Loading...
12-09-2021 VC-REG-A with attachments_REVISED VILLAGE OF NORTH PALM BEACH REGULAR SESSION REVISED AGENDA VILLAGE HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS THURSDAY, DECEMBER 09, 2021 501 U.S. HIGHWAY 1 7:00 PM Darryl C. Aubrey Deborah Searcy Mark Mullinix Susan Bickel David B. Norris Mayor Vice Mayor President Pro Tem Councilmember Councilmember Andrew D. Lukasik Leonard G. Rubin Jessica Green Village Manager Village Attorney Village Clerk INSTRUCTIONS TO JOIN MEETING ELECTRONICALLY To join meeting by computer (video & audio) click or type the following link in address bar: https://us02web.zoom.us/j/87452332874?pwd=aVE3Z2dFVkNzMmZBc0t3ZGQ4NTNPUT09 Meeting ID: 874 5233 2874 Passcode: 609595 To join meeting by phone (voice only): 877 853 5257 US Toll-free 888 475 4499 US Toll-free Meeting ID: 874 5233 2874 Passcode: 609595 Regular Session Agenda, December 09, 2021 Page 2 of 3 ROLL CALL INVOCATION - MAYOR PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE - VICE MAYOR AWARDS AND RECOGNITION 1. Distinguished Golf Destination Award presented by Tom Fitzgerald, Managing Director APPROVAL OF MINUTES 2. Minutes of the Special Session held November 18, 2021 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. DECLARATION OF EX PARTE COMMUNICATIONS PUBLIC HEARINGS AND QUASI-JUDICIAL MATTERS 3. 1ST READING OF ORDINANCE 2022-01 CODE AMENDMENT – FRACTIONAL HOME OWNERSHIP Consider a motion to adopt on first reading Ordinance 2022-01 amending Appendix C (Chapter 45), "Zoning," of the Village Code of Ordinances to incorporate a definition of Fractional Ownership and expressly prohibit Fractional Ownership Units and Time-Share Units in the Village's Residential Zoning Districts. 4. 1ST READING OF ORDINANCE 2022-02 – CODE AMENDMENT – PARKING CITATION PROCEDURE Consider a motion to adopt on first reading Ordinance 2022-02 amending Article III "Stopping, Standing and Parking", of Chapter 18, "Motor Vehicles and Traffic,: of the Village Code of Ordinances to update the Village's regulations and formalize the parking citation procedure. 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. 5. RESOLUTION - Approving an Amendment to the Contract with All Florida Tree and Landscape, Inc. for arboricultural services at the North Palm Beach Country Club to increase the amount of compensation from $40,000 to $49,048.16; and authorizing execution of the Amendment. 6. RESOLUTION – Amending the Comprehensive Pay Plan adopted as part of the Fiscal Year 2022 Budget to include two additional part-time Solid Waste Refuse Collector positions. 7. RESOLUTION – Approving an Amendment to the Contract with J.W. Cheatham, LLC for the milling, resurfacing and striping of specified Village roadways to modify the scope and increase the total amount of the Contract by $46,191.90; and authorizing execution of the Amendment. 8. RESOLUTION – Approving a Contract with Ballard Partners for Legislative and Executive Agency Advocacy Services in the amount of $72,000; and authorizing execution of the Contract. Regular Session Agenda, December 09, 2021 Page 3 of 3 9. Receive for file Minutes of the Police and Fire Pension Board meeting held 8/10/21. 10. Receive for file Minutes of the Golf Advisory Board meeting held 10/25/21. 11. Receive for file Minutes of the Recreation Advisory Board meeting held 11/9/21. 12. Receive for file Minutes of the Waterways Board meeting held 11/17/21. OTHER VILLAGE BUSINESS MATTERS 13. PRESENTATION – Utility Undergrounding Master Plan and Feasibility Study 14. PRESENTATION – Twin City Mall Market Analysis 15. RESOLUTION – QUASI-JUDICIAL PROCEDURES – TABLED 11/18/21 Consider a motion to adopt a proposed resolution adopting procedures applicable to quasi-judicial proceedings before the Village Council and Planning Commission. 16. DISCUSSION – Lakeside Park Parking Pass System COUNCIL AND ADMINISTRATION MATTERS MAYOR AND COUNCIL MATTERS/REPORTS VILLAGE MANAGER MATTERS/REPORTS REPORTS (SPECIAL COMMITTEES AND ADVISORY BOARDS) 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 SPECIAL SESSION VILLAGE COUNCIL OF NORTH PALM BEACH, FLORIDA NOVEMBER 18, 2021 Present: Darryl C. Aubrey, Sc.D., Mayor Deborah Searcy, Vice Mayor Mark Mullinix, President Pro Tem David B. Norris, Councilmember Susan Bickel, Councilmember Andrew D. Lukasik, Village Manager Len Rubin, Village Attorney Jessica Green, Village Clerk ROLL CALL Vice Mayor Searcy called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. All members of Council were physically present except for Mayor Aubrey who attended the meeting virtually. All members of staff were present. INVOCATION AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Vice Mayor Searcy gave the invocation and President Pro Tem Mullinix led the public in the Pledge. APPROVAL OF MINUTES The Minutes of the Regular Session held October 28, 2021 were approved as written. STATEMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC John Samadi, 512 Marlin Road, expressed his concerns with Council not responding to him regarding his complaints about certain employees of the Village. Chris Ryder, 118 Dory Road S, discussed and expressed his concerns regarding Palm Beach Crew’s use of Anchorage Park and its dry storage. Lisa Interlandi, 150 Anchorage Drive, discussed her concerns with proposed restrictions for Lakeside Park and gave her recommendations for easing its parking issues. Judy Pierman, 560 Greenway Drive, expressed her kudos to the Village for its events and the opportunity that was afforded to the Youth Orchestra to practice in the Country Club Banquet Room. Ms. Pierman stated that the Youth Orchestra was recognized by the Palm Beach Post. PUBLIC HEARINGS AND QUASI-JUDICIAL MATTERS There was no ex-parte communication for the following item: PUBLIC HEARING AND SECOND READING OF ORDINANCE 2021-12 PROSPERITY VILLAGE PUD Draft Minutes of the Village Council Special Session held November 18, 2021 Page 2 of 6 PUBLIC HEARING AND SECOND READING OF ORDINANCE 2021-12 PROSPERITY VILLAGE PUD continued A motion was made by President Pro Tem Mullinix and seconded by Councilmember Norris to adopt and enact on second reading Ordinance 2021-12 entitled: AN ORDINANCE OF THE VILLAGE COUNCIL OF THE VILLAGE OF NORTH PALM BEACH, FLORIDA, CREATING A RESIDENTIAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT TO BE KNOWN AS “PROSPERITY VILLAGE” ON APPROXIMATELY 2.33 ACRES OF REAL PROPERTY LOCATED ON THE WEST SIDE OF PROSPERITY FARMS ROAD SOUTH OF ALLAMANDA DRIVE, AS MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED HEREIN; PROVIDING FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE PROPERTY IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PLANS, SPECIFICATIONS, WAIVERS AND CONDITIONS REFERENCED IN THIS ORDINANCE; PROVIDING PROCEDURES FOR FUTURE MODIFICATIONS; PROVIDING FOR CONFLICTS; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. Donaldson Hearing of Cotleur & Hearing stated that a detailed presentation regarding the proposed Prosperity Village PUD was heard on first reading at the October 28th Council meeting and requested that the presentation be made part of the record. Mr. Hearing gave a brief summary of the proposed project. Mr. Hearing requested final approval for the proposed project. Vice Mayor Searcy opened public comment. Deborah Cross, 2560 Pepperwood Circle South expressed her concerns regarding the proposed Prosperity Village PUD and asked that it be tabled in order to have time to address those concerns. There being no further comments, Vice Mayor Searcy closed the public hearing. Mayor Aubrey, President Pro Tem Norris and Councilmember Norris expressed support for the proposed Prosperity Village PUD. Vice Mayor Searcy and Councilmember Bickel expressed that they did not support the proposed Prosperity Village PUD. Thereafter, the motion to adopt and enact on second reading Ordinance 2021-12 passed 3 to 2 with Mayor Aubrey, President Pro Tem Mullinix and Councilmember Norris voting aye and Vice Mayor Searcy and Councilmember Bickel voting nay. PUBLIC HEARING AND SECOND READING OF ORDINANCE 2021-19 CODE AMENDMENT – CIVIL CITATIONS A motion was made by Councilmember Norris and seconded by Councilmember Bickel to adopt and enact on second reading Ordinance 2021-19 entitled: AN ORDINANCE OF THE VILLAGE COUNCIL OF THE VILLAGE OF NORTH PALM BEACH, FLORIDA, AMENDING CHAPTER 2, “ADMINISTRATION,” OF THE VILLAGE CODE OF ORDINANCES BY AMENDING ARTICLE VII, “ALTERNATE METHOD OF CODE ENFORCEMENT,” TO MODIFY THE PROCEDURES APPLICABLE TO THE ISSUANCE OF CIVIL CODE ENFORCEMENT CITATIONS; PROVIDING FOR CODIFICATION; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; PROVIDING FOR CONFLICTS; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. Draft Minutes of the Village Council Special Session held November 18, 2021 Page 3 of 6 PUBLIC HEARING AND SECOND READING OF ORDINANCE 2021-19 CODE AMENDMENT – CIVIL CITATIONS continued Mr. Rubin explained the purpose of the proposed ordinance and stated that nothing had changed since the first reading. Mr. Rubin stated that staff would be bringing forward a resolution to a future meeting that would update the list of code sections that may be enforced by citation and would modify the fine schedule for various violations of the Village Code. Vice Mayor Searcy opened public comment. There being no comments from the public, Vice Mayor Searcy closed the public hearing. Thereafter, the motion to adopt and enact on second reading Ordinance 2021-19 passed unanimously. PUBLIC HEARING AND SECOND READING OF ORDINANCE 2021-20 CODE AMENDMENT – FIRES AND GRILLS IN PARKS A motion was made by President Pro Tem Mullinix and seconded by Councilmember Bickel to adopt and enact on second reading Ordinance 2021-20 entitled: AN ORDINANCE OF THE VILLAGE COUNCIL OF THE VILLAGE OF NORTH PALM BEACH, FLORIDA, AMENDING ARTICLE I, “IN GENERAL,” OF CHAPTER 20, “PARKS, PLAYGROUNDS AND RECREATION,” OF THE VILLAGE CODE OF ORDINANCES TO ADOPT A NEW SECTION 20-10, “PROHIBITED FIRES AND GRILLS;” PROVIDING FOR CODIFICATION; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; PROVIDING FOR CONFLICTS; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. Mr. Lukasik explained the purpose of the ordinance and that there had been no changes since its first reading. The ordinance would allow the use of grills in Village parks if they are provided by the Village or if it was a contractor acting under the authority of the Village. The ordinance precludes the use of private grills or having open flames in the parks. Vice Mayor Searcy opened public comment. There being no comments from the public, Vice Mayor Searcy closed the public hearing. Vice Mayor Searcy asked if grills had been ordered for the parks. Mr. Lukasik stated that grills had not been ordered yet. Mr. Lukasik stated that conversations were needed with the Recreation Advisory Board or Council to provide direction. Council came to consensus to have the Recreation Advisory Board make a recommendation for the new grills in the Village’s parks. Thereafter, the motion to adopt and enact on second reading Ordinance 2021-20 passed unanimously. Draft Minutes of the Village Council Special Session held November 18, 2021 Page 4 of 6 CONSENT AGENDA APPROVED President Pro Tem Mullinix moved to approve the Consent Agenda. Mayor Aubrey seconded the motion, which passed unanimously. The following items were approved: Resolution approving an increase in the purchase order issued to Hy-Byrd Incorporated for building inspection services for Fiscal Year 2021 by $20,425. Resolution amending the Comprehensive Pay Plan adopted as part of the Fiscal Year 2022 Budget to include a part-time Functional Manager Position. Receive for file Minutes of the General Employees Pension Board meeting held 8/3/21. Receive for file Minutes of the Planning Commission meeting held 10/5/21. Receive for file Minutes of the Library Advisory Board meeting held 10/26/21. OTHER VILLAGE BUSINESS MATTERS PRESENTATION – RECREATION NEEDS ASSESSMENT SURVEY Mr. Barth of Barth and Associates gave a final presentation on the recreation needs assessment survey results. Mr. Barth reviewed and discussed the scope of work, needs assessment finding and recommendations. Mr. Barth concluded the presentation by asking if Council had any questions. Vice Mayor Searcy asked what the next step would be. Mr. Lukasik explained that the strategic prioritization process that is done every year is when and how the recreation needs would be addressed. Discussion ensued between Councilmembers and Mr. Barth regarding recreation programs that were desired or needed in the Village. RESOLUTION – QUASI-JUDICIAL PROCEDURES A motion was made by Councilmember Norris and seconded by President Pro Tem Mullinix to adopt a Resolution entitled: A RESOLUTION OF THE VILLAGE COUNCIL OF THE VILLAGE OF NORTH PALM BEACH, FLORIDA, ADOPTING PROCEDURES APPLICABLE TO QUASI-JUDICIAL PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE VILLAGE COUNCIL AND PLANNING COMMISSION; PROVIDING FOR CONFLICTS; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. Mr. Rubin explained that the Village never formally adopted a formal quasi-judicial proceeding. Mr. Rubin stated that formal procedures were not legally required, however based on the revisions and updates to the Village’s Commercial Zoning Code, Village staff anticipated an increase in both the total number of quasi-judicial proceedings and the number of proceedings before Council. Mr. Rubin discussed and explained what types of matters were considered quasi-judicial. If the quasi-judicial matter involved an Ordinance with more than one reading, the first reading would constitute the quasi-judicial proceeding. The Council may ratify its prior decision or re-open the hearing. The proposed procedures also provide a procedure for participation by interested persons. Interested persons who meet the required criteria would be entitled to participate in the hearing and be afforded an opportunity to be heard in the same manner as party to the proceedings. Mr. Rubin discussed and explained the proposed procedures for quasi-judicial proceedings. Draft Minutes of the Village Council Special Session held November 18, 2021 Page 5 of 6 RESOLUTION – QUASI-JUDICIAL PROCEDURES continued David Milledge of Cotleur & Hearing requested that Council direct staff to research what qualifies persons as an interested or affected party and come up with a specific procedure. Mr. Rubin explained that the proposed procedure was modeled after the Village’s notice requirements. Questions and discussion ensued between Councilmembers and Mr. Rubin regarding the proposed procedures for quasi-judicial proceedings. Council requested that revisions be made to the proposed quasi-judicial procedures to include a more expansive definition of what would constitute an interested person that would be afforded party status. A motion was made by Councilmember Norris and seconded by Councilmember Bickel to table the Resolution adopting procedures applicable to quasi-judicial proceedings to the next scheduled Council meeting. Thereafter the motion passed unanimously. RESOLUTION 2021-95 – DISCLAIMING VILLAGE’S INTEREST IN A DRAINAGE EASEMENT A motion was made by Councilmember Norris and seconded by President Pro Tem Mullinix to adopt Resolution 2021-95 entitled: A RESOLUTION OF THE VILLAGE COUNCIL OF THE VILLAGE OF NORTH PALM BEACH, FLORIDA, DISCLAIMING THE VILLAGE’S INTEREST IN A DRAINAGE EASEMENT IN FAVOR OF PALM BEACH COUNTY ENCUMBERING A VACANT PARCEL OF REAL PROPERTY LOCATED ON THE WEST SIDE OF PROSPERITY FARMS ROAD SOUTH OF ALLAMANDA DRIVE, AS MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED HEREIN; PROVIDING FOR CONFLICTS; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. Mr. Rubin explained that the Village received a request from the property owner of the site for the proposed Prosperity Village Planned Unit Development to disclaim the Village’s interest in a Drainage Easement located on one of the vacant parcels. The easement runs in favor of Palm Beach County, which owns the roadway. All other portions of the easement have already been abandoned and was not utilized by the Village or any other utility provider. Northern Palm Beach County Improvement District had already indicated that it had no objection to abandonment of the easement. Thereafter, the motion to adopt Resolution 2021-95 passed with all present voting aye. MAYOR AND COUNCIL MATTERS/REPORTS Councilmember Bickel asked that Mr. Rubin address comments made by Mr. Ryder regarding Palm Beach Crew’s use of Anchorage Park. Mr. Rubin stated that he would address Mr. Ryder’s questions and concerns when the agreement for Palm Beach Crew came back before Council for consideration. President Pro Tem Mullinix stated that he addressed Mr. Samadi’s comments and concerns by speaking with Village Manager Lukasik. President Pro Tem Mullinix stated that Council did not deal directly with employees and that he was confident that Mr. Lukasik was handling and addressing Mr. Samadi’s concerns. Draft Minutes of the Village Council Special Session held November 18, 2021 Page 6 of 6 VILLAGE MANAGER MATTERS/REPORTS Mr. Lukasik stated that Public Works Director Chuck Huff would introduce a new staff member. Mr. Huff introduced Keith Davis as the new Fleet Manager in the Public Works Department. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business to come before the Council, the meeting was adjourned at 8:23 p.m. VILLAGE OF NORTH PALM BEACH VILLAGE ATTORNEY’S OFFICE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT TO: Honorable Mayor and Council THRU: Andrew D. Lukasik, Village Manager FROM: Leonard G. Rubin, Village Attorney Jeremy Hubsch, Community Development Director DATE: December 9, 2021 SUBJECT: ORDINANCE 1st Reading – Ordinance Prohibiting Time Share Units and Fractional Ownership properties within the Village’s Residential Zoning Districts Based on concerns raised by residents, the Village Council directed the Village Attorney to draft an Ordinance prohibiting fractional ownership properties within the Village’s residential zoning districts. A fractional ownership unit is similar to a time-share unit, which is defined by the Village Code as “a dwelling unit in which the right of use or occupancy circulates among various persons for specific periods of time less than one (1) year in accordance with a fixed time schedule.” The Village Code currently restricts time-share units to the following three commercial zoning districts: the C-MU US-1 Mixed Use Zoning District, the C-NB Northlake Boulevard Zoning District, and the C-3 Regional Business District. While time-share units are not specifically prohibited within the Village’s residential zoning districts, according to the principles applicable to the interpretation of municipal ordinances, the specific inclusion of a permitted use in one district generally means that the use is prohibited in other zoning districts where not specifically listed. Fractional ownership v. time-shares: The Code does not currently address the fractional ownership of real property, which differs slightly from time-share units. Fractional ownership of residential property is an emerging trend in which shares of ownership rights to a property are sold to multiple buyers, thus providing each buyer an ownership interest and the right to use the property for a certain period of time. Although this model effectively operates similarly to a time-share, fractional ownership typically conveys actual ownership rights instead of a right to use of the property for a certain period of time only, and also divides a property into fewer fractions than a typical time-share arrangement. In a typical fractional ownership scheme, the fraction of ownership may directly correlate to the amount of time the owner is permitted to use and/or occupy the dwelling unit, whereas in a typical time-share scheme, the customer typically buys only the rights to use the property for a set period of time. Impacts of transient uses on established neighborhoods: Both time-shares and fractional ownership negatively impact and undermine the stability of established residential neighborhoods by introducing transient uses and the adverse impacts typically associated with such uses. The introduction of time-share units and fractional ownership properties within established neighborhoods can disturb the quiet enjoyment of the residents of the neighborhood and create numerous secondary impacts, including noise, loss of privacy, traffic, parking and a greater demand on public services. Fractional ownership further reduces the number of available housing units from the housing market for long-term residents to utilize and can adversely impact future development, redevelopment, safety and property maintenance as a result of the complexities associated with the incongruent and changing objectives, intents and goals of multiple owners. While the impacts of both time-shares and fractional ownership are similar to vacation rentals and community (recovery) residences, the Village is cannot prohibit these uses pursuant to state and federal law. Proposed revisions to the Village Code: The attached Ordinance amends Section 45-2 of the Village Code to provide the following definition f or the term fractional ownership: Fractional ownership shall mean shared ownership of a property, entitlement to ownership rights of a property, entitlement to use a property, or possession of property through any means whereby an owner of the property or fraction thereof, receives ownership rights in, or the right to use, the property for a period of time less than one (1) full year within a two (2) year period. As discussed above, the Village Code already defines a time share unit as “a dwelling unit in which the right of use or occupancy circulates among various persons for specific periods of time less than one (1) year in accordance with a fixed time schedule.” The Ordinance also amends Section 45-36 of the Village Code to add a new subsection (V) to read as follows: V. Time-share units and fractional ownership. Time-share units and the fractional ownership of any parcel of real property shall be prohibited in all residential zoning districts. Such prohibition shall not include community residences or vacation rentals as defined and regulated in this chapter. Planning Commission: At its November 9, 2021 meeting, the Planning Commission reviewed the proposed Ordinance at a public hearing and voted to recommend approval to the Village Council. The attached Ordinance has been prepared by the Village Attorney and reviewed for legal sufficiency. There is no fiscal impact. Recommendation: Village Staff requests Council consideration and approval on first reading of the attached Ordinance prohibiting time share units and fractional ownership properties within the Village’s Residential Zoning Districts. Page 1 of 3 ORDINANCE NO. _____ 1 2 AN ORDINANCE OF THE VILLAGE COUNCIL OF THE VILLAGE OF NORTH 3 PALM BEACH, FLORIDA, AMENDING APPENDIX C (CHAPTER 45), 4 “ZONING,” OF THE VILLAGE CODE OF ORDINANCES TO INCORPORATE A 5 DEFINITION OF FRACTIONAL OWNERSHIP AND EXPRESSLY PROHIBIT 6 FRACTIONAL OWNERSHIP UNITS AND TIME -SHARE UNITS IN THE 7 VILLAGE’S RESIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICTS; AMENDING SECTION 45 -2, 8 “DEFINITIONS,” AND SECTION 45-36, “GENERAL PROVISIONS;” 9 PROVIDING FOR CODIFICATION; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; 10 PROVIDING FOR CONFLICTS; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. 11 12 WHEREAS, to the extent not preempted by state or federal law, the Village possesses the Home Rule 13 Authority granted by the Florida Constitution and Chapter 166, Florida Statutes, to regulate local land 14 use issues; and 15 16 WHEREAS, the Village Code of Ordinances currently allows time-share units within specified mixed 17 use and commercial zoning districts, specifically the C-MU US-1 Mixed Use District, the C-NB 18 Northlake Boulevard Commercial District, and the C-3 Regional Business District; and 19 20 WHEREAS, according to the general principles applicable to the interpretation of municipal 21 ordinances, the specific inclusion of a permitted use in one district means that the use is prohibited in 22 other zoning districts where not specifically listed; and 23 24 WHEREAS, the Village Council wishes to confirm and expressly prohibit time-share units within its 25 residential zoning districts and to expand the prohibition to include fractional ownership; and 26 27 WHEREAS, fractional ownership of residential property is an emerging trend in which shares of 28 ownership rights to a property are sold to multiple buyers, thus providing each buyer an ownership 29 interest and the right to use the property for a certain period of time; and 30 31 WHEREAS, although this model effectively operates similarly to a time -share, it typically conveys 32 actual ownership rights instead of a right to use of the property for a certain period of time only, and 33 also divides a property into fewer fractions than a typical time-share arrangement; and 34 35 WHEREAS, in a typical fractional ownership scheme, the fraction of ownership may directly 36 correlate to the amount of time the owner is permitted to use and/or occupy the dwelling unit, whereas 37 in a typical time-share scheme, the customer typically buys only the rights to use the property for a 38 set period of time; and 39 40 WHEREAS, recent trends indicate that fractional ownership schemes are being applied to single-41 family residences; and 42 43 WHEREAS, both time-shares and fractional ownership negatively impact and undermine the stability 44 of established residential neighborhoods by introducing a transient use and the adverse impacts 45 typically associated with such use; and 46 47 WHEREAS, the introduction of time-share units and fractional ownership properties within 48 established neighborhoods can disturb the quiet enjoyment of the residents of the neighborhood and 49 Page 2 of 3 create numerous secondary impacts, including noise, loss of privacy, traffic, parking and a greater 1 demand on public services; and 2 3 WHEREAS, fractional ownership further reduces the number of available housing units from the 4 housing market for long-term residents to utilize; and 5 6 WHEREAS, fractional ownership can adversely impact future development, redevelopment, safety 7 and property maintenance as a result of the complexities associated with the incongruent and changing 8 objectives, intents and goals of multiple owners; and 9 10 WHEREAS, as required by Section 21-12 of the Village Code of Ordinances, the Village’s Planning 11 Commission conducted a duly advertised public hearing on this Ordinance and provided its 12 recommendation to the Village Council; and 13 14 WHEREAS, the Village Council determines that the adoption of this Ordinance benefits the public 15 health, safety and welfare of the residents of the Village of North Palm Beach. 16 17 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE VILLAGE COUNCIL OF THE VILLAGE OF 18 NORTH PALM BEACH, FLORIDA as follows: 19 20 Section 1. The foregoing “Whereas” clauses are hereby ratified and incorporated herein. 21 22 Section 2. The Village Council hereby amends Article I, “In General,” of Appendix C (Chapter 23 45), “Zoning,” of the Village Code of Ordinances by amending Section 45-2 to read as follows 24 (additional language underlined): 25 26 Sec. 45-2. Definitions. 27 28 For the purposes of this Code, certain words and terms are defined as follows: 29 30 * * * 31 32 Fractional ownership shall mean shared ownership of a property, entitlement 33 to ownership rights of a property, entitlement to use a property, or possession of 34 property through any means whereby an owner of the property or fraction thereof, 35 receives ownership rights in, or the right to use, the property for a period of time less 36 than one (1) full year within a two (2) year period. 37 38 * * * 39 40 Time-share unit is a dwelling unit in which the right of use or occupancy 41 circulates among various persons for specific periods of time less than one (1) year in 42 accordance with a fixed time schedule. 43 44 Section 3. The Village Council hereby amends Article III, “District Regulations,” of Appendix 45 C (Chapter 45), “Zoning,” of the Village Code of Ordinances by amending Section 45-36 to read as 46 follows: 47 48 49 Page 3 of 3 Sec. 45-36. General provisions. 1 2 The provisions of this article shall be subject to the following provisions and 3 exceptions: 4 5 * * * 6 7 V. Time-share units and fractional ownership. 8 9 Time-share units and the fractional ownership of any parcel of real property 10 shall be prohibited in all residential zoning districts. Such prohibition shall not include 11 community residences or vacation rentals as defined and regulated in this chapter. 12 13 Section 4. The provisions of this Ordinance shall become and be made a part of the Code of the 14 Village of North Palm Beach, Florida. 15 16 Section 5. If any section, paragraph, sentence, clause, phrase, or word of this Ordinance is for 17 any reason held by a court of competent jurisdiction to be unconstitutional, inoperative or void, such 18 holding shall not affect the remainder of the Ordinance. 19 20 Section 6. All ordinances or parts of ordinances in conflict with this Ordinance are hereby 21 repealed to the extent of such conflict. 22 23 Section 7. This Ordinance shall become effective immediately upon adoption 24 25 PLACED ON FIRST READING THIS _____ DAY OF ________________, 2021. 26 27 PLACED ON SECOND, FINAL READING AND PASSED THIS ______ DAY OF ___________, 28 2022. 29 30 31 (Village Seal) 32 MAYOR 33 34 35 ATTEST: 36 37 38 VILLAGE CLERK 39 40 41 APPROVED AS TO FORM AND 42 LEGAL SUFFICIENCY: 43 44 45 VILLAGE ATTORNEY 46 47 VILLAGE OF NORTH PALM BEACH VILLAGE ATTORNEY’S OFFICE TO: Honorable Mayor and Council THRU: Andrew D. Lukasik, Village Manager FROM: Leonard G. Rubin, Village Attorney DATE: December 9, 2021 SUBJECT: ORDINANCE 1st Reading – Ordinance adopting formal parking citation procedures and expanding parking restrictions on rights-of-way in the vicinity of Lakeside Park Article III of Chapter 18 of the Village Code generally regulates parking throughout the Village. As authorized by Section 316.008, Florida Statutes, the Village may regulate or prohibit stopping, standing and parking on streets and highways within its jurisdiction through the exercise of its police powers. The purpose of the attached Ordinance is to standardize the Village’s procedures for the issuance of parking citations and expand the Village’s enforcement authority. The proposed Ordinance accomplishes the following:  Expands the restrictions on parking set forth in Section 18-34.1(b) of the Village Code on rights- of way in the vicinity of Lakeside Park by allowing for the enforcement of such restrictions between sunrise and sunset on a daily basis (in lieu of weekends and holidays only).  Provides for general prohibitions against stopping, parking and standing (except when necessary to avoid conflict with other traffic or in compliance with the directions of a law enforcement officer or traffic control device) in the following areas:  On a sidewalk or in such a manner that any part of the vehicle is protruding over the sidewalk;  Within any intersection or crosswalk;  On a bicycle path or exclusive bicycle lane;  Within a marked fire lane; and  Within any are where a sign or other traffic control device (including signals, markings and devices placed or erected by the Village for the purpose of regulating, warning or guiding motor vehicles and traffic) prohibits standing, stopping or parking.  Adopts standard parking citation procedures and allows the issuance of citations for any Code provision regulating parking, including those applicable within Village parks (including the boat launching area at Anchorage Park) and registered vacation rentals.  Allows for the issuance of citations by a law enforcement officer, a code enforcement officer or a park ranger.  Provides procedures for the payment of fines, the assessment of delinquent fees, and a method for challenging a parking citation before the Village’s Code Enforcement Special Magistrate.  Allows fines that remain unpaid to be referred for collection to a collection agency designated by the Village. The Ordinance specifically provides that the issuance of a parking citation is an additional and supplemental means of enforcing the Village Code and shall not prohibit the enforcement of the Village’s Codes and Ordinances by any other means. The Ordinance also incorporates the statutory provisions applicable to parking in spaces reserved for the physically disabled, for which the fine is established by statute at $250.00. The Ordinance removes the fines for violations of Section 5-33 (requiring vehicles using the boat ramps at Anchorage Park to have a Village launch sticker) and Section 5-35 (parking at the boat launch area) set forth in Section 5-38 of the Village Code so that these fines may be adopted (and modified) by resolution of the Village Council. Village Staff will be bringing back a proposed fine schedule, along with the fine schedule for code enforcement civil citations, at the first Village Council meeting in January. The attached Ordinance has been prepared and reviewed for legal sufficiency by the Village Attorney. There is no fiscal impact. Recommendation: Village Staff requests Council consideration and approval on first reading of the attached Ordinance adopting formal parking citations procedures and modifying the parking regulations set forth in Chapter 18 of the Village Code of Ordinances. Page 1 of 7 ORDINANCE NO. 2021-____ 1 2 AN ORDINANCE OF THE VILLAGE COUNCIL OF THE VILLAGE OF NORTH 3 PALM BEACH, FLORIDA, AMENDING ARTICLE III, “STOPPING, STANDING 4 AND PARKING,” OF CHAPTER 18, “MOTOR VEHICLES AND TRAFFIC,” OF 5 THE VILLAGE CODE OF ORDINANCES TO UPDATE THE VILLAGE’S 6 REGULATIONS AND FORMALIZE THE PARKING CITATION PROCEDURE; 7 AMENDING SECTION 18-34.1, “VEHICLE, TRAILER OR BOAT PARKING 8 PROHIBITED UPON PAVED OR UNPAVED AREA OF ROAD RIGHT-OF-WAY 9 OF SPECIFIC ROADWAYS,” TO ALLOW FOR DAILY ENFORCEMENT OF THE 10 RESTRICTIONS IN SUBSECTION (B); REPEALING SECTION 18-36, “PARKING 11 IN VIOLATION OF SIGNS,” SECTION 18-37, ‘VIOLATIONS; FINES – 12 HANDICAP SPACES,” AND SECTION 18-38, “SAME – NON-HANDICAP 13 SPACES,” AND ADOPTING A NEW SECTION 18-36, “STOPPING, STANDING 14 AND PARKING IN SPECIFIED AREAS,” SECTION 18-37, “PARKING CITATION 15 PROCEDURE,” SECTION 18-38, “FINES,” AND SECTION 18-39, “PARKING 16 SPACES FOR THE PHYSICALLY DISABLED;” AMENDING ARTICLE II, “BOAT 17 LAUNCHING AREA,” OF CHAPTER 5, “BOATS, DOCKS AND WATERWAYS,” 18 BY REPEALING SECTION 5-38, “VIOLATION; PENALTY;” PROVIDING FOR 19 CODIFICATION; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; PROVIDING FOR 20 CONFLICTS; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. 21 22 WHEREAS, the Village of North Palm Beach, as a duly organized Florida municipality, 23 possesses the Home Rule Authority conferred upon it by the Florida Constitution and Chapter 166, 24 Florida Statutes; and 25 26 WHEREAS, Section 316.008, Florida Statutes, authorizes municipalities, with respect to streets 27 and highways under their jurisdiction and within the reasonable exercise of their police powers, to 28 regulate or prohibit stopping, standing and parking; and 29 30 WHEREAS, the Village Council wishes to amend Article III, “Stopping, Standing and 31 Parking,” of Chapter 18, “Motor Vehicles and Traffic,” of the Village Code of Ordinance to: modify 32 the regulations set forth in Section 18-34.1(b) applicable to rights-of-way in the vicinity of Lakeside 33 Park; provide additional regulations applicable to parking, stopping and standing; update and formalize 34 the Village’s parking citation procedures and extend such procedures to all Village Code provisions 35 regulating parking; and provide for the establishment of all fines by resolution of the Village Council 36 (including the removal of fines currently set forth in Chapter 5 of the Village Code); and 37 38 WHEREAS, the Village Council determines that the adoption of this Ordinance is in the best 39 interests of the residents of the Village of North Palm Beach. 40 41 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE VILLAGE COUNCIL OF THE VILLAGE OF 42 NORTH PALM BEACH, FLORIDA as follows: 43 44 Section 1. The foregoing “Whereas” clauses are hereby ratified as true and correct and are 45 incorporated herein. 46 47 Page 2 of 7 Section 2. The Village Council hereby amends Chapter 18, “Motor Vehicles and Traffic,” of the 1 Village Code of Ordinances by amending Article III, “Stopping, Standing and Parking,” to read as 2 follows (additional language is underlined and deleted language is stricken through): 3 4 ARTICLE III. - STOPPING, STANDING AND PARKING 5 6 * * * 7 Sec. 18-34. Parking restricted. 8 9 (a) Between the hours of 2:00 a.m. and 6:00 a.m. on streets where no curbing is 10 provided, the parking of a vehicle shall not usurp more than twelve (12) inches 11 of the paved portion of the street. 12 13 (b) No person shall leave any truck, trailer, boat or any vehicle of a similar type 14 parked upon any public street or highway within the village between the hours 15 of 12:30 a.m. and 6:00 a.m. 16 17 (c) No truck with a payload or carrying capacity (truck model rating) in excess of 18 one-ton shall be parked upon a public street or highway inclusive of swale area 19 within the village; provided, however, commercial vehicles making deliveries 20 or pickups or otherwise servicing residential, commercial or industrial property 21 within the village shall have the right, if necessary, to temporarily park in such 22 areas during normal business hours. 23 24 (d) No truck with a payload or carrying capacity (truck model rating) in excess of 25 one-ton shall be parked at any time upon private property within the village 26 unless such truck is being utilized as part of an existing business on the private 27 property; provided, however, commercial vehicles making deliveries or 28 pickups or otherwise servicing residential, commercial or industrial property 29 within the village shall have the right, if necessary to temporarily park upon 30 private property during normal business hours. 31 32 (e) The following vehicles shall not be parked overnight (from 11:00 p.m. to 7:00 33 a.m.) in any residential zoning district, unless parked within a fully enclosed 34 garage: 35 36 (1) Tractor trailers, and semi-trailer trucks; 37 38 (2) Tow trucks, wreckers or flat bed vehicle carriers; 39 40 (3) Commercial buses, school buses, or vans accommodating more than 41 sixteen (16) passengers; 42 43 (4) Dump trucks; 44 45 (5) Construction equipment and vehicles, including farm tractors, 46 backhoes, front-end loaders, cranes, cement mixers, pitch buckets or 47 similar items; 48 Page 3 of 7 (6) Step vans, panel trucks or other vehicles with rectangular bulk and a 1 payload or carrying capacity in excess of one-ton; 2 3 (7) Any vehicle used and designed for the commercial sale of food or 4 beverages; 5 6 (8) More than one (1) taxi, car service vehicle, or limousine; 7 8 (9) Stretch limousines (i.e., any automobile, sport utility vehicle or van for 9 hire, and of original manufacture or remanufacture, that exceeds a 10 seating capacity of eight (8) persons); 11 12 (10) Boom or bucket trucks; 13 14 (11) Swamp buggies and half-tracks; 15 16 (12) Tandem wheel pick up trucks (dooley type); and 17 18 (13) Vehicles that exceed eight (8) feet in height, inclusive of attached 19 equipment and accessories. 20 21 (f) In addition to the foregoing, vehicles with commercial advertising or markings 22 that occupy more than ten (10) square feet of any given side of the vehicle shall 23 not be parked overnight (from 11:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m.) in any residential 24 zoning district unless: 25 26 (1) The vehicle is covered with a fitted vehicle cover specifically 27 manufactured for that purpose; 28 29 (2) The vehicle is parked within a fully enclosed garage or otherwise 30 screened from view from adjacent properties and rights-of-way; or 31 32 (3) The vehicle's commercial advertising or markings are completely 33 covered by magnetic signs affixed to the vehicle that have no markings 34 whatsoever and are the same color as the base paint of the vehicle. 35 36 Sec. 18-34.1. Vehicle, trailer or boat parking prohibited upon paved or unpaved 37 area of the road right-of-way of specific roadways. 38 39 (a) The parking of any vehicle, trailer or boat is hereby prohibited upon the paved 40 or unpaved area of the road right-of-way of those portions of the following 41 described roadways located within the corporate limits of the Village of North 42 Palm Beach, Florida: 43 44 State Road A-1-A; 45 46 Prosperity Farms Road; 47 48 Page 4 of 7 U.S. Highway # 1 (SR #5); 1 2 Northlake Boulevard; 3 4 800 Block of Lighthouse Drive; 5 6 North side of Lighthouse Drive between Lighthouse Bridge and one hundred 7 (100) feet east of the east right-of-way line of Lagoon Drive; 8 North Anchorage Drive from Eastwind Drive to U.S. #1 (SR #5); 9 10 South Anchorage Drive and Eastwind Drive adjacent to the North Palm Beach 11 Elementary School property only during the period starting one (1) hour prior 12 to and ending one (1) hour after published school hours inclusive; 13 14 Southerly most four hundred (400) feet of the westerly road right-of-way of 15 Castlewood Drive adjacent to the First Church of Christ Scientist. 16 17 (b) From sunrise to sunset on weekends and legal holidays, the parking of any 18 vehicle is hereby prohibited upon the paved or unpaved area of the road right-19 of-way of the following described roadways (or portions thereof) located 20 within the corporate limits of the Village of North Palm Beach, Florida: 21 22 Lakeside Drive from the southerly right-of-way line of Anchorage Drive North 23 south to Atlantic Road; 24 25 Atlantic Road; 26 27 Lakeside Court; 28 29 Lakeside Circle; 30 31 Lighthouse Drive from U.S. Highway One to Lakeside Drive; 32 33 Buoy Road; 34 35 Cruiser Road South; 36 37 Cruiser Road North; 38 39 Dory Road South; and 40 41 Dory Road North; 42 43 Notwithstanding the foregoing, residents may continue to park boats and boat 44 trailers and recreational vehicles and trailers in the swales of these roadways 45 on a temporary basis to the extent authorized by sections 18-35 and 18-35.1 of 46 this article. 47 48 Page 5 of 7 * * * 1 Sec. 18-36. Parking in violation of signs 2 3 It shall be unlawful, when signs have been erected giving notice thereof, to 4 stop, stand or park a vehicle in violation of signs regulating or prohibiting the stopping, 5 standing or parking of vehicles. 6 7 Sec. 18-36. Stopping, parking and standing prohibited in specified areas. 8 9 No person shall stop, park or leave standing a motor vehicle in any of the 10 following places, except when necessary to avoid conflict with other traffic or in 11 compliance with the directions of a law enforcement officer or traffic control device: 12 13 (1) On a sidewalk or in such a manner that any part of the vehicle is 14 protruding over a sidewalk; 15 16 (2) Within any intersection or crosswalk; 17 18 (3) On a bicycle path or exclusive bicycle lane; 19 20 (4) Within a marked fire lane; and 21 22 (5) Within any area where a sign or other traffic control device (including 23 signals, markings and devices placed or erected by the village for the 24 purpose of regulating, warning or guiding motor vehicles and traffic) 25 prohibits standing, stopping or parking. 26 27 Sec. 18-37. - Violations; fines—Handicap spaces. 28 29 The fine for stopping, standing or parking in handicap parking spaces in 30 violation of F.S. sections 316.1955, 316.1956 shall be in the amount of one hundred 31 dollars ($100.00). 32 33 Sec. 18-38. - Same—Non-handicap spaces. 34 35 The fine for stopping, standing and parking a vehicle in violation of provisions, 36 other than handicap parking provisions, of this article shall be in the amount of twenty-37 five dollars ($25.00). 38 39 Sec. 18-37. Parking citation procedure. 40 41 (a) Any violator of the provisions of this article or any other code provision 42 regulating parking within the village, including but not limited to Section 5-33, Section 43 5-35, Section 20-5, and Section 45-40(c)(4), may be notified of said violation by the 44 issuance of a citation to the operator of the vehicle or the attachment of the citation to 45 the vehicle by a law enforcement officer, code enforcement officer or in the case of 46 violations at village parks, a park ranger. 47 48 Page 6 of 7 (b) Payment of the parking fine may b e made at the police department 1 within the timeframe specified on the citation. 2 3 (c) If the violator does not pay the citation within the specified time frame, 4 the village shall assess a delinquent fee 5 6 (d) Persons wishing to challenge the issuance of a parking citation may 7 request a hearing before the village’s code enforcement special magistrate within the 8 timeframe specified on the citation. A request for a hearing or the failure to pay fine 9 amount and, if applicable, delinquent fee constitutes a waiver of the right to pay the 10 amount of the civil penalty indicated on the citation and subjects the person to whom 11 a citation is issued to a fine of up to up $150.00 plus administrative costs incurred by 12 the village (except for fines for disabled parking violations which shall not exceed 13 $250.00 plus administrative costs incurred by the village). 14 15 (e) If the specified fine, delinquent fee, and/or administrative costs are not 16 paid by the time set forth for payment, the entire amount may be referred for collection 17 to a collection agency designated by the village. 18 19 (f) The issuance of parking citations constitutes an additional and 20 supplemental means of enforcing the provisions of the village code and shall not 21 prohibit the village from enforcing its codes or ordinances by any other lawful means. 22 23 Sec. 18-38. Fine schedule. 24 25 With the exception of parking in spaces designated for the physically disabled, 26 for which in the penalty is specified in section 18-39, the village council shall adopt 27 by resolution a fine schedule and delinquent fee for the violations specified in Section 28 18-37(a). 29 30 Sec. 18-39. Parking spaces for the physically disabled 31 32 (a) The provisions of Sections 316.1955—316.1959, 316.1964 and 33 316.1967, Florida Statutes, are specifically incorporated herein by reference, and the 34 village is empowered to enforce such provisions. 35 36 (b) A violation of Section 316.1955, Florida Statutes, shall be deemed a 37 civil infraction, the fine for which shall be $250.00. The penalties set forth herein are 38 nonexclusive and may be imposed in addition to or in lieu of any other penalties set 39 forth in Florida Statutes. 40 41 Section 3. The Village Council hereby amends Article II, “Boat Launching Area,” of Chapter 5, 42 “Boats, Docks and Waterways,” of the Village Code of Ordinances by repealing Section 5-38 (deleted 43 language is stricken through): 44 45 Sec. 5-38. - Violation; penalty. 46 47 Page 7 of 7 Violation of any provision of section 5-33, Designated; use restricted 1 or section 5-35, Vehicle/trailer parking in designated areas; permits required, shall 2 result in a civil fine of fifty dollars ($50.00) for a first offense and one hundred dollars 3 ($100.00) for any subsequent violation. 4 5 Section 4. The provisions of this Ordinance shall become and be made part of the Code of 6 Ordinances for the Village of North Palm Beach, Florida. 7 8 Section 5. If any section, paragraph, sentence, clause, phrase or word of this Ordinances is for 9 any reason held by a court of competent jurisdiction to be unconstitutional, inoperative or void, such 10 holding shall not affect the remainder of the Ordinance. 11 12 Section 6. All ordinances and resolutions, or parts of ordinances and resolutions, in conflict 13 herewith are hereby repealed to the extent of such conflict. 14 15 Section 7. This Ordinance shall be effective immediately upon adoption. 16 17 PLACED ON FIRST READING THIS _____ DAY OF ________________, 2021. 18 19 PLACED ON SECOND, FINAL READING AND PASSED THIS ______ DAY OF ___________, 20 2022. 21 22 23 24 (Village Seal) 25 MAYOR 26 27 ATTEST: 28 29 30 VILLAGE CLERK 31 32 APPROVED AS TO FORM AND 33 LEGAL SUFFICIENCY: 34 35 36 VILLAGE ATTORNEY 37 VILLAGE OF NORTH PALM BEACH COUNTRY CLUB - GOLF OPERATIONS TO: Honorable Mayor and Council THRU: Andrew D. Lukasik, Village Manager FROM Allan Bowman, Head Golf Professional DATE: December 9, 2021 SUBJECT: RESOLUTION – Approving an Amendment to the Contract with All Florida Tree and Landscape, Inc. Through the adoption of Resolution No. 2021-84 on September 23, 2021, the Village Council approved a Contract with All Florida Tree and Landscaping, Inc. for Arboricultural Services in the amount of $40,000. However, due to the removal of some dead and invasive trees that weren’t identified in the initial scope of work, the cost of the services provided by the vendor exceeded the amount of the contract by $9,048.16. Village Staff is recommending approval of an Amendment to the Contract to increase the total amount of compensation to $49,048.16. Account Information: Fund Department / Division Account Number Account Description Amount Country Club Golf / Golf Course Maintenance L8045-33430 Tree Trimming $49,048.16 The attached Resolution and Amendment have been prepared and/or reviewed for legal sufficiency by the Village Attorney. Recommendation: Village Staff requests Council consideration and approval of the attached Resolution approving an Amendment to the Contract with All Florida Tree and Landscape, Inc. for Arboriculture Services to increase the total compensation amount to $49,048.16, with funds expended from Account No. L8045-33430 (Golf Course Maintenance – Tree Trimming) and authorizing the Mayor and Village Clerk to execute the Amendment in accordance with Village policies and procedures. RESOLUTION 2021-_____ A RESOLUTION OF THE VILLAGE COUNCIL OF THE VILLAGE OF NORTH PALM BEACH, FLORIDA APPROVING AN AMENDMENT TO THE CONTRACT WITH ALL FLORIDA TREE AND LANDSCAPE, INC. FOR ARBORICULTURAL SERVICES AT THE NORTH PALM BEACH COUNTRY CLUB GOLF COURSE AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND VILLAGE CLERK TO EXECUTE THE AMENDMENT ON BEHALF OF THE VILLAGE; PROVIDING FOR CONFLICTS; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, through the adoption of Resolution No. 2021-84 on September 23, 2021, the Village Council approved a Contract with All Florida Tree and Landscape, Inc. for arboricultural services at the North Palm Beach Country Club; and WHEREAS, due to the removal of additional (and previously unknown) dead and invasive trees, the parties wish to increase the amount of compensation payable under the Contract; and WHEREAS, the Village Council determines that the adoption of this Resolution is in the best interests of the residents of the Village of North Palm Beach. 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 approves an Amendment to the Contract with All Florida Tree and Landscape, Inc. for arboricultural services at the North Palm Beach Country Club Golf Course to increase the amount of compensation from $40,000.00 to $49,048.16, with funds expended from Account No. L8045-33430 (Golf Course Maintenance – Tree Trimming), and authorizes the Mayor and Village Clerk to execute the Amendment on behalf of the Village. Section 3. All resolutions or parts of resolutions in conflict with this Resolution are hereby repealed to the extent of such conflict. Section 4. This Resolution shall take effect immediately upon adoption. PASSED AND ADOPTED THIS ____DAY OF ____________, 2021. (Village Seal) MAYOR ATTEST: VILLAGE CLERK Page 1 of 2 AMENDMENT TO CONTRACT THIS AMENDMENT is made as of this _______ day of ______________, 2021, by and between the VILLAGE OF NORTH PALM BEACH, 501 U.S. Highway One, North Palm Beach, Florida 33408, a Florida municipal corporation (hereinafter “VILLAGE”), and ALL FLORIDA TREE & LANDSCAPE, INC., 1760 Jog Road, Suite 150, West Palm Beach, Florida 33411 (hereinafter “CONTRACTOR”), whose F.E.I. Number is 05-0567287. RECITALS WHEREAS, the VILLAGE and CONTRACTOR executed a Contract dated September 23, 2021, (“Contract”) whereby CONTRACTOR agreed to perform arboricultural services at the Country Club Golf Course based on pricing established in an existing City of Weston Contract; and WHEREAS, the VILLAGE and CONTRACTOR wish to amend the Contract to increase the total amount of compensation payable for services provided by CONTRACTOR. NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual promises set forth in the Contract, as modified herein, and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of wh ich are hereby acknowledged, the parties hereto agree as follows: 1. The foregoing recitals are ratified and incorporated herein. 2. Section 3.B of the Contract is hereby amended to read as follows: “The total cost of such services shall not exceed $49,048.16.” 3. All other provisions of the Contract, to the extent not expressly modified herein, shall remain in full force and effect. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the VILLAGE and CONTRACTOR hereto have made and executed this Amendment as of the day and year first above written. ALL FLORIDA TREE & LANDSCAPE, INC. By: Print Name:__________________________ Position:_____________________________ VILLAGE OF NORTH PALM BEACH By: ________________________________ DARRYL AUBREY MAYOR ATTEST: BY:________________________________ VILLAGE CLERK Page 2 of 2 APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGAL SUFFICIENCY BY: ________________________________ VILLAGE ATTORNEY RESOLUTION 2021-84 A RESOLUTION OF THE VILLAGE COUNCIL OF THE VILLAGE OF NORTH 1 PALM BEACH, FLORIDA APPROVING A CONTRACT AWARD TO ALL FLORIDA TREE AND LANDSCAPE, INC. FOR ARBORICULTURAL SERVICES AT THE NORTH PALM BEACH COUNTRY CLUB GOLF COURSE UTILIZING PRICING ESTABLISHED IN AN EXISTING AGREEMENT WITH THE CITY OF WESTON AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND VILLAGE CLERK TO EXECUTE THE CONTRACT ON BEHALF OF THE VILLAGE; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, the Village is in need of a contractor to perform arboricultural services at the North Palm Beach County Club Golf Course, including, but not limited to, trimming and pruning the oak trees, removing non-native species, stump grinding and basic trimming of other trees; and WHEREAS, Village Staff recommended that the Contract be awarded to All Florida Tree and Landscape, Inc. pursuant to pricing established in an existing Agreement for Arboricultural Services with the City of Weston (RFP No. 2017-12); and WHEREAS, the Village Council determines that the adoption of this Resolution is in the best interests of the citizens and residents of the Village of North Palm Beach. 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 approves a Contract with All Florida Tree and Landscape, Inc. for arboricultural services at the North Palm Beach Country Club Golf Course pursuant to pricing established in an existing Agreement for Arboricultural Services with the City of Weston (RFP No. 2017-12) and authorizes the Mayor and Village Clerk to execute the Contract on behalf of the Village, a copy of which is attached hereto and incorporated herein. The total cost of this Contract shall not exceed $40,000.00, with funds expended from Account No. L8045-33430 (Golf Course Maintenance — Tree Trimming). Section 3. This Resolution shall take effect immediately upon adoption. PASS TED THIS 23RDDAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2021. o.•. V RIDA 0 AYOR kATT VILLA CLERK Page 1 of 5 CONTRACT This Contract is made as of this 23rd day of September, 2021, by and between the VILLAGE OF NORTH PALM BEACH, 501 U.S. Highway One, North Palm Beach, Florida 33408, a Florida municipal corporation (hereinafter “VILLAGE”), and ALL FLORIDA TREE & LANDSCAPE, INC., 1760 Jog Road, Suite 150, West Palm Beach, Florida 33411 (hereinafter “CONTRACTOR”), whose F.E.I. Number is 05-0567287. RECITALS WHEREAS, the VILLAGE is in need of a contractor to perform arboricultural services at the North Palm Beach Country Club Golf Course; and WHEREAS, the City of Weston, through its competitive selection process, awarded an Agreement for Arboricultural Services (RFP No. 2017-12) (“Weston Contract”) to CONTRACTOR; and WHEREAS, the VILLAGE requested that CONTRACTOR provide the requested services based on the pricing established in the Weston Contract; and WHEREAS, as authorized by the VILLAGE’s purchasing policies and procedures, the VILLAGE desires to retain CONTRACTOR’s services by “piggy-backing” the Weston Contract, including all terms, conditions and pricing set forth therein. NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual promises set forth herein, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, the parties hereto agree as follows: 1. Recitals. The parties agree that the recitals set forth above are true and correct and are fully incorporated herein by reference. 2. WESTON Contract. The City of Weston’s Agreement for Arboricultural Services (RFP No. 2017-12) with CONTRACTOR, attached hereto as Exhibit “A,” is incorporated herein by reference. 3. CONTRACTOR’s Services and Time of Completion. A. In accordance with the terms and conditions of the Weston Contract and at the direction of the VILLAGE, CONTRACTOR shall perform arboricultural services at the North Palm Beach Country Club Golf Course, including, but not limited to, trimming and pruning the oak trees, removing non- native species, stump grinding and basic trimming of other trees. B. The total cost of such services shall not exceed $40,000.00. C. The services to be provided by CONTRACTOR shall be commenced subsequent to the execution and approval of this Contract by the VILLAGE and upon written notice from the VILLAGE to CONTRACTOR to proceed. 4. Conflict of Terms and Conditions. Conflicts between documents shall be resolved in the following order of precedence: A. This Contract DocuSign Envelope ID: 77865E8F-5445-4C93-BF63-125AFF178272DocuSignEnvelopeID: 91E434E4-CDA9-45F4-BFF0-64F4086EA333DocuSignEnvelopeID: FDE87C45-7C0D-4943-8F6C-07D7E88E25C3 Page 2 of 5 B. Exhibit “A” (WESTON Contract) 5. Compensation to CONTRACTOR. Payments by the VILLAGE to CONTRACTOR under this Contract shall not exceed the amount of compensation stated in Section 3(B) above without prior written consent of the VILLAGE. CONTRACTOR shall submit invoices to the VILLAGE for review and approval by the VILLAGE’s representative, indicating that goods and services have been provided and rendered in conformity with this Contract, and they then will be sent to the Finance Department for payment. Invoices will normally be paid within thirty (30) days following the VILLAGE representative’s approval. CONTRACTOR waives consequential or incidental damages for claims, disputes or other matters in question arising out of or relating to this Contract. In order for both parties herein to close their books and records, CONTRACTOR will clearly state “final invoice” on CONTRACTOR’s final/last billing to the VILLAGE. This certifies that all goods and services have been properly performed and all charges have been invoiced to the VILLAGE. Since this account will thereupon be closed, any and other further charges if not properly included in this final invoice are waived by CONTRACTOR. The VILLAGE will not be liable for any invoice from CONTRACTOR submitted thirty (30) days after the provision of all goods and services. 6. Term and Termination. A. This Contract shall be for the term as indicated in the Weston Contract. Extensions or renewals to the Weston Contract or any modification including new products, terms, or price changes to the Weston Contract shall be submitted by CONTRACTOR to the VILLAGE for approval. In the event the Weston Contract expires and no new contract is let by the Weston, the VILLAGE reserves the right, upon written agreement with CONTRACTOR to renew this Contract under the same terms and conditions for an additional period of one (1) year. B. This Contract may be terminated by the VILLAGE, with or without cause, upon providing ten 10) days’ notice to CONTRACTOR. This Contract may be terminated by CONTRACTOR upon providing thirty (30) days’ notice to the VILLAGE. Upon any such termination, CONTRACTOR waives any claims for damages from such termination, including, but not limited to, loss of anticipated profits. Unless CONTRACTOR is in breach of this Contract, the VILLAGE shall pay CONTRACTOR for work performed and accepted through the date of termination. 7. Insurance. CONTRACTOR shall obtain and maintain during the term of this Contract all insurance required under the Weston Contract, with the VILLAGE named as an additional insured. 8. Indemnification. A. To the fullest extent permitted by applicable laws and regulations, CONTRACTOR shall indemnify and save harmless and defend the VILLAGE, its officials, agents, servants, and employees from and against any and all claims, liability, losses, and/or causes of action arising out of or in any way related to the services furnished by CONTRACTOR pursuant to this Contract, including, but not limited to, those caused by or arising out of any act, omission, negligence or default of CONTRACTOR and/or its subcontractors, agents, servants or employees. B. CONTRACTOR shall not be required to indemnify the VILLAGE, its officials, agents, servants and employees when the occurrence results solely from the wrongful acts or omissions of the VILLAGE, its officials, agents, servants and employees. The terms of this Section shall survive DocuSign Envelope ID: 77865E8F-5445-4C93-BF63-125AFF178272DocuSignEnvelopeID: 91E434E4-CDA9-45F4-BFF0-64F4086EA333DocuSignEnvelopeID: FDE87C45-7C0D-4943-8F6C-07D7E88E25C3 Page 3 of 5 completion of all services, obligations and duties provided for in this Contract as well as the termination of this Agreement for any reason. C. Nothing contained in this Contract shall create a contractual relationship with or a cause of action in favor of a third party against either the VILLAGE or CONTRACTOR, nor shall this Contract be construed a waiver of sovereign immunity beyond the limited waiver provided in § 768.28, Florida Statutes. 9. Compliance with all Laws, Regulations and Ordinances. In performing the services contemplated by this Contract, CONTRACTOR shall obtain all required permits (if any) and comply with all applicable federal, state and local laws, regulations and ordinances, including, but by no means limited to, all requirements of the Village Code and the Florida Building Code. 10. Warranty/Guaranty. Unless a longer period is stated in the Weston Contract, CONTRACTOR warrants that its goods and services provided under this Contract will be free of defects in materials and workmanship for a period of one (1) year following delivery and completion of those goods and services. 11. Access/Audits. CONTRACTOR shall maintain adequate records to justify all charges, expenses, and costs incurred in estimating and performing services pursuant to this Contract for at least five (5) years after termination of this Contract. The VILLAGE shall have access to such books, records, and documents as required in this section for the purpose of inspection or audit during normal business hours, at CONTRACTOR’s place of business. Under no circumstances will CONTRACTOR be required to disclose any confidential or proprietary information regarding its products and service costs. 12. Miscellaneous Provisions. A. Failure of a party to enforce or exercise any of its right(s) under this Contract shall not be deemed a waiver of that parties’ right to enforce or exercise said right(s) at any time thereafter. B. This Contract shall be governed by the laws of the State of Florida. Any and all legal action necessary to enforce the Contract will be held in Palm Beach County. No remedy herein conferred upon any party is intended to be exclusive of any other remedy, and each and every such remedy shall be cumulative and shall be in addition to every other remedy given hereunder or now or hereafter existing at law or in equity or by statute or otherwise. No single or partial exercise by any party of any right, power, or remedy hereunder shall preclude any other or further exercise thereof. The parties knowingly, voluntarily and intentionally waive any right they may have to trial by jury with respect to any litigation arising out of or in connection with this Contract. C. If any legal action or other proceeding is brought for the enforcement of this Contract, or because of an alleged dispute, breach, default or misrepresentation in connection with any provisions of this Contract, the successful or prevailing party or parties shall be entitled to recover reasonable attorney’s fees, court costs and all expenses (including taxes) even if not taxable as court awarded costs (including, without limitation, all such fees, costs and expenses incident to appeals), incurred in that action or proceeding, in addition to any other relief to which such party or parties may be entitled. D. If any term or provision of this Contract, or the application thereof to any person or circumstances shall, to any extent, be held invalid or unenforceable, to remainder of this Contract, or DocuSign Envelope ID: 77865E8F-5445-4C93-BF63-125AFF178272DocuSignEnvelopeID: 91E434E4-CDA9-45F4-BFF0-64F4086EA333DocuSignEnvelopeID: FDE87C45-7C0D-4943-8F6C-07D7E88E25C3 Page 4 of 5 the application of such terms or provision, to persons or circumstances other than those as to which it is held invalid or unenforceable, shall not be affected, and every other term and provision of this Contract shall be deemed valid and enforceable to the extent permitted by law. E. All notices required in this Contract shall be sent by certified mail, return receipt requested, and sent to the addresses appearing on the first page of this Contract. F. The VILLAGE and CONTRACTOR agree that this Contract sets forth the entire agreement between the parties, and that there are no promises or understandings other than those stated herein. None of the provisions, terms and conditions contained in this Contract may be added to, modified, superseded or otherwise altered, except by written instrument executed by the parties hereto. Any provision of this Contract which is of a continuing nature or imposes an obligation which extends beyond the term of this Contract shall survive its expiration or earlier termination. G. CONTRACTOR warrants and represents that CONTRACTOR and all subcontractors are in compliance with Section 448.095, Florida Statutes, as may be amended. CONTRACTOR has registered to use, and shall continue to use, the E-Verify System (E-Verify.gov) to electronically verify the employment eligibility of newly hired employees and has received an affidavit from each subcontractor stating that the subcontractor does not employ, contract with or subcontract with an unauthorized alien. If the VILLAGE has a good faith belief that CONTRACTOR has knowingly violated Section 448.09(1), Florida Statutes, the VILLAGE shall terminate this Contract pursuant to Section 448.095(2), Florida Statutes, as may be amended. If the VILLAGE has a good faith believe that a subcontractor has knowingly violated Section 448.09(1), Florida Statutes, but CONTRACTOR has otherwise complained, it shall notify CONTRACTOR, and CONTRACTOR shall immediately terminate its contract with the subcontractor. H. IF THE CONTRACTOR HAS QUESTIONS REGARDING THE APPLICATION OF CHAPTER 119, FLORIDA STATUTES, TO THE CONTRACTOR’S DUTY TO PROVIDE PUBLIC RECORDS RELATING TO THIS CONTRACT, CONTACT THE CUSTODIAN OF PUBLIC RECORDS AT: (561) 841-3355; NPBCLERK@VILLAGE-NPB.ORG; OR 501 U.S. HIGHWAY ONE, NORTH PALM BEACH, FL 33408. In performing services pursuant to this Contract, CONTRACTOR shall comply with all relevant provisions of Chapter 119, Florida Statutes. As required by Section 119.0701, Florida Statutes, CONTRACTOR shall: 1. Keep and maintain public requires required by the VILLAGE to perform the service. 