REGULAR MEETING OF THE WELLINGTON VILLAGE COUNCIL

Village Council Regular Meeting - January 12, 2010 Page 1 of 421 

1. CALL TO ORDER 

REGULAR MEETING OF THE 

WELLINGTON VILLAGE COUNCIL 

2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 

3. INVOCATION – TO BE ANNOUNCED 

4. APPROVAL OF AGENDA 

5. PRESENTATIONS AND PROCLAMATIONS 

Darell Bowen, Mayor 

Dr. Carmine A. Priore, Vice Mayor 

Lizbeth Benacquisto, Councilwoman 

Matt Willhite, Councilman 

Howard K. Coates, Jr., Councilman 

Wellington Community Center 

12165 West Forest Hill Boulevard 

Wellington, Florida 

TUESDAY, JANUARY 12, 2010 

7:00 PM 

AGENDA 

A. LEGISLATIVE SESSION PRESENTATION BY MR. JIM HARVEY 

Mr. Jim Harvey will provide Council with a presentation on the Legislative Session. 

6. CONSENT AGENDA 

A. MINUTES OF THE WELLINGTON COUNCIL MEETINGS OF OCTOBER 27, 2009, 

NOVEMBER 10, 2009 AND NOVEMBER 24, 2009. 

Staff seeks Council approval of the Minutes of the Regular Council meetings of October 27, 

2009, November 10, 2009 and November 24, 2009.


B. APPROVE THE RENEWED ANNUAL CONTRACT FOR THE COOPERATIVE 

PURCHASE OF BULK QUICKLIME 

Council authorization to renew the annual contract for the cooperative purchase of bulk 

pebble quicklime from Chemical Lime Company of Alabama, Inc. Bid #005-2821-09/JA was 

awarded to Chemical Lime by City of Boynton Beach, acting as the lead agency on behalf of 

co-op participants. 

C. RESOLUTION NO. R2010- 07 (TEMPLE B’NAI JACOB OF WELLINGTON) 

A RESOLUTION OF THE VILLAGE COUNCIL OF WELLINGTON, FLORIDA 

ACCEPTING AND APPROVING THE PLAT KNOWN AS “TEMPLE B’NAI JACOB OF 

WELLINGTON” AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND VILLAGE CLERK TO EXECUTE THE 

PLAT; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. 

The petitioner is requesting approval of a proposed plat for Temple B'Nai Jacob of 

Wellington (a replat of Tract “R” of The Isles at Wellington Plat I). 

D. A RESOLUTION NO. R2010-01 (APPROVAL OF THE 2010 SUSAN P. BRADFORD ART 

IN PUBLIC PLACES PROGRAM) 

A RESOLUTION OF THE VILLAGE COUNCIL OF WELLINGTON, FLORIDA APPROVING 

AND AUTHORIZING THE VILLAGE MANAGER TO EXECUTE ART DISPLAY 

AGREEMENTS AND DONATION AGREEMENTS IN ORDER TO FACILITATE THE 

VILLAGE'S ART IN PUBLIC PLACES PROGRAM; PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. 

Staff requests approval of the 2010 annual public art plan authorizing the display of art 

pieces selected by the Public Art Advisory Panel on November 18, 2009. 

E. APPROVE AWARD OF BID #031-09/JWV FOR LEASE AND LAUNDERING OF 

EMPLOYEE UNIFORMS 

REQUEST: Approve award of Bid #031-09/JWV to Unifirst Corporation for lease and 

laundering of employee uniforms. 

F. APPROVE AWARD OF BID #037-09/BJJ FOR SUPPLY AND DELIVERY OF 

JANITORIAL SUPPLIES 

REQUEST: Council approval of award of Bid #037-09/BJJ for supply and delivery of 

janitorial supplies to All American Poly, AmSan Interline, Dade Paper, Glocecol LLC, Gold 

Coast Chemical, W.W. Grainger, Pyramid School Products, and South Florida Janitorial. 

G. AGENDA ITEM NAME: AUTHORIZATION FOR STAFF TO PIGGYBACK THE 

FOLLOWING CONTRACTS: COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, CA CONTRACT #MA-IS- 

42595-19 FROM OFFICE DEPOT, PASCO COUNTY, FL CONTRACT #08-086 FROM 

OFFICE MAX AND PALM BEACH COUNTY, FL CONTRACT #06001B FROM HALSEY & 

GRIFFITH FOR THE PURCHASE OF OFFICE SUPPLIES. 

