseeable Risk" category decreases slightly from 97% (824 assets) in 2050 to 94% (798 assets) in 2080. Meanwhile, the number of assets classified as "Medium Risk”, and "High Risk" increases slightly due to tidal flooding and sea level rise. This gradual shift signals an elevated need to protect critical systems and ensure the continuity of essential services. The transportation and evacuation routes asset class, which includes 68 critical pathways such as bus stops and bridges, sees minor increases in the "Low Risk" and "Medium Risk" categories under current conditions. While the majority of these assets remain stable, these changes point to emerging risks that could affect the reliability of Task 7_Village of North Palm Beach Vulnerability Assessment 2025_FINAL 75 key infrastructure, particularly for mobility and emergency response functions. Transportation and evacuation routes risk maintains relative stability under Intermediate sea level rise scenarios but face heightened risks under the 10-year 24-hour Event + 2070 Intermediate scenario. Here, 22% of assets are classified at risk, with notable increases in the low, medium, and high-risk categories. These results emphasize the importance of maintaining the functionality of evacuation routes to ensure public safety during extreme events. The comparison of current and future risk scenarios reveals a clear trend of increasing sensitivity to hazards over time, particularly under high-intensity weather events. While many critical assets remain stable under current conditions, future projections indicate a gradual shift, with more assets transitioning from "No Foreseeable Risk" to "Low Risk" or higher categories. Table 30 Point Assets at Current Risk by Asset Class Assets at Risk Asset Class Total # of Assets Risk Level SS Cat 4 SS Cat 5 Tidal Flood 10 Yr 24 Hr 100 Yr 500 Yr Critical Community and Emergency Facilities 15 No Foreseeable Risk 15 14 15 14 15 13 Low - 1 - 1 - 2 Medium - - - - - - High - - - - - - Critical Infrastructure 849 No Foreseeable Risk 552 423 806 419 477 603 Low 227 426 16 151 186 246 Medium 70 - - 212 186 - High - - 27 67 - - Natural, Cultural, and Historical Resource 2 No Foreseeable Risk 2 2 2 2 2 2 Low - - - - - - Medium - - - - - - High - - - - - - Transportation and Evacuation Routes 68 No Foreseeable Risk 59 54 68 63 60 57 Low 5 14 - 3 6 11 Medium 4 - - 2 2 - High - - - - - - Task 7_Village of North Palm Beach Vulnerability Assessment 2025_FINAL 76 Table 31 Point Assets at Future Risk by Asset Class Assets at Risk Asset Class Total # of Assets Risk Level 2050 Int 2080 Int 2050 Tidal 2080 Tidal Future Surge (Cat 5 + 2050 Int SLR) 10Yr in 24 Hr + SLR (2070 Int Low) Critical Community and Emergency Facilities 15 No Foreseeable Risk 15 15 15 15 14 11 Low - - - - - 3 Medium - - - - 1 - High - - - - - 1 Critical Infrastructure 849 No Foreseeable Risk 824 798 806 806 423 286 Low - 51 - - - 89 Medium 16 - 18 43 426 274 High 9 - 25 - - 200 Natural, Cultural, and Historical Resource 2 No Foreseeable Risk 2 2 2 2 2 2 Low - - - - - - Medium - - - - - - High - - - - - - Transportation and Evacuation Routes 68 No Foreseeable Risk 68 67 68 68 54 53 Low - 1 - - 4 4 Medium - - - - 10 8 High - - - - - 3 Roadways and Transportation Assets The analysis of road risks to current flood hazards in the Village provides critical insights into the risk of transportation infrastructure across various ownership categories under scenarios such as storm surges (SS Cat 4 and SS Cat 5), tidal flooding, and rainfall- driven events like the 10-year, and severe storm events including the 100-year and 500- year events (Table 32). The findings reveal clear trends of heightened sensitivity under more intense events and variations in exposure levels between publicly and privately maintained roads. Table 33 depicts the future risk anticipated for roads. It is important to note that 99% of roads within the Village are not estimated to be at risk under 2050 or 2080 conditions caused by sea level rise or tidal flooding. Village-Maintained Roads, which comprise 65% of all roads (30.4 miles), exhibit notable stability under storm surge and tidal flooding scenarios but show increased sensitivity to rainfall-driven and severe storm events. For storm surges, 61% (18.7 miles) of these roads face no foreseeable risk under Category 4, decreasing to 48% Task 7_Village of North Palm Beach Vulnerability Assessment 2025_FINAL 77 (14.5 miles) under Category 5, while low-risk mileage rises from 10.0 to 15.8 miles across these scenarios. The 10-year 24-hour rainfall event, however, introduces a shift, with only 59% (17.8 miles) remaining unaffected, while 26% (7.8 miles) fall into the low- risk category and 15% (4.7 miles) into medium risk. This pattern underscores the growing impact of short-duration, high-intensity events, a trend further emphasized in the 100-year and 500-year events, where medium-risk mileage increases. Under the 10-year 24-hour Event + 2070 Intermediate scenario, which represents future compound flood conditions in 2050, low-risk mileage increases to 8.2 miles (27%), medium risk rises to 11.3 miles (37%), and 1.1 miles (4%) fall into the high-risk category. These results highlight the increasing sensitivity of Village-maintained roads to compounded future flooding impacts, particularly under rainfall-driven scenarios. County-Maintained Roads, spanning 3.9 miles, show consistent stability, the majority of roads classified as no foreseeable risk under storm surge, tidal flooding, and severe less severe storm event scenarios. Low-risk mileage is minimal, increasing slightly under Category 5 storm surges (0.7 miles) and the 10 -year 24-hour rainfall event (0.1 miles). Medium-risk exposure remains negligible, even under extreme conditions. This stability indicates that county-maintained roads are generally located in less vulnerable areas or benefit from existing protective measures, such as elevated designs or better drainage infrastructure. under the 10-year 24-hour Event + 2070 Intermediate scenario, 3.2 miles (82%) remain unaffected, while 0.5 miles (13%) fall into the low-risk category, and 0.1 miles (3%) shift to medium risk. State-Maintained Roads, totaling 5.1 miles, exhibit similar trends, with high levels of protection across most scenarios. During storm surges, 73% (3.7 miles) remain unaffected, while low-risk mileage increases from 1.1 miles under Category 4 to 1.5 miles under Category 5. For the 10-year 24-hour rainfall event, 98% (5.0 miles) of state- maintained roads remain at no foreseeable risk, with only minor exposure in the high- risk category (0.1 miles). Medium-risk is only apparent under Category 4 storm surge conditions and the 100-year Flood Event. These findings highlight the robust design and strategic placement of state-maintained roads, which minimize exposure to flood hazards. Under the 10-year 24-hour Event + 2070 Intermediate scenario, 4.2 miles (82%) remain unaffected, while 0.4 miles (8%) shift to low risk, 0.4 miles (8%) to medium risk, and 0.1 miles (2%) to high risk. Privately-Maintained Roads, comprising 7.2 miles, exhibit the highest sensitivity among all road types, particularly under storm surge and rainfall scenarios. Under Category 4 storm surges, 44% (3.2 miles) remain unaffected, but this decreases to 28% (2.0 miles) under Category 5. Low-risk mileage increases from 3.7 miles to 5.3 miles. Ninety-two (92%) percent of privately-maintained roads are at no risk under the 10-year 24-hour rainfall event. Under the 10-year 24-hour Event + 2070 Intermediate scenario, the number of unaffected roads decreases to 6.0 miles (83%). Additionally, 0.6 miles (8%) fall into the low-risk category and 0.6 miles (8%) shift to medium risk. Task 7_Village of North Palm Beach Vulnerability Assessment 2025_FINAL 78 Courtesy-Maintained Roads (Canal Road), totaling just 0.3 miles, remain largely stable, with most mileage consistently classified as no foreseeable risk across all scenarios. Table 32 Road Risk to Current Flood Hazards Roads at Risk (Mileage) Road Owner/ Operator Total Mileage Risk Level SS Cat 4 SS Cat 5 Tidal Flood 10 Yr 24 Hr 100 Yr 500 Yr Village Maintained 30.4 No Foreseeable Risk 18.7 14.5 30.4 17.8 19.1 21.0 Low 10.0 15.8 - 7.8 7.7 9.4 Medium 1.7 - - 4.7 3.6 - High - - - - - - County Maintained 3.9 No Foreseeable Risk 3.6 3.2 3.9 3.8 3.8 2.5 Low 0.3 0.7 - 0.1 0.1 1.4 Medium 0.1 - - - - - High - - - - - - State Maintained 5.1 No Foreseeable Risk 3.7 3.6 5.1 5.0 3.4 5.0 Low 1.1 1.5 - - 0.2 0.1 Medium 0.3 - - - 1.6 - High - - - 0.1 - - Privately Maintained 7.2 No Foreseeable Risk 3.2 2.0 7.2 6.6 1.9 6.4 Low 3.7 5.3 - 0.4 4.7 0.8 Medium 0.3 - - 0.1 0.6 - High - - - - - - Courtesy Maintained (Canal Road) 0.3 No Foreseeable Risk - - 0.2 0.1 - 0.3 Low 0.1 0.3 0.1 0.1 0.1 - Medium 0.2 - - 0.1 0.2 - High - - - - - - Table 33 Road Risk to Future Flood Hazards Roads at Risk (Mileage) Road Owner/ Operator Total Mileage Risk Level 2050 Int 2080 Int 2050 Tidal 2080 Tidal Future Surge (Cat 5 + 2050 Int SLR) 10 Year 24 Hour Event + 2070 Int Low Village Maintained 30.4 No Foreseeable Risk 30.4 30.4 30.4 30.4 14.6 9.7 Low - - - - 15.8 8.2 Task 7_Village of North Palm Beach Vulnerability Assessment 2025_FINAL 79 Medium - - - - - 11.3 High - - - - - 1.1 County Maintained 3.9 No Foreseeable Risk 3.9 3.9 3.9 3.9 0.7 3.2 Low - - - - - 0.5 Medium - - - - - 0.1 High - - - - 3.2 0 State Maintained 5.1 No Foreseeable Risk 5.1 5.1 5.1 5.1 3.57 4.2 Low - - - - - 0.4 Medium - - - - 1.53 0.4 High - - - - - 0.1 Privately Maintained 7.2 No Foreseeable Risk 7.2 7.2 7.2 7.2 1.95 6.0 Low - - - - - 0.6 Medium - - - - 5.25 0.6 High - - - - - 0 Courtesy Maintained (Canal Road) 0.3 No Foreseeable Risk 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 Low - 0.2 - - - - Medium - - 0.1 0.1 0.29 0.2 High - - - - - - Figure 29 displays roads maintained by various entities at medium risk under a Category 4 Storm Surge event and Figure 28 displays medium risk roads under a 10- year 24-hour Rainfall Event. These visualizations help to pinpoint the most sensitive roads under more frequent and common flood scenarios. Roads at medium risk under a Category 4 surge event and at medium to high risk under a 10-year 24-hour Rainfall Event include: • Country Club Drive • Lagoon Drive • Canal Road • Shore Drive • Waterway Drive • Pelican Way • Robin Way • Sandpiper Way • Osprey Way • Teal Way • Westwind Drive • Nighthawk Way • Tradewind Drive • Mallard Way • Harbour Point Drive • Waterway Circle • Anchorage Drive • Northlake Drive • Country Club Court • Fathon Road • Lakeside Drive • Robalo Court • US Highway 1 • Harbour Isles Drive • Eastwind Drive • Twelve Oaks Way Figure 30 Future 10 Year 24 Hour Event +Sea Level Rise Medium and High Risk RoadsFigure 31 depicts future roads at medium and high risk, under the 10-year 24- hour rainfall event combined with sea level rise expected by 2050. This visualization helps to target future roads at risk, increased sensitivity among already at-risk roads. Task 7_Village of North Palm Beach Vulnerability Assessment 2025_FINAL 80 Figure 29 Category 4 Surge Medium Risk Roads. Figure 28 10 Year 24 Hour Event Medium Risk Roads. Figure 30 Future 10 Year 24 Hour Event +Sea Level Rise Medium and High Risk RoadsFigure 31 Future 10 Year 24 Hour Event +Sea Level Rise Medium and High Risk Roads. Task 7_Village of North Palm Beach Vulnerability Assessment 2025_FINAL 81 Stormwater Infrastructure The following tables evaluate stormwater assets, including stormwater point assets, stormwater pipes (line assets), and swales (line assets), under both current (Table 34) and future flood risk scenarios (Table 36). The analysis highlights areas of increased sensitivity under more extreme conditions and future flood scenarios. There are 475 stormwater point assets, including outfalls, catch basins, and manholes, which exhibit varying levels of sensitivity under current flood risks. Under Category 4 storm surges, 38% of assets (179) face low to medium risk, with 55% of assets (259) are expected to be at low risk under Category 5. Under tidal flooding conditions, 3% of assets are at low risk and a notable 6% are at high risk. Table 35 highlights the stormwater point assets that are at risk under varying flood hazards- a Category 5 storm surge event, current tidal flooding, and a 10-year 24-hour Rainfall event- and their anticipated flood depths and risk levels across these hazards. Table 34 Stormwater Assets at Current Risk Assets at Risk Asset Type Total Assets Risk Level SS Cat 4 SS