2. Upon request from the VILLAGE’s custodian of public records, provide the VILLAGE with a copy the requested records or allow the records to be inspected or copied within a reasonable time at a cost that does not exceed the cost provided in Chapter 119, Florida Statutes, or as otherwise provided by law. 3. Ensure that public records that are exempt or confidential and exempt from public records disclosure requirements are not disclosed except as authorized by law for the duration of the Contract term and following completion of the Contract if the CONTRACTOR does not transfer the records to the VILLAGE. DocuSign Envelope ID: 77865E8F-5445-4C93-BF63-125AFF178272DocuSignEnvelopeID: 91E434E4-CDA9-45F4-BFF0-64F4086EA333DocuSignEnvelopeID: FDE87C45-7C0D-4943-8F6C-07D7E88E25C3 Page 5 of 5 4. Upon completion of the Contract, transfer, at no cost, to the VILLAGE all public records in possession of CONTRACTOR or keep and maintain public records required by the VILLAGE to perform the services. If CONTRACTOR transfers all public records to the VILLAGE upon completion of the Contract, CONTRACTOR shall destroy any duplicate public records that are exempt or confidential and exempt from public records disclosure requirements. If CONTRACTOR keeps and maintains public records upon completion of the Contract, CONTRACTOR shall meet all applicable requirements for retaining public records. All records stored electronically must be provided to the VILLAGE, upon request from the VILLAGE’s custodian of public records, in a format that is compatible with the information technology systems of the VILLAGE. I. CONTRACTOR is aware that the Inspector General of Palm Beach County has the authority to investigate and audit matters relating to the negotiation and performance of this Contract, and in furtherance thereof, may demand and obtain records and testimony from CONTRACTOR and its subcontractors. CONTRACTOR understands and agrees that in addition to all other remedies and consequences provided by law, the failure of CONTRACTOR or its subcontractors to fully cooperate with the Inspector General when requested may be deemed by the VILLAGE to be a material breach of the Contract justifying termination. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the VILLAGE and CONTRACTOR hereto have made and executed this Contract as of the day and year first above written. ALL FLORIDA TREE & LANDSCAPE, INC. By: Print Name:__________________________ Position:_____________________________ VILLAGE OF NORTH PALM BEACH By: ________________________________ DARRYL AUBREY MAYOR ATTEST: BY:________________________________ VILLAGE CLERK APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGAL SUFFICIENCY BY: ________________________________ VILLAGE ATTORNEY DocuSign Envelope ID: 77865E8F-5445-4C93-BF63-125AFF178272DocuSignEnvelopeID: 91E434E4-CDA9-45F4-BFF0-64F4086EA333DocuSignEnvelopeID: FDE87C45-7C0D-4943-8F6C-07D7E88E25C3 President Allan McPherson VILLAGE OF NORTH PALM BEACH PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT – SOLID WASTE DIVISION TO: FROM: Honorable Mayor and Members of the Village Council Marc Holloway, Solid Waste Manager THRU: Chuck Huff, Director of Public Works Andrew D. Lukasik, Village Manager DATE: December 9, 2021 SUBJECT: RESOLUTION – Amendment to the FY2021-2022 Comprehensive Pay Plan to Include Two (2) additional Part-Time Refuse Collector Positions Village Staff is recommending the Village Council’s adoption of a resolution amending the FY2021-2022 Comprehensive Pay Plan by adding two (2) part-time Refuse Collector positions. The primary purpose of the added positions is to create staffing flexibility to better address solid waste collection needs. Background: At this time, the Village has a vacant full-time Commercial Driver position. Staff’s intent is to replace the full-time position with two (2) part-time positions. The addition of the part-time positions will not result in a budget increase as a vacant full-time driver position will be “frozen” for the remainder of the fiscal year – meaning that the full-time position will not be filled. This change will be evaluated throughout the year to determine if the reduction of a full-time position in favor of the part-time positions is a more effective service delivery method. This change should be more cost effective as staff is reevaluating the redundancy that was put in place related to employees obtaining CDL licenses. A couple of years ago, the Village had a limited number of employees with Commercial Drivers Licenses (CDL). A CDL certification is required to operate the Village’s garbage trucks. Having a limited number of certified drivers led to service delivery challenges when those drivers were not available to work. As a result, Solid Waste employees were all trained and received Commercial Drivers Licenses (CDL) in order to operate the Village’s garbage trucks. Staff believes that a lower level of redundancy might be more effective and will evaluate this change during the year. Further, the Solid Waste Division is awaiting the arrival of the 2022 GO-4 collection vehicles. The two (2) part-time employees will improve the versatility of the Solid Waste staff and cost effectiveness of our service delivery as these vehicles do not require a commercial license for operation and are responsible for the collection of over half of the Village’s annual solid waste volume. Recommendation: Village Staff requests Council consideration and approval of the attached resolution amending the Fiscal Year 2022 Comprehensive Pay Plan by adding two (2) part-time Refuse Collector positions and freezing the open Commercial Driver Position in accordance with Village policies and procedures. RESOLUTION 2021- 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 2022 BUDGET TO INCLUDE TWO ADDITIONAL PART-TIME SOLID WASTE REFUSE COLLECTOR POSITIONS; PROVIDING FOR CONFLICTS; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, through the adoption of Ordinance No. 2021-17 (“Budget Ordinance”) on September 23, 2021, the Village Council adopted the Comprehensive Pay Plan as part of the annual budget for Fiscal Year 2022; 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 amend the Comprehensive Pay Plan to include two additional part-time Solid Waste Refuse Collector positions; 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 2022 to include two part-time Solid Waste Refuse Collector positions at Pay Grade 104. The Village Council further approves freezing the vacant Commercial Driver position through the end of the Fiscal Year 2022. Section 3. All other provisions of the Comprehensive Pay Plan, to the extent not specifically modified herein, shall remain in full force and effect as originally adopted. Section 4. This Resolution shall take effect immediately upon its adoption. PASSED AND ADOPTED THIS ____ DAY OF ____________, 2021. (Village Seal) MAYOR ATTEST: VILLAGE CLERK SOLID WASTE COLLECTOR (PART-TIME / TEMPORARY) DEPARTMENT: Public Works FLSA STATUS: Non-Exempt UNION STATUS: Non-Union PAY GRADE: 104 / $13.83/hour REVISED: 07/08/2021 CLASSIFICATION SUMMARY The Solid Waste Collector is responsible for routine, heavy labor as it pertains to residential side-door garbage collection, trash and vegetation collection, and recycling efforts. ESSENTIAL FUNCTIONS  Empties garbage cans and loads trash bags into satellite collection utility vehicles or front-end load trucks.  Collects recyclables, loads bulk items into packer, and gathers and loads vegetative waste into packer truck or satellite utility vehicles.  Picks up trash and spilled refuse along curbs and roads.  Drives satellite utility vehicles on an established waste collection route.  Operates the controls to rise, empty and lower receptacles.  Reports violations of refuse ordinances to Driver.  Leaves notices of refuse violations.  Sprays, washes and rinses tote can and satellite utility vehicles with chemical disinfectant and water.  Rides in packer truck to dump site and assists Driver in unloading truck.  Operates back blade.  Sorts and processes recyclable materials for distribution.  Performs at a constant pace and in all weather conditions.  Understands and follows oral instructions. (The list of essential functions is not exclusive or all-inclusive. Other duties may be required and assigned.) MINIMUM QUALIFICATIONS  Ability to learn and retain knowledge of the locations of refuse containers on assigned routes.  Ability to get along with other employees and the public.  Meet heavy lifting and carrying requirements of the job.  Minimum of six (6) months experience as laborer (solid waste-related experience desired).  Hold a valid Florida driver license. PHYSICAL REQUIREMENTS Tasks include the intermittent performance of physically demanding work, typically involving some combination of reaching, bending, stooping, kneeling, or crouching. In addition, duties require the lifting, carrying, pushing and/or pulling of moderately heavy objects and materials (20-50 pounds) and intermittently require the lifting, carrying, pushing, and /or pulling of heavier objects (100+ pounds). ENVIRONMENTAL REQUIREMENTS When riding or operating a vehicle or automotive equipment, work includes exposure to some traffic conditi ons. Due to the nature and location of the work environment, tasks include potential for intermittent exposure to disagreeable elements, e.g. heat, humidity, inclement weather, unsanitary conditions. Some tasks include working around moving parts, carts, and materials handling where physical risks are predictable and/or controllable by observance of standard safety precautions. VILLAGE OF NORTH PALM BEACH PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT TO: Honorable Mayor and Council THRU: Andrew D. Lukasik, Village Manager FROM: Chad Girard, Assistant Director of Public Works DATE: December 9, 2021 SUBJECT: RESOLUTION – Approving an Amendment to the Contract with J.W. Cheatham, LLC for the milling and resurfacing project to modify the scope and increase the cost by $46,191.90 Through the adoption of Resolution 2021-85 on September 23, 2021, the Village Council approved a Contract with J.W. Cheatham, LLC for the milling, resurfacing, striping and crosswalk improvements on specified Village roadways. Village Staff is seeking approval of an Amendment to the Contract to modify the scope of work and increase the total cost of the project by $46,191.90. The modifications to the scope of work consist of adding header curbs at the outside edge of the asphalt between the new sidewalk approaches and re-grading the swales at the intersections of Lighthouse Drive and Anchorage Drive. These items were not included in the original project scope. The total cost of the additional work is $46,191.90 therefore increasing the total contract amount to $668,950.40. As shown in the table below, including contingency, the total project budget would increase from $640,000 to $686,191.90. Description Original Revised Original Contract Amount $622,758.50 $622,758.50 Change to Scope of Work 0.00 46,191.90 Revised Contract Amount 622,758.50 668,950.40 Project Contingency 17,241.50 17,241.50 Total Budget $640,000.00 $686,191.90 Although the total cost exceeds the project budget of $640,000, there are sufficient funds available in the infrastructure surtax funds account to cover this additional cost. The attached Resolution and Amendment have been prepared and/or reviewed for legal sufficiency by the Village Attorney. Recommendation: Village Staff requests Council consideration and approval of the attached Resolution approving an Amendment to the Contract with J.W. Cheatham, LLC for milling, resurfacing and striping services on Village roadways by modifying the scope of work and increasing the amount of the Contract by $46,191.90 and authorizing the Mayor and Village Clerk to execute the Amendment in accordance with Village policies and procedures. RESOLUTION 2021-_____ A RESOLUTION OF THE VILLAGE COUNCIL OF THE VILLAGE OF NORTH PALM BEACH, FLORIDA APPROVING AN AMENDMENT TO THE EXISTING CONTRACT WITH J.W. CHEATHAM LLC FOR MILLING, RESURFACING AND STRIPING OF SPECIFIED VILLAGE ROADWAYS TO MODIFY THE SCOPE AND INCREASE THE COST; PROVIDING FOR CONFLICTS; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, through the adoption of Resolution No. 2021-85 on September 23, 2021, the Village Council approved a Contract with J.W. Cheatham, LLC in the amount of $622,758.50 for the milling, resurfacing, striping and crosswalk improvements on specified Village roadways; and WHEREAS, parties wish to execute an Amendment to the Contract to modify the scope of work to add header curbs and regrade swales at a total additional cost of $46,191.90; and WHEREAS, the Village Council determines that the adoption of this Resolution is in the best interests of the residents of the Village of North Palm Beach. 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 approves an Amendment to the existing Contract with J.W. Cheatham LLC for milling, resurfacing, striping and crosswalk improvements on specified Village roadways to modify the scope of work and increase the total amount of the Contract by $46,191.90 to $668,950.40), with funds expended from Account No. I7321-66210 (Public Works/Streets & Grounds - Construction & Major Renovation). The Village Council further authorizes the Mayor and Village Council to execute the Amendment on behalf of the Village. Section 3. All resolutions or parts of resolutions in conflict with this Resolution are hereby repealed to the extent of such conflict. Section 4. This Resolution shall take effect immediately upon adoption. PASSED AND ADOPTED THIS ____DAY OF ____________, 2021. (Village Seal) MAYOR ATTEST: VILLAGE CLERK Page 1 of 2 AMENDMENT TO CONTRACT THIS AMENDMENT is made as of this _______ day of ______________, 2021, by and between the VILLAGE OF NORTH PALM BEACH, 501 U.S. Highway One, North Palm Beach, Florida 33408, a Florida municipal corporation (hereinafter “VILLAGE”), and J.W. CHEATHAM LLC, 7396 Westport Place, West Palm Beach, Florida 33413, a Florida limited liability company (hereinafter “CONTRACTOR”), whose F.E.I. Number is 20-1928479. RECITALS WHEREAS, the VILLAGE and CONTRACTOR executed a Contract dated September 23, 2021 for milling, resurfacing and striping on specified Village roadways (Kingfish Road, Dogwood Road, Lagoon Drive, Westwind Drive, Fairwind Drive, Golfview Drive, McClaren Road, and Inlet Road), as well as milling and resurfacing and crosswalk improvements at the intersection of Anchorage Road and Lighthouse Drive; and WHEREAS, the parties wish to modify the scope of the Contract to include adding header curbs at the outside edge of the asphalt between the new sidewalk approaches and re-grading the swales at the intersection of Lighthouse Drive and Anchorage Drive and TO adjust the compensation to incorporate the additional work. NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual promises set forth in the Contract, as modified herein, and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, the parties hereto agree as follows: 1. The foregoing recitals are ratified and incorporated herein. 2. Section 3.A. of the Contract is amended to include the additional work detailed in the Proposal from CONTRACTOR dated November 18, 2021, a copy of which is attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference. 3. Section 3.B of the Contract is amended to increase the cost of such services by $46,191.90 to $668,950.40. 4. All other provisions of the Contract, to the extent not expressly modified herein, shall remain in full force and effect. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the VILLAGE and CONTRACTOR hereto have made and executed this Amendment as of the day and year first above written. J.W. CHEATHAM LLC By: Print Name:__________________________ Position:_____________________________ Page 2 of 2 VILLAGE OF NORTH PALM BEACH By: ________________________________ DARRYL AUBREY MAYOR ATTEST: BY:________________________________ VILLAGE CLERK APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGAL SUFFICIENCY BY: ________________________________ VILLAGE ATTORNEY Page 1 of 6 CONTRACT This Contract is made as of this 23rd day of September, 2021, by and between the VILLAGE OF NORTH PALM BEACH, 501 U.S. Highway One, North Palm Beach, Florida 33408, a Florida municipal corporation (hereinafter “VILLAGE”), and J.W. CHEATHAM LLC, 7396 Westport Place, West Palm Beach, Florida 33413, a Florida limited liability company (hereinafter CONTRACTOR”), whose F.E.I. Number is 20-1928479. RECITALS WHEREAS, the VILLAGE is in need of a contractor to perform milling, resurfacing and striping on specified Village roadways (Kingfish Road, Dogwood Road, Lagoon Drive, Westwind Drive, Fairwind Drive, Golfview Drive, McClaren Road, and Inlet Road), as well as milling and resurfacing and crosswalk improvements at the intersection of Anchorage Road and Lighthouse Drive; and WHEREAS, the City of Palm Beach Gardens, through its competitive selection process, awarded an Agreement for Miscellaneous Public Works Projects (ITB2020-124PS) (“PBG Contract”) to CONTRACTOR; and WHEREAS, the VILLAGE requested that CONTRACTOR provide the requested services based on the pricing established in the PBG Contract; and WHEREAS, as authorized by the VILLAGE’s purchasing policies and procedures, the VILLAGE desires to retain CONTRACTOR’s services by “piggy-backing” the PBG Contract, including all terms, conditions and pricing set forth therein. NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual promises set forth herein, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, the parties hereto agree as follows: 1. Recitals. The parties agree that the recitals set forth above are true and correct and are fully incorporated herein by reference. 2. PBG Contract. The City of Palm Beach Gardens’ Agreement for Miscellaneous Public Works Projects (ITB2020-124PS) (“PBG Contract”) with CONTRACTOR, attached hereto as Exhibit “A,” is incorporated herein by reference. 3. CONTRACTOR’s Services and Time of Completion. A. In accordance with the terms and conditions of the PBG Contract and at the direction of the VILLAGE, CONTRACTOR shall perform the services in accordance with its Proposal dated September 3, 2021, a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit “B” and incorporated herein by reference. B. The total cost of such services shall not exceed $622,758.50. C. The services to be provided by CONTRACTOR shall be commenced subsequent to the execution and approval of this Contract by the VILLAGE and upon written notice from the VILLAGE to CONTRACTOR to proceed and shall be completed within ninety (90) days of the VILLAGE’s issuance of the notice to proceed. DocuSign Envelope ID: 20CF94A5-69CE-4A1D-AE57-71079ED7DF1FDocuSign Envelope ID: 8C6D3777-D558-4CD5-B8DD-603CDD8DE73D Page 2 of 6 4. Conflict of Terms and Conditions. Conflicts between documents shall be resolved in the following order of precedence: A. This Contract B. Exhibit “A” (PBG Contract) C. Exhibit “B” (CONTRACTOR’s Proposal) 5. Compensation to CONTRACTOR. Payments by the VILLAGE to CONTRACTOR under this Contract shall not exceed the amount of compensation stated in Section 3(B) above without prior written consent of the VILLAGE. CONTRACTOR shall submit invoices to the VILLAGE for review and approval by the VILLAGE’s representative, indicating that goods and services have been provided and rendered in conformity with this Contract, and they then will be sent to the Finance Department for payment. Invoices will normally be paid within thirty (30) days following the VILLAGE representative’s approval. CONTRACTOR waives consequential or incidental damages for claims, disputes or other matters in question arising out of or relating to this Contract. In order for both parties herein to close their books and records, CONTRACTOR will clearly state “final invoice” on CONTRACTOR’s final/last billing to the VILLAGE. This certifies that all goods and services have been properly performed and all charges have been invoiced to the VILLAGE. Since this account will thereupon be closed, any and other further charges if not properly included in this final invoice are waived by CONTRACTOR. The VILLAGE will not be liable for any invoice from CONTRACTOR submitted thirty (30) days after the provision of all goods and services. 6. Term and Termination. A. This Contract shall be for the term as indicated in the PBG Contract. Extensions or renewals to the PBG Contract or any modification including new products, terms, or price changes to the PBG Contract shall be submitted by CONTRACTOR to the VILLAGE for approval. In the event the PBG Contract expires and no new contract is let by the PBG, VILLAGE reserves the right, upon written agreement with CONTRACTOR to renew this Contract under the same terms and conditions for an additional period of one (1) year. B. This Contract may be terminated by the VILLAGE, with or without cause, upon providing ten 10) days’ notice to CONTRACTOR. This Contract may be terminated by CONTRACTOR upon providing thirty (30) days’ notice to the VILLAGE. Upon any such termination, CONTRACTOR waives any claims for damages from such termination, including, but not limited to, loss of anticipated profits. Unless CONTRACTOR is in breach of this Contract, the VILLAGE shall pay CONTRACTOR for work performed and accepted through the date of termination. 7. Insurance. CONTRACTOR shall obtain and maintain during the term of this Contract all insurance required under the PBG Contract, with the VILLAGE named as an additional insured. 8. Indemnification. A. To the fullest extent permitted by applicable laws and regulations, CONTRACTOR shall indemnify and save harmless and defend the VILLAGE, its officials, agents, servants, and employees from and against any and all claims, liability, losses, and/or causes of action arising out of or in any way related to the services furnished by CONTRACTOR pursuant to this Contract, including, but not DocuSign Envelope ID: 20CF94A5-69CE-4A1D-AE57-71079ED7DF1FDocuSign Envelope ID: 8C6D3777-D558-4CD5-B8DD-603CDD8DE73D Page 3 of 6 limited to, those caused by or arising out of any act, omission, negligence or default of CONTRACTOR and/or its subcontractors, agents, servants or employees. B. CONTRACTOR shall not be required to indemnify the VILLAGE, its officials, agents, servants and employees when the occurrence results solely from the wrongful acts or omissions of the VILLAGE, its officials, agents, servants and employees. The terms of this Section shall survive completion of all services, obligations and duties provided for in this Contract as well as the termination of this Agreement for any reason. C. Nothing contained in this Contract shall create a contractual relationship with or a cause of action in favor of a third party against either the VILLAGE or CONTRACTOR, nor shall this Contract be construed a waiver of sovereign immunity beyond the limited waiver provided in § 768.28, Florida Statutes. 9. Compliance with all Laws, Regulations and Ordinances. In performing the services contemplated by this Contract, CONTRACTOR shall obtain all required permits (if any) and comply with all applicable federal, state and local laws, regulations and ordinances, including, but by no means limited to, all requirements of the Village Code and the Florida Building Code. 10. Warranty/Guaranty. Unless a longer period is stated in the PBG Contract, CONTRACTOR warrants that its goods and services provided under this Contract will be free of defects in materials and workmanship for a period of one (1) year following delivery and completion of those goods and services. 11. Access/Audits. CONTRACTOR shall maintain adequate records to justify all charges, expenses, and costs incurred in estimating and performing services pursuant to this Contract for at least five (5) years after termination of this Contract. The VILLAGE shall have access to such books, records, and documents as required in this section for the purpose of inspection or audit during normal business hours, at CONTRACTOR’s place of business. Under no circumstances will CONTRACTOR be required to disclose any confidential or proprietary information regarding its products and service costs. 12. Miscellaneous Provisions. A. Failure of a party to enforce or exercise any of its right(s) under this Contract shall not be deemed a waiver of that parties’ right to enforce or exercise said right(s) at any time thereafter. B. This Contract shall be governed by the laws of the State of Florida. Any and all legal action necessary to enforce the Contract will be held in Palm Beach County. No remedy herein conferred upon any party is intended to be exclusive of any other remedy, and each and every such remedy shall be cumulative and shall be in addition to every other remedy given hereunder or now or hereafter existing at law or in equity or by statute or otherwise. No single or partial exercise by any party of any right, power, or remedy hereunder shall preclude any other or further exercise thereof. The parties knowingly, voluntarily and intentionally waive any right they may have to trial by jury with respect to any litigation arising out of or in connection with this Contract. C. If any legal action or other proceeding is brought for the enforcement of this Contract, or because of an alleged dispute, breach, default or misrepresentation in connection with any provisions of this Contract, the successful or prevailing party or parties shall be entitled to recover reasonable DocuSign Envelope ID: 20CF94A5-69CE-4A1D-AE57-71079ED7DF1FDocuSign Envelope ID: 8C6D3777-D558-4CD5-B8DD-603CDD8DE73D Page 4 of 6 attorney’s fees, court costs and all expenses (including taxes) even if not taxable as court awarded costs (including, without limitation, all such fees, costs and expenses incident to appeals), incurred in that action or proceeding, in addition to any other relief to which such party or parties may be entitled. D. If any term or provision of this Contract, or the application thereof to any person or circumstances shall, to any extent, be held invalid or unenforceable, to remainder of this Contract, or the application of such terms or provision, to persons or circumstances other than those as to which it is held invalid or unenforceable, shall not be affected, and every other term and provision of this Contract shall be deemed valid and enforceable to the extent permitted by law. E. All notices required in this Contract shall be sent by certified mail, return receipt requested, and sent to the addresses appearing on the first page of this Contract. F. The VILLAGE and CONTRACTOR agree that this Contract sets forth the entire agreement between the parties, and that there are no promises or understandings other than those stated herein. None of the provisions, terms and conditions contained in this Contract may be added to, modified, superseded or otherwise altered, except by written instrument executed by the parties hereto. Any provision of this Contract which is of a continuing nature or imposes an obligation which extends beyond the term of this Contract shall survive its expiration or earlier termination. G. CONTRACTOR warrants and represents that CONTRACTOR and all subcontractors are in compliance with Section 448.095, Florida Statutes, as may be amended. CONTRACTOR has registered to use, and shall continue to use, the E-Verify System (E-Verify.gov) to electronically verify the employment eligibility of newly hired employees and has received an affidavit from each subcontractor stating that the subcontractor does not employ, contract with or subcontract with an unauthorized alien. If the VILLAGE has a good faith belief that CONTRACTOR has knowingly violated Section 448.09(1), Florida Statutes, the VILLAGE shall terminate this Contract pursuant to Section 448.095(2), Florida Statutes, as may be amended. If the VILLAGE has a good faith believe that a subcontractor has knowingly violated Section 448.09(1), Florida Statutes, but CONTRACTOR has otherwise complained, it shall notify CONTRACTOR, and CONTRACTOR shall immediately terminate its contract with the subcontractor. H. IF THE CONTRACTOR HAS QUESTIONS REGARDING THE APPLICATION OF CHAPTER 119, FLORIDA STATUTES, TO THE CONTRACTOR’S DUTY TO PROVIDE PUBLIC RECORDS RELATING TO THIS CONTRACT, CONTACT THE CUSTODIAN OF PUBLIC RECORDS AT: (561) 841-3355; NPBCLERK@VILLAGE-NPB.ORG; OR 501 U.S. HIGHWAY ONE, NORTH PALM BEACH, FL 33408. In performing services pursuant to this Contract, CONTRACTOR shall comply with all relevant provisions of Chapter 119, Florida Statutes. As required by Section 119.0701, Florida Statutes, CONTRACTOR shall: 1. Keep and maintain public requires required by the VILLAGE to perform the service. 2. Upon request from the VILLAGE’s custodian of public records, provide the VILLAGE with a copy the requested records or allow the records to be inspected or copied within a reasonable DocuSign Envelope ID: 20CF94A5-69CE-4A1D-AE57-71079ED7DF1FDocuSign Envelope ID: 8C6D3777-D558-4CD5-B8DD-603CDD8DE73D Page 5 of 6 time at a cost that does not exceed the cost provided in Chapter 119, Florida Statutes, or as otherwise provided by law. 3. Ensure that public records that are exempt or confidential and exempt from public records disclosure requirements are not disclosed except as authorized by law for the duration of the Contract term and following completion of the Contract if the CONTRACTOR does not transfer the records to the VILLAGE. 4. Upon completion of the Contract, transfer, at no cost, to the VILLAGE all public records in possession of CONTRACTOR or keep and maintain public records required by the VILLAGE to perform the services. If CONTRACTOR transfers all public records to the VILLAGE upon completion of the Contract, CONTRACTOR shall destroy any duplicate public records that are exempt or confidential and exempt from public records disclosure requirements. If CONTRACTOR keeps and maintains public records upon completion of the Contract, CONTRACTOR shall meet all applicable requirements for retaining public records. All records stored electronically must be provided to the VILLAGE, upon request from the VILLAGE’s custodian of public records, in a format that is compatible with the information technology systems of the VILLAGE. I. CONTRACTOR is aware that the Inspector General of Palm Beach County has the authority to investigate and audit matters relating to the negotiation and performance of this Contract, and in furtherance thereof, may demand and obtain records and testimony from CONTRACTOR and its subcontractors. CONTRACTOR understands and agrees that in addition to all other remedies and consequences provided by law, the failure of CONTRACTOR or its subcontractors to fully cooperate with the Inspector General when requested may be deemed by the VILLAGE to be a material breach of the Contract justifying termination. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the VILLAGE and CONTRACTOR hereto have made and executed this Contract as of the day and year first above written. J.W. CHEATHAM LLC By: Print Name:__________________________ Position:_____________________________ VILLAGE OF NORTH PALM BEACH By: ________________________________ DARRYL AUBREY MAYOR ATTEST: BY:________________________________ VILLAGE CLERK DocuSign Envelope ID: 20CF94A5-69CE-4A1D-AE57-71079ED7DF1F Thomas Uhrig President DocuSign Envelope ID: 8C6D3777-D558-4CD5-B8DD-603CDD8DE73D Page 6 of 6 APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGAL SUFFICIENCY BY: ________________________________ VILLAGE ATTORNEY DocuSign Envelope ID: 20CF94A5-69CE-4A1D-AE57-71079ED7DF1FDocuSign Envelope ID: 8C6D3777-D558-4CD5-B8DD-603CDD8DE73D VILLAGE OF NORTH PALM BEACH VILLAGE MANAGER’S OFFICE TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the Village Council FROM: Andrew D. Lukasik, Village Manager DATE: December 9, 2021 SUBJECT: RESOLUTION – Approval of a Contract with Ballard Partners for Legislative and Executive Agency Advocacy Services in the amount of $72,000. In recent years, the Village has not been active with respect to legislative advocacy. Although the Council maintains communication with the Village’s representatives in Florida’s House and Senate, the Village has not aggressively advocated for or against legislation and has not pursued appropriations from the State. Working with Ballard Partners will provide the Village with opportunities for more effective legislative advocacy and securing funding for upcoming capital projects. Assistance with Funding for Capital Projects: The Village’s Five-Year Capital Plan is heavily reliant on grants and other forms of State or Federal funding. The Plan anticipates expenditures of nearly $20 million over the next 5 years. Just over $9 million of the funding for theses projects, approximately 45% of the funding, is anticipated from grants or government appropriations. Advocacy assistance is needed to improve the Village’s ability to secure these important sources of funding. Recently, Village Staff has been working with Ballard to pursue a series of project appropriations under a short-term agreement executed by the Village Manager. With Mr. Atwater’s assistance, the Village submitted three (3) appropriations requests for the following projects/acquisitions to the State of Florida:  A generator to support Emergency Response activities,  The extension of Village-owned fiber between Village facilities to improve communication and expand wi-fi capabilities, and  Development of the Village’s Stormwater Master Plan. Representative Roth has submitted appropriations bills for each of the projects. Ballard has also coordinated with Senator Powell on the Village’s behalf. Legislative Advocacy: Although the Village hasn’t maintained agreements with lobbyists recently, it is not uncommon in local government circles. Ballard Partners has over 20 local governmental clients in Florida, including several in Palm Beach County. Palm Beach County governments that are represented by Ballard include Boca Raton, Boynton Beach, Delray Beach, Palm Beach and Palm Beach Gardens. Other Palm Beach County-based organizations represented by Ballard Partners include the Health Care District of Palm Beach County, the Max Planck Florida Foundation, the Florida Atlantic University Foundation, and FP&L. Contract Agreement: The short-term agreement executed by the Village Manager expires on January 31, 2022. The contract being considered is for a one-year term beginning on February 1, 2022 and ending on January 21, 2023. The cost of services is $72,000 over the term of the contract (or $6,000/month). It is important to note that the scope of work under this contract is limited to advocacy work in Florida. Should the Village Council approve this contract, it will be staff’s recommendation in the future to expand the scope of work to include federal advocacy efforts. Staff has determined that the Village’s current work on capital planning documents – such as the Stormwater Master Plan, the Utility Undergrounding Master Plan and the Lighthouse Bridge Construction plans – should be completed prior to considering the expansion of Ballard Partners’ scope of work. The Village did not secure proposals or qualifications from other firms. Ballard’s presence in Florida and in Washington DC makes the firm an excellent representative of the Village’s interests. The Village Council will be required to waive the Village’s purchasing policy related to the issuance of a request for proposals if the contract with Ballard Partners is approved. The attached Resolution has been prepared by the Village Attorney. Account Information: Fund Department Account Number Account Description Amount General Fund Village Manager A4902-33190 Professional Services $72,000.00 Recommendation: Village Staff requests Council consideration and adoption of the attached resolution approving a Contract for Legislative and Executive Agency Advocacy Services, effective February 1, 2022, in the amount of $72,000 and waiving the Village’s Purchasing Policies and Procedures. RESOLUTION 2021- A RESOLUTION OF THE VILLAGE COUNCIL OF THE VILLAGE OF NORTH PALM BEACH, FLORIDA, APPROVING AN AGREEMENT WITH BALLARD PARTNERS, INC. FOR PROFESSIONAL LOBBYING SERVICES AND AUTHORIZING THE VILLAGE MANAGER TO EXECUTE THE AGREEMENT; WAIVING THE VILLAGE’S PURCHASING POLICIES AND PROCEDURES; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, Village is in need of lobbying services before the Florida State Legislature and state executive agencies; and WHEREAS, Village Staff recommended executing an Agreement with Ballard Partners, Inc. based in the firm’s experience in representing other units of local government, including a number of local governments in Palm Beach County; and WHEREAS, the Village Council determines that adoption of this Resolution is in the best interests of the residents and citizens of the Village of North Palm Beach. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE VILLAGE COUNCIL 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 approves an Agreement with Ballard Partners, Inc. for professional lobbying services at an annual cost of $72,000,00, with funds expended from Account No. A4902-33190 (Village Manager – Professional Services), and authorizes the Village Manager and Village Clerk to execute the Agreement on behalf of the Village, a copy of which is attached hereto and incorporated herein. Section 3. In approving this Agreement, the Village Council waives any conflicting provisions of the Village’s purchasing policies and procedures. Section 4. This Resolution shall take effect immediately upon adoption. PASSED AND ADOPTED THIS DAY OF , 2021. (Village Seal) MAYOR ATTEST: VILLAGE CLERK Page 1 of 4 CONTRACT FOR SERVICES THIS CONTRACT is entered into between the Village of North Palm Beach, a Florida municipal corporation (“the Client”), 501 U.S. Highway One, North Palm Beach, FL 33408, and Ballard Partners, Inc. (“the Firm”), a Florida corporation, 201 East Park Avenue, 5th Floor, Tallahassee, FL 32301. Recitals WHEREAS, the Client wishes to retain the services of the Firm in order that the Firm may represent the Client’s interests before the Florida Legislature and executive agencies; and WHEREAS, the Firm wishes to provide such representation as the Client may from time to time require; and WHEREAS, the parties have agreed to the terms under which the Firm will represent the Client and wish to memorialize their agreement in writing. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants herein contained and intending to be legally bound hereby, the parties agree as follows: 1. Term of Agreement. This agreement shall become effective on February 1, 2022 and shall remain effective until January 31, 2023 (“Initial Term”). This Agreement shall automatically renew for successive one-year periods on the anniversary of the effective date of the Agreement unless either party terminates the agreement by providing written notice to the other party. Notwithstanding the foregoing, this Agreement may be terminated with thirty (30) days’ written notice by either party for any or no reason. In the event the Client terminates the Agreement, the Firm shall cease all services as of the date of receipt of the written notice and the Client shall pay the Firm for all services performed prior to that date on a prorated basis. 2. Duties of The Firm. It shall be the Firm’s duty to advocate the interests of the Client before the Florida Legislature and executive agencies of Florida government. Included within the scope of the Firm’s duties is the advocacy for passage or defeat of legislation that is relevant to the Client. It shall further be the Firm’s duty to inform the Client of developments in legislation and policy relevant to the Client’s operations. 3. Duties of The Client. It shall be the Client’s duty to inform the Firm of its wishes with regard to legislative and executive advocacy and to provide the Firm the information necessary to best represent the Client in Florida. It shall also be the Client’s duty to timely compensate the Firm for its services. 4. Compensation. The Client shall pay the Firm the annual sum of $72,000.00 for services performed pursuant to this Agreement, plus actual out of pocket costs incurred in such representation, including but not limited to lobbyist registration fees. Such costs shall not include any costs typically associated with the operation of an office, such as overhead, staff, and equipment. The fee shall be paid in monthly installments of $6,000.00 a month, beginning February 1, 2022, and continuing to be due on the first day of each month until the termination of the Agreement as set forth in Section 1. The Firm will bill costs monthly. Page 2 of 4 5. Indemnification. To the fullest extent permitted by applicable laws and regulations, the Firm shall indemnify and save harmless, the Client, its officials, agents, servants and employees from and against any and all claims, liability, losses and/or causes of action, including, but not limited to, reasonable attorney’s fees, to the extent caused by the negligence, recklessness, or intentionally wrongful conduct of the Firm or persons employed or utilized by the Firm in the performance of this Agreement. The Firm shall not be required to indemnify the Client, its officials, agents, servants and employees when the occurrence results from the wrongful acts or omissions of the Client, its officials, agents, servants and employees. The terms of this paragraph shall survive completion of all services, obligations and duties provided for in this Agreement as well as termination of this Agreement for any reason. Nothing contained in this Agreement shall create a contractual relationship with or a cause of action in favor of third party against either the Client or the Firm, nor shall this Agreement be construed as a waiver of sovereign immunity beyond the limited waiver set forth in Section 768.28, Florida Statutes. 6. Independent Contractor. The Firm is, and shall be, in the performance of services pursuant to this Agreement, an independent contractor and not an employee, agent or servant of the Client. All persons engaged in any services performed pursuant to this Agreement shall at all times, and in all places, be subject to the Firm’s sole discretion, supervision and control, and the Firm shall exercise sole control over the means and manner in which its employees, consultants and subcontractors perform such services. 7. Insurance. The Firm shall maintain in full force and effect, during the term of this Agreement, Standard Professional Liability Insurance with limits of no less than $1,000,000.00 each occurrence, with a maximum deductible of $50,000.00. A certification of insurance, satisfactory to the Client, evidencing such coverage and listing the Village of North Palm Beach as an additional insured, shall be furnished to the Client immediately upon execution of this Agreement. Such Certificate shall provide the Client with thirty days prior written notice of any cancellation or non-renewal. The Firm shall provide the Client with a renewal certificate thirty days prior to the expiration of the current Certificate of Insurance, and the Firm’s failure to provide and maintain Certifications of Insurance, as required herein, shall constitute a material breach of this Agreement justifying immediate termination. 8. Enforcement Costs. If any legal action or other proceeding is brought for the enforcement of this Agreement, or because of an alleged dispute, breach, default or misrepresentation in connection with any provisions of this Agreement, the successful or prevailing party or parties shall be entitled to recover reasonable attorney’s fees, court costs and all expenses (including taxes) even if not taxable as court awarded costs (including, without limitation, all such fees, costs and expenses incident to appeals), incurred in that action or proceeding, in addition to any other relief to which such party or parties may be entitled. 9. Legal Effect/Binding Authority. This Agreement shall not become binding and effective until approved by the Firm’s legislative body. The persons executing this Agreement represent that they have the full power, authority and legal right to execute and deliver this Agreement and perform all obligations under this Agreement. 10. Governing Law, Venue and Waiver. This Agreement shall be governed by the laws of the State of Florida and any and all legal action necessary to enforce this Agreement will be held in Palm Beach County, Florida. The parties knowingly, voluntarily and intentionally waiver any right they may have to trial by jury with respect to any litigation arising out of this Agreement. Page 3 of 4 11. E-Verify. The Firm warrants and represents that Firm and, if applicable, all subcontractors are in compliance with Section 448.095, Florida Statutes, as may be amended. The Firm has registered to use, and shall continue to use, the E-Verify System (E-Verify.gov) to electronically verify the employment eligibility of newly hired employees and, if applicable, has received an affidavit from each subcontractor stating that the subcontractor does not employ, contract with or subcontract with an unauthorized alien. If the Client has a good faith belief that the Firm has knowingly violated Section 448.09(1), Florida Statutes, the Client shall terminate this Contract pursuant to Section 448.095(2), Florida Statutes, as may be amended. 12. Inspector General. The Firm is aware that the Inspector General of Palm Beach County has the authority to investigate and audit matters relating to the negotiation and performance of this Agreement, and in furtherance thereof, may demand and obtain records and testimony from the Firm and its subcontractors. The Firm understands and agrees that in addition to all other remedies and consequences provided by law, the failure of the Firm or its subcontractors to fully cooperate with the Inspector General when requested may be deemed by the Client to be a material breach of the Agreement justifying immediate termination. 13. Public Records. In performing services pursuant to this Contract, the Firm shall comply with all relevant provisions of Chapter 119, Florida Statutes. As required by Section 119.0701, Florida Statutes, the Firm shall: A. Keep and maintain public records required by the Client to perform the service. B. Upon request from the Client’s custodian of public records, provide the Client with a copy the requested records or allow the records to be inspected or copied within a reasonable time at a cost that does not exceed the cost provided in Chapter 119, Florida Statutes, or as otherwise provided by law. C. Ensure that public records that are exempt or confidential and exempt from public records disclosure requirements are not disclosed except as authorized by law for the duration of the Contract term and following completion of the Contract if the Firm does not transfer the records to the Client. D. Upon completion or termination of the Agreement, transfer, at no cost, to the Client all public records in possession of the Firm or keep and maintain public records required by the Client to perform the services. If the Firm transfers all public records to the Client upon completion or termination of the Agreement, the Firm shall destroy any duplicate public records that are exempt or confidential and exempt from public records disclosure requirements. If the Firm keeps and maintains public records upon completion of the Agreement, the Firm shall meet all applicable requirements for retaining public records. All records stored electronically must be provided to the Client, upon request from the Client’s custodian of public records, in a format that is compatible with the information technology systems of the Client. IF THE FIRM HAS QUESTIONS REGARDING THE APPLICATION OF CHAPTER 119, FLORIDA STATUTES, TO THE FIRM’S DUTY TO PROVIDE PUBLIC RECORDS RELATING TO THIS AGREEMENT, CONTACT THE CUSTODIAN OF PUBLIC RECORDS AT: (561) 841-3355; Page 4 of 4 NPBCLERK@VILLAGE-NPB.ORG; OR 501 U.S. HIGHWAY ONE, NORTH PALM BEACH, FL 33408. 14. Entire Agreement. The foregoing terms and conditions constitute the entire Agreement between the parties hereto and any representation not contained herein shall be null and void and of no force and effect. This Agreement may be amended only in writing upon mutual consent of the parties. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have made and executed this Agreement as of the dates indicated below. VILLAGE OF NORTH PALM BEACH BALLARD PARTNERS, INC. _____________________________________ ____________________________________ By: Andy Lukasik By: Brian D. Ballard Title: Village Manager Title: President Date:_________________________________ Date:_______________________________ ATTEST: Jessica Green, Village Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGAL SUFFICIENCY: Leonard G. Rubin, Village Attorney Village of North Palm Beach Police and Fire Pension Fund MINUTES OF MEETING HELD August 10, 2021 1 Chairman Robert DiGloria called the meeting to order at 2:00 PM in the conference room of the North Palm Beach Village Hall located at 501 US Highway One, North Palm Beach, FL. Those persons present were: TRUSTEES PRESENT Robert DiGloria, Chairman Edward Ciezak Erik Jensen Robert Coliskey Frank Winewski TRUSTEES ABSENT OTHERS PRESENT Amanda Kish, Resource Centers Bonni Jensen, Klausner Kaufman Jensen & Levine Steve Stack, Highland Capital Kerry Richardville, AndCo Sara Carlson, Foster and Foster ITEMS FROM THE PUBLIC There were no public comments. MINUTES The minutes from the May 2021 had been presented for the Trustees review and approval. Robert Coliskey made a motion to approve the minutes dated May 2021. The motion received a second from Frank Winewski and was approved by the Trustees 3-0. DISBURSEMENTS Mrs. Kish reviewed the disbursements which had been presented in the Trustees Packets. Edward Ciezak made a motion to approve all disbursements. The motion received a second from Robert Coliskey was approved by the Trustees 4-0. EXPERINCE STUDY Mrs. Carlson introduced herself to the Board. She presented Experience Study to the Board. Mrs. Carlson provided a summary of the recommended assumption changes. The recommended changes were Amortization Method, Investment Return, Salary Increases, Mortality Rates, Retirement Rates and Withdrawal Rates. Mrs. Carlson reviewed each assumption change in detail. If the Board adopts all the changes the city contribution will increase to 5.45% with a funding ration 89.7%. The Board held discussion regarding the assumption changes. Mrs. Carlson recommended item 6 combination of the investment return remaining at the 7.70%. Mrs. Richardville suggested lowering the investment return in a step-down approach because of the over performance in the fiscal year. Mrs. Carlson reviewed item 5 which is combination of the actuarial assumption and lowering the investment return 10 basis points. The Board suggested taking time reviewing the assumption changes. The Board suggested a discussion at the November meeting. Mrs. Jensen informed the Board that they will need to make a motion for Edward Ciezak to participate and vote virtually. Robert Coliskey made a motion to approve Edward Ciezak to vote and attend the meeting virtually due to exigent circumstances. The motion received a second from Frank Winewski was approved by the Trustees 4-0. Village of North Palm Beach Police and Fire Pension Fund MINUTES OF MEETING HELD August 10, 2021 2 HIGHLAND CAPITAL Steve Stack of Highland Capital appeared before the Board to present the Quarterly Manger Report for the quarter ending June 30, 2021. He reported on the current market environment Growth out continued to outperformed value. He reviewed the total return summary stating the cumulative return for the quarter was 4.92% compared to the benchmark 5.60%. The asset allocation was 18,76,210.00 for the quarter ending June 30, 2021. Mr. Stack did not recommend any changes to the portfolio and thinks that it is positioned nicely. ANDCO Mrs. Richardville appeared before the Board to present the Investment Report for the quarter ending June 30, 2021. The Board asset classes had positive returns. The US economy continues to recover as the vaccines are being distributed. Mrs. Richardville continued to review the market environment. The asset allocation increased from $31,736,532.00 to $33,883,793.00 Mrs. Richardville went on to review the quarterly report in detail explaining it was a positive return for the quarter which was 6.15% placing in the 3rd percentile. The fiscal year date return was 20.39.% compared to the benchmark of 18.23%. She further reported equities were up 8.29% beating the policy of 8.09%, total fixed income 1.77% versus the bench of 1.83%. Real Estate was up for the quarter at 4.03 versus the benchmark of 4.39%. Mrs. Richardville continued to review the individual manager performances. Richardville stated that fiscal year performance is outstanding. ATTORNEY REPORT Administrative Policy of the DROP: Mrs. Jensen presented the revised Administrative Policy to the Board. The revision to policy states the latest retirement date. The member can wait until they reach fifty-five years of age or anytime in between. The Board stated that the members should be made aware. Robert Coliskey made a motion to approve Revised DROP Policy. The motion received a second from Edward Ciezak was approved by the Trustees 4-0. ADMINSTRATORS REPORT 2021-2022 Conference List Mrs. Kish presented the 2021-2022 Conference List to the Board. She informed the Board that if the Trustees are interested in attending a conference, she can provide further information. SOC 1 Memorandum Mrs. Kish presented the SOC 1 Memo to the Board. The memo provides and overview of our firms audit and the auditor’s opinion. Benefit Approval Mrs. Kish presented Benefit Approval for August 11, 2021 Robert Coliskey made a motion to approve the presented Benefit Approval. The motion received a second from Robert Coliskey and was approved by the Trustees 4-0. Mrs. Kish addressed the Alive and Well letters. She stated that all the retirees returned the letters. The Board held a discussion regarding the continuation of the Alive and Well letters. Mrs. Jensen reviewed the benefits of the Alive and Well Letters. A lengthy discussion ensued regarding the letters. The Board suggested bring a policy back regarding the Alive and Well Letter. Village of North Palm Beach Police and Fire Pension Fund MINUTES OF MEETING HELD August 10, 2021 3 Erik Jensen made a motion to adjourn the meeting at 2:50 PM. The motion received a second from Edward Ciezak and was approved by the Trustees 4-0. Respectfully submitted, Robert Coliskey VILLAGE OF NORTH PALM BEACH GOLF ADVISORY BOARD Minutes of October 25, 2021 I. CALL TO ORDER A. The meeting was called to order by Chairman Steve Mathison at 6:00 p.m. II. ROLL CALL A. Board: Present Absent Stephen Mathison — Chairman X Rich Pizzolato — Vice Chairman X Curtis Witters — Secretary X Jeff Egizio — Member X Landon Wells — Member X Orlando Puyol —Member X Sandra Felis — Member X B• Staff Members: Allan Bowman, Director of Golf X Beth Davis, General Manager X Lenore Dingle, Membership Coordinator X C• Council Members: Daryl Aubrey Susan Bickel Mark Mullinix David Norris X Deborah Searcy NPB Golf Advisory Board Minutes of October 25, 2021 D. Public Present: III. APPROVAL OF IV. MEETING MINUTES A. Minutes of the September 20, 20213 GAB Meeting were approved 6-0. V. ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS Golf Report. Allan Bowman, Director of Golf, delivered his report. Our new software is up and running. It was suggested that some members need a tutorial regarding use of the product. Allan will prepare a video to explain the functions and use of the software. The software will be adjusted so that the tee sheet shows the names of the individual players in group play. We ate working on software and credit card issues with the ball machines on the driving range. Mr. Puyol told the Board that we seem to have an increased number of range balls hit into the 10"' fairway. He suggested that we should have more fencing between the driving range and the 10"' hole. However, no injuries to golfers on the 10"' hole have been reported. The preliminary budget summary (attached) for the fiscal year ending 9/30121 shows income of $710,000 for the Club. Part of the income is attributable to payment of an insurance claim which is anon -recurring item. The F&B portion of the summary shows income as well. Farmers Table is converting part of its space to the "North Palm Beach Public House", which will serv e a casual sports bat• menu of food items. The Public House will open in early November, be open seven days, and maintain hours of 11:00 am to 11:00 pm. NPB Golf Advisory Board Minutes of October 25, 2021 Materials for a shelter in the staging area will arrive this week. We are still looking at bids to complete a structure for our starter on the 1 Stee. We hope to have our tower• clock by Thanksgiving. Renovation of the restrooms on the course have been completed. In the future we also renovate the restrooms at the driving range. We aze engaged in substantial tree trimming. We have approximately 980 palm trees which will be trimmed. In addition, we are trimming the numerous oak and ficus pees on the course. In response to a question, Allan said the Dodder• vine in our trees will be removed in the spring. New golf carts will be delivered and in use by Thanksgiving. Allan suggested that the Club should develop both five-year• and ten-year• Capital Improvement Plans (C1P). He is working on draft plans with the assistance of Brightview and some outside input. Our target number for members is 190. We are at 210 at present. The Club experienced 3.5%attrition (non -renewal) in our membership. Typically, we would expect 10%attrition; this speaks well of the quality and value of membership at NPBCC. Our current policy is that only residents of NPB can add their names to the membership waiting list, paying ad osit of $250.00. It was suggested that Lenore Dingle should tell all of those on the waiting list that the time to become a member will be a number of years. Allan was asked about the status of group play under our• new protocol. He reported that it seems to be going well. NPB Golf Advisory Board Minutes of October 25, 2021 Finally, Allan addressed two housekeeping items: members. 1. On the third Tuesday m November, we will have a nine -hole event for 2. Individuals wishing to play in the MGA or WGA on Wednesday must put their names on the sign -in list by F Sunday. VI. DISCUSSION TOPICS VII. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 6:50 p.m. The next meeting will be November 15, 2021. Minutes by Curtis L. Witters, Secretary. C! 9 w R9Ho oO'ZolSd p 13 oqElfly pp R 6 0 k 0 f v O to e Foi y C Ig m o_. w Oho m v.. a p V m c 9 n N fA o o o IXt to c C C 3 uoa fit y o Neo" oo to oo bo CDCD c1 i2° F rcr to 4At o tA to o m m93c G o tel ti A tvm V N to w S w W q l o w o a o' X80 a B as N w Hoff, a e 8irnNe&--- a--- h1K A P N A o g oo t4 Q W$ w o o o o CD n o Village of North Palm Beach Recreation Advisory Board Agenda November 9, 2021 at 7:00 p.m. Anchorage Park Chairman Bob Bell ( ) Vice Chair Don Grill ( ) Member Maria Cassidy (X ) Member Paul Beach (X) Member Stephen Heiman (X) Member Rita Budnyk (X) Member Mia St John (X) Recreation Stephen Poh ( ) Council Rep. __Mark Mullinix___ (X) Leisure Services Zak Sherman (X) Call to Order: Roll Call: Absent: Bob Bell, Don Grill (both were out of town). Total of 13 people in attendance. Approval of Minutes: Minutes approved but with one change: Rita Budnyk asked to include this paragraph to her comment about dry storage: I think the Village should consider charging closer to market rate as that may take care of boats and vehicles, not being used, and that are stored there simply because it's cheap. I also agree with residents' concerns that there needs to be a more equitable and transparent way of allocating spots via the waiting list. Public Comment: Chris Ryder: Thanks for publicly posting the list. Asking to post current list of renters in the storage spaces. Would like the new storage area staked out. Did you receive email regarding Lakeside Park? Berm at Lakeside Park. North Side is being replaced. South side will need to be raised. The space in between needs to be raised. Limits of moderate wave action line. If the change in flood maps changes. There’s a gap in between. Concerned that there will be a low spot in between 2 spots. Jerry Sullivan: Vacated his spot. How long to take to accept a spot? Becky has done a good job of handling this. He believes there should be a strict timeline regarding how long you have to accept a spot. Rita Budnyk: We will discuss the list tonight. Jerry Sullivan: People expect too much from Village. Zak Sherman: The dry storage area was staked out in certain spots but someone pulled up some of the stakes and tossed them to the side. Maybe grounds crew? Directors Report: Lakeside Park: Swing Set o Still waiting on ramp for the entrance of the ADA pathway to arrive and then installation; also ADA swing options. Playground o Lakeside Park playground is currently closed for maintenance painting. Because of the rain, the playground will be closed until Tuesday. o New playground pieces are already in. Compliment about playground and Stephen’s efforts to improve the park: o Good morning! I see interesting activity in the playground…..I’m so excited. Thank you for all your continued efforts. I sing your praises constantly. Marie Silvani Fence line o Cleaned up fence line at Lakeside (Courtesy Environmental Quality, Inc.). Wooden Walkovers o Staircases have been replaced for both wooden walkovers (north and south). Pull up bars o Stephen placed the order for the new bars. Berm Repairs o Environmental Quality, Inc. is planning to repair the berm on either side of north walkovers at the end of November or early December. o Project, once started, should take 1.5 to 2 weeks. Stephen ready to place order for golf cart for new Ranger position. o New Ranger will open Lakeside on weekends as well as the Osborne and Community Center restrooms. Commercial activity o In October, Stephen had to speak to a yoga instructor about commercial activity in the park. o This instructor is now offering class at Anchorage Park, outdoors (with a contract). Park Ranger o Offered position to James Marcellino, retired PBCSO. o Tentative start date is November 16. o James is a Village resident and doesn’t mind working weekends. o Chris Ryder asked if he’d be carrying a gun (because he’s a retired PBCSO officer). Zak said that issue hadn’t been raised yet and would look into it. Anchorage Park: Building is open Saturdays from 9:00 a.m. to 1:00 p.m. (will be some Saturday classes as well). Wooden Walkways (Piers) o Replace boards on southeast pier. Public Works o Contractors using some parking spaces along Anchorage Drive to stage equipment/vehicles (near Anchorage and Harbour) when they do road work nearby. Transfer of dry storage grant to playground o Still waiting on final approval (new rep is reviewing paperwork; we’re asking for extension); currently working on playground designs. o Will need to do outreach for a couple weeks. Show residents a couple design and let them choose. Maybe have signage outside with QR code to scan and fill out survey. o Rita: could we put it in newsletter? o Zak: yes, as a heads up. o Tarps (shade) are expensive. o Mark Mullinix: trees take a long time to mature. o Rita: what’s the cost to move the trees? o Mark Mullinix: they would require packing with peat moss. You’d be better off with a guarantee from tree farm. Outdoor trash bins o New outdoor bins are in. PW will install. Main Gazebo o Looking into sealing the wood. Merry-go round piece has been installed. Marina: ADA parking space and sidewalk installation o Project will begin shortly, maybe end of November/early December. Security Cameras o New cameras have been installed at Anchorage Park marina. o See the screenshot to the right as an example of what the cameras capture and the image quality. o Has keyword searching abilities. o Currently, we only have cameras on the north side. o We hope to start replacing cameras throughout the Village with the same models. o They are cloud-based cameras with a 10-year warranty and operate on a 5g router. o We currently have 6 of this new model deployed (Anchorage Park and Country Club entrance). Electrolysis Test o Company coming out November 18 to do new test. o Ideally, we’d like all boats to be in their slips. o Some people’s propellers/blades have been getting corroded. o Hopefully, this test can help us figure out what is causing the issue. o Mark Mullinix: anytime there are dissimilar metals there will be corrosion. Community Center: Pavilion o Contractor removed rusted bottom brackets and installed new bottom brackets. o Next step is to fix up the top brackets. o Once fixed, all the posts and wood and brackets will get painted. o Helps squeeze out a few more years. Fence o Plan to replace portion of fence that runs along the parking lot to the Pavilion. o Precision will be capping off irrigation along front fence (the recently replaced portion) to prevent future water damage (to the fence) and removing grass strip. Once we get city water, they will be replaced. Flag Football o End of season party will be November 18. o Library Camera club will take photos of event. o Getting new grill from Lowes for the cookout. o Jupiter Bounce will provide obstacle course. o Becky/Meagan to grill. o Julie/Edna from library to assist with bouncy houses/food handout. o Stephen and I will be there till 6:45 (until we have to leave for Council meeting). o Hoping that a Council member will be able to hand out trophies before going to Council meeting. Sand volleyball court o Another awesome view of new sand volleyball court! Playground grant o Still waiting on approval to move forward. Dumpster area o Repaired front gate in front of garbage dumpster. (it was very hard to use before). Soccer/Futsol o Gary to host holiday soccer clinic and extend futsol into spring. Minis (ages 3-5) Baseball o Mondays and Tuesdays (Stephen and Mia coaching). o Total of 18 kids, 12 Monday and 6 Tuesday. o That was full capacity as well. o Lasted 7 weeks long. o Recently, the kids got their trophies! TCS o Using fields for boys soccer. Won’t have home game until after flag football. o Using gym and new outdoor sand court for girls volleyball. Mulch o Installed new mulch at fitness station. Gas Cylinder cabinet o Installed near Pavilion to store propane tanks. Pesticide/spray bottle cabinet o Installed in maintenance shed, just outside ballfields. Seacoast o Still waiting on quote to run city water to fields. Osborne Park: Grant o Still waiting on approval to move forward. Public Works o Contractor staging equipment in back parking lot for when they do road work nearby. Pesticide/spray bottle cabinet o Installed in maintenance shed, next to baseball field. Bottle filler stations o Still waiting for two to arrive. Racquetball lights o Replaced ballasts. o Also getting quote for new lighting. Baseball Field o Haverland working on field to prevent clay from going into parking lot. Community Garden o Should be nearly complete soon. Fence is going in week of 11-15. o Next step is to recruit volunteers. o Environmental Committee is establishing garden but turning it over to volunteers. o Village staff will be helping to get them organized. o Environmental Committee is interested in having the volunteers be able to join initially at no cost and simply have them sign a liability waiver and a commitment to maintain their section of the garden. o Mary Phillips will be helping with some of the details. o The membership packet that Abacoa put together for their garden will be our starting guide. Will include sign up form and waiver. o Still working on initial meeting date. Paul brought up hole in fence by Pineapple Apts. Zak reached out to Lily in Code, and she said she was going to follow up. Owners are out of state. Veterans Park: Everything set for Veterans Day celebration November 11 at 9 a.m. May be moved to Community Center if rain. o Stephen will be pressure cleaning the sidewalks. o Precision will be installing new pots. Reached out to three companies for brick work. Special Events: Haunted House o October 29 through 31. o Friday and Sunday (29th and 31st) were Haunted house only. o October 30th was the Haunted House, hay rides, DJ, carnival games, costume contest, and food. o About 100 people came each night on Friday and Sunday but Saturday night was the most well attended with the carnival where an estimated 300+ people came to dance, play games, ride the hayride, and go through the Haunted House. o Kona Ice and Chick-Fil-A were present and the public also feasted on candies won at the various carnival games throughout the night. o Cash for three nights at the door totaled $2,016. Made an additional $690 from Square Inc. at the door as well. Online ticket sales through Eventbrite totaled $1,652 (these were the net sales after fees were taken out). Net Paypal transactions amounted to $881.04. o Total costs to host Haunted House were $1,813.83. o Total gross collected from the event: $5,239.04. o Net Profits = $3,425.21. Only netted $200 or so last time. o Werewolves got 195 votes; vampires 228. o Compliment: Mr. Lukasik, I wanted to reach out and say thank you for an excellent Halloween party at the village library. My son loved everything! It was a blast. Thank you, Ryan Nagel Mia: Meagan was wonderful. She worked hard and involved a lot of kids from community. Zak: we wouldn’t do 3 days again, because Sunday was slow. Links 5k o 428 signed up. o 359 ran the 5K. o 24 ran the monster mile. o 40 ran the goblin gallop. o 5 participated virtually. o Packet pickup was October 28. o We had a number of volunteers who helped hand out water along with other duties on race day. o We thank them for helping!! o Rita: shout out to Cardinal Newman students who came to volunteer. Read for the Record o Thank you to all who participated. o Because of the Haunted House, we got a bit behind on video editing, but we’ll share our video of staff reading the themed book as soon as possible. o This year’s Read for the Record selection was Amy Wu and the Patchwork Dragon by Kat Zhang and illustrated by Charlene Chua. o Julie Morrell read via Facebook Live, while others used Zoom. Books and Bites o Held on October 26 and we had 37 people for the event. o After a bit of a rough start due to valet parking issues, everyone had a fantastic time! o Most of the patrons were already asking when the next Books and Bites program would be and which author. Bus Trip—Dolphin football Game o Sunday, Oct. 24th in Miami at Hard Rock Stadium. o It was quite an adventure for the trip goers as they saw a close game and also saw firsthand the construction in the parking lot for the new race track being built around the stadium. o Section 300 seats were surprisingly popular as everyone had a great view of the game. Bus Trip--Lyric Theater Bus Trip - Orleans Live o Thursday, November 4, 2021. o Bus departs at 4 p.m. and will not return until about 10-10:30 p.m., give or take. Upcoming Events: o Craft Show Saturday, November 6 at the Community Center from 9:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. Find a variety of holiday gifts, decorations and works of art. It is not a flea market, and all items must be created, hand crafted or embellished by the exhibitor. This show is FREE to attend; will be held rain or shine! 