REQUEST: Approval for the purchasing dept. to utilize the following piggyback contracts for 

the purchase of office supplies:


H. RESOLUTION R2010-10 (AMENDMENT NUMBER THREE (3) TO THE AGREEMENT 

BETWEEN WELLINGTON AND KIMLEY-HORN AND ASSOCIATES, INC. FOR DESIGN 

OF SOUTH SHORE BOULEVARD PHASE II). 

A RESOLUTION OF THE VILLAGE COUNCIL OF WELLINGTON, FLORIDA 

APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND VILLAGE CLERK TO EXECUTE 

AMENDMENT NUMBER THREE (3) TO THE AGREEMENT WITH KIMLEY-HORN AND 

ASSOCIATES, INC., FOR THE ENGINEERING DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION OF 

SOUTH SHORE PHASE II; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. 

REQUEST: Council Approval of Resolution No. R2010-10, Acceptance of Amendment 

Number 3 to the Agreement with Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. for the Design of South 

Shore Boulevard Road Widening - Phase II (27,500). 

I. APPROVAL OF AGREEMENT WITH SWEETWATER ENVIRONMENTAL INC. FOR 

SLUDGE HAULING SERVICES 

REQUEST: Approve the request by the Utilities Department to award Bid#041-09/BJJ 

"Sludge Hauling Services" to Sweetwater Environmental, Inc. located in Sebring, FL. 

7. PUBLIC HEARINGS 

A. RESOLUTION NO. R2010- 05 (TEMPLE B’NAI JACOB OF WELLINTGON) 

A RESOLUTION OF THE VILLAGE COUNCIL OF WELLINGTON, FLORIDA, 

APPROVING A DEVELOPMENT ORDER AMENDMENT AND MASTER PLAN 

AMENDMENT , FOR PETITION NUMBER 2009-010 DOA 1 AND 2009-010 MPA 1, 

AMENDING THE DEVELOPMENT ORDER AND MASTER PLAN OF THE ORANGE 

POINT PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (PUD) TO CHANGE THE PROPERTY 

DESIGNATION FROM PUBLIC CIVIC SITE TO CIVIC SITE, AND PROVIDE A NEW 

POINT OF INGRESS / EGRESS ON LAKE WORTH ROAD AND BAREFOOT LAKE 

DRIVE (WELLINGTON SHORES DRIVE), THE CIVIC SITE TOTALING 2.82 ACRES, 

MORE OR LESS, IS LOCATED AT THE SOUTH WEST CORNER OF LAKE WORTH 

ROAD AND BAREFOOT LAKE DRIVE (WELLINGTON SHORES DRIVE) AS MORE 

SPECIFICALLY DESCRIBED HEREIN; PROVIDING A CONFLICTS CLAUSE AND A 

SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. 

The petitioner is requesting to change the property designation to “Civic Site” and add new 

point of ingress / egress for Tract “R” of The Isles at Wellington Plat I within the Orange Point 

Planned Unit Development (PUD) Master Plan. 

B. RESOLUTION NO. R2010- 06 (TEMPLE B’NAI JACOB OF WELLINGTON) 


APPROVING A DEVELOPMENT ORDER AMENDMENT APPLICATION FOR PETITION 

NUMBER 2009-010 DOA2 ALSO KNOWN AS TEMPLE B'NAI JACOB OF WELLINGTON; 

TO ALLOW REQUESTED USES FOR A PLACE OF WORSHIP AND DAY CARE CENTER 

IN THE ORANGE POINT PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT; SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS; 

THE CIVIC SITE TOTALING 2.82 ACRES, MORE OR LESS, IS LOCATED AT THE 

SOUTH WEST CORNER OF LAKE WORTH ROAD AND BAREFOOT LAKE DRIVE 

(WELLINGTON SHORES DRIVE) AS MORE SPECIFICALLY DESCRIBED HEREIN;


PROVIDING A CONFLICTS CLAUSE AND A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; AND 

PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. 

The petitioner is requesting approval to allow requested uses for the proposed Civic Site 

within the Orange Point Planned Unit Development (PUD) Master Plan. 