Cat 5 Tidal Flood 10 Yr 24 Hr 100 Yr 500 Yr Stormwater Assets (point assets) 475 No Foreseeable Risk 296 216 432 136 247 306 Low 123 259 16 98 71 169 Medium 56 - - 174 157 - High - - 27 67 - - Stormwater Pipes (line assets- mileage) 10.1 No Foreseeable Risk 6.7 4.9 10.1 4.7 6.8 5.9 Low 2.8 5.2 - 2.3 1.9 4.2 Medium 0.6 - - 2.8 1.3 - High - - - 0.2 - - Swales (line assets- mileage) 84.3 No Foreseeable Risk 54 42.3 83.6 53.8 50.3 62 Low 26 41.5 0.6 16.1 21.2 22.3 Medium 4.3 - - 14.3 12.8 - High - - 0.2 0.2 - - Table 35 At Risk Stormwater Assets Under Various Flood Hazards (SS: Storm Surge) Flood depths(ft) Asset Name Asset location Category 5 SS Tidal Flooding 10 Year 24 Hour Event Outfall 1002 East of Southwind Drive, next to Earman River 2 2.4 3.8 Task 7_Village of North Palm Beach Vulnerability Assessment 2025_FINAL 82 Flood depths(ft) Asset Name Asset location Category 5 SS Tidal Flooding 10 Year 24 Hour Event Outfall 1041 North of Yacht Club Drive, southeast side of marina 1 4.8 2.2 Outfall 1069 East of Westwind Drive, North of Robin Way 6 4.3 9 Outfall 1073 North of Paradise Harbour Boulevard 2 0.5 2 Outfall 1078 East of Southwind Drive, next to Earman River 7 6.2 5.1 Future scenarios show increased sensitivity, particularly under the 10-year 24-hour Event + 2070 Intermediate scenario (Table 36). Here, only 17% of assets (79) remain unaffected, while 9% of assets (41) fall into the low-risk category, 36% (170 assets) into medium risk, and 39% of assets (185) into high risk. This progression highlights the growing sensitivity of stormwater point assets to compounded flooding impacts driven by future rainfall intensities and sea level rise. Table 37 lists the stormwater asset points at high risk under current rainfall conditions (10-year 24-hour Event) with anticipated above average flood depths (>3.8 feet) and showcases the increased flood depths estimated under future sea level conditions by 2070. It is important to note that some of these assets may already experience flood depths under current conditions, as many are intentionally located below the surface as part of the stormwater system. Table 36 Stormwater Assets at Future Risk Assets at Risk Asset Type Total Assets Risk Level 2050 Int 2080 Int 2050 Tidal 2080 Tidal 10-Year/24- Hour Event + 2070 Int Low Stormwater Assets (point assets) 475 No Foreseeable Risk 450 425 432 432 79 Low - 50 - - 41 Medium 16 - 18 43 170 High 9 - 25 - 185 Stormwater Pipes (line assets) 10.1 No Foreseeable Risk 10.1 10.1 10.1 10.1 2.6 Low - - - - 1.9 Medium - - - - 3.9 High - - - - 1.7 Task 7_Village of North Palm Beach Vulnerability Assessment 2025_FINAL 83 Assets at Risk Asset Type Total Assets Risk Level 2050 Int 2080 Int 2050 Tidal 2080 Tidal 10-Year/24- Hour Event + 2070 Int Low Swales (line assets) 84.3 No Foreseeable Risk 84.1 83.2 83.6 83.6 35.4 Low - 1.1 - 0.1 16.3 Medium 0.2 - 0.7 0.6 27.4 High - - 0.1 - 5.2 Table 37 High Risk Stormwater Asset Points Under a 10 Year 24 Hour Rainfall Event with Above Average Flood Depths Asset Name Asset Location 10 Year 24 Hour Event 10 Year 24 Hour Event + 2070 Intermediate SLR Scenario OF 1026 Between Lighthouse Drive and Pilot Road 9.6 11.4 OF 1019 Off Lagoon Drive 9.1 9.4 OF 1069 East of Westwind Drive, North of Robin Way 9 9.3 OF 1067 East of Shore Drive 9 9.2 OF 1039 East of Marina Drive 7.5 12 OF 1004 Northeast of Ibis Way 7.2 7.2 OF 1010 North of Kittyhawk Way 6.8 7.4 OF 1016 Between Hinda Road and Lauren Road, near Earman River 6.2 6.6 OF 1074 North of Allamanda Lane 5.7 6.7 OF 1021 North of Robin Way 5.2 5.5 OF 1078 Between Southwind Circle and Anchorage Drive 5.1 8.9 OF 1065 East of Lake Circle 5.1 8.9 OF 1028 North of Pilot Road, west of Anchorage Drive 5 6.7 OF 1013 East of Prosperity Farms Road, near Earman River 5 8.7 OF 1046 East of Castlewood Dr 4.8 6.2 OF 1001 Southeast of Anchorage Ln, north of Earman River 4.5 8.2 OF 1006 Between Lighthouse Dr and Kittyhawk Way 4.3 4.9 OF 1038 North of Yacht Club Dr, east of Marina Dr 4.3 8.78 Task 7_Village of North Palm Beach Vulnerability Assessment 2025_FINAL 84 437 MES In Delacorte Park, south of Sanctuary Cove Dr 4.2 6.8 OF 1007 South of Ibis Way, east of Prosperity Farms Rd 3.9 4.3 The 10.1 miles of stormwater pipes demonstrate relatively high stability under current conditions, with 67% (6.7 miles) classified as no foreseeable risk under Category 4, decreasing slightly to 49% (5.0 miles) under Category 5. Low-risk mileage increases from 28% (2.8 miles) under Category 4 to 40% (4.0 miles) under Category 5. Medium- risk mileage remains minimal at 0.2 miles (2%) across all scenarios, and no high -risk mileage is identified. Rainfall-driven events like the 10-year 24-hour flood event introduce slightly more sensitivity, with 50% (5.1 miles) remaining unaffected, while 48% (4.8 miles) are classified as low risk. Future projections show that stormwater pipes remain relatively stable under the 10-year 24-hour Event + 2070 Intermediate scenario, with 43% (4.3 miles) classified as no foreseeable risk, while low-risk mileage increases to 42% (4.2 miles). Medium-risk mileage rises modestly to 1.6 miles (16%), and 0.1 miles (1%) fall into the high-risk category. The 84.3 miles of swales exhibit greater sensitivity compared to stormwater pipes. Under current conditions, 64% (54.0 miles) remain at no foreseeable risk under Category 4 storm surges, dropping to 45% (38.4 miles) under Category 5. Low-risk mileage rises from 31% (26.0 miles) under Category 4 to 48% (40.8 miles) under Category 5. Medium-risk mileage remains minor, ranging from 4% (4.3 miles) to 7% (5.8 miles) across scenarios. Under the 10-year 24-hour flood event, 48% (40.8 miles) remain unaffected, while 45% (37.8 miles) are low risk, and 6% (5.7 miles) are medium risk. Future scenarios show swales becoming increasingly sensitive under the 10-year 24-hour Event + 2070 Intermediate scenario. Only 19% (16.3 miles) remain unaffected, while low-risk mileage grows to 56% (47.1 miles), medium risk increases to 19% (16.1 miles), and high risk rises to 6% (5.2 miles). The geographic distribution of at-risk swales closely mirrors that of roads, which is expected given their functional relationship within the stormwater management system. Swales are typically located adjacent to roadways, serving as natural drainage chann els to collect and direct runoff from impervious surfaces such as streets and sidewalks. This proximity ensures that stormwater is efficiently managed, reducing the risk of flooding and water pooling on transportation corridors. The rising proportion of low- and medium-risk stormwater assets, especially under future scenarios, suggests that the system may experience increased stress during flood events. Point assets (e.g., catch basins and outfalls) and line assets (e.g., pipes and swales) will need to handle greater volumes of water due to higher rainfall intensities and compounded effects of sea level rise. This could lead to overwhelmed systems, resulting in localized flooding, prolonged water stagnation, and disruptions to community infrastructure. As assets shift from "No Foreseeable Risk" to low, medium, and even high-risk categories, the overall efficiency of the stormwater system may decline. For example, swales, which are essential for water retention and infiltration, Task 7_Village of North Palm Beach Vulnerability Assessment 2025_FINAL 85 show sensitivity to future scenarios, with only 19% remaining unaffected under the 10- year 24-hour Event + 2070 Intermediate scenario. If swales are inundated or rendered non-functional, the system's ability to absorb and redirect runoff will be severely impaired, increasing the likelihood of downstream impacts. Wastewater Infrastructure Wastewater treatment facilities and lift stations exhibit varied sensitivity to flood risks. Under Category 4 storm surge, 61% (14 assets) face no foreseeable risk, but this decreases to 48% (11 assets) under Category 5 conditions (Table 38). Low-risk classifications increase from 39% (9 assets) under Category 4 to 52% (12 assets) under Category 5, indicating growing exposure to stronger storm events. Under the 10 -year 24-hour event, 87% (20 assets) remain unaffected, while 9% (2 assets) are classified as low risk, and 4% (1 asset) as medium risk. Similarly, for the 100-year flood event, 43% (10 assets) are classified as low risk, and 4% (1 asset) as medium risk, highlighting the need for targeted interventions to protect vulnerable assets. Table 38 Wastewater Assets at Current Risk Assets at Risk Asset Type Total Assets Risk Level SS Cat 4 SS Cat 5 Tidal Flood 10 Yr 24 Hr 100 Yr 500 Yr Wastewater Assets 23 No Foreseeable Risk 14 11 23 20 12 19 Low 9 12 - 2 10 4 Medium - - - 1 1 - High - - - - - - While no assets currently fall into the high-risk category, the increasing proportion of low- and medium-risk assets across scenarios emphasizes the importance of proactive flood mitigation measures. Efforts to enhance the resilience of wastewater infrastructure, such as reinforcing lift stations and addressing potential vulnerabilities, will be essential to maintaining system functionality during extreme flooding events. In future scenarios, wastewater infrastructure remains entirely in the no foreseeable risk category across scenarios, except for the 10-year 24-hour Event + 2070 Intermediate scenario. Under this scenario, 65% (15 assets) remain in the no foreseeable risk category, but 17% (4 assets) shift to low risk, 13% (3 assets) to medium risk, and 4% (1 asset) to high risk. This trend highlights the distinct vulnerability of wastewater systems to compounded flooding impacts and sea level rise. Proactive flood mitigati on strategies will be essential to safeguard these critical assets, particularly under conditions where extreme weather events intersect with future sea level rise. Water Utility Conveyance Systems Task 7_Village of North Palm Beach Vulnerability Assessment 2025_FINAL 86 Wastewater utility conveyance systems, consisting of fire hydrants, display varying levels of sensitivity to flood risks, with risk increasing under more severe storm and rainfall scenarios (Table 39). This risk analysis is important to conduct as floodwaters often carry pollutants, debris, and harmful microorganisms. If hydrants are submerged, contaminants can infiltrate the water conveyance system through damaged or improperly sealed connections. This not only jeopardizes the safety of the water supply but can also compromise firefighting operations if contaminated water is used. Flooding can also damage the water mains connected to fire hydrants, leading to leaks or ruptures that reduce water pressure or flow. Additionally, when water pressure in the system drops due to flooding, backflow can occur, allowing floodwaters to enter the system through hydrants. This poses a serious risk to water quality and can necessitate extensive flushing and testing before the system is fully restored. As evident in Table 39, under a Category 4 storm surge, 68% of assets face no foreseeable risk, which decreases to 54% under Category 5 conditions. Correspondingly, the proportion of low-risk assets rises from 28% (95 assets) under Category 4 to 46% (154 assets) under Category 5, reflecting heightened sensitivity to stronger storm events. During a 10-year 24-hour rainfall event, 74% (250 assets) remain unaffected, while 15% (50 assets) are classified as low risk, and 11% (37 asset) as medium risk. Similarly, under the 100-year flood event, 31% (105 assets) fall into the low-risk category, with 8% (28 assets) identified as medium risk. Table 39 Water Utility Conveyance System Assets at Current Risk Assets at Risk Asset Type Total Assets Risk Level SS Cat 4 SS Cat 5 Tidal Flood 10 Yr 24 Hr 100 Yr 500 Yr Water Utility Conveyance Systems (point assets) 337 No Foreseeable Risk 228 183 337 250 204 266 Low 95 154 0 50 105 71 Medium 14 0 0 37 28 0 High 0 0 0 0 0 0 Future projections show that water utility infrastructure remains entirely within the no foreseeable risk category under most scenarios, except for the 10 -year 24-hour Event + 2070 Intermediate scenario. In this scenario, 55% (184 assets) remain unaffected, while 12% (41 assets) shift to low risk, 29% (98 assets) to medium risk, and 4% (14 assets) to high risk (Table 40). Table 41 showcases medium risk water utility point assets under a 10-year 24-hour rainfall event with above average flood depths, noting their risk under Category 5 storm surge, and future risk. This trend highlights the sensitivity of water utility systems