48 Vendors signed up as of Friday, October 29; collected just over $1,500. o Santa’s Mailbox Nov. 29 - Dec. 10 Buying three new mailboxes. One to go at library. o Santa’s Texts Dec. 14 & 15 o Tree Lighting Wednesday, Dec. 1 at 7 p.m. o Holiday Boat Parade (Marine Industries Assoc. event) Saturday, Dec. 4 o Trolley Rides Friday, Dec. 17, 6:30 – 8:30 p.m. Getting 4 trolleys again. o Santa’s Visit Saturday, Dec. 18, 10 a.m. – 12 p.m. Communications: Newsletter o Working on redoing it since August, came out really well. o I want to praise Stephanie for her continuous work on the Printed Newsletter since August. o It took a few iterations and a big meeting with the Communications Manager but we finally got it all worked out. o This is the first newsletter in which Parks and Rec has all its programs and special events and bus trips listed together. o To me, it looks pretty darn good! o All the programs are listed according to facility location and grouped under Youth, Adult, and Special events. o Hopefully, it will be an easy tool to use when people have questions. o Stephanie also put together a really good E-newsletter as well. o Next, we’ll be working on the website! Adobe Suite o Purchased full Adobe suite which includes Photoshop and Premiere Pro for video editing. Staffing: Parks and Rec o Park Ranger Hired NPB resident and retired PBCSO James Marcellino. Tentative start date is November 16. o Recreation Supervisor Made an offer but the candidate ultimately declined the offer. Plan to repost the position asap. Stephen Heiman: will other applicant be offered the job? Zak: no, ultimately we want someone with coaching experience, working with youth sports. Mark Mullinix: Did we make coaching a prerequisite? Zak: no. Mark Mullinix suggested we revisit job description to see if we need to revise. Library o Ylana Luigi resigned effective October 31. She got a full time position with the PBCLS. We wish her well because she was a terrific staff member. Library: Facilities o Repaired elevator. o Replaced lobby AC/Air Handler. Programming o Junior League of the Palm Beaches will be volunteering to read to kids starting Saturday November 6th. The Junior League is an organization of women committed to promoting voluntarism, developing the potential of women and improving communities through the effective action and leadership of trained volunteers. Program will be called Saturday Storytime with the League and be at 10:00 a.m. the first Saturday of each month. https://www.jlpb.org/about/ o Park days with afterschool kids. Trips to Anchorage Park afterschool to begin in November. Some options will be free play, sports, playground time, park pick-ups, nature walks, etc. o The Palm Beach County Historical Society has contacted the Library and will be bringing their traveling exhibit called “Postcards from the Palm Beaches” to us on November 10th for one month. It showcases the wide variety of historic postcards from the Historical Society’s archives and the history of postcards. Yoga in the Park had 8 people. Mi Sun is now under instructor agreement. Adult Book Club met today with 12 members to discuss the book Beautiful World, Where Are You? BY Sally Rooney. Now that the mask mandate is loosened, coffee, tea, and cookies were enjoyed again at the book club. The next Book Club will be hold on December 2nd and the book will be Oh, William! by Elizabeth Strout. Friends of the Library o Thanks so much for helping host the Haunted House! o Current raffle is a $100 gift card to Publix with a fun Thanksgiving centerpeice. o Planning Christmas boutique for Tuesday, December 7 from 10:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Circulation o E-book circ year-over-year FY20 7,292 vs FY21 12,277 o E-audiobook circ year-over-year FY20 2,586 vs FY21 5,913 o Tota E-circ year-over-year FY20 7,997 vs FY21 18,190 This is a 127.46% increase! Misc: Needs assessment o Final presentation to be given by Dr. Barth at next Council meeting, November 18. New ordinance o Fires and grills ordinance passed on first reading. o Second reading will be November 18. Training o Staff participated in Harassment/Discrimination training at Village Hall. All Village staff were required to attend. o Bill renewed CDL license. North Palm Symphony o Will be rehearsing Wednesday night, NOV. 10 From 5pm – 6pm in the main room at Anchorage. o The North Palm Symphony is preparing to play perform at the Veterans Day Ceremony and also the Tree Lighting ceremony in December. Plumbing o Still working on plumbing companies to come out to replace faucets and other kitchen/restroom/outdoor needs. New Business: Comments from discussion are listed first, and then the general consensus from discussion is listed underneath each bullet point in the heading “Policy Guidance related to wet slips & dry storage.” Zak: waitlist has been posted online. It opens up as a PDF. We can add policies, etc. to the site as well. Today, it’s a start. Next meeting, we will address these issues again and we can update. Want Bob and Don to provide input as well. Rita Budnyk: It’s up to applicant to keep current contact info. Has mail been used? Becky Ring: Certified mail has been used in the past with mixed results. Mark Mullinix: what’s typical time frame? Becky Ring: No written guidelines currently. Currently, the process takes way too much time. I leave a message and state I will send an email. Most of the time I’m waiting to hear back from someone and have to keep touching base until I get a firm answer. At the very least it takes a week or so. Had two recently that took over 3 weeks. Mark Mullinix: A week is too long. Stephen Heiman: Last time we talked about people who were not in possession of a boat. Rite Budnyk: once accepted you have 3 days to pay. Zak Sherman: total time from when 1st call is made to moving on? Mark Mullinix: 5 days is generous. Rita Budnyk: Becky should only have to make 2 calls. Chris Ryder: The Village should think as a municipality instead of a business owner. The only way for people to have a boat is housing it in the Village. Needs to be more time. 45 days to put something in the space. Should be 90-day window. Paul Beach: are there situations where people leave during the year (meaning remove their boat or RV permanently)? Becky Ring: yes, they are pro-rated. Mark Mullinix: with the demand, the residents that are waiting also want a turn. Should be a faster process. Charles Jones: what difference does it make if you have a boat in there if you have paid? Zak Sherman: you can pay and have two months to get a boat. Mark Mullinix: money isn’t issue; it’s having residents be able to use it. Zak Sherman: Shouldn’t be more than 14 days. All notifications can be done (mail, email, phone). Current lease reads that residents are allowed 2 months or 6 weeks (depending on whether we’re talking about wet slip or dry storage). So we’d also need proof of purchase within the 2 months (wet slips) or 6 weeks (dry storage). Residents can provide update. Paul Beach: We should be lenient. Zak Sherman: what if someone says, “I’d like to stay on list?” In other words, if they refuse spot but want to stay at #1. Chris Ryder: people should be allowed one deferment. Mia St. John: List is publicly posted. Jerry Sullivan: the onus should be on the resident (to update their info). If they want the slip, it’s their responsibility. Charles Jones: at annual renewal, a suggestion to give update to residents about where they fall on the list). Board: too much on staff. Becky Ring: people do ask about where they are on list. Zak Sherman: someone asked if it was okay to install some type of floating boat lift in their slip. Also noticed that another resident installed a boom in their slip. Both require permits per Amy Corp of Engineers for various reasons. Recommended that we have a policy in place. Mark Mullinix: would anyone here prefer floating docks or lifts? Residents: lifts. Maria Cassidy: we would recommend lifts for south side. Zak Sherman: one resident has an older boat and having trouble getting insurance. Chris Ryder: suggested that Village get additionally insured and become certified insurance holder (be additionally insured on private property). Would get notified if policy lapses or gets canceled. Rita Budnyk: This is a Len question as to whether a municipality is allowed to do this. Zak Sherman: Directing people to list instead of verbally or writing them their place on waitlist. That way there will be no mistakes. No typos or anyone misspeaking. Rita Budnyk: I like idea of directing them to list. Zak Sherman: how often should list be updated? Becky Ring: adding to list happens a lot. Mark Mullinix: can we automate the list? Zak Sherman: staff can touch base with IT. Maria Cassidy: wait until next month (update the following month). Notes: There were many different opinions on this. Staff recommended once per quarter. Zak Sherman: Do we publish current list of renters? On the one hand, it’s public record. Chris Ryder: would like to publish current list of renters. Note: most did not want to publish current list. o Policy Guidance related to wet slips & dry storage o How long to accept or refuse a spot? What if we can’t get ahold of you? How long do we keep trying? 10 days seemed to be consensus. In addition, when a spot opens, staff will try to contact next person on list via phone, email, and mail. o Moving from one list to another? No moving from one list to another and keeping the same position on the list. If you want to be put on another list, you accept going to the bottom of the new list. o What if open spot and you do not own a boat/RV? Accept or decline spot. If accept, pay for spot within 10 days. Tell us you are in process of getting boat/RV. Please let us know in writing. Within 2 months or 6 weeks (depending on whether it is a wet slip or dry storage spot), provide bill of sale and timeline for delivery. o What if you refuse a spot? Do you stay at #1, go to bottom of list, or get removed? No do overs or mulligans. If you refuse open spot, you either get removed totally or go to bottom of list. o The addition of any structure, devices or mechanisms to any of the wet slips or storage area by the lessee (e.g. lifts/various docking systems). Not allowed because any additions to wets slips including booms require permits per the Army Corp of Engineers. o The insurance requirement for insurance to lease a wet slip and what those coverage requirements are? How long do you have to obtain coverage? (Had one gentleman with a 1960s boat; and insurance IS required for all boats in wet slips). Insurance is required per agreement. No insurance, no slip. o The establishment of some type of protocol to handle the questions relating to where people are on the list(s). (Direct folks to posted list or email them the link). (Have folks sign a paper acknowledging correct list and #). Discussed some type of form that residents would have to sign prior to going on a list. Form would include name of list, waitlist position, and pertinent policies. o How often update list and post to website? (Quarterly?) No consensus yet on this point. Suggestions ranged from immediately after every change to once per quarter. Software was also suggested to help manage list. o Post list of current renters? No consensus yet on this point. On the one hand, the list is public record. On the other, it could open the door to harassing emails/phone calls. o Responsibility to update contact info Responsibility of those on the list to keep their contact info up to date. May also be wise to provide emergency contacts, such as a spouse, etc. so that staff have another avenue to call when trying to get ahold of someone. Old Business: Lakeside Park Parking Permits December Council meeting we’d like to bring up parking on weekends. Permit parking at Lakeside or asking businesses to allow parking (not sure how talks went about this in the past or if we seriously pursued this). No guest passes for Lakeside parking lot (seemed to be the consensus). But there are guest passes on website for residents to print out that would allow guests to park on their swale or in area outside of a driveway. Palm Beach Shores has non-resident permits. Previously they sold them for $200 per year and always sold out. This year they raised the cost to $350 per year and only sold 30 passes from July through October. 80% or so vehicles in lot on weekends seem to be non-residents. 22 parking spots and 1 handicapped spot. Chris Ryder said he expected lots of residents to show up at these meetings when discussing Lakeside or dry storage. In terms of Lakeside parking, Council is split on decision of what to do. Mark Mullinix: I think parking should be residents only. Member Comments: No additional comments. Adjournment: Adjourned at 8:55 p.m. VILLAGE OFNORTH PALMBEACH WATERWAYS ADVISORY BOARD MEETING MINUTES NOV17, 20215:00PM I. MEMBERS: Jerry Sullivan, Chairman Bill Hipple, Vice Chairman – excused absence Bruce Crawford, Secretary Mark Michels, Welcome New Member Ed Preti, Member Paul Bartlett, Member George Alger, Welcome New Member II. GUESTS : Mark Mullinex, Village Councilman, Andy Lukasik, Village Manager, Rita Budnik and Lisa Gallagher, Shore Dr. residents attending re the large yacht issues Chris “plat” Ryder, resident attending re NPB survey discrepancy issues Ron Lance, resident attending re the Schwenke Earman River issue III. MINUTES APPROVAL : The Feb 5, 2019 meeting minutes were approved unanimously IV. EXCUSAL OF ABSENT MEMBERS :Bill Hipple V. MATTERS BY THE PUBLIC : Guests above commented on the issues stated above VI. OLD BUSINESS : most of below was old business revisited VII. NEW BUSINESS : A. Earman River shoreline regulations : Andy presented the issue of permits being applied for to restore existing seawalls and build new ones. And he showed and talked about alternatives and that the Village Council is leaning away from concrete and metal or plastic seawalls and toward more natural construction including rocks, wood, rip rap. Our WAB Board agreed with this preference for more natural materials for seawalls and liked the Jupiter plan which Andy showed as an example and how to deal with existing vs new seawalls. B. Earman River Schwencke : We all reviewed the terrible extortion which is going on in NPB for many years now, with no signs of hope coming from Village or Government or commercial interests who are paying ever higher payments to use the Earman River waterfront. Ron Lance is the sole remaining riverfront property owners who is standing up to them and litigating it. He reported on his progress. Good for him and shame on all the rest of us. C. Yacht regulations : Another multi-year continuing issue is home owners creating a marina-like mooring place for very large yachts creating more semi-commercial yacht maintenance traffic and very large blockage to waterfront views. The other problem of larger boats is they create prop wash which undercuts seawalls near their operation and stir up bottom material. After discussion, the WAB suggested that draft (depth of hull into the water) or displacement (weight) were the best ways to limit vessel size and justified by the shallow portions of the NP Waterway where prop wash disturbs the bottom. D. Lozman floating structures : Andy briefed the WAB on the status or measures being taken to stop Lozman from developing floating homes in the Lake Worth Lagoon. E. Anchorage Park Marina : Andy briefed the WAB on the progress of work at Anchorage Park. Discussion turned to installing lifts and renting them and the WAB reiterated it’s concerns about maintenance problems and costs and risks of public operating sometimes dangerous and temperamental lifts. F. NPB Survey Discrepancies : Chris Ryder discussed his findings that NPB survey info in vicinty of the NP Waterway had discrepancies including places where definition was missing and where definition did not match. The WAB is not sure what to do about these discrepancies and the Village has heard from before. Does the Village wish to hire a surveyor to check these out and recommend action ? The meeting was adjourned at 8:00 pm VILLAGE OF NORTH PALM BEACH VILLAGE MANAGER’S OFFICE TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the Village Council FROM: Andrew D. Lukasik, Village Manager DATE: December 9, 2021 SUBJECT: PRESENTATION – Utility Undergrounding Master Plan and Feasibility Study On June 24, 2021 the Village awarded a contract to Kimley-Horn for the completion of a Utility Undergrounding Master Plan and Feasibility Study. The consultant has completed the majority of the work necessary to complete the Plan. However, before it is finalized, Kimley Horn will share its findings and recommendations with the Council to ensure that any questions and concerns are addressed before the strategy is finalized. Although not a topic of discussion during the presentation, it is important to note that the Village will need to secure financial consultation services in order to establish the assessment methodology that would be used to distribute project costs amongst property owners based upon the benefit they receive relative to others. The results of this analysis will be shared with property owners as we conduct public outreach efforts on the utility undergrounding initiative. Further, this information will be important factor as Village Council determines how and when the Village implements the undergrounding projects. A Request for Proposals for consultants has been issued and staff anticipates bringing a contract for financial consultation services to the Village Council for consideration in January or February. Staff and Kimley-Horn will hold a public outreach meeting in March to review the information being provided during tonight’s meeting in greater detail. By that time, we will also be promoting a website that will contain information about the project. Background Information: Undergrounding overhead utilities has been identified as a desired project for the Village:  The 2016 Citizens’ Master Plan identified undergrounding as a lower priority infrastructure project.  Additionally, the Village Council has identified undergrounding overhead utilities as a priority in the Village’s Annual Strategic Plan. There are several reasons to consider undergrounding overhead power lines:  Aesthetics: The appearance of an area can be greatly improved by reducing the visual clutter of utility wires and poles.  Increased Reliability: Falling tree limbs and blowing debris from high winds frequently cause utility disruptions by destroying overhead lines. According to data submitted to the Florida Public Service Commission by FPL, underground power systems perform significantly better than overhead systems during hurricanes and other significant windstorm events.  Safety and Community Health: Burying lines eliminates fire hazards, accidents, and safety risks from power outages due to downed lines. People and animals are far less likely to come into contact with underground power lines than they are with overhead power lines.  Economic Development: Many revitalization experts agree that investing in improving the appearance of traditional commercial areas is one of the best ways to attract new business and stimulate economic development. Minimizing the visual impact of utilities can be a major strategy to beautify and revitalize an area. In addition to the Village’s interest in undergrounding overhead utility lines, it is important to note that Florida Power and Light (FPL) has an immediate interest in hardening the power system in the Village. FPL has submitted nine permit applications to harden its energy grid in the Village since July 2019. These permits were submitted to the Village as part of FPL’s state-wide initiative to harden facilities by 2024. FPL and the Village have communicated about the status of FPL’s hardening initiative and are working collaboratively to implement a plan to underground overhead facilities as opposed to investing in new poles. Undergrounding now, before FPL hardens its overhead facilities, will allow the Village to leveraging the lower cost of removing depreciated infrastructure and using a regulatory “credit” from FPL to reduce the cost of the project. The reason for this is that, under Florida Public Service Commission regulations and the tariff that governs the underground conversion of overhead powerlines, FPL is required to give the Village a 25 percent discount toward the cost of a new, underground power system. Additionally, FPL provides credit for the cost avoidance of overhead hardening projects that FPL has scheduled but are able to cancel due to local undergrounding initiatives. Utility Undergrounding Master Plan and Feasibility Study: The scope of work for this initial plan will serve as the basis for future services to aid in the final planning, design and construction of the undergrounding program. Data Collection and Base Mapping: Kimley Horn has used existing and created Geographic Information System (GIS) data to complete base maps showing the approximate locations of existing major overhead infrastructure as well as planned construction projects by the Village or other stakeholders. This will be important as the Village begins to resolve stormwater infrastructure capacity, maintenance and water quality issues in order to maximize construction dollars and minimize disruption in residential neighborhoods. Initial Program Planning: Based upon feedback from utility providers and the need to establish cost effective projects that minimize neighborhood impacts, Kimley-Horn has developed recommended limits of proposed phases of construction. Kimley-Horn developed a year-by-year construction schedule and cost estimate for each identified phase. Additionally, Kimley-Horn has provided or will provide:  A Risk Assessment, specifically focused on the schedule and budget, as well as mitigation strategies to address those risks;  Recommended policies related to undergrounding requirements for private development, particularly along the US1, Northlake and Alternate A1A commercial corridors;  Recommended policies related to the deployment of 5G infrastructure and “smart poles” in the Village;  Recommendations regarding the conversion of the transmission lines on US1 (although this is not likely to be feasible).  Public Outreach recommendations for use during the design and construction phases of the overall program.  A matrix of potential grant funding sources to help fund the total cost of the program. Public Outreach: Tasks include creation of a program website and hosting of an open house to review preliminary recommendations and receive feedback. Grant Research and Identification: This includes the preparation of a list of third-party funding options that could offset project costs. A master plan document will be prepared that contains the above maps, information, and recommendations that can then be used to guide implementation of the program until conclusion of construction. Hard copies of the master plan will be provided as well as a version that can be posted on the website. * * * * Phasing Limits •FPL Tariff •Physical Size •Technical Requirements •Cost Efficiency Phasing Sequence •Major Work Programs •Traffic Impacts •Cost Efficiency •Schedule Efficiency Opinion of Schedule Opinion of Cost •Opinion of Probable Cost •Assumptions and Qualifications •Cost / Revenue Refinement •Process Description Opinion of Cost Opinion of Cost -Overall Program Summary Total Program Cost (Today’s Dollars)$144,000,000 Contingency $14,400,000 Inflation (Projected)$47,870,000 Program Total (Rounded)$206,300,000 Opinion of Cost -Individual Phase Summary Phase 1 $14,890,000 Phase 6 $17,380,000 Phase 2 $18,890,000 Phase 7 $30,480,000 Phase 3 $22,730,000 Phase 8 $16,930,000 Phase 4 $16,580,000 Phase 9 $27,080,000 Phase 5 $24,510,000 Phase 10 $16,780,000 Opinion of Cost Assumptions and Qualifications (General) •“Like for Like” Overhead to Underground Conversion •Village Contractor will perform the bulk of the work •Conduit will be installed in a joint trench or joint bore •Easement Acquisition Assistance •Landscape Screening •Village Employees and Construction Management •Village-Owned Fiber Infrastructure Opinion of Cost Assumptions and Qualifications (General) •Service Entrances •Rear to Front Conversion •Spare Conduit •Pavement Restoration •Street Lighting Impacts •MacArthur UG Segment •Master Planning •Project Contingency •Market Fluctuations Opinion of Cost Opinion of Cost -Overall Program Line Item Summary Description OPC Description OPC Overhead to Underground Conversion –FPL $32,280,000 Direct Costs –FPL $6,900,000 Overhead to Underground Conversion –ATT $16,130,000 Direct Costs –AT&T $5,000,000 Overhead to Underground Conversion –Comcast $10,010,000 Direct Costs –Comcast $2,725,000 Overhead to Underground Conversion –Other Utility Providers $1,200,000 Direct Costs –Other Utility Providers $775,000 Overhead to Underground Conversion – Miscellaneous $7,790,000 Engineering/Permitting/Surveying $8,600,000 General Requirements $2,770,000 Easement Acquisition Assistance $3,220,000 Property Restoration $3,430,000 Construction Phase Services $3,670,000 Pavement Restoration $10,670,000 Construction Management $28,040,000 Street Lighting $1,510,000 Contingency $14,400,000 Inflation $47,870,000 14 Overhead to Underground Conversion –FPL Overhead to Underground Conversion –ATT Overhead to Underground Conversion –Comcast Overhead to Underground Conversion –Other Utility Providers Overhead to Underground Conversion –Miscellaneous General Requirements Property RestorationPavement Restoration Street Lighting Direct Costs –FPL Direct Costs –AT&T Direct Costs –Comcast Direct Costs –Other Utility Providers Engineering/Permitting/Surveying Easement Acquisition Assistance Construction Phase Services Construction Management Graphical Breakdown of Program Costs Funding Sources Beyond Assessments •Grant Funding •Shared Restoration Costs Opinion of Cost Process Description •Recent Cost Information from Similar Projects •Comprehensive Cost Information •Consistent Methodology for Cost Application •Area Types o Residential o Commercial •Quantity Estimation •Inflation Opinion of Cost VILLAGE OF NORTH PALM BEACH VILLAGE MANAGER’S OFFICE TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the Village Council FROM: Andrew D. Lukasik, Village Manager DATE: December 9, 2021 SUBJECT: PRESENTATION – Twin City Mall Market Analysis On February 25, 2021, the Village Council approved an Agreement with the Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council (TCRPC), working with WTL+a, to conduct a Market Analysis and Financial Feasibility Study for the Twin City Mall Site. The purpose of the study is to determine what new uses will be economically viable at this location and what type of development plan will be needed to attract investment to the site in order to develop a regulatory plan, or zoning code, that would be financially feasible for future investors. The study has been completed. Tonight’s presentation will summarize the findings. As this was a collaborative project with the Town of Lake Park, a presentation will be made at the Lake Park Commission meeting on December 15th. Background Information: Located at the southwest corner of US1 and Northlake Boulevard, the Twin City Mall opened on July 21, 1971. The 400,000-square foot mall bisected the Village of North Palm Beach and the Town of Lake Park, thus the “Twin City” name. The Twin City Mall took a year and approximately $10 million to build. By the 1980’s, the mall began to struggle financially – especially when the opening of the Gardens Mall in 1988 drew major tenants away. After years of financial issues, code violations and attempts to revitalize the mall, demolition took place in June, 1997. Currently, the site has approximately 103,000 sf of commercial space located on 15.75 acres in the Village of North Palm Beach. The Lake Park section of the site contains nearly 22.5 acres of land and 74,500 sf of commercial space, including Publix. The Village’s 2016 Citizens’ Master Plan identified the redevelopment of the Twin City Mall Site as a priority. The Plan noted that: Many charrette participants recognized the potential for redevelopment of the old Twin City Mall site, which currently includes the Northlake Promenade Shoppes. A lifestyle center, like CityPlace or Mizner Park, was the most common description of the preferred form. These types of development provide shopping, entertainment, restaurant uses within the form of an urban neighborhood that incorporates residential as an integral use. The site is large enough to accommodate a significant project. Buildings tall enough to afford water views could be incorporated without impacting existing residences. Currently, the project turns its back to adjacent houses, negatively impacting physical and economic potential, particularly for the residential uses. Since half of the site is located within the boundary of Lake Park, a clear vision that both municipalities support is a crucial tool to encourage investment. The development of a regulatory framework for the site has also been identified as a high priority initiative as part of the Village’s Annual Strategic Plan. Because of the origins of the Twin City Mall, the Village and the Town of Lake Park have committed to work collaboratively on development issues affecting the property through an interlocal agreement that was approved in 1993. * * * * Twin City Mall Redevelopment Feasibility Study Phase 1 Market Study Real Estate & Economic Advisors DC & MA Retail & Development Strategies Arlington, VA Prepared for: Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council On behalf of: Town of Lake Park & Village of North Palm Beach December 2021 WTL+a Introduction Tom Moriarity, Managing Principal Retail & Development Strategies LLC 1 Tom Lavash, Managing Principal WTL+a Real Estate & Economic Advisors WTL+a Introduction CRA & TIF Studies—Boynton Beach, Delray Beach, Jupiter, Lake Park, Lake Worth, Riviera Beach, West Palm Beach TOD Master Plans—Delray Beach, Jupiter, Palm Beach Gardens, West Palm Beach Community & District Master Plans: Glades Region, North Palm Beach, SR 7 Corridor, Transit Village, Waterways Plan Redevelopment Feasibility— Twin City Mall, Atlantic Crossing, Auburn Trace, Seacrest Village Multiple Projects Across Palm Beach County Since 2005 2 Introduction Commenced feasibility study in March 2021 Two phases: Phase 1:Demographic/economic profile Stakeholder interviews Real estate market conditions Redevelopment potentials Implementation issues & direction Completed October 2021 Phase 2:Financial feasibility of up to 3 development scenarios (TBD by TC) Anticipated draft 2 months from receipt of development scenarios Key objective to ensure plan is grounded in economic/market realities Sequential tasks serve as “building blocks”: o Demographic & economic profile: the “drivers” of real estate demand o Market conditions: real estate metrics & performance o Demand potentials: evaluates redevelopment opportunities 3 Demographics 4 North County Trade Area Town of Lake Park Village of North Palm Beach Demographics Population growth since 2010: o Lake Park: 600+ residents in 250+ HHs o North Palm Beach: 950+ residents in 470+ HHs o North County: 8,100+ residents in 3,600+ HHs Population forecasts (2025) do not consider opportunities associated with a 38-acre transformative site: o Lake Park: 339 new residents in 134 HHs o North Palm Beach: 515 new residents in 250 HHs o North County: 3,980 new residents in 1,720 HHs Average annual HH incomes: o Lake Park: $62,400 o North Palm Beach: $107,800 o North County: $107,000 5 Demographics Annual household retail spending: o Lake Park: $14,176 o North Palm Beach: $23,966 o North County: $23,785 Annual retail sales inflow or leakage: o Lake Park: $169.4 million inflow o North Palm Beach: $84.6 million leakage across multiple merchandise categories o Leakage represents a potential sales recapture opportunity 6 Economic Profile Net new jobs (2007—2018): o Lake Park: 552 o North Palm Beach: 182 o North County: 3,760 Share of countywide jobs: o Lake Park: 0.75% o North Palm Beach: 0.79% o North County: 7.4% Jobs-to-population ratio: o Boca Raton: 1.24 o West Palm Beach: 0.86 o Lake Park: 0.75 o Riviera Beach: 0.63 o Palm Beach County: 0.49 o North Palm Beach: 0.48 7 Economic Profile Both municipalities account for 9% to 12% of North County jobs— share has remained consistent DEO employment forecast for Palm Beach County: 87,755 new jobs countywide (2020—2028) If municipalities maintain their fair share of County employment: o Lake Park @ 0.75% = 659 new jobs o North Palm Beach @ 0.79% = 697 new jobs 8 Market Conditions: Housing Town of Lake Park Housing market is generally stable: o Flat owner-occupancy (40%) o Increasing renter-occupancy (46%) o Limited new construction o Average values: $233,900 o True vacancy rate: 11.7% has increased since 2010 Significant increase in investor interest in US 1 corridor: o Nautilus 220 (transformative) o 315 Federal Highway o Woolbright 9 Market Conditions: Housing Village of North Palm Beach Housing market is strong: o Increasing owner-occupancy (60%) o Stable renter-occupancy (21%) o Housing starts average 17 units/year o Average values: $505,700 o True vacancy rate: 5.7% on par with industry standards Recent/new investment in US 1 corridor: o Water Club (new price ceiling) o Solara City Centre o Emara Palm Beach 10 Market Conditions: Office Town of Lake Park Very limited supply: 57,600 SF in 13 buildings (0.10% of County) & no new construction Negligible net absorption: o Past 14 years: 867 SF/year o Past 5 years: 741 SF/year Fluctuating vacancy rates—from 6% (2011) to 20% (2019) Vacancies declined in 2020: 4.6% with 8,860 SF of positive net absorption 11 Market Conditions: Office Village of North Palm Beach Supply: 1,081,300 SF in 68 buildings (1.9% of County) & only 11,300 SF of new construction since 2007 Negative net absorption: o Past 14 years: (5,500 SF)/year o Past 5 years: (3,800 SF)/year Fluctuating vacancy rates—from 22% (2010) to 7% (2017) to 11% (2020) Vacancies remain at 11% in 2021; net absorption is flat 12 Market Conditions: Retail RDS Inventory Classified retail in 7 major industry categories: o Specialty Retail o Food & Beverage/Grocery o Consumer Services o FIRE (Finance, Insurance, Real Estate) o Professional Offices o Automotive o Vacant Space Retail vacancy rates: o Lake Park: 16.1% o North Palm Beach: 15.0% o Gardens Mall Area: 25.2% 13 Market Conditions: Retail RDS Inventory Surrounding 3-mile area is already a regional shopping destination with an estimated 6.7 million SF of retail space Municipal retail inventory includes: o Lake Park: 1.96 million SF o North Palm Beach: 1.81 million SF Major retail cluster on PGA corridor contains 2.9 million SF: o The Gardens Mall: 1.4 million SF o Downtown at the Gardens: 450,000 SF o Legacy Place: 416,000 SF 14 Market Conditions: Hotel No hotels in Lake Park & only one in North Palm Beach Pre-COVID market performance is strong: o Selected 16 properties with 2,162 rooms (12% of County supply) o Average annual occupancies strengthened—from 73.2% (2013) to a peak of 77.6% (2017) o Seven-year average occupancies exceeded 70%in 6 of past 7 years o Average daily rates (ADRs) increased at sustained pace of 4.91% per year o Newest: Hampton Inn on RCA Blvd. o Planned: 174-room hotel in Downtown at the Gardens expansion 15 Market Potentials 16 Market Potentials: Housing 250 New Housing Units + Potential for 130—140 “Unallocated” Units 17 Average 2030 Population Household Housing Scenario 2021 2030 Change Size Units Scenario #3 (Required Growth to Support Proposed Projects) (4) Average Annual Growth Rate 1.52% Current & Future Population 8,762 10,193 1,431 1.75 818 Allocation to Known Residential Projects:(5) Under Construction - Approved - Nautilus 220 332 Proposed - 310 Federal Highway & Woolbright 350 Subtotal - Allocated Units:682 Unallocated Units-Scenario #3:136 Forecasts Twin City Mall Site: Lake Park Portion Market Potentials: Housing 600 to 800 (or More?) New Housing Units 18 Twin City Mall Site: North Palm Beach Portion Average 2030 Population Household Housing Scenario 2021 2030 Change Size Units Scenario #3 (Required Growth to Support Proposed Projects) (4) Average Annual Growth Rate 1.30% Current & Future Population 12,975 14,764 1,789 1.75 1,022 Allocation to Known Residential Projects:(5) Under Construction - Approved - Proposed-200 Yacht Club/Mast Capital 215 Subtotal - Allocated Units:215 Unallocated Units-Scenario #3:807 Forecasts Market Potentials: Office 3,000 to 5,000 SF of Office 19 New Jobs % Office-SF Occupancy 2028 Demand Industry Sector 2020-2028 Using Factor (In SF) Professional/General Office Total Employment:6,604 As % of Palm Beach County (5-Year Average)(1)0.75% Fair Share Analysis 2020-2028 Employment Growth (If Fair Share Maintained)659 % Office-using Jobs (2)5.5% SF Occupancy Factor 150 2028 Gross Demand (All Office):5,500 Existing Vacant Office Space (10-Year Average)7,660 (3) -Lease-up Required @ 25%(1,915) (1,915) Remaining Vacant Space:5,745 % Vacant 10.0% 2028 NET DEMAND (Rounded, In SF):3,600 Twin City Mall Site: Lake Park Portion Market Potentials: Office Negligible Demand Unless Anchor Tenant Can be Secured 20 Twin City Mall Site: North Palm Beach Portion New Jobs % Office-SF Occupancy 2028 Demand Industry Sector 2020-2028 Using Factor (In SF) Professional/General Office Total Employment:6,185 As % of Palm Beach County (5-Year Average)(1)0.79% Fair Share Analysis 2020-2028 Employment Growth (If Fair Share Maintained)697 % Office-using Jobs (2)44.3% SF Occupancy Factor 150 2028 Gross Demand (All Office):46,300 Existing Vacant Office Space (10-Year Average)140,099 (3) -Lease-up Required @ 35%(49,035) (49,035) Remaining Vacant Space:91,064 % Vacant 8.4% 2028 NET DEMAND (Rounded, In SF):(2,700) Market Potentials: Retail 22,000 –24,000 SF of Retail, F&B & Services 21 Area supply, retail industry transitions & Pandemic impacts suggest the site’s retail program should be carefully planned & selected to serve on- site/nearby markets Creating a walkable, “place-based” character will differentiate the product & sustain consumer traffic The analysis suggests market support will be generated by: o Future on-site residents & employees (46%) o Existing residents (23%) o Nearby office workers (7%) o Re-captured “sales leakage” (25%) If overall redevelopment plan is not ‘transformative’ in densities & heights, total supportable retail would be considerably less Implementation Issues 22 Multiple Property Owners/Separate Jurisdictions o Property owners have different priorities, timetables & investment requirements; more complex to weave into a coherent plan o Separate jurisdictions require coordination of planning, use of potential incentives & approved development programs Design/Development Consistency & Central Controlling Plan o Both jurisdictions modified complementary development codes, but there is no governing plan for the overall site Achieving Public Goals & Objectives o How can public goals/objectives be satisfied (e.g., public gathering space, coordinated parking, connectivity, accessibility, etc.) Implementation Issues 23 Administrative Reviews & Approvals o How can reviews & approvals process be coordinated? Changing Market Forces & Characteristics o Lake Park/North Palm Beach/US 1 Corridor is attracting developers who want greater heights & densities o How can these market forces, preferences be balanced? Next Steps 24 Phase 2 Select development scenarios Upon authorization, initiate financial feasibility analysis to measure: o Investment viability of each use o Order-of-magnitude cost estimates for public realm, infrastructure improvements o Residual value & magnitude of financing gap, if any Prepare summary of findings Schedule staff workshop & final presentation Contact Information 25 Kim DeLaney, Ph.D. Director of Strategic Development & Policy Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council kdelaney@tcrpc.org W. Thomas (Tom) Lavash Managing Principal WTL+a Real Estate & Economic Advisors wthomas.lavash@wtl-a.com Tom Moriarity Managing Principal Retail & Development Strategies, LLC tmoriarity@retaildevelopmentstrategies.com WTL+a WTL+a 1 Twin City Mall Redevelopment Feasibility Study Town of Lake Park & Village of North Palm Beach, FL Phase 1 Report: Market Study Prepared for: Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council Stuart, FL On behalf of: Town of Lake Park & Village of North Palm Beach November 2021 FINAL WTL +a R ea l E s ta t e & E c o no mi c A d v i so r s Wa sh i ng to n, DC—C ap e Co d , M A 301 . 5 02 . 41 71 50 8. 214. 0 915 WTL+a WTL +a Real Estate & Economic Advisors Washington, DC—Cape Cod, MA 301.502.4171 508.214.0915 2 General & Limiting Conditions Every reasonable effort has been made to ensure that the data contained in this study reflect the most accurate and timely information possible. These data are believed to be reliable at the time the study was conducted. This study is based on estimates, assumptions, and other information developed by WTL +Associates (referred hereinafter as “WTL+a”) from its independent research effort, general knowledge of the market and the industry, and consultations with the client and its representatives. No responsibility is assumed for inaccuracies in reporting by the client, its agent and/or representatives, or any other data source used in preparing or presenting this study. No warranty or representation is made by WTL+a that any of the projected values or results contained in this study will be achieved. Possession of this study does not carry with it the right of publication thereof or to use the name of "WTL+a" in any manner without first obtaining the prior written consent of WTL+a. No abstracting, excerpting or summarizing of this study may be made without first obtaining the prior written consent of WTL+a. This report is not to be used in conjunction with any public or private offering of securities or other similar purpose where it may be relied upon to any degree by any person, other than the client, without first obtaining the prior written consent of WTL+a. This study may not be used for purposes other than that for which it is prepared or for which prior written consent has first been obtained from WTL+a. This study is qualified in its entirety by, and should be considered in light of, these limitations, conditions and considerations. WTL+a WTL +a Real Estate & Economic Advisors Washington, DC—Cape Cod, MA 301.502.4171 508.214.0915 3 Table of Contents General & Limiting Conditions .................................................................................................... 2 Table of Contents ............................................................................................................................ 3 Tables & Figures .............................................................................................................................. 4 1 Executive Summary ................................................................................................................ 7 Introduction .......................................................................................................................................... 7 Impacts of the 2020—21 Pandemic (Updated) .................................................................................. 8 Key Findings ....................................................................................................................................... 14 2 Site Characteristics .............................................................................................................. 19 3 Demographic & Economic Profile .................................................................................... 23 Demographic Trends & Forecasts ................................................................................................... 23 Household Incomes & Retail Spending ........................................................................................... 37 Retail “Recapture” Opportunities .................................................................................................... 40 Economic Characteristics ................................................................................................................. 48 4 Real Estate Market Conditions ......................................................................................... 69 Housing ............................................................................................................................................... 69 Workplace—Office ............................................................................................................................. 88 General Retail ..................................................................................................................................... 93 Hotel/Lodging ................................................................................................................................... 107 5 Real Estate Development Potentials ............................................................................ 114 Market-rate Housing ........................................................................................................................ 114 Workplace: Multi-tenant/Speculative Office .................................................................................. 124 Hotel/Lodging ................................................................................................................................... 131 General Retail ................................................................................................................................... 135 6 Redevelopment & Marketing Issues ................................................................................. 148 Property Ownership Patterns/Separate Jurisdictions ................................................................. 149 Potential Marketing & Implementation Issues .............................................................................. 152 WTL+a WTL +a Real Estate & Economic Advisors Washington, DC—Cape Cod, MA 301.502.4171 508.214.0915 4 Appendix ......................................................................................................................................... 157 Tables & Figures Table 1: Twin City Mall Parcel Information—Village of North Palm Beach, 2021 .................................. 21 Table 2: Twin City Mall Parcel Information—Town of Lake Park, 2021 .................................................. 22 Table 3: State-by-State Relocations to Florida —Top 10 States, 2010—2019 ....................................... 24 Table 4: Permanent Address Changes—New York City to Florida Counties, 2019—2020 ................. 27 Table 5: Palm Beach County Population Trends & Forecasts, 2000—2040 .......................................... 29 Table 6: Demographic Trends & Forecasts—Town of Lake Park, 2000—2025 .................................... 31 Table 7: Demographic Trends & Forecasts—Village of North Palm Beach, 2000—2025 .................... 33 Table 8: Demographic Trends & Forecasts—North County Trade Area, 2000—2025 ......................... 36 Table 9: Annual Household Consumer Spending, 2019 ............................................................................ 38 Table 10: Retail “Recapture” Opportunities—Town of Lake Park, 2018 ................................................. 42 Table 11: Retail “Recapture” Opportunities—Village of North Palm Beach, 2018 ................................. 45 Table 12: Employment Trends—Palm Beach County, 1995—2018 ........................................................ 49 Table 13: Business Mix—Palm Beach County, 2020 ................................................................................. 51 Table 14: State Employment Forecasts—Palm Beach County, 2020—2028......................................... 53 Table 15: Employment Trends—Town of Lake Park, 2007—2018 .......................................................... 54 Table 16: Business Mix—Town of Lake Park, 2020 ................................................................................... 56 Table 17: Employment Trends—Village of North Palm Beach, 2007—2018 ......................................... 59 Table 18: Business Mix—Village of North Palm Beach, 2020 .................................................................. 61 Table 19: Employment Trends—North County Trade Area, 2007—2018 ............................................... 64 Table 20: Business Mix—North County Trade Area, 2020 ........................................................................ 66 Table 21: Housing Profile—Town of Lake Park, 2010—2025 ................................................................... 70 Table 22: Housing Profile—Village of North Palm Beach, 2010—2025 .................................................. 73 Table 23: Housing Profile—North County Trade Area, 2010—2025 ....................................................... 76 Table 24: Housing Starts—Palm Beach County & Selected Municipalities, 2007—2019 .................... 78 Table 25: Multi-family Rental Characteristics—Town of Lake Park, 2007—2020 ................................. 81 Table 26: Multi-family Rental Characteristics—Village of North Palm Beach, 2007—2020 ................. 82 Table 27: Profile of Selected Multi-family Properties .................................................................................. 84 Table 28: Office Market Profile—Town of Lake Park, 2007—2020.......................................................... 89 Table 29: Office Market Profile—Village of North Palm Beach, 2007—2020 ......................................... 91 Table 30: Retail Market Profile—Town of Lake Park, 2007—2020 .......................................................... 98 Table 31: Summary of Area Retail Inventory—by Sub -district, 2020 ..................................................... 100 Table 32: Retail Market Profile—Village of North Palm Beach, 2007—2020 ....................................... 103 Table 33: Palm Beach County Hotel Inventory, 2020............................................................................... 109 Table 34: North County Area Hotel Inventory, 2020 ................................................................................. 110 WTL+a WTL +a Real Estate & Economic Advisors Washington, DC—Cape Cod, MA 301.502.4171 508.214.0915 5 Table 35: Annual Market Performance of Selected Competitive Hotels, 2012—2019 ........................ 112 Table 36: Monthly Market Performance of Selected Competitive Hotels, 2013—2019 ...................... 113 Table 37: Housing Potentials Scenario #1—Town of Lake Park, 2030 ................................................. 115 Table 38: Housing Potentials Scenario #2—Town of Lake Park, 2030 ................................................. 116 Table 39: Housing Potentials Scenario #3—Town of Lake Park, 2030 ................................................. 117 Table 40: Housing Potentials Scenario #1—Village of North Palm Beach, 2030 ................................ 119 Table 41: Housing Potentials Scenario #2—Village of North Palm Beach, 2030 ................................ 120 Table 42: Housing Potentials Scenario #3—Village of North Palm Beach, 2030 ................................ 121 Table 43: Office Potentials—Palm Beach County, 2020—2028 ............................................................. 126 Table 44: Office Potentials—Town of Lake Park, 2020—2028 ............................................................... 128 Table 45: Office Potentials—Village of North Palm Beach, 2000—2028 .............................................. 130 Table 46: Hotel Potentials Scenario #1—Twin City Mall Site, 2020—2030 .......................................... 133 Table 47: Hotel Potentials Scenario #2—Twin City Mall Site, 2020—2030 .......................................... 134 Table 48: Retail Potentials—Existing Residents, 2025 ............................................................................ 138 Table 49: Retail Potentials—New On -Site Residents, 2025.................................................................... 141 Table 50: Retail Potentials—Nearby Office & Service Employees, 2025 .............................................. 143 Table 51: Retail Potentials—Recapture of Existing Resident-based Sales Leakage .......................... 145 Table 52: Retail Demand—Summary of Market Support ......................................................................... 147 Table 53: Summary of Demographic Characteristics & Forecasts, 2010—2025 ................................. 158 Table 54: Summary of Economic Characteristics & Forecasts, 2007—2028 ....................................... 159 Table 55: Summary of Real Estate Market Conditions, 2001—2020 .................................................... 160 Table 56: Employee Inflow/Outflow—Town of Lake Park, 2008—2018 ................................................ 162 Table 57: Employee Inflow/Outflow—Village of North Palm Beach, 2008—2018 ............................... 163 Table 58: Employee Inflow/Outflow—North County Trade Area, 2008—2018..................................... 164 Table 59: Demographic Trends & Forecasts—Palm Beach County, 2000—2024 .............................. 165 Table 60: Industrial Market Profile—Town of Lake Park, 2007—2020 .................................................. 166 Table 61: Multi-family Rental Characteristics—North County Trade Area, 2007—2020 .................... 167 Table 62: Office Market Profile—North County Trade Area, 2007—2020 ............................................ 168 Table 63: Retail Market Profile—North County Trade Area, 2007—2020............................................. 169 Figure 1: Palm Beach County Property Appraiser Twin City Mall Parcel Boundaries ........................... 19 Figure 2: Top 50 Metropolitan Destinations from New York City, 2020 ................................................... 26 Figure 3: North County Trade Area ............................................................................................................... 35 Figure 4: Retail Leakage & Surplus—Town of Lake Park, 2018 .............................................................. 41 Figure 5: Retail Leakage & Surplus—Village of North Palm Beach, 2018 .............................................. 47 Figure 6: Employment Densities—Town of Lake Park, 2018 .................................................................... 57 Figure 7: Employment Inflow/Outflow—Town of Lake Park, 2018 ........................................................... 58 WTL+a WTL +a Real Estate & Economic Advisors Washington, DC—Cape Cod, MA 301.502.4171 508.214.0915 6 Figure 8: Employment Densities—Village of North Palm Beach, 2018 ................................................... 62 Figure 9: Employment Inflow/Outflow—Village of North Palm Beach, 2018........................................... 63 Figure 10: Employment Densities—North County Trade Area, 2020 ...................................................... 67 Figure 11: Employment Inflow/Outflow—North County Trade Area, 2020 .............................................. 68 WTL+a WTL +a Real Estate & Economic Advisors Washington, DC—Cape Cod, MA 301.502.4171 508.214.0915 7 1 Executive Summary Introduction WTL+a, a national real estate and economic development consulting firm in Massachusetts and Washington, DC, with significant project experience throughout Florida, was retained in March 2021 by the Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council (TCRPC) to prepare a redevelopment feasibility study of the Twin City Mall site, located in the Town of Lake Park and the Village of North Palm Beach, in Palm Beach County. Retail & Development Strategies LLC of Arlington, VA assisted WTL+a in this effort. The study is intended to provide municipal officials with critical real estate market and financial data necessary to guide public decisions regarding redevelopment of the site and comprises the following phases and tasks:  Phase 1 o Profile and analyze demographic/economic characteristics and real estate market conditions across four land uses (housing, workplace/office, general retail and hotel/lodging) o Conduct public outreach across a broad spectrum of stakeholders o Evaluate market/redevelopment potentials by testing market support for each land use, and o Outline implementation strategies and approaches to ensure successful redevelopment.  Phase 2 o Prepare a financial feasibility analysis of up to three (3) redevelopment scenarios to measure the overall investment viability of specified land uses and understand whether these uses would be expected to attract private investment, and WTL+a WTL +a Real Estate & Economic Advisors Washington, DC—Cape Cod, MA 301.502.4171 508.214.0915 8 o Estimate potential “residual value” that could be utilized to offset land acquisition and/or costs of required infrastructure (such as structured parking), public realm improvements, etc., as identified and prioritized by both municipalities. This document represents the deliverable for Phase 1. It is organized as follows: Section 1: Executive Summary & Key Findings Section 2: Site Characteristics & Conditions Section 3: Demographic Characteristics & Economic Profile Section 4: Real Estate Market Conditions Section 5: Development Potentials Section 6: Implementation Issues & Approaches Impacts of the 2020—21 Pandemic (Updated) This report presents the findings of demographic and real estate market conditions and development potentials on the Twin City Mall site for housing, “workplace” (professional and medical office), and supporting uses such as retail and lodging. It should be noted that market conditions are based on data and conditions prior to COVID-19 impacts. While the timing of future development may be delayed due to the pandemic, there are potentials for selected, well considered new growth and investment. Experience in other Florida markets has demonstrated the best way to fully optimize economic benefits generated by redevelopment of the site will result from a carefully structured and implemented plan that appropriately integrates different land uses and phases to provide development flexibility. Office Market The most important difference between year-end 2019 (the data -year used for this analysis) and current conditions is the impact of the global Coronavirus pandemic. COVID-19 has resulted in significant impacts on commercial real estate, although these impacts vary considerably from location to location. It has affected consumer spending, real estate sales, job prospects, and recreation options in ways that are profoundly different than pre -COVID conditions. The office market, especially for technology and other computer-based industries, has been affected the most significantly and in ways that are not likely to encourage new office development. At the broadest levels across the country, reactions to self-isolation and working-at-home have resulted in multiple companies advising employees to continue working from home for the near future. Many WTL+a WTL +a Real Estate & Economic Advisors Washington, DC—Cape Cod, MA 301.502.4171 508.214.0915 9 companies have integrated “work from home” as a permanent component of the work environment as well as staggered in-office work commitments that substantially reduce demand for office space. During summer 2021, an explosion of COVID cases driven by the emergence of the highly contagious and rapidly changing Delta variant, uneven and low (especially in the Southern U.S.) vaccination rates, and re-emergence of mask mandates has resulted in a growing number of office users to reconsider office reopening plans, whether delaying return to in- person office attendance or permanently reducing office occupancy on a day-to-day basis. With infection and hospitalization rates rising across the U.S.