8. REGULAR AGENDA 

A. ORDINANCE NO. 2009-17 EQUESTRIAN OVERLAY ZONING DISTRICT ZTA 

AN ORDINANCE OF THE VILLAGE COUNCIL OF WELLINGTON, FLORIDA, 

PERTAINING TO ZONING; AMENDING THE LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATION 

CODE OF WELLINGTON BY AMENDING ARTICLE 6, CHAPTER 10,.“EQUESTRIAN 

OVERLAY ZONING DISTRICT;” AMENDING SECTION 6.10.3 REGARDING 

“DEFINITIONS,” PROVIDING FOR DEFINITIONS OF “EQUESTRIAN ARENA, PRIVATE, 

COVERED,” “EQUESTRIAN AREA, PRIVATE, NOT COVERED,”AND FOR 

“RECREATIONAL VEHICLE;” AMENDING SECTION 6.10.4 REGARDING “SUBAREAS” 

BY CREATING AN NEW SUBAREA E; AMENDING SECTION 6.10.6 REGARDING 

“DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS” BY PROVIDING BY INCREASING THE PERMITTED 

FLOOR AREA RATIO FOR STRUCTURES; AMENDING SECTION 6.10.7.A REGARDING 

“PRINCIPAL AND CONDITIONAL USES” BY AMENDING TABLE C TO CHANGE 

CERTAIN PERMITTED AND ACCESSORY USES; AMENDING SECTION 6.10.7.B 

REGARDING “ADDITIONAL STANDARDS,” PROVIDING FOR ADDITIONAL 

STANDARDS FOR OUTDOOR AUCTIONS AND BED AND BREAKFAST 

ESTABLISHMENTS; AMENDING SECTION 6.10.8 REGARDING COMMON FEATURES 

INCLUDING EQUESTRIAN AMENITIES WITHIN A CLUSTER DEVELOPMENT; 

AMENDING SECTION 6.10.9 REGARDING “SUPPLEMENTAL DISTRICT 

REGULATIONS” AND PROVIDING FOR ADDITIONAL REGULATIONS FOR 

TEMPORARY RESIDENCES, ROOFED EQUESTRIAN ARENAS, USE OF TENTS AS 

TEMPORARY STALLS, PARKING ON PUBLIC RIGHTS-OF-WAY, STORAGE OF HORSE 

TRAILERS, AND FENCING; AMENDING SECTION 6.10.10 REGARDING “BRIDLE 

TRAILS AND EASEMENTS,” PROVIDING FOR DEDICATION OF BRIDLE TRAILS; 

AMENDING SECTION 6.10.12.D REGARDING “SUPPLEMENTAL REGULATIONS FOR 

BARNS AND STABLES,” ELIMINATING DEVELOPMENT REVIEW COMMITTEE FOR 

CERTAIN SITE PLANS; AMENDING SECTION 6.10.12.E REGARDING “ADDITIONAL 

SITE PLAN REVIEW;” PROVIDING A REPEALER CLAUSE; PROVIDING A SAVINGS 

CLAUSE; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. 

Approve amendments to the text of the Equestrian Overlay Zoning District. as presented in 

Ordinance No. 2009-17. 

B. ACCEPTANCE OF $490,200 IN ENERGY EFFICIENCY AND CONSERVATION BLOCK 

GRANT (EECBG) FUNDS 

Acceptance of $490,200 in EECBG Funds and authorization for Village Manager to execute 

budget amendment. 

C. RESOLUTION R2010-11 (BOYS AND GIRLS CLUB COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 

BLOCK GRANT)


A RESOLUTION OF THE VILLAGE COUNCIL OF WELLINGTON, FLORIDA DIRECTING 

STAFF TO APPLY FOR A GRANT OF $300,000 FROM THE PALM BEACH COUNTY 

COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT PROGRAM TO ASSIST WITH 

CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW BOYS AND GIRLS CLUB; AND PROVIDINGAN 

EFFECTIVE DATE. 

Council direction to apply for and accept grant funds not to exceed $300,000 from the Palm 

Beach County Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) for the purpose of assisting 

with construction of a new Boys and Girls Club facility. 