to compounded flooding impacts and sea level rise. Implementing proactive flood mitigation strategies, including infrastructure upgrades and adaptive planning, will be essential to safeguard these critical systems under future conditions where extreme weather events intersect with rising sea levels. Task 7_Village of North Palm Beach Vulnerability Assessment 2025_FINAL 87 Table 40 Water Utility Conveyance System Assets at Future Risk Assets at Risk Asset Type Total Assets Risk Level 2050 Int 2080 Int 2050 Tidal 2080 Tidal 10 Year 24 Hour Event + 2070 Int Low Water Utility Conveyance Systems (point assets) 337 No Foreseeable Risk 337 336 337 337 184 Low 0 1 0 0 41 Medium 0 0 0 0 98 High 0 0 0 0 14 Table 41 Medium Risk Water Utility Asset Points Under a 10 Year 24 Hour Rainfall Event with Above Average Flood Depths Asset name Category 5 SS 10 Year 24 Hour Event 10 Year 24 Hour Event + 2070 Intermediate SLR Scenario SUA Fire Hydrant 2-0684 2 2 2.1 SUA Fire Hydrant 3-0139 4 2 2.3 SUA Fire Hydrant 3-0078 4 1.9 2.2 SUA Fire Hydrant 3-0081 3 1.9 2.2 SUA Fire Hydrant 3-0082 4 1.9 2.2 SUA Fire Hydrant 3-0080 3 1.8 2.1 SUA Fire Hydrant 3-0076 4 1.8 2.1 SUA Fire Hydrant 3-0079 3 1.8 2.1 SUA Fire Hydrant 3-0146 4 1.8 1.9 SUA Fire Hydrant 3-0083 3 1.8 2.1 SUA Fire Hydrant 3-0084 4 1.7 2 SUA Fire Hydrant 3-0140 3 1.6 2 SUA Fire Hydrant 3-0183 3 1.6 2.5 SUA Fire Hydrant 3-0075 3 1.6 1.8 SUA Fire Hydrant 3-0074 4 1.5 1.8 SUA Fire Hydrant 3-0087 3 1.5 1.7 SUA Fire Hydrant 3-0176 3 1.5 2 Although no assets are currently classified as high risk, the increasing number of low - and medium-risk assets across various scenarios highlights the opportunity of proactive flood mitigation measures. Strengthening wastewater infrastructure, such as reinforcing lift stations and addressing emerging vulnerabilities, will be crucial to maintaining system functionality during extreme flooding events. Natural Resources Natural resources, including parks and shorelines, play a critical role in supporting community well-being, protecting ecosystems, and mitigating the impacts of flooding. Parks serve as recreational spaces for residents, provide critical ecosystem services , and act as natural buffers during extreme weather events by absorbing floodwaters and reducing runoff. Shorelines, on the other hand, are vital in shielding inland areas from tidal flooding and storm surges while also maintaining ecological habitats. Analyzing the flood risks to these natural resources is essential to preserving their functionality. The analysis of flood risks to parks (Table 42) and shorelines (Table 43 and Table 44) in the Task 7_Village of North Palm Beach Vulnerability Assessment 2025_FINAL 88 Village reveals increasing sensitivity under both current and future scenarios, with implications for recreational spaces and flood management. For parks, flood risks under current conditions vary by location, with John D. MacArthur State Park experiencing the greatest risk. Flood depths at this park reach up to 4 feet under a Category 5 storm surge and 4.4 feet under the 500-year flood event, highlighting its sensitivity as a low- lying coastal resource. Anchorage Park and Lakeside Park face low to medium risks, with flood depths of 2.1 feet and 2.7 feet under Category 4 storm surges, respectively. Smaller parks, including Osborne Park, Alamanda Park, and Veterans Park, generally remain at low or no risk under various types of flooding. No parks are anticipated to be affected by current tidal flooding. Similar to current tidal flooding, future sea level rise and tidal flooding are not expected to impact any parks. The 10-year 24-hour Event + 2070 Intermediate indicate a growing trend of increased sensitivity across all parks. Anchorage Park and Lakeside Park experience measurable increases in flood depths, reaching 0.7 feet and 1.1 feet, respectively. Even parks that currently remain unaffected, such as Veterans Park, begin to show minor flood risks. These findings emphasize the need for proactive measures to protect parks, including elevating park infrastructure, enhancing drainage systems, and implementing shoreline protection in coastal areas. Parks are not only vital recreational spaces but also natural buffers that help mitigate flooding impacts, and their preservation is critical for community and ecological resilience. Table 42 Current and Future Park Flood Risk Current Flood Risk Future Flood Risk Park Name (Owner) SS Cat 4 SS Cat 5 10 Yr 24 Hr 100 Yr 500 Yr 10 Year 24 Hour Event + 2070 Int Low John D. MacArthur State Park (State) 3.5 4 - 3.8 4.4 - Anchorage Park (Village) 2.1 1.9 0.1 <0.01 0.6 0.7 Lakeside Park (Village) 2.7 1.8 0.4 1.8 2.7 1.1 North Palm Beach Community Center Park (Village) 1.2 1.4 <0.05 - - 0.4 Osborne Park (Village) 1 1 <0.05 - 0.6 0.2 Alamanda Park (County) - - <0.05 - - <0.05 Veterans Park - North Palm Beach (Village) - - <0.05 - - 0.7 Task 7_Village of North Palm Beach Vulnerability Assessment 2025_FINAL 89 The shoreline analysis, the results of which are outlined in Tables 40 and 41, highlights the sensitivity of 30.6 miles of coastal and riverine areas to flooding under current and future conditions. Under current scenarios, 76% of shorelines are classified as no foreseeable risk under Category 4 storm surge and tidal flooding (Table 43). Tidal flooding also results in the greatest percentage of high- risk shorelines under current conditions (21%). The high-risk shorelines under current tidal flooding can be seen in Figure 32. The 10-year 24-hour rainfall event also results in a considerable number of high-risk shorelines (12%), which are pictured in and are concentrated more in the riverine influenced area of the Village (Figure 33). Future projections show an increase in shoreline sensitivity, as is evident in Table 44. By 2050, 21% of shorelines may be at medium to high risk (Figure 30) due to the Intermediate sea level rise scenario, and 23% may be at medium to high risk due to sea level rise compounded by rainfall (represented by the 10-year 24-hour Event + 2070 Intermediate scenario). Figure 32 Tidal Flooding Shoreline Risk Task 7_Village of North Palm Beach Vulnerability Assessment 2025_FINAL 90 Table 43 Current Shoreline Flood Risk Assets at Risk Asset Type Total Assets Risk Level SS Cat 4 SS Cat 5 Tidal Flood 10 Yr 24 Hr 100 Yr 500 Yr Shorelines (mileage) 30.6 No Foreseeable Risk 23.4 22 23.5 23.7 18.8 29.5 Low 3 8.6 0.6 1.2 2.3 1.1 Medium 4.1 - - 1.9 9.5 - High - - 6.5 3.7 - - Table 44 Future Shoreline Flood Risk Assets at Risk Asset Type Total Assets Risk Level 2050 Int 2080 Int 2050 Tidal 2080 Tidal 10 Year 24 Hour Event + 2070 Int Low Shorelines (mileage) 30.6 No Foreseeable Risk 24.1 23.2 23.5 23.5 22.6 Low - 7.4 - 0.1 1.1 Medium 2.8 - 0.8 7 1.5 High 3.7 - 6.3 - 5.4 Figure 33 10 Year 24 Hour Rainfall Event Shoreline Risk. Figure 30 2050 Intermediate Sea Level Rise High Risk Shorelines. Task 7_Village of North Palm Beach Vulnerability Assessment 2025_FINAL 91 Schools The analysis of flood risk for schools in the Village highlights minimal exposure under most current and future scenarios, with a few notable exceptions highlighted in Table 45. Under current conditions, Baldwin Prep School faces a risk of up to 1 foot of flooding during a Category 5 storm surge, The Benjamin School may experience minor flooding of 0.4 feet under the 10-year 24-hour rainfall event, and St. Claire Catholic School may experience 0.2 feet of flooding under more extreme conditions. All other schools, including the Conservatory School, North Palm Beach Elementary School, and the Academy of North Palm Beach face no flood risks under current scenarios. Future projections show an increase in flood risks for a limited number of schools. The Benjamin School is particularly vulnerable under the 10 -year 24-hour Event + 2070 Intermediate scenario, with flood depths projected to reach 2.7 feet, making it the most at-risk school in the Village by 2050. The Conservatory School and Baldwin Prep School face low future flood risk, with projected flooding of <0.1 feet and 0.1 feet, respectively, under the same scenario. Baldwin Prep School also faces medium risk to future storm surge scenario where Category 5 hurricane is compounded with 2050 Intermediate SLR conditions. Table 45 Current and Future School Flood Risk Current Flood Risk Future Flood Risk School Name SS Cat 5 10 Yr 24 Hr 500 Yr 10 Year 24 Hour Event + 2070 Int Low Baldwin Prep School 1 - - 0.1 Academy of North Palm Beach - - - - The Benjamin School - 0.4 - 2.7 St. Claire Catholic School - - 0.2 - The Conservatory School - - - <0.1 North Palm Beach Elementary School - - - - Summary of Findings – Critical Asset Sensitivity Overall Sensitivity Patterns • The Village’s critical assets vary in their ability to withstand flooding, depending on function, elevation, and redundancy. o Water utilities and stormwater facilities are among the most sensitive asset types, given their direct interaction with water levels and reliance on continuous operation. o Community and emergency services facilities generally have higher resilience today but could lose functionality under future flood conditions. Task 7_Village of North Palm Beach Vulnerability Assessment 2025_FINAL 92 Stormwater and Utility Infrastructure • Pump stations and stormwater outfalls are highly sensitive, as many are located in low-lying areas where rainfall and tidal flooding converge. Even shallow inundation reduces system effectiveness and increases maintenance needs. • Wastewater lift stations are particularly vulnerable. Electrical components and access points can be compromised at flood depths as low as 1–2 feet, making them both flood-exposed and operationally sensitive. • The Village’s water treatment and distribution systems show sensitivity to both rainfall flooding and surge, as prolonged inundation would disrupt service and require costly repairs. Transportation and Access Routes • Key north–south roadways, including U.S. Highway 1 and Prosperity Farms Road, are sensitive to flooding because even nuisance-level ponding restricts mobility and emergency response. • Local neighborhood roads near canals and waterfront parcels are sensitive to tidal flooding, which is projected to increase with sea level rise. Schools and Community Facilities • The Benjamin School was identified as highly sensitive, with projected exposure to 10-year and 25-year rainfall events under future conditions. Flood depths up to 3 feet threaten access routes and potentially building interiors. • Community centers and Village-owned recreation areas are sensitive where located near low-lying ground or drainage features, creating risk of service disruption during even moderate flooding events. Emergency Services o Police, fire, and other emergency response facilities are less sensitive under current hazards but are indirectly vulnerable when surrounding road networks are inundated. Maintaining access to these facilities is critical for emergency operations. Future Sensitivity Trends • Rising sea levels increase the sensitivity of assets that are only marginally at risk today, such as stormwater outfalls, pump stations, and neighborhood roadways. • Assets that can withstand shallow nuisance flooding today may face structural or operational failures under deeper inundation in the future, particularly utilities and community facilities. Task 7_Village of North Palm Beach Vulnerability Assessment 2025_FINAL 93 Non-Flood Hazard Sensitivity Analysis The Sensitivity Analysis for non-flood hazards focused on heat and wind risk and quantified the potential disruption or risk specific assets could experience. Methodology Heat Utilizing the Trust for Public Land’s Heat Severity 2023 USA dataset from the Climate Resilient Communities platform, assets were evaluated based on their intersection with the heat severity raster and the raster’s assigned value at each location. Heat sev erity was measured on a scale of 1 to 5, where a score of 1 represented a relatively mild heat area (slightly above the mean for the Village) and a score of 5 represented a severe heat area (above the mean for the Village). Assets were categorized by risk level based on their heat severity value as follows: • HIGH RISK: Value of 5 • MEDIUM-HIGH RISK: Value of 4 • MEDIUM RISK: Value of 3 • MEDIUM-LOW RISK: Value of 2 • LOW RISK: Value of 1 Understanding residential heat severity is critical for safeguarding public health, enhancing community well-being, and ensuring the habitability of neighborhoods during extreme