—and persistent vaccine hesitancy rendering herd immunity unlikely—many companies are reported to be rethinking previously announced deadlines for employees to start reporting to the office. Firms in the tech sector—among the first to go remote at the start of the pandemic—are leading the retreat from office reopening. Google and Apple both announced in July 2021 they were pushing their office re-openings to October 2021. However, in August, Google, Apple, Amazon, and Facebook decided to delay reopening until January 2022 . Twitter, which last year announced that employees could work from home indefinitely, has closed offices that it had recently reopened in New York and San Francisco. Financial firms, including BlackRock, Wells Fargo, Credit Suisse, PIMCO, T. Rowe Price, and Liberty Mutual, have all pushed back plans to return to their offices until at least October 2021. Boston- based asset manager State Street announced in August that it would abandon and sublease its two Manhattan office buildings entirely in a more permanent embrace of hybrid remote and in-person work. While JP Morgan and Goldman Sachs have targeted a late September reopening, the list of major firms postponing office re-opening dates continues to increase across a range of economic sectors—from Viacom/CBS and Sony Pictures to Ford Motor Company and Coca-Cola. These uncertainties are prolonging anticipated recovery in the commercial office sector. To identify trends in how Americans are returning to the office, Kastle Systems has been evaluating anonymous aggregated occupancy data (from keycard, fob and “KastlePresence” app) for 2,600 buildings and 41,000 businesses the company secure s in 138 cities across 47 states. Through its “Back-to-Work Barometer,” Kastle Systems’ data reflect unique authorized user entries in multiple markets relative to a pre-COVID (March 5, 2020) baseline, averaged on a weekly basis. Across all office-using industries, national office occupancies for 10 major cities averaged 30.9% in September 2021. This reflected a decline in occupied office space from 33.1% in August 2021, WTL+a WTL +a Real Estate & Economic Advisors Washington, DC—Cape Cod, MA 301.502.4171 508.214.0915 10 suggesting continued business uncertainty regarding employees returning to the office. For specific cities, occupancies ranged from:  19% in San Francisco and New York  28% to 29% in Washington, DC, Philadelphia and Los Angeles, and  42% to 45% in Austin, Dallas and Houston. Retail/Restaurants & Travel/Hospitality The travel/hospitality and retail/food service industries, which were particularly hard-hit in 2020 (e.g., airline passenger volumes declined by 90% to 95%, major layoffs in the hotel and food & beverage industries, etc.), began to emerge from these declines in mid-2021. The tourism/travel/leisure markets were seriously impacted and may require several years to stabilize, much less fully recover. In its bi-annual bankruptcy update of the retail industry at year-end 2020, BDO counted 18 retailers that headed to bankruptcy court in the first half of the year and another 11 in the last half. In fact, the industry's bankruptcy record so far put it on pace with 2010, following the Great Recession, when there were 48 bankruptcy filings by retailers. The COVID-19 pandemic has interfered with what is normally a cyclical pattern for retailers and set up the industry for yet more bankruptcies and store closings through 2021. According to BDO researchers, 2020 set the record for the highest number of retail bankruptcies and store closings in a single year. By BDO's measure, bankrupt retailers announced nearly 6,000 store closings in 2020, on top of the 9,500 stores that closed in 2019 (most closings were in regional and super-regional malls). Another 15 retailers (including Macy's, Bed Bath & Beyond, and Gap) outside of bankruptcy court announced a total of 4,200 closures at year-end 2020. According to Coresight Data, retailers have announced 4,889 store closures in 2021 representing a decline of 37.9% from the number of store closures announced in 2020. The number of retail bankruptcies has declined in 2021 due to the following factors:  Government stimulus funding has provided both subsidies and more available capital to the retail sector;  Online spending grew by over 21% in 2020 and is likely to increase again in 2021; this increase in sales does not correlate with bricks-and-mortar retail store sales, which remain challenged by COVID restrictions and cautious consumer behavior As noted above, thousands of retail businesses have closed during the global pandemic; industry sources suggest the pace of WTL+a WTL +a Real Estate & Economic Advisors Washington, DC—Cape Cod, MA 301.502.4171 508.214.0915 11 closures has largely stabilized in late 2021, but online sales growth is expected to continue to affect new physical retail store opportunities;  Due to the increasing amount of retail space vacancy, property owners have less leverage over tenants and have lowered rents to maintain occupancy, easing the cost of operations for specific retailers;  Spending has shifted toward goods rather than services. The food service, hospitality, travel, and sporting and entertainment/events retail categories remain deeply affected by COVID, significantly reducing in-person attendance and on-site consumer spending. This has redirected the share of spending on consumer services, which traditionally accounted for about 70% of all consumer spend ing (National Retail Federation, 2021). According to the National Restaurant Association, more than 110,000 eating and drinking establishments across the United States closed—temporarily or permanently—in 2020, with nearly 2.5 million jobs erased from pre-pandemic levels. Of restaurants that closed permanently in 2020, the majority were established businesses; these eateries had been in business for an average of 16 years, and 16% had been open for at least 30 years. Since the pandemic started, 62% of fine dining operators and 54% of family and casual dining operators reported staffing levels more than 20% below normal. Moreover, restaurant and food service sales fell by $240 billion in 2020 from an expected level of $899 billion. The association’s 2021 State of the Restaurant Industry report also noted that sales and employment losses have disproportionately impacted full-service restaurants, which have had greater challenges in pivoting to off-premises service. COVID-related impacts on the visitor market in this part of Palm Beach County are characterized as significant—at least as it pertains to impacts on the area’s hotel market. As noted in the analysis of hotel market conditions, area occupancies declined sharply in 2020—from 83.7% in February 2020 to 17.6% in March 2020. Occupancies climbed steadily through the remainder of the year—to 50.2% by December 2020. During the first four months of 2021, area hotel occupancies jumped from 57.2% in January to 77.1% in March but fell slightly in April. VisitFlorida data for Southeast Florida (including Broward, Palm Beach, Miami-Dade , and Monroe Counties) indicates that visitor volumes were down dramatically in 2020 over prior years. Survey data on visitors “planning to travel in the next six months” indicated the proportion of those planning WTL+a WTL +a Real Estate & Economic Advisors Washington, DC—Cape Cod, MA 301.502.4171 508.214.0915 12 to visit Florida decreased from 87% in March 2020 to 58% in November 2020. Commercial airline capacities declined significantly in 2020 but are rapidly improving in mid-2021. For a visitor destination like Florida, where the $111.7 billion annual tourism industry is the state’s largest industry, the impacts are great. Government policies are attempting to balance social responsibility and safety with the need to re-open businesses and encourage visitors to return. While beaches and tourist destinations across the state reopened in late 2020 and early 2021, the emergence of virus variants such as Delta in mid-2021 are producing a significant increase in caseloads and hospitalizations, thus generating significant uncertainty about full economic recovery. Unemployment & Impacts on Real Estate Development In 2020, national unemployment levels were the highest since the Great Depression of the 1930s. From a record annual low of 3.5% in February, seasonally adjusted unemployment jumped to 14.7% in April. With uneven recovery generated by the pandemic, the official unemployment rate in 2020 steadily declined —from 13.3% in May to 6.7% in December. As vaccination rates soared in 2021, national unemployment levels decreased steadily—from 6.3% in January to 5.4% in July. In fact, 943,000 jobs were added across the U.S. in June 2021. Fully 40% (380,000) of the job increase occurred in Leisure & Hospitality, including Food Services & Drinking Places (+253,000 jobs) and Accommodations (+74,000) as restaurants and hotels across the U.S. reopened and the summer tourism season flourished. Another 243,000 jobs nationwide were created in July. By comparison, according to the Department of Economic Opportunity (DEO), Florida’s unemployment rate jumped from a low of 2.8% in February 2020 to a peak of 13.8% in April 2020. During the last half of 2020, the state’s unemployment rate declined—from 11.4% in July to 6.4% in November. During the first-quarter 2021, the state’s unemployment rate remained in the range of 4.7%; the state’s unemployment rate increased to 5.0% in June 2021 as the Delta variant of the virus and hospitalizations surged across the state. Other factors impacting real estate development and economic potentials include significant inflation in multiple sectors of the economy as well as inordinately high increases in construction material costs. In fact, inflation of 5% to 6% per month has been reported , and lumber set an all-time price record of $1,515 per thousand board feet in May 2021. However, the "cash" market price dropped to $472 per thousand board feet in the first week of August according to data from Fast-markets Random Lengths and reported by Fortune. The highest price that lumber fetched by the same metric in mid-2018 was $582. WTL+a WTL +a Real Estate & Economic Advisors Washington, DC—Cape Cod, MA 301.502.4171 508.214.0915 13 Driving that decline is an inversion of the supply-and-demand equation. Just as lumber producers increased their capacity and were reducing backlogs, developers and construction firms had started planning for delays, pivoting to other materials or halting projects altogether. Lumber costs are felt most acutely by the homebuilding and low-rise multi-family sectors, where project starts had begun tailing off as prices hit record highs in May. According to Bloomberg, steel, which commercial developers turned to as a way of avoiding lumber, continued to rise in price well into the summer. Ongoing supply-chain delays and disruptions in deliveries will affect the 2021 holiday season, which traditionally accounts for most retailers’ annual profits. Conclusion Taken in total, these impacts caused a major slowdown in economic activity across Florida (especially in hospitality and tourism-dependent sectors) in 2020; the costs of lost consumer spending resulted in sizable increases in vacancy rates for retail and office uses and a massive slowdown in tourism and visitor spending. While recovery in multiple business sectors emerged in early 2021, full economic recovery is uncertain—if not temporarily stalled—due to the emergence of virus variants and remaining unknowns about the pandemic. For at least the remainder of 2021, economic prospects are likely to remain cautious. However, there are mitigating factors that could change the mid-to longer-term outlook:  Slowing of Unsupportable Speculative Real Estate Development—an overheated real estate market in Florida has encouraged speculative development and over-entitlements in multiple submarkets.  Time to Plan More Effectively—the 2020 recession and uneven 2021 recovery could encourage a more manageable pace of development and reduce environmental and social impacts that often result from hurried decisions.  Business Opportunities for Millennials—the millennial generation is highly entrepreneurial and will be more willing to start new retail, food & beverage, and consumer service businesses once the pandemic has stopped.  Pent-up Demand for Social Experiences—while on-line sales spiked, higher vaccination rates have allowed consumers to feel more comfortable dining out, going out, and shopping; in fact, consumer demand for goods and services occurred at pent-up levels in early- and mid-2021 not seen since the 2007 recession. WTL+a WTL +a Real Estate & Economic Advisors Washington, DC—Cape Cod, MA 301.502.4171 508.214.0915 14  Creative Regulation & Behavior Management—if reasonable standards are implemented and safety practices realized, Florida’s beaches, communities and visitor destinations should rebound faster than other parts of the country (although the Delta variant has appeared to temporarily slow recovery). It remains to be seen whether the mid-2021 spike in COVID cases in Florida and in other states across the country will stall ongoing economic recovery. As of mid -September 2021, Palm Beach County has confirmed 212,877 COVID -19 cases and 3,514 COVID-related deaths. The recent impacts of the Delta variant are striking; while Florida recorded 251 deaths in all of June and July, there were 6 ,603 new deaths in August. That said, Florida has reportedly benefited from major residential relocation from the Northeast, adding new residents, spenders, and workers to the state’s economic base. COVID remains a major factor affecting otherwise available, pent-up spending power by U.S. consumers. As the travel/tourism industry regains stability, Florida’s largest industry should accelerate its recovery, potentially rippling through the state’s other economic sectors. Key Findings The following summarizes key findings of the demographic and economic profile, real estate market conditions by land use, and development potentials: Housing As detailed in Section 5, the analysis to determine market support for new residential development illustrates how transformational the Twin City Mall site can be for both the Town of Lake Park and the Village of North Palm Beach. The limited number of vacant/undeveloped parcels in both communities has hindered population/household growth, particularly in Lake Park, over the past 20 years. While nominal population growth occurred in each municipality between 2010 and 2020, a historic trendline analysis as exhibited in Scenarios #1 and #2 will not justify market support for new housing. As a result, WTL+a prepared an alternative analysis for Lake Park as depicted in Scenario #3 to identify the rate of population growth necessary over the next 10 years to ensure successful redevelopment. As noted, the analysis suggests that Lake Park will need to grow at a sustained compound annual pace of 1.5% per year—well above its recent 0.76% annual growth rate. This could expect to generate sufficient demand to support up to 820 new housing units town-wide by 2030 , including: WTL+a WTL +a Real Estate & Economic Advisors Washington, DC—Cape Cod, MA 301.502.4171 508.214.0915 15  Nautilus 220 (332 units under construction)  315 Federal Highway (100 units proposed)  Woolbright Development’s proposed “Lake Park Apartments” (250 units) on a portion of the Twin City site, and  Another 130 to 140 “unallocated” units over the next 10 years. Lake Park’s required growth rate could be slightly lower if a portion of the 332 units at Nautilus sell to seasonal occupants. Similarly, while slightly higher historic growth rates between 2010—2020 have generated modest population/household growth in North Palm Beach, the Village will also need to strengthen its future growth rate to support new housing on the Twin City Mall site. Specifically, as the portion of the site available to accommodate redevelopment in North Palm Beach is larger than it is in Lake Park, land acquisition costs by any developer will be significantly higher. Higher land costs will necessitate additional density and building height to justify construction feasibility. As densities along the corridor appear to be increasing, the Twin City Mall site is both a larger and pre- assembled redevelopment opportunity and therefore should anticipate higher densities (i.e., 800 to 1,000 units). As a result, WTL+a created an alternative scenario to illustrate the higher growth rate/market capture necessary to support approximately 800 to 1,000 units of new housing on the North Palm Beach portion of the Twin City Mall site. Another factor bearing upon feasibility will be the costs associated with providing structured parking, which would be required to support a higher density redevelopment scenario. As a result, WTL+a prepared an alternative analysis for North Palm Beach as depicted in Scenario #3 to identify the rate of population growth necessary over the next 10 years to ensure successful redevelopment. As noted, the analysis suggests that North Palm Beach will need to grow at a sustained compound annual pace of 1.3% per year—well above its recent 0.77% annual growth rate. This could expect to generate sufficient demand to support up to 1,000 new housing units village-wide by 2030 , including:  200 Yacht Club (215 units proposed), and  Another 800 “unallocated” units over the next 10 years. This suggests that redevelopment opportunities for new housing on the North Palm Beach portion of the Twin City Mall site could support up to 800 units of new housing by 2030. WTL+a WTL +a Real Estate & Economic Advisors Washington, DC—Cape Cod, MA 301.502.4171 508.214.0915 16 The analysis concludes that stronger population/household growth in the U.S. Highway 1 corridor in this part of Palm Beach County is feasible, in part due to the impacts that the COVID pandemic has introduced, including enhanced/accelerated forces such as population shifts from New York/the Northeast to South Florida as well as recent, ongoing interest in private investment as exhibited by such projects as Nautilus 220. Since real estate market conditions data was collected and analyzed in May/June 2021, supplemental data from CoStar, Inc. reveals that “Emara Palm Beach”, a 250-unit rental complex that replaced Beach Plaza on U.S. 1 (just north of the Village’s municipal boundaries), and delivered in mid-2021, is approximately 34% leased. This suggests that monthly absorption has averaged approximately 17 units per month (assuming lease-up started in June 2021). Information on net absorption at “Solara City Centre,” a 136 -unit complex located at PGA Boulevard and U.S. 1, and delivered in mid-2021, was not reported. The multi-family industry considers the reported pace of monthly absorption at Emara Palm Beach to be strong. In total, these factors could expect to generated market potentials that support between 850 and 1,050 units of new housing across the entirety of the Twin City Mall site over the next 10 years (2030). Twin City Mall: 850 to 1,050 Units of New Housing Across Entire Site Multi-tenant/Speculative Office As detailed in Section 5, the analysis of supportable market demand for new office space is extremely limited in Lake Park and negligible in North Palm Beach. Moreover, the majority of existing office inventory in both jurisdictions is aging/outdated and may have a degree of functional and/or physical obsolescence—even with the presence of multiple owner-occupied office condominium buildings in North Palm Beach. This is best exemplified in negative net absorption, particularly in North Palm Beach, over the past 14 years. While a small amount of office space may be attractive as part of a mixed-use project, any office space developed on the Twin City Mall site should be considered a tertiary use that serves as an WTL+a WTL +a Real Estate & Economic Advisors Washington, DC—Cape Cod, MA 301.502.4171 508.214.0915 17 amenity to activate public space during the day. Any limited office space built should comprise no more than 5,000 to 10,000 sq. ft. of space oriented to professional services tenancies and located above street-level retail. The capacity to support any additional office space beyond this amount will be determined by growth in specific business markets and office-using sectors, transition of home-based businesses into leased space, rental/occupancy costs compared to competing nearby locations, etc. Twin City Mall: Office Potentials are Very Limited; May Serve as Supporting Amenity Hotel/Lodging To understand hotel market performance and opportunities for hotel development on the Twin City Mall site, WTL+a obtained hotel performance data from STR Global for 16 selected properties located primarily on nearby commercial corridors and I-95 interchanges. It is critical to understand market conditions given the enormity of the impacts on the hotel and hospitality industries from the COVID pandemic as well as the time required for recovery. The COVID pandemic which struck in early March 2020 has significantly impacted the hotel/hospitality industry. Monthly occupancies dropped precipitously—from 83.7% in February 2020 to 17.6% in April 2020. Overall occupancies among these 16 properties in 2020 averaged 44.8%. Occupancies climbed to 50.2% by year’s end and returned to pre-COVID metrics in the range of 77% during the first quarter of 2021. As detailed in Section 5, the analysis reveals negligible market support for new hotel development on the Twin City Mall site in what would be considered by the hotel industry as a secondary location. Even if peak growth in roomnight demand (which occurred between 2013 and 2017 among the competitive set) continues, it is insufficient to support more than 150 additional hotel rooms in the surrounding area over the next 10 years. This demand is likely to be captured in stronger, primary locations, such as the commercial node created by The Gardens Mall and Downtown at the Gardens or at interchanges along I-95. In fact, ShopCore is planning a 174-room hotel as part of expansion and repurposing of Downtown at the Gardens. This will capture competitive area roomnight demand in the near-term. WTL+a WTL +a Real Estate & Economic Advisors Washington, DC—Cape Cod, MA 301.502.4171 508.214.0915 18 Twin City Mall: Near-term Hotel Demand will be Focused On More Marketable Sites in Surrounding Area Supporting Retail The retail demand analysis in Section 5 details potential consumer markets and sales estimates from various sources that could expect to support new retail uses as part of the redevelopment of the Twin City Mall site. A critical assumption is that the redevelopment program will create a retail setting that is differentiated from other offerings in the area, that the configuration is pedestrian and on-site resident friendly, and that the mix of retail businesses can become a dining and limited shopping/services location. These assumptions are necessary to achieve capture rates applied in the analysis and to retain a portion of household sales leakage occurring in North Palm Beach. If these criteria are not met, then the retail program will not be achievable. Moreover, if the residential development program identified in the housing analysis is reduced below the supportable 800 to 1,050 units, the site’s retail program will also be reduced. Using potential sales increases from all consumer sources, the tota l retail development program for the Twin City Mall site should target a range of 22,000 to 24,000 sq. ft. Twin City Mall: Retail Potentials Limited as a Secondary Use to Support On-site Residential Program WTL+a WTL +a Real Estate & Economic Advisors Washington, DC—Cape Cod, MA 301.502.4171 508.214.0915 19 2 Site Characteristics The following highlights key site and location characteristics of the Twin City Mall site. It is intended to illustrate the complexities associated with redeveloping a large site that straddles two different municipalities with multiple parcels and fragmented/multiple private ownership. Property data was obtained from Palm Beach County Property Appraiser public records. Figure 1: Palm Beach County Property Appraiser Twin City Mall Parcel Boundaries WTL+a WTL +a Real Estate & Economic Advisors Washington, DC—Cape Cod, MA 301.502.4171 508.214.0915 20 Key findings from the County Property Appraiser indicate that:  The subject site in its entirety contains 38.22 acres of land with 177,749 sq. ft. of commercial uses. This suggests an overall density (floor area ratio) of .106 FAR. While this is considered low density for commercial/retail uses, it reflects six vacant commercial parcels (with 12.58 acres, 33% of the total) and two parcels for stormwater management (with 2.51 acres);  The entire site has a preliminary 2021 market value of $26,396,200 and a preliminary 2021 taxable value of $24,838,980 ($139.74 per sq. ft. of building area). This is a slight increase over the site’s 2019 taxable value of $23,401,328, or $131.65 per sq. ft.-GBA);  There are nine separate property owners/entities and 16 separate parcels. These include: o Village Shops LLC (13.07 acres and five parcels) and Northlake Promenade Shops LLC (11.57 acres and four parcels); o Real Sub LLC/Publix Supermarket (one parcel comprising 7.41 acres); o OPV Northlake Promenade LLC (2.30 acres and two parcels); and o Multiple pad sites along Northlake Boulevard and U.S. 1 occupied by various retail tenants (e.g., BP Gas, CVS, Wendy’s, TD Bank).  There are seven parcels comprising 15.75 acres of land located in North Palm Beach (accounting for 41% of the total site). These seven parcels contain 103,285 sq. ft. of commercial uses with a 2021 taxable value of $12,186,168 ($118 per sq. ft.-GBA); and  There are nine parcels comprising 22.47 acres of land located in Lake Park (accounting for 59% of the total site). These nine parcels contain 74,464 sq. ft. of commercial uses (including the Publix Supermarket) with a 2021 taxable value of $12,652,812 ($169 per sq. ft.-GBA). While there is less commercial space located on the Lake Park portion of the site, it generates higher taxable value (driven by Publix and the UPS retail store). WTL+a WTL +a Real Estate & Economic Advisors Washington, DC—Cape Cod, MA 301.502.4171 508.214.0915 21 Table 1: Twin City Mall Parcel Information—Village of North Palm Beach, 2021 Parcel Site Size Year Property Land Size Address Owner (Acres)Built Use Code Uses (SF)Market Taxable Per SF Market Taxable Per SF North Palm Beach Multiple Tenants Village Shops 7.99 1967 Shopping Office 5,566 101 US Highway 1 at US 1 LLC Center-Lobby 1,813 Community Warehouse 7,120 Warehouse 71,117 Total:85,616 7,437,763$ 4,831,530$ 56.43$ 6,983,995$ 5,846,151$ 68.28$ -6.1%21.0% BP Gas Northlake 0.75 2000 Service C-Mart 2,275 165 US Highway 1 Petroleum,Station Car Wash 648 Inc.Total:2,923 1,235,824$ 1,235,824$ 422.79$ 1,278,332$ 1,278,332$ 437.34$ 3.4%3.4% CVS OPVC 1.45 1997 Supermarket/Drug store 312 Northlake Blvd.Northlake Drug Store Freestanding 9,842 Promenade Total:9,842 1,900,000$ 1,900,000$ 193.05$ 2,509,376$ 2,090,000$ 212.36$ LLC 32.1%10.0% TD Bank Palm Beach 0.95 2005 Financial Neighborhood 316 Northlake Blvd.County Bank Bank 4,904 Total:4,904 1,683,976$ 1,683,976$ 343.39$ 1,781,917$ 1,781,917$ 363.36$ 5.8%5.8% Stormwater Parcels Northlake 0.37 River/Lakes 112$ 112$ -$ 112$ 112$ -$ Promenade 0.0%0.0% Shoppes LLC Vacant Village Shops 3.81 Vacant 898,331$ 898,331$ -$ 943,164$ 943,164$ -$ at US 1 LLC Commercial 5.0%5.0% Vacant Village Shops 0.43 Vacant 234,710$ 234,710$ -$ 246,492$ 246,492$ -$ at US 1 LLC Commercial 5.0%5.0% Subtotal - North Palm Beach:15.75 103,285 13,390,716$ 10,784,483$ 104.41$ 13,743,388$ 12,186,168$ 117.99$ 41%81%2.6%13.0% 2019 Values 2021 Values & % Change From 2019 WTL+a WTL +a Real Estate & Economic Advisors Washington, DC—Cape Cod, MA 301.502.4171 508.214.0915 22 Table 2: Twin City Mall Parcel Information—Town of Lake Park, 2021 Parcel Site Size Year Property Land Size Address Owner (Acres)Built Use Code Uses (SF)Market Taxable Per SF Market Taxable Per SF Lake Park Wendy's Wendys 0.87 2002 Restaurant,Franchise 320 Northlake Blvd.Properties LLC Drive-in Food 2,938 Total:2,938 1,115,431$ 1,115,431$ 379.66$ 1,148,231$ 1,148,231$ 390.82$ 2.9%2.9% Bank San Fiz Inc.1.39 2005 Financial Neighborhood 328 Northlake Blvd.Bank 4,176 Total:4,176 1,352,533$ 1,352,533$ 323.88$ 1,701,929$ 1,701,929$ 407.55$ 25.8%25.8% Publix Supermarket Real Sub LLC 7.32 2000 Shopping Comm. Retail 4,036 370 Northlake Blvd.Center-Supermarket 52,768 Community Total:56,804 6,232,749$ 6,232,749$ 109.72$ 5,891,872$ 5,891,872$ 103.72$ -5.5%-5.5% UPS Store Northlake 2.41 2000 Shopping Comm. Retail 6,196 378 Northlake Blvd.Promenade Center-Comm. Retail 4,350 Shoppes LLC Community Total:10,546 1,599,073$ 1,599,073$ 151.63$ 1,525,631$ 1,525,631$ 144.66$ -4.6%-4.6% Stormwater Parcels Northlake 2.14 River/Lakes - 642$ 642$ -$ 642$ 642$ -$ Promenade 0.0%0.0% Shoppes LLC Vacant OPV Northlake 0.85 Vacant - 660,789$ 660,789$ -$ 693,736$ 693,736$ -$ Promenade Commercial 5.0%5.0% LLC Vacant Northlake 6.65 Vacant (MF Parcel)Promenade Commercial - 1,641,058$ 1,641,058$ -$ 1,676,187$ 1,676,187$ -$ Shoppes LLC 2.1%2.1% Vacant Village Shops 0.70 Vacant - 228$ 228$ -$ 239$ 239$ -$ at US 1 LLC Commercial 4.8%4.8% Vacant Village Shops 0.14 Vacant - 14,342$ 14,342$ -$ 14,345$ 14,345$ -$ at US 1 LLC Commercial 0.02%0.02% Subtotal - Lake Park:22.47 74,464 12,616,845$ 12,616,845$ 169.44$ 12,652,812$ 12,652,812$ 169.92$ 59%100%0.3%0.3% TOTAL:38.22 177,749 26,007,561$ 23,401,328$ 131.65$ 26,396,200$ 24,838,980$ 139.74$ Source: Palm Beach County Property Appraiser; WTL+a, updated August 2021. 2019 Values 2021 Values & % Change From 2019 WTL+a WTL +a Real Estate & Economic Advisors Washington, DC—Cape Cod, MA 301.502.4171 508.214.0915 23 3 Demographic & Economic Profile The following evaluates those indices that drive fundamental market demand for various land uses to help inform redevelopment potentials for the Twin City Mall site. Accordingly, the profile is focused on population and household growth ; employment trends and forecasts; household incomes and annual retail spending power; current business mix; and other economic indicators for Lake Park, North Palm Beach, and the northern part of Palm Beach County based on available data that form the basis of potential market support for redevelopment. This profile and analysis are based on data from various secondary public and private sources, including U.S. Census Bureau; University of Florida Bureau of Business & Economic Research; Town of Lake Park; Village of North Palm Beach; Palm Beach County; ESRI Business Analyst; Claritas, Inc.; Dun & Bradstreet, Inc.; and other sources. Demographic Trends & Forecasts WTL+a evaluated historic population growth patterns and forecasts for the Town of Lake Park, the Village of North Palm Beach, and a selected portion of northern Palm Beach County using the sources noted above. Key findings are summarized below, with data illustrated in Table 3 through Table 18. Domestic Relocations to Florida A portion of Florida’s annual population growth can be attributed to domestic relocations from other cities and states across the U.S. As illustrated in Table 3, U.S. Census data from the American WTL+a WTL +a Real Estate & Economic Advisors Washington, DC—Cape Cod, MA 301.502.4171 508.214.0915 24 Table 3: State-by-State Relocations to Florida—Top 10 States, 2010—2019 Rank by Total % Share Share State 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 Relocations of Total 1 New York 55,011 59,288 53,009 55,419 58,753 69,289 60,472 63,722 63,033 57,488 595,484 10.7% Annual % Change - 7.8%-10.6%4.5%6.0%17.9%-12.7%5.4%-1.1%-8.8% 2 Georgia 35,615 38,658 42,754 35,386 42,020 38,654 39,578 38,800 35,350 49,681 396,496 7.2% 3 New Jersey 22,344 25,206 27,606 30,914 24,425 29,390 33,966 27,892 30,105 28,222 280,070 5.1% 4 Pennsylvania 19,935 20,821 25,659 28,771 28,841 28,826 30,258 28,507 31,712 34,965 278,295 5.0% 5 Texas 24,039 25,532 28,564 24,226 25,175 29,706 31,153 31,625 24,197 26,174 270,391 4.9% 6 North Carolina 19,108 23,983 23,133 29,017 25,333 24,003 28,726 23,270 26,708 28,207 251,488 4.5% 7 California 22,130 22,420 20,386 26,690 23,239 21,217 28,420 30,919 26,888 28,628 250,937 4.5% 8 Ohio 21,047 18,191 22,927 22,597 27,438 27,403 29,655 22,946 22,452 30,335 244,991 4.4% 9 Virginia 20,080 16,614 25,697 18,132 25,342 23,377 29,485 28,232 31,798 26,031 244,788 4.4% 10 Illinois 17,432 19,152 22,565 19,973 25,095 26,406 23,319 28,631 27,622 24,425 234,620 4.2% TOTAL BY YEAR:482,889 498,597 537,148 529,406 546,501 584,938 605,018 566,476 587,261 601,611 5,539,845 Annual % Change:- 3.3%7.7%-1.4%3.2%7.0%3.4%-6.4%3.7%2.4% State-to-State Migration Flows (census.gov) Source: U.S. Census Bureau; American Community Survey, 2010-2019; WTL+a, November 2021. 2010-2019 WTL+a WTL +a Real Estate & Economic Advisors Washington, DC—Cape Cod, MA 301.502.4171 508.214.0915 25 Community Survey for 2010 —2019, resident relocations from the top 10 states accounted for 55% of all domestic relocations to Florida. In particular, the Northeast (New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania and Virginia) accounted for 25% of all relocations from these top 10 states, with residents relocating from New York State comprising the largest share (10.7%) of the 5.5 million total statewide relocations over the past 10 years . Notably, the number of New York State residents relocating to Florida declined in 2018 and 2019—by 1.1% between 2017—2018 and almost 9% between 2018—2019. Georgia accounted for the second largest share of relocations to Florida—with 7.2% of the total between 2010 and 2019. While relocation data for 2020 and 2021 are not yet available, change-of-address filings from the United States Postal Service (USPS) provide insights into patterns expected upon release of U.S. Census data. However, permanent residential change-of-address filings (combining both individuals and families) are not a perfect measure of resident relocations. While individuals filing represent one mover, the number of people associated with one family filing cannot be determined. Moreover, duplicate filings can occur (such as a family with different last names at the same address), or a mover may not even submit a USPS filing. According to the USPS, migration patterns for most of the U.S. were remarkably similar in 2020 to resident relocations in 2018 and 2019. Notably, several densely populated cities experienced a dramatic change of filings compared to prior years. According to USPS permanent filings, the number of individuals and families leaving New York City for a new state jumped 47% from 2019 to 2020 . It is not known how many of these moves were attributable to the COVID pandemic . While the number of permanent change-of-address filings by New York City residents leaving for other states increased in 2020, there was little change in which destination states they chose. The share of movers from New York City to Florida over the past three years is illustrated below: Year % of Movers % Change 2018 12.4% N/A 2019 12.7% 2.4% 2020 12.2% (3.9%) WTL+a WTL +a Real Estate & Economic Advisors Washington, DC—Cape Cod, MA 301.502.4171 508.214.0915 26 Figure 2: Top 50 Metropolitan Destinations from New York City, 2020 USPS data on permanent address changes from New York City to selected counties in Florida is illustrated in Table 4. According to USPS, the four South Florida counties (Broward, Miami- Dade, Monroe and Palm Beach) accounted for 5,793 address changes from New York City in 2020, a jump of 89% from 2019 (2,735 filings). South Florida accounted for 62% of all permanent address changes from New York City between 2019 and 2020. There were 2,048 address changes from New York City to Palm Beach County in 2020, an increase of 1,059 filings over 2019 (107%). Notably, Palm Beach County accounted for 22% of all New York City filings to the State of Florida between 2019 and 2020 . WTL+a WTL +a Real Estate & Economic Advisors Washington, DC—Cape Cod, MA 301.502.4171 508.214.0915 27 Table 4: Permanent Address Changes—New York City to Florida Counties, 2019—2020 2020 As % Destination County 2019 2020 No.%of State Miami-Dade 1,411 2,639 1,228 87% Palm Beach 989 2,048 1,059 107%22% Broward 646 1,069 423 65% Monroe 12 37 25 208% Subtotal-South Florida:3,058 5,793 2,735 89%62% Hillsborough 289 427 138 48% Manatee 58 156 98 169% Pasco 53 69 16 30% Pinellas 206 330 124 60% Sarasota 122 245 123 101% Subtotal-Tampa Bay:728 1,227 499 69%13% Orange 269 468 199 74% Osceola 78 122 44 56% Polk 75 100 25 33% Seminole 59 91 32 54% Lake 30 46 16 53% Subtotal-Central Florida:511 827 316 62%9% Collier 152 312 160 105% Lee 113 199 86 76% Charlotte 15 17 2 13% Subtotal-SW Florida:280 528 248 89%6% Duval 114 189 75 66% St. John's 41 115 74 180% Alachua 39 70 31 79% Leon 24 38 14 58% Flagler 16 36 20 125% Clay 21 25 4 19% Subtotal-NE Florida:255 473 218 85%5% Brevard 51 106 55 108% Volusia 50 87 37 74% Indian River 28 77 49 175% Martin 34 74 40 118% St. Lucie 39 51 12 31% Subtotal-Treasure Coast:202 395 193 96%4% Marion 14 33 19 136% Sumter 13 27 14 108% Okaloosa 16 25 9 56% Hernando 18 20 2 11% Subtotal-Other:61 105 44 72%1% TOTAL-Florida:5,095 9,348 4,253 83% New York City to Florida Relocations: Flight or Hype? - Sarasota Luxury Real Estate (peterglaughlin.com) Source: U.S. Postal Service; Florida Realtors; WTL+a, November 2021. Change WTL+a WTL +a Real Estate & Economic Advisors Washington, DC—Cape Cod, MA 301.502.4171 508.214.0915 28 Palm Beach County  As illustrated in Table 5, Palm Beach County’s population increased—from 1,131,200 residents in 2000 to 1,466,500 residents as of the April 1, 2020 State census, reflecting strong population growth exceeding 335,300 new residents over the past 20 years. This represents sustained annual growth of 1.31 % per year since 2000; growth slowed to a more reasonable but still solid compound annual rate of 1.06% per year between 2010 and 2020; Since 2000, Palm Beach County Added 335 ,300 New Residents  The University of Florida-Bureau of Business & Economic Research (BEBR) prepares the official population forecasts for all 67 counties across the state. Its Medium Growth Scenario suggests that Palm Beach County’s population will increase to 1,668 ,600 by 2035, reflecting an increase of more than 202 ,100 new residents over the next 15 years based on a compound annual growth rate of 0.86% per year;  Lake Park, North Palm Beach, and five other selected municipalities contain a 2020 population of 323,340, accounting for 22% of the County’s total population. These seven municipalities (which gained 40,400+ new residents between 2000 and 2010) added population at an annual growth rate of 1.54% per year during this 10-year period. This was on par with the County’s overall growth rate of 1.56% per year between 2000 and 2010 ; and  Over the past 10 years, however, redevelopment and infill growth accelerated in these seven municipalities, generating 38,340 new residents between 2010 and 2020. This resulted in a compound annual growth rate of 1.27% per year—exceeding the County’s growth rate of 1.06% during this period. More detailed demographic data for Lake Park, North Palm Beach , and the North County “trade area” is provided below. WTL+a WTL +a Real Estate & Economic Advisors Washington, DC—Cape Cod, MA 301.502.4171 508.214.0915 29 Table 5: Palm Beach County Population Trends & Forecasts, 2000—2040 % of % of 1-Apr % of % of 2000 County 2010 County 2020 County Amount CAGR (2)2025 2030 2035 County Amount CAGR (2) Population Palm Beach County 1,131,184 1,320,134 1,466,494 146,360 1.06% 1,544,900 1,612,200 1,668,600 202,106 0.86% Boynton Beach 60,389 5.3% 68,217 5.2%78,495 5.4%10,278 1.41%84,201 90,322 96,887 5.8%18,392 Delray Beach 60,020 5.3% 60,522 4.6%67,168 4.6%6,646 1.05%70,760 74,544 78,530 4.7%11,362 Jupiter 38,397 3.4% 55,156 4.2%63,188 4.3%8,032 1.37%67,633 72,390 77,481 4.6%14,293 Lake Park 8,659 0.77% 8,155 0.62%8,912 0.61%757 0.89%9,316 9,739 10,181 0.61%1,269 North Palm Beach 12,157 1.07% 12,021 0.91%12,813 0.87%792 0.64%13,228 13,657 14,100 0.85%1,287 Palm Beach Gardens 35,058 3.1% 48,440 3.7%56,709 3.9%8,269 1.59%61,359 66,390 71,833 4.3%15,124 Riviera Beach 29,884 2.6% 32,488 2.5%36,057 2.5%3,569 1.05%37,986 40,018 42,159 2.5%6,102 Total: 244,564 21.6% 284,999 21.6% 323,342 22.0%38,343 1.27%344,483 367,059 391,172 23.4%67,830 1.28% (1) Based on the 2025-2045 Low-Medium-High Population Forecasts prepared by BEBR (for the 2020-2035 period), using the Medium Growth Scenario for Palm Beach County. (2) CAGR=Compound Annual Growth Rate. (3) As municipal population forecasts are not prepared by the State of Florida, population projections for 2025-2035 for these municipalities assume that each continues the same rate of growth as occurred between 2010-2020. Population Studies Program | www.bebr.ufl.edu *2020_pop_estimates-Revised.xlsx (state.fl.us) Source: U.S. Census Bureau; Florida Legislature, Office of Economic & Demographic Research; ESRI Business Analyst; WTL+a, revised October 2021. Change: 2010-2020 Change: 2020-2035Forecasts (3) WTL+a WTL +a Real Estate & Economic Advisors Washington, DC—Cape Cod, MA 301.502.4171 508.214.0915 30 Town of Lake Park Key demographic characteristics of the Town of Lake Park are illustrated in Table 6 and summarized below:  In 2020, data from ESRI Business Analyst suggests that Lake Park contains 8,762 residents in 3,400 households . This is slightly lower than the official April 1st state estimate of 8,912 residents;  While Lake Park lost population between 2000—2010, the town gained more than 600 new residents between 2010 and 2020, equating to a solid average annual growth rate of 0.72% per year over the past 10 years;  The Town ’s share of Palm Beach County’s population has declined over the past 20 years—from 0.77% in 2000 to 0.60% in 2020. Over the next five years, ESRI forecasts suggest Lake Park’s share of the County’s population will remain stable in the range of 0.59% by 2025;  Lake Park’s population is 32% White, 60% Black, and 10% Hispanic (can be two or more races);  Residents have a median age of 37.5 years, which is forecast to increase slightly to 38.0 years by 2025. By comparison, Palm Beach County’s median age is older—45.9 with a nominal increase to 46.2 years over the next five years;  Lake Park is a moderate-income community, with average household incomes of almost $62,400 per year. Approximately 15.5% of Lake Park’s households have annual incomes greater than $100,000 per year;  Average household incomes are forecast to increase by 1.2 % per year over the next five years, rising to $66,100 by 2025. The Town ’s average household incomes are forecast to remain well- below its counterparts in Palm Beach County, where average household incomes are forecast to be $106,700 by 2025. Notably, the largest gains in household incomes are forecast to occur in the $100,000-$149,999 range , with declines in annual household incomes below $50,000 over the next five years. This would be expected to enhance disposable incomes and retail spending patterns in Lake Park over the next five years; WTL+a WTL +a Real Estate & Economic Advisors Washington, DC—Cape Cod, MA 301.502.4171 508.214.0915 31 Table 6: Demographic Trends & Forecasts—Town of Lake Park, 2000—2025 2000 2010 2020 % Dist.2025 % Dist.No.CAGR % Demographic Profile Population 8,659 8,155 8,762 9,101 339 0.76% As % of County 0.77%0.62%0.60%0.59% Households 3,326 3,144 3,400 3,534 134 0.78% Avg. HH Size 2.57 2.57 2.55 2.55 Median Age 35.9 37.5 38.0 Race White 3,054 2,765 32%2,651 29%(114) -0.8% Black 4,485 5,242 60%5,622 62%380 1.4% American Indian 15 15 0%15 0%- 0.0% Asian, Pacific Islander 204 232 3%252 3%20 1.7% Other 167 229 3%267 3%38 3.1% Two or More Races 230 279 3%294 3%15 1.1% Total:8,155 8,762 9,101 339 Hispanic (1)653 896 10%1,052 12%156 3.3% Age Distribution 0-14 1,605 1,633 19%1,695 19%62 0.7% 15-24 1,299 1,100 13%1,055 12%(45) -0.8% 25-34 1,081 1,381 16%1,413 16%32 0.5% 35-44 1,038 1,049 12%1,185 13%136 2.5% 45-54 1,305 1,063 12%1,049 12%(14) -0.3% 55-64 898 1,257 14%1,163 13%(94) -1.5% 65-74 491 742 8%918 10%176 4.3% 75-84 320 368 4%454 5%86 4.3% 85+118 169 2%169 2%- 0.0% Income Profile Households by Income <$15,000 12.0%10.9%-1.9% $15,000 - $24,999 10.5%10.1%-0.8% $25,000 - $34,999 13.1%12.8%-0.5% $35,000 - $49,999 13.7%13.6%-0.1% $50,000 - $74,999 25.2%25.8%0.5% $75,000 - $99,999 10.0%10.2%0.4% $100,000 - $149,999 8.4%9.3%2.1% $150,000 - $199,999 5.4%5.7%1.1% $200,000+1.7%1.6%-1.2% Average HH Income 62,384$ 66,100$ 1.2% Median HH Income 50,398$ 51,534$ 0.4% Educational Profile Years of Education: 25 Years & Over (2019 American Community Survey/ACS) High School Graduate or Higher 84.0% Bachelor's Degree or Higher 30.1% (1) Persons of Hispanic origin are a subset of other race categories; therefore, totals do not add. U.S. Census Bureau QuickFacts: Lake Park town, Florida Source: U.S. Census Bureau; American Community Survey; ESRI Business Analyst; WTL +a, April 2021. Change: 2020-2025 WTL+a WTL +a Real Estate & Economic Advisors Washington, DC—Cape Cod, MA 301.502.4171 508.214.0915 32  ESRI’s five-year forecasts through 2025 suggest that Lake Park’s growth rate will increase slightly over previous trends, with a forecast population gain of 339 new residents in 134 new households. This forecast suggests an average annual growth rate of 0.76% per year over the next five years; and  ESRI forecasts further suggest that population growth will be greatest in specific age cohorts over the next five years: o Two age cohorts - 65 —74 and 75 —84 - are expected to exhibit the greatest rate of growth —4.3% per year (consistent with an aging population throughout Florida and the U.S.) o The only other cohort where notable growth is forecast includes 35—44-year-olds (2.5% per year). In combination, this is likely to translate into opportunities for specific types of housing, such as move -up buyers in for-sale housing units as well as age -restricted and independent living/continuing care for those over the age of 65. Lake Park Population Growth Next 5 Years: 339 New Residents in 134 New Households by 202 5 Village of North Palm Beach Key demographic characteristics of the Village of North Palm Beach are illustrated in Table 7 and summarized below:  In 2020, data from ESRI Business Analyst suggests that North Palm Beach contains 12 ,975 residents in 6,570 households. This is slightly higher than the official April 1st state estimate of 12,813 residents;  Like Lake Park, North Palm Beach lost population between 2000—2010, but gained over 950 new residents between 2010 and 2020 , equating to a solid average annual growth rate of 0.77% per year over the past 10 years; WTL+a WTL +a Real Estate & Economic Advisors Washington, DC—Cape Cod, MA 301.502.4171 508.214.0915 33 Table 7: Demographic Trends & Forecasts—Village of North Palm Beach, 2000—2025 2000 2010 2020 % Dist.2025 % Dist.No.CAGR % Demographic Profile Population 12,157 12,021 12,975 13,490 515 0.78% As % of County 1.1%0.9%0.9%0.9% Households 6,237 6,097 6,570 6,819 249 0.75% Avg. HH Size 1.97 1.97 1.97 1.97 Median Age 51.8 57.4 60.0 Race White 11,221 11,782 91%12,039 89%257 0.4% Black 320 483 4%588 4%105 4.0% American Indian 10 13 0%13 0%- 0.0% Asian, Pacific Islander 205 281 2%339 3%58 3.8% Other 108 181 1%230 2%49 4.9% Two or More Races 157 236 2%281 2%45 3.6% Total:12,021 12,976 13,490 514 Hispanic (1)826 1,383 11%1,781 13%398 5.2% Age Distribution 0-14 1,360 1,246 10%1,255 9%9 0.1% 15-24 937 837 6%804 6%(33) -0.8% 25-34 1,089 1,108 9%1,072 8%(36) -0.7% 35-44 1,280 1,254 10%1,339 10%85 1.3% 45-54 1,975 1,514 12%1,382 10%(132) -1.8% 55-64 1,858 2,256 17%2,079 15%(177) -1.6% 65-74 1,580 2,342 18%2,723 20%381 3.1% 75-84 1,392 1,603 12%1,991 15%388 4.4% 85+550 814 6%844 6%30 0.7% Income Profile Households by Income <$15,000 6.2%5.4% $15,000 - $24,999 7.3%6.5% $25,000 - $34,999 8.9%8.0% $35,000 - $49,999 11.2%10.3% $50,000 - $74,999 16.9%16.2% $75,000 - $99,999 9.9%9.9% $100,000 - $149,999 18.4%19.9% $150,000 - $199,999 9.6%11.0% $200,000+11.6%12.7% Average HH Income 107,822$ 119,111$ 2.0% Median HH Income 73,715$ 82,501$ 2.3% Educational Profile Years of Education: 25 Years & Over (2018 American Community Survey/ACS) High School Graduate or Higher 96.0% Bachelor's Degree or Higher 45.2% (1) Persons of Hispanic origin are a subset of other race categories; therefore, totals do not add. U.S. Census Bureau QuickFacts: North Palm Beach village, Florida Source: U.S. Census Bureau; American Community Survey; ESRI Business Analyst; WTL +a, April 2021. Change: 2020-2025 WTL+a WTL +a Real Estate & Economic Advisors Washington, DC—Cape Cod, MA 301.502.4171 508.214.0915 34  The Village’s share of Palm Beach County’s population has declined slightly over the past 20 years—from 1.1 % in 2000 to 0.90% in 2020. Over the next five years, ESRI forecasts suggest the Village’s share of the County’s population will remain stable in the range of 0.90% by 202 5;  North Palm Beach’s population is far less diverse than Lake Park: 91% White, 4% Black, and 11% Hispanic (can be two or more races);  Village residents are older than Lake Park residents, with a median age of 57.4 years. This is forecast to increase to 60.0 years by 2025. By comparison, Palm Beach County’s median age is much younger—45.9 with a nominal increase to 46.2 years over the next five years;  North Palm Beach is an affluent community, with average household incomes of over $107,800 per year. Fully 40% of Village households have annual incomes greater than $100,000 per year;  Average household incomes are forecast to increase by 2.0 % per year over the next five years, rising to $119,100 by 2025. The Village’s average household incomes are forecast to remain above Palm Beach County, where average household incomes are forecast to be $106,700 by 2025. Notably, gains in household incomes are forecast to occur for all levels above $100,000, with declines in all levels of annual household incomes below $100 ,000 over the next five years. This could enhance disposable incomes and retail spending patterns in North Palm Beach over the next five years;  ESRI’s five-year forecasts through 2025 suggest that North Palm Beach’s growth rate will parallel its growth over the past 10 years, with a forecast population gain of 515 new residents in 249 new households. This forecast suggests an average annual growth rate of 0.78% per year over the next five years; and  ESRI forecasts further suggest that North Palm Beach’s population will continue to age, with population growth greatest in the 65—74 and 75—84 age cohorts (3.1% and 4.4%, respectively). Nominal growth of 0.7% per year is also forecast for those over the age of 85. Notably, the proportion of Village residents in peak earning years (45—54 and 55-64) are forecast to decline. North County Trade Area At the request of the municipalities, WTL+a also examined demographic characteristics of the northern portion of Palm Beach County. This was conducted to understand growth trends in a larger regional context. As illustrated in Figure 3 below, the “North County” trade area comprises a 26.2 square mile area bounded by Donald Ross Road on the north, the Florida WTL+a WTL +a Real Estate & Economic Advisors Washington, DC—Cape Cod, MA 301.502.4171 508.214.0915 35 Turnpike on the west, Silver Beach Road on the south, and the Intracoastal Waterway on the east. The trade area includes portions of Palm Beach Gardens, Jupiter, and unincorporated Palm Beach County. Figure 3: North County Trade Area Key demographic characteristics of the North County trade area are illustrated in Table 8 and summarized below:  In 2020, data from ESRI Business Analyst suggests that North County contains 73,538 residents in over 32,880 households. The share of both municipalities’ population of North County declined between 2000 and 2020—from 15% to 12% in Lake Park and 21% to 18% in North Palm Beach—as the outlying portion of North County continue to grow; WTL+a WTL +a Real Estate & Economic Advisors Washington, DC—Cape Cod, MA 301.502.4171 508.214.0915 36 Table 8: Demographic Trends & Forecasts—North County Trade Area, 2000—2025 2000 2010 2020 % Dist.2025 % Dist.No.CAGR % Demographic Profile Population 57,761 65,356 73,538 77,525 3,987 1.06% As % of County 5.1%5.0%5.0%5.0% Households 25,002 29,268 32,882 34,604 1,722 1.03% Avg. HH Size 2.22 2.22 2.23 2.23 Median Age 45.0 47.6 48.1 Race White 52,986 56,550 77%57,868 75%1,318 0.5% Black 7,716 10,054 14%11,352 15%1,298 2.5% American Indian 131 143 0%147 0%4 0.6% Asian, Pacific Islander 2,033 2,921 4%3,508 5%587 3.7% Other 1,269 2,016 3%2,493 3%477 4.3% Two or More Races 1,220 1,854 3%2,157 3%303 3.1% Total:65,355 73,538 77,525 3,987 Hispanic (1)6,379 10,574 14%13,399 17%2,825 4.8% Age Distribution 0-14 9,880 10,208 14%10,626 14%418 0.8% 15-24 6,634 6,839 9%6,897 9%58 0.2% 25-34 7,883 8,490 12%8,761 11%271 0.6% 35-44 8,262 8,892 12%9,608 12%716 1.6% 45-54 10,371 9,456 13%9,213 12%(243) -0.5% 55-64 9,077 11,373 15%11,057 14%(316) -0.6% 65-74 6,876 9,760 13%11,194 14%1,434 2.8% 75-84 4,614 5,864 8%7,300 9%1,436 4.5% 85+1,756 2,656 4%2,869 4%213 1.6% Income Profile Households by Income <$15,000 7.7%6.9% $15,000 - $24,999 6.4%5.8% $25,000 - $34,999 8.1%7.6% $35,000 - $49,999 11.5%10.9% $50,000 - $74,999 18.2%17.8% $75,000 - $99,999 12.6%12.8% $100,000 - $149,999 15.3%16.2% $150,000 - $199,999 8.0%8.9% $200,000+12.1%13.3% Average HH Income 107,081$ 116,950$ 1.8% Median HH Income 71,490$ 76,691$ 1.4% Educational Profile Years of Education: 25 Years & Over (2018 American Community Survey/ACS) High School Graduate or Higher N/A Bachelor's Degree or Higher N/A (1) Persons of Hispanic origin are a subset of other race categories; therefore, totals do not add. Source: U.S. Census Bureau; American Community Survey; ESRI Business Analyst; WTL +a, May 2021. Change: 2020-2025 WTL+a WTL +a Real Estate & Economic Advisors Washington, DC—Cape Cod, MA 301.502.4171 508.214.0915 37  In fact, North County gained almost 15,800 new residents between 2000—2020, equating to a positive average annual growth rate of 1.21% per year over the past 20 years. This growth is attributable to new residential development in portions of Pal m Beach Gardens and Jupiter;  North County’s population is less diverse than Lake Park but more diverse than North Palm Beach: 77% White, 14% Black, and 14% Hispanic (can be two or more races);  North County residents have a median age of 47.6 years. This is forecast to increase to 48.1 years by 2025. By comparison, Palm Beach County’s median age is slightly younger—45.9 with a nominal increase to 46.2 years over the next five years;  Like North Palm Beach, North County is affluent, with average household incomes of more than $107,000 per year. Fully 35% of North County households have annual incomes greater than $100,000 per year;  Average household incomes are forecast to increase by 1.8 % per year over the next five years, rising to $116,950 by 2025. Average household incomes are forecast to remain above Palm Beach County, where average household incomes are forecast to be $106,700 by 2025. Notably, gains in household incomes are forecast to occur for all levels above $75,000, with declines in all levels of annual household incomes below $75,000 over the next five years. This should ensure that disposable incomes and retail spending patterns in North County remain strong over the next five years;  ESRI’s five-year forecasts through 2025 suggest that North County’s growth rate will parallel its growth over the past 20 years, with a forecast population gain of 3,980+ new residents in 1,720+ new households. This forecast suggests an average annual growth rate of 1.06% per year over the next five years; and  ESRI forecasts further suggest that North County’s population will continue to age, with population growth greatest in 65—74 and 75—84 cohorts (2.8% and 4.5%, respectively). Solid growth of 1.6% per year is also forecast for those over the age of 85 as well as those ages 35— 44. Nominal declines are expected in peak earning cohorts: 45—54 and 55—64. Household Incomes & Retail Spending Household retail spending is the primary driver of demand for retail space, such as neighborhood commercial districts, community shopping centers, “Big Box” stores such as Wal-Mart or Target, food & beverage, and specialty or destination retail projects. WTL+a WTL +a Real Estate & Economic Advisors Washington, DC—Cape Cod, MA 301.502.4171 508.214.0915 38 Table 9: Annual Household Consumer Spending, 2019 Palm Beach Boynton Delray Lake North Palm North Palm Beach Riviera County Beach Beach Park Beach County Gardens Beach Total Households (2020)595,315 32,834 30,244 3,400 6,570 32,882 27,069 13,386 Apparel & Accessories Men's Wear 439$ 352$ 443$ 309$ 489$ 498$ 580$ 344$ Women's Wear 781 638 812 536 916 906 1,069 614 Children's Wear 323 258 309 233 319 357 400 271 Footwear 512 407 506 362 544 568 649 419 Watches & Jewelry 154 99 125 80 139 137 162 123 Apparel Products & Services 74 49 64 43 74 71 87 55 Subtotal:2,284$ 1,802$ 2,259$ 1,565$ 2,481$ 2,538$ 2,947$ 1,827$ Computers Computers & Hardware 179$ 152$ 191$ 116$ 198$ 197$ 253$ 141$ Software & Accessories 37 16 19 23 40 38 26 29 Subtotal:216$ 168$ 211$ 139$ 237$ 235$ 279$ 170$ Entertainment & Recreation Membership Fees for Clubs 256$ 195$ 256$ 163$ 299$ 294$ 353$ 185$ Fees for Participant Sports 123 86 107 65 130 122 147 90 Tickets to Theater/Operas/Concerts 82 66 88 58 104 101 121 58 Tickets to Movies 61 50 61 42 68 69 80 46 Tickets to Parks/Museums 34 27 34 23 38 38 45 26 Admission to Sporting Events 66 49 65 42 75 74 89 51 Fees for Recreational Lessons 147 108 144 102 165 174 208 104 Dating Services 0.79 0.73 0.98 0.70 0.99 1.04 1.18 0.74 Subtotal:769$ 581$ 755$ 495$ 879$ 873$ 1,045$ 562$ TV/Video/Audio Cable & Satellite TV Services 944$ 689$ 874$ 574$ 992$ 952$ 1,112$ 795$ Televisions 119 96 116 78 129 128 148 98 Satellite Dishes 2 1 1 0.77 2 1 2 1 VCRs, Video Cameras & DVD Players 7 5 6 4 6 6 7 5 Miscellaneous Video Equipment 27 21 26 17 28 29 33 23 Video Cassettes & DVDs 12 9 11 7 12 12 14 10 Video Game Hardware/Accessories 29 24 30 22 30 33 36 26 Video Game Software 16 14 17 13 18 19 21 14 Rental/Streaming/Downloaded Video 51 48 58 40 62 65 73 42 Installation of Televisions 1 1 1 0.64 2 2 2 1 Audio 104 90 113 74 126 127 149 83 Rental & Repair of TV/Radio/Audio/Sound 3 2 3 2 3 3 3 3 Subtotal:1,315$ 1,000$ 1,255$ 831$ 1,408$ 1,376$ 1,601$ 1,102$ (1)Consumer spending data are derived from the 2017 and 2018 Consumer Expenditure Surveys conducted by the Bureau of Labor Statistics. Source: US Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Market Statistics; ESRI Business Analyst; WTL +a, April 2021. WTL+a WTL +a Real Estate & Economic Advisors Washington, DC—Cape Cod, MA 301.502.4171 508.214.0915 39 Table 9 (Continued): Annual Household Consumer Spending, 2019 Palm Beach Boynton Delray Lake North Palm North Palm Beach Riviera County Beach Beach Park Beach County Gardens Beach Other Entertainment Pets 680$ 549$ 709$ 448$ 796$ 790$ 931$ 548$ Toys & Games 123 100 125 89 136 142 161 100 Recreational Vehicles & Fees 156 105 147 89 178 175 215 101 Sports/Recreation/Exercise Equipment 225 173 211 143 243 242 282 171 Photo Equipment & Supplies 56 42 54 37 59 61 70 43 Reading 118 93 120 75 145 134 160 89 Catered Affairs 27 24 32 24 36 36 42 19 Subtotal:1,385$ 1,087$ 1,398$ 905$ 1,593$ 1,581$ 1,861$ 1,071$ Food & Alcohol Food at Home 5,556$ 4,533$ 5,697$ 3,855$ 6,351$ 6,298$ 7,342$ 4,501$ Food Away from Home 3,940 3,202 4,001 2,672 4,412 4,440 5,194 3,130 Alcoholic & Non-alcoholic Beverages 629 520 669 428 757 750 893 472 Subtotal:10,125$ 8,254$ 10,366$ 6,955$ 11,520$ 11,488$ 13,430$ 8,103$ Household Furnishings & Equipment Household Textiles 108$ 86$ 109$ 74$ 122$ 121$ 140$ 88$ Furniture 667 540 674 454 760 764 888 530 Floor Coverings 32 27 36 24 44 43 49 24 Major Appliances 381 296 369 234 436 422 500 302 Housewares 115 84 105 65 121 116 138 89 Small Appliances 52 42 53 36 59 59 68 42 Luggage 15 13 16 11 18 18 21 12 Telephones & Accessories 82 75 95 64 113 108 126 62 Lawn & Garden 508 398 517 296 633 584 715 375 Housekeeping Supplies 820 680 841 545 961 921 1,083 660 Maintenance & Remodeling Materials 498 415 539 324 643 625 754 375 Subtotal:3,277$ 2,658$ 3,354$ 2,125$ 3,910$ 3,780$ 4,484$ 2,559$ Health & Personal Care Non- & Prescription Drugs 558$ 431$ 544$ 333$ 639$ 591$ 697$ 462$ Optical 95 75 98 64 112 110 129 75 Personal Care Products 546 431 533 360 591 589 683 437 School Supplies 164 124 154 103 167 173 202 131 Smoking Products 399 331 423 302 429 451 500 385 Subtotal:1,762$ 1,392$ 1,752$ 1,162$ 1,938$ 1,914$ 2,211$ 1,491$ TOTAL: Total Annual Spending 12,581,291,960$ 556,305,149$ 645,685,810$ 48,198,910$ 157,459,577$ 782,102,316$ 754,081,164$ 226,011,901$ As % of Palm Beach County 4.4%5.1%0.4%1.3%6.2%6.0%1.8% Per Household 21,134$ 16,943$ 21,349$ 14,176$ 23,966$ 23,785$ 27,858$ 16,884$ Average HH Income 93,331$ 74,503$ 95,197$ 62,384$ 107,822$ 107,081$ 126,644$ 72,695$ As % of Average HH Income 22.6%22.7%22.4%22.7%22.2%22.2%22.0%23.2% (1)Consumer spending data are derived from the 2017 and 2018 Consumer Expenditure Surveys conducted by the Bureau of Labor Statistics. Source: US Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Market Statistics; ESRI Business Analyst; WTL +a, April 2021. WTL+a WTL +a Real Estate & Economic Advisors Washington, DC—Cape Cod, MA 301.502.4171 508.214.0915 40 Household retail spending patterns among households in Palm Beach County, the two municipalities, the North County trade area and selected other nearby communities are illustrated in Table 9 and summarized below:  Households in specific jurisdictions—including North Palm Beach and Palm Beach Gardens— have high household incomes and, therefore, higher amounts of discretionary spending potentials on retail and restaurants. This includes consumer retail goods (clothing, entertainment/recreation, electronics, household furnishings, personal care products, etc.) and food & beverage (restaurants, liquor, catering, etc.): o With 2020 average household incomes exceeding $107,000 per year in both North Palm Beach and the North County trade area, households in these jurisdictions spend in the range of $24,000 per year on consumer retail and restaurants (or 22% of annual household income). This is slightly below their more affluent counterparts in Palm Beach Gardens, which spend approximately $27,900 annually on retail and restaurants; o By comparison, lower household incomes in Lake Park, Boynton Beach, and Riviera Beach translate into lower annual retail spending ranging from $14,176 per year in Lake Park to roughly $16,900 per year in Boynton and Riviera; and o Palm Beach County households, with average household incomes of $93,300, spend approximately $21,100 per year on retail and restaurants.  In total, retail spending among North Palm Beach households exceeds $157.4 million per year, accounting for 1.3 % of the $12.5 billion in annual household consumer retail spending in Palm Beach County. Lake Park households spend $48.2 million per year (0.4% of the County) and North County trade area households spend $782.1 million (6.2% of the County); and  Notably, household spending totals are irrespective of location (i.e., spending can occur anywhere). Retail “Recapture” Opportunities Another key indicator of retail market potentials involves what is known as the “retail opportunity gap .” This compares annual household spending (i.e., “demand”) in specific merchandise categories against estimated annual retail sales by businesses in those same categories (i.e., “supply”). The difference between demand and supply represents the “recapture” opportunity, or surplus, available in each retail category in the reporting geography. WTL+a WTL +a Real Estate & Economic Advisors Washington, DC—Cape Cod, MA 301.502.4171 508.214.0915 41 When demand is greater than supply, there is an apparent opportunity for additional retail space in that category. By comparison, when demand is less than supply, there is a surplus of sales in that retail category. That is, a positive value in green indicates a potential recapture opportunity, while a negative value in red indicates a surplus of sales among businesses or an “inflow” of sales from outside of the reporting geography. In the figures that follow, recapture opportunities among specific merchandise categories are illustrated on the right side of the graph while surplus sales (inflow) are illustrated on the left side of the graph. Numerical findings for each municipality are illustrated in Table 10 and Table 11. Town of Lake Park Figure 4: Retail Leakage & Surplus—Town of Lake Park, 2018 Another source for household retail spending includes the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) and Claritas, Inc. WTL+a WTL +a Real Estate & Economic Advisors Washington, DC—Cape Cod, MA 301.502.4171 508.214.0915 42 Table 10: Retail “Recapture” Opportunities—Town of Lake Park, 2018 Key findings for Lake Park indicate that:  Lake Park households spend $60.9 million per year. This estimate is higher than annual spending illustrated previously in Table 9 because it includes multiple additional merchandise categories such as Building Materials, Leisure & Entertainment and Miscellaneous Store sales. This compares to estimated town-wide store sales of $230.3 million per year; Demand Supply "Recapture" Retail Category (HH Spending)(Store Sales)Opportunity General Merchandise Stores Department Stores Excl Leased Depts.9,289,614$ 65,100,821$ (55,811,207)$ Other General Merchandise Stores 3,994,399 6,107,249 (2,112,850) Subtotal:13,284,013$ 71,208,070$ (57,924,057)$ Clothing & Accessories Stores Clothing Stores 2,753,813$ 2,734,516$ 19,297$ Shoe Stores 625,226 1,002,015 (376,789) Jewelry, Luggage, Leather Goods 686,201 1,785,253 (1,099,052) Subtotal:4,065,240$ 5,521,784$ (1,456,544)$ Furniture & Home Furnishings Stores Furniture Stores 1,606,598$ 4,603,071$ (2,996,473)$ Home Furnishing Stores 1,224,899 5,504,126 (4,279,227) Subtotal:2,831,497$ 10,107,197$ (7,275,700)$ Electronics & Appliance Stores Appliances, TVs, Electronics Stores 2,288,138$ 4,876,218$ (2,588,080)$ Subtotal:2,288,138$ 4,876,218$ (2,588,080)$ Leisure & Entertainment Sporting Goods/Hobby/Musical Instruments 1,599,336$ 7,653,964$ (6,054,628)$ Books, Periodicals & Music Stores 351,965 - 351,965 Subtotal:1,951,301$ 7,653,964$ (5,702,663)$ Food Services & Drinking Places Special Food Services 144,291$ 785,470$ (641,179)$ Drinking Places - Alcoholic Beverages 669,532 303,276 366,256 Restaurants/Other Eating Places 7,722,066 23,678,623 (15,956,557) Subtotal:8,535,889$ 24,767,369$ (16,231,480)$ WTL+a WTL +a Real Estate & Economic Advisors Washington, DC—Cape Cod, MA 301.502.4171 508.214.0915 43 Table 10 (Continued): Retail “Recapture” Opportunities—Town of Lake Park, 2018 Demand Supply "Recapture" Retail Category (HH Spending)(Store Sales)Opportunity Food & Beverage Stores Grocery Stores 13,182,752$ 33,474,553$ (20,291,801)$ Specialty Food Stores 611,258 1,398,769 (787,511) Beer, Wine & Liquor Stores 688,469 2,290,980 (1,602,511) Subtotal:14,482,479$ 37,164,302$ (22,681,823)$ Health & Personal Care Stores Health & Personal Care Stores 5,292,528$ 11,418,780$ (6,126,252)$ Subtotal:5,292,528$ 11,418,780$ (6,126,252)$ Building Material, Garden Equipment Stores Building Materials & Supplies 4,632,512$ 30,250,098$ (25,617,586)$ Lawn & Garden Equipment & Supplies 370,047 2,018,913 (1,648,866) Subtotal:5,002,559$ 32,269,011$ (27,266,452)$ Miscellaneous Store Retailers Florists 125,842$ 191,312$ (65,470)$ Office Supplies, Stationery, Gift Stores 690,596 8,542,747 (7,852,151) Used Merchandise Stores 727,783 1,480,720 (752,937) Other Miscellaneous Retail Stores 1,656,468 15,160,631 (13,504,163) Subtotal:3,200,689$ 25,375,410$ (22,174,721)$ TOTAL: HH Demand vs. Retail Sales 60,934,333$ 230,362,105$ (169,427,772)$ (2) (1)Claritas' "Retail Market Power" data is derived from two major sources of information. Demand data are derived from Consumer Expenditure Surveys fielded by the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS). Supply data are derived from the Census Bureau. The difference between demand and supply represents the "recapture opportunity", or surplus, available for each retail category in the reporting geography. When demand is greater than supply, there is an apparent opportunity for additional retail space in that category. By comparison, when demand is less than supply, there is a surplus of sales in that retail category (i.e., positive value = recapture opportunity, while negative value = sales inflow from sources other than resident households). (2)Total household retail spending excludes spending on Non-Store Retailers (Internet); Motor Vehicle Parts and Dealers; and Gas Stations. Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics; Claritas, Inc.; ESRI Business Analyst; WTL +a, April 2021. WTL+a WTL +a Real Estate & Economic Advisors Washington, DC—Cape Cod, MA 301.502.4171 508.214.0915 44  The difference between spending and sales is known as inflow or leakage; in other words, there is more than $169.4 million in annual household retail sales inflow into Lake Park due to the presence of Big Box stores as well as a significant retail cluster on commercial corridors such as Northlake Boulevard. It should be noted that resident household sales can occur anywhere (i.e., often outside of the Town ), so sources of sales inflow include daytime employees (who do not live in Lake Park), visitors, and others such as pass-through traffic;  Given the depth of retail sales inflow into Lake Park from sources other than existing households, the retail analysis reveals there are very few merchandise categories where apparent opportunities could be recaptured to support new retail uses as part of mixed- use redevelopment of the Twin City Mall site—at least as supported by existing households in Lake Park. More than $169 Million in Annual Household Retail Sales Inflow into Lake Park Village of North Palm Beach  With higher household incomes, North Palm Beach households spend $182.1 million per year. This estimate is higher than annual spending illustrated previously in Table 9 because it includes multiple additional merchandise categories such as Building Materials, Leisure & Entertainment, and Miscellaneous Store sales. This compares to estimated village-wide store sales of almost $97.6 million per year; WTL+a WTL +a Real Estate & Economic Advisors Washington, DC—Cape Cod, MA 301.502.4171 508.214.0915 45 Table 11: Retail “Recapture” Opportunities—Village of North Palm Beach, 2018 Demand Supply "Recapture" Retail Category (HH Spending)(Store Sales)Opportunity General Merchandise Stores Department Stores Excl Leased Depts.30,676,563$ -$ 30,676,563$ Other General Merchandise Stores 13,010,334 1,737,262 11,273,072 Subtotal:43,686,897$ 1,737,262$ 41,949,635$ Clothing & Accessories Stores Clothing Stores 8,999,395$ 2,756,891$ 6,242,504$ Shoe Stores 1,980,057 421,568 1,558,489 Jewelry, Luggage, Leather Goods 2,471,955 3,207,485 (735,530) Subtotal:13,451,407$ 6,385,944$ 7,065,463$ Furniture & Home Furnishings Stores Furniture Stores 5,427,613$ 7,246,601$ (1,818,988)$ Home Furnishing Stores 4,549,249 6,207,445 (1,658,196) Subtotal:9,976,862$ 13,454,046$ (3,477,184)$ Electronics & Appliance Stores Appliances, TVs, Electronics Stores 7,850,046$ 8,175,393$ (325,347)$ Subtotal:7,850,046$ 8,175,393$ (325,347)$ Leisure & Entertainment Sporting Goods/Hobby/Musical Instruments 5,447,183$ 3,502,311$ 1,944,872$ Books, Periodicals & Music Stores 1,114,800 630,883 483,917 Subtotal:6,561,983$ 4,133,194$ 2,428,789$ Food Services & Drinking Places Special Food Services 454,105$ 78,919$ 375,186$ Drinking Places - Alcoholic Beverages 2,457,478 413,558 2,043,920 Restaurants/Other Eating Places 25,883,379 23,685,972 2,197,407 Subtotal:28,794,962$ 24,178,449$ 4,616,513$ WTL+a WTL +a Real Estate & Economic Advisors Washington, DC—Cape Cod, MA 301.502.4171 508.214.0915 46 Table 11 (Continued): Retail “Recapture” Opportunities—Village of North Palm Beach, 2018 Demand Supply "Recapture" Retail Category (HH Spending)(Store Sales)Opportunity Food & Beverage Stores Grocery Stores 1,966,612$ 9,021,589$ (7,054,977)$ Specialty Food Stores 2,403,006 1,270,000 1,133,006 Beer, Wine & Liquor Stores 18,740,434 9,169,811 9,570,623 Subtotal:23,110,052$ 19,461,400$ 3,648,652$ Health & Personal Care Stores Health & Personal Care Stores 18,740,434$ 9,169,811$ 9,570,623$ Subtotal:18,740,434$ 9,169,811$ 9,570,623$ Building Material, Garden Equipment Stores Building Materials & Supplies 17,536,940$ 2,181,192$ 15,355,748$ Lawn & Garden Equipment & Supplies 1,432,099 463,021 969,078 Subtotal:18,969,039$ 2,644,213$ 16,324,826$ Miscellaneous Store Retailers Florists 504,747$ 286,968$ 217,779$ Office Supplies, Stationery, Gift Stores 2,396,789 2,626,312 (229,523) Used Merchandise Stores 2,396,555 2,255,920 140,635 Other Miscellaneous Retail Stores 5,711,847 3,062,920 2,648,927 Subtotal:11,009,938$ 8,232,120$ 2,777,818$ TOTAL: HH Demand vs. Retail Sales 182,151,620$ 97,571,832$ 84,579,788$ (2) (1)Claritas' "Retail Market Power" data is derived from two major sources of information. Demand data are derived from Consumer Expenditure Surveys fielded by the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS). Supply data are derived from the Census Bureau. The difference between demand and supply represents the "recapture opportunity", or surplus, available for each retail category in the reporting geography. When demand is greater than supply, there is an apparent opportunity for additional retail space in that category. By comparison, when demand is less than supply, there is a surplus of sales in that retail category (i.e., positive value = recapture opportunity, while negative value = sales inflow from sources other than resident households). (2)Total household retail spending excludes spending on Non-Store Retailers (Internet); Motor Vehicle Parts and Dealers; and Gas Stations. Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics; Claritas, Inc.; ESRI Business Analyst; WTL +a, April 2021. WTL+a WTL +a Real Estate & Economic Advisors Washington, DC—Cape Cod, MA 301.502.4171 508.214.0915 47 Figure 5: Retail Leakage & Surplus—Village of North Palm Beach, 2018  Thus, the retail analysis reveals there are multiple merchandise categories where apparent opportunities could be recaptured to support new retail uses as part of mixed-use redevelopment of the Twin City Mall site—as generated solely by existing households in North Palm Beach. These include: o $41.9 million in General Merchandise stores o $9.5 million in Health/Personal Care stores o $7.0 million in Clothing/Apparel stores o $4.6 million in Food Services/Restaurants o $3.6 million in Food & Beverage/Grocery stores Opportunities to recapture the loss of existing sales leakage out of North Palm Beach are considered in the retail demand analysis provided in Section 4. WTL+a WTL +a Real Estate & Economic Advisors Washington, DC—Cape Cod, MA 301.502.4171 508.214.0915 48 Economic Characteristics Employment Trends—Palm Beach County Job growth is a key barometer of demand for “workplace” uses such as multi-tenant office space, industrial parks, retail centers, and the like. WTL+a examined trends and forecasts in employment growth, utilizing data for Palm Beach County, as prepared by the state’s labor agency, the Department of Economic Opportunity (DEO), for the period between 1995 and 2020. This data is critical to understanding redevelopment potentials of the Twin City Mall site. Key findings are summarized below and illustrated in Table 12:  Palm Beach County added a remarkable 175,700 new jobs in the 1 1-year period between 1995 and 2006. This growth, which translates into 17,500+ new jobs annually, was focused in specific sectors, including: o Construction (22,000) o Professional/Business Services (56,200), fueling demand for office space o Education/Healthcare (20,900) o Retail Trade (16,700), and o Government (16,100);  By contrast, the economic downturn of 2007—2009 resulted in the loss of 66,200 jobs; WTL+a WTL +a Real Estate & Economic Advisors Washington, DC—Cape Cod, MA 301.502.4171 508.214.0915 49 Table 12: Employment Trends—Palm Beach County, 1995—2018 Pandemic Industry Sector 1995 2000 2006 Amount CAGR %2007 2009 2011 2013 2015 2017 2019 2020 Amount CAGR % In 000s Construction 27.7 36.4 49.7 22.0 5.5%42.0 25.8 24.1 27.8 32.8 36.8 38.3 37.9 (4.1) -0.8% Manufacturing 28.0 28.5 20.1 (7.9) -3.0%19.2 16.0 15.4 16.2 18.8 20.5 20.4 19.8 0.6 0.2% Transp/Warehousing/Utilities 7.6 8.2 9.8 2.2 2.3%10.3 9.3 9.3 10.1 12.5 13.6 14.7 14.5 4.2 2.7% Trade Wholesale 14.8 18.1 24.3 9.5 4.6%23.8 21.7 21.6 22.8 24.2 24.1 24.1 22.8 (1.0) -0.3% Retail 61.3 74.1 78.0 16.7 2.2%76.7 69.4 71.9 76.6 82.5 83.8 83.1 78.1 1.4 0.1% Information 9.5 13.3 11.0 1.5 1.3%11.0 9.0 9.1 10.4 10.8 11.6 11.0 9.5 (1.5) -1.1% Financial Activities 29.1 37.8 42.1 13.0 3.4%40.2 35.1 36.5 38.8 41.0 41.1 44.4 44.4 4.2 0.8% Services Prof'l/Business Services 41.7 82.1 97.9 56.2 8.1%96.0 84.2 90.5 98.7 107.6 115.0 117.5 118.3 22.3 1.6% Education/Health Services 58.1 65.3 79.0 20.9 2.8%80.3 81.9 83.7 87.6 95.9 100.8 108.3 101.8 21.5 1.8% Leisure & Hospitality 53.5 62.5 74.2 20.7 3.0%74.9 68.9 73.8 79.1 85.6 89.8 94.4 79.6 4.7 0.5% Other Services 23.1 25.6 27.9 4.8 1.7%29.1 27.4 28.2 30.2 32.5 33.6 33.4 30.1 1.0 0.3% Government 51.1 57.8 67.2 16.1 2.5%68.5 66.4 63.8 62.8 63.3 64.4 66.8 61.6 (6.9) -0.8% Total (In 000s):405.5 509.7 581.2 175.7 3.3%572.0 515.1 528.0 561.1 607.5 635.1 656.4 618.4 46.4 0.6% Change During Period:104.2 71.5 (9.2) (57.0) 12.9 33.1 46.4 27.6 21.3 (38.0) (1) As of year-end for each reported year. CES Current Employment Statistics - FloridaJobs.org Source: US Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Market Statistics; Florida Department of Economic Opportunity, Bureau of Labor Market Statistics; WTL +a, April 2021. Change: 1995-2006 Change: 2007-2020 WTL+a WTL +a Real Estate & Economic Advisors Washington, DC—Cape Cod, MA 301.502.4171 508.214.0915 50  There was significant job growth in the nine-year economic boom between 2011 and 2019. In fact, more than 141,400 new jobs were created by 2019, far surpassing the job losses during the 2007 —2009 recession;  In 2020, the recession generated by the COVID 19 pandemic resulted in the loss of 38,000 jobs across Palm Beach County. The Retail Trade, Education, and Leisure/Hospitality sectors suffered the greatest job losses; and  Even accounting for the 2007—2009 recession and 2020 pandemic, the economy of Palm Beach County has exhibited remarkable resiliency—with a net gain of 46,400 new jobs since 2007. Notably, the Services sector—which comprises multiple categories such as Business and Professional Services, Education/Health Services, and Leisure/Hospitality, has gained the largest share of new jobs, with 49,400 new jobs during this period. Conversely, job losses were greatest in Government (-6,900), Construction (-4,100), and Information (-1,500). Palm Beach County Gained 141 ,400 New Jobs between 2011 & 2019  As illustrated in Table 13, Dun & Bradstreet, Inc. estimates that Palm Beach County contained almost 71 4,000 full- and part-time jobs in 79,241 registered businesses in January 2020, which reflects a jobs-to-population ratio of 0.49. That is, there are 49 jobs for every 100 residents in the County, which reflects the concentration of multiple employment centers such as downtown West Palm Beach, Boca Raton, Delray Beach, and others;  Notably, the County’s jobs-to -population ratio is higher than both neighboring Martin County (0.46) and Broward County (0.47); and  Employment is concentrated in particular sectors, including Services (46%), Wholesale/Retail Trade (2 5%), and Finance/Insurance/Real Estate (10%). WTL+a WTL +a Real Estate & Economic Advisors Washington, DC—Cape Cod, MA 301.502.4171 508.214.0915 51 Table 13: Business Mix—Palm Beach County, 2020 NAICS Category No.% of Total No.% of Total Agriculture & Mining 1,471 1.9%11,258 1.6% Construction 5,036 6.4%29,726 4.2% Manufacturing 1,527 1.9%35,163 4.9% Transportation & Warehousing 1,805 2.3%12,424 1.7% Communications 610 0.8%5,731 0.8% Utilities 141 0.2%4,083 0.6% Wholesale & Retail Trade Wholesale 2,031 24,472 Retail 13,487 154,632 - Home Improvement 802 7,814 - General Merchandise 560 14,895 - Food Stores 1,304 21,276 - Auto Dealers/Gas Stations 1,386 16,680 - Apparel & Accessory Stores 1,133 7,416 - Furniture/Home Furnishings 1,102 6,813 - Eating & Drinking Places 3,523 53,545 - Miscellaneous & Non-store Retail 3,677 26,193 Subtotal - All Retail:15,518 19.6%179,104 25.1% Finance/Insurance/Real Estate 9,273 11.7%70,082 9.8% Services - Hotel/Lodging 325 13,481 - Automotive Services 1,558 7,618 - Motion Pictures & Amusements 2,034 25,003 - Health Services 5,342 76,789 - Legal Services 1,988 14,275 - Educational Institutions 937 72,932 - Other Services 17,817 119,946 Subtotal - Services:30,001 37.9%330,044 46.2% Government 920 1.2%34,187 4.8% Unclassified Establishments 12,939 16.3%2,141 0.3% TOTAL:79,241 100.0%713,943 100.0% ANALYSIS: 2020 Employment 713,943 2020 Population (State Estimate)1,466,494 Jobs/Population Ratio 0.49 Source: ESRI Business Analyst; InfoGroup, Inc.; Dun & Bradstreet, Inc.; WTL +a, April 2021. Businesses Employees WTL+a WTL +a Real Estate & Economic Advisors Washington, DC—Cape Cod, MA 301.502.4171 508.214.0915 52 Employment Forecasts—Palm Beach County Employment forecasts for Florida’s 67 counties are prepared in eight-year forecast periods by the Department of Economic Opportunity. As illustrated in Table 14 , these forecasts suggest that:  Palm Beach County is forecast to add more than 87,750 new jobs between 20 20 and 2028, reflecting a sustained pace of 11,000 new jobs annually over this eight-year period.  The Services sector is expected to comprise fully 50% of all new jobs in the region—adding almost 60,500 new jobs—with the largest gains expected in Health Care and Accommodation & Food Services (hospitality, and food and beverage) sectors. The Wholesale & Retail Trade sector is forecast to add more than 5,6 00 new jobs. This growth can be expected to fuel demand for medical office space, restaurants, and lodging. Employment Trends—Town of Lake Park WTL+a utilized data from the U.S. Census Bureau’s “On-the-Map” database, which tallies job growth by major industry sectors for specific jurisdictions and discrete geographies of the U.S., to understand employment trends in Lake Park. As illustrated in Table 15, data indicate the following:  In 2018 (latest Census data available), Lake Park contained a total of 4,865 jobs . This would suggest that, in 201 8, the Town accounted for 0.79% of total jobs in Palm Beach County, a slightly higher proportionate share versus its population representing only 0.60% of the county. Notably, the Town’s share of countywide jobs has remained flat—from 0.80% in 200 7 to 0.65 % in 2012 to 0.79% in 2018;  The 2007 —20 12 recession and recovery resulted in the loss of 1,051 jobs . Since 2013, however, Lake Park has added more than 1,500 new jobs and experienced a net gain of 552 new jobs during this 12-year period;  Between 2007 and 2018, notable job losses occurred in 10 of 19 industry sectors, including: o Professional/Business Services (-140 jobs) (reducing demand for office space) o Construction (-80 jobs)  Conversely, gains occurred in the following sectors: o Administration/Waste Management (+343 jobs) o Accommodation & Food Services (+229 jobs), and o Retail (+169 jobs) WTL+a WTL +a Real Estate & Economic Advisors Washington, DC—Cape Cod, MA 301.502.4171 508.214.0915 53 Table 14: State Employment Forecasts—Palm Beach County, 2020—2028 Employment Category 2020 % Dist.2028 % Dist.Total CAGR Agriculture & Forestry Crop & Animal Production 4,214 3,958 (256) -0.8% Agriculture & Forestry Support Activity 2,084 1,982 (102) -0.6% Subtotal:6,298 0.9%5,940 0.8%(358) -0.7% Construction Buildings/Heavy & Civil Construction 13,229 14,660 1,431 1.3% Specialty Trade Contractors 25,832 28,050 2,218 1.0% Subtotal:39,061 5.9%42,710 5.7%3,649 1.1% Manufacturing Durable Goods Manufacturing 15,332 16,468 1,136 0.9% Non-Durable Goods Manufacturing 5,257 5,643 386 0.9% Subtotal:20,589 3.1%22,111 2.9%1,522 0.9% Transportation/Communications/Public Utilities Public Utilities 2,288 1,736 (552) -3.4% Transportation & Warehousing 12,040 13,783 1,743 1.7% Subtotal:14,328 2.2%15,519 2.1%1,191 1.0% Wholesale & Retail Trade Wholesale Trade 22,635 24,455 1,820 1.0% Retail Trade 77,791 83,386 5,595 0.9% Subtotal:100,426 15.1%107,841 14.3%7,415 0.9% Finance/Insurance/Real Estate Information 10,907 11,067 160 0.2% Finance & Insurance 25,208 26,181 973 0.5% Real Estate, Rental & Leasing 17,604 19,346 1,742 1.2% Subtotal:53,719 8.1%56,594 7.5%2,875 0.7% Services Professional, Scientific & Technical Services 49,950 56,514 6,564 1.6% Management of Companies & Enterprises 11,494 13,029 1,535 1.6% Administrative & Waste Management 52,132 61,171 9,039 2.0% Educational Services 13,437 16,193 2,756 2.4% Health Care & Social Assistance 91,215 104,470 13,255 1.7% Arts, Entertainment & Recreation 16,526 21,093 4,567 3.1% Accommodation & Food Services 59,283 78,482 19,199 3.6% Other Services (Except Government)26,467 30,010 3,543 1.6% Subtotal:320,504 48.2%380,962 50.6%60,458 2.2% Government 64,356 9.7%69,610 9.3%5,254 1.0% Self-Employed & Unpaid Family Workers 45,166 6.8%50,952 6.8%5,786 1.5% TOTAL:664,487 752,242 87,755 1.6% Annual Increase (Rounded):11,000 http://www.floridajobs.org/workforce-statistics/data-center/statistical-programs/employment-projections Change: 2020-2028 Source: Florida Department of Economic Opportunity, Bureau of Labor Statistics; WTL +a, April 2021. WTL+a WTL +a Real Estate & Economic Advisors Washington, DC—Cape Cod, MA 301.502.4171 508.214.0915 54 Table 15: Employment Trends—Town of Lake Park, 2007—2018 2018 Industry Sector 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 % Dist.Amount CAGR % Agriculture & Mining - 1 2 11 - - 1 2 - - - - 0.0%- 0.0% Construction 824 837 535 470 349 390 444 646 603 504 577 744 15.3%(80) -0.9% Manufacturing 488 365 335 330 226 190 216 285 309 403 481 540 11.1%52 0.9% Transp & Warehousing 6 7 16 24 37 20 43 73 29 44 47 30 0.6%24 15.8% Utilities 40 38 32 25 28 33 31 35 67 52 54 44 0.9%4 0.9% Trade Wholesale 248 211 181 189 207 175 179 195 178 232 253 245 5.0%(3) -0.1% Retail 932 955 949 988 835 744 761 841 1,013 1,018 973 1,101 22.6%169 1.5% Information 13 18 23 15 4 5 4 8 8 4 4 4 0.1%(9) -10.2% Finance & Insurance 104 139 140 103 64 53 54 62 56 43 54 44 0.9%(60) -7.5% Real Estate/Rental & Leasing 35 32 19 24 37 29 42 46 62 43 20 20 0.4%(15) -5.0% Services Prof'l/Business Services 269 226 224 102 67 113 125 105 139 111 101 129 2.7%(140) -6.5% Management of Companies 7 6 4 5 2 6 5 6 6 1 4 2 0.0%(5) -10.8% Administration/Waste Mgmt.313 386 366 414 439 344 490 456 511 586 685 656 13.5%343 7.0% Educational Services 48 51 39 38 28 24 21 7 12 8 6 19 0.4%(29) -8.1% Health Care & Social Assistance 335 380 425 416 459 476 462 566 552 404 411 403 8.3%68 1.7% Arts/Entertainment/Recreation 10 11 61 5 56 72 49 56 100 91 90 71 1.5%61 19.5% Accommodation & Food Services 337 433 340 344 309 413 397 419 460 515 593 566 11.6%229 4.8% Other Services 214 203 210 190 161 167 194 168 175 178 201 193 4.0%(21) -0.9% Public Administration/Gov't 90 73 82 75 79 67 77 67 77 51 59 54 1.1%(36) -4.5% Total:4,313 4,372 3,983 3,768 3,387 3,321 3,595 4,043 4,357 4,288 4,613 4,865 552 1.1% Annual Change - 59 (389) (215) (381) (66) 274 448 314 (69) 325 252 Annual % Change - 1%-9%-5%-10%-2%8%12%8%-2%8%5% Lake Park As % of County:0.80%0.83%0.82%0.78%0.65%0.65%0.68%0.74%0.76%0.71%0.76%0.79%12 Years 0.75% 5 Years 0.75% Source: U.S. Census Bureau, On-the-Map; WTL +a, April 2021. Change: 2007-2018National Recession As % of County WTL+a WTL +a Real Estate & Economic Advisors Washington, DC—Cape Cod, MA 301.502.4171 508.214.0915 55  As illustrated in Table 16, Dun & Bradstreet, Inc. estimated there are 6,604 jobs in 1,040 registered businesses in Lake Park in 2020. According to Dun & Bradstreet, the Town accounts for approximately 0.9% of the nearly 714,000 jobs in Palm Beach County;  The two largest sectors generating demand for workplace real estate in Lake Park include: Wholesale/Retail Trade (2,824 jobs, or 43% of all jobs) and Services (1,854 jobs, or 28% of all jobs. Within the Retail Trade sector, Auto Dealers/Gas Stations and Eating & Drinking Places account for 23% and 22% of all jobs, respectively. Within the Services sector, “Other Services” accounts for 56% all Services employment (1,037 jobs); this includes auto repair and associated businesses. Together, Wholesale/Retail Trade and Services account for fully 75% of total employment in Lake Park;  Another sector, Finance/Insurance/Real Estate, accounts for less than 4 % of Lake Park’s employment base, with 248 jobs. This sector generates limited demand for office space;  As noted above, Lake Park contains 0.9% of all at-place jobs in Palm Beach County. This is known as fair share, and is considered in the analysis of development potentials for workplace/office uses; and Lake Park’s Jobs-to-Population Ratio of 0.75 is Significantly Above Surrounding Communities  The data also suggest Lake Park’s current jobs-to-population ratio is 0.75 (i.e., there are 75 jobs for every 100 residents living in the Town ). Notably, this is much higher than the overall ratio of Palm Beach County (0.49). Lake Park’s jobs-to-population ratio is significantly higher than Boynton Beach (0.46), Delray Beach (0.59) and Riviera Beach (0.63), on par with Palm Beach Gardens (0.72), and lower than West Palm Beach (0.86) and Boca Raton (1.24). WTL+a WTL +a Real Estate & Economic Advisors Washington, DC—Cape Cod, MA 301.502.4171 508.214.0915 56 Table 16: Business Mix—Town of Lake Park, 2020 NAICS Category No.% of Total No.% of Total Agriculture & Mining 12 1.2%50 0.8% Construction 90 8.7%634 9.6% Manufacturing 32 3.1%314 4.8% Transportation & Warehousing 19 1.8%62 0.9% Communications 8 0.8%24 0.4% Utilities 3 0.3%8 0.1% Wholesale & Retail Trade Wholesale 36 257 Retail 265 2,824 - Home Improvement 28 286 - General Merchandise 12 554 - Food Stores 28 280 - Auto Dealers/Gas Stations 59 656 - Apparel & Accessory Stores 7 37 - Furniture/Home Furnishings 21 82 - Eating & Drinking Places 48 614 - Miscellaneous & Non-store Retail 62 315 Subtotal - All Retail:301 28.9%3,081 46.7% Finance/Insurance/Real Estate 70 6.7%248 3.8% Services - Hotel/Lodging 3 16 - Automotive Services 62 295 - Motion Pictures & Amusements 30 146 - Health Services 28 144 - Legal Services 7 27 - Educational Institutions 7 189 - Other Services 214 1,037 Subtotal - Services:351 33.8%1,854 28.1% Government 13 1.3%305 4.6% Unclassified Establishments 141 13.6%24 0.4% TOTAL:1,040 100.0%6,604 100.0% ANALYSIS: 2020 Employment 6,604 % Share of Palm Beach County 0.9% 2020 Population 8,762 Jobs/Population Ratio 0.75 Source: ESRI Business Analyst; InfoGroup, Inc.; Dun & Bradstreet, Inc.; WTL +a, April 2021. Businesses Employees WTL+a WTL +a Real Estate & Economic Advisors Washington, DC—Cape Cod, MA 301.502.4171 508.214.0915 57  As illustrated in Figure 6, the U.S. Census Bureau estimates the highest employment densities are concentrated in the western half of Lake Park, including the industrial uses along Old Dixie Highway, 10th Street, Watertower Road, and Killian Drive corridors as well as the retail/Big Box stores located on N. Congress Avenue. Secondary and tertiary employment clusters include the Northlake Boulevard corridor and the Twin City Mall site (Publix), respectively; and Figure 6: Employment Densities—Town of Lake Park, 2018  As illustrated in Figure 7, according to 2018 U.S. Census Bureau data, Lake Park exhibited daily inflow of 4,701 employees who live elsewhere but work in the Town , as compared to 4,333 residents who leave Lake Park daily for jobs elsewhere. The difference —in flow of 368 employees daily—reflects an 80% increase since 2008. The Number of Employees Working in Lake Park But Living Elsewhere Increase d by 11% Since 2008 WTL+a WTL +a Real Estate & Economic Advisors Washington, DC—Cape Cod, MA 301.502.4171 508.214.0915 58 Figure 7: Employment Inflow/Outflow—Town of Lake Park, 2018 In summary, despite 1,051 recession-based job losses, Lake Park had a net gain of 552 new jobs between 200 7 and 2018 (reflecting an average annual growth rate of 1.1% per year). Differences between the U.S. Census Bureau On-the -Map data (Table 15) and Dun & Bradstreet (Table 16) are attributed to part-time jobs, self-employment, two different reporting years (in part, 2018 and 2020), and those jobs not contributing to the Unemployment Insurance Fund. Employment Trends—Village of North Palm Beach Using the same data from the Census Bureau’s “On -the-Map” database, employment trends in North Palm Beach are illustrated in Table 17 . This indicates the following:  In 2018 (latest Census data available), North Palm Beach contained a total of 4,619 jobs . This would suggest that, in 2018, the Village accounted for 0.75% of total jobs in Palm Beach County. Notably, the Village’s share of countywide jobs has fluctuated—from 0.82% in 2007 , 0.69% in 2012, 0.86% in 2016 and 0.82% in 2018; WTL+a WTL +a Real Estate & Economic Advisors Washington, DC—Cape Cod, MA 301.502.4171 508.214.0915 59 Table 17: Employment Trends—Village of North Palm Beach, 2007—2018 2018 Industry Sector 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 % Dist.Amount CAGR % Agriculture & Mining 3 9 2 - 1 4 2 1 - - - - 0.0%(3) -100.0% Construction 212 191 245 304 172 178 222 179 255 302 231 201 4.4%(11) -0.5% Manufacturing 55 46 34 24 94 28 26 25 21 33 26 25 0.5%(30) -6.9% Transp & Warehousing 21 23 30 15 15 18 25 15 15 15 27 22 0.5%1 0.4% Utilities - - 1 10 12 7 6 8 2 2 - - 0.0%- 0.0% Trade Wholesale 99 67 67 91 149 147 111 114 110 67 49 48 1.0%(51) -6.4% Retail 220 241 142 174 235 239 257 204 245 294 344 356 7.7%136 4.5% Information 49 52 27 19 21 25 18 15 10 4 5 3 0.1%(46) -22.4% Finance & Insurance 578 384 197 243 248 208 137 149 161 139 189 229 5.0%(349) -8.1% Real Estate/Rental & Leasing 121 108 89 107 91 71 86 65 100 102 106 115 2.5%(6) -0.5% Services Prof'l/Business Services 931 455 413 535 608 567 566 584 707 724 716 680 14.7%(251) -2.8% Management of Companies 5 9 8 12 12 21 35 24 24 22 20 16 0.3%11 11.2% Administration/Waste Mgmt.266 148 108 334 629 158 509 500 627 693 821 378 8.2%112 3.2% Educational Services 356 356 366 351 341 348 263 287 294 313 306 294 6.4%(62) -1.7% Health Care & Social Assistance 528 480 443 573 627 651 606 695 888 1,096 892 1,118 24.2%590 7.1% Arts/Entertainment/Recreation 136 116 51 61 49 66 74 78 81 56 73 83 1.8%(53) -4.4% Accommodation & Food Services 457 460 450 393 438 385 532 457 632 643 697 635 13.7%178 3.0% Other Services 256 232 202 238 204 198 216 265 410 412 292 209 4.5%(47) -1.8% Public Administration/Gov't 144 133 223 234 220 212 220 241 218 223 192 207 4.5%63 3.4% Total:4,437 3,510 3,098 3,718 4,166 3,531 3,911 3,906 4,800 5,140 4,986 4,619 182 0.4% Annual Change - (927) (412) 620 448 (635) 380 (5) 894 340 (154) (367) Annual % Change - -21%-12%20%12%-15%11%-0.1%23%7%-3%-7% North Palm Beach As % of County:0.82%0.67%0.64%0.77%0.80%0.69%0.74%0.71%0.83%0.86%0.82%0.75%12 Years 0.76% 5 Years 0.79% Source: U.S. Census Bureau, On-the-Map; WTL +a, April 2021. As % of County National Recession Change: 2007-2018 WTL+a WTL +a Real Estate & Economic Advisors Washington, DC—Cape Cod, MA 301.502.4171 508.214.0915 60  The 2007 —20 12 recession and recovery resulted in the loss of 906 jobs . Between 2013 and 2018, the Village added almost 1,100 new jobs. However, when combined with recession-based job losses, there was a limited net gain of 182 new jobs in North Palm Beach during this 12- year period;  Between 2007 and 2018, notable job losses occurred in 11 of 19 industry sectors, including: o Finance & Insurance (-349 jobs) and Professional/Business Services (-251 jobs) and Information (-46 jobs), significantly reducing demand for office space  Conversely, gains occurred in the following sectors: o Health Care & Social Assistance (+590 jobs) o Accommodation & Food Services (+178 jobs), and o Retail Trade (+136 jobs)  As illustrated in Table 18, Dun & Bradstreet, Inc. estimated there are 6,185 jobs in 1,132 registered businesses in North Palm Beach in 2020. According to Dun & Bradstreet, the Village accounts for approximately 0.9% of the nearly 714,000 jobs in Palm Beach County;  The two largest sectors generating demand for workplace real estate in the Village include: Services (2,974 jobs, or 48% of all jobs) and Finance/Insurance/Real Estate (1,310 jobs, or 21% of all jobs). Retail Trade, with 1,042 jobs, accounts for 17% of total employment;  Like Lake Park, North Palm Beach also contains 0.9% of all at-place jobs in Palm Beach County. This is known as fair share, and is considered in the analysis of development potentials for workplace/office uses; and North Palm Beach’s Jobs-to-Population Ratio of 0.48 is Lower than Surrounding Communities  The data also suggest the Village ’s current jobs-to -population ratio is 0.48 (i.e., there are 48 jobs for every 100 residents). Notably, this is on par with the overall ratio of Palm Beach County (0.49) as well as Boynton Beach (0.46). The Village’s jobs-to-population ratio is significantly lower than Riviera Beach (0.63), Palm Beach Gardens (0.72), Lake Park (0.75), West Palm Beach (0.86), and Boca Raton (1.24). WTL+a WTL +a Real Estate & Economic Advisors Washington, DC—Cape Cod, MA 301.502.4171 508.214.0915 61 Table 18: Business Mix—Village of North Palm Beach, 2020 NAICS Category No.% of Total No.% of Total Agriculture & Mining 16 1.4%69 1.1% Construction 64 5.7%271 4.4% Manufacturing 17 1.5%143 2.3% Transportation & Warehousing 30 2.7%144 2.3% Communications - 0.0%- 0.0% Utilities 1 0.1%4 0.1% Wholesale & Retail Trade Wholesale 13 71 Retail 145 1,042 - Home Improvement 6 24 - General Merchandise 2 4 - Food Stores 10 39 - Auto Dealers/Gas Stations 30 246 - Apparel & Accessory Stores 6 35 - Furniture/Home Furnishings 19 83 - Eating & Drinking Places 39 464 - Miscellaneous & Non-store Retail 33 147 Subtotal - All Retail:158 14.0%1,113 18.0% Finance/Insurance/Real Estate 168 14.8%1,310 21.2% Services - Hotel/Lodging 4 24 - Automotive Services 14 148 - Motion Pictures & Amusements 31 163 - Health Services 66 399 - Legal Services 50 487 - Educational Institutions 14 437 - Other Services 278 1,316 Subtotal - Services:457 40.4%2,974 48.1% Government 9 0.8%137 2.2% Unclassified Establishments 212 18.7%20 0.3% TOTAL:1,132 100.0%6,185 100.0% ANALYSIS: 2020 Employment 6,185 % Share of Palm Beach County 0.9% 2020 Population 12,975 Jobs/Population Ratio 0.48 Source: ESRI Business Analyst; InfoGroup, Inc.; Dun & Bradstreet, Inc.; WTL +a, April 2021. Businesses Employees WTL+a WTL +a Real Estate & Economic Advisors Washington, DC—Cape Cod, MA 301.502.4171 508.214.0915 62  As illustrated in Figure 8, the U.S. Census Bureau estimates the highest employment densities in North Palm Beach are concentrated along U.S. 1, which ha s a concentration of low- rise suburban office buildings as well as retail businesses located on the north side of Northlake Boulevard; and Figure 8: Employment Densities—Village of North Palm Beach, 2018  As illustrated in Figure 9, according to 2018 U.S. Census Bureau data, North Palm Beach exhibited daily inflow of 4,313 employees who live elsewhere but work in the Village, as compared to 5,038 residents who leave the Village daily for jobs elsewhere. The difference— outflow of 725 employees daily—has decreased by 47% since 2008 , when outflow totaled 1,370 employees. The Number of Employees Working in North Palm Beach But Living Elsewhere Increased by 32% Since 2008 WTL+a WTL +a Real Estate & Economic Advisors Washington, DC—Cape Cod, MA 301.502.4171 508.214.0915 63 Figure 9: Employment Inflow/Outflow—Village of North Palm Beach, 2018 In summary, recession-based job losses between 2007 and recovery in 2013 has limited the number of new jobs created in North Palm Beach between 2007 and 2018. In fact, the Village had a net gain of only 182 new jobs over this 12-year period (reflecting a limited average annual growth rate of 0.4% per year). Differences between the U.S. Census Bureau On-the-Map data (Table 17) and Dun & Bradstreet (Table 18) are attributed to part-time jobs, self-employment, two different reporting years (in part, 2018 and 2020), and those jobs not contributing to the Unemployment Insurance Fund. Employment Trends—North County Trade Area Using the same data from the Census Bureau’s “On-the-Map” database, employment trends in North County are illustrated in Table 19 . This indicates the following:  In 2018 (latest Census data available), North County contained a total of 44,755 jobs , suggesting that, in 2018, the trade area accounted for 7.4% of total jobs in Palm Beach County. Notably, North County’s share of countywide jobs has remained stable—in the range of 7% to 8% over the past 12 years; WTL+a WTL +a Real Estate & Economic Advisors Washington, DC—Cape Cod, MA 301.502.4171 508.214.0915 64 Table 19: Employment Trends—North County Trade Area, 2007—2018 2018 Industry Sector 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 % Dist.Amount CAGR % Agriculture & Mining 23 41 11 16 11 23 72 64 64 6 33 31 0.1%8 2.8% Construction 4,043 2,575 1,910 1,853 1,561 1,358 1,587 2,050 2,318 2,619 2,793 2,629 5.9%(1,414) -3.8% Manufacturing 2,627 2,519 2,643 2,598 2,629 1,406 1,410 1,516 1,843 1,731 1,998 2,063 4.6%(564) -2.2% Transp & Warehousing 182 154 156 194 127 121 129 183 113 142 158 135 0.3%(47) -2.7% Utilities 194 188 188 169 164 162 158 167 209 192 188 178 0.4%(16) 0.0% Trade Wholesale 1,615 1,400 1,278 1,372 1,321 1,272 1,188 1,313 1,200 1,421 1,468 1,638 3.7%23 0.1% Retail 7,254 7,230 6,587 6,701 8,217 6,852 7,178 7,397 7,890 7,975 7,930 7,711 17.2%457 0.6% Information 495 471 406 372 445 464 541 471 497 476 574 422 0.9%(73) -1.4% Finance & Insurance 2,697 2,013 1,795 1,923 2,362 2,164 2,120 2,061 2,013 2,128 2,219 2,235 5.0%(462) -1.7% Real Estate/Rental & Leasing 965 965 850 776 899 853 916 819 801 882 886 943 2.1%(22) -0.2% Services Prof'l/Business Services 3,312 3,157 2,965 2,567 2,726 2,767 2,991 3,230 3,418 3,619 3,917 3,792 8.5%480 1.2% Management of Companies 447 378 327 363 485 514 523 346 446 463 443 444 1.0%(3) -0.1% Administration/Waste Mgmt.4,390 4,673 2,906 3,440 4,864 3,320 3,671 4,934 3,082 5,929 5,302 4,975 11.1%585 1.1% Educational Services 374 316 310 342 247 342 477 516 510 508 435 466 1.0%92 2.0% Health Care & Social Assistance 5,258 5,330 5,735 5,378 5,456 5,754 6,118 5,922 6,058 6,428 6,730 6,720 15.0%1,462 2.3% Arts/Entertainment/Recreation 920 823 654 630 888 918 854 885 995 1,054 1,150 1,116 2.5%196 1.8% Accommodation & Food Services 4,016 4,974 4,011 4,139 4,614 4,792 4,787 4,923 5,698 5,576 5,856 5,935 13.3%1,919 3.6% Other Services 1,406 1,351 1,314 1,268 1,418 1,721 1,567 1,452 1,662 1,676 1,669 2,425 5.4%1,019 5.1% Public Administration/Gov't 777 758 934 923 929 894 935 933 909 869 876 897 2.0%120 1.3% Total:40,995 39,316 34,980 35,024 39,363 35,697 37,222 39,182 39,726 43,694 44,625 44,755 3,760 0.8% Annual Change - (1,679) (4,336) 44 4,339 (3,666) 1,525 1,960 544 3,968 931 130 Annual % Change - -4%-11%0.1%12%-9%4%5%1%10%2%0% North Trade Area As % of County:7.7%7.3%6.7%7.2%8.1%6.9%7.3%7.4%7.2%7.6%7.5%7.4%12 Years 7.35% As % of North County Trade Area:5 Years 7.41% Lake Park 10.5%11.1%11.4%10.8%8.6%9.3%9.7%10.3%11.0%9.8%10.3%10.9% North Palm Beach 10.8%8.9%8.9%10.6%10.6%9.9%10.5%10.0%12.1%11.8%11.2%10.3% Source: U.S. Census Bureau, On-the-Map; WTL +a, May 2021. As % of County National Recession Change: 2007-2018 WTL+a WTL +a Real Estate & Economic Advisors Washington, DC—Cape Cod, MA 301.502.4171 508.214.0915 65  The 2007 —20 09 recession resulted in the loss of more than 6,000 jobs . Despite the loss of almost 3,700 jobs in 2012 (in Manufacturing, Retail Trade and Administration/Waste Management), the trade area added 9,775 new jobs over multiple economic cycles between 2010 and 2018 . When combined with the previous recession-based job losses, there was an overall net gain of 3,760 new jobs in North County over this 12-year period;  Between 2007 and 2018, job losses occurred in eight of 19 industry sectors, including: o Construction (-1,414 jobs) o Manufacturing (-564 jobs), and o Finance & Insurance (-462 jobs)  Conversely, gains occurred in the following sectors: o Accommodation & Food Services (+1,919 jobs) o Health Care & Social Assistance (+1,462 jobs), and o Other Services (+1,019 jobs)  As illustrated in Table 20, Dun & Bradstreet, Inc. estimated there are 49,371 jobs in 6,055 registered businesses in North County in 2020. According to Dun & Bradstreet, North County accounts for roughly 7% of the nearly 714,000 jobs in Palm Beach County;  The two largest sectors generating demand for workplace real estate in North County include: Services (20,293 jobs, or 41% of all jobs) and Wholesale/Retail Trade, with 15,474 jobs, accounts for 31% of total employment;  North County also contains 7% of all at-place jobs in Palm Beach County. This is known as fair share, and is considered in the analysis of development potentials for workplace/office uses; and North County’s Jobs -to-Population Ratio of 0.67 Reflects a Blend of Low & High Job Concentrations WTL+a WTL +a Real Estate & Economic Advisors Washington, DC—Cape Cod, MA 301.502.4171 508.214.0915 66 Table 20: Business Mix—North County Trade Area, 2020 NAICS Category No.% of Total No.% of Total Agriculture & Mining 86 1.4%470 1.0% Construction 357 5.9%2,517 5.1% Manufacturing 121 2.0%2,163 4.4% Transportation & Warehousing 113 1.9%466 0.9% Communications 35 0.6%297 0.6% Utilities 15 0.2%70 0.1% Wholesale & Retail Trade Wholesale 133 895 Retail 1,061 14,579 - Home Improvement 63 779 - General Merchandise 40 1,806 - Food Stores 80 1,536 - Auto Dealers/Gas Stations 136 1,852 - Apparel & Accessory Stores 111 950 - Furniture/Home Furnishings 86 864 - Eating & Drinking Places 279 4,996 - Miscellaneous & Non-store Retail 266 1,796 Subtotal - All Retail:1,194 19.7%15,474 31.3% Finance/Insurance/Real Estate 731 12.1%6,466 13.1% Services - Hotel/Lodging 26 767 - Automotive Services 106 836 - Motion Pictures & Amusements 160 1,343 - Health Services 466 5,055 - Legal Services 181 1,235 - Educational Institutions 70 2,390 - Other Services 1,366 8,667 Subtotal - Services:2,375 39.2%20,293 41.1% Government 59 1.0%1,045 2.1% Unclassified Establishments 969 16.0%110 0.2% TOTAL:6,055 100.0%49,371 100.0% ANALYSIS: 2020 Employment 49,371 % Share of Palm Beach County 6.9% 2020 Population 73,538 Jobs/Population Ratio 0.67 Source: ESRI Business Analyst; InfoGroup, Inc.; Dun & Bradstreet, Inc.; WTL +a, May 2021. Businesses Employees WTL+a WTL +a Real Estate & Economic Advisors Washington, DC—Cape Cod, MA 301.502.4171 508.214.0915 67  The data also suggest North County’s current jobs-to -population ratio is 0.67 (i.e., there are 67 jobs for every 100 residents). Notably, this is higher than North Palm Beach (0.32) as well as the overall ratio of Palm Beach County (0.49) but lower than Palm Beach Gardens (0.72) and Lake Park (0.75). It reflects a blend of low and high job concentrations such as the PGA Boulevard corridor.  As illustrated in Figure 10, the U.S. Census Bureau estimates the highest employment densities in North County are concentrated in the area encompassing the PGA Boulevard and Military Trail corridors, surrounding the Gardens Mall, and the west side of Lake Park, including the Northlake Boulevard corridor; and Figure 10: Employment Densities—North County Trade Area, 2020  As illustrated in Figure 11, according to 2018 U.S. Census Bureau data, North County exhibited daily inflow of almost 38,500 employees who live elsewhere but work in the trade area as compared to 25,700 residents who leave North County daily for jobs elsewhere. The difference —inflow of more than 12,700 employees daily—has increased by 23% since 2008. WTL+a WTL +a Real Estate & Economic Advisors Washington, DC—Cape Cod, MA 301.502.4171 508.214.0915 68 The Number of Employees Working in North County But Living Elsewhere Increased by 23% Since 2008 Figure 11: Employment Inflow/Outflow—North County Trade Area, 2020 In summary, the North County trade area encompasses a diverse, 26.2 square mile region that includes employment concentrations in Lake Park (west), the PGA Boulevard and Military Trail corridors, and the area surrounding the Gardens Mall. Strong job growth between 2010 and 2018 was offset by recession-based job losses between 2007 and 2009, resulting in a net gain of 3,760 new jobs, an average annual growth rate of 0.8% per year. Over this 12-year period, both Lake Park and North Palm Beach have maintained a consistent share of North County jobs—with each falling in the range of 9% to 12% between 2007 and 2018. WTL+a WTL +a Real Estate & Economic Advisors Washington, DC—Cape Cod, MA 301.502.4171 508.214.0915 69 4 Real Estate Market Conditions WTL +a evaluated real estate market conditions in Lake Park, North Palm Beach, and other selected locations in Palm Beach County to understand how recent market trends, current economic conditions, and future growth may affect opportunities for redevelopment of the Twin City Mall site. This section of the report analyzes historic and current building inventory, occupancy and vacancy levels, annual absorption (leasing) activity, historic development trends, and other appropriate market indices for housing, workplace /office, and supporting commercial (retail and hotel/lodging) uses based on available data. Data is illustrated in Table 21 through Table 36. Due to variations in supply, demographic characteristics, seasonal residencies and other factors, there is no single adopted standard for a level of ‘True Vacancy’ among Florida’s cities. Real estate industry standards hold that a 5% vacancy rate in commercial office, retail, industrial, and (rental) residential reflects ‘stabilized’ market conditions. Housing Town of Lake Park Lake Park’s housing stock is characteristic of a fully built-out suburb in South Florida with a mix of housing types. Market metrics of the Town’s housing stock are illustrated in Table 21 and detailed below:  Based on data from ESRI Business Analyst, the U.S. Census and the American Community Survey (ACS), Lake Park contains 3,940 total housing units;  The number of owner-occupied units in Lake Park has remained stable over the past 10 years—in the range of 40%—while the number of renter-occupied units increased slightly—from 44% in 2010 to 46% by 2020. While the number of “unoccupied” units decreased between 2010 and 2020, approximately 14% of the Town ’s housing stock is empty (estimated at 540 units). Distinctions between “unoccupied” and “truly vacant” are explained below; WTL+a WTL +a Real Estate & Economic Advisors Washington, DC—Cape Cod, MA 301.502.4171 508.214.0915 70 Table 21: Housing Profile—Town of Lake Park, 2010—2025 2010 2020 % Dist.2025 % Dist.No.CAGR % Housing Tenure Owner-occupied 1,481 1,570 1,633 63 0.79% % of Total 39.6%39.8%40.0% Renter-occupied 1,663 1,830 1,901 71 0.76% % of Total 44.4%46.4%46.6% Unoccupied 598 540 545 5 0.18% % of Total 16.0%13.7%13.4% Total Units:3,742 3,940 4,079 139 0.70% Change in Units:198 139 Owner-Occupied Value $0 - $99,999 44 3%16 1%(28) -18.3% $100,000 - $199,999 687 44%538 33%(149) -4.8% $200,000 - $299,999 603 38%729 45%126 3.9% $300,000 - $399,999 85 5%148 9%63 11.7% $400,000 - $499,999 133 8%173 11%40 5.4% $500,000 - $749,999 1 0%3 0%2 24.6% $750,000 - $999,999 4 0%8 0%4 14.9% $1,000,000 - $1,499,999 3 0%5 0%2 10.8% $1,500,000 - $1,999,999 10 1%13 1%3 5.4% $2,000,000+- 0%- 0%- 0.0% Median Value 205,556$ 223,107$ 1.7% Average Value 233,869$ 261,053$ 2.2% All Housing Units By Structure (2019 American Community Survey) 1 Unit, Detached 1,381 71.7% 1 Unit, Attached 67 9.4% 2 Units 107 2.2% 3 or 4 Units 173 5.0% 5 to 9 Units 350 3.7% 10 to 19 Units 429 2.3% 20 to 49 Units 412 4.0% 50 or more Units 333 0.9% Mobile Home - 0.6% Boat/RV/Other - 0.0% Total Units:3,252 100% Unoccupied Housing Units By Status Unoccupied-All Reasons 2010 2019 (ACS) Rented (Not Occupied)3 For Sale Only 84 Sold (Not Occupied)11 Seasonal Use 91 2% For Migrant Workers - Subtotal:189 TRUE VACANCIES Other Vacant 119 Vacant, For Rent 290 Subtotal:409 460 True Vacancy Rate 10.9%11.7% Total Unoccupied Units:598 672 68.4% Source: ESRI Business Analyst; American Community Survey; WTL +a, May 2021. Change: 2020-2025 WTL+a WTL +a Real Estate & Economic Advisors Washington, DC—Cape Cod, MA 301.502.4171 508.214.0915 71  The average value of all owner-occupied housing units in Lake Park in 2020 is $233 ,900 . Over the next five years, ESRI Business Analyst forecasts suggest that average owner-occupied housing values will increase—at a compound annual rate of 1.7% per year—to $261,000;  Fully 85% of the Town’s owner-occupied housing stock is valued at less than $300,000. Another 14% is valued between $300,000 and $500,000, and only 1.1% is valued above $500,000;  More specific analysis of Lake Park’s unoccupied housing stock indicates that units are unoccupied for various reasons. As a result, this does not accurately reflect actual, “truly vacant” units. U.S. Census data indicate that 598 units, or 16% of inventory, were unoccupied as of the 2010 Census, as the economic recovery from the 2007—2009 recession ended, and recovery gained momentum, thereby reducing the number of vacant units in housing markets with an improving economy. In fact, the number of unoccupied units decreased between 2010 and 2020 —from 598 units in 2010 to 540 units in 2020;  The number of unoccupied units includes only 91 units (2%) that are seasonally owned (i.e., occupied for only a portion of the year, such as units owned by snowbirds who vacation in Florida). When such units (as well as others, such as units sold but not yet occupied) are removed from the unoccupied category, Lake Park’s true vacancy in 2010 was lower—10.9%, or 409 units; WTL+a WTL +a Real Estate & Economic Advisors Washington, DC—Cape Cod, MA 301.502.4171 508.214.0915 72  If the proportion of truly vacant units to total unoccupied units remains the same as it did in 2010 (2%), data from the 2019 American Community Survey (ACS) suggests that the number of truly vacant units in Lake Park has increased slightly since 2010 —to 460 units—which would reflect a vacancy rate of 11.7%. That is well-above the standard 5% vacancy levels that the housing industry considers to be “stabilized”; and  ACS data reveal Lake Park’s housing stock consists of an array of housing characteristic of a well-established, built-out suburban community, including: 1,381 single -family detached units (72%), 67 single -family attached units (9%), and 1,804 multi-family units (19%). Village of North Palm Beach Like Lake Park, the housing stock in North Palm Beach is also characteristic of well-developed suburb in South Florida . However, the Village has significantly higher price points as well as a much higher proportion of multi-unit and high -rise buildings. Market metrics of the Village’s housing stock are illustrated in Table 22 and detailed below:  Based on data from ESRI Business Analyst, the U.S. Census and the American Community Survey (ACS), North Palm Beach contains 8,092 total housing units;  The number of owner-occupied units in North Palm Beach has increased over the past 10 years—from 58 % in 2010 to 60% in 2020—while the number of renter-occupied units remained stable—in the range of 21%. The number of “unoccupied” units decreased between 2010 and 2020—from 21% to 19%, it is due primarily to the higher number of seasonal units (estimated at 1,014 units). Distinctions between “unoccupied” and “truly vacant” are explained below;  The average value of all owner-occupied housing units in North Palm Beach in 2020 is significantly higher than in Lake Park: $505,700. Over the next five years, ESRI Business Analyst forecasts suggest that average owner-occupied housing values will increase—at a compound annual rate of 2.2% per year—to $552,200;  Approximately 37% of the Village’s owner-occupied housing stock is valued at less than $300,000. Another 32% is valued between $300,000 and $500,000, 25% is valued between $500,000 and $1.0 million, and 7% is valued above $1.0 million WTL+a WTL +a Real Estate & Economic Advisors Washington, DC—Cape Cod, MA 301.502.4171 508.214.0915 73 Table 22: Housing Profile—Village of North Palm Beach, 2010—2025 2010 2020 % Dist.2025 % Dist.No.CAGR % Housing Tenure Owner-occupied 4,501 4,872 5,089 217 0.88% % of Total 58.3%60.2%60.8% Renter-occupied 1,596 1,698 1,730 32 0.37% % of Total 20.7%21.0%20.7% Unoccupied 1,617 1,522 1,553 31 0.40% % of Total 21.0%18.8%18.5% Total Units:7,714 8,092 8,372 280 0.68% Change in Units:378 280 Owner-Occupied Value $0 - $99,999 48 1%12 0%(36) -24.2% $100,000 - $199,999 586 12%246 5%(340) -15.9% $200,000 - $299,999 1,184 24%1,104 22%(80) -1.4% $300,000 - $399,999 906 19%1,104 22%198 4.0% $400,000 - $499,999 615 13%745 15%130 3.9% $500,000 - $749,999 757 16%937 18%180 4.4% $750,000 - $999,999 425 9%548 11%123 5.2% $1,000,000 - $1,499,999 129 3%144 3%15 2.2% $1,500,000 - $1,999,999 57 1%73 1%16 5.1% $2,000,000+165 3%177 3%12 0.0% Median Value 368,212$ 410,604$ 2.2% Average Value 505,716$ 552,176$ 1.8% All Housing Units By Structure (2019 American Community Survey) 1 Unit, Detached 2,899 34.9% 1 Unit, Attached 347 4.2% 2 Units 94 1.1% 3 or 4 Units 249 3.0% 5 to 9 Units 378 4.5% 10 to 19 Units 802 9.7% 20 to 49 Units 1,504 18.1% 50 or more Units 2,027 24.4% Mobile Home 8 0.1% Boat/RV/Other - 0.0% Total Units:8,308 100% Unoccupied Housing Units By Status Unoccupied-All Reasons 2010 2019 (ACS) Rented (Not Occupied)16 For Sale Only 193 Sold (Not Occupied)28 Seasonal Use 1,014 13% For Migrant Workers - Subtotal:1,251 TRUE VACANCIES Other Vacant 152 Vacant, For Rent 214 Subtotal:366 465 True Vacancy Rate 4.7%5.7% Total Unoccupied Units:1,617 2,054 22.6% Source: ESRI Business Analyst; American Community Survey; WTL +a, May 2021. Change: 2020-2025 WTL+a WTL +a Real Estate & Economic Advisors Washington, DC—Cape Cod, MA 301.502.4171 508.214.0915 74  As compared to Lake Park (where only 5% of the Town’s stock is in buildings with 20 or more units), fully 42.5% of the Village’s housing inventory is in buildings with 20 or more units. This includes a number of high-density condominium buildings such as Water Club, Marina Pointe, Gemini Club, Ports O’ Call, Old Port Cove, and others;  More specific analysis of the Village’s unoccupied housing stock indicates that units are unoccupied for various reasons. As a result, this does not accurately reflect actual, “truly vacant” units. U.S. Census data indicate that 1,617 units, or 21% of inventory, were unoccupied as of the 2010 Census, as the economic recovery from the 2007—2009 recession ended, and recovery gained momentum, thereby reducing the number of vacant units in housing markets with an improving economy. The number of unoccupied units decreased slightly between 2010 and 2020—from 1,617 units in 2010 to 1,522 units in 2020;  The number of unoccupied units includes 1,014 units (13%) that are seasonally owned (i.e., occupied for only a portion of the year). When such units (as well as others, such as those units sold but not ye t occupied) are removed from the unoccupied category, the Village’s true vacancy in 2010 was significantly lower—4.7 %, or 366 units;  If the proportion of truly vacant units to total unoccupied units remains the same as it did in 2010 (13%), data from the 2019 American Community Survey (ACS) suggests that the number of WTL+a WTL +a Real Estate & Economic Advisors Washington, DC—Cape Cod, MA 301.502.4171 508.214.0915 75 truly vacant units in North Palm Beach has increased since 2010—to 465 units—which would reflect a vacancy rate of 5.7%. This is on par with the standard 5% vacancy levels that the housing industry considers to be “stabilized”; and  ACS data reveal North Palm Beach’s housing stock is characteristic of a well-established, built- out suburban community, including: 3,246 single-family detached or attached units (38%), 1,523 units in buildings of 2—19 units (18%), and 3,531 multi-family units in buildings of 20 units or more (42.5%). North County Trade Area  As illustrated in Table 23, based on data from ESRI Business Analyst, the U.S. Census and the American Community Survey (ACS), the North County trade area contains almost 37,500 total housing units;  The number of owner-occupied units has increased slightly over the past 10 years—from 58.6% in 2010 to 59.4% in 2020. The number of renter-occupied units has also increased—from 26.6% to 28.4%. The resulted in a decrease in the number of “unoccupied” units—from 14.8% to 12.2%;  The average value of all owner-occupied housing units in North County in 2020 is lower than North Palm Beach and higher than Lake Park: $481,315. Over the next five years, ESRI Business Analyst forecasts suggest that average owner-occupied housing values will increase— at a compound annual rate of 1.6% per year—to $522,700;  Approximately 40% of the trade area’s owner-occupied housing stock is valued at less than $300,000. Another 32% is valued between $300,000 and $500,000, 20% is valued between $500,000 and $1.0 million, and 8% is valued above $1.0 million  As compared to Lake Park (where only 4.9% of its stock is in buildings with 20 or more units) and North Palm Beach (where 42.5% of its stock is in buildings with 20 or more units), only 12% of North County’s housing inventory is in buildings with 20 or more units. This reflects the predominantly single-family detached areas of Palm Beach Gardens and Jupiter;  U.S. Census data indicate that 5,072 units, or almost 15% of inventory, were unoccupied as of the 2010 Census. The number of unoccupied units in North County decreased slightly between 2010 and 2020—to 4,580 units (12.8%) in 2020; WTL+a WTL +a Real Estate & Economic Advisors Washington, DC—Cape Cod, MA 301.502.4171 508.214.0915 76 Table 23: Housing Profile—North County Trade Area, 2010—2025 2010 2020 % Dist.2025 % Dist.No.CAGR % Housing Tenure Owner-occupied 20,120 22,253 23,629 1,376 1.21% % of Total 58.6%59.4%60.3% Renter-occupied 9,148 10,629 10,975 346 0.64% % of Total 26.6%28.4%28.0% Unoccupied 5,072 4,580 4,589 9 0.04% % of Total 14.8%12.2%11.7% Total Units:34,340 37,462 39,193 1,731 0.91% Change in Units:3,122 1,731 Owner-Occupied Value $0 - $99,999 572 3%340 1%(232) -9.9% $100,000 - $199,999 3,019 14%1,770 7%(1,249) -10.1% $200,000 - $299,999 5,322 24%5,369 23%47 0.2% $300,000 - $399,999 4,319 19%5,298 22%979 4.2% $400,000 - $499,999 2,864 13%3,471 15%607 3.9% $500,000 - $749,999 3,239 15%3,897 16%658 3.8% $750,000 - $999,999 1,132 5%1,358 6%226 3.7% $1,000,000 - $1,499,999 761 3%895 4%134 3.3% $1,500,000 - $1,999,999 355 2%410 2%55 2.9% $2,000,000+670 3%821 3%151 0.0% Median Value 351,250$ 381,833$ 1.68% Average Value 481,315$ 522,688$ 1.66% All Housing Units By Structure (2019 American Community Survey) 1 Unit, Detached 16,695 46.7% 1 Unit, Attached 4,792 13.4% 2 Units 1,658 4.6% 3 or 4 Units 2,713 7.6% 5 to 9 Units 1,768 4.9% 10 to 19 Units 2,847 8.0% 20 to 49 Units 2,272 6.4% 50 or more Units 2,135 6.0% Mobile Home 868 2.4% Boat/RV/Other 9 0.03% Total Units:35,757 100% Unoccupied Housing Units By Status Unoccupied-All Reasons 2010 2019 (ACS) Rented (Not Occupied)75 For Sale Only 721 Sold (Not Occupied)121 Seasonal Use 2,143 6% For Migrant Workers - Subtotal:3,060 TRUE VACANCIES Other Vacant 797 Vacant, For Rent 1,222 Subtotal:2,019 2,336 True Vacancy Rate 5.9%6.2% Total Unoccupied Units:5,079 5,876 39.8% Source: ESRI Business Analyst; American Community Survey; WTL +a, May 2021. Change: 2020-2025 WTL+a WTL +a Real Estate & Economic Advisors Washington, DC—Cape Cod, MA 301.502.4171 508.214.0915 77  The number of unoccupied units includes 2,143 units that are seasonally owned. When such units (as well as others, such as units sold but not yet occupied) are removed from the unoccupied category, North County’s true vacancy in 2010 was significantly lower—5.9%, or 2,019 units;  If the proportion of truly vacant units to total unoccupied units remains the same as it did in 2010 (6%), data from the 2019 American Community Survey (ACS) suggests that the number of truly vacant units in North County has increased slightly since 2010—to 2,336 units—which would reflect a vacancy rate of 6.2%. This is on par with the standard 5% vacancy levels that the housing industry considers to be “stabilized”; and  ACS data reveal North County’s housing stock includes almost 21,500 single-family detached or attached units (60%), 8,980 units in buildings of 2—19 units (25%), and 4,400 multi -family units in buildings of 20 units or more (12%). Housing Starts To document how population and household growth affects market potentials for new housing at the Twin C ity Mall site, WTL+a reviewed information on annual housing starts. Housing starts are defined as the start of actual construction (after permits are issued). This analysis also compares housing starts to household growth to understand whether the pace of one metric is consistent with (or exceeds) the other. Municipalities across the U.S. provide housing starts data to the U.S. Department of Housing & Urban Develop ment (HUD). Starts for the 13-year period between 2007 and 2019 (latest date available) are illustrated in Table 24 . Key findings indicate that:  Between 2007 and 2019, housing starts across Palm Beach County resulted in delivery of more than 49,750 new housing units, producing a sustained annual pace of 3,827 units per year over this 13-year period. In terms of unit distribution, this includes 28,823 single-family units (58% of the total) and 20,934 multi-family units (42 % of the total). Unincorporated parts of the County accounted for 40% of all starts; WTL+a WTL +a Real Estate & Economic Advisors Washington, DC—Cape Cod, MA 301.502.4171 508.214.0915 78 Table 24: Housing Starts—Palm Beach County & Selected Municipalities, 2007—2019 Total Annual % of Municipality 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 Starts Average County Single-family Detached Boynton Beach 61 96 36 9 214 50 115 29 39 20 15 15 22 721 55 3% Delray Beach 113 38 27 21 57 99 153 111 129 85 69 54 107 1,063 82 4% Lake Park - - 1 - - 1 - - - - 1 - - 3 0 0.0% North Palm Beach 1 - - 5 3 6 - - 6 6 6 6 6 45 3 0.2% Palm Beach Gardens 206 111 76 98 111 194 196 188 154 187 205 219 220 2,165 167 8% Riviera Beach 48 45 4 1 - 2 5 3 8 10 9 75 100 310 24 1% West Palm Beach 35 17 10 8 15 29 27 107 169 193 46 40 69 765 59 3% Selected Jurisdictions:464 307 154 142 400 381 496 438 505 501 351 409 524 5,072 390 18% As % of County 22%24%14%11%21%18%19%17%19%22%13%14%16% Unincorporated County 1,145 465 605 687 763 1,021 1,241 1,301 1,718 1,211 1,733 1,754 1,843 15,487 1,191 54% As % of County 54%36%55%55%40%47%46%51%65%53%66%59%56% TOTAL COUNTY-SFD:2,101 1,277 1,102 1,256 1,885 2,172 2,678 2,552 2,625 2,297 2,622 2,993 3,263 28,823 2,217 58% Multi-family Boynton Beach 368 400 - 2 20 298 538 - 525 700 22 266 747 3,886 299 19% Delray Beach 93 55 217 144 27 687 6 172 234 349 115 20 15 2,134 164 10% Lake Park - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 0.0% North Palm Beach - - - - - - - 146 26 10 - - - 182 14 0.9% Palm Beach Gardens 128 121 - - - 42 180 49 87 68 57 66 71 869 67 4% Riviera Beach 4 77 - - - - - - - 18 5 234 24 West Palm Beach 4 - 11 - - - - 797 99 321 278 323 460 2,293 176 11% Selected Jurisdictions:597 653 228 146 47 1,027 724 1,164 971 1,466 477 909 1,317 9,726 748 46% As % of County 58%72%69%57%8%45%31%46%44%47%32%60%58% Unincorporated County 232 98 47 66 458 252 497 552 294 633 221 100 888 3,450 265 12% As % of County 23%11%14%26%75%11%21%22%13%20%15%7%39% TOTAL COUNTY-MF:1,029 905 329 255 614 2,297 2,336 2,519 2,206 3,119 1,513 1,525 2,287 20,934 1,610 42% http://socds.huduser.org/permits/ Source: U.S. Census Bureau; U.S. Dept. of Housing & Urban Development; WTL+a, May 2021. Change: 2007-2019 WTL+a WTL +a Real Estate & Economic Advisors Washington, DC—Cape Cod, MA 301.502.4171 508.214.0915 79 Table 24 (Continued): Housing Starts—Palm Beach County & Selected Municipalities, 2007—2019 Total Annual % of Municipality 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 Starts Average Total Total Starts Boynton Beach 429 496 36 11 234 348 653 29 564 720 37 281 769 4,607 354 9% Delray Beach 206 93 244 165 84 786 159 283 363 434 184 74 122 3,197 246 6% Lake Park - - 1 - - 1 - - - - 1 - - 3 0.2 0.0% North Palm Beach 1 - - 5 3 6 - 146 32 16 6 6 6 227 17 0.5% Palm Beach Gardens 334 232 76 98 111 236 376 237 241 255 262 285 291 3,034 233 6% Riviera Beach 52 122 4 1 - 2 5 3 8 28 14 309 124 672 52 1% West Palm Beach 39 17 21 8 15 29 27 904 268 514 324 363 529 3,058 235 6% Total-Selected Jurisdictions:1,061 960 382 288 447 1,408 1,220 1,602 1,476 1,967 828 1,318 1,841 14,798 1,138 30% As % of County 34%44%27%19%18%32%24%32%31%36%20%29%33% Total-Unincorporated:1,377 563 652 753 1,221 1,273 1,738 1,853 2,012 1,844 1,954 1,854 2,731 19,825 1,525 40% As % of County 44%26%46%50%49%28%35%37%42%34%47%41%49% TOTAL - County:3,130 2,182 1,431 1,511 2,499 4,469 5,014 5,071 4,831 5,416 4,135 4,518 5,550 49,757 3,827 100% http://socds.huduser.org/permits/ Source: U.S. Census Bureau; U.S. Dept. of Housing & Urban Development; WTL+a, May 2021. Change: 2007-2019 WTL+a WTL +a Real Estate & Economic Advisors Washington, DC—Cape Cod, MA 301.502.4171 508.214.0915 80  In Lake Park, HUD data indicate no multi-family units and only three (3) single-family detached units were built over the 13 years between 2007 and 2019 ; and  In North Palm Beach, a total of 227 housing starts were recorded, including 45 single-family and 182 multi-family starts, between 2007 and 2019. The Village accounted for only 0.5% of all housing starts in Palm Beach County during this period. Notably, multi-family starts jumped in 2014, when Water Club was approved. Multi-family Rental WTL+a examined market trends in the area’s multi-family rental market based on data for those properties that are tracked by CoStar, Inc. Overall market conditions are key to understanding market potentials for development of new housing, particularly for multi-family rental, on the Twin City Mall site. WTL+a notes the Town of Lake Park has received a proposal from Woolbright Development to construct 250 market-rate rental units on a 6.65-acre portion of the site. Market performance characteristics for each jurisdiction’s multi-family rental market are illustrated in Table 25 and Table 26 and summarized below:  As tracked by CoStar, Inc., Lake Park contains an inventory of 183 rental units in 11 properties with an average unit size of 823 sq. ft., and North Palm Beach contains 393 units in 37 properties with an average unit size of 906 sq. ft.;  In 2020, the overall apartment vacancy rate in both municipalities achieved stabilized levels—Lake Park at 4.4 % and North Palm Beach at 3.8%. Vacancies peaked at 11.6% in Lake Park and 7.6% in North Palm Beach during the national recession in 2009. Vacancies have declined steadily since then and are now below industry-standard “stabilized” levels of 5%;  As a result of the lack of new multi-family construction and stabilized vacancies, net absorption in both municipalities has been extremely limited over the past 13 years. In fact, only 12 units were absorbed in the Village, and 13 units were absorbed in Lake Park; and  As a result, average monthly rents in Lake Park increased at a solid compound annual rate of 2.4% per year since 2007, with an average rent of $1,115 per month ($1.36 per sq. ft.) in 2020. Monthly rents in North Palm Beach increased at a lower rate of 1.4% per during this period but remain higher than Lake Park, with an average rent of $1,982 per month ($1.96 per sq. ft.) in 2020. A detailed profile of selected multi-family properties in the two municipalities is illustrated in Table 26. WTL+a WTL +a Real Estate & Economic Advisors Washington, DC—Cape Cod, MA 301.502.4171 508.214.0915 81 Table 25: Multi -family Rental Characteristics—Town of Lake Park, 2007—2020 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Total Ann'l Avg.% CAGR Inventory (Units)181 181 181 181 181 181 181 181 181 181 181 183 183 183 2 No. of Buildings 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 - Vacant Stock (Units)20 20 21 19 18 17 16 12 7 8 11 10 9 8 (12) Vacancy Rate 11.0%11.0%11.6%10.5%9.9%9.4%8.8%6.6%3.9%4.4%6.1%5.5%4.9%4.4%-6.9% Total Net Absorption (Units)(3) - - 3 - 1 1 4 4 - (3) 3 2 1 13 0.9 Past 5 Years 3 0.6 Construction Deliveries - - - - - - - - - - - 5 - - 5 Average Unit Size (SF)823 823 823 823 823 823 823 823 823 823 823 823 823 823 0.0% Average Monthly Rent 817$ 797$ 769$ 787$ 794$ 800$ 818$ 859$ 955$ 993$ 1,063$ 1,071$ 1,100$ 1,115$ 2.4% Per SF Rent 0.99$ 0.96$ 0.91$ 0.94$ 0.94$ 0.95$ 0.97$ 1.03$ 1.16$ 1.20$ 1.30$ 1.31$ 1.35$ 1.36$ 2.5% Average Annual % Change -3.0%-5.2%3.3%0.0%1.1%2.1%6.2%12.6%3.4%8.3%0.8%3.1%0.7% Source: CoStar, Inc.; WTL+a, May 2021. Change: 2007-2020National Recession & Recovery WTL+a WTL +a Real Estate & Economic Advisors Washington, DC—Cape Cod, MA 301.502.4171 508.214.0915 82 Table 26: Multi -family Rental Characteristics—Village of North Palm Beach, 2007—2020 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Total Ann'l Avg.