9. ATTORNEY’S REPORT 

10. MANAGER’S REPORT & UPDATES 

11. COUNCIL REPORTS 

12. CLOSING COMMENTS 

13. PUBLIC FORUM 

14. ADJOURNMENT 

NOTICE 

If a person decides to appeal any decision made by the Village Council with respect to any matter considered at this meeting, you will need 

a record of the proceedings, and you 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. (The above notice is required by State Law. Anyone desiring a verbatim 

transcript shall have the responsibility, at his own cost, to arrange for the transcript). 

Pursuant to the provision of the Americans With Disabilities Act: any person requiring special accommodations to participate in these 

meetings, because of a disability or physical impairment, should contact the Village Manager’s Office (561) 791-4000 at least five calendar 

days prior to the Hearing.

5. A 


WELLINGTON COUNCIL 

AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY 

AGENDA ITEM NAME: Legislative Session Presentation by Mr. Jim Harvey 

ACTION REQUESTED: Discussion Approval 

BUDGET AMENDMENT 

REQUIRED: Yes No See Below 

PUBLIC HEARING: Yes No 

FIRST READING 

SECOND READING 

REQUEST: Mr. Jim Harvey will provide Council with a presentation on the Legislative Session. 

EXPLANATION: None. 

LEGAL SUFFICIENCY: No 

FISCAL IMPACT: N/A. 

VILLAGE GOAL: Responsive Government 

RECOMMENDATION: None.

6. A 




AGENDA ITEM NAME: Minutes of the Regular Council meetings of October 27, 2009, November 

10, 2009 and November 24, 2009. 





FIRST READING 


REQUEST: Staff seeks Council approval of the Minutes of the Regular Village Council meetings of 

October 27, 2009, November 10, 2009 and November 24, 2009. 

EXPLANATION: Attached for Council’s review and approval are the Minutes of the Regular 

Village Council meetings of October 27, 2009, November 10, 2009 and November 24, 2009. 

LEGAL SUFFICIENCY: No 

FISCAL IMPACT: N/A Type fiscal impact, if applicable. 


RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends a motion by Council approving the Minutes of the 

Regular Village Council meetings of October 27, 2009, November 10, 2009 and November 24, 

2009.


MINUTES 





Wellington, Florida 33414 

Tuesday, October 27, 2009 

7:00 p.m. 

Pursuant to the foregoing notice, a Regular Meeting of the Council was held on Tuesday, October 27, 

2009 commencing at 7:00 p.m. at the Wellington Community Center, 12165 W. Forest Hill Boulevard, 

Wellington, FL 33414. 

Council Members present were: Darell Bowen, Mayor, Dr. Carmine A. Priore, Vice Mayor, Lizbeth 

Benacquisto, Councilwoman, Matt Willhite, Councilman, and Howard K. Coates, Jr., Councilman 

Advisors to the Council were: Paul Schofield, Village Manager, Jeffrey S. Kurtz, Esq., Village 

Attorney, and Awilda Rodriguez, Village Clerk. 

1. CALL TO ORDER – Mayor Bowen called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. 

2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE – Mayor Bowen led the Pledge of Allegiance. 

3. INVOCATION - Rabbi Stephen Pinsky, Temple Beth Torah, Wellington 


Mr. Schofield presented the Agenda for approval with one amendment: (1) Move Consent Agenda 

item 6Cmove Consent Item 6C, Resolution No. 2009-66 (Amending Schedule for Building Permit 

Fees) to the Regular Agenda as Item 8B. 

A motion was made by Vice Mayor Priore, seconded by Councilman Willhite, and unanimously 

passed (5-0) approving the Agenda with the following amendment: Move Consent Agenda 

item 6Cmove Consent Item 6C, Resolution No. 2009-66 (Amending Schedule for Building 

Permit Fees) to the Regular Agenda as Item 8B. 


A. LEGISLATIVE UPDATE PRESENTATION BY FLORIDA HOUSE REPRESENTATIVE, 

JOSEPH ABRUZZO 

Mr. Schofield introduced the Agenda item. He introduced Representative Abruzzo noting that his 

Freshman term was both successful and remarkable. 

Representative Abruzzo thanked Mr. Schofield for his kind words, and expressed his appreciation to 

each member of Council for all of their efforts and support. He went on to say that the last time he 

spoke before the Council, he had informed them that he had passed five bills through the House, and


he was happy to announce that they have become law. Representative Abruzzo then highlighted 

those bills: 

� Nicole’s Law: He announced that Councilwoman Benacquisto was very instrumental in the 

passage of this bill which now requires minors 16 years old and younger to wear a helmet 

while riding horseback on public trails and during riding lessons. 