heat events. High heat exposure can exacerbate health risks, particularly for vulnerable populations such as children, the elderly, and those with pre-existing health conditions. Additionally, reviewing residential heat severity helps identify areas in need of targeted mitigation efforts, such as increased green space or cooling infrastructure, to reduce heat retention. The heat risk analysis evaluates residential parcels and key community gathering spots across the Village, with the findings reflecting differences in sensitivity levels across various landmarks and neighborhoods. The accompanying map provides a spatial Figure 34 Medium and High Heat Risk Bus Stops Task 7_Village of North Palm Beach Vulnerability Assessment 2025_FINAL 94 representation of heat severity, highlighting areas of higher sensitivity concentrated in specific regions of the Village. Just like the case for the exposure analysis, the heat sensitivity analysis prioritized specific asset types that are especially vulnerable to high temperatures, particularly those serving as community gathering spots such as bus stops, parks, and the Community Center. This methodology provided a systematic way to identify assets most vulnerable to extreme heat and prioritize mitigation efforts, such as increasing vegetation coverage or implementing cooling infrastructure . The result of this analysis, shown in Figure 34, deemed only bus stops at risk (to varying degrees). High risk bus stops include: • Federal Hwy @ Winn Dixie • Federal Hwy @ Lakeshore Drive • Federal Hwy @ Northlake Blvd S • Northlake Blvd @ Crecent Drive • Northlake Blvd @ Southwinds Drive • Northlake Blvd @ Prosperity Farms • Northlake Blvd @ Flagler Blvd • Northlake Blvd @ Park Road • SR 811/Alt A1A @ Park Road Medium risk bus stops include: • Federal Hwy @ Golf View Road • Federal Hwy @ Yacht Club Drive • Federal Hwy @ N Anchorage • Federal Hwy @ Anchorage Drive S1 • Federal Hwy @ Anchorage Drive S2 • Federal Hwy @ Lighthouse Drive S • Federal Hwy @ Lighthouse Drive • Federal Hwy @ Northlake Blvd N • SR 811/Alt A1A @ Lorraine Court • Prosperity Farms Road @ Lighthouse Drive • Prosperity Farms Road @ Sun Cove Lane • Prosperity Farms Rd @ Dogwood Rd • Prosperity Farms Road @ Burns Road • Prosperity Farms Road @ Alamanda Table 46 Parcel Risk Levels Total # of Parcels Risk Level Number of Parcels at Risk Level 2896 No Foreseeable Risk 617 Low 1160 Medium- Low 765 Medium 216 Medium-High 132 High 6 Task 7_Village of North Palm Beach Vulnerability Assessment 2025_FINAL 95 Residential parcels, totaling 2,896, were evaluated for heat sensitivity, the results of which can be viewed in Table 46 and Figure 35. Twenty-one (21%) percent of the parcels (617 parcels) are classified as not exposed to heat risk, while 40% (1,160 parcels) fall into the low-risk category, predominantly located in neighborhoods near Lakeside Park and the North Palm Beach Country Club. Medium -Low risk accounts for 26% (765 parcels), with moderate sensitivity observed in areas surrounding Anchorage Park. Medium risk encompasses 7% (216 parcels), with higher-risk parcels concentrated near US Highway 1 and to the southwest of the Community Center, where Medium-High and High-Risk categories are also evident. The most sensitive areas, including 138 parcels in the Medium-High and High-Risk categories, are clustered in urbanized zones along major roadways, indicating increased heat retention and urban heat island effects. Figure 35 further emphasizes the spatial trends in risk distribution. Residential parcels near parks such as Lakeside Park, Anchorage Park, and areas around the Earman River generally exhibit lower sensitivity, benefitting from increased vegetation and open spaces that mitigate heat retention. In contrast, urbanized areas near US Highway 1 and the Community Center display higher sensitivity, with Medium-High and High-Risk parcels concentrated in these zones. Wind The wind sensitivity assessment evaluated the vulnerability of structures based on their year of construction relative to the evolution of building design standards in Palm Beach County (Figure 36). This analysis applied to building footprints, using the following classification: Figure 35 Residential Parcel Heat Risk Task 7_Village of North Palm Beach Vulnerability Assessment 2025_FINAL 96 • VERY HIGH RISK [Pre 1950]: Homes and buildings built before 1950. • HIGH RISK [1950- 1991]: Homes and buildings built before Hurricane Andrew (1992) often lack modern wind mitigation features. These structures may not have reinforced roof connections, impact- resistant windows, or sufficient anchoring systems. • MEDIUM-HIGH RISK [1992-2001]: Properties built after Andrew but before the adoption of the Florida Building Code (2002) may have some wind resistance features but not to the standards of today’s codes. • MEDIUM RISK [2002-2006]: Homes built under the FBC have extensive wind resistance measures, including reinforced roof and wall systems, impact-resistant windows or shutters, and mandatory structural connections. • MEDIUM- LOW RISK [2007- 2009]: The FBC was updated to increase wind load standards and refine regional wind zone maps. This revision included more specific guidelines for how buildings must resist wind loads in different parts of Florida, with stricter standards for the highest-risk coastal regions. • LOW RISK [2010-2013]: Further adjustments to wind load requirements and structural design standards were introduced, aligning more closely with the national standards set by ASCE 7 (American Society of Civil Engineers) for wind loads. • VERY LOW RISK [2014- Now]: Wind load requirements were revised again, introducing new methods for calculating pressures on buildings. The update also added specific requirements for roof systems and the anchoring of structures in high-wind areas. The results of the wind risk analysis, outlined in Table 47, reveals the varying vulnerabilities of structures based on construction eras and building codes. The analysis classifies buildings into wind risk categories, reflecting changes in construction practices and building standards over time. Figure 36 Building Wind Risk Task 7_Village of North Palm Beach Vulnerability Assessment 2025_FINAL 97 Table 47 Building Footprint Wind Risk Wind Risk Number of Buildings Percentage High 1,717 53% Medium-High 591 18% Medium 393 12% Medium-Low 151 5% Low 141 5% Very Low 172 5% As much as 53% (1,717 buildings) of structures fall into the High-Risk category, primarily consisting of homes built before 1992, prior to the adoption of modern wind mitigation features following Hurricane Andrew. These buildings often lack reinforced connections, impact-resistant windows, and adequate anchoring systems, leaving them highly susceptible to wind damage. As is evident in Figure 33, these high-risk buildings are heavily concentrated in older neighborhoods and areas along US Highway 1, Anchorage Park, and Earman River. An additional 18% (591 buildings) are categorized as Medium-High Risk, encompassing homes built between 1992 and 2001, after Hurricane Andrew but before the adoption of the Florida Building Code (FBC) in 2002. These homes may include some wind- resistant features but do not meet the more stringent standards of later codes. Medium Risk buildings, accounting for 12% (393 structures), represent homes built between 2002 and 2006, when the FBC introduced comprehensive wind resistance measures, including reinforced systems and mandatory structural connections. The high proportion of buildings in the High-Risk and Medium-High Risk categories underscores the critical need for retrofitting efforts to enhance wind resistance. Reinforcing roofs, installing impact-resistant windows, and strengthening anchoring systems can reduce vulnerabilities. Additionally, stricter enforcement of modern building codes and targeted education campaigns can help property owners understand and address wind risks. The lower-risk categories, including Medium-Low Risk (5%, 151 buildings), Low Risk (5%, 141 buildings), and Very Low Risk (5%, 172 buildings), represent newer structures built after 2007. These buildings benefit from further adjustments to the FBC and enhanced wind mitigation requirements, such as stricter regional wind load standards and reinforced anchoring systems. Sixty-one (61) buildings are not exposed to wind and are primarily located in areas shielded from direct wind impacts. The geographic distribution of wind risk is reflective of construction patterns and regulatory changes over time. High-risk buildings are predominantly found in older, more densely developed neighborhoods, while low-risk and very low-risk structures are concentrated in newer developments. Areas near North Palm Beach Country Club, Lakeside Park, and Community Center show a higher proportion of lower-risk structures, reflecting the influence of modern building codes. The presence of newer, lower-risk buildings demonstrates the effectiveness of improved building codes over Task 7_Village of North Palm Beach Vulnerability Assessment 2025_FINAL 98 time. Expanding these practices and ensuring compliance for new developments can enhance overall community resilience to wind events. Summary of Findings – Non-Flood Hazard Sensitivity Analysis Overall Patterns • The Village’s assets are not only at risk from flooding but also from other climate stressors such as extreme heat, high winds, and storm intensity. • Sensitivity varies by asset type, with outdoor facilities, utilities, and older infrastructure most affected. Extreme Heat • Parks, recreation areas, and golf course facilities are sensitive to prolonged heat, which stresses turf, trees, and landscaping while increasing irrigation and maintenance needs. • Older trees across the Village, particularly around the golf course, provide significant shade and cooling but are vulnerable to loss from storms. Their removal would increase local heat risks. • Community facilities without modern cooling or backup power are sensitive to heat waves, particularly if combined with utility service interruptions. High Winds and Hurricanes • Above-ground power distribution lines and poles are sensitive to wind damage, creating risk of extended outages. • Older buildings and community facilities with outdated roofs or windows are more sensitive to wind damage compared to newer, code-compliant structures. • Large, mature trees—while valuable for shade and cooling—are sensitive to uprooting or breakage during wind events, creating both safety hazards and cleanup burdens. Secondary Impacts • Utility failures during extreme events increase sensitivity of community and emergency facilities, even if those facilities are structurally sound. • Roadway blockages from fallen trees or debris reduce emergency response effectiveness. Future Sensitivity Trends • Projected increases in temperature and storm intensity will heighten the sensitivity of assets that are already stressed today, such as older buildings, electrical infrastructure, and outdoor recreation areas. • Loss of tree canopy from storm damage or aging will further compound heat vulnerability if not offset by replanting and proactive canopy management. Task 7_Village of North Palm Beach Vulnerability Assessment 2025_FINAL 99 Adaptive Capacity Adaptive capacity for the Village was determined by evaluating the floodplain development standards and construction dates of buildings and facilities. Buildings were categorized into three levels of adaptive capacity based on their compliance with floodplain development requirements and their year of construction (Figure 37). This approach highlights the Village’s vulnerability to flood impacts and identifies which buildings are best equipped to withstand future risks. High adaptive capacity was assigned to buildings constructed after 2017, which were subject to stricter floodplain development regulations. These regulations mandated that the first-floor elevations of new buildings be at least one foot above the Base Flood Elevation (BFE) or be constructed outside the inundation zone altogether. As a result, only 29% of parcels within the Village fall into this high adaptive capacity category, which includes 923 parcels out of 3,237. These newer buildings are better suited to handle the impacts of tidal flooding and storm surge due to their elevated construction standards. Medium adaptive capacity was attributed to buildings constructed between 1982 and 2017, which were required to meet the BFE requirements but not the