% CAGR Inventory (Units)393 393 393 393 393 393 393 393 393 393 393 393 393 393 - No. of Buildings 37 37 37 37 37 37 37 37 37 37 37 37 37 37 - Vacant Stock (Units)28 30 30 25 24 20 18 18 18 17 20 18 16 15 (13) Vacancy Rate 7.1%7.6%7.6%6.4%6.1%5.1%4.6%4.6%4.6%4.3%5.1%4.6%4.1%3.8%-4.7% Total Net Absorption (Units)(2) (1) - 5 - 5 2 - - 2 (4) 2 1 2 12 0.9 Past 5 Years 3 0.6 Construction Deliveries - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Average Unit Size (SF)906 906 906 906 906 906 906 906 906 906 906 906 906 906 0.0% Average Monthly Rent 1,658$ 1,603$ 1,527$ 1,573$ 1,592$ 1,617$ 1,655$ 1,691$ 1,770$ 1,831$ 1,868$ 1,908$ 1,945$ 1,982$ 1.4% Per SF Rent 1.65$ 1.59$ 1.52$ 1.56$ 1.58$ 1.60$ 1.64$ 1.68$ 1.74$ 1.80$ 1.84$ 1.88$ 1.92$ 1.96$ 1.3% Average Annual % Change -3.6%-4.4%2.6%1.3%1.3%2.5%2.4%3.6%3.4%2.2%2.2%2.1%2.1% Source: CoStar, Inc.; WTL+a, May 2021. National Recession & Recovery Change: 2007-2020 WTL+a WTL +a Real Estate & Economic Advisors Washington, DC—Cape Cod, MA 301.502.4171 508.214.0915 83 Profile of Selected Multi-family Projects As illustrated in Table 27 , WTL+a prepared a profile of selected multi-family rental projects to understand market conditions to inform the feasibility of multi-family residential on the Twin City Mall site. This profile categorizes 12 comparable projects into primary, secondary, and tertiary categories, defined by specific metrics such as location/proximity, age/year built, rent levels, net absorption, and the like. Key findings indicate that: Primary Comparable Set  There are four primary rental projects—Marina Key (Lake Park), Village at Mangonia Lake (West Palm Beach), Emara (delivered in 2021 in North Palm Beach), and Solara at City Centre (North Palm Beach). These four projects contain 833 units and average densities of 25 units per acre. Building heights range from three to six floors;  Two projects are under construction. Emara, located at 12155 U.S. 1 in North Palm Beach, is scheduled for delivery in 2021. It will contain 250 units on an 11.1-acre site (22 units per acre). The other, Solara City Centre, located at 2100 PGA Boulevard in Palm Beach Gardens, is scheduled for delivery in 2021. Solara will contain 136 units on a 3.21-acre site (42 units per acre). It is not known if either project is in pre-leasing;  These four projects contain a mix of one-, two- and three-bedroom units with a weighted average size of 967 sq. ft., a weighted average monthly asking rent of $2,108 per month ($2.18 per sq. ft.). Asking rents for the two newest projects are expected to range from $2.20 to $2.44 per sq. ft.;  With two projects under construction and a third (Village at Mangonia Lake) in lease-up, information on net absorption is limited. Average annual unit absorption at Mangonia Lake, which was delivered in 2019, totaled 77 units per year (6.4 units per month). Lease-up continues, as Mangonia Lake remains 29.6% vacant; and  Marina Key, located at 913 Lake Shore Drive in Lake Park, was built in 1965 and renovated in 2009. Its 207 units have a weighted average asking rent of $2,219 per month ($2.15 per sq. ft.). Average asking rents for both secondary and tertiary comparables are significantly lower—$1.65 per sq. ft. for the three secondary comparables and $1.25 per sq. ft. for five tertiary comparables. WTL+a WTL +a Real Estate & Economic Advisors Washington, DC—Cape Cod, MA 301.502.4171 508.214.0915 84 Table 27: Profile of Selected Multi-family Properties Year Built Site Size Class &Densities &Unit No. of %Size Asking Rent Effective Rent Current Project/Location Height Bldg. Area Type Units Dist.(In SF)Rent Per SF Rent Per SF 2021 2020 2019 2018 2017 2016 Primary Comparables Marina Key 1965/2009 10.93 1 BR 35 17%754 1,894$ 2.51$ 1,894$ 2.51$ 2.9% Low-rise Garden Class B acres 2 BR 170 82%1,082 2,281 2.11 2,281 2.11 6 913 Lake Shore Drive 3 floors 0.52 3 BR 2 1%1,615 2,586 1.60 2,574 1.59 Lake Park 246,578 True Owner: Carroll Organization Total:207 1,032 2,219$ 2.15$ 2,218$ 2.15$ 1.8%2.3%6.9%6.4%7.5% Recorded Owner: Mariners Key Owner LLC 1 10 (1) 2 (2) 5-Year Absorption:10 Asking Rent Concessions:-0.05%Annual Average:2 Village at Mangonia Lake 2019 7.56 1 BR 72 30%615 1,367$ 2.22$ 1,353$ 2.20$ 29.6% Mid-rise Elevator Class A acres 2 BR 168 70%855 1,673 1.96 1,657 1.94 71 2201 N. Australian Avenue 6 floors 0.69 3 BR - 0%- - - - - West Palm Beach 227,651 True Owner: AHS Development Group Total:240 783 1,581$ 2.02$ 1,566$ 2.00$ 35.9%74.2%100.0%- - Recorded Owner: Village at Mangonia Lake LLC 92 62 - - - 5-Year Absorption:154 Asking Rent Concessions:-0.95%Annual Average:77 Emara Palm Beach 2021 11.12 Studio 9 4%635 1,677$ 2.64$ 1,677$ 2.64$ 100.0% Low-rise Garden Delivery acres 1 BR 82 33%848 1,944 2.29 1,944 2.29 250 12155 US Highway 1 Class A 0.59 2 BR 131 52%1,256 2,646 2.11 2,646 2.11 North Palm Beach 3 floors 286,295 3 BR 28 11%1,661 3,924 2.36 3,924 2.36 True Owner: Fairway Investments Total:250 1,145 2,524$ 2.20$ 2,524$ 2.20$ 100.0% Recorded Owner: OHFP North Palm LLC - 5-Year Absorption:- Asking Rent Concessions:0.00%Annual Average:- Solara at City Centre 2021 3.21 1 BR 76 56%708 1,864$ 2.63$ 1,864$ 2.63$ 100.0% Mid-rise Elevator Delivery acres 2 BR 52 38%1,034 2,380 2.30 2,380 2.30 136 2100 PGA Boulevard Class A 0.84 3 BR 8 6%1,228 2,546 2.07 2,546 2.07 Palm Beach Gardens 5 floors 117,400 True Owner: AW Real Estate Mgmt. LLC Total:136 863 2,102$ 2.44$ 2,102$ 2.44$ 100.0% Recorded Owner: City Centre Housing LLC - 5-Year Absorption:- Asking Rent Concessions:0.00%Annual Average:- COMPARABLES ANALYSIS (Primary):463 Total/Weighted Average 833 967 2,108$ 2.18$ 55.6%59.4%38.3%53.5%3.2%3.8% Total Unit Absorption (2016-2020):93 71 (1) 2 (2) Annual Average 33 Per Month 5-Year Vacancy & Absorption Analysis WTL+a WTL +a Real Estate & Economic Advisors Washington, DC—Cape Cod, MA 301.502.4171 508.214.0915 85 Table 27 (Continued): Profile of Selected Multi-family Properties Year Built Site Size Class &Densities &Unit No. of %Size Asking Rent Effective Rent Current Project/Location Height Bldg. Area Type Units Dist.(In SF)Rent Per SF Rent Per SF 2021 2020 2019 2018 2017 2016 Secondary Comparables The Abbey at Northlake 1987/2015 40.26 1 BR 168 32%650 1,235$ 1.90$ 1,235$ 1.90$ 0.8% Low-rise Garden Class C acres 2 BR 190 37%786 1,340 1.70 1,340 1.70 4 2304 W. Congress Avenue 2 floors 0.25 3 BR 162 31%950 1,599 1.68 1,599 1.68 West Palm Beach 433,243 True Owner: Joe Ciccarello Total:520 793 1,387$ 1.75$ 1,387$ 1.75$ 2.5%4.9%3.1%4.6%4.6% Recorded Owner: DXM-Northlake LLC 12 (9) 8 - 33 5-Year Absorption:44 Asking Rent Concessions:0.00%Annual Average:9 Woodbine Apt. Homes 2000 19.24 1 BR 132 32%751 1,571$ 2.09$ 1,566$ 2.09$ 0.8% Low-rise Garden Class B acres 2 BR 204 50%1,078 1,808 1.68 1,802 1.67 3 9000 Woodbine Trail 3 floors 0.50 3 BR 72 18%1,311 2,100 1.60 2,093 1.60 Riviera Beach 416,171 True Owner: Morguard N. American Residential REIT Total:408 1,013 1,783$ 1.76$ 1,777$ 1.75$ 4.0%4.8%4.1%5.0%2.6% Recorded Owner: Morguard Woodbine LLC 3 (3) 4 (10) 4 5-Year Absorption:(2) Asking Rent Concessions:-0.34%Annual Average:(0.3) Sanctuary Cove 1996/2017 32.80 1 BR 113 27%866 1,490$ 1.72$ 1,484$ 1.71$ 2.3% Low-rise Garden Class B acres 2 BR 190 45%1,175 1,676 1.43 1,669 1.42 10 700 Sanctuary Cove Drive 3 floors 0.33 3 BR 117 28%1,335 1,885 1.41 1,878 1.41 North Palm Beach 472,500 True Owner: Olen Properties Total:420 1,137 1,684$ 1.48$ 1,677$ 1.47$ 3.4%10.2%10.5%11.5%23.2% Recorded Owner: Sanctuary Bay Trust Corp.29 1 4 49 (13) 5-Year Absorption:70 Asking Rent Concessions:-0.42%Annual Average:14 COMPARABLES ANALYSIS (Secondary):17 Total/Weighted Average 1,348 967 1,599$ 1.65$ 1.3%3.3%6.6%5.9%7.0%10.1% Total Unit Absorption (2016-2020):44 (11) 16 39 23 Annual Average 22 Per Month 5-Year Vacancy & Absorption Analysis WTL+a WTL +a Real Estate & Economic Advisors Washington, DC—Cape Cod, MA 301.502.4171 508.214.0915 86 Table 27 (Continued): Profile of Selected Multi-family Properties Year Built Site Size Class &Densities &Unit No. of %Size Asking Rent Effective Rent Current Project/Location Height Bldg. Area Type Units Dist.(In SF)Rent Per SF Rent Per SF 2021 2020 2019 2018 2017 2016 Tertiary Comparables Humani Court 1975 3.06 1 BR 10 17%650 1,077$ 1.66$ 1,067$ 1.64$ 2.9% 806 9th Street Class C acres 2 BR 40 67%800 1,229 1.54 1,225 1.53 2 Lake Park 2 floors 0.35 3 BR 10 17%1,150 1,722 1.50 1,718 1.49 46,150 True Owner: Anthony Gironta Total:60 833 1,286$ 1.54$ 1,281$ 1.54$ 3.1%3.4%5.0%5.1%3.8% Recorded Owner: Humani Courts LLC 0.2 1.0 0.1 (0.8) - 5-Year Absorption:0.4 Asking Rent Concessions:-0.4%Annual Average:N/A Lake Park Manors 2018 0.39 1 BR - 0%- -$ -$ -$ -$ 4.3% 105 2nd Street Class A acres 2 BR 3 60%- - - - - 0.2 Lake Park 2 floors 1.18 3 BR 2 40%- - - - - 20,000 True Owner: Anastasia Vlasyuk Total:5 - -$ 4.7%5.3%52.5%100.0%N/A Recorded Owner: Lake Park Manors LLC 0 2 2 - - 3-Year Absorption:4.8 Asking Rent Concessions:N/A Annual Average:1.6 Cedar Crest 1982 0.20 1 BR 49 100%736 -$ -$ -$ -$ 4.3% 12 E Ilex Drive Class C acres 2 BR - 0%- - - - - 2 Lake Park 2 floors 4.83 3 BR - 0%- - - - - 42,044 True Owner: Sami Baghdady Total:49 736 -$ -$ -$ -$ 4.7%5.3%5.3%6.7%5.1% Recorded Owner: Sami J Baghdady 0.3 - 1 (1) - 5-Year Absorption:0.2 Asking Rent Concessions:N/A Annual Average:N/A Evergreen Manor 1971 0.67 1 BR 1 6%700 857$ 1.22$ 855$ 1.22$ 4.1% 921 Evergreen Drive Class C acres 2 BR 17 94%1,000 1,054 1.05 1,048 1.05 1 Lake Park 2 floors 0.61 3 BR - 0%- 17,706 True Owner: Buy Here Pay Here RE LLC Total:18 983 1,043$ 1.06$ 1,038$ 1.06$ 4.5%5.0%5.0%6.3%4.9% Recorded Owner: 730 Whitmore LLC 0.1 - 0.2 (0.3) - 5-Year Absorption:0.1 Asking Rent Concessions:-0.5%Annual Average:N/A Opabola Square 1962 1.00 1 BR - 0%- -$ -$ -$ -$ 0.0% 923 Magnolia Drive Class C acres 2 BR 32 57%1,000 1,016 1.02 1,014 1.01 - Lake Park 2 floors 1.43 3 BR 24 43%1,200 1,319 1.10 1,315 1.10 62,226 True Owner: Equinox Realty Inc.Total:56 1,086 1,146$ 1.06$ 1,143$ 1.05$ 0.0%1.3%2.7%4.2%5.1% Recorded Owner: Amoc Holdings LLC 0.7 0.8 0.8 0.5 - 5-Year Absorption:3 Asking Rent Concessions:-0.26%Annual Average:N/A COMPARABLES ANALYSIS (Tertiary):11 Total/Weighted Average 134 958.96 1,195$ 1.25$ 8.1%3.1%3.8%12.9%21.5%5.3% Total Unit Absorption (2016-2020):2 14 3 1 (2) Annual Average 4 Source: CoStar, Inc.; WTL+a, May 2021. 5-Year Vacancy & Absorption Analysis Per Month WTL+a WTL +a Real Estate & Economic Advisors Washington, DC—Cape Cod, MA 301.502.4171 508.214.0915 87 In conclusion, the area’s housing market reflects stabilized market conditions—with solid occupancies among rental properties; increasing values among owner-occupied properties; limited new residential development over the past five years; and, ongoing lease-up (absorption) activity in recently-delivered multi-family properties. Marina Key, Lake Park Village at Mangonia Park, West Palm Beach Emara Palm Beach, North Palm Beach Solara City Centre, Palm Beach Gardens WTL+a WTL +a Real Estate & Economic Advisors Washington, DC—Cape Cod, MA 301.502.4171 508.214.0915 88 Workplace—Office WTL+a evaluated development potentials for “workplace” uses including multi-tenant/speculative office for professional/business services and medical office uses. (In such an analysis, it is not possible to evaluate development potentials for specific end-users—also known as “build-to -suits”— as such deals are based on specific recruitment strategies and terms, including the amount of space to be occupied, and are negotiated on a case-by-case basis). A profile of market conditions in each municipality’s office sector was prepared to:  Understand the overall competitive market position for speculative/multi-tenant office uses on the Twin City Mall site, based on key performance metrics (total inventory, construction deliveries, net annual absorption/leasing activity, vacant stock, vacancy rates, and rental rates);  Inform the evaluation of workplace/office development potentials based on the findings in this profile; and  Guide the TCRPC planning team’s evaluation of development scenarios to ensure that uses such as office physically fit and are sufficiently marketable. Key findings in each municipality’s office market are summarized below: Town of Lake Park  As illustrated in Table 28, Lake Park has an extremely limited office inventory. There are only 57,566 sq. ft. of speculative office space in 13 buildings as tracked by CoStar, Inc. The Town accounts for only 0.10% of Palm Beach County’s 57.9 million sq. ft. of office space and is a tertiary office submarket. Lake Park’s share of the County’s supply has remained flat since 2007;  Between 2007 and 2012, office vacancies ranged between 6% and 12%. However, since 2013 the Town’s office vacancy rate has increased—to 17% in 2013, 19.5% in 20 17, and 20% in 2019. Notably, with positive net absorption of 8,860 sq. ft. in 2020 (during the COVID pandemic no less), the office vacancy rate dropped to stabilized levels of 4.6%;  No new office space was built in Lake Park between 2007 and 2019 as new office construction was built elsewhere in Palm Beach County; WTL+a WTL +a Real Estate & Economic Advisors Washington, DC—Cape Cod, MA 301.502.4171 508.214.0915 89 Table 28: Office Market Profile—Town of Lake Park, 2007—2020 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Total Ann'l Avg.% CAGR Office Inventory 57,566 57,566 57,566 57,566 57,566 57,566 57,566 57,566 57,566 57,566 57,566 57,566 57,566 57,566 - As % of County 0.11%0.10%0.10%0.10%0.10%0.10%0.10%0.10%0.10%0.10%0.10%0.10%0.10%0.10% No. of Buildings/Centers 13 13 13 13 13 13 13 13 13 13 13 13 13 13 - Vacant Stock 5,670 6,684 6,499 3,989 3,439 5,439 9,816 5,839 6,339 10,192 11,217 10,192 11,492 2,632 (3,038) Vacancy Rate 9.8%11.6%11.3%6.9%6.0%9.4%17.1%10.1%11.0%17.7%19.5%17.7%20.0%4.6%-5.7% Net Absorption:9,100 (1,014) 185 2,510 550 (2,000) (4,377) 3,977 (500) (3,853) (1,025) 1,025 (1,300) 8,860 12,138 867 Past 5 Years 3,707 741 Construction Deliveries - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Gross Rent/SF 21.50$ 16.18$ 14.96$ 10.89$ 11.08$ 11.63$ 15.13$ 13.55$ 17.43$ 17.80$ 21.26$ 22.20$ 18.79$ -$ -1.0% Average Annual % Change - -24.7%-7.5%-27.2%1.7%5.0%30.1%-10.4%28.6%2.1%19.4%4.4%-15.4%N/A Base Rent/SF (NNN)11.73$ 11.70$ 11.86$ 10.73$ 10.81$ 11.63$ 13.18$ 13.18$ 12.44$ 11.48$ 13.47$ 20.74$ 12.60$ 25.00$ 0.6% Source: CoStar, Inc.; WTL+a, May 2021. Change: 2007-2020National Recession & Recovery WTL+a WTL +a Real Estate & Economic Advisors Washington, DC—Cape Cod, MA 301.502.4171 508.214.0915 90  As a result of increasing vacancy rates, net office absorption was extremely limited over the past 14 years—totaling only 12,130 sq. ft. and averaging less than 900 sq. ft. per year. Over the past five years, net absorption weakened to 740 sq. ft. per year between 2016 and 2020 (3,700 sq. ft. total); and  Illustrative of other impacts attributable to limited absorption, gross office rents decreased between 2007 and 2011—from $21.50 per sq. ft. to $11.08 per sq. ft. Office rents in Lake Park fluctuated between $11 and $15 per sq. ft. between 2012 and 2014. Since 2015, however, office rents have rebounded—between $17 and $22 per sq. ft. through 2019. Lake Park is a Tertiary Office Market with Limited Inventory & Annual Net Absorption of 740 SF/Year Past 5 Years Village of North Palm Beach  As illustrated in Table 29, North Palm Beach contains almost 1,081,300 sq. ft. of speculative office space in 68 buildings as tracked by CoStar, Inc. The Village accounts for 1.9 % of Palm Beach County’s 57.9 million sq. ft. of office space and is a tertiary office submarket. The Village’s share of the County’s supply has remained flat since 2007; WTL+a WTL +a Real Estate & Economic Advisors Washington, DC—Cape Cod, MA 301.502.4171 508.214.0915 91 Table 29: Office Market Profile—Village of North Palm Beach, 2007—2020 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Total Ann'l Avg.% CAGR Office Inventory 1,093,972 1,093,972 1,093,972 1,093,972 1,069,972 1,081,296 1,081,296 1,081,296 1,081,296 1,081,296 1,081,296 1,081,296 1,081,296 1,081,296 (12,676) As % of County 2.0%2.0%1.9%1.9%1.9%1.9%1.9%1.9%1.9%1.9%1.9%1.9%1.9%1.9% No. of Buildings/Centers 68 68 68 68 67 68 68 68 68 68 68 68 68 68 - Vacant Stock 120,952 159,698 207,598 237,991 216,396 205,188 214,995 158,369 103,741 74,598 77,610 103,822 123,497 122,772 1,820 Vacancy Rate 11.1%14.6%19.0%21.8%20.2%19.0%19.9%14.6%9.6%6.9%7.2%9.6%11.4%11.4%0.2% Net Absorption:(62,539) (38,746) (47,900) (30,393) (2,405) 22,532 (9,807) 56,626 54,628 29,143 (3,012) (26,212) (19,675) 725 (77,035) (5,503) Past 5 Years (19,031) (3,806) Construction Deliveries - - - - - 11,324 - - - - - - - - 11,324 Gross Rent/SF 24.87$ 23.42$ 20.16$ 19.14$ 18.65$ 18.31$ 19.34$ 21.17$ 21.22$ 21.69$ 26.35$ 24.02$ 22.81$ 24.89$ -0.7% Average Annual % Change - -5.8%-13.9%-5.1%-2.6%-1.8%5.6%9.5%0.2%2.2%21.5%-8.8%-5.0%9.1% Base Rent/SF (NNN)18.52$ 17.34$ 16.16$ 14.66$ 15.33$ 15.17$ 15.49$ 17.13$ 17.31$ 18.21$ 21.04$ 18.39$ 18.83$ 20.50$ 0.1% Source: CoStar, Inc.; WTL+a, May 2021. National Recession & Recovery Change: 2007-2020 WTL+a WTL +a Real Estate & Economic Advisors Washington, DC—Cape Cod, MA 301.502.4171 508.214.0915 92  Office vacancies in North Palm Beach peaked at 21.8% in 2010 as the economy emerged from the 2007—2009 recession. Over the next six years, vacancies declined to 7% in 2017. However, over the past three years, office vacancy rates increased—to 9.6% in 2018 and 11.4% in both 2019 and 2020;  Only 11,324 sq. ft. of new office space was built in North Palm Beach between 2007 and 2019, as new office construction was built elsewhere in Palm Beach County;  Net office absorption has been uneven over the past 14 years, as there were nine years of negative absorption and only five years of positive absorption village-wide. In fact, North Palm Beach lost over 77,000 sq. ft. of occupied office space between 2007 —2020; and  Coinciding with negative net absorption between 2007 and 2012, gross rents declined—from $24.87 per sq. ft. in 2007 to $18.31 per sq. ft. in 2012. Conversely, during three years of positive net absorption, gross rents increased—from $19.34 per sq. ft. in 2013 to $26.35 per sq. ft. in 2017. Over the past three years office rents have been in the range of $23 to $25 per sq. ft. on a gross basis. The Village’s Office Market is clustered on U.S. 1; Overall Net Absorption over Past 14 Years is Negative: -77,000 SF WTL+a WTL +a Real Estate & Economic Advisors Washington, DC—Cape Cod, MA 301.502.4171 508.214.0915 93 In conclusion, the extent to which office occupancies and rents in the Town and Village can be strengthened will depend on multiple factors over the near-term, including growth in specific business and office-using sectors, transition of home-based businesses into leased space, rental/occupancy costs compared to competing nearby locations, etc. Opportunities and strategies to increase commercial office as a viable use as part of redevelopment of the Twin City Mall site are explored in Sections 5 and 6 of this report. General Retail WTL+a and RDS LLC most frequently utilize CoStar, Inc., a national commercial real estate database, as the most reliable data source to evaluate market characteristics and metrics associated with specific land uses (residential, commercial office/workplace, industrial, and retail). CoStar data is aggregated from information provided through its network of realtors/brokers and other real estate industry sources. It is considered the most accurate resource to evaluate real estate industry performance. However, WTL+a and RDS LLC have determined that CoStar’s retail database, in multiple markets, is insufficiently reported, as retail brokers focus on established shopping centers, mixed-use projects completed by major property owners/investors and projects with national “credit” tenants, usually defined as chain-affiliated retail stores. In “non-mall” areas, particularly those with fragmented ownership, a mix of national retailers and locally owned businesses and older/smaller commercial buildings, CoStar data can be seriously underreported. These environments are not as lucrative or easily leased as malls and larger community shopping centers, so CoStar data is not readily available or reported. In other Florida locations, reporting by commercial brokers is more complete , and CoStar information can be considered accurate. In other locations, however, particularly older commercial districts and corridors, as much as one-third of existing retail space is unaccounted in CoStar’s data. We note that Florida’s County Property Appraiser records are among the best and most accessible in the U.S., but Appraiser records for multi-tenant retail properties are reported only for total size (in square feet); records on individual business spaces, such as retail category, vacant space, and annual net absorption over time—all elements to better understand overall retail mix, store counts and available space—are excluded. To address this data issue, WTL+a and RDS LLC have developed a methodology to conduct back- up inventories of existing retail space that documents the following: WTL+a WTL +a Real Estate & Economic Advisors Washington, DC—Cape Cod, MA 301.502.4171 508.214.0915 94  Retail businesses by name  Each business is sorted into a specific retail category, and  Estimated size (in square feet) for each business Total estimated square footage of all retail space and sub -totals by retail category are useful indicators to identify potential new space and the types of businesses that best reflect potential spending and capture rates of household spending on soft goods, consumer services, food & beverage, groceries, etc. This information is also useful in providing perspective on whether specific areas are over-supplied with particular types of retail categories. For purposes of this analysis, the following categories and totaled: Retail Mix Analysis Categories  Retail—specialty retail stores, apparel, shoes, accessories, gifts, furniture and household goods, anchor/freestanding department stores, ‘big box’ stores, pawn shops, etc.  Food & Beverage/Grocery—full-service and casual dining restaurants, fast food and carry-out food service, liquor and juice bars, produce and meat stores, grocery stores, convenience stores, liquor stores, etc.  Consumer Services—hair and nail salons, beauty supplies, dry cleaners, repair services, travel services, etc.  Finance, Insurance & Real Estate (FIRE)—banks, walk-in insurance agency offices, real estate sales and management offices, financial advisors, credit companies, etc.  Professional Offices—medical offices, chiropractic and acupuncture offices, dentists, storefront law offices, other storefront professional services, etc. occupying street-level/storefront commercial space  Automotive—automotive sales dealerships and services, used car sales, auto repair, tire stores, auto parts, gas stations (enclosed structures only), etc., and  Vacant—existing commercial space unoccupied or available for lease at the time of the inventory. Although not considered a traditional “retailer,” automotive sales and services generate sales taxes, occupy large parcels that frequently are sold and converted to other commercial uses when land values warrant the investment returns and create customer traffic. Similarly, FIRE and other storefront-using professional services activate the street and generate traffic to retail districts, so these two categories are included as part of the inventory. Overall sizes for each category are field estimates and reflect total space within a 5% to 10% degree of accuracy; actual square WTL+a WTL +a Real Estate & Economic Advisors Washington, DC—Cape Cod, MA 301.502.4171 508.214.0915 95 footages by building or “improvement” were documented through the Palm Beach County Property Appraiser. As general comment, Florida has traditionally granted entitlements to developers, investors, and owner/occupants for retail as a land use without comparing the amount of existing physical space with what is measured as market supportable. Too often, this practice has resulted in retail entitlements that far exceed what is market supportable and sustainable over time. As a result, this has produced retail space entitlements without any net increase in the amount of supply operating as successful retail space. More often, over-entitlements cause a shift of stronger, market-supportable retail tenants from one commercial project/area to another, thereby increasing vacancy rates in aging retail properties or conversion of space formerly occupied by retail businesses to non-retail uses such as medical facilities, law firms and other professional office, or social service uses. In summary, the continuing over-supply of retail space in multiple Florida locations is well outside what is market sustainable. The national average of retail space per capita (before the COVID 19 pandemic) in the U.S. ranges from approximately 25 sq. ft. per person, potentially up to 50 sq. ft. per capita if all spaces (i.e., mall and non-mall locations) are included. This total includes retail of all types, such as anchor department stores and in-line stores within major malls like Gardens Mall; fast food restaurants on pad sites and along major roadways; “Big Box” stores; consumer service businesses such as hair and nail salons, dry cleaners, and banks; and locally owned specialty retail stores in mixed-use buildings, downtown areas, and automobile-oriented strip shopping centers. WTL+a and RDS note that all these store types exist in large quantities in and around the Twin City Mall site. This is due, in part, to the presence of major malls, including Gardens Mall, and surrounding properties (e.g., Downtown at the Gardens, Legacy Place, the former Loehmann’s Plaza, etc.). These centers comprise approximately 43% of the existing retail supply within three miles of the Twin City Mall site. Town of Lake Park Performance Metrics from CoStar Retail Data As the primary commercial component, particularly in Lake Park, retail land uses play a disproportionate role in generating real estate tax revenues in this part of Palm Beach County. According to CoStar, Inc., Palm Beach County contains 79,631,653 sq. ft. of retail space (as of 2Q/2021). CoStar retail performance data for Lake Park is summarized below. WTL+a WTL +a Real Estate & Economic Advisors Washington, DC—Cape Cod, MA 301.502.4171 508.214.0915 96 CoStar information is followed by the more detailed RDS retail inventory. While the RDS inventory illustrated below is more exhaustive, it does not analyze key metrics over time—such as annual net absorption, new construction deliveries, or changes in retail rents, as CoStar is the only commercial real estate database that tracks such metrics over time.  As tracked by CoStar, Inc. and illustrated in Table 30, Lake Park contains a reported 908,700 sq. ft. of retail space in 59 retail centers/buildings, comprising approximately 1.1% of the County’s total retail supply in four primary locations: o Downtown Lake Park/Park Avenue o Congress Avenue corridor o Northlake Boulevard corridor o U.S. Highway 1 corridor  CoStar estimates that there was only 30,700 sq. ft. of vacant retail space (including direct vacancies and sublet space) in 2020, reflecting a vacancy rate of 3.4%. Retail vacancies in Lake Park have fluctuated over the past 14 years. Surprisingly, recession-based vacancies remained at stabilized levels of 4% to 5% between 2008 and 2012. Vacancies peaked in the range of 13% to 14% in 2015 and 2016, and they have been stabilized in the range of 3 % to 4% since 2018;  While vacancies are low, net annual retail absorption totaled 114,640 sq. ft., averaging less than 8,200 sq. ft. per year over the past 14 years. However, net absorption strengthened over the past five years to almost 102,900 sq. ft., averaging almost 20,600 sq. ft. per year;  CoStar data suggest that approximately 101,900 sq. ft. of new retail space was built in Lake Park between 2007 and 2020, including: o 260 N. Congress Avenue (Culver’s, 4,765 sq. ft., 2019) o 400 N. Congress Avenue (Kohl’s, 97,109 sq. ft., 2009)  Three Big Box stores were built on the Congress Avenue corridor between 2003 and 2006, including: Lowe’s (134,727 sq. ft., 2003), Target (112,294 sq. ft., 2005) and Walmart (214,698 sq. ft. 2006); and WTL+a WTL +a Real Estate & Economic Advisors Washington, DC—Cape Cod, MA 301.502.4171 508.214.0915 97  Base (triple net) retail rents in Lake Park declined in the national recession and subsequent recovery years—dropping from $12.66 per sq. ft. in 2008 to $11.06 per sq. ft. in 2011. Retail rents increased thereafter—steadily increasing to $19.73 per sq. ft. by year-end 2019. Notably, rents dropped by 21.5% in 2020 (as a direct result of the COVID pandemic) to $15.49 per sq. ft. Declines in retail rents could also be attributed to reduced sales/rents, fewer available retail tenants because of national retail industry trends/bankruptcies, and/or other factors. WTL+a WTL +a Real Estate & Economic Advisors Washington, DC—Cape Cod, MA 301.502.4171 508.214.0915 98 Table 30: Retail Market Profile—Town of Lake Park, 2007—2020 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Total Ann'l Avg.% CAGR Inventory 806,865 903,974 903,974 903,974 903,974 903,974 903,974 903,974 903,974 903,974 903,974 903,974 908,739 908,739 101,874 As % of County 1.1%1.2%1.2%1.2%1.2%1.2%1.2%1.2%1.1%1.1%1.1%1.1%1.1%1.1% No. of Buildings/Centers 57 58 58 58 58 58 58 58 58 58 58 58 59 59 Vacant Stock 93,226 43,855 40,861 35,689 34,564 30,897 40,900 40,410 128,745 121,555 79,224 34,147 39,361 30,654 (62,572) Vacancy Rate 11.6%4.9%4.5%3.9%3.8%3.4%4.5%4.5%14.2%13.4%8.8%3.8%4.3%3.4%-9.0% Net Absorption:(49,800) 146,480 2,994 5,172 1,125 3,667 (10,003) 490 (88,335) 7,190 42,331 45,077 (449) 8,707 114,646 8,189 Past 5 Years 102,856 20,571 Construction Deliveries - 97,109 - - - - - - - - - - 4,765 - 101,874 Gross Rent/SF 12.96$ 14.05$ 13.30$ 11.45$ 10.80$ 11.63$ 12.27$ 13.37$ 13.63$ 14.09$ 17.81$ 16.26$ 18.65$ 17.96$ 2.5% Average Annual % Change - 8.4%-5.3%-13.9%-5.7%7.7%5.5%9.0%1.9%3.4%26.4%-8.7%14.7%-3.7% Base Rent/SF (NNN)12.06$ 12.66$ 13.47$ 10.59$ 9.00$ 11.31$ 12.55$ 12.48$ 12.94$ 15.72$ 31.86$ 21.31$ 19.73$ 15.49$ 1.9% Source: CoStar, Inc.; WTL+a, May 2021. National Recession & Recovery Change: 2007-2020 WTL+a WTL +a Real Estate & Economic Advisors Washington, DC—Cape Cod, MA 301.502.4171 508.214.0915 99 RDS Retail Inventory To better understand the actual store mix and amount of existing space, a more comprehensive field inventory was prepared within three miles of the Twin City Mall site. The I-95 corridor marks the western edge of primary retail competition for the site; the boundary of Riviera Beach forms the southern limit; Oakbrook Center in Palm Beach Gardens form s the northern edge ; and the concentration of major retail developments in Palm Beach Gardens (east of I-95) forms the western boundary. The results of this field inventory suggest a vastly different supply of total retail space than CoStar data. At the time of the field data inventory (May 2021), there was almost 6.7 million sq. ft. of total retail space within a three-mile radius; approximately 11.4% of the retail inventory was vacant (over 760,000 sq. ft.). RDS LLC identified 10 separate retail sub-districts comprising the existing retail supply, with four located in Lake Park; three located in North Palm Beach; and three zones encompassing selected nearby retail concentrations outside these municipal boundaries that will remain strong competition for any incremental retail space considered as part of Twin City Mall’s redevelopment planning. For purposes of geographic definition, retail concentrations are defined by facing roadways. In specific cases, retail is totaled for both sides of the street/boulevard while others are separated by the municipality in which the retail area is located (e.g., Northlake Boulevard’s inventory is separated into north (in the Village of North Palm Beach) and south (in the Town of Lake Park). Table 31 illustrates the more detailed inventory by geographic sub-zone. Key findings indicate that:  There is a total of 6.67 million sq. ft. of retail space located within a three-mile radius of the Twin City Mall site;  1.959 million sq. ft. are in Lake Park (29%)  1.813 million sq. ft. are in North Palm Beach (27%), and  2.893 million sq. ft. include and surround the Gardens Mall (43%). This includes selected retail centers immediately adjacent to the boundaries of North Palm Beach and selected Lake Park- adjacent spaces). WTL+a WTL +a Real Estate & Economic Advisors Washington, DC—Cape Cod, MA 301.502.4171 508.214.0915 100 Table 31: Summary of Area Retail Inventory—by Sub -district, 2020 As noted above, within Lake Park, there are four retail subareas:  Downtown Lake Park —Approximately 0.62 miles in length and containing approximately 140,000 sq. ft. of retail space (7% of the Town’s total) along Park Avenue —from 5th Street to 10th Street—and northwest of the traditional downtown  Congress Avenue—Northwest of downtown Lake Park, between Silver Beach Road on the south and N. Killian Drive on the north (approximately 0.86 miles in length), and containing multiple Big-Box stores (Target, Walmart, Kohl’s, and Lowe’s), with almost 514,000 sq. ft. of retail (26% of the Town’s total) No.Subarea Approximate Length (In Miles) In SF As % of Total No. of Retail Businesses In SF % Vacant No. of Vacant Spaces Town of Lake Park (Municipal Boundaries Only) 1 Downtown Lake Park 0.62 139,432 7%53 37,080 27%9 2 Congress Avenue Corridor 0.86 514,195 26%11 - 0%- 3 Northlake Boulevard (South Side Only) (1)1.64 942,717 48%284 93,129 10%25 4 U.S. Route 1 0.82 363,639 19%388 186,306 51%34 Subtotal:1,959,983 29%736 316,515 16.1%68 North Palm Beach 5 Northlake Boulevard (North Side Only) (2)1.31 565,655 31%128 16,458 3%6 6 Old Dixie Highway/SR 811 (East/West Sides) (3)0.58 285,656 16%62 40,048 14%9 7 U.S. Route 1 (North of Northlake) (4)2.58 962,495 53%194 216,352 22%34 Subtotal:1,813,806 27%384 272,858 15.0%49 Selected Nearby Retail Concentrations 8 PGA Blvd (Mall Entrance East to U.S. 1)1.51 419,967 15%83 25,335 3%4 9 Malls & Surrounding Areas (5)- 2,193,966 76%216 532,712 73%TBD 10 U.S. Route 1 (NPB Boundary to PGA Blvd.)0.30 279,415 10%36 171,528 24%15 Subtotal:2,893,348 43%335 729,575 25.2%19 TOTAL:6,667,137 100%1,455 1,318,948 19.8%136 Plus Others Field estimates may not exactly match properties & jurisdictions, but reflect total square footage of existing retail (1)Includes the south side of Northlake Boulevard located in Lake Park. (2)Includes the north side of Northlake Boulevard, from I-95 to U.S. 1, in North Palm Beach. (3)Includes Prosperity Farms Road. (4)Includes north of Northlake Boulevard to Juno Road in Juno Beach; includes retail properties located within North Palm Beach and selected adjacent retail in neighboring jurisdictions. (5)All malls and retail locations from I-95 on the west to Kew Gardens Avenue on the east; PGA Boulevard on the south and Gardens Parkway on the north. Vacant spaces not verified. Source: RDS LLC; Palm Beach County Property Appraiser; WTL+a, revised September 2021. Total Retail Space Vacant Space WTL+a WTL +a Real Estate & Economic Advisors Washington, DC—Cape Cod, MA 301.502.4171 508.214.0915 101  Northlake Boulevard (south side only within Lake Park)—Approximately 1.64 mile s in length , and comprising an auto-related corridor and major east-west arterial; the south side of Northlake Boulevard contains 942,700 sq. ft. of retail space (48% of the total), and  Federal Highway/U.S. Route 1 (from the municipal boundary to Silver Beach Road)—With approximately 0.82 miles in length and containing 363,600 sq. ft. of retail space (19% of the total). At the time of the inventory, Lake Park had 736 retail spaces in these four sub -districts. There are 68 retail vacancies with 316,515 sq. ft. of vacant space, reflecting an overall vacancy of 16.1%. Fully half of these vacant spaces are located along Park Avenue in downtown Lake Park. The Town’s retail vacancy rate is well-above the acceptable industry standard “stabilized” vacancy rate of 5%. We note that Lake Park’s regional market retail drawing power is significantly greater than what resident households could support. In fact, as noted in Section 3, annual retail spending inflow into Lake Park totals more than $169.4 million per year. The larger stores on Congress Avenue (Walmart, Lowe’s Target, Kohl’s) attract regional as well as local spending, drawing customers from well beyond the boundaries of Lake Park. From the standpoint of consumer behaviors and preferences, Congress Avenue’s retail cluster is considered equivalent extensions of the regional identity/drawing power of the Gardens Mall and its neighboring major retail developments. Village of North Palm Beach Performance Metrics from CoStar Retail Data CoStar retail performance data for North Palm Beach is summarized below. CoStar information precedes the more detailed RDS retail inventory. While the RDS inventory illustrated below is more exhaustive, it does not analyze key metrics over time—such as annual net absorption, new construction deliveries or changes in retail rents, as CoStar is the only commercial real estate database that tracks such metrics over time.  As tracked by CoStar, Inc. and illustrated in Table 32, North Palm Beach contains a reported 1,285,500 sq. ft. of retail space in 106 retail centers/buildings, comprising approximately WTL+a WTL +a Real Estate & Economic Advisors Washington, DC—Cape Cod, MA 301.502.4171 508.214.0915 102 1.6% of the County’s total retail supply. Like Lake Park, CoStar data likely under-reports the amount of retail space in the Village, particularly in locally owned, small retail centers and pad sites. o Northlake Boulevard corridor o U.S. Highway 1 corridor, including above the intersection of PGA Boulevard (properties have a North Palm Beach address but are in unincorporated Palm Beach County) o Prosperity Farms Road corridor  While the inventory illustrated below is more exhaustive, it does not analyze key metrics over time—such as annual net absorption, new construction deliveries or changes in retail rents. As CoStar is the only commercial real estate database that tracks such metrics over time. Accordingly, CoStar estimates that there was 81,700 sq. ft. of vacant retail space (including direct vacancies and sublet space) in 2020, reflecting a vacancy rate of 6.4%. Retail vacancies in North Palm Beach have fluctuated over the past 14 years, peaking at 14.3% in 2010. Vacancies declined to 2.2% in 2017, but they have since increased to 9.1% in 2019;  Even as vacancies declined overall net absorption was negative over the past 14 years. However, since 2016 net annual retail absorption totaled only 3,990 sq. ft., averaging only 800 sq. ft. per year between 2016 and 2020;  CoStar data suggest that only 15,400 sq. ft. of new retail space was built in North Palm Beach between 2007 and 2020, including: o 555 Northlake Boulevard (Flagler Bank, 10,000 sq. ft., 2008) o 124 U.S. 1 (Dairy Queen, 3,100 sq. ft., 2016) o 900 U.S. 1 (Sunoco, 2,337 sq. ft., 2007), and  Base (triple net) retail rents in North Palm Beach declined in the national recession and subsequent recovery years—dropping from $19.73 per sq. ft. in 2009 to $11.48 per sq. ft. in 2012. Retail rents increased thereafter, rising to $22.52 per sq. ft. by 2020. WTL+a WTL +a Real Estate & Economic Advisors Washington, DC—Cape Cod, MA 301.502.4171 508.214.0915 103 Table 32: Retail Market Profile—Village of North Palm Beach, 2007—2020 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Total Ann'l Avg.% CAGR Inventory 1,342,047 1,325,872 1,325,872 1,325,872 1,325,872 1,325,872 1,316,492 1,316,492 1,309,642 1,285,492 1,285,492 1,285,492 1,285,492 1,285,492 (56,555) As % of County 1.8%1.7%1.7%1.7%1.7%1.7%1.7%1.7%1.7%1.6%1.6%1.6%1.6%1.6% No. of Buildings/Centers 111 108 108 108 108 108 107 107 106 106 106 106 106 106 Vacant Stock 157,297 93,031 107,967 189,202 158,418 123,233 126,810 127,662 109,886 46,418 28,137 75,265 117,074 81,746 (75,551) Vacancy Rate 11.7%7.0%8.1%14.3%11.9%9.3%9.6%9.7%8.4%3.6%2.2%5.9%9.1%6.4%-4.6% Net Absorption:(36,280) 48,091 (14,936) (81,235) 30,784 35,185 (12,957) (852) 10,926 39,318 18,281 (47,128) (41,809) 35,328 (17,284) (1,235) Past 5 Years 3,990 798 Construction Deliveries 2,337 10,000 - - - - - - - 3,100 - - - - 15,437 Gross Rent/SF 18.05$ 18.72$ 18.95$ 15.57$ 14.17$ 11.65$ 11.72$ 11.71$ 13.04$ 14.10$ 26.02$ 22.49$ 21.99$ 22.45$ 1.69% Average Annual % Change - 3.7%1.2%-17.8%-9.0%-17.8%0.6%-0.1%11.4%8.1%84.5%-13.6%-2.2%2.1% Base Rent/SF (NNN)18.05$ 19.28$ 19.73$ 15.92$ 14.17$ 11.48$ 11.64$ 11.54$ 12.46$ 12.50$ 26.39$ 22.55$ 21.96$ 22.52$ 1.72% Source: CoStar, Inc.; WTL+a, May 2021. National Recession & Recovery Change: 2007-2020 WTL+a WTL +a Real Estate & Economic Advisors Washington, DC—Cape Cod, MA 301.502.4171 508.214.0915 104 RDS Retail Inventory As illustrated previously in Table 31 above , North Palm Beach’s retail inventory clusters in three areas:  Northlake Boulevard—The north side of Northlake Boulevard is located within the municipal boundaries of North Palm Beach and includes 565,655 sq. ft. of space between I-95 and U.S. Route 1/Federal Highway (31% of the Village total), primarily in smaller strip centers and pad sites along the 1.31-mile corridor. RDS notes this total includes retail space not technically within the Village’s boundaries, but tied to the overall character of Northlake Boulevard  Old Dixie Highway/State Road 811 (from Northlake Boulevard to north of Hinda Road)— This 0.58-mile segment includes almost 285,700 sq. ft. of retail businesses located along the east and west sides of US 1 in the southwe st corner of North Palm Beach (16% of the Village total). Specific businesses in unincorporated Palm Beach County adjacent to the Village boundary (in selected locations north to Hinda Road) are included in this total, and  U.S. Route 1 (from municipal boundary north to PGA Boulevard)—This 2.58-mile corridor contains 962,495 sq. ft. of retail space on both sides of the arterial (53% of the Village total). This commercial corridor is more fragmented with intermittent retail clusters, but it still presents potential competition for the Twin City Mall site as it is the approach to the site from the north. In sum, North Palm Beach’s three retail clusters include 1.83 million sq. ft. in 384 spaces. There are 49 vacancies with 272,858 sq. ft. of vacant space, reflecting an overall vacancy rate of 15%. The Village’s retail inventory is characterized as typical of commercial corridors. Notably, the Village lacks a concentrated, pedestrian-oriented retail “center.” While Lake Park’s Park Avenue sub-district qualifies as pedestrian-friendly in its layout and scale, it still lacks sufficient retail uses/critical mass to be a regional destination. Nearby/Adjacent Retail Concentrations While not within the municipal boundaries of Lake Park or North Palm Beach, these adjacent retail concentrations represent powerful regional destinations and contain with fully 43% of the total 6.6 million sq. ft. of competitive supply affecting retail potentials at the Twin City Mall site. Dominated by The Gardens Mall (1.4 million sq. ft.), the mall and its neighboring properties in Palm Beach Gardens comprise the majority of the 2,893,300+ sq. ft. of retail space in this sub-district. We WTL+a WTL +a Real Estate & Economic Advisors Washington, DC—Cape Cod, MA 301.502.4171 508.214.0915 105 note that the former Loehmann’s Plaza (included as vacant in the inventory) is planned for redevelopment. While Legacy Place and Downtown at the Gardens have different retail concepts, both account for significant concentrations of “mall-oriented” retail space. The Gardens Mall is an upscale enclosed super-regional mall with four major anchors and multiple higher-end in - line stores. Even with the fallout in the regional mall industry, The Gardens Mall has maintained its ability to generate and sustain customer traffic and reportedly high sales productivities (before COVID 19 ). In fact, The Gardens Mall is in the upper tier of super-regional malls nationally, both in its tenant mix and its sustained annual sales (per square foot). The mall also has 10 large surface parking fields (containing 7,700 spaces) that could potentially be redeveloped with residential, office, and mixed-use. This would likely require structured parking to meet parking requirements, but the economic generation provided by The Gardens Mall over the decades since its construction suggest that its site is primed for phased and infill redevelopment and the introduction of new, complementary uses. As other regional malls are closing across the U.S. due to underperformance, the failure of traditional anchor department stores, and shifts in shopping patterns caused by rapid growth of online shopping and exacerbated by the pandemic, The Gardens Mall appears to have emerged as a ‘survivor mall,’ a major destination that will “outlive” retrenchment occurring in the shopping mall industry. A second concentration, Legacy Place , delivered in 2003, was built as a mixed -use, well-landscaped center anchored by “Big-Box” tenants and strong pad/outparcel businesses with abundant surface parking. There are also 384 residential units integrated into the project. If Legacy Place’s anchor tenants remain viable , the center is a strong complement to the Gardens Mall across PGA Boulevard and serves as a destination. Legacy Place has been the subject of various proposals in recent years, and its proximity to neighboring retail centers and high visibility make it a likely redevelopment candidate. WTL+a WTL +a Real Estate & Economic Advisors Washington, DC—Cape Cod, MA 301.502.4171 508.214.0915 106 Third, Downtown at the Gardens represents the newest retail concept on PGA Boulevard—that of a walkable/pedestrian-friendly, open air, two-story center featuring a “lifestyle” mix of stores, restaurants, and entertainment uses on a 49.4-acre site. In 2021, the center’s owners announced a significant redevelopment and expansion plan that will include a 174-room hotel, 280 apartments, and an eight-floor parking garage. While there have been multiple changes in management and store mix since its opening, and amidst ongoing efforts to withstand COVID impacts on businesses, its dining/entertainment uses, proximity to high-income households in Palm Beach Gardens, expansion plan, and adjacency to I-95 should allow Downtown to continue its repositioning and long- term viability. In combination, these three projects create a powerful competitive context for any new retail in the three-mile trade area. This suggests that additional retail included as part of redevelopment of the Twin City Mall site requires consideration of the following:  Total retail inventory in a three-mile area, and  Range and depth of offerings, store mix and quality of existing retail. The presence of almost 6.7 million sq. ft. of existing retail space strongly suggests that any new retail programmed for a redeveloped Twin City Mall site must be carefully planned to provide elements that are not easily found in the area’s existing supply. Moreover, any retail should be created as part of a new concept, not a replica of what already exists nearby. Just as residential potentials for the site (and selected others in the surrounding area) must be transformative to catalyze incremental growth beyond the traditional pace of absorption, so should any new retail provide a consumer experience that is not currently present in the surrounding trade area. WTL+a WTL +a Real Estate & Economic Advisors Washington, DC—Cape Cod, MA 301.502.4171 508.214.0915 107 Hotel/Lodging Palm Beach County WTL+a reviewed data on market conditions for hotel and lodging uses in the communities surrounding Lake Park and North Palm Beach based on performance data provided by STR Global, the industry leader in hotel market data. Performance metrics from this analysis served as the basis to determine hotel/lodging market potentials as part of redevelopment of the Twin City Mall site. In larger population centers and communities with established commercial office concentrations, hotels can serve as an important supporting amenity to corporate and business activity generators, for tourism destinations, and for nearby residential clusters. Hotel quality levels are determined by the depth and sustainability of support from available market segments. In areas with lower spending potentials or more price-sensitive consumers (such as logistics-related markets serving truck drivers and others), market potentials may be best met by a limited-service property (which is defined by the hotel industry to include the absence of an on-site restaurant and limited other amenities such as gyms, meeting/conference/event spaces, swimming pools, spas, etc.) as opposed to higher-priced hotel categories (such as full-service business-oriented hotels, which include all of the above amenities) or destination resort properties oriented toward beaches/waterfronts, golf courses, etc. As illustrated in Table 33, Palm Beach County contains 17,740 hotel rooms, with the County’s two largest submarkets, West Palm Beach containing 4,944 rooms (28% of supply) and Boca Raton containing 4,061 rooms (23% of supply). STR Global categorizes hotel properties into the following class levels:  Economy—properties in this class typically include EconoLodge, Day’s Inn, Extended Stay America, Red Roof Inn, and other smaller, non-chain affiliated properties across the County. This category comprises 14% of the County’s hotel market  Midscale—hotels in this category typically include Best Western, Quality Inn, Sleep Inn, and Wingate by Wyndham. This category comprises only 6% of the County’s hotel market  Upper Midscale—properties in this category typically include the Comfort Inn, Fairfield Inn, Hampton Inn, and Holiday Inn Express & Suites. This category comprises 18% of the County’s hotel market WTL+a WTL +a Real Estate & Economic Advisors Washington, DC—Cape Cod, MA 301.502.4171 508.214.0915 108  Upscale —properties in this class typically include Marriott Courtyard, Hilton Garden Inn, Hyatt Place , and Residence Inn. This category comprises 21% of the County’s hotel market  Upper Upscale—properties in this class typically include Hyatt Regency, Marriott, Sheraton, and Wyndham. This category comprises fully 26% of the County’s hotel market  Luxury—properties in this class typically include international chains such as the Ritz Carlton and W Hotel. There are multiple luxury properties in Palm Beach County—mostly in beach/resort locations—that comprise 15% of the County’s room inventory Hotel occupancies are a principal source of information on both business and leisure travel markets; measures of demand for hotel development follow general industry patterns that identify markets to determine readiness to add more room capacity. The general investment thresholds used in capital markets to assess expansion feasibility for new hotel rooms include Average Daily Rates (ADRs) and sustained average annual room occupancies (allowing for seasonal changes over the year in major visitor markets. The industry benchmark identified for construction feasibility/potential expansion is a sustained annual occupancy level between 65% and 72%. If a market/location sustains an average annual occupancy within these levels (or higher), that location can support additional capacity and warrant development of new hotel rooms. North County Area Hotel Inventory To understand hotel market performance and opportunities for additional new hotel development in the study area, WTL+a obtained hotel performance data from STR Global for 16 selected properties in or surrounding Lake Park/North Palm Beach. There are no hotels in Lake Park, and only one competitive property in North Palm Beach reporting to STR (Super 8 with 102 rooms) (Camelot Lodge does not report). To ensure a thorough competitive context, WTL identified multiple other properties in this area of northern Palm Beach County. It is critical to understand market conditions given the enormity of the impacts on the hotel and hospitality industries from the COVID pandemic as well as the time required for recovery. WTL+a WTL +a Real Estate & Economic Advisors Washington, DC—Cape Cod, MA 301.502.4171 508.214.0915 109 Table 33: Palm Beach County Hotel Inventory, 2020 As % of Upper Upper Total Palm Beach Location (By Rooms)Economy Mid-scale Mid-scale Upscale Upscale Luxury Rooms County (1)(2)(3)(4)(5)(6) West Palm Beach 600 584 821 1,356 1,583 - 4,944 27.9% Boca Raton 183 144 690 948 1,049 1,047 4,061 22.9% Palm Beach Gardens - 95 199 554 778 - 1,626 9.2% Delray Beach 17 69 124 559 304 154 1,227 6.9% Palm Beach - - 98 - - 1,101 1,199 6.8% Jupiter - 52 317 128 347 - 844 4.8% Boynton Beach 185 100 373 170 - - 828 4.7% Riviera Beach/Singer Isl 271 - - 31 412 - 714 4.0% Lake Worth 309 20 104 - - - 433 2.4% Lantana 303 - 122 - - - 425 2.4% Manalapan - - - - - 309 309 1.7% Wellington - - 229 - - - 229 1.3% Juno Beach - - 197 - - - 197 1.1% North Palm Beach 154 - - - - - 154 0.9% South Bay 122 - - - - - 122 0.7% Highland Beach - - - - 114 - 114 0.6% Royal Palm Beach 111 - - - - - 111 0.6% Belle Glade 105 - - - - - 105 0.6% Palm Beach Shores 50 - - - - - 50 0.3% Greenacres 48 - - - - - 48 0.3% Lake Park - - - - - - - 0.0% TOTAL:2,458 1,064 3,274 3,746 4,587 2,611 17,740 100% % Dist. by Class 14%6%18%21%26%15% (1) Examples of economy class properties include: Days Inn; Extended Stay America; Red Roof Inn; Super 8; and Travelodge. (2) Examples of mid-scale class properties include: Best Western; LaQuinta Inn; Quality Inn; Sleep Inn & Suites and Wingate By Wyndham. (3) Examples of upper mid-scale properties include: Comfort Inn; Fairfield Inn; Hampton Inn; and Holiday Inn Express & Suites. (4) Examples of upscale properties include: Marriott Courtyard; Crowne Plaza; Doubletree; Hilton Garden Inn; Hyatt Place; and Residence Inn. (5) Examples of upper upscale properties include: Hyatt Regency; Marriott; Sheraton and Wyndham. (6) Examples of luxury properties include: Boca Raton Resort; Seagate Hotel & Spa; Jupiter Beach Resort; The Breakers; Brazilian Court and others. Source: STR Global; WTL+a, May 2021. No. of Rooms by Property Class WTL+a WTL +a Real Estate & Economic Advisors Washington, DC—Cape Cod, MA 301.502.4171 508.214.0915 110 Table 34: North County Area Hotel Inventory, 2020 Table 35 and Table 36 illustrate key performance metrics among the selected competitive hotel properties. These properties include a range of limited-, select-, and full-service categories located on commercial corridors or at I-95 interchanges. Key findings from STR Global data on these competitive properties indicate that:  The 16 properties selected for this analysis that report to STR include 2,159 rooms (another three properties, with 171 rooms, do not report to STR). These rooms represent more than 12% of Palm Beach County’s hotel supply. WTL+a notes that STR criteria prohibit the use of properties if any single “corporate” flag exceeds 50% of supply. Notably, the newest property, a Opening No. of % of Facility Location Date Rooms Supply Product Class Property Reports to STR Super 8 North Palm Beach North Palm Beach Jun 1972 102 5%Economy Super 8 Riviera Beach Riviera Beach Jun 1982 100 5% Travelodge Riviera Beach Riviera Beach Jul 1988 116 5% Red Roof Inn West Palm Beach West Palm Beach Jun 1996 129 6% Extended Stay America Northpoint West Palm Beach Nov 1998 73 3% Subtotal:520 24% Hampton Inn Palm Beach Gardens Jul 1999 116 5%Upper Midscale Best Western Plus Hotel & Suites Palm Beach Gardens Feb 1990 83 4% Holiday Inn Express & Suites Metrocenter West Palm Beach Jul 2008 70 3% Subtotal:269 12% Doubletree Hotel Executive Mtg Center Palm Beach Gardens Nov 1970 280 13%Upscale Hilton Garden Inn Palm Beach Gardens Palm Beach Gardens Dec 2008 180 8% Homewood Suites by Hilton West Palm Beach Oct 2009 114 5% Residence Inn West Palm Beach Jan 1998 78 4% SpringHill Suites I-95 West Palm Beach Aug 2009 130 6% Marriott Courtyard West Palm Beach Jan 1989 149 7% Subtotal:931 43% Marriott Palm Beach Gardens Palm Beach Gardens Feb 1990 279 13%Upper Upscale Embassy Suites PGA Boulevard Palm Beach Gardens Feb 1990 160 7% Subtotal:439 20% TOTAL ROOMS:2,159 100% As % of Palm Beach County Inventory 12.2% Property Does Not Report to STR Camelot Motor Lodge North Palm Beach Mar 1973 52 Economy Inn Of America Palm Beach Gardens Aug 1989 95 Travel Inn Riviera Beach May 1957 24 Subtotal:171 Source: STR Global; WTL+a, May 2021. WTL+a WTL +a Real Estate & Economic Advisors Washington, DC—Cape Cod, MA 301.502.4171 508.214.0915 111 Hilton Homewood Suites on I-95 in West Palm Beach, with 114 rooms, opened over 11 years ago in 2009. (A newer property, a Hampton Inn located at 4001 RCA Boulevard in Palm Beach Gardens is not contained in the STR dataset);  Average annual occupancies strengthened between 2013 and 2017, increasing from 73.2% to a peak of 77.6%; the seven-year average occupancy was 70.7%. Occupancies declined slightly to 74% in 2018 and 70.6% in 2019;  As illustrated in Table 36, indicative of peak seasonality in south Florida, occupancies averaged 76.5 in January, 83.9% in February, and 83.2% in March over the past seven years. In fact, occupancies exceeded 80% for fully 23% of the 100 months profiled in this analysis;  Other indicators of solid market performance include Average Daily Rates (ADRs), which increased at a sustained annual pace of 4.91% per year, and Revenue per Available Room (REVPAR), which increased at a solid annual rate of 4.30% per year between 201 3 and 2019. As illustrated, there were specific year-over-year fluctuations in these metrics; and  The COVID pandemic which struck in early March 2020 has caused considerable damage to the hotel/hospitality industry. Monthly occupancies dropped precipitously—from 83.7% in February 2020 to 17.6% in April 2020. Overall occupancies among these 16 properties in 2020 averaged 44.8%. Occupancies climbed to 50.2% by year-end and returned to pre -COVID metrics in the range of 77% during the first quarter of 2021. In conclusion, based on pre -COVID occupancy and revenue performance, this analysis suggests there appears to be sufficient demand/investment-level performance necessary to support new hotel rooms in this area of northern Palm Beach County. It is likely that this near-term demand will be captured by the proposed 174-room hotel planned as part of the expansion of Downtown at the Gardens in Palm Beach Gardens. Impacts of the pandemic on the hotel industry are well-known (as exhibited by significant declines in occupancy between March and October 2020); and the industry’s recovery in the near-term is highly uncertain. Additional time is required to gauge its longer-term impacts on market performance and the capacity to support additional new hotel rooms in the market area. Pre-COVID Area Hotel Market Performance is Strong: Occupancies Exceeded 70% in 6 of the Past 7 Years WTL+a WTL +a Real Estate & Economic Advisors Washington, DC—Cape Cod, MA 301.502.4171 508.214.0915 112 Table 35: Annual Market Performance of Selected Competitive Hotels, 2012—2019 Pandemic Thru April 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Average CAGR Performance Characteristics (1) Number of Rooms 2,158 2,155 2,156 2,156 2,158 2,158 2,159 2,162 2,162 Available Room Nights (Supply)787,783 786,575 786,759 786,940 787,552 787,731 788,128 789,130 259,440 787,575 0.01% Occupied Room Nights (Demand)576,381 600,760 592,667 581,791 611,338 582,912 556,770 353,231 179,617 556,981 -0.58% Annual Occupancy (%)73.2%76.4%75.3%73.9%77.6%74.0%70.6%44.8%69.2%70.7%-0.58% Average Daily Rate 95.45$ 104.19$ 112.20$ 114.79$ 120.57$ 126.62$ 127.25$ 117.93$ 122.61$ 114.66$ 4.91% (2)Revenue Per Available Room 69.83$ 79.58$ 84.52$ 84.87$ 93.59$ 93.69$ 89.90$ 52.79$ 84.88$ 81.09$ 4.30% Year-to-Year % Growth Annual Occupancy - 4.4%(1.4%)(1.9%)5.0%(4.7%)(4.5%)(36.6%)54.7% Average Daily Rate - 9.2%7.7%2.3%5.0%5.0%0.5%(7.3%)4.0% Revenue/Available Room - 14.0%6.2%0.4%10.3%0.1%(4.1%)(41.3%)60.8% Selected Property Location Rooms % Dist.Year Open Super 8 Riviera Beach W Palm Beach 100 5%Jun 1982 Travelodge Riviera Beach Riviera Beach 116 5%Jul 1988 Marriott Courtyard W Palm Beach 149 7%Jan 1989 Red Roof Inn W Palm Beach 129 6%Jun 1996 Residence Inn W Palm Beach 78 4%Jan 1998 Extended Stay America Northpoint W Palm Beach 73 3%Nov 1998 Holiday Inn Express & Suites Metrocentre W Palm Beach 70 3%Jul 2008 SpringHill Suites I-95 W Palm Beach 130 6%Aug 2009 Homewood Suites by Hilton W Palm Beach 114 5%Oct 2009 Super 8 North Palm Beach N Palm Beach 102 5%Jun 1972 Best Western Plus Hotel & Suites/Conf Ctr PB Gardens 83 4%Feb 1990 DoubleTree by Hilton Hotel Executive Mtg Ctr PB Gardens 280 13%Nov 1970 Marriott Palm Beach Gardens PB Gardens 282 13%Feb 1990 Embassy Suites by Hilton PGA Boulevard PB Gardens 160 7%Feb 1990 Hampton Inn Palm Beach Gardens PB Gardens 116 5%Jul 1999 Hilton Garden Inn Palm Beach Gardens PB Gardens 180 8%Dec 2008 Total:2,162 100% (1)CAGR=Compound Annual Growth Rate. (2)Revenue per available room is total annual room revenue divided by available rooms. It is the best measure of year-to-year growth as it considers simultaneous changes in room rate and annual occupancies. Source: STR Global; WTL+a, June 2021. CHANGE: 2013-2019 WTL+a WTL +a Real Estate & Economic Advisors Washington, DC—Cape Cod, MA 301.502.4171 508.214.0915 113 Table 36: Monthly Market Performance of Selected Competitive Hotels, 2013—2019 Pandemic Thru April Annual Annual % 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Average Change Occupancies By Month January 77.2%81.5%83.7%81.2%78.7%79.0%73.5%76.9%57.2%76.5%- February 83.3%90.9%91.2%87.4%90.0%84.6%78.4%83.7%65.7%83.9%10% March 84.5%89.4%92.4%88.8%91.4%90.3%87.6%47.1%77.1%83.2%-1% April 76.4%76.3%80.8%80.0%80.1%81.1%76.5%17.6%76.9%71.7%-14% May 70.1%71.4%67.0%67.9%74.8%72.5%69.6%26.1%64.9%-10% June 70.4%69.8%69.9%70.7%76.0%75.5%66.8%36.0%66.9%3% July 68.4%75.4%70.8%71.0%70.0%65.8%68.2%39.9%66.2%-1% August 66.1%68.2%65.4%62.8%65.2%65.5%59.5%40.8%61.7%-7% September 60.0%66.3%62.4%59.8%68.8%60.8%56.7%38.5%59.2%-4% October 73.2%73.9%70.8%68.5%78.1%68.2%66.1%39.9%67.3%14% November 76.3%74.0%72.1%75.0%81.2%71.0%71.1%42.9%70.4%5% December 72.7%80.1%78.4%75.0%78.4%74.5%74.2%50.2%72.9%4% Annual Average:73.2%76.4%75.3%73.9%77.6%74.0%70.6%44.8%69.2%70.7% Indicates months where occupancies exceed 80%. Indicates impacts of the Covid pandemic from March 2020 through early 2021. Source: STR Global; WTL+a, June 2021. 2013 Thru April 2021 WTL+a WTL +a Real Estate & Economic Advisors Washington, DC—Cape Cod, MA 301.502.4171 508.214.0915 114 5 Real Estate Development Potentials The following details the analysis of real estate market/redevelopment potentials for key land uses for the Twin City Mall site based on the demographic profile and real estate market conditions. The analysis focuses on the following land uses: market-rate housing, workplace/office, and supporting services such as retail and hotel/lodging. Market-rate Housing WTL+a prepared a demand analysis that measures development potentials for new, market-rate housing for a 10-year period between 2020 and 2030. As the site falls in two jurisdictions, separate demand analyses were prepared for both Lake Park and North Palm Beach. These analyses use various historic population growth rates as well as forecast growth to estimate demand and consider key real estate metrics such as approved or proposed new housing and other private investment identified at the time of the study. Town of Lake Park Scenario #1—Past 10-Year Trendline This model assumes that Lake Park will continue to growth as it has over the last 10 years, using an average annual growth rate of 0.72% per year consistent with historic actual population growth in Lake Park between 2010 —2020. Notably, population growth in Lake Park strengthened between 2010 and 2020 over the preceding 10 years. For purposes of this analysis, this average annual growth rate was extrapolated for the next 10 years (i.e., growth remains constant through 2030). As Scenario #1 is based on past trends, it does not consider the transformational nature of the Twin City Mall site on redevelopment opportunities in Lake Park.  