� Consumer Energy Savings Act: This is a rebate program for “Energy Star” appliances. He 

secured $17.5 million for this program. People who purchase an “Energy Star” rated 

refrigerators, freezers, washing machines, dish washers, room air conditioners or gas-tankless 

water heaters between April 16 th and April 25 th will receive a 20% discount. He felt that this 

was an incredible opportunity which will help boost retail sales, educate consumers on the 

benefits of having Energy-Star appliances in their home, and stimulus money will be going 

back to the consumers. 

� Hotel and Restaurant Industry: At the beginning of the legislative session, Representative 

Abruzzo was approached by members of the hotel industry who had a big concern. He 

explained that their concern was that every hotel and restaurant in the State pays an additional 

$10.00 per year in their annual licensing fee which is supposed to be directed towards 

hospitality education. $2.50 of this fee goes into the public high schools to fund ProStart which 

is the Culinary Arts Program, and the Lodge and Management Courses. The hotel industry 

representatives were concerned that the legislature would be removing the money from those 

programs due to the large budget deficit. He not only was able to save the $2.50, but almost 

all of the $10.00 was moved into the public high schools for these programs. This saved over 

20,000 enrolled in these classes and it will be expanded throughout the states to other public 

high schools. 

� Two local bills were also passed. 

Representative Abruzzo said that his main purpose to speak to Council at this time was able to bring 

to light on several issues which he felt would be main issues coming in this legislative session. He 

said that along with the budget, he believed that the Seminole Indian Compact Deal and the Offshore 

Drilling will dominate this legislative session. 

� Seminole Indian Compact Deal – Representative Abruzzo said that he serves on the 

Committee and is the only Freshman to serve on it. The history of this issue is that in 2007, 

the Governor signed a Compact Deal with the Seminole Indians giving them the exclusive right 

to “Blackjack.” He said that the problem with that was that a Bill never went through the 

legislature which resulted in it being brought to the Supreme Court who ruled that deal was 

illegal and that the Compact was void. He said that in hopes of a good faith deal, the 

Seminoles were still allowed to run “ Blackjack” and a Bill was filed this year in the legislature 

that the Committee was hoping to pass so that everything would become legal. 

Representative Abruzzo explained that both the Senate and the House passed their own 

version of the deal. He further explained that the original deal signed by the Governor was for 

$100 million a year for the guaranteed exclusive right for “Blackjack.” He was of the opinion 

that was far too low of an amount, and he felt the State should be receiving a minimum of 

$500 million a year. The Senate’s version of what was passed was $400 million a year with 

graduating increases; however, the House version was for $150 million a year. The House 

version won in Conference and Committee. Representative Abruzzo believed that the 

problem with this is that the existing Para-mutual Florida-owned companies are taxed 62%, 

50% from the State and 12% from the local government. The Seminole Indians claim that they 

make about $1.6 billion from their “Blackjack” play, and to the original deal, that is about a 7% 

tax rate. He understood that the Indians have had many hardships and they should receive


benefits; however, he said he has a problem with a 62% tax rate for Florida-owned businesses 

versus 7% for the Seminole Indians. Furthermore, although the Seminoles claim to make $1.6 

billion, the government is not allowed to go in and audit these numbers. He felt that there are 

many intricacies in this deal that need to be worked out. In summary, the Bill that the 

legislature passed was for $150 million per year which was sent to the Governor to bring to the 

Seminole Indian Tribe to close the deal, and in return the Seminoles voiced opposition to the 

deal and supported something similar to the original deal. Representative Abruzzo pointed out 

that the Seminoles continue to offer Blackjack without the State collecting $1.00. He said that 

the money which is supposedly by their goodwill going into a trust fund that the State will 

collect if there is a deal signed. Over the past week, a letter was written by the Speaker of the 

House to the Federal Government demanding that the Seminoles shut down the casino 

operations. He envisioned this as an on-going battle that will occur over the next couple of 

month. 