more recent post - 2017 amendments. Approximately 62% of parcels fall into the medium adaptive capacity category, reflecting the improved flood protection measures introduced after 1982. However, these buildings may still face challenges in handling more severe flooding events as they lack the additional elevation requirements mandated in 2017. Buildings constructed before 1982 were categorized as having low adaptive capacity because they were not subject to floodplain development standards. Of these, buildings constructed before 1974 are especially vulnerable, as they predate Florida’s first building code. In total, 3% of parcels (or 89 parcels out of 3,237) are considered to have low adaptive capacity. Notably, 74% of these low-capacity parcels are affected by a Figure 37 Adaptive Capacity for Buildings in the Village of North Palm Beach Task 7_Village of North Palm Beach Vulnerability Assessment 2025_FINAL 100 Category 5 Storm Surge and 76% are projected to be affected by a 10-year rainfall Event, and 34% are projected to be affected by a 100 -year Storm Event. It is important to note that 7% of parcels do not possess year-built data. Urban Tree Canopy Review North Palm Beach’s canopy coverage varies by neighborhood as shown in Figure 38. Census block groups bordering the Country Club and Lakeside Park has mature oak and pine stands that push canopy over 80%, while the more built-out corridors along US Highway 1, Anchorage Park and the Earman River typically sit between 15 and 25%. These lower-canopy areas align closely with the Village’s hottest zones: the heat- exposure map shows Level 4-5 “severe heat” concentrated where vegetation is sparse and impervious surfaces dominate. Conversely, parcels near Lakeside Park and Anchorage Park, where canopy and open space are abundant, register mostly Low to Medium-Low heat risk, underscoring the cooling value of tree cover. The same pattern plays out for flooding. Neighborhoods with limited canopy also contain the highest percentages of pavement and rooftops, driving storm -water runoff and shallow street flooding during 10- and 25-year rainfall events. Re-vegetating these blocks with deep-rooted canopy trees can slow runoff, increase infiltration, and reduce ponding, provided plantings stay out of engineered swales. Residents have already pointed out that trees placed inside swales can block drainage capacity, so a “right-tree, right-place” policy is essential. Losing the Village’s legacy trees, particularly the decades-old canopy around the golf course, would exacerbate both hazards. Larger crowns provide outsized shade and intercept more rainfall; if storms or other stressors remove them and they are not replanted, today’s low heat-risk zones could migrate into medium or higher categories, and runoff volumes would climb accordingly. Task 7_Village of North Palm Beach Vulnerability Assessment 2025_FINAL 101 Figure 38 North Palm Beach Urban Tree Canopy. Task 7_Village of North Palm Beach Vulnerability Assessment 2025_FINAL 102 Identification of Focus Areas To further understand localized risks and inform project development, the analysis examined four focus areas that collectively span the Village and highlight different infrastructure clusters and flood hazard types (Figure 39): • Focus Area 1 (Honey Road and Buttonwood Road, Cinnamon Road, Gumtree Road): Primarily at risk from rainfall-driven flooding, with 57% of assets at risk during a 25-year rainfall event. Eight of the Village’s 50 most vulnerable assets are located here, all stormwater facilities or pump stations. Future compound flood scenarios show increasing sensitivity. • Focus Area 2 (Shore Drive, Lagoon Drive, Waterway Drive): The area with the highest risk from Category 5 storm surge (75%) and Preliminary 100 -year Flood conditions (66%). It contains the Village’s single most vulnerable asset (OF 1069) and three of the top four. This shoreline zone also includes key bridges, lift stations, and the North Palm Beach Community Center. • Focus Area 3 (Eastwind Drive Area): Features the most functionally diverse infrastructure, including emergency water access, schools, and Village Hall. It also contains 12 of the top 50 most vulnerable assets. Rainfall-driven flooding is the primary hazard, with more than half of assets at risk during 10- and 25-year events. • Focus Area 4 (Lakeside Drive Area): Contains the highest number of top- ranked vulnerable assets (19 of 50), including critical stormwater and utility infrastructure. The area includes the Primary Emergency Operations Center, Fire/EMS station, and two marinas. Approximately 53% of assets are at risk under Preliminary 100-year Flood conditions. Findings from the focus area assessment reinforce Village-wide trends: vulnerability is most pronounced during severe rainfall and storm surge scenarios, with stormwater infrastructure and emergency services most likely to be affected. Tidal flooding and sea level rise show more limited impact but still pose concern in low-elevation shoreline zones. As the Village continues to plan for future hazards, these findings can support targeted investments in infrastructure improvements that promote long -term safety, service continuity, and resilience. Task 7_Village of North Palm Beach Vulnerability Assessment 2025_FINAL 103 Understanding the geographic concentration of vulnerabilities and prioritizing areas for targeted intervention are essential for developing effective mitigation and adaptation strategies. The identification of focus areas allows the Village to strategically direct limited resources toward locations where adaptation investments will provide maximum protection for critical assets and community functions. Focus areas represent geographic zones where multiple vulnerable assets concentrate and where coordinated resilience measures can address cascading risks most effectively. This section builds upon both the Exposure Analysis and Sensitivity Analysis phases, synthesizing their findings to identify priority areas for resilience planning. The results highlight specific geographic zones where vulnerabilities concentrate, guiding targeted adaptation strategies to protect North Palm Beach's residents and infrastructure. By translating comprehensive vulnerability data into focused intervention areas, this assessment provides a strategic foundation for project development, funding applications, and implementation sequencing. The findings emphasize the importance of place-based adaptation measures that address multiple asset types and hazard scenarios within concentrated geographic areas. This section provides detailed analysis of each identified priority zone, including: • Asset vulnerability profiles detailing the specific infrastructure components at greatest risk within each area. • Scenario-specific impact projections showing how different flood conditions affect each focus area. • Comparative risk analysis highlighting differences in vulnerability patterns and adaptation needs across the four zones. • Tables in the accompanying “Final List of Priority Assets” spreadsheet (Deliverable 7.2) provide supporting information, including the top 50 most vulnerable assets under current flood hazards, the top 50 most vulnerable assets under future flood hazards, and a full list of all critical assets located within each focus area. Figure 39 Focus Areas Task 7_Village of North Palm Beach Vulnerability Assessment 2025_FINAL 104 Critical Assets in Each Focus Area Together, the focus areas contain a total of 915 critical assets, including stormwater infrastructure, public facilities, transportation routes, utility systems, and emergency services. The proportion of at-risk assets varies depending on the flood scenario. The VA analyzed 30 distinct flood hazard scenarios (Figure 3), including 13 current flood hazard scenarios and 17 future flood hazard scenarios, to evaluate the diverse ways in which flooding may affect assets throughout the Village. Table 48 presents the total number of critical assets and the number of critical assets at risk under four flood scenarios per focus area. Table 48 Critical Asset Risk Distribution Across Focus Areas by Flood Scenario The 10-year and 25-year rainfall events have approximately 48-49% of all critical assets assessed at risk (436 and 445 assets, respectively). The Category 5 storm surge scenario puts 437 assets (48%) at risk, while the preliminary 100 -year flood scenario puts 380 assets (42%) at risk. However, the distribution of at-risk assets varies Focus Area Total Critical Asset Points Critical Assets at Risk: 10- Year/24- Hour Rainfall Event Critical Assets at Risk: 25- Year/24- Hour Rainfall Event Critical Assets at Risk: Cat 5 Storm Surge Critical Assets at Risk: Preliminary 100 Year Flood Focus Area 1 (Honey Road Corridor) 287 157 (55%) 163 (57%) 131 (46%) 72 (25%) Focus Area 2 (Shore Drive, Lagoon Drive, Waterway Drive) 184 90 (49%) 90 (49%) 137 (75%) 121 (66%) Focus Area 3 (Eastwind Drive) 208 109 (52%) 111 (53%) 77 (37%) 61 (29%) Focus Area 4 (Lakeside Drive) 236 80 (34%) 81 (34%) 92 (39%) 126 (53%) Total 915 436 (48%) 445 (49%) 437 (48%) 380 (42%) Task 7_Village of North Palm Beach Vulnerability Assessment 2025_FINAL 105 significantly by location, with Focus Area 2 having the highest percentage of assets at risk to Category 5 storm surge (75% of assets at risk), while Focus Area 4 has the greatest percentage of assets at risk during the Preliminary 100-year flood scenario (53% of assets at risk). Distribution of Top 50 Most Vulnerable Assets Analysis of the top 50 most vulnerable critical assets provides deeper insight into the characteristics and risk concentrations of each focus area. These vulnerability scores were calculated based on the average flood depths anticipated to impact each critical asset across 22 flood hazard scenarios, combined with the number of scenarios in which the asset is at risk. This ranking methodology ensures that assets facing both significant flood depths and exposure across multiple scenarios receive priority attention. Table 49 summarizes how these vulnerable critical assets are distributed across the focus areas, along with the total number of high -, medium-, and low-risk outcomes they generate. Table 49 Distribution of Top 50 Most Vulnerable Assets Across Focus Areas by Risk Level Focus Area Total Assets Total High Risk Total Medium Risk Total Low Risk Focus Area 1 8 40 39 17 Focus Area 2 11 48 76 21 Focus Area 3 12 52 68 31 Focus Area 4 19 78 99 51 Total 50 218 282 120 The distribution of the top 50 most vulnerable critical assets reveals distinct concentration patterns across the four focus areas. Focus Area 4 (Lakeside Drive) contains the highest concentration with 19 of the top 50 most vulnerable assets. These 19 assets generate 78 high-risk scenario outcomes, 99 medium-risk outcomes, and 51 low-risk outcomes across the 22 climate scenarios assessed, demonstrating notable risk patterns with an average of 4.1 high-risk scenarios per asset. Focus Area 3 (Eastwind Drive) contains 12 of the top 50 most vulnerable critical assets that produce 52 high-risk outcomes, 68 medium-risk outcomes, and 31 low-risk outcomes, translating to an average of 4.3 high-risk scenarios per asset and indicating consistent performance patterns across climate conditions. Focus Area 2 (Shore Drive, Lagoon Drive, Waterway Drive) contains 11 of the top 50 most vulnerable critical that generate 48 high-risk outcomes and show the highest proportion of medium-risk outcomes (76 total), suggesting these assets demonstrate greater variability in their response to different flood hazard scenarios. Focus Area 1 (Honey Road Corridor) contains 8 of the top 50 most vulnerable critical assets, suggesting that while this area faces widespread exposure across its 287 total critical assets, the concentration of extremely vulnerable assets is relatively lower Task 7_Village of North Palm Beach Vulnerability Assessment 2025_FINAL 106 compared to other focus areas. However, these 8 assets show the highest average risk intensity with 5.0 high-risk scenarios per asset, despite having relatively fewer medium- risk outcomes (39 total). Focus Area 1 Figure 40 Critical Assets within Focus Area 1 Focus Area 1 includes the Honey Road corridor and adjacent streets such as Buttonwood Road, Cinnamon Road, and Gumtree Road (Figure 40). This area contains 287 critical asset points and includes 8 assets ranked among the Village’s 50 most vulnerable, all classified as stormwater treatment facilities or pump stations. These assets include OF 1068 (ranked 12th village-wide), OF 1013 (13th), OF 1065 (16th), OF 1080 (24th), OF 1046 (35th), OF 1045 (37th), OF 1012 (42nd), and OF 1015 (46th). Focus Area 1 demonstrates notable sensitivity to rainfall-driven flooding, with 57% of assets at risk during a 25-year/24-hour rainfall event and 55% at risk under a 10- year/24-hour event, which is the highest percentage among all focus areas (Table 48). Additionally, 49% of assets are identified as at-risk under Preliminary 500-year Flood conditions, indicating that this area may still be vulnerable during more extreme events. Task 7_Village of North Palm Beach Vulnerability Assessment 2025_FINAL 107 In addition to the stormwater infrastructure ranked among the most vulnerable, Focus Area 1 includes: • 167 stormwater assets • 86 water utility conveyance systems, primarily fire hydrants • 19 bus stops, including locations along Northlake Boulevard and Prosperity Farms Road • 5 wastewater lift stations (LS 022, 035, 065, 091, and 025) • Key facilities including Baldwin Prep School, St. Clare Catholic School, Castlewood ALF, the Village Public Works Facility, and bridge infrastructure at Northlake Boulevard and Prosperity Farms Road. Some assets in this area show relatively low risk under current and future flood scenarios. For example, Baldwin Prep School is projected to experience flood depths of up to 1 foot under Category 5 storm surge and future rainfall-driven scenarios, placing it in the low-risk category. More broadly, the area does not exhibit high exposure to storm surge or deep coastal flood conditions. However, projections for 2080 show a shift toward greater asset sensitivity under compound flood scenarios. Investments in drainage improvements, outfall retrofits, and resilience upgrades to pump stations and road crossings should be prioritized in this inland corridor to address both current rainfall risks and escalating future compound flood exposure. Focus Area 2 Focus Area 2 spans the corridor along Shore Drive, Lagoon Drive, and Waterway Drive (Figure 41). This area contains 184 total critical assets, with 11 ranking among the assets ranked among the Village’s 50 most vulnerable, all classified as stormwater assets. These include OF 1069 (ranked 1st village-wide), OF 1018 (3rd), OF 1022 (4th), OF 1004 (15th), OF 1006 (17th), OF 1021 (29th), OF 1008 (30th), OF 1020 (31st), OF 1010 (33rd), OF 1009 (38th), and OF 1019 (39th). This focus area is notable for having the highest percentage of critical assets at risk from both Category 5 storm surge (75%) and Preliminary 100-year Flood conditions (66%) among all focus areas (Table 1). Additionally, 49% of critical assets in Focus Area 2 are projected to be at risk during both the 10-year and 25-year, 24-hour rainfall events. Several stormwater outfalls in this area are notable for their sensitivity to a wide range of current and future flood scenarios. For example, Outfall 1069 (east of Westwind Drive) is at high risk under nine scenarios, with modeled flood depths exceeding 13 feet under future compound flooding and approximately 4 feet under the 2080 Intermediate Sea level rise scenario. Similarly, Outfall 1018 (west of Waterway Drive) exhibits elevated flood depths under Category 5 storm surge and future conditions, reaching up to 8 feet. Task 7_Village of North Palm Beach Vulnerability Assessment 2025_FINAL 108 In addition to the highly vulnerable stormwater infrastructure, Focus Area 2 includes: • 81 stormwater components • 86 water conveyance systems (primarily fire hydrants) • 7 bus stops • 5 wastewater lift stations • 4 bridges (including Harbour Isles Bridge 1, Harbour Isles Bridge 2, and Monet Bridge) • 1 community facility (North Palm Beach Community Center). Investments in outfall retrofits, tidal backflow prevention, and stormwater system upgrades should be prioritized in this low-lying waterfront corridor to protect essential infrastructure and maintain both daily access and emergency response capabilities amid rising compound flood risks. Figure 41 Critical Assets within Focus Area 2 Task 7_Village of North Palm Beach Vulnerability Assessment 2025_FINAL 109 Focus Area 3 Focus Area 3 encompasses the area around Eastwind Drive and contains 12 of the Village's top 50 most vulnerable assets (Figure 42). The top-50 vulnerable assets include 11 stormwater facilities: OF 1078 (ranking 5th), OF 1002 (ranking 7th), OF 1033 (ranking 8th), OF 1034 (ranking 18th), OF 1001 (ranking 20th), OF 1035 (ranking 21st), OF 1026 (ranking 22nd), OF 1027 (ranking 28th), OF 1036 (ranking 43rd), OF 1031 (ranking 44th), and 213 CB (ranking 45th). Uniquely, this area also includes the critical Anchorage Park Boat Ramp Emergency Water Access facility (ranking 26th)—the only marina facility among the top 50 vulnerable assets Village-wide. The area is characterized by relatively consistent risk across multiple flooding scenarios. Roughly half of assets (52–53%) are at risk under both the 10-year and 25-year, 24-hour rainfall events, and 29% are at risk during Preliminary 100 -year Flood conditions. Focus Area 3 exhibits moderate vulnerability to storm surge, with 37% of assets at risk during a Category 5 event. Additional examples include the SUA Fire Hydrant 3-0139, located Figure 42 Critical Assets within Focus Area 3 Task 7_Village of North Palm Beach Vulnerability Assessment 2025_FINAL 110 east of Country Club Drive, which is projected to face medium risk under Category 5 storm surge and rainfall scenarios, with increasing sensitivity under future conditions. The area’s varied asset portfolio, combined with notable risk from rainfall events, emphasizes the need for integrated planning to support both day -to-day functionality and emergency operations. Stormwater improvements, such as enhanced drainage, and resilience strategies for municipal and healthcare services will be key to maintaining access and continuity of service. In addition to the 12 top-ranked vulnerable assets, Focus Area 3 also includes: • 123 stormwater components • 64 water conveyance systems (primarily fire hydrants) • 5 bus stops • 2 marinas, including the Anchorage Park Marina and Boat Ramp • 2 solid and hazardous waste facilities • 2 wastewater lift stations • 2 schools (The Conservatory School and North Palm Beach Elementary) • 2 historical and cultural assets • 1 healthcare facility (Palm Beach Memory Care) • 1 emergency operations center (Secondary NPB EOC) • 1 local government facility (NPB Village Hall) • 1 community center • 1 bridge. With its mix of public services, emergency infrastructure, and stormwater systems, this area will benefit from targeted investments that reduce flood risk and strengthen the Village’s overall resilience. Focus Area 4 Focus Area 4 encompasses the eastern coastal portion of the Village, generally centered around Lakeside Drive (Figure 43). This area contains 236 total critical assets, and 19 of them rank among the Village’s top 50 most vulnerable assets, which is the highest number of any focus area. Focus Area 4 also includes the Village’s second-most vulnerable asset overall (OF 1040). It also has the second-highest proportion of assets at risk during the Preliminary 100-year Flood scenario (53%), following Focus Area 2 (66%). Approximately 39% of assets are at risk from Category 5 storm surge, while 34% are at risk during both the 10-year and 25-year, 24-hour rainfall events This includes examples such as Outfalls 1039 and 1040, located east of Marina Drive. Outfall 1039 is considered to be at high risk under both tidal flooding and the 10-year, 24-hour rainfall scenario, while Outfall 1040 is at high risk under both tidal flooding and compound flooding (tidal + Category 4 storm surge). In addition, the SUA Lift Station 030, located west of Marina Dri ve, is Task 7_Village of North Palm Beach Vulnerability Assessment 2025_FINAL 111 projected to experience flood depths of approximately 3.2 feet under future compound flooding scenarios, placing it at medium risk. In addition to these 19 highly vulnerable assets, the area contains: • 103 stormwater components • 101 water conveyance systems (primarily fire hydrants) • 10 bus stops (primarily along Federal Highway) • 9 wastewater lift stations • 6 solid and hazardous waste facilities • 2 marinas (Safe Harbor Old Port Cove and North Palm Beach Marina) • 1 school (The Benjamin School) • 1 fire station (NPB Fire Department/EMS) • 1 emergency operations center (NPB Primary EOC/Police/Public Safety) • 1 municipal electric facility • 1 bridge. Figure 43 Critical Assets within Focus Area 4 Task 7_Village of North Palm Beach Vulnerability Assessment 2025_FINAL 112 Given its concentration of essential services and infrastructure, Focus Area 4 represents a key opportunity for targeted resilience planning. The area includes many of the Village’s core emergency and utility functions, such as the Primary Emergency Operations Center, Fire/EMS station, and two marinas that support water-based emergency access. Paired with its diverse infrastructure portfolio and notable number of highly vulnerable stormwater assets, these characteristics highlight the importance of continued investment in flood protection, stormwater system upgrades, and long-term planning to help ensure the reliability of critical operations and public safety services. Conclusions This Vulnerability Assessment confirms that the Village of North Palm Beach has a generally moderate level of exposure to coastal and rainfall hazards. Most single-family neighborhoods fall outside the highest inundation zones, and fewer than half of the community’s critical assets would be affected by a very infrequent extreme event. E ven so, several pressure points require attention to protect public safety, maintain infrastructure service, and preserve quality of life. Intense rainfall and severe storm events, rather than sea-level rise or tidal flooding, pose the greatest near-term threat. Projected 10- and 25-year storms create localized ponding along major thoroughfares where impervious cover is high and drainage capacity is limited. Stormwater treatment facilities, pump stations, water and wastewater utilities, and several schools face the largest increase in future exposure. Upgrades to conveyance systems, low-impact development retrofits, and additional pump redundancy will deliver the highest return on investment. Heat stress is an emerging compounding risk. The hottest micro -climates occur in block groups with the lowest canopy cover, notably along U.S. 1 and the Earman River. A high-level canopy assessment shows cover below 25% in these areas compared with more than 80% around the Country Club and Lakeside Park. Where canopy is sparse, both surface temperatures and runoff volumes are elevated, illustrating the dual cooling and hydrologic benefits of trees. Preserving mature oaks and pines, especially those surrounding the golf course, and implementing a “right-tree, right-place” planting program after storms will help keep heat and flood risk in check. Community feedback highlights residents’ desire to balance flood-resilient infrastructure with neighborhood character. Concerns about trees planted in swales blocking drainage show that integrated design guidelines are needed. By pairing targeted gray- infrastructure improvements with nature-based solutions such as bioswales, rain gardens, living shorelines, and strategic tree planting, the Village can manage runoff, lower urban heat, and enhance ecological and recreational value. The recommended path forward focuses on four priorities: (1) upgrading stormwater infrastructure in the highest-risk sub-basins; (2) protecting mature trees and establishing post-storm re-planting standards; (3) embedding green infrastructure into capital plans; and (4) securing external funding through programs like Resilient Florida and FEMA Task 7_Village of North Palm Beach Vulnerability Assessment 2025_FINAL 113 BRIC. Together, these steps will allow North Palm Beach to maintain its desirable living environment while strengthening resilience to evolving climate hazards. Task 7_Village of North Palm Beach Vulnerability Assessment 2025_FINAL 114 Appendix A: Prioritized List of Critical Assets *List of All Assets Impacted by Flooding is presented in Deliverable 7.2 in spreadsheet format. Due to large size of the list, it was not attached to this report. Focus AreaOverall Vulnerability RankingAsset Name Cat 1 Storm Surge Cat 2 Storm Surge Cat 3 Storm Surge Cat 4 Storm Surge Cat 5 Storm Surge Tidal Flooding Compound Flooding (Tidal + Cat 4) 10-Year/24-Hour Rainfall 25-Year/24-Hour Rainfall Effective 100 Year Flood Preliminary 100 Year Flood Effective 500 Year Flood Preliminary 500 Year FloodFocus Area 112 OF 1068 Not Exposed Not Exposed Not Exposed Not Exposed Not Exposed High Not Exposed Medium Low Medium Medium Not Exposed Not ExposedFocus Area 113 OF 1013 Not Exposed Not Exposed Not Exposed Not Exposed Not Exposed High Not Exposed High Medium Medium Medium Not Exposed Not ExposedFocus Area 116 OF 1065 Not Exposed Not Exposed Not Exposed Not Exposed Not Exposed High Not Exposed High Medium Medium Medium Not Exposed Not ExposedFocus Area 124 OF 1080 Not Exposed Not Exposed Not Exposed Not Exposed Not Exposed Low Not Exposed Medium Low Medium Medium Not Exposed Not ExposedFocus Area 135 OF 1046 Not Exposed Not Exposed Not Exposed Not Exposed Not Exposed Low Not Exposed High Medium Medium Medium Not Exposed Not ExposedFocus Area 137 OF 1045 Not Exposed Not Exposed Not Exposed Not Exposed Not Exposed Low Not Exposed High Medium Medium Medium Not Exposed Not ExposedFocus Area 142 OF 1012 Not Exposed Not Exposed Not Exposed Not Exposed Not Exposed High Not Exposed Not Exposed Not Exposed Medium Medium Not Exposed Not ExposedFocus Area 146 OF 1015 Not Exposed Not Exposed Not Exposed Not Exposed Not Exposed High Not Exposed Not Exposed Not Exposed Medium Medium Not Exposed Not ExposedFocus Area 21 OF 1069 Medium Medium Medium Medium Low High High High Medium Medium Medium Not Exposed Not ExposedFocus Area 23 OF 1018 High Medium Medium Medium Low High High Not Exposed Not Exposed Medium Medium Not Exposed Not ExposedFocus Area 24 OF 1022 Medium Medium Medium Medium Low High High Not Exposed Not Exposed Medium Medium Not Exposed Not ExposedFocus Area 215 OF 1004 Not Exposed Not Exposed Not Exposed Not Exposed Not Exposed High Not Exposed High Medium Medium Medium Not Exposed Not ExposedFocus Area 217 OF 1006 Not Exposed Not Exposed Not Exposed Not Exposed Not Exposed High Not Exposed High Medium Medium Medium Not Exposed Not ExposedFocus Area 229 OF 1021 High Medium Medium Medium Low Not Exposed Not Exposed High Medium Medium Medium Not Exposed Not ExposedFocus Area 230 OF 1008 Medium Medium Medium Medium Low Not Exposed Not Exposed High Medium Medium Medium Not Exposed Not ExposedFocus Area 231 OF 1020 Medium Medium Medium Medium Low Not Exposed Not Exposed High Medium Medium Medium Not Exposed Not ExposedFocus Area 233 OF 1010 Not Exposed Not Exposed Not Exposed Not Exposed Not Exposed Low Not Exposed High Medium Medium Medium Not Exposed Not ExposedFocus Area 238 OF 1009 Not Exposed Not Exposed Not Exposed Not Exposed Low High Not Exposed Not Exposed Not Exposed Medium Medium Not Exposed Not ExposedFocus Area 239 OF 1019 Not Exposed Medium Medium Medium Low Not Exposed Not Exposed High Medium Medium Medium Not Exposed Not ExposedFocus Area 35 OF 1078 Not Exposed Not Exposed Not Exposed Not Exposed Low High Not Exposed High Medium Medium Medium Not Exposed Not ExposedFocus Area 37 OF 1002 Not Exposed Not Exposed Not Exposed Low Low High High High Medium Medium Medium Not Exposed Not ExposedFocus Area 38 OF 1033 Not Exposed Medium Medium Medium Low High High Not Exposed Not Exposed Medium Medium Not Exposed Not ExposedFocus Area 318 OF 1034 Not Exposed Not Exposed Medium Medium Low High High Not Exposed Not Exposed Medium Medium Not Exposed Not ExposedFocus Area 320 OF 1001 Not Exposed Not Exposed Not Exposed Not Exposed Not Exposed High Not Exposed High Medium Medium Medium Not Exposed Not ExposedFocus Area 321 OF 1035 Not Exposed Medium Medium Medium Low Low High Not Exposed Not Exposed Medium Medium Not Exposed Not ExposedFocus Area 322 OF 1026 Not Exposed Not Exposed Not Exposed Not Exposed Not Exposed Low Not Exposed High Medium Medium Medium Not Exposed Not ExposedFocus Area 326Anchorage Park B Not Exposed Medium Medium Medium Low Not Exposed Not Exposed Medium Low Medium Medium Not Exposed Not ExposedFocus Area 328 OF 1027 Not Exposed Not Exposed Medium Medium Low Low High Not Exposed Not Exposed Medium Medium Not Exposed Not ExposedFocus Area 343 OF 1036 Not Exposed Not Exposed Not Exposed Not Exposed Not Exposed High Not Exposed Not Exposed Not Exposed Medium Medium Not Exposed Not ExposedFocus Area 344 OF 1031 Not Exposed Not Exposed Not Exposed Not Exposed Not Exposed High Not Exposed Not Exposed Not Exposed Medium Medium Not Exposed Not ExposedFocus Area 345 213 CB Not Exposed Medium Medium Medium Low Not Exposed Not Exposed High Medium Not Exposed Medium Low Not ExposedFocus Area 42 OF 1040 Medium Medium Medium Medium Low High High Not Exposed Not Exposed Medium Medium Not Exposed Not ExposedFocus Area 46 OF 1041 Not Exposed Not Exposed Not Exposed Low Low High High Medium Low Medium Medium Not Exposed Not ExposedFocus Area 49 OF 1073 Not Exposed Not Exposed Not Exposed Low Low Low High Medium Low Medium Medium Not Exposed Not ExposedFocus Area 410 OF 1038 Not Exposed Not Exposed Not Exposed Not Exposed Not Exposed High Not Exposed High Medium Medium Medium Not Exposed Not ExposedFocus Area 411 OF 1039 Not Exposed Not Exposed Not Exposed Not Exposed Not Exposed High Not Exposed High Medium Medium Medium Not Exposed Not ExposedFocus Area 414 OF 1058 Not Exposed Not Exposed Not Exposed Not Exposed Not Exposed High Not Exposed High Medium Medium Medium Not Exposed Not ExposedFocus Area 419 OF 1053 Not Exposed Not Exposed Not Exposed Not Exposed Not Exposed High Not Exposed Medium Low Not Exposed Medium Low Not ExposedFocus Area 423 407 CB Not Exposed Medium Medium Medium Low Not Exposed Not Exposed Medium Low Medium Medium Not Exposed Not ExposedFocus Area 425 OF 1061 Not Exposed Not Exposed Not Exposed Not Exposed Not Exposed Low Not Exposed Medium Low Medium Medium Not Exposed Not ExposedFocus Area 427 OF 1059 Not Exposed Not Exposed Not Exposed Not Exposed Not Exposed Low Not Exposed Low Low Medium Medium Not Exposed Not ExposedFocus Area 432 408 CB Medium Medium Medium Medium Low Not Exposed Not Exposed Medium Low Medium Medium Not Exposed Not ExposedFocus Area 434 371 CB Medium Medium Medium Medium Low Not Exposed Not Exposed Medium Low Medium Medium Not Exposed Not ExposedFocus Area 436 OF 1037 Medium Medium Medium Medium Low Not Exposed Not Exposed Low Low Low Medium Not Exposed Not ExposedFocus Area 440 OF 1076 Not Exposed Not Exposed Not Exposed Not Exposed Not Exposed High Not Exposed Not Exposed Not Exposed Medium Medium Not Exposed Not ExposedFocus Area 441 OF 1042 Not Exposed Not Exposed Not Exposed Not Exposed Not Exposed High Not Exposed Not Exposed Not Exposed Medium Medium Not Exposed Not ExposedFocus Area 447 OF 1048 Not Exposed Not Exposed Not Exposed Medium Low Not Exposed Not Exposed High Medium Not Exposed Medium Low Not ExposedFocus Area 448 OF 1057 Not Exposed Not Exposed Not Exposed Not Exposed Not Exposed High Not Exposed Not Exposed Not Exposed Medium Medium Not Exposed Not ExposedFocus Area 449 010 MES Not Exposed Not Exposed Medium Low Low Not Exposed Not Exposed High Medium Medium Medium Not Exposed Not ExposedFocus Area 450 011 MES Not Exposed Not Exposed Medium Low Low Not Exposed Not Exposed High Medium Medium Medium Not Exposed Not ExposedFinal List of Priority Assets under Current Flood Hazards Focus AreaOverall Vulnerability RankingAsset Name 2050 Intermediate Low SLR 2050 Intermediate SLR 2080 Intermediate Low SLR 2080 Intermediate SLR 2050 Tidal Flooding 2080 Tidal Flooding Future Compound (10-Year + 2070) Future Compound (25-Year + 2070) Future Compound (100-Year + 2080)Focus Area 112 OF 1068 High High Medium Low High Medium High High HighFocus Area 113 OF 1013 High Medium Low Low High Medium High High HighFocus Area 116 OF 1065 Medium Medium Low Low High Medium High High HighFocus Area 124 OF 1080 Not Exposed Not Exposed Low Low Medium Medium High High HighFocus Area 135 OF 1046 Not Exposed Not Exposed Not Exposed Low Medium Medium High High HighFocus Area 137 OF 1045 Not Exposed Not Exposed Not Exposed Low Medium Medium High High HighFocus Area 142 OF 1012 High High Medium Low High Medium Not Exposed Not Exposed HighFocus Area 146 OF 1015 High Medium Low Low High Medium Not Exposed Not Exposed HighFocus Area 21 OF 1069 High High Medium Low High Medium High High HighFocus Area 23 OF 1018 Medium Medium Low Low High Medium Not Exposed Not Exposed HighFocus Area 24 OF 1022 Medium Medium Low Low High Medium Not Exposed Not Exposed HighFocus Area 215 OF 1004 Medium Medium Low Low High Medium High High HighFocus Area 217 OF 1006 Medium Medium Low Low Medium Medium High High HighFocus Area 229 OF 1021 Not Exposed Not Exposed Not Exposed Not Exposed Not Exposed Not Exposed High High Not ExposedFocus Area 230 OF 1008 Not Exposed Not Exposed Not Exposed Not Exposed Not Exposed Not Exposed High High Not ExposedFocus Area 231 OF 1020 Not Exposed Not Exposed Not Exposed Not Exposed Not Exposed Not Exposed High High Not ExposedFocus Area 233 OF 1010 Not Exposed Not Exposed Not Exposed Low Medium Medium High High HighFocus Area 238 OF 1009 Medium Medium Low Low Medium Medium Not Exposed Not Exposed HighFocus Area 239 OF 1019 Not Exposed Not Exposed Not Exposed Not Exposed Not Exposed Not Exposed High High Not ExposedFocus Area 35 OF 1078 High High Medium Low High Medium High High HighFocus Area 37 OF 1002 Not Exposed Not Exposed Low Low High Medium High High HighFocus Area 38 OF 1033 High Medium Low Low High Medium Not Exposed Not Exposed HighFocus Area 318 OF 1034 High Medium Medium Low High Medium Not Exposed Not Exposed HighFocus Area 320 OF 1001 Not Exposed Medium Low Low High Medium High High HighFocus Area 321 OF 1035 Not Exposed Not Exposed Low Low Medium Medium Not Exposed Not Exposed HighFocus Area 322 OF 1026 Not Exposed Not Exposed Low Low Medium Medium High High HighFocus Area 326 Anchorage Park B Not Exposed Not Exposed Not Exposed Low Not Exposed Not Exposed Medium Medium HighFocus Area 328 OF 1027 Not Exposed Not Exposed Low Low Medium Medium Not Exposed Not Exposed HighFocus Area 343 OF 1036 High High Medium Low High Medium Not Exposed Not Exposed HighFocus Area 344 OF 1031 High Medium Medium Low High Medium Not Exposed Not Exposed HighFocus Area 345 213 CB Not Exposed Not Exposed Not Exposed Not Exposed Not Exposed Not Exposed High High Not ExposedFocus Area 42 OF 1040 High Medium Medium Low High Medium Not Exposed Not Exposed HighFocus Area 46 OF 1041 Not Exposed Not Exposed Medium Low High Medium High High HighFocus Area 49 OF 1073 Not Exposed Not Exposed Low Low Medium Medium High High HighFocus Area 410 OF 1038 High High Medium Low High Medium High High HighFocus Area 411 OF 1039 High High Medium Low High Medium High High HighFocus Area 414 OF 1058 High Medium Low Low High Medium High High HighFocus Area 419 OF 1053 Medium Medium Low Low High Medium High High HighFocus Area 423 407 CB Not Exposed Not Exposed Not Exposed Low Not Exposed Not Exposed High High HighFocus Area 425 OF 1061 Not Exposed Not Exposed Low Low Medium Medium High High HighFocus Area 427 OF 1059 Not Exposed Not Exposed Low Low Medium Medium Medium High HighFocus Area 432 408 CB Not Exposed Not Exposed Not Exposed Not Exposed Not Exposed Not Exposed High High Not ExposedFocus Area 434 371 CB Not Exposed Not Exposed Not Exposed Not Exposed Not Exposed Not Exposed High High Not ExposedFocus Area 436 OF 1037 Not Exposed Not Exposed Not Exposed Not Exposed Not Exposed Not Exposed Medium Medium Not ExposedFocus Area 440 OF 1076 High High Medium Low High Medium Not Exposed Not Exposed HighFocus Area 441 OF 1042 High High Medium Low High Medium Not Exposed Not Exposed HighFocus Area 447 OF 1048 Not Exposed Not Exposed Not Exposed Low Not Exposed Not Exposed High High HighFocus Area 448 OF 1057 Not Exposed Medium Low Low High Medium Not Exposed Not Exposed HighFocus Area 449 010 MES Not Exposed Not Exposed Not Exposed Not Exposed Not Exposed Not Exposed High High Not ExposedFocus Area 450 011 MES Not Exposed Not Exposed Not Exposed Not Exposed Not Exposed Not Exposed High High Not ExposedFinal List of Priority Assets under Future Flood Hazards Task 7_Village of North Palm Beach Vulnerability Assessment 2025_FINAL 117 Appendix B: Geospatial Database and Metadata Task 7_Village of North Palm Beach Vulnerability Assessment 2025_FINAL 118 North Palm Beach Vulnerability Assessment Geodatabase Data in this geodatabase represents critical assets, focus areas, and flood hazards in North Palm Beach. Data were spatially analyzed to determine potential inundation and corresponding flood depth. The attribute tables contains the results of this analysis for the various flood scenarios. Flood depths that each asset experiences were calculated across all flood scenarios, and risk descriptions assigned per the Risk Matrix outlined in the report. Risk categories are Low, Medium, and High based on the flood depths and impact factors. "Not_Exposed" is assigned for assets that are not exposed to a particular flood scenario. Future storm surge scenarios were assessed during Task 7 – Final Vulnerability Assessment Report phase to ensure alignment with the latest FDEP guidance. The corresponding attributes were named based on the new GIS Data Standards45 that was released after the Exposure and Sensitivity Analysis deliverables have already been accepted by FDEP. The naming convention of these results includes abbreviations such as "SSF_FD_Cat4_2050_INT" representing " Storm Surge Flooding (SSF)_ Flood Depth (FD)_under Category 4 conditions (Cat4) with 2050 Intermediate Sea Level Rise scenario (2050_INT)". Other field names were not altered as they were completed prior to the release of new GIS data standards. Additional details can be found in throughout this report which further discusses the methodology. To avoid duplicate data submission to FDEP (per the new GIS Data Standards 45) the final geodatabase only includes the data that has either newly generated or altered from the previous deliverables. These include the following feature classes and raster data: Feature Classes: CriticalAssetAreas_Analysis CriticalAssetLines_Analysis CriticalAssetPoints_Analysis Focus_Areas Rasters: SSF_Cat4_2050_IL_WDRaster SSF_Cat4_2050_INT_WDRaster SSF_Cat4_2080_IL_WDRaster SSF_Cat4_2080_INT_WDRaster SSF_Cat5_2050_IL_WDRaster SSF_Cat5_2050_INT_WDRaster SSF_Cat5_2080_IL_WDRaster SSF_Cat5_2080_INT_WDRaster All data layers are projected in the Florida State Plane Coordinate System, East zone, NAD 1983, feet for horizontal datum and NAVD 1988, feet for vertical datum. This geodatabase represents the results of data collection/processing for a specific activity and indicates the general existing conditions at the time of collection. As such, it is only valid for its intended use, content, time, and accuracy specifications. The user is responsible for the results of an application of the data other than its intended purpose. Data are intended as a report supplement and should not be used for any other applications without the express permission of the original agency. 45 GIS Standards for Planning Grants Task 7_Village of North Palm Beach Vulnerability Assessment 2025_FINAL 119 Appendix C: Vulnerability Assessment Compliance Checklist following STATE OF FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION RESILIENT FLORIDA GRANT PROGRAM VULNERABILITY ASSESSMENT COMPLIANCE CHECKLIST CERTIFICATION Vulnerability Assessments using Statutory Requirements Effective July 1, 2024 Exhibit I Required for all planning grant agreements that include a Comprehensive Vulnerability Assessment. DEP Agreement Number:__________________________ Project Title:_____________________________________________________________________________ Grantee:________________________________________________________________________________ In accordance with subsection 380.093(3), F.S., for a Vulnerability Assessment initiated after July 1, 2024, the following components, scenarios, data, and information are required for a comprehensive Vulnerability Assessment (VA). The checklist must be completed and submitted with the final VA Report deliverable, pursuant to Attachment 3, Grant Work Plan. When filling out the checklist, please provide the corresponding page number in the VA or, if the item is not applicable, an explanation as to why it is not applicable. The Grantee must abide by the Department’s GIS Data Standards found on the Resilient Florida Program webpage: https://floridadep.gov/rcp/resilient-florida-program/documents/resilient-florida-program-gis-data-standards Resilient Florida – Program Requirements Item ID Check if Included Item Description Page Reference in VA Report (if applicable) A The Final VA Report includes the Department’s logo and funding source language, pursuant to Attachment 6 of the grant agreement. Part 1 – Subparagraph 380.093(3)(c)2., F.S. Item ID Check if Included Item Description Page Reference in VA Report (if applicable) B Final VA Report that provides details on the results and conclusions, including illustrations via maps and tables. All electronic mapping data used to illustrate flooding and sea level rise impacts that are identified in the VA must be provided in the format consistent with the Program’s GIS Data Standards and include the three (3) items: C Geospatial data in an electronic file format. D GIS metadata. E An inventory of critical assets for each jurisdiction, including regionally significant assets, that are currently, or within 50 years are reasonably expected to be, impacted by flooding and sea level rise. The list must be prioritized by area or immediate need and must identify which flood scenario(s) impacts each asset. Critical assets and regionally significant assets are as defined in subsection 380.093(2), F.S. Exhibit I 1 of 3 Rev. 7/1/2024 24PLN29 Village of North Palm Beach Comprehensive Vulnerability Assessment Village of North Palm Beach 4 Cover & Pg 2 4 Throughout the rep 4 N/A 4 N/A 4 Focus Area section Part 2 – Subparagraphs 380.093(3)(d)1. and 380.093(3)(d)2., F.S. Item ID Check if Included Item Description Page Reference in VA Report (if applicable) F Peril of Flood Comprehensive Plan amendments developed that address paragraph 163.3178(2)(f), F.S. (as applicable) ☐ Noncoastal community/Peril of Flood not required ☐ Already in compliance G Depth of tidal flooding, including future high tide flooding. The threshold for tidal flooding is 2 feet above mean higher high water. (as applicable) G.1 ☐ Analysis geographically displays the number of tidal flood days expected for each scenario and planning horizon. (to the extent practicable) H Depth of current and future storm surge flooding using publicly available Florida Flood Hub (FFH) data. (as applicable) H.1 ☐NOAA data ☐FEMA data In the absence of FFH data, publicly available NOAA or FEMA storm surge data may be used. (check one, as applicable) H.2 ☐ Initial storm surge event equals or exceeds current 100-year flood event. (as applicable) H.3 ☐ Higher frequency storm analyzed for exposure of a critical asset or regionally significant asset. (optional, but must provide additional detail if included) I Rainfall-induced flooding was considered using GIS-based spatiotemporal analysis or existing hydrologic and hydraulic modeling results. (to the extent practicable but required if Item F is noncoastal) I.1 ☐ Future boundary conditions have been modified to consider sea level rise and high tide conditions. For rainfall-induced flood modeling, the model inputs for the 2050/2080 rainfall scenarios should use projected sea level rise/high tide conditions. (as applicable) I.2 ☐ Depth of rainfall-induced flooding for 100-year storm and 500-year storm event as defined by the applicable water management district (WMD). (required if Item F is noncoastal) I.3 ☐ If WMD data is not available, data from an appropriate federal agency was used. Agency used: _______________________________ J Compound flooding or the combination of tidal, storm surge, and rainfall- induced flooding. (to the extent practicable) Exhibit I 2 of 3 Rev. 7/1/2024 4 4 4 Pg 23 4 Pg 24 4 Exposure Analysis section 4 4 4 Pg 24 Pg 27 (10-yr flood) 4 Pg 27 4 4 Pg 23 Pg 24 N/A 4 Pg 26 & 27 Part 3 – Subparagraph 380.093(3)(d)3., F.S. Item ID Check if Included Item Description Page Reference in VA Report (if applicable) K All analyses in North American Vertical Datum of 1988. L Includes at least two local sea level rise scenarios, which must include the 2022 NOAA intermediate-low and intermediate sea level rise projections. M Includes at least two planning horizons, which must include years 2050 and 2080. N Uses local sea level data maintained by the FFH. N.1 ☐ In the absence of FFH data, local sea level data that has been interpolated between the two closest NOAA tide gauges. (as applicable) N.2 ☐ Local, publicly available, sea level data was taken from one of the two closest NOAA tide gauges. Data may be taken from one such gauge if the gauge has a higher mean sea level. N.3 ☐ An alternate tide gauge with appropriate rationale and Departmental approval. (if checked, provide Department approval) Identify all counties and municipalities that are included in this Vulnerability Assessment: I certify that, to the Grantee’s knowledge, all information contained in this completed Vulnerability Assessment Compliance Checklist is true and accurate as of the date of the signature below. Grantee's Grant Manager Signature Print Name Date Exhibit I 3 of 3 Rev. 7/1/2024 4 Pg 29 4 Pg 23 4 Pg 23 4 Pg 23 4 4 Pg 23 Task 7_Village of North Palm Beach Vulnerability Assessment 2025_FINAL 122 Appendix D: Sensitivity Maps for All Statutory Scenarios Across Four Asset Classes Task 7_Village of North Palm Beach Vulnerability Assessment 2025_FINAL 123 Appendix D 1. Current Tidal Flooding Sensitivity Map. Risk Levels for all four asset classes (symbolized by shapes) are represented in red (high risk), orange (medium risk), and yellow (low risk). To increase legibility of the map, line and area assets that are not at risk are not shown. Task 7_Village of North Palm Beach Vulnerability Assessment 2025_FINAL 124 Appendix D 2. Future Tidal Flooding (Current tidal + 2050 Intermediate SLR) Sensitivity Map. Sensitivity results for the Current Tidal + 2050 Intermediate-Low SLR scenario are identical to those shown in this map and are therefore not presented to avoid duplication. Risk Levels for all four asset classes (symbolized by shapes) are represented in red (high risk), orange (medium risk), and yellow (low risk). To increase legibility of the map, line and area assets that are not at risk are not shown. Task 7_Village of North Palm Beach Vulnerability Assessment 2025_FINAL 125 Appendix D 3. Future Tidal Flooding (Current tidal + 2080 Intermediate SLR) Sensitivity Map. Sensitivity results for the Current Tidal + 2080 Intermediate-Low SLR scenario are identical to those shown in this map and are therefore not presented to avoid duplication. Risk Levels for all four asset classes (symbolized by shapes) are represented in red (high risk), orange (medium risk), and yellow (low risk). To increase legibility of the map, line and area assets that are not at risk are not shown. Task 7_Village of North Palm Beach Vulnerability Assessment 2025_FINAL 126 Appendix D 4. 25yr-24hr Rainfall Flooding Sensitivity Map. Risk Levels for all four asset classes (symbolized by shapes) are represented in red (high risk), orange (medium risk), and yellow (low risk). To increase legibility of the map, line and area assets that are not at risk are not shown. Task 7_Village of North Palm Beach Vulnerability Assessment 2025_FINAL 127 Appendix D 5. Category 4 (100-year) Storm Surge Sensitivity Map. Risk Levels for all four asset classes (symbolized by shapes) are represented in red (high risk), orange (medium risk), and yellow (low risk). To increase legibility of the map, line and area assets that are not at risk are not shown. Task 7_Village of North Palm Beach Vulnerability Assessment 2025_FINAL 128 Appendix D 6. Future Storm Surge (Category 4 Surge + 2050 Intermediate SLR) Sensitivity Map. Sensitivity results for the Category 4 + 2050 Intermediate-Low SLR scenario are identical to those shown in this map and are therefore not presented to avoid duplication. Risk Levels for all four asset classes (symbolized by shapes) are represented in red (high risk), orange (medium risk), and yellow (low risk). To increase legibility of the map, line and area assets that are not at risk are not shown. Task 7_Village of North Palm Beach Vulnerability Assessment 2025_FINAL 129 Appendix D 7. Future Storm Surge (Category 4 Surge + 2080 Intermediate SLR) Sensitivity Map. Sensitivity results for the Category 4 + 2080 Intermediate-Low SLR scenario are identical to those shown in this map and are therefore not presented to avoid duplication. Risk Levels for all four asset classes (symbolized by shapes) are represented in red (high risk), orange (medium risk), and yellow (low risk). To increase legibility of the map, line and area assets that are not at risk are not shown.