As noted in the demographic profile in Section 3, the Town of Lake Park gained 607 new residents in 256 new households between 2010 and 2020—for a 2020 population of 8,762 residents in 3,400 households. This resulted in a compound average annual growth rate of 0.72% over this 10-year period; WTL+a WTL +a Real Estate & Economic Advisors Washington, DC—Cape Cod, MA 301.502.4171 508.214.0915 115 Table 37: Housing Potentials Scenario #1—Town of Lake Park, 2030  As illustrated in Table 37, if the pace of growth continues at this historic 10-year average of 0.72% per year, it would yield 652 new residents in 256 new households (i.e., housing units) by 2030, assuming the Town’s average household size of 2.55 remains unchanged. This would translate into average annual demand of approximately 25 units per year;  The next step allocates future growth in population/households to known approved, proposed , or under construction residential projects totaling 682 units. According to data provided by the Town and stakeholders, these include Nautilus 220 (approved for 332 units; site demolition is underway); 310 Federal Highway (proposed 100 multi-family units), and Lake Park Apartments (proposed 250 multi-family units on that portion of the Twin City Mall site owned by Woolbright Development);  The analysis assumes that all 682 units as identified are built. However, market potentials in Scenario #1 support only 256 new units, which leaves a shortfall of 425 “unallocated” Average 2030 Population Household Housing Scenario 2021 2030 Change Size Units Scenario #1 (Based on 2010-2020 Trendline) (1) Average Annual Growth Rate 0.72% Current & Future Population 8,762 9,414 652 2.55 256 Allocation to Known Residential Projects:(2) Under Construction - N/A - Approved - Nautilus 220 332 Proposed - 310 Federal Highway 100 - "Lake Park Apartments" (Woolbright)250 Subtotal - Allocated Units:682 Unallocated Units-Scenario #1:(426) (1)In Scenario #1, 10-year population forecasts assume that the Town of Lake Park continues to growth at the same pace it did between 2010 and 2020 (0.72% per year). (2)In order to convert 2030 population growth into housing units, the analysis assumes average household size of 2.55 people per household remains the same in the future as it was in 2020. (3)In Scenario #2, 10-year population forecasts utilize the 5-year (2020-2025) forecast of growth as prepared by ESRI, and extrapolated over the 10-year forecast period. (4)In Scenario #3, the Town's annual growth rate would have to double (to 1.5% per year) to support the 682 units in approved and proposed projects town-wide. This would leave an additional 130 to 140 "unallocated" units that could be built at Twin City Mall or elsewhere in Lake Park. (5)As is characteristic of moderate-density, urban infill multi-family housing, average household size is typically smaller than it is in low- density, suburban housing. To reflect those characteristics, an average household size of 1.75 people per household was utilized. Source: ESRI Business Analyst; Town of Lake Park; WTL+a, revised September 2021. Forecasts WTL+a WTL +a Real Estate & Economic Advisors Washington, DC—Cape Cod, MA 301.502.4171 508.214.0915 116 units. In other words, if the historic trendline growth rate (2010—2020) continued, growth would be insufficient to support the total number of approved and proposed units in Lake Park; and  While a portion of the proposed Nautilus 220 project will sell to seasonal residents, it is not known how many seasonal buyers there will be. As noted in the housing profile in Section 4, the 2019 American Community Survey (ACS) indicates seasonal units in Lake Park amounted to only 2% of the Town’s housing stock. Since seasonal residents are excluded from population growth forecasts, multiple seasonal buyers at Nautilus could serve to reduce the “shortfall” in unallocated units. Scenario #2—5-Year Forecast Extrapolated This scenario utilizes Lake Park’s five-year (2020—2025) forecast of population growth at a rate of 0.7 6% per year as prepared by ESRI Business Analyst. ESRI’s forecast considers multiple factors in suggesting that redevelopment opportunities in Lake Park will be enhanced such as supportive policies as defined in the updated Comprehensive Plan, job growth, and physical and/or transportation improvements. For purposes of this analysis, this average annual growth rate was extrapolated for the next 10 years through 2030. Table 38: Housing Potentials Scenario #2—Town of Lake Park, 2030 Average 2030 Population Household Housing Scenario 2021 2030 Change Size Units Scenario #2 (Based on ESRI 2020-2025 Forecast & Extrapolated 10 Years) (3) Average Annual Growth Rate 0.76% Current & Future Population 8,762 9,453 691 2.55 271 Allocation to Known Residential Projects:(2) Under Construction - Approved 332 Proposed 350 Subtotal - Allocated Units:682 Unallocated Units-Scenario #2:(411) (1)In Scenario #1, 10-year population forecasts assume that the Town of Lake Park continues to growth at the same pace it did between 2010 and 2020 (0.72% per year). (2)In order to convert 2030 population growth into housing units, the analysis assumes average household size of 2.55 people per household remains the same in the future as it was in 2020. (3)In Scenario #2, 10-year population forecasts utilize the 5-year (2020-2025) forecast of growth as prepared by ESRI, and extrapolated over the 10-year forecast period. (4)In Scenario #3, the Town's annual growth rate would have to double (to 1.5% per year) to support the 682 units in approved and proposed projects town-wide. This would leave an additional 130 to 140 "unallocated" units that could be built at Twin City Mall or elsewhere in Lake Park. (5)As is characteristic of moderate-density, urban infill multi-family housing, average household size is typically smaller than it is in low- density, suburban housing. To reflect those characteristics, an average household size of 1.75 people per household was utilized. Source: ESRI Business Analyst; Town of Lake Park; WTL+a, revised September 2021. Forecasts WTL+a WTL +a Real Estate & Economic Advisors Washington, DC—Cape Cod, MA 301.502.4171 508.214.0915 117  As illustrated in Table 38, if this pace of growth is achieved, it would yield more than 691 new residents in 271 new households (i.e., housing units) by 2030, assuming the Town’s average household size of 2.55 during this 10-year period remains unchanged. This would translate into annual demand of 27 units per year;  The next step allocates future growth in population/households to known approved, proposed or under construction residential projects and assumes that all 682 units as identified are built. However, market potentials in Scenario #2 support only 271 new units, which leaves a shortfall of more than 400 “unallocated” units. In other words, if ESRI’s growth forecast for 2020—2025 continues through 2030, growth would be insufficient to support the total number of approved and proposed units in Lake Park. Scenario #3—Required Capture to Support New Development The first two scenarios suggest there is insufficient market demand necessary to support the 682 units in approved and proposed residential projects in Lake Park identified during the study (332 for-sale units at Nautilus 220, 100 rental units at 315 Federal Highway, and 250 rental units at Woolbright). As a result, an alternative scenario was prepared that illustrates the minimum required growth rate/market capture that would be necessary to support all approved/proposed units. Table 39: Housing Potentials Scenario #3—Town of Lake Park, 2030 Average 2030 Population Household Housing Scenario 2021 2030 Change Size Units Scenario #3 (Required Growth to Support Proposed Projects) (4) Average Annual Growth Rate 1.52% Current & Future Population 8,762 10,193 1,431 1.75 818 Allocation to Known Residential Projects:(5) Under Construction - Approved 332 Proposed 350 Subtotal - Allocated Units:682 Unallocated Units-Scenario #3:136 (1)In Scenario #1, 10-year population forecasts assume that the Town of Lake Park continues to growth at the same pace it did between 2010 and 2020 (0.72% per year). (2)In order to convert 2030 population growth into housing units, the analysis assumes average household size of 2.55 people per household remains the same in the future as it was in 2020. (3)In Scenario #2, 10-year population forecasts utilize the 5-year (2020-2025) forecast of growth as prepared by ESRI, and extrapolated over the 10-year forecast period. (4)In Scenario #3, the Town's annual growth rate would have to double (to 1.5% per year) to support the 682 units in approved and proposed projects town-wide. This would leave an additional 130 to 140 "unallocated" units that could be built at Twin City Mall or elsewhere in Lake Park. (5)As is characteristic of moderate-density, urban infill multi-family housing, average household size is typically smaller than it is in low- density, suburban housing. To reflect those characteristics, an average household size of 1.75 people per household was utilized. Source: ESRI Business Analyst; Town of Lake Park; WTL+a, revised September 2021. Forecasts WTL+a WTL +a Real Estate & Economic Advisors Washington, DC—Cape Cod, MA 301.502.4171 508.214.0915 118  As illustrated in Table 39, Lake Park’s population would have to increase at a sustained annual rate of approximately 1.3% to 1.5% per year for each of the next 10 years to provide sufficient market support for the 682 approved and proposed units identified during this study;  If this pace of growth is achieved it would yield more than 1,400 new residents in 818 new households (i.e., housing units) by 2030. This would translate into annual demand of 80 units per year. As is characteristic of moderate-density, urban infill multi-family housing, average household size is typically smaller than it is in low-density suburban housing. To reflect those characteristics, Scenario #3 utilizes an average household size of 1.75 people per household; and  If Lake Park can achieve a higher annual growth rate of 1.5% per year, it would also suggest market support for an additional 130 to 140 “unallocated” units town-wide. These could be located either at Twin City and/or other redevelopment sites within Lake Park. Village of North Palm Beach Scenario #1—Past 10-Year Trendline This model assumes that North Palm Beach will continue to growth as it has over the last 10 years, using an average annual growth rate of 0.77% per year consistent with historic actual population growth in the Village between 2010—2020. For purposes of this analysis, this average annual growth rate was extrapolated for the next 10 years (i.e., growth remains constant through 2030). As Scenario #1 is based on past trends, it does not consider the transformational nature of the Twin City Mall site on redevelopment opportunities in North Palm Beach.  As noted in the demographic profile in Section 3, North Palm Beach gained 954 new residents in 473 new households between 2010 and 2020—for a 2020 population of 12,975 residents in 6,570 households. This resulted in a compound average annual growth rate of 0.77% over this 10-year period; WTL+a WTL +a Real Estate & Economic Advisors Washington, DC—Cape Cod, MA 301.502.4171 508.214.0915 119 Table 40: Housing Potentials Scenario #1—Village of North Palm Beach, 2030  As illustrated in Table 40, if the pace of growth continues at this historic 10-year average of 0.77% per year, it would yield 1,030 new residents in 523 new households (i.e., housing units) by 2030, assuming the Village’s average household size of 1.97 remains unchanged. This would translate into average annual demand of approximately 52 units per year;  The next step allocates future growth in population/households to known approved, proposed or under construction residential projects. According to data provided by the Village and stakeholders, this includes 215 units proposed as part of a potential assemblage of parcels located on U.S. 1 known as 200 Yacht Club. The analysis assumes that all 215 units as identified are built;  The analysis in Scenario #1 suggests supportable market potentials for both the 200 Yacht Club project as well as an additional 300+ “unallocated” units (i.e., not assigned to a proposed or approved project). Average 2030 Population Household Housing Scenario 2021 2030 Change Size Units Scenario #1 (Based on 2010-2020 Trendline) (1) Average Annual Growth Rate 0.77% Current & Future Population 12,975 14,005 1,030 1.97 523 Allocation to Known Residential Projects:(2) Under Construction - N/A - Approved - N/A - Proposed - 200 Yacht Club/US 1 Site (Mast Capital)215 Subtotal - Allocated Units:215 Unallocated Units-Scenario #1:308 (1)In Scenario #1, 10-year population forecasts assume that the Village of North Palm Beach continues to growth at the same pace it did between 2010 and 2020 (0.77% per year). (2)In order to convert 2030 population growth into housing units, the analysis assumes average household size of 1.97 people per household remains the same in the future as it was in 2020. (3)In Scenario #2, 10-year population forecasts utilize the 5-year (2020-2025) forecast of growth as prepared by ESRI, and extrapolated over the 10-year forecast period. (4)In Scenario #3, the Village's annual growth rate would have to increase by approximately 65% (to 1.3% per year) to support up to 800 units, after accounting for the proposed 215 units in the 200 Yacht Club project. (5)As is characteristic of moderate-density, urban infill multi-family housing, average household size is typically smaller than it is in low- density, suburban housing. To reflect those characteristics, an average household size of 1.75 people per household was utilized. Source: ESRI Business Analyst; Village of North Palm Beach; WTL+a, revised September 2021. Forecasts WTL+a WTL +a Real Estate & Economic Advisors Washington, DC—Cape Cod, MA 301.502.4171 508.214.0915 120 Scenario #2—5-Year Forecast Extrapolated This scenario utilizes the Village’s five-year (2020—2025) forecast of population growth at a rate of 0.78% per year as prepared by ESRI Business Analyst. ESRI’s forecast considers multiple factors in suggesting that redevelopment opportunities in North Palm Beach will be enhanced such as zoning and land use policies that support additional density and height, continued job growth, and physical and/or transportation improvements. For purposes of this analysis, this average annual growth rate was extrapolated for the next 10 years through 2030.  As illustrated in Table 41 , if this pace of growth is achieved, it would yield 1,050 new residents in 533 new households (i.e., housing units) by 2030, assuming the Village’s average household size of 1.97 remains unchanged during this 10 -year period. This would translate into annual demand of 53 units per year;  The next step allocates future growth in population/households to known approved, proposed or under construction projects and assumes that 215 units at 200 Yacht Club are built; and  The analysis in Scenario #2 suggests supportable market potentials for both the 200 Yacht Club project as well as an additional 320 “unallocated” units (i.e., not assigned to a proposed or approved project). Table 41: Housing Potentials Scenario #2—Village of North Palm Beach, 2030 Average 2030 Population Household Housing Scenario 2021 2030 Change Size Units Scenario #2 (Based on ESRI 2020-2025 Forecast & Extrapolated 10 Years) (3) Average Annual Growth Rate 0.78% Current & Future Population 12,975 14,025 1,050 1.97 533 Allocation to Known Residential Projects:(2) Under Construction - Approved - Proposed 215 Subtotal - Allocated Units:215 Unallocated Units-Scenario #2:318 (1)In Scenario #1, 10-year population forecasts assume that the Village of North Palm Beach continues to growth at the same pace it did between 2010 and 2020 (0.77% per year). (2)In order to convert 2030 population growth into housing units, the analysis assumes average household size of 1.97 people per household remains the same in the future as it was in 2020. (3)In Scenario #2, 10-year population forecasts utilize the 5-year (2020-2025) forecast of growth as prepared by ESRI, and extrapolated over the 10-year forecast period. (4)In Scenario #3, the Village's annual growth rate would have to increase by approximately 65% (to 1.3% per year) to support up to 800 units, after accounting for the proposed 215 units in the 200 Yacht Club project. (5)As is characteristic of moderate-density, urban infill multi-family housing, average household size is typically smaller than it is in low- density, suburban housing. To reflect those characteristics, an average household size of 1.75 people per household was utilized. Source: ESRI Business Analyst; Village of North Palm Beach; WTL+a, revised September 2021. Forecasts WTL+a WTL +a Real Estate & Economic Advisors Washington, DC—Cape Cod, MA 301.502.4171 508.214.0915 121 Scenario #3—Required Capture to Support New Development The first two scenarios indicate there is sufficient market demand to support the construction of approximately 520—530 units of new housing in North Palm Beach by 2030. After construction of 215 units at the proposed 200 Yacht Club project, this leaves 300—320 “unallocated” units that could potentially be built on the Twin City Mall site. However, WTL+a notes that the cost to acquire the Twin City Mall site by any developer will necessitate higher residential densities to justify feasibility. As densities along the corridor appear to be increasing, the Twin City Mall site is both a larger and pre-assembled redevelopment opportunity and therefore should anticipate higher densities (i.e., 800 to 1,000 units). As a result, WTL+a created an alternative scenario to illustrate the higher growth rate/market capture necessary to support approximately 800 units of new housing on the Twin City Mall site. Table 42: Housing Potentials Scenario #3—Village of North Palm Beach, 2030  As illustrated in Table 42, the Village’s population would have to increase at a sustained annual rate of approximately 1.3% per year for each of the next 10 years to provide sufficient market support for approximately 800 units on the Twin City Mall site; Average 2030 Population Household Housing Scenario 2021 2030 Change Size Units Scenario #3 (Required Growth to Support Proposed Projects) (4) Average Annual Growth Rate 1.30% Current & Future Population 12,975 14,764 1,789 1.75 1,022 Allocation to Known Residential Projects:(5) Under Construction 0.663418958 - Approved - Proposed 215 Subtotal - Allocated Units:215 Unallocated Units-Scenario #3:807 (1)In Scenario #1, 10-year population forecasts assume that the Village of North Palm Beach continues to growth at the same pace it did between 2010 and 2020 (0.77% per year). (2)In order to convert 2030 population growth into housing units, the analysis assumes average household size of 1.97 people per household remains the same in the future as it was in 2020. (3)In Scenario #2, 10-year population forecasts utilize the 5-year (2020-2025) forecast of growth as prepared by ESRI, and extrapolated over the 10-year forecast period. (4)In Scenario #3, the Village's annual growth rate would have to increase by approximately 65% (to 1.3% per year) to support up to 800 units, after accounting for the proposed 215 units in the 200 Yacht Club project. (5)As is characteristic of moderate-density, urban infill multi-family housing, average household size is typically smaller than it is in low- density, suburban housing. To reflect those characteristics, an average household size of 1.75 people per household was utilized. Source: ESRI Business Analyst; Village of North Palm Beach; WTL+a, revised September 2021. Forecasts WTL+a WTL +a Real Estate & Economic Advisors Washington, DC—Cape Cod, MA 301.502.4171 508.214.0915 122  If this pace of growth is achieved, it would yield almost 1,800 new residents in 1,020+ new households (i.e., housing units) by 2030. This would translate into annual demand of approximately 100 units per year. As is characteristic of moderate-density, urban infill multi- family housing, average household size is typically smaller than it is in low-density suburban housing. To reflect those characteristics, Scenario #3 utilizes an average household size of 1.75 people per household; and  After construction of the 215 units at the 200 Yacht Club project, market support would be sufficient for an additional 800 “unallocated” units across North Palm Beach. These could be located either at Twin City and/or other redevelopment sites within the Village. Conclusion—Housing Potentials The analysis to determine market support for new residential development illustrates how transformational the Twin City Mall site can be for both the Town of Lake Park and the Village of North Palm Beach. The limited number of vacant/undeveloped parcels in both communities has hindered population/household growth, particularly in Lake Park, over the past 20 years. As a result, a historic trendline analysis as exhibited in Scenarios #1 and #2 does not indicate market support for new housing. As a result, WTL+a prepared an alternative analysis for Lake Park as depicted in Scenario #3 to identify the rate of population growth necessary over the next 10 years to ensure successful redevelopment. As noted, the analysis suggests that Lake Park would need to grow at a sustained compound annual pace of 1.5% per year—well above its recent 0.76% annual growth rate. This could expect to generate sufficient demand to support up to 820 new housing units town-wide by 2030 , including:  Nautilus 220 (332 units under construction)  315 Federal Highway (100 units proposed)  Woolbright Development’s proposed “Lake Park Apartments” (250 units) on a portion of the Twin City site, and  Another 130 to 140 “unallocated” units over the next 10 years. Lake Park’s required growth rate could be slightly lower if a portion of the 332 units at Nautilus sell to seasonal occupants. WTL+a WTL +a Real Estate & Economic Advisors Washington, DC—Cape Cod, MA 301.502.4171 508.214.0915 123 Similarly, while slightly higher historic growth rates between 2010—2020 ha ve generated modest population/household growth in North Palm Beach, th e Village would also need to strengthen its future growth rate to support new housing on the Twin City Mall site. Specifically, as a portion of the site available to accommodate redevelopment in North Palm Beach is larger than it is in Lake Park, land acquisition costs by any developer will be significantly higher. Higher land costs will necessitate additional density and building height to justify construction feasibility. Another factor bearing upon feasibility will be the costs associated with providing structured parking. As a result, WTL +a prepared an alternative analysis for North Palm Beach as depicted in Scenario #3 to identify the rate of population growth necessary over the next 10 years to ensure successful redevelopment. As noted, the analysis suggests that North Palm Beach would need to grow at a sustained compound annual pace of 1.3% per year—well above its recent 0.77% annual growth rate. This could be expected to generate sufficient demand to support up to 1,000 new housing units village-wide by 2030 , including:  200 Yacht Club (215 units proposed), and  Another 800 “unallocated” units over the next 10 years. This suggests that redevelopment opportunities for new housing on the North Palm Beach portion of the Twin City Mall site could support up to 800 units of new housing by 2030. Our analysis concludes that stronger population/household growth in the U.S. Highway 1 corridor in this part of Palm Beach County is feasible, in part due to the impacts that the COVID pandemic has introduced, including enhanced/accelerated forces such as population shifts from New York/the Northeast to South Florida as well as recent, ongoing interest in private investment as exhibited by such projects as Nautilus 220. In total, these factors could expect to generated market potentials that support between 850 and 1,050 units of new housing across the entirety of the Twin City Mall site over the next 10 years (2030). Twin City Mall: 850 to 1,050 Units of New Housing Across Entire Site WTL+a WTL +a Real Estate & Economic Advisors Washington, DC—Cape Cod, MA 301.502.4171 508.214.0915 124 Workplace: Multi-tenant/Speculative Office Prior to the COVID-19 pandemic’s emergence in 2020, knowledge-based industries like finance, software, business and management consulting services, market and communications, professional/business services such as accountants, legal and medical and other similar businesses typically housed their employees in commercial office buildings. The first step in measuring support for new multi-tenant/speculative office space at the Twin City Mall site examines market potentials for office use in Palm Beach County and allocates demand to both Lake Park and North Palm Beach. The analysis translates employment forecasts (for 2019— 2027) among specific industry sectors in Palm Beach County (as prepared by the Florida Department of Economic Opportunity/DEO) into demand for office space by applying an occupancy factor (of occupied space per employee) and estimates the proportion of employees in each sector who are office workers. We note that DEO employment forecasts are issued only in eight-year periods. The analysis also considers demand generated by other market factors, such as vacancy adjustments, part-time/self-employed individuals (who may or may not occupy multi-tenant office space), and cumulative replacement; these estimates either increase or reduce future demand for office space. Cumulative replacement, for example, considers tenants that move when a building is removed from the inventory due to physical and/or functional obsolescence. We note that assumptions pertaining to occupancy factors may be overstated. Since the 2007— 2009 recession, office-using busines ses have been reducing office occupancies, sometimes by significant amounts. Historically, the commercial real estate industry has used an average occupancy factor of 250 sq. ft. per office employee. However, according to a 2017 study by REIS, Inc. (a national commercial real estate database) the amount of office space per employee has been steadily declining in each successive business cycle after a recession. REIS data indicate that in the national economic expansion of the late 1990s, a new office employee was typically associated with approximately 175 sq. ft. of additional office space. During the early- and mid-2000s (until the 2007—2009 recession), the typical employee was associated with approximately 125 sq. ft. of additional office space. Since 2010, however, each added/new employee has been associated with only about 50 sq. ft. of additional office space. This is particularly notable in space-efficient industries like software and professional/business services, which have been the strongest growing sectors in the current business cycle. Moreover, hoteling and remote work-arrangements, where employees share space rather than having dedicated offices or cubicles, enables companies to WTL+a WTL +a Real Estate & Economic Advisors Washington, DC—Cape Cod, MA 301.502.4171 508.214.0915 125 accommodate eve n more workers in a given amount of occupied space . The unprecedented shift to teleworking because of COVID-19 may, as previously noted, lead to permanent part-time and full-time teleworking for multiple workplace industries. Another study by CoStar, Inc., an international commercial real estate database, indicates the amount of office space occupied per employee dropped to 182 sq. ft. per worker in 2017 from 197.3 sq. ft. in 2010. According to the annual 2018 Experience Exchange Report (EER) prepared by the Building Owners & Managers Association, the average occupancy factor for office employees in 2018 was 288 sq. ft. per employee on a rentable basis (rentable includes all common areas of a building). However, after netting out a common area factor (typically 30% to 35%), the usable occupancy factor for office employees is in the range of 187 to 202 sq. ft. per employee. The following evaluates office market potentials for speculative (or multi-tenant) and medical office space. That is, the analysis excludes any estimates for individual end-users, also known as “build- to-suits.” The analysis is illustrated in Table 43 through Table 45. Palm Beach County  The Florida Department of Economic Opportunity/DEO prepares employment forecasts for individual counties and groups of counties throughout the state known as “workforce regions.” Palm Beach County is its own Workforce Region (#21). DEO estimates that Palm Beach County will add more than 87,750 new jobs between 2020 and 2028;  The analysis indicates potential gross demand for 6.94 million sq. ft. of office space across the County between 2020 and 2028. This estimate is based on an average occupancy factor of 194 sq. ft. per office employee, generated by growth in office-using jobs comprising roughly 34% of all jobs. This is inclusive of adjustments related to vacancy, cumulative (building) replacements, tenant churn, etc.;  From a financing perspective, however, a portion of the County’s existing 6.25 million sq. ft. of vacant office space would need to be leased before new office space could be financed. It is also not known how much of the remaining existing vacant inventory suffers from physical and/or functional obsolescence, will convert to other uses such as residential, or could be demolished; and  For purposes of this analysis, WTL+a conservatively assumes that 35% of Palm Beach County’s vacant office inventory is leased before financing is provided for new office construction. This serves to reduce the County’s office vacancy rate to roughly 7% from current levels, and lowers WTL+a WTL +a Real Estate & Economic Advisors Washington, DC—Cape Cod, MA 301.502.4171 508.214.0915 126 demand generated by job growth in office-using sectors to approximately 4.75 million sq. ft. of net new space by 202 8. Table 43: Office Potentials—Palm Beach County, 2020—2028 New Jobs % Office-SF Occupancy 2028 Demand Industry Sector 2020-2028 Using Factor (In SF) Palm Beach County (Workforce Region #21) Agriculture/Mining & Construction 3,649 10%175 63,900 Manufacturing 1,522 20%200 60,900 Transp/Communications/Utilities 1,191 40%200 95,300 Wholesale & Retail Trade 7,415 20%175 259,500 Finance/Insurance/Real Estate 2,875 85%275 672,000 Services Professional, Scientific & Technical Services 6,564 90%250 1,476,900 Management of Companies & Enterprises 1,535 60%275 253,300 Administrative & Waste Management 9,039 35%175 553,600 Educational Services 2,756 20%200 110,200 Health Care & Social Assistance 13,255 35%200 927,900 Arts, Entertainment & Recreation 4,567 20%175 159,800 Accommodation & Food Services 19,199 20%175 672,000 Other Services (Except Government)3,543 35%225 279,000 Government 5,254 60%150 472,900 Self-Employed 5,786 10%200 115,700 Total/Weighted Average:87,755 34%194 6,172,900 +Vacancy Adjustment @ 5%(1)308,600 +Cumulative Replacement Demand 7.5%(2)463,000 2028 Gross Demand - Palm Beach County:6,944,500 Existing Vacant Office Space 6,257,221 -Lease-up Required @ 35%(2,190,027) (3)(2,190,027) Remaining Vacant Space:4,067,194 % Vacant 7.0% 2028 NET DEMAND (Rounded, In SF):4,754,500 (1) (2) (3) space is leased, thereby reducing the overall vacancy rate to approximately 7.0%. From a financing perspective, some portion of existing vacant office space in Palm Beach County will need to be leased before financing of new construction is viable. The analysis assumes that 35% of existing vacant office This allows for a 5% "frictional" vacancy rate in new office space delivered to the market (i.e., this accounts for tenant movement to new space). This represents new space required by existing businesses to replace obsolete or otherwise unusable office space. This is assumed to represent 7.5% of total demand. Source: Florida Dept. of Economic Opportunity (DEO); CoStar, Inc.; WTL +a, September 2021. WTL+a WTL +a Real Estate & Economic Advisors Washington, DC—Cape Cod, MA 301.502.4171 508.214.0915 127 Town of Lake Park Table 44 estimates market potentials for speculative/multi-tenant office space in Lake Park based on the Town ’s current share of countywide employment.  With an estimated 6,604 employees working in Lake Park, the Town ’s share of all jobs in Palm Beach County has averaged 0.75 % over the past five years;  Under this “fair share” analysis, Lake Park would continue to capture 0.75% of future countywide job growth, or approximately 660 new jobs, of the 87,750+ new jobs across Palm Beach County by 2028. However, as illustrated in Section 4, Lake Park has an extremely limited amount of office space;  Based on Lake Park’s current occupied office inventory (54,934 sq. ft.) using an occupancy factor of 150 sq. ft. per office employee, there are an estimated 366 office employees comprising only 5.5% of all jobs in Lake Park. If future office-using employment remains at this 5.5% share, this translates into gross demand for only 5,500 sq. ft. of office space in Lake Park over the next eight years;  For new office buildings to receive construction financing, a portion of Lake Park’s existing 7,660 sq. ft. of vacant office space would need to be leased before new office space could be built. It is also not known how much of the Town ’s remaining existing vacant office inventory suffers from physical and/or functional obsolescence, will convert to other uses such as residential, or could be demolished; and  For purposes of this analysis, WTL+a conservatively assumes that 25% of Lake Park’s vacant office inventory is leased before financing is provided for new office construction. This serves to reduce its office vacancy rate to 10% from current levels, and lowers demand generated by job growth in office-using sectors to only 3,600 sq. ft. of net new office space by 2028. In effect, there is negligible demand for new office space on the Lake Park portion of the site. WTL+a WTL +a Real Estate & Economic Advisors Washington, DC—Cape Cod, MA 301.502.4171 508.214.0915 128 Table 44: Office Potentials—Town of Lake Park, 2020—2028 New Jobs % Office-SF Occupancy 2028 Demand Industry Sector 2020-2028 Using Factor (In SF) Professional/General Office Total Employment:6,604 As % of Palm Beach County (5-Year Average)(1)0.75% Fair Share Analysis 2020-2028 Employment Growth (If Fair Share Maintained)659 % Office-using Jobs (2)5.5% SF Occupancy Factor 150 2028 Gross Demand (All Office):5,500 Existing Vacant Office Space (10-Year Average)7,660 (3) -Lease-up Required @ 25%(1,915) (1,915) Remaining Vacant Space:5,745 % Vacant 10.0% 2028 NET DEMAND (Rounded, In SF):3,600 (1)This reflects the 5-year average of Lake Park's share of all jobs in Palm Beach County. The analysis assumes that the Town maintains its "fair share" of the County's total employment in the future. (2)Based on Lake Park's 2020 occupied office inventory (54,934 sq. ft.), there are approximately 366 office employees at an average occupancy factor of 150 sq. ft. per employee). This suggests that office-using employees comprise approximately 5.5% of the 6,604 total employees in Lake Park. (3)Due to fluctuating office vacancy rates in Lake Park (ranging from a low of 4.6% in 2020 to a peak of 20% in 2019), a 10-year average of 13.3% was utilized in the analysis. To reflect financing conditions, a 25% lease-up factor (of existing vacant space) was assumed; this would reduce future vacancies to approximately 10%. Source: Florida Dept. of Economic Opportunity; CoStar, Inc.; WTL +a, September 2021. WTL+a WTL +a Real Estate & Economic Advisors Washington, DC—Cape Cod, MA 301.502.4171 508.214.0915 129 Village of North Palm Beach As illustrated in Table 45 , market potentials for speculative/multi-tenant office space in North Palm Beach were also prepared based on the Village’s current share of countywide employment.  With an estimated 6,185 employees working in North Palm Beach, the Village’s share of all jobs in Palm Beach County has averaged 0.79% over the past five years;  Under this “fair share” analysis, the Village would continue to capture 0.79% of future countywide job growth, or approximately 697 new jobs, of the 87,750+ new jobs across Palm Beach County by 2028. As noted previously in Section 4, North Palm Beach contains 1,081,300 sq. ft. of office space;  Based on the Village’s current occupied office inventory (958,524 sq. ft.) using an occupancy factor of 350 sq. ft. per office employee, there are an estimated 2,739 office employees comprising fully 44.3% of all jobs in North Palm Beach. WTL+a notes the office occupancy factor (350 sq. ft.) in North Palm Beach is much higher than it is in Lake Park (150 sq. ft.) due to the presence of a large amount of owner-occupied office condominium buildings as well as boutique professional services tenancies. If future office-using employment remains at this 44 % share, this translates into gross demand for approximately 46 ,300 sq. ft. of office space in North Palm Beach over the next eight years;  For new office buildings to receive construction financing, a portion of the Village’s existing 140,000 sq. ft. of vacant office space would need to be leased before new office space could be built. It is also not known how much of the Village’s remaining existing vacant office inventory suffers from physical and/or functional obsolescence, will convert to other uses such as residential, or could be demolished . As noted previously in Section 4, the Village’s office vacancy rate has remained stubbornly high, ranging from a low of 7% to 22% between 2007 and 2020; and  Due to consistently high office vacancies, WTL+a conservatively assumes that 35% of North Palm Beach’s vacant office inventory would have to be leased before financing is provided for new office construction. This serves to reduce the Village’s future office vacancy rate to 8.4 % from current levels. Notably, it would negate any market potentials for new office development in North Palm Beach over the next eight years. In other words, demand for office space generated by job growth in office-using sectors can be accommodated in existing vacant office space in North Palm Beach for the near future. WTL+a WTL +a Real Estate & Economic Advisors Washington, DC—Cape Cod, MA 301.502.4171 508.214.0915 130 Table 45: Office Potentials—Village of North Palm Beach, 2000—2028 Conclusion—Office Potentials In conclusion, the analysis of supportable market demand for new office space is extremely limited in Lake Park and negligible in North Palm Beach. Moreover, existing office inventory in both jurisdictions is aging/outdated and may have a degree of functional and/or physical obsolescence— even with the presence of owner-occupied office condominium buildings in North Palm Beach. This is best exemplified in negative net absorption, particularly in North Palm Beach, over the past 14 years. It should be noted that the only significant office investment in the portion of the North County trade area closest to the two municipalities includes “Divosta Towers” a two-building complex located at New Jobs % Office-SF Occupancy 2028 Demand Industry Sector 2020-2028 Using Factor (In SF) Professional/General Office Total Employment:6,185 As % of Palm Beach County (5-Year Average)(1)0.79% Fair Share Analysis 2020-2028 Employment Growth (If Fair Share Maintained)697 % Office-using Jobs (2)44.3% SF Occupancy Factor 150 2028 Gross Demand (All Office):46,300 Existing Vacant Office Space (10-Year Average)140,099 (3) -Lease-up Required @ 35%(49,035) (49,035) Remaining Vacant Space:91,064 % Vacant 8.4% 2028 NET DEMAND (Rounded, In SF):(2,700) (1)This reflects the 5-year average of North Palm Beach's share of all jobs in Palm Beach County. The analysis assumes the Village maintains its "fair share" of the County's total employment in the future. (2)Based on North Palm Beach's 2020 occupied office inventory (958,524 sq. ft.), there are approximately 2,739 office employees at an average occupancy factor of 325 sq. ft. per employee). This suggests that office-using employees comprise approximately 44% of the 6,185 total employees in North Palm Beach. A higher office occupancy factor (325 sq. ft. per employee) was utilized due to the presence of multiple office condominium buildings. (3)Due to fluctuating office vacancy rates in North Palm Beach (ranging from a low of 6.9% in 2016 to a peak of 20.2% in 2011) a 10-year average of 13.0% was utilized in the analysis. To reflect financing conditions, a 35% lease-up factor (of existing vacant space) was assumed; this would reduce future vacancies to approximately 9.7%. Source: Florida Dept. of Economic Opportunity; CoStar, Inc.; WTL +a, September 2021. WTL+a WTL +a Real Estate & Economic Advisors Washington, DC—Cape Cod, MA 301.502.4171 508.214.0915 131 3825-35 PGA Boulevard. According to CoStar, Inc., data, these twin 11-story buildings contain 217,208 sq. ft. of space and were delivered in 2019 and 2020. Specific metrics for each building are noted as follows:  North Tower—contains 108,786 sq. ft. of leasable area. As of October 2021, the building was reportedly 30.9% occupied (69.1% vacant), suggesting annual net absorption of only 8,400 sq. ft. per year for the four years since constructed started in October 2017 (i.e., including pre- leasing efforts). Six floors remain fully vacant. While several other floors are reportedly partially occupied, the CoStar tenant stacking plan identifies only one tenant occupying the 11th floor  South Tower—contains 108,422 sq. ft. of leasable area. As of October 2021, the building was reportedly 95.4% occupied (4.6% vacant), suggesting annual net absorption of approximately 51,700 sq. ft. per year for the two-year period between construction start (September 2017) and completion (late 2019). However, WTL+a notes that the CoStar tenant stacking plan has no information on tenant occupancies for five floors of the building. According to the Palm Beach Post, DiVosta Towers were the first new office buildings built in Palm Beach Gardens in 10 years. The complex sold in September 2021 to Gatsby Enterprises of New York, for $80 million ($368 per sq. ft.). As illustrated in Table 62 in the Appendix, the North County office market contains 4.97 million sq. ft. of office inventory in 230 buildings (8.6% of the County). The office vacancy rate peaked at 19.7% in 2011, declined to 9.0% in 2016, and increased to 12.6% in 2020. Annual net absorption has been modest—avera ging approximately 34,400 sq. ft. per year over the past 14 years (2007—2020) and increasing to 42,500 sq. ft. per year over the past five years (2016—2020). While a small amount of office space may be attractive as part of a mixed-use project, any office space developed on the Twin City Mall site should be considered a tertiary use that serves as an amenity to activate public space during the day. Any limited office space built should comprise no more than 5,000 to 10,000 sq. ft. of space oriented to professional services tenancies and located above street-level retail. The capacity to support any additional office space will be determined by growth in specific business markets and office-using sectors, transition of home-based businesses into leased space, rental/occupancy costs compared to competing nearby locations, etc. Hotel/Lodging Demand for hotel/motel rooms in any location is typically driven by specific market segments, including corporate business, leisure/social, interstate pass-by traffic, tourism , and visitors to specific WTL+a WTL +a Real Estate & Economic Advisors Washington, DC—Cape Cod, MA 301.502.4171 508.214.0915 132 venues or events. The capital markets typically seek sustained annual occupancies between 65% and 72% before financing new hotel construction. To understand hotel market performance and opportunities for hotel development on the Twin City Mall site, WTL+a obtained hotel performance data from STR Global for multiple selected properties located primarily on nearby commercial corridors and I-95 interchanges. It is critical to understand market conditions given the enormity of the impacts on the hotel and hospitality industries from the COVID pandemic as well as the time required for recovery:  Average annual occupancies strengthened between 2013 and 2017, increasing from 73.2% to a peak of 77.6%; the seven-year average occupancy was 70.7%. Occupancies declined slightly, to 74% in 2018 and 70.6% in 2019;  The COVID pandemic which struck in early March 2020 has significantly impacted the hotel/hospitality industry. Monthly occupancies dropped precipitously—from 83.7% in February 2020 to 17.6% in April 2020. Overall occupancies among these 16 properties in 2020 averaged 44.8%. Occupancies climbed to 50.2% by year-end and returned to pre-COVID metrics in the range of 77% during the first quarter of 2021. As illustrated in Table 46 and Table 47, WTL+a prepared two possible scenarios to evaluate hotel potentials at Twin City Mall. Scenario #1: Past Trends  Scenario #1 assumes that growth in available roomnights among the area’s existing supply of hotel rooms remains flat (i.e., 0.01% annual growth), and growth in occupied roomnights (demand) continues at their historic 2013—2019 negative pace of -0.58% per year through 2030. This translates into negative demand for (56) fewer hotel rooms over the next 10 years (through 2030); and  There are 174 new hotel rooms planned as part of an expansion of the Downtown at the District project in Palm Beach Gardens. If these rooms are built, this would represent a room count 312% greater than the market will support. In other words, there would be an excess of supply of (230) rooms over the next 10 years. Any new hotel, including this 174-room property as proposed at Downtown at the Gardens, would have to steal market share among existing hotel properties. WTL+a WTL +a Real Estate & Economic Advisors Washington, DC—Cape Cod, MA 301.502.4171 508.214.0915 133 Table 46: Hotel Potentials Scenario #1—Twin City Mall Site, 2020—2030 Scenario #2: Moderate Growth  Scenario #2 utilizes peak market trends as occurred between 2013 and 2017. First, it assumes that growth in available roomnights among the area’s existing supply of hotel rooms remains flat (i.e., -0.01 % growth). This scenario also utilizes the actual 1.49% per year compound annual growth rate that occurred in occupied roomnights between 2013 and 2017. This is predicated on business expansion generated by commercial growth in this area of northern Palm Beach County, aided by focused economic development initiatives aimed at business retention and recruitment; and, dependent on unknown recovery in the tourism industry;  Similar to Scenario #1, there are 174 new hotel rooms planned as part of an expansion of the Downtown at the District project in Palm Beach Gardens. If these rooms are built, this would represent a room count 112% greater than the market will support. In other words, there would be a nominal excess of supply of (18) rooms over the next 10 years. Market growth will Change:Supportable 2020 2030 2020-2030 Rooms Scenario 1: Past Trends (2013-2019) Area Hotel Rooms 2,162 Available Roomnights 789,130 789,706 576 Annual Growth (2013-2019)0.01% Occupied Roomnights 353,231 333,428 (19,803) (56) Annual Growth (2013-2019)-0.58% Allocation to Known Hotel Rooms: Under Construction - N/A - Planned/Approved - Downtown at the Gardens (ShopCore)174 Subtotal-Allocated Hotel Rooms:174 As % of Area-wide Demand -312% Unallocated Hotel Rooms:(230) Source: STR Global; WTL+a, revised September 2021. WTL+a WTL +a Real Estate & Economic Advisors Washington, DC—Cape Cod, MA 301.502.4171 508.214.0915 134 accommodate a new 174-room property as proposed at Downtown at the Gardens without any significant loss of demand for rooms in the area’s existing hotel supply. Table 47: Hotel Potentials Scenario #2—Twin City Mall Site, 2020—2030 Conclusion—Hotel Potentials The analysis reveals negligible market support for new hotel development on the Twin City Mall site in what would be considered by the hotel industry as a secondary location. Even if peak growth in roomn ight demand (which occurred between 2013 and 2017 among the competitive set) continues, it is insufficient to support more than 150 additional hotel rooms in the surrounding area over the next 10 years. This demand is likely to be captured in stronger, primary locations, such as the commercial node created by The Gardens Mall and Downtown at the Gardens, or at interchanges along I-95. In fact, ShopCore is planning a 174-room hotel as part of expansion and repurposing of Downtown at the Gardens. This will capture competitive area roomnight demand in the near-term. Change:Supportable 2020 2030 2020-2030 Rooms Scenario 2: Moderate Growth (2013-2017) Area Hotel Rooms 2,162 Available Roomnights 789,130 788,552 (578) Annual Growth (2013-2017)-0.01% Occupied Roomnights 353,231 409,550 56,319 156 Annual Growth (2013-2017)1.49% Allocation to Known Hotel Rooms: Under Construction - N/A - Planned/Approved - N/A 174 Subtotal-Allocated Hotel Rooms:174 As % of Area-wide Demand 112% Unallocated Hotel Rooms:(18) Source: STR Global; WTL+a, revised September 2021. WTL+a WTL +a Real Estate & Economic Advisors Washington, DC—Cape Cod, MA 301.502.4171 508.214.0915 135 General Retail The potential for retail uses as part of the redevelopment of the Twin City Mall site is less affected by past trends and development patterns than other commercial land uses. The major influences and economic forces affecting retail feasibility in 2021 are significantly different than when Twin City Mall opened in 1973 and closed in 1994. The effects of COVID-19 on consumer behavior, supply chain delays in securing merchandise and supplies, reduced in-store sales due to growth of online shopping (particularly for soft goods and gifts), job losses, and household income fluctuations caused by the pandemic have combined to reduce sales for retail, food and beverage, and consumer services. Those reduced sales have rippled through increased vacancies and unpaid rents in commercial retail space. For traditional shopping malls, the significant decline in the viability of department stores has reduced the number of store locations and has disrupted the balance of anchor stores and the inline businesses that connected them; in fact, the entire retail industry has been in turmoil, particularly since 2020. In addition to these industry-wide challenges, the Twin City Mall site will be affected by other localized forces, both positive and negative. Those forces include:  The abundant supply of existing/competitive retail located within three miles totaling almost 6.7 million sq. ft. of retail space (based on the findings of the RDS field inventory). The greater area is an established retail destination (particularly surrounding The Gardens Mall). While there is major drawing power across the region, the Twin City Mall site is not central to these other destination points and must compete with that critical mass of retail that forms multiple major destinations within that three-mile trade area;  The potential for new on-site residential densit ies, with as many as 850 to 1,050 new units, plus other new housing nearby such as the Nautilus 220 and 315 Federal Highway projects represent a new market segment of resident spending, potentially enhanced by the presence of Publix and direct proximity for 1,500 to 1,800 new on-site residents. The local resident market will expand through development of new dwelling units; and  There is an ongoing shift in total retail sales across adjacent markets in North Palm Beach and Lake Park. As noted in Section 3, there is $169 million in annual net inflow of retail spending from outside of Lake Park into the Town and annual sales outflow (i.e., ‘leakage’) of $84 million out of North Palm Beach; these existing spending patterns may create opportunities for on-site retail if the right type of new development and tenant mix is implemented. WTL+a WTL +a Real Estate & Economic Advisors Washington, DC—Cape Cod, MA 301.502.4171 508.214.0915 136 In dollar volume, consumer spending on retail goods and services is primarily attributable to resident-based activities. But those same residents can also spend (in different ways) as employees, purchasing food and beverage for lunch, making purchases of apparel and accessories, gifts, or consumer services during the workday. However, not all employees have the time or opportunity to go out for lunch, but other employees in specific industry sectors eat out and shop frequently as long as food and retail stores and services are proximate to allow efficient use of lunch times or other parts of the workday. Industry sectors that more regularly patronize retail areas principally correlate to the number of nearby office workers. While neither Lake Park nor North Palm Beach are major office clusters, potential spending generated by nearby office and service employees remains a factor in determining how much retail might be supportable at the Twin City site. In Florida, tourism and visitor spending are the single largest economic activity in the state. While Palm Beach County contains many visitor destinations, limited visitation and business travel to both Lake Park and North Palm Beach do not suggest that a visitor-oriented market (and a hotel to accommodate it) will be present at the Twin City Mall site. Visitor spending potentials are not significant contributors to retail viability at the site. These market factors can either continue to operate under current conditions (resulting in limited potential to add feasible new retail), or market conditions can be changed by inducing modifications in consumer spending. Perhaps most important, those traditional consumer behaviors and modifications can be altered by re-thinking the use mix, implementing proven planning concepts that result in a clear ‘sense of place,’ and a more walkable environment (which does not exist in this part of Palm Beach County). If the redevelopment of Twin City Mall is characterized as a transformative new mixed-use product and a differentiated setting, it may be possible to add selective retail uses into the project plan. Retail Methodology To recognize this potential (and assuming a transformative overall character is created), four potential sources of increased retail sales were analyzed; each is described below. The four consumer market segments are drawn from each of the municipalities as well as through the capture of a new share from overall regional spending. These increased sales projections should be considered conservative and potentially achievable as long as a dramatically differentiated redevelopment project is implemented. If redevelopment character is similar to what exists in the competitive trade area today, incremental supportable retail space would not be considered WTL+a WTL +a Real Estate & Economic Advisors Washington, DC—Cape Cod, MA 301.502.4171 508.214.0915 137 financially feasible or economically sustainable over time. Achieving an increase in demand for viable retail will be almost solely dependent on the quality and execution of a new identity and physical character for the Twin City Mall site. The four major consumer markets include: Retail Demand—Existing Residents (“Baseline”) The first consumer market that may be increased through retail spending comprises existing residents (the “baseline”) in Lake Park, North Palm Beach, and the North County trade area. Table 46 illustrates:  Current (2020) and future (2025) population and households in each municipality and North County, and  Total spending potentials and assumptions regarding potential increased sales by each. The premise in the estimated increase in spending is that, if a compelling and differentiated new ‘place’ (providing a pedestrian-oriented ‘civic place’ that is programmed with strong retail operators, most likely focused on food & beverage), existing resident-based consumers should increase on-site spending. Total retail spending was increased by very modest percentages (e.g., 0.50% for Lake Park, 0.35% for North Palm Beach, and 0.10% for North Cou nty residents). Next, additional sales were divided by an aggregated average sales productivity factor of $372.82 per sq. ft. (i.e., total annual sales divided by total square footage). WTL+a WTL +a Real Estate & Economic Advisors Washington, DC—Cape Cod, MA 301.502.4171 508.214.0915 138 Table 48: Retail Potentials—Existing Residents, 2025 Incremental Add'l Annual Avg. Sales 2025 Avg HH Total Increase in On-site Spending Productivity Supportable Location 2020 2025 2020 2025 Retail Spending Retail Spending Capture (1)Existing HHs Per SF (2)SF Town of Lake Park 8,762 9,101 3,400 3,534 16,837$ 59,501,319$ 0.50%297,507$ 372.82$ 798 Village of North Palm Beach 12,975 13,490 6,570 6,819 28,465$ 194,100,274$ 0.35%679,351$ 372.82$ 1,822 North County Trade Area 73,538 73,538 32,882 34,604 28,249$ 977,537,438$ 0.10%977,537$ 372.82$ 2,622 Total:95,275 96,129 42,852 44,957 1,231,139,031$ 1,954,395$ 5,242 % Change:0.9%4.9% (1) The increase in capture is an estimate that reflects the enhanced marketability of a redeveloped Twin City Mall in capturing additional household retail sales from area residents. (2) This reflects 2025 aggregated average sales productivity (per sq. ft.) across selected retail categories. This is based on an average annual inflation rate of 3.5% per year (using an adjusted Federal Reserve rate from 2021, during which the Fed increased estimated inflation rates from 3.4% to 4.2%). Source: Federal Reserve Bank, 2021; Bureau of Labor Statistics; Claritas, Inc.; ESRI Business Analyst; RDS LLC; WTL+a, September 2021 Population Households 2025 WTL+a WTL +a Real Estate & Economic Advisors Washington, DC—Cape Cod, MA 301.502.4171 508.214.0915 139 RDS notes different retailers generate different sales per square foot; as the final mix of retail uses is not known, an aggregated average of all sales productivities of $372.82 per sq. ft. (a 2025 estimate across various retail sectors) was used to determine supportable new retail square footage attributable to the increase in sales. Using these analytical parameters, increased sales generated by additional spending from existing (baseline) residents could justify approximately 5,250 sq. ft. of retail space at buildout. Retail Demand—New On -site Residents The second resident-based consumer market to provide additional sales can be generated by new on-site residents in approved and/or proposed new residential development on the Twin City Mall site:  A 250-unit, multi-family rental complex proposed by Woolbright Development on acreage the applicant currently owns on the Lake Park side of the site, and  Any future residential that might be built by development of the 13.1 acres of land located on the North Palm Beach side of the site. The Woolbright program was more fully understood at the time of the retail analysis. If approved by the Town of Lake Park, these 250 units would be built adjacent to the Publix grocery store. Required parking will be provided on surface lots with amenities located in the central courtyard of the new project. The project is not currently planned to include any retail space. The unit mix will comprise one-, two- and three-bedroom units. Assuming an average of 1.75 residents per unit suggest over 430 new on-site residents at buildout on the Lake Park portion of the site. As noted, 13.1 acres located on the North Palm Beach side of the site were recently contracted by a resident of northern Palm Beach County. Due diligence is underway, and any future redevelopment remains conceptual and without exact unit counts. However, WTL+a has assumed the contract purchaser will pursue both greater building heights and densities (that will likely necessitate the provision of structured parking); a high level of resident amenities; and opportunities for enhanced values provided by views of the Intracoastal Waterway and/or the Atlantic Ocean. The housing demand analysis measured market potentials for residential development totaling between 600 and 800 units for th is portion of the site. Assuming an average of 1.75 residents per units suggest the potential for 1,000 to 1,400 new, on-site residents at buildout on the North Palm Beach portion of the site. WTL+a WTL +a Real Estate & Economic Advisors Washington, DC—Cape Cod, MA 301.502.4171 508.214.0915 140 We recognize that densities at this scale are greater than currently considered. The retail analysis also assumes that any future development program will be mixed-use, potentially incorporating new housing, a retail component, and possibly a limited amount of office space. Due to the size of the site and potential residential buildout, on-site parking requirements would be met in new, on-site structured parking. As planning assumptions are more clearly defined (and ultimately, development entitlements), a final unit count is likely to have a significant effect on retail market potentials. The retail analysis assumed both “low” (i.e., 600 units) and “high” (i.e., 800 units) development scenarios. We also note these estimates may not reflect a final development program but were used to measure the impacts of these densities on how much retail could be supported by new on-site residents. The methodology used to calculate incremental retail demand generated by new, on-site residents is similar to the approach used for existing (baseline) residents. Average annual household spending by new on-site residents is assumed to be similar to spending patterns among existing households in both Lake Park and North Palm Beach. Potential household spending for residents of the 250 units proposed by Woolbright may be considered conservative, as likely rents will require higher average household incomes than existing residents of Lake Park command. Further, estimated spending capture rates for new, on-site residents are higher than for existing (baseline) residents due to the immediate adjacency of the retail (this includes spending at Publix) and the convenience and ready access to a potential retail concentration (which would be walkable from both sides of the site). To the extent the redevelopment plan emphasizes a coherent walkable plan and cohesive connections between the two jurisdictions, ease and convenience factors affecting spending will be sustainable over time. As illustrated in Table 49, the analysis suggests that new, on-site residents on both the Lake Park and North Palm Beach sides of the site will support between 9,200 sq. ft. and 11,700 sq. ft. of retail space at buildout, depending upon the approved/final unit mix. WTL+a WTL +a Real Estate & Economic Advisors Washington, DC—Cape Cod, MA 301.502.4171 508.214.0915 141 Table 49: Retail Potentials—New On-Site Residents, 2025 Average Estimated Annual Avg. Sales 2025 No. of Persons New Annl Retail Ann'l Spending Capture On-Site Spending Productivity Supportable Location Units (HHs)Per Unit Residents Spending/HH All New HHs Rate (1)New HHs Per SF (2)SF Proposed Woolbright Project 250 1.75 438 16,837$ 3,998,745$ 15.0%599,812$ 372.82$ 1,609 Lake Park Proposed Residential - Low 600 1.75 1,050 28,465$ 16,224,836$ 17.5%2,839,346$ 372.82$ 7,616 North Palm Beach Proposed Residential - High 800 1.75 1,400 28,249$ 21,469,439$ 17.5%3,757,152$ 372.82$ 10,078 North Palm Beach Total: Low Scenario 850 1,488 20,223,581$ 3,439,158$ 9,225 to to to to to High Scenario 1,050 1,838 25,468,183$ 4,356,963$ 11,686 (1) The capture rate is an estimate that considers that new on-site households are immediately proximate to on-site retail/food & beverage/consumer services. (2) This reflects 2025 aggregated average sales productivity (per sq. ft.) across selected retail categories. This is based on an average annual inflation rate of 3.5% per year (using an adjusted Federal Reserve rate from 2021, during which the Fed increased estimated inflation rates from 3.4% to 4.2%). Source: Federal Reserve Bank, 2021; Bureau of Labor Statistics; Claritas, Inc.; ESRI Business Analyst; RDS LLC; WTL+a, September 2021 2025 WTL+a WTL +a Real Estate & Economic Advisors Washington, DC—Cape Cod, MA 301.502.4171 508.214.0915 142 Retail Demand—Nearby Office & Service Employees While smaller than both existing and future resident-based markets, area office and service workers could also provide spending support for new retail at the site. This assumes that there will be a range of food and beverage offerings in a distinctive setting (i.e., not similar to the existing strip commercial character of Northlake Boulevard or U.S. 1). Not all employees have the ability to dine out for lunch or to go shopping; as a result, the retail analysis selected those segments most likely to be lunchtime dining and shopping consumers—this is comprised primarily of office workers in professional and business services, among others. As presented in Section 3, 2020 employment data for both Lake Park and North Palm Beach served as the basis to estimate potential spending and capture rates, and office worker spending patterns were based on a 2012 employee spending survey (updated in 2019) completed by the International Council of Shopping Centers (ICSC), considered the most accurate source in the retail industry. Average weekly spending on retail, food and beverage and consumer services was annualized over 50 weeks per year (as vacation spending would be counted as visitor-, not worker-, expenditures). We also note that spending patterns are prior to the pandemic’s effects on workplace populations and reduced in-person visitation to stores and restaurants. Since the redevelopment of Twin City Mall will require multiple years of construction and lease-up, the analysis assumes stabilized (i.e., non-COVID) market and economic conditions. As illustrated in Table 50, 2020 employee counts from both Lake Park and North Palm Beach were utilized to estimate total potential spending by office and service workers. North County was excluded from this analysis—to ensure a more conservative approach and because of the significant retail inventory that exists elsewhere in the surrounding trade area. As such, employees in the larger North County trade area are less likely to travel to the Twin City Mall redevelopment due to time constraints. Using very modest capture rates of spending potentials for selected workplace categories suggests that nearby office and service employees will support a limited amount up to 1,575 sq. ft. of retail space at buildout. WTL+a WTL +a Real Estate & Economic Advisors Washington, DC—Cape Cod, MA 301.502.4171 508.214.0915 143 Table 50: Retail Potentials—Nearby Office & Service Employees, 2025 Annual Total Annual Estimated Annual Avg. Sales 2025 Total Office & Service Per Employee Employee Capture On-site Spending Productivity Supportable Location Employment Employees Spending (1)Spending Rate (2)Area Employees Per SF (3)SF Lake Park 6,604 1,520 8,957.50$ 13,615,400$ 1.5%204,231$ 372.82$ 548 North Palm Beach 6,185 1,712 8,957.50$ 15,335,240$ 2.5%383,381$ 372.82$ 1,028 Total:12,789 3,232 8,957.50$ 28,950,640$ 587,612$ 1,576 (1) ICSC Research Report on Office Worker Spending, 2012 (updated to 2019). (2) The capture rate is an estimate that reflects the enhanced marketability of a redeveloped Twin City Mall in capturing a portion of area office/service employee spending. (3) This reflects 2025 aggregated average sales productivity (per sq. ft.) across selected retail categories. This is based on an average annual inflation rate of 3.5% per year (using an an adjusted Federal Reserve rate from 2021, during which the Fed increased estimated inflation rates from 3.4% to 4.2%). Source: Federal Reserve Bank; International Council of Shopping Centers (ICSC); RDS LLC; WTL+a, September 2021 2020 WTL+a WTL +a Real Estate & Economic Advisors Washington, DC—Cape Cod, MA 301.502.4171 508.214.0915 144 Retail Demand—Resident -based Leakage & Inflow Using information on household retail sales (among residents of both municipalities) and actual store sales (as presented in Section 3), it is possible to understand the degree to which existing retail is capturing expenditures by residents and other consumers such as visitors. The origin of non - resident sales is not documented, but by comparing estimated volumes of resident spending potentials against total store sales, the difference between resident-serving locations and retail that attracts spending from outside the area can be determined. If store sales exceed what households spend, the difference is known as ‘inflow,’ meaning that a portion of total retail sales are attributable to outside/non-resident consumers. As illustrated previously in Table 10 , store sales in the Town of Lake Park generate annual sales inflow of approximately $169 million per year. This is mostly attributable to large format (“Big Box”) stores located on Congress Avenue , such as Walmart, Lowe’s, Kohl’s, and Target, which draw consumers from a much larger trade area. These types of stores are strong shopping destinations and offer product ranges and price values that encourage shoppers to travel farther than they might for smaller/local businesses. By contrast, households in North Palm Beach export sales (known as retail ‘leakage’) of $84.6 million per year to stores and retail businesses located outside of North Palm Beach. It is likely that a portion of this spending transfers to both Lake Park retailers along Congress as well as The Gardens Mall area, where there are three major retail destinations. In North Palm Beach, these ‘exported’ or ‘leaked’ sales appear in green in Table 9, suggesting that some portion of this leakage can be “recaptured” if a better product mix is available nearby, such as the Twin City site. The part of the site fronting U.S. 1 (north of Palmetto Drive in Lake Park) is within the municipal boundaries of North Palm Beach. Existing uses like the BP Gas Station, CVS, and other pad site uses are not likely to be removed in the near future, but the 13.1 -acre parcel containing the auto museum is under contract, and redevelopment concepts are being prepared. One concept considers a mix of uses, predominantly residential, that may also include limited retail and a small amount of professional office space. If this mix of uses is approved/entitled and built on the site proximate to the rest of North Palm Beach, an opportunity exists to ‘recapture’ a share of existing retail sales ‘leakage’ out of the Village. WTL+a WTL +a Real Estate & Economic Advisors Washington, DC—Cape Cod, MA 301.502.4171 508.214.0915 145 Table 51: Retail Potentials—Recapture of Existing Resident-based Sales Leakage Avg. Sales Potential Estimated Recaptured Avg. Sales 2025 Productivity Supportable Capture On-site Productivity Supportable Location Inflow (1)Leakage (2)Per SF (3)SF Rate (4)Spending Per SF (3)SF Lake Park Sales 169,427,772$ 372.82$ 454,449 0.50%847,139$ 372.82$ 2,272 North Palm Beach Sales (84,579,788)$ 372.82$ (226,865) 1.5%1,268,697$ 372.82$ 3,403 Total:169,427,772$ (84,579,788)$ 227,584 2,115,836$ 5,675 (1) Inflow is defined as retail store sales that occur within the jurisdiction in excess of annual household spending. This reflects sales drawn from outside Lake Park (primarily to Congress Avenue). (2) Leakage is defined as household retail sales that households transfer out of the jurisdiction to other jurisdictions. This reflects sales leaving North Palm Beach for other areas, and represents a potential "recapture" opportunity. (3) This reflects 2025 aggregated average sales productivity (per sq. ft.) across selected retail categories. This is based on an average annual inflation rate of 3.5% per year (using an adjusted Federal Reserve rate from 2021, during which the Fed increased estimated inflation rates from 3.4% to 4.2%). (4) The capture rate is an estimate that reflects the enhanced marketability of a redeveloped Twin City Mall in capturing existing household sales inflow and leakage. Source: Federal Reserve Bank, 2021; Bureau of Labor Statistics; Claritas, Inc.; ESRI Business Analyst; RDS LLC; WTL+a, September 2021 Annual "Opportunity Gap" WTL+a WTL +a Real Estate & Economic Advisors Washington, DC—Cape Cod, MA 301.502.4171 508.214.0915 146 As illustrated in Table 51 , if Lake Park is able to recapture 0.50% more of total annual inflow sales, that slight increase would support approximately 2,270 sq. ft. of retail space (either on the Lake Park portion of the site or shifted to a mixed-use concept with a retail concentration on the North Palm Beach side of the site). While Lake Park may not want to forego potential ad valorem and sales tax revenues generated by new retail space, shifting this sp ace across the municipal boundary might also strengthen the convenience of retail as an amenity for residents of Woolbright’s project, which will include no retail space . Conversely, supporting a cohesive retail component on the North Palm Beach side of the site could potentially recapture a share of annual household retail spending leaving the Village for other jurisdictions. If 1.5% of the ‘leaked’ sales could be recaptured at the site, this would support an additional 3,400 sq. ft. of new retail. In summary, the recapture opportunity suggests support for up to 5,675 sq. ft. of retail space at buildout. Retail Demand—Conclusion Table 52 summarizes potential consumer markets and sales estimates from various sources that could expect to support new retail uses as part of the redevelopment of the Twin City Mall site. A critical assumption is that the redevelopment program will create a retail setting that is differentiated from other offerings in the area, that the configuration is pedestrian and on-site resident friendly, and that the mix of retail businesses can become a dining and limited shopping/services location. These assumptions are necessary to achieve capture rates applied in the analysis and to retain a portion of household sales leakage occurring in North Palm Beach. If these criteria are not met, then the retail program would not appear to be achievable. Moreover, if the residential development program identified in the housing analysis is reduced below the supportable 800 to 1,050 units, market demand for the site’s retail program would also be reduced. Using potential sales increases from all consumer sources, the total retail development program for the Twin City Mall site should target a range of 22,000 to 24,000 sq. ft. WTL+a WTL +a Real Estate & Economic Advisors Washington, DC—Cape Cod, MA 301.502.4171 508.214.0915 147 Table 52: Retail Demand—Summary of Market Support Location Consumer Segment/ Source Low High Lake Park Existing Residents 798 798 New On-site Residents 1,609 1,609 Office & Service Employees 548 548 Sales Inflow/Leakage 2,272 2,272 Subtotal - Lake Park:5,227 5,227 North Palm Beach Existing Residents 1,822 1,822 New On-site Residents 7,616 10,078 Office & Service Employees 1,028 1,028 Sales Inflow/Leakage 3,403 3,403 Subtotal - North Palm Beach:13,869 16,331 North County Existing Residents 2,622 2,622 TOTAL SUPPORTABLE RETAIL:21,718 24,180 Source: RDS, LLC; WTL+a, September 2021. Supportable SF WTL+a WTL +a Real Estate & Economic Advisors Washington, DC—Cape Cod, MA 301.502.4171 508.214.0915 148 6 Redevelopment & Marketing Issues The possible redevelopment of the Twin City Mall site will be a significant improvement to a complicated parcel that has been underutilized for a significant period of time. That redevelopment opportunities will be enhanced due to a joint effort between the Village of North Palm Beach and the Town of Lake Park will create economic benefits for both communities. Notably, redevelopment planning will require a shared effort to market, administer, review, and approve future proposals. As background for discussion and coordination between the two jurisdictions in managing the redevelopment process, this section outlines several areas for consideration. Depending on how the developer solicitation process is defined, proposals reviewed and approved, and financial and/or regulatory incentives authorized, initial design of the process can avoid misunderstandings or mistaken expectations and unintended project delays, or final outcomes may vary from goals established at the outset of the process. Similar to other redevelopment projects, there are likely to be multiple successive steps in this process. These steps are generally sequential, including the earliest to determine initial goals and objectives as defined by each municipality, structuring and solicitation of redevelopment proposals, to developer selection(s)/project approvals/entitlements and final implementation. Unlike other sites in which there is (at least) partial ownership by the public sector, neither municipality owns any of the multiple properties comprising the redevelopment site. The public sector’s influence on the desired plan will be less direct and based on entitlements, adoption and incorporation of an overall master redevelopment plan, negotiations with developers between the two jurisdictions, and project implementation. Redevelopment will result from the exercise of zoning and public policies rather than direct participation as an owner. This policy-based method is used frequently and requires clarity in terms and goals, longer-term commitments to the adopted master plan, and flexibility over time to ensure that redevelopment is successful. The redevelopment project can be grouped under three major areas:  Definition of Redevelopment Program and Master Plan  Marketing, Developer Solicitation, and Selection Process, and WTL+a WTL +a Real Estate & Economic Advisors Washington, DC—Cape Cod, MA 301.502.4171 508.214.0915 149  Application and Implementation of Public Policy to Leverage Developer Commitments Each of these elements is discussed in greater detail below. The long-term redevelopment program for the Twin City Mall site will be shaped by the following components: Property Ownership Patterns/Separate Jurisdictions One of the biggest challenges to a cohesive, master-planned redevelopment of the site is fragmented ownership. As depicted in Figure 1, the Twin City Mall site is located in two adjoining municipalities—the Town of Lake Park and the Village of North Palm Beach. As noted in Section 2, there are at least 16 parcels within the site’s boundaries with nine separate property owners. Town of Lake Park Portion As illustrated previously in Table 1 and according to Palm Beach County Property Appraiser records:  Approximately 59% of the western portion of the site (comprising 22.47 acres) is located in the Town of Lake Park. This portion is bounded by Northlake Boulevard on the north; Palmetto Drive on the south; an internal road on the west; and the municipal limits with North Palm Beach on the east;  Northlake Promenade Shoppes/Woolbright Development (based in Boca Raton) own four parcels comprising 11.57 acres across the site (in both jurisdictions). The other major property owner is a LLC partnership known as JS133 US One LLC and Village Shoppes at US1 LLC;  The largest retail property, “Northlake Promenade Shoppes,” is located in Lake Park and anchored by a + 52,768 sq. ft. Publix supermarket; another 4,036 sq. ft. of adjacent in-line retail spaces for 10 businesses; 10,546 sq. ft. occupied by a UPS store; and 300+/- surface parking spaces. The grocery store and parking areas are owned/controlled by Publix, but the store is the anchor use of the Northlake Promenade Shoppes, owned by Woolbright Development;  Pad sites along U.S. 1 and Northlake Boulevard located in Lake Park include Helix Urgent Care (a walk-in medical clinic) and Wendy’s; and  Three parcels used as storm water management ponds are recorded under one property number. Woolbright Development is seeking approval to construct 250 rental apartments on a vacant 6.6- acre parcel west of Publix supermarket in Lake Park. The building would be constructed around a WTL+a WTL +a Real Estate & Economic Advisors Washington, DC—Cape Cod, MA 301.502.4171 508.214.0915 150 central ‘amenity’ ‘courtyard with approximately 260 surface parking spaces located to the west of the building. This significant infill project will be the first private investment in redevelopment of the site. Village of North Palm Beach Portion As illustrated previously in Table 1 and according to Palm Beach County Property Appraiser records:  The remainder (41%) of the site is located in the Village of North Palm Beach (comprising 15.75 acres). The North Palm Beach portion of the site is bounded by Northlake Boulevard on the north; by U.S. Route 1 on the east; and , by the eastern extension of Palmetto Drive on the south. There are three curb-cut access roads into the mall site from Northlake Boulevard; another three from U.S. 1; and three from Palmetto Drive;  The eastern portion of the northernmost water retention pond is located in North Palm Beach;  Pad sites along U.S. 1 and Northlake Boulevard located in North Palm Beach include a CVS Pharmacy (at the intersection), a BP Gas Station, and TD Bank; and  WTL+a understands that 13.1 acres were placed under contract in August 2021 by JS 133 US One LLC and Village Shoppes at US1 LLC. At the time of this report, the sale has not yet been recorded in the County’s records. This property formerly housed the “Cars of Dreams” Museum, office and warehouse space, and a restaurant and has frontage on U.S. 1 (a small linear parcel on the back side/western edge of the auto museum is located in Lake Park). The site totals 38.22 acres of land. Notably, the two largest parcels on the site are slated for redevelopment, one located in each municipality. These projects will be the primary focus of the redevelopment master plan and are expected to generate greater ad valorem tax revenues for both Lake Park and North Palm Beach after redevelopment. From a regulatory and administrative perspective, both Lake Park and North Palm Beach have taken critical steps in creating an overall conceptual approach for the Twin City Mall site, and both jurisdictions have modified their planning documents and building codes to mutually promote an overall site plan concept:  The Village of North Palm Beach’s plan and development code amendments addressed broader zoning descriptions/designations and review and approval processes to update the 1972 Ordinance to a new ‘Code’, which removed the Certificates of Appropriateness submission/review and approvals system enacted in 1972; WTL+a WTL +a Real Estate & Economic Advisors Washington, DC—Cape Cod, MA 301.502.4171 508.214.0915 151  The new code in North Palm Beach updates an older, more cumbersome system of submittal and review by proposers. The Village’s amendments were approved and adopted on September 24, 2020;  The revised building code for North Palm Beach assigns review and approval of development design issues to the Planning Board, which (since 1977) has served as the former ‘Appropriateness Board’ in reviewing development proposals by developers. References to the process and awarding of Certificates of Appropriateness have been struck from the new document; and  The Lake Park amendments, reviewed in September 2020 also addressed changes in site layout and mix of uses and included an overall site plan that illustrated conceptual redevelopment concepts for the site in both jurisdictions. We note that the concepts shown on the documents do not match the proposed site plan of the 250- unit residential project submitted by Woolbright Development for its property west of Publix. According to municipal staff, there is no interlocal agreement between North Palm Beach and Lake Park that outlines how an approved/adopted redevelopment master plan might be reviewed, approved, and/or adopted through a design partnership between the two municipalities. As noted above, the building location of the former Cars of Dreams Museum was included in the sale of several parcels (comprising 7.99 acres, 0.43 acres and 0.72 acres) that were placed under contract for sale in August 2021. The redevelopment concept for this group of properties is planned to be a mix of uses with housing, retail, and possibly limited office space. The initial concept is anticipated to seek between 600 and 800 residential units, structured parking in two garages, open space for public gathering surrounded by activating retail uses (especially food and beverage), and possible office space on the second floor of mixed-use buildings. Planning and design for this redevelopment concept are underway, but there is no schedule for submission, review, and approvals by the Village, nor is there a determined construction/completion schedule at the time of this analysis. Notably, the number of units needed to recover the property’s purchase price will necessitate that existing building heights and densities be reconsidered and/or revised. The applicant recognizes that public support for these possible changes is critical. WTL+a WTL +a Real Estate & Economic Advisors Washington, DC—Cape Cod, MA 301.502.4171 508.214.0915 152 Potential Marketing & Implementation Issues Potential marketing and implementation issues resulting from fragmented/multiple property ownership and two different jurisdictions include: Design/Development Consistency & Central Planning Guidance Document While both local governments have modified their development codes to accommodate redevelopment and outline broad height and density guidelines, Woolbright Development’s proposal does not correspond to the conceptual plans developed by Lake Park in its Comprehensive Plan, or the conceptual diagrams developed for the Village of North Palm Beach Master Plan by TCRPC. Based on documents provided, it appears that there is no single guiding master plan document to be used by the two local governments in implementing redevelopment. Modifications to respective local development codes and Comprehensive Plans will provide a level of consistency, but the two are not linked. We recognize this may not be an issue, as Woolbright’s multi-family rental project is already designed, and redevelopment planning of the property formerly occupied by the Cars of Dreams Museum has just been initiated . For purposes of consistency and predictability for present and future developers on the Twin City Mall site, a mutually related legal description of materials, scale/height/density, and other design characteristics could enhance the final redevelopment image and identity. To ensure a predictable planning process, the two jurisdictions should collaborate on production of a shared planning guidance document that illustrates 1) existing allowed heights and densities; 2) how the two portions of the site can be optimally connected for pedestrians and vehicles; and 3) a vision of how future redevelopment might occur for existing outparcels, project entries and (should it ever become an opportunity), consideration of a new location for a future (potentially expanded) Publix. There does not appear to be a jointly develope d plan for the site’s redevelopment today; without this type of documented future vision (which could also comprise an evolved consolidation of past plans), redevelopment will occur in a more piecemeal manner. Excellent development results from excellent planning. A central vision plan would establish both predictability for long-term redevelopment and allow for consistent outcomes across a site with multiple owners. WTL+a WTL +a Real Estate & Economic Advisors Washington, DC—Cape Cod, MA 301.502.4171 508.214.0915 153 Public Goals & Objectives Without a fully vetted master plan for the site across both municipalities (whether incentivized or legally adopted as a planning requirement), it is unclear where and how much public open space, accessible amenities, and other non-revenue generating features of redevelopment will be guaranteed in the project’s implementation. In different ways, each conceptual plan identified in this report (Woolbright site in Lake Park and investor concept in North Palm Beach) recognizes the objectives of increasing the amount of public open space, providing ‘urban’ plazas/green space, landscaped roadways, and other benefits, but as there is no single plan, there is no single agreed location and/or development mechanism to achieve this important public goal. A joint planning effort may strengthen the ability of the two governments to meet open space goals by legislatively “sharing” the available open space on one site to serve the requirements of another. That is not to say that there are not significant other benefits that will accrue from redevelopment. In terms of direct and indirect economic benefits, there will be new housing, new residents (generating additional resident spending), increased ad valorem property taxes, new sales taxes generated, and opportunities for job creation, with categories depending on the final development program of uses. But it is noted that during public discussions about redevelopment, there were stated goals for more open space in a larger combination of redevelopment parcels. There were also comments about balancing increased density with walkable scale and a well-connected, pedestrian -friendly environment, something largely lacking in both communities today. As the project evolves, to meet the goal of increased densitie s (and potentially goals of more affordable housing, mixed-use and more multi-family residential), there may be the need to plan for structured parking, whether for existing retail (like the Publix supermarket) or for mid-rise residential to free up land for increased density. Key issues surrounding structured parking include:  At present, base land values and allowed redevelopment densities at the site are not likely to justify the capital investment costs of structured parking at a commercial level, so a mechanism for public funding may be necessary if this objective is pursued;  The location, linkage to adjacent use(s), and timing of structured parking could conceivably be managed by either Lake Park, North Palm Beach, or a combination of the two; and  The ability to use public financing sources (such as a public bond) may require consideration of an overlay ‘authority district’ or planning district (potentially including land in both jurisdictions) as a solution, should structured parking become a requirement. WTL+a WTL +a Real Estate & Economic Advisors Washington, DC—Cape Cod, MA 301.502.4171 508.214.0915 154 At present, redevelopment planning is specific to the municipality in which the new project is located. While the Wendy’s site on Northlake Boulevard is relatively small, the property is split between the two local governments. As a legal issue, Wendy’s is functioning well as currently divided. As a future redevelopment site, however, split parcels may complicate a single connected plan and vision. Administration, Review & Approvals With nine separate property owners, each having different priorities and timing for redevelopment or other investment, it is likely that longer-term redevelopment will result in property consolidation, higher-density projects (concurrent with increasing values in the underlying land) and changing development patterns along the major roadways framing the site. While the Town of Lake Park and Village of North Palm Beach have worked cooperatively to revise development codes and to share information about developer proposals, the municipalities do not appear to have a joint mechanism to administer, review , and approve development program review for components such as potentially shared infrastructure investment, differing property tax rates, or sales tax revenues. If the primary objective is to redevelop the site and generate net new ad valorem taxes for each municipality, a more formalized structure may not be needed. But if there are economies-of-scale or joint financing benefits to be gained by considering cost-sharing of elements like storm water management, water and sewer, police and fire protection services, building inspections, or property tax assessment rates, a more structured approach (such as a joint- or shared-jurisdiction overlay district) may be considered. A less structured approach may involve regular joint meetings between the two municipalities for planning and development workshops for review by both jurisdictions’ specific committees. These regular meetings could help identify issues of inconsistency and allow representative advisory review committees/commissions/boards to discuss and resolve unanticipated project circumstances or requests for planning policy changes or financial incentives. This ‘joint meetings’ approach could also consider consistencies or differences in urban design and planning standards, material standards, and public space connectivity across both parts of the site. Changing Market Forces & Characteristics Both Lake Park and North Palm Beach have developed over time as low-scale , suburban communities characterized by a predominance of single-family detached housing, with selected higher-density development along the Intracoastal Waterway in each community. Because WTL+a WTL +a Real Estate & Economic Advisors Washington, DC—Cape Cod, MA 301.502.4171 508.214.0915 155 waterfront properties are highly desirable for residential development (and generally more highly valued in the marketplace), these parcels present a particular opportunity for long-term redevelopment, particularly in Lake Park. Existing development along the Lake Park waterfront is centered around Kelsey Park and the Town’s marina, which preserve public views and access. These public amenities are now attracting potentially significant new investment, such as the Nautilus 220 project (which will contain 332 high-end condominium units) and are developing in response to a higher-density opportunity, both in scale and height and in the achieved values that are anticipated over time. This raises the issue of future reconsideration of current building heights and densities and the new markets they can represent. Florida has long benefitted from the relocation of residents from the Northeast and Midwest due to its tropical climate; more recently, population relocation has increased as a result of the pandemic and ability to work remotely. New ‘relocated’ residents are looking for new places to live and do not bring preconceived notions about community character. In response, developers are looking for lower-priced parcels to create higher values, and Lake Park’s waterfront is viewed as an opportunity to create those higher-priced (and higher-density) values. While the North Palm Beach part of the site is technically within the Village’s boundaries, it is positioned to capitalize on this new resident opportunity, as the Village’s remaining water-proximate properties are already developed, have highly fragmented ownership, and will be more costly to purchase. This suggests that a higher-density option should be considered for that portion of the site adjacent to U.S. 1, including the former Dreams of Cars Museum building. Higher elevations bring water views and value premiums in both sale prices and rental rates, and this will be appealing to new residents who may not want the lower-scale lifestyle that exists in the single-family neighborhoods in North Palm Beach. Current development codes and height limits do not encourage or allow developments above mid- rise levels. The decision to consider increased heights on the North Palm Beach part of the site will also affect views and public space access from the Lake Park parcels. WTL+a suggests, because of its location and context, that new uses on the North Palm Beach portion of the site consider greater densities and building heights to capture a share of this emerging market. The Village is effectively competing for this market with multiple other communities along the waterfront in South Florida. Another consideration is the value of land for surface parking. In real estate economics, there will be a point in time when the value per surface-foot will exceed the inherent value of surface parking. WTL+a WTL +a Real Estate & Economic Advisors Washington, DC—Cape Cod, MA 301.502.4171 508.214.0915 156 This will mean that structured parking can become more financially feasible than the opportunity-cost of retaining surface parking over the long-term. This issue is an immediate one for the mixed-use concept being considered by the prospective owners of 13.1 acres on the North Palm Beach side of the site. Over time, this may also become an issue for the Publix site in Lake Park. Grocery stores require parking and provide an amenity to nearby residents, but they are generally planned with suburban development and parking standards. It is unknown whether Publix’ real estate department is considering long-term redevelopment of their existing Lake Park store (and particularly its large parking field). The planned Woolbright project is also meeting its parking requirements with surface parking, but that could also change as property values increase. It is also recognized that structured parking is much more costly per parking stall than surface parking (by a cost factor of two to four times per parking stall ). This is the reason that public incentives may be required to close the ‘cost gap’ between land values that exceed those of surface parking but may not be high enough to be cross- subsidized by the value of internal project uses (on a per square foot basis). WTL+a suggests that the Town of Lake Park should anticipate that long-term future redevelopment on parcels dependent on surface parking may evolve over time to require structured parking; the Town should seek to balance opportunities for additional density against the structured parking costs, whether incorporated into developer costs or incentivized by the Town or another public entity. WTL+a WTL +a Real Estate & Economic Advisors Washington, DC—Cape Cod, MA 301.502.4171 508.214.0915 157 Appendix WTL+a WTL +a Real Estate & Economic Advisors Washington, DC—Cape Cod, MA 301.502.4171 508.214.0915 158 Table 53: Summary of Demographic Characteristics & Forecasts, 2010—2025 As % of Annual Annual 2020 County 2010-2020 Growth Rate 2020-2025 Growth Rate Population Trends & Forecasts Palm Beach County 1,460,733 140,599 1.02%88,359 1.18% Lake Park 8,762 0.6%607 0.72%339 0.76% North Palm Beach 12,975 0.9%954 0.77%515 0.78% North County Trade Area 73,538 5.0%8,182 1.19%3,987 1.06% Age Cohorts Median Age Age 25-64 Age 65+Age 25-64 Age 65+Age 25-64 Age 65+ Lake Park 37.5 54%15%53%17%-2.5%16.0% North Palm Beach 57.4 47%37%44%41%-7.9%12.3% North County Trade Area 47.6 52%25%50%28%-4.1%10.9% Annual Household Incomes Annual Average < $100,000 $100,000+< $100,000 $100,000+< $100,000 $100,000+ Lake Park 62,384$ 85%16%83%17%-1.3%7.1% North Palm Beach 107,822$ 60%40%56%44%-6.8%10.1% North County Trade Area 107,081$ 65%35%62%38%-4.2%8.5% Source: U.S. Census Bureau; American Community Survey; ESRI Business Analyst; WTL +a, May 2021. 5-Year Forecast (2025)% Change: 2020-2025 Current Estimates (2020) Current Estimates (2020) Population Growth (Past 10 Years)Population Forecast (Next 5 Years)Current Estimates (2020) 5-Year Forecast (2025)% Change: 2020-2025 WTL+a WTL +a Real Estate & Economic Advisors Washington, DC—Cape Cod, MA 301.502.4171 508.214.0915 159 Table 54: Summary of Economic Characteristics & Forecasts, 2007—2028 Annual HH Comparison to Retail Leakage or Retail Space Retail Spending County (Inflow)Per Capita Retail Spending & Inflow/Leakage Palm Beach County 21,134$ 54.3 Lake Park 14,176$ 67.1%(169,427,772)$ 103.7 North Palm Beach 23,966$ 113.4%84,579,788$ 99.1 North County Trade Area 23,785$ 112.5%112.0 Employment 2028 (DEO) As % of County Jobs-to-Population Job Gains or New Jobs If Fair Total Jobs (Fair Share)Ratio (Losses)Past 12 Years Past 5 Years Share Maintained Palm Beach County 713,943 0.49 75,851 87,755 Lake Park 6,604 0.93%0.75 552 0.747%0.751%812 North Palm Beach 6,185 0.87%0.48 182 0.758%0.794%760 North County Trade Area 49,371 6.9%0.67 3,760 5.0%7.4%6,068 Selected Industry Sectors (As % of Total Jobs) Industrial Retail Trade &Administration Professional/Information Manufacturing Arts/Entertainmt Accommodation/& Waste Scientific/Tech'l Finance/Insur Wholesale Trade & Recreation Food Services Healthcare Management Services & Real Estate Transp & Whsg Palm Beach County 15%11%15%11%8%8%8% Lake Park 24%12%8%14%3%1%17% North Palm Beach 10%14%24%9%15%8%2% North County Trade Area 20%13%15%12%8%8%9% Source: U.S. Census Bureau; American Community Survey; ESRI Business Analyst; WTL +a, May 2021. Retail & Hospitality Office 2018 (Census) 2020 (Dun & Bradstreet)2007-2018 (Census) New Jobs As % of County WTL+a WTL +a Real Estate & Economic Advisors Washington, DC—Cape Cod, MA 301.502.4171 508.214.0915 160 Table 55: Summary of Real Estate Market Conditions, 2001—2020 Palm Beach North County Lake North County Trade Area Park Palm Beach Workplace: Office 2020 Inventory (SF)57,613,955 4,970,337 57,566 1,081,296 As % of County or Trade Area 8.6%1.2%21.8% Annual Net Absorption Past 20 Years (2001-2020)10,222,609 1,365,726 7,822 (53,440) Average Annual 511,130 68,286 391 (2,672) As % of County or Trade Area 13%0.6%- Past 5 Years (2016-2020)854,515 212,422 3,707 (19,031) Average Annual 170,903 42,484 741 (3,806) As % of County or Trade Area 25%1.7%- 2020 Only (Pandemic)(434,190) 59,890 8,860 725 2021 (Jan-April)237,726 (52,234) (1,345) 18,679 New Development Past 20 Years (2001-2020)14,750,527 1,763,316 1,332 35,496 Average Annual 737,526 88,166 - - As % of County or Trade Area 12%0.08%2.0% Past 5 Years (2016-2020)1,277,936 300,158 - - Average Annual 255,587 60,032 - - As % of County or Trade Area 23%0%0% WTL+a WTL +a Real Estate & Economic Advisors Washington, DC—Cape Cod, MA 301.502.4171 508.214.0915 161 Table 55 (Continued): Summary of Real Estate Market Conditions, 2001—2020 Palm Beach North County Lake North County Trade Area Park Palm Beach Retail & Hotel 2020 Inventory (SF)79,577,880 8,239,538 908,739 1,285,492 As % of County or Trade Area 10%11%16% Annual Net Absorption Past 15 Years (2006-2020)5,330,722 1,292,961 109,050 77,437 Average Annual 355,381 86,197 7,270 5,162 As % of County or Trade Area 24%8%6% Past 5 Years (2016-2020)1,361,841 325,811 102,856 3,990 Average Annual 272,368 65,162 20,571 798 As % of County or Trade Area 24%32%1.2% 2020 Only (Pandemic)(161,770)(49,235) 8,707 35,328 2021 (Jan-April)119,226 72,768 4,332 (36,503) New Development Past 15 Years (2006-2020)11,941,314 1,849,853 101,874 36,803 Average Annual 796,088 123,324 6,792 2,454 As % of County or Trade Area 15%6%2% Past 5 Years (2016-2020)2,481,384 259,332 4,765 3,100 Average Annual 496,277 51,866 - - As % of County or Trade Area 10%1.8%1.2% Hotel Inventory (Rooms)17,740 N/A - 154 As % of County N/A 0%0.9% Housing Housing Starts (2007-2019) Single-family Detached 28,823 N/A 3 45 Multi-family 20,934 N/A - 182 Total:49,757 3 227 Annual Net Absorption-Multi-family Past 20 Years (2001-2020)N/A 1,537 (14) 10 Average Annual 77 - - As % of County or Trade Area - - Past 5 Years (2016-2020)N/A 812 3 3 Average Annual 162 - - As % of County or Trade Area - - Source: CoStar, Inc.; ESRI Business Analyst; STR Global; WTL+a, May 2021. WTL+a WTL +a Real Estate & Economic Advisors Washington, DC—Cape Cod, MA 301.502.4171 508.214.0915 162 Table 56: Employee Inflow/Outflow—Town of Lake Park, 2008—2018 2008 2013 2018 Amount % Total Inflow/Outflow Employed in Lake Park 4,372 3,595 4,865 493 11% Labor Force Living in Lake Park 4,167 2,915 4,497 330 8% Net Job Inflow (+) or Outflow (-)205 680 368 163 80% Outflow Job Characteristics (1) Workers in "Goods Producing" Industries 371 184 361 (10) -3% Workers in "Trade, Transportation & Utilities" Industries 708 402 822 114 16% Workers in "All Other Services" Industries 2,911 2,197 3,150 239 8% Total:3,990 2,783 4,333 343 9% Inflow Job Characteristics (2) Workers in "Goods Producing" Industries 1,170 643 1,259 89 8% Workers in "Trade, Transportation & Utilities" Industries 1,182 990 1,385 203 17% Workers in "All Other Services" Industries 1,843 1,830 2,057 214 12% Total:4,195 3,463 4,701 506 12% (1) Includes job characteristics of labor force residents of Lake Park who work elsewhere. (2) Includes job characteristics of labor force residents living elsewhere who work in Lake Park. Source: U.S. Census Bureau, On-the-Map; WTL+a; April 2021. Change: 2008-2018 WTL+a WTL +a Real Estate & Economic Advisors Washington, DC—Cape Cod, MA 301.502.4171 508.214.0915 163 Table 57: Employee Inflow/Outflow—Village of North Palm Beach, 2008—2018 2008 2013 2018 Amount % Total Inflow/Outflow Employed in North Palm Beach 3,510 3,911 4,619 1,109 32% Labor Force Living in North Palm Beach 4,880 4,188 5,344 464 10% Net Job Inflow (+) or Outflow (-)(1,370) (277) (725) 645 -47% Outflow Job Characteristics (1) Workers in "Goods Producing" Industries 557 347 533 (24) -4% Workers in "Trade, Transportation & Utilities" Industries 972 659 984 12 1% Workers in "All Other Services" Industries 3,135 2,889 3,521 386 12% Total:4,664 3,895 5,038 374 8% Inflow Job Characteristics (2) Workers in "Goods Producing" Industries 217 226 201 (16) -7% Workers in "Trade, Transportation & Utilities" Industries 320 375 403 83 26% Workers in "All Other Services" Industries 2,757 3,017 3,709 952 35% Total:3,294 3,618 4,313 1,019 31% (1) Includes job characteristics of labor force residents of North Palm Beach who work elsewhere. (2) Includes job characteristics of labor force residents living elsewhere who work in North Palm Beach. Source: U.S. Census Bureau, On-the-Map; WTL+a; April 2021. Change: 2008-2018 WTL+a WTL +a Real Estate & Economic Advisors Washington, DC—Cape Cod, MA 301.502.4171 508.214.0915 164 Table 58: Employee Inflow/Outflow—North County Trade Area, 2008—2018 2008 2013 2018 Amount % Total Inflow/Outflow Employed in North County Trade Area 39,316 37,222 44,755 5,439 14% Labor Force Living in North County Trade Area 28,912 26,967 31,999 3,087 11% Net Job Inflow (+) or Outflow (-)10,404 10,255 12,756 2,352 23% Outflow Job Characteristics (1) Workers in "Goods Producing" Industries 2,524 1,759 2,611 87 3% Workers in "Trade, Transportation & Utilities" Industries 4,635 4,068 5,015 380 8% Workers in "All Other Services" Industries 15,560 15,507 18,085 2,525 16% Total:22,719 21,334 25,711 2,992 13% Inflow Job Characteristics (2) Workers in "Goods Producing" Industries 4,464 2,622 4,108 (356) -8% Workers in "Trade, Transportation & Utilities" Industries 7,988 7,704 8,586 598 7% Workers in "All Other Services" Industries 20,671 21,263 25,773 5,102 25% Total:33,123 31,589 38,467 5,344 16% (1) Includes job characteristics of labor force residents of North County Trade Area who work elsewhere. (2) Includes job characteristics of labor force residents living elsewhere who work in North County Trade Area. Source: U.S. Census Bureau, On-the-Map; WTL+a; May 2021. Change: 2008-2018 WTL+a WTL +a Real Estate & Economic Advisors Washington, DC—Cape Cod, MA 301.502.4171 508.214.0915 165 Table 59: Demographic Trends & Forecasts—Palm Beach County, 2000—2024 2000 2010 2019 % Dist.2024 % Dist.No.CAGR % Demographic Profile Population 1,131,184 1,320,134 1,460,733 1,549,092 88,359 1.18% Households 474,175 544,227 595,315 629,257 33,942 1.12% Avg. HH Size 2.34 2.39 2.42 2.43 Median Age 43.5 45.9 46.2 Race White 970,121 1,015,647 70%1,043,274 67%27,627 0.5% Black 228,690 284,136 19%319,417 21%35,281 2.4% American Indian 6,043 6,010 0%5,967 0%(43) -0.1% Asian, Pacific Islander 31,870 41,944 3%49,228 3%7,284 3.3% Other 53,138 71,768 5%84,150 5%12,382 3.2% Two or More Races 30,272 41,228 3%47,056 3%5,828 2.7% Total:1,320,134 1,460,733 1,549,092 88,359 Hispanic (1)250,823 343,611 24%409,465 26%65,854 3.6% Age Distribution 0-14 220,616 223,593 15%233,670 15%10,077 0.9% 15-24 153,675 155,395 11%156,584 10%1,189 0.2% 25-34 146,694 176,499 12%185,962 12%9,463 1.1% 35-44 165,576 159,321 11%178,203 12%18,882 2.3% 45-54 188,126 177,559 12%169,783 11%(7,776) -0.9% 55-64 160,292 197,572 14%197,733 13%161 0.0% 65-74 130,427 181,184 12%204,744 13%23,560 2.5% 75+154,728 189,610 13%222,413 14%32,803 3.2% Income Profile Households by Income <$15,000 9.3%7.6% $15,000 - $24,999 9.2%7.6% $25,000 - $34,999 9.0%7.7% $35,000 - $49,999 12.7%11.8% $50,000 - $74,999 17.8%17.4% $75,000 - $99,999 12.5%13.1% $100,000 - $149,999 14.0%15.9% $150,000 - $199,999 6.4%8.4% $200,000+9.1%10.6% Average HH Income 93,331$ 106,694$ 2.7% Median HH Income 61,366$ 70,955$ 2.9% Education Profile Years of Education (2018 American Community Survey/ACS) Less than 9th Grade 5.9% 9th-12th Grade, No Diploma 6.0% High School Graduate (Includes Equivalency)24.9% Some College, No Degree 19.6% Associate Degree 8.8% Bachelor's Degree 21.8% Graduate/Professional Degree 13.0% (1) Persons of Hispanic origin are a subset of other race categories; therefore, totals do not add. https://factfinder.census.gov/faces/nav/jsf/pages/index.xhtml Source: ESRI Business Analyst; American Community Survey; WTL +a, April 2021. Change: 2019-2024 WTL+a WTL +a Real Estate & Economic Advisors Washington, DC—Cape Cod, MA 301.502.4171 508.214.0915 166 Table 60: Industrial Market Profile—Town of Lake Park, 2007—2020 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Total Ann'l Avg.% CAGR Industrial Inventory 872,422 872,422 872,422 872,422 872,422 872,422 872,422 872,422 872,422 872,422 872,422 872,422 872,422 872,422 - As % of County 1.8%1.7%1.8%1.8%1.8%1.8%1.8%1.8%1.7%1.7%1.7%1.7%1.7%1.6% No. of Buildings/Centers 86 86 86 86 86 86 86 86 86 86 86 86 86 86 Vacant Stock 101,590 122,231 110,497 73,207 33,571 40,491 31,016 36,938 32,369 8,725 5,214 2,800 13,300 3,800 (97,790) Vacancy Rate 11.6%14.0%12.7%8.4%3.8%4.6%3.6%4.2%3.7%1.0%0.6%0.3%1.5%0.4%-22.3% Net Absorption:(47,047) (20,641) 11,734 37,290 39,636 (6,920) 9,475 (5,922) 4,569 23,644 3,511 2,414 (10,500) 9,500 50,743 3,625 Past 5 Years 28,569 5,714 Construction Deliveries 38,043 - - - - - - - - - - - - - 38,043 Gross Rent/SF 9.16$ 10.48$ 8.94$ 9.30$ 8.90$ 9.76$ 9.33$ 9.12$ 10.00$ 11.60$ 11.90$ 11.73$ 13.32$ 13.40$ 3.0% Average Annual % Change - 14.4%-14.7%4.0%-4.3%9.7%-4.4%-2.3%9.6%16.0%2.6%-1.4%13.6%0.6% Flex Inventory 191,575 191,575 191,575 191,575 191,575 191,575 191,575 191,575 191,575 191,575 191,575 191,575 191,575 191,575 - As % of County 1.7%1.6%1.6%1.6%1.6%1.6%1.6%1.6%1.6%1.6%1.6%1.6%1.7%1.7% No. of Buildings/Centers 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 Vacant Stock 29,100 9,392 5,497 7,271 6,355 5,541 9,920 7,920 17,550 2,000 - - 7,235 7,235 (21,865) Vacancy Rate 15.2%4.9%2.9%3.8%3.3%2.9%5.2%4.1%9.2%1.0%0.0%0.0%3.8%3.8%-10.2% Net Absorption:(27,700) 19,708 3,895 (1,774) 916 814 (4,379) 2,000 (9,630) 15,550 2,000 - (7,235) - (5,835) (417) Past 5 Years 10,315 2,063 Construction Deliveries - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Gross Rent/SF 4.43$ 9.63$ 9.87$ 9.91$ 9.03$ 8.85$ 8.99$ 8.99$ 13.36$ 13.09$ 12.53$ 12.00$ 12.15$ 11.95$ 7.9% Average Annual % Change - 117.4%2.5%0.4%-8.9%-2.0%1.6%0.0%48.6%-2.0%-4.3%-4.2%1.3%-1.6% Source: CoStar, Inc.; WTL+a, May 2021. Change: 2007-2020National Recession & Recovery WTL+a WTL +a Real Estate & Economic Advisors Washington, DC—Cape Cod, MA 301.502.4171 508.214.0915 167 Table 61: Multi -family Rental Characteristics—North County Trade Area, 2007—2020 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Total Ann'l Avg.% CAGR Inventory (Units)3,910 3,910 3,910 3,910 3,910 3,910 4,134 4,134 4,474 4,474 4,482 4,961 4,961 4,961 1,051 No. of Buildings 81 81 81 81 81 81 82 82 83 83 84 86 86 86 5 Vacant Stock (Units)290 322 326 239 273 208 251 170 527 282 266 403 249 205 (85) Vacancy Rate 7.4%8.2%8.3%6.1%7.0%5.3%6.1%4.1%11.8%6.3%5.9%8.1%5.0%4.1%-4.4% Total Net Absorption (Units)(32) (32) (2) 86 (35) 65 181 81 (18) 245 26 343 154 44 1,106 79 Past 5 Years 812 162 Construction Deliveries - - - - - - 224 - 340 - 8 482 - - 1,054 Average Unit Size (SF)1,009 1,009 1,009 1,009 1,009 1,009 1,026 1,026 1,060 1,060 1,063 1,098 1,098 1,098 0.7% Average Monthly Rent 1,376$ 1,350$ 1,272$ 1,335$ 1,343$ 1,373$ 1,413$ 1,454$ 1,527$ 1,579$ 1,641$ 1,691$ 1,738$ 1,758$ 1.9% Per SF Rent 1.27$ 1.25$ 1.18$ 1.23$ 1.24$ 1.27$ 1.31$ 1.34$ 1.41$ 1.46$ 1.52$ 1.56$ 1.61$ 1.62$ 1.9% Average Annual % Change -1.6%-5.6%4.2%0.8%2.4%3.1%2.3%5.2%3.5%4.1%2.6%3.2%0.6% Source: CoStar, Inc.; WTL+a, May 2021. National Recession & Recovery Change: 2007-2020 WTL+a WTL +a Real Estate & Economic Advisors Washington, DC—Cape Cod, MA 301.502.4171 508.214.0915 168 Table 62: Office Market Profile—North County Trade Area, 2007—2020 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Total Ann'l Avg.% CAGR Office Inventory 4,326,209 4,494,078 4,549,145 4,549,145 4,622,620 4,661,564 4,661,564 4,661,564 4,699,969 4,695,760 4,326,209 4,708,993 4,800,551 4,970,337 644,128 As % of County 8.1%8.0%8.0%8.0%8.1%8.2%8.2%8.1%8.2%8.2%7.5%8.2%8.3%8.6% No. of Buildings/Centers 216 222 225 225 226 227 227 227 228 227 227 228 228 230 14 Vacant Stock 457,063 637,767 733,927 811,442 912,734 820,332 846,298 664,125 567,552 420,915 424,202 543,847 515,602 625,498 168,435 Vacancy Rate 10.6%14.2%16.1%17.8%19.7%17.6%18.2%14.2%12.1%9.0%9.8%11.5%10.7%12.6%1.4% Net Absorption:6,440 (12,835) (41,093) (77,515) (27,817) 131,346 (25,966) 182,173 134,978 142,428 (3,287) (106,412) 119,803 59,890 482,133 34,438 Past 5 Years 212,422 42,484 Construction Deliveries 218,877 167,869 55,067 - 73,475 38,944 - - 38,405 - - 18,400 111,972 169,786 892,795 Gross Rent/SF 28.61$ 27.59$ 26.37$ 26.39$ 23.36$ 23.63$ 25.26$ 25.52$ 26.01$ 26.68$ 29.59$ 29.36$ 30.23$ 34.80$ 0.4% Average Annual % Change - -3.6%-4.4%0.1%-11.5%1.2%6.9%1.0%1.9%2.6%10.9%-0.8%3.0%15.1% Base Rent/SF (NNN)20.85$ 20.42$ 19.64$ 19.95$ 18.78$ 18.54$ 20.04$ 19.69$ 20.69$ 21.56$ 22.44$ 22.62$ 23.28$ 26.78$ 0.9% Source: CoStar, Inc.; WTL+a, May 2021. National Recession & Recovery Change: 2007-2020 WTL+a WTL +a Real Estate & Economic Advisors Washington, DC—Cape Cod, MA 301.502.4171 508.214.0915 169 Table 63: Retail Market Profile—North County Trade Area, 2007—2020 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Total Ann'l Avg.% CAGR Inventory 7,546,358 7,841,154 7,970,229 8,061,489 8,061,489 8,049,125 8,036,933 8,036,933 8,039,089 8,038,829 8,013,696 8,117,459 8,199,142 8,239,538 693,180 As % of County 9.9%10.1%10.2%10.4%10.3%10.3%10.3%10.2%10.2%10.1%10.1%10.2%10.4%10.4% No. of Buildings/Centers 383 394 394 398 398 397 395 395 392 395 395 399 407 409 26 Vacant Stock 432,136 471,503 544,942 496,653 406,178 283,307 326,689 344,556 451,444 335,271 192,103 359,505 236,451 326,082 (106,054) Vacancy Rate 5.7%6.0%6.8%6.2%5.0%3.5%4.1%4.3%5.6%4.2%2.4%4.4%2.9%4.0%-2.8% Net Absorption:(143,578) 259,429 55,636 139,549 90,475 110,507 (55,574) (17,867) (104,732) 115,913 118,035 (63,639) 204,737 (49,235) 659,656 47,118 Past 5 Years 325,811 65,162 Construction Deliveries 46,855 320,971 144,121 91,260 ----16,000 29,490 4,000 103,763 81,683 40,396 878,539 Gross Rent/SF 22.45$ 23.22$ 22.15$ 18.17$ 16.56$ 15.34$ 16.38$ 18.05$ 18.75$ 20.36$ 27.80$ 26.62$ 24.71$ 22.87$ 0.14% Average Annual % Change - 3.4%-4.6%-18.0%-8.9%-7.4%6.8%10.2%3.9%8.6%36.5%-4.2%-7.2%-7.4% Base Rent/SF (NNN)22.04$ 24.90$ 23.41$ 17.99$ 16.20$ 14.65$ 15.77$ 17.29$ 18.40$ 20.44$ 31.82$ 27.21$ 24.80$ 23.15$ 0.38% Source: CoStar, Inc.; WTL+a, May 2021. National Recession & Recovery Change: 2007-2020 VILLAGE OF NORTH PALM BEACH VILLAGE ATTORNEY’S OFFICE TO: Honorable Mayor and Council THRU: Andrew D. Lukasik, Village Manager FROM: Leonard G. Rubin, Village Attorney DATE: December 9, 2021 SUBJECT: RESOLUTION – Adoption of quasi-judicial procedures (Tabled from November 18, 2021) Through the adoption of Resolution No. 32-95 on July 27, 1995, the Village Council adopted a procedure for the disclosure of ex-parte communication for quasi-judicial proceedings to remove the presumption of prejudice associated with such communications. However, the Village Council never adopted formal procedures for quasi-judicial proceedings. Quasi-judicial decisions must be based on competent, substantial evidence presented during the course of the public hearing before the decision-making body, and the parties to such a proceeding are entitled to procedural due process. While formal procedures are not legally required, based on the revisions and updates to the Village’s Commercial Zoning Code, Village Staff anticipates an increase in both the total number of quasi-judicial proceedings and the number of proceedings before the Village Council. The attached Resolution provides formal procedures for quasi-judicial proceedings before both the Village Council and the Planning Commission. These procedures may be waived by the Village for applications seeking only appearance review and approval, such as sign face approvals or changes and color approvals or changes, or applications that are essentially ministerial in nature, such as plat approvals. A proceeding is quasi-judicial in nature when it involves the application of a general rule or policy to specific individuals, interests or activities. The quasi-judicial body is required to hold hearings, weigh and consider evidence, and exercise discretion of a judicial nature. Quasi-judicial matters include, but are not necessarily limited to, the following applications:  Site-specific rezoning of real property  Site plan and appearance approval  Special exception uses  Planned Unit Developments  Variances;  Administrative appeals; and  Plats. If the quasi-judicial matter involves more than one reading, such as an Ordinance approving a Planned Unit Development, the first reading shall constitute the quasi-judicial proceeding. On second reading, the Village Council may ratify the its prior decision or re-open the hearing. The proposed procedures also provide a procedure for participation by interested persons. An interested person is defined as a person or corporate entity that owns property or operates a business within 500 feet of the property that is the subject of the application or a person who resides within 500 feet of the property. The 500 feet is consistent with the Village’s noticing requirements for development applications. By law, interested persons are entitled to participate in the hearing and be afforded an opportunity to be heard in the same manner as party to the proceedings. Interested persons may be afforded party status by filing a notice with the Community Development Department no later than the close of business five (5) days before the hearing. Staff will verify that the interested person satisfies the requirements for party status. The procedures for quasi-judicial proceedings before the Village Council and Planning Commission shall be as follows:  Introduction of the matter (and reading of the caption if appropriate)  Swearing in of all persons who wish to speak, including parties, representatives, and members of the public  Presentation of evidence by the Applicant, Staff and any interested person (limited to 20 minutes each)  Rebuttal by the Applicant, Staff and any interested person (limited to 5 minutes each)  Public Comment (limited to 3 minutes each)  Questions by the Village Council or Planning Commission to any party, witness or person providing comment.  Closing argument by any interested person, Staff, and the Applicant. Once the public hearing is closed, the presiding officer shall entertain a motion. The Council or Planning Commission may re-open the public hearing during its deliberations if it so chooses. All relevant evidence shall be admitted. While the formal rules of evidence do not apply, the proceedings shall be governed by fundamental due process (a fair opportunity to be heard). At the conclusion of the hearing, the quasi-judicial body shall issue a written determination (in the form of an Ordinance, Resolution or Order). The procedures do not provide for rehearing or reconsideration of a quasi-judicial decision, and the final determination is subject only to judicial review in a court of competent jurisdiction within thirty (30) days of the rendition of the written determination. There is no fiscal impact. The attached Resolution has been prepared by this office and reviewed for legal sufficiency. Update: At its November 18, 2021 meeting, the Village Council tabled consideration of the Resolution and directed this office to modify the procedures to expand the definition of Interested Person to include persons (natural or corporate) who may not reside or own a business within 500 feet of the property that is the subject of the application but may have a special interest in the proceeding. To that end, the definition of Interested Person has been expanded to include any person “who will suffer a negative effect to a protected interest as a result of the quasi-judicial application, where such interest exceeds in degree the general interest of the community or public at large.” To effectuate this change, the procedures have been modified as follows:  The Community Development Department shall verify Interested Person status in consultation with the Village Attorney; and  In the event multiple Interested Persons seeking to become a party to the proceeding share the same protected interest and are members of the same community association, the community association shall be recognized as the Interested Person absent a compelling reason for each Interested Person to be recognized as a separate party. Staff has also included an additional provision addressing continuances. Continuances may be requested by the Applicant, Village Staff, or an Interested Person who is a party to the proceeding. Continuances shall be to a time and date certain and shall be in the sole discretion of the decision-making body. Furthermore, either the Village Council or the Planning Commission may continue the proceeding on its own volition. Recommendation: Village Administration requests Council consideration and approval of the attached Resolution adopting procedures for quasi-judicial proceedings before the Village Council and Planning Commission. RESOLUTION 2021- A RESOLUTION OF THE VILLAGE COUNCIL OF THE VILLAGE OF NORTH PALM BEACH, FLORIDA, ADOPTING PROCEDURES APPLICABLE TO QUASI- JUDICIAL PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE VILLAGE COUNCIL AND PLANNING COMMISSION; PROVIDING FOR CONFLICTS; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, through the adoption of Resolution No. 32-95 on July 27, 1995, the Village Council adopted a procedure for the disclosure of ex-parte communications for quasi-judicial proceedings to remove the presumption of prejudice association with such communications; and WHEREAS, notwithstanding the foregoing, the Village Council never adopted formal procedures for quasi-judicial proceedings; and WHEREAS, quasi-judicial decisions must be based on competent substantial evidence presented during a course of the public hearing before the decision-making body, and the parties to such a proceeding are entitled to procedural due process; and WHEREAS, while formal procedures are not legally mandated, based on the revisions and updates to its commercial zoning regulations, the Village anticipates an increase in both the total number of quasi- judicial proceedings and the number of proceedings before the Village Council; and WHEREAS, the Village wishes to formalize its quasi-judicial procedures for proceedings before the Village Council and the Planning Commission and determines that the adoption of this Resolution is in the best interests of the residents and citizens of the Village of North Palm Beach. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE VILLAGE COUNCIL OF NORTH PALM BEACH, FLORIDA as follows: Section 1. The foregoing recitals are hereby ratified and are incorporated herein. Section 2. The Village Council hereby adopts formal quasi-judicial procedures, a copy of which is attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference. Section 3. All resolutions or parts of resolutions in conflict herewith are hereby repealed to the extent of such conflict. Section 4. This Resolution shall take effect immediately upon adoption. PASSED AND ADOPTED THIS _____ DAY OF ________________, 2021. (Village Seal) MAYOR ATTEST: VILLAGE CLERK Page 1 of 4 VILLAGE OF NORTH PALM BEACH QUASI-JUDICIAL PROCEDURES Intent These procedures are intended to provide an equitable and efficient method for the Village Council and the Planning Commission to hear matters that are considered quasi-judicial in nature. These procedures shall apply to all quasi-judicial matters, except as otherwise set forth herein. Definitions For the purpose of these procedures, the following definitions shall apply unless the context clearly indicates or requires a different meaning: Interested person means any person, natural or corporate, who owns property, owns a business or resides within five hundred (500) feet of the property that is the subject of the application or any person, natural or corporate, who will suffer a negative effect to a protected interest as a result of the quasi-judicial application, where such interest exceeds in degree the general interest of the community or public at large. Applicant means any person, corporation or other legal entity who files an application with the Community Development Department determined by Village Staff to be quasi-judicial in nature. Party or parties means the Applicant, the Village, and any Interested Person who has complied with the notice provisions set forth below and meets the applicable criteria. Quasi-judicial body means the Village Council or the Planning Commission acting in its quasi- judicial capacity. Quasi-judicial in nature means the application of a general rule or policy to specific individuals, interests, or activities by the quasi-judicial body, as more specifically set forth below. Quasi-judicial matters (a) Matters that are quasi-judicial in nature involve the actions of public officials who are required to investigate facts, or ascertain the existence of facts, hold hearings, weigh evidence and draw conclusions from such facts, as a basis for their official action, and to exercise discretion of a judicial nature and any other decision involving the implementation, rather than formation, of Village policy. Quasi- judicial matters include, but may not necessarily be limited to, the following: (1) Applications for the site-specific rezoning of real property; (2) Applications for site plan and appearance approval; (3) Applications for special exception uses; (4) Applications for Planned Unit Developments; (5) Applications for variances; (6) Administrative appeals; and (7) Applications for plat approval (b) For all quasi-judicial matters which require more than one reading, the first reading shall constitute the quasi-judicial proceeding. Once a decision is rendered to grant or grant with conditions the relief sought by the applicant, then the second reading shall be procedural in nature with the Village Council ratifying and affirming its prior decision. If new evidence is introduced which, if brought to the attention Page 2 of 4 of the Village Council at the first reading, would have had a material impact on its decision, the Village Council may reopen the quasi-judicial hearing. (c) The formal procedures set forth herein may be waived by the Village for applications seeking only appearance review and approval, such as sign face and color changes, or applications that are essentially ministerial nature, such as plat approval. Notice procedures for Interested Persons (a) Interested persons are entitled to a fair and impartial hearing, notice of the hearing, and an opportunity to be heard. (b) Any Interested Person desiring to become a party in a quasi-judicial proceeding shall provide written notice to the Community Development Department which notice shall, at a minimum, set forth the Interested Person's name, address, e-mail address (if applicable) and telephone number, and indicate how the person qualifies as an Interested Person for the proceeding at issue. The filing of notice with the Community Development Department shall serve as notice of the Interested Person's request to appear at the applicable quasi-judicial proceeding to testify, present evidence, bring forth witnesses, and cross- examine witnesses. The required notice must be received by the Community Development Department no later than the close of business (5:00 p.m.) five (5) business days prior to the hearing. The Department , in consultation with the Village Attorney, shall verify that the person seeking designation as an Interested Person satisfies the requirements for such status and shall provide written confirmation. In the event multiple Interested Persons seeking to become a party in a quasi-judicial proceeding share the same protected interest and are members of the same community association, the Village shall recognize t he community association as the Interested Person absent a compelling reason for each Interested Person to be recognized as a separate party. (c) The written confirmation from the Community Development Department in subsection (b) above shall serve as the notice for the Interested Person to appear at the quasi-judicial proceeding, where he/she will be afforded party status. A copy shall also be provided to the Applicant. Procedures for quasi-judicial proceedings (a) The following is a guideline for conducting quasi-judicial hearings: (1) Introduction. The presiding officer will introduce the case and, if appropriate, defer to the Village Attorney for the reading of the ordinance or resolution caption. (2) Swearing in. All persons wishing to speak on a quasi-judicial matter shall take an oath to tell the truth. This includes attorneys representing parties, as well as members of the public providing comment. (3) Presentation of evidence. The presiding officer shall have the option of determining the order to expedite the proceedings. However, all parties shall be provided the opportunity to present their case. The general order of the presentation of evidence shall be as follows: a. Presentations. The Applicant, Village staff, and any Interested Person, in that order, shall each have twenty (20) minutes to make an initial presentation. b. Rebuttal. The Applicant, Village staff, and any Interested Person, in that order, shall each have five (5) minutes for rebuttal. During this time, the parties may Page 3 of 4 present rebuttal testimony, cross-examine opposing witnesses, impeach witnesses, and rebut evidence. c. Public comment. Any person who did not speak during presentations and rebuttals may speak for not more than three (3) minutes. Prior to being heard, each speaker must state his/her name and address for the record. d. Questions. The presiding officer and any member of the Village Council or Planning Commission, as applicable, may ask questions of any party, witness, or person providing public comment. e. Closing argument. Any Interested Person, Village staff, and the Applicant, in that order, shall each have five minutes for closing argument. (5) Action by the quasi-judicial body. a. At the conclusion of the presentation of the evidence and testimony, the quasi- judicial body shall close the public hearing. The presiding officer shall entertain any motions, and the quasi-judicial body shall proceed to deliberate and vote on the motion(s). b. If after notice of hearing, a party does not appear, the hearing may be conducted and an order entered in the absence of the party. c. If during the deliberations a question arises which the quasi-judicial body desires to ask, it shall reopen the public hearing, pose the question and allow each party the opportunity to respond to the question posed prior to closing the public hearing again and resuming deliberations. (b) Representation of parties . (1) Attorney. Any natural person or party may represent himself/herself or may be represented by an attorney. If the party chooses to be represented by an attorney, a notice of representation, signed by the attorney, shall be filed with the Community Development Department prior to the hearing. (2) Non-attorney. In the event any party (other than a corporation or the Village) chooses to be represented by a non-attorney, such party shall file a written, notarized power of attorney with the Community Development Department prior to the hearing stating that the person appearing has the full power and authority to act on behalf of the party in the matter. (3) Business representative. A corporation or limited liability company may appear through a representative who is listed with the Florida Department of State as a current officer or manager of an active corporation or limited liability company entity. The representative must identify himself/herself in that business capacity. (c) Evidence. (1) All relevant evidence shall be admitted. The quasi-judicial body may exclude irrelevant, immaterial, or unduly repetitious evidence. Page 4 of 4 (2) Except as provided herein, neither the Federal Rules of Evidence nor the Florida Evidence Code shall apply, but fundamental due process shall be observed and shall govern said proceedings at all times. (d) Orders. (1) If the quasi-judicial body denies relief to the Applicant, the village shall issue a subsequent written order setting forth the reasons therefor. (2) The quasi-judicial body shall have the authority to issue any and all orders to afford the proper relief, and this authority shall include the authority to grant continuances to a date certain. (e) Hearing record. The Village Clerk shall maintain custody of all recordings of testimony, evidence, and documents submitted into evidence at the hearing. This shall include all back up documentation, as well as any document presented at the hearing or demonstrative exhibit seen by the Village Council or Planning Commission while making its decision. Nothing herein shall be deemed to prohibit any party from providing a court reporter for the proceedings. Any party wishing to appeal the decision of a quasi-judicial body shall have the responsibility to ensure compliance with F.S. §286.0105. (f) Continuances. At the request of the Applicant, Village staff or an Interested Person who is a party to the proceeding or on its own volition, the Village Council or the Planning Commission may continue a quasi-judicial proceeding to a time and date certain. The decision to grant a continuance shall be in the sole discretion of the quasi-judicial body. (g) Rehearing/Reconsideration and Appeal. While there is no specific rule or statutory authority for the rehearing or reconsideration of a quasi-judicial decision, a local government body or board has the inherent power and authority to rehear and reconsider a previously entered order. Notwithstanding this inherent power and authority, the Village determines that neither the Village Council nor the Planning Commission shall entertain any request for rehearing or reconsideration of a previ ously entered quasi- judicial order. A final determination of the Village Council or Planning Commission acting in its quasi - judicial capacity is subject to judicial review in a court of competent jurisdiction within thirty (30) days of the Council or Commission’s rendition of its written determination. Discussion: Lakeside Permit Parking Village Council December 9,2021 Existing Problem •We are experiencing a parking shortage at Lakeside Park, particularly on weekends and holidays. •This creates impacts on the surrounding neighborhood. •The Village has found that over 80% of weekend volume can be attributed to vehicles registered to non- Village residents. 2 Desired Outcomes •To reduce parking congestion on weekends and holidays. •To eliminate on- street parking in the surrounding neighborhood, except for those that live there. •To accommodate more resident parking. 3 Permits and Fees •In terms of fees, parking experts recommend setting parking prices to maintain 85-90% occupancy rates. •That means, at the very least, we want the cost to be high enough so that we always have a couple spots open. •Council direction in October was to focus on providing access to residents. However, the strategy related to non-residents was not as clear to staff. 4 Permits and Fees •To reverse the 80/20 split, staff propose free annual permits for residents and paid annual permits for non-residents. •Residents will be able to register for permits at Anchorage Park or on-line through our Activities page. Permits can be picked up or mailed. •Non-residents must register for permits in person. •Per general consensus, staff will investigate dashboard placards. 5 •www.NPBVillageActivities.com Details Cont. •To make registration easier, we will only require valid drivers license, property tax bill or 1-year lease, and current utility bill (for proof of residency). (We are defining residents as property owners in the Village and/or renters who have a current one year lease). •For registration purposes, the permit will be tied to each licensed resident, not to a particular vehicle. 6 Details Cont. •This mean residents could loan their placard to a family member -- such as grandma who is taking their grandkids to the park for the day. •If we allow non-resident permits, a fee will be required. $100? $200? $300? •Each year, the placards will need to be reissued as they will be issued in a different color with a new expiration date. 7 Outreach Getting the Word Out: •Website, newsletter, e- newsletter, social media, front lobby TVs. •Signage with QR codes to scan which direct residents to our online Activities page, where folks can sign up for programs online, purchase Marina decals, or parking permits. •Also, new permanent signage that states, “parking by permit only.” •Education via Park Ranger. 8 In Closing Remember: Our goal is to reduce parking congestion on weekends and holidays, and accommodate more resident parking. Staff believe the best approach to accomplishing our task lay in free annual permits for residents and paid annual permits for non- residents. Also, we have a Park Ranger on board who will be helping to educate patrons and enforce the rules. 9 Questions or Comments 10