� Offshore Oil Drilling: Representative Abruzzo personally believed that the Offshore Oil 

Drilling Bill will eventually pass. He explained that when the Speaker of the House, Dean 

Cannon and the new Senate President, Senator Haridopolos, take office in 2011, they will be 

facing a minimum of a $5.3 billion budget deficit with no federal stimulus dollars coming in. He 

thought that the only way to bring in an abundance of general revenue that would be 

supported overall by Floridians is Offshore Oil Drilling. He thought that this will pass because 

a Bill was brought to the House last year which overwhelmingly passed. Last year’s Bill was 

very aggressive and allowed slant drilling on the Gulf Coast all the way up to the beach. He 

voted against that because he could not support that type of Bill. If the Bill that may be coming 

up this year specifically bans drilling on the East Coast, the Florida Keys, certain protected 

regions around the Gulf, around military bases as well in the Gulf, if there are sub-C oil 

platforms that are constructed so they can’t be seen by tourists or residents of the Gulf Area, 

and drilling is not allowed all the way up to the beach, he may support the Bill; however, he 

could not commit to that at this time until he reads the legislation which has not yet come 

forward. Representative Abruzzo said that he would be open to the idea of Offshore Oil 

Drilling if it has the right components. 

Representative Abruzzo then briefed the Council on two other issues that he has been involved with: 

� Potential Cancer Cluster in the Acreage: He has teamed up with Senator Aronberg when 

they learned there may be an issue with this. They wrote a letter to the State Surgeon 

General requesting that they move quickly and to form some type of task force. He said that 

the Acreage is a community of over 50,000 worried residents, and thought the testing could be 

done swiftly, it would be better for those families to learn whether or not there is a problem. 

He said that they have done some form of testing, but his opinion was that much higher stages 

of testing were needed. 

� University of Florida issue: Representative Abruzzo reported that he had an issue with the 

University of Florida. He explained that the University has a tax-payer owned radio station 

who owns both an AM and FM license. The signal for the FM license stems from the Georgia 

border all the way to Orlando. He further noted that the FM station purchased a syndication of 

a show which degrades every religion, nationality and creed. Representative Abruzzo said he 

would not have an issue with this if it was a private station; however, since this is broadcast 

from the College of Journalism on campus, the people who work on this station are University 

faculty and students and tax payer money is co-mingled with this. He said he was greatly 

upset with one segment called “Mentally Challenged” where they would take someone who 

they labeled as a “Tard” and bring in other imposters to act as “Tards” and the callers would


have to select the true mentally-challenged person. Representative Abruzzo said that he 

teamed up with Erik Fresen, a Republican from Miami who he had served with on the State 

University Policy Committee, and they addressed the President of the University of Florida 

who has made a commitment to remove this content on that show. He said that they will 

continue to work with the President, and there will probably be an announced in the next 

couple of weeks that this has been done. 

Overall, Representative Abruzzo expects there to be a very busy legislative session. He said that he 

will come back before Council when he is ready to file his Bills in order to provide an update of what 

his plans are for the upcoming legislative session. He said that he will always be looking out for 

Wellington’s interest. Representative Abruzzo advised Council that their input has been extremely 

helpful and beneficial to him, and he values their friendship. He recognized and thanked the 

Williamson Family for their generous commitment to the community. He also congratulated Max 

Clarke on his award of courage noting that he is an inspiration to everyone. At this time, he concluded 

his report and said he was available to answer any of Council’s questions. 

Councilman Willhite thanked Representative Abruzzo for his report and for the work that he is doing 

for the community and residents of Wellington, Palm Beach County and the State of Florida. He said 

that his work ethic and commitment is apparent by his accomplishments in his first session in 

Tallahassee. Councilman Willhite expected the same great things from the Representative in the 

coming year. He offered his help to Representative Abruzzo in any way he could either locally or in 

Tallahassee to benefit the residents of Florida. 

Councilwoman Benacquisto felt that the community was very fortunate to have Representative 

Abruzzo represent them. She thought that he accomplished in more in just one year then what many 

other legislators don’t accomplish in years of service. With regard to the issues he brought forth, 

Councilwoman Benacquisto felt that they were very important to Wellington as a community and as a 

region. She thanked Representative Abruzzo for his work on Nicole’s Law noting that the Acreage 

named their park after Nicole. She thought that the most fun would be to watch Representative 

Abruzzo’s service over the coming years because of his incredible work ethic and tenacity. 

Councilwoman Benacquisto said that she looked forward to working with him in whatever capacity 

that holds for her in the future. She praised his work in Wellington, and hoped that the community will 

get to know him, reach out to his office staff and bring their issues to him so that they can receive the 

help that Representative Abruzzo provides to the community. 

Councilman Coates thanked Representative Abruzzo for his service this past session. He said that 

most people in Wellington know that they ran a very competitive campaign against each other; 

however, at the conclusion of the campaign they both considered each other friends. He said that 

during the campaign questions had been raised whether Representative Abruzzo was truly one of 

Wellington’s own and if he would really represent the community. Councilman Coates felt that the 

service given to Wellington over the past year by Representative Abruzzo alleviates any doubt about 

his being a Wellington representative. He further stated that Representative Abruzzo has worked hard 

for the community, and Councilman Coates wanted to go on record that he was proud to have 

Representative Abruzzo serve as a representative from Wellington. 

Vice Mayor Priore said that, as President of the Florida League of Cities, he had relayed messages 

from the 412 cities across the State, and when there were issues that affected them, Representative 

Abruzzo contacted him and asked what the status was on the issues. He thought that they had a 

great open door policy with much conversation. Vice Mayor Priore said that, without hesitation, 

Representative Abruzzo supported them on very close issues and thanked him on behalf of the


League of Cities. He also expressed his thanks to Representative Abruzzo for the work that he is 

doing in Wellington. 

Mayor Bowen said that he echoed all of the comments made by the Councilmembers. He particularly 

appreciated the opportunity to be able to discuss with Representative Abruzzo any issues or anything 

that was on his mind, and also was very appreciative that he truly listened even though they may not 

agree on everything. Mayor Bowen believed that this makes Representative Abruzzo a true 

representative of Wellington. 

Representative Abruzzo thanked Council for their accolades. He said that he would continue working 

for the community. He then introduced his District Secretary, Darly Adams. Representative Abruzzo 

left copies of his Legislative Report for the residents. 

B. PROCLAMATION OF THE VILLAGE COUNCIL OF THE VILLAGE OF WELLINGTON, 

FLORIDA RECOGNIZING 6-YEAR OLD MAX CLARK, A WELLINGTON RESIDENT AND 

STUDENT AT ELBRIDGE GALE ELEMENTARY SCHOOL 

Mr. Schofield read the Proclamation. 

The Village Council presented the Proclamation to Max Clark and his family. 

Mr. Clark, Max’ Dad, thanked the Mayor and the Council and particularly, Councilwoman Benacquisto 

for all of their support. 

C. PROCLAMATION OF THE VILLAGE COUNCIL OF THE VILLAGE OF WELLINGTON, 

FLORIDA RECOGNIZING DEL AND BARARA WILLIAMSON 

Mr. Schofield read the Proclamation. 

The Village Council presented the Proclamation to Del and Barbara Williamson. 

On behalf of Mrs. Williamson and their daughter, Mr. Williamson thanked the Council for the 

recognition bestowed upon them. He said that they have been working for the past year and a half 

with Councilwoman Benacquisto to reach this point, and hopefully the next couple of months will be 

even more exciting. Mr. Williamson said that they were happy to be a part of Wellington and that 

Scott’s Place will be a great thing for the community. He further noted that Home Depot also 

contributed $10,000 to Scott’s Place. The Williamsons look forward to the completion of the park, and 

being part of the overall Town Center. Mr. Williamson also said it was a pleasure to work with Rick 

Greene in helping to coordinate the construction of the park. 

D. PROCLAMATION OF THE VILLAGE COUNCIL OF THE VILLAGE OF WELLINGTON, 

FLORIDA RECOGNIZING WELLINGTON’S AMERICAN LEGION POST 390 

Mr. Schofield read the Proclamation. He announced that present from American Legion Post 390 

were: Former Mayor Tom Wenham, present Post Commander, David Knapp, former Post 

Commander who is presently the Southeast Regional Commander, Tom Clapp, Keith Ullman, and 

Jerry Klein, Vietnam veteran, Service Officer Ms. Mary Castillo who was scheduled to attend, was not 

present due to a travel commitment. Mr. Schofield pointed out that Councilman Willhite is a member 

of Post 390 and Vice Mayor Priore is a Charter member of the Post. 

Former Mayor Wenham thanked the Village Council for recognizing American Legion Post 390. He 

expressed his appreciation to Mr. Schofield for his involvement in the partnership between the Post


and the Village, and also to Bruce Delaney and Nicole Evangelista for attending their meeting to 

discuss cooperative efforts between the Post and the Village. In addition, he introduced Tom Clapp, 

Vietnam veteran who was the Post’s first Vice Commander, Jerry Klein, Vietnam veteran and their 

Service Officer, Dave Knapp, Vietnam veteran, the Southern area Commander and the Post’s 

Chaplain, and Keith Ullman, Navy veteran. Former Mayor Wenham noted that he is an Air Force 

veteran. He said that as was previously mentioned, Mary Castillo who couldn’t attend is a Marine 

veteran. He said that they looked forward to working with the Village Council in a partnership on 

Veterans Day and Memorial Day. He further explained that since its formation one of the activities 

that the Post has been involved with is Stand Down House in Lake Worth. He asked Mr. Knapp to 

speak on Stand Down House. Mr. Knapp explained that Stand Down House is a facility which is the 

only one of its kind that is connected with the VA Hospital in the United States, and was recently 

declared a Pilot Program for the United States. He noted that both he and Mr. Klein are members of 

its Advisory Board, and explained that the program deals with taking veterans off of the streets and 

out of the woods. Mr. Roy Foster, who was homeless and is a reformed alcoholic and drug addict, is 

the Founder of the House. He further explained that since 2000, Mr. Foster has rehabilitated over 900 

veterans with a 93.7% successful ratio for getting them back into the work environment. Recently, Mr. 

Foster was selected as one of the top ten finalists for this year’s CNN Heroes of the Year Award, and 

Mr. Knapp encouraged everyone to vote for him at cnn.com because if he wins, $100,000 is given to 

the facility. This would be amazing because there are over 1,900 homeless veterans. He then 

extended an invitation to the Council to tour the Stand Down House to see what have been 

accomplished there. Lastly, Mr. Knapp said that the Post now has 40 members; however, efforts 

need to be made to recruit more members because there are over 500 veterans in Wellington. 

Former Mayor Wenham said that they wanted to welcome those veterans who were watching the 

meeting at home to their Post. 

The Village Council presented the Proclamation to Former Mayor Wenham and members of American 

Legion Post 390. 

E. EMPLOYEE RECOGNITION PROGRAM FOR THE MONTH OF SEPTEMBER & 

QUARTER 

Mr. Schofield introduced the Agenda item. He announced that they would be recognizing the 

Employee of the Month for September: Elizabeth Arocho; and Supervisor of the Quarter, Jose 

Sanchez. 

Mr. Schofield recognized both Ms. Arocho and Mr. Sanchez for their outstanding work. He said that 

the Village received many calls from residents regarding the exceptional work that they both did at the 

Dog Park, and for the recent changes that they recently instituted there. Mr. Schofield said that while 

many employees do good work every day, Ms. Arocho’s and Mr. Sanchez’ work have been exemplary 

over the past weeks and months. He extended his thanks to both of them. 

The Village Council and Mr. Schofield presented plaques of recognition to Ms. Elizabeth Arocho for 

being named Wellington’s Employee of the Month for the September; and to Mr. Jose Sanchez for 

being named Wellington’s Supervisor of the Quarter. 


A. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR VILLAGE COUNCIL MEETINGS OF AUGUST 11, 2009, 

AUGUST 25, 2009 AND SEPTEMBER 15, 2009. 

B. CERTIFICATES OF CORRECTION


C. RESOLUTION R2009-66 (AMENDING A FEE SCHEDULE FOR BUILDING PERMITTING 

FEES) RESOLUTION OF THE VILLAGE COUNCIL OF THE VILLAGE OF WELLINGTON, 

FLORIDA ADOPTING A REVISED FEE SCHEDULE FOR BUILDING PERMITTING FEES; 

AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. Moved to Regular Agenda as Item 8B. 

D. RESOLUTION R2009-46 (GRANGE PLAT NO. 1) A RESOLUTION OF THE VILLAGE 

COUNCIL OF THE VILLAGE OF WELLINGTON, FLORIDA ACCEPTING AND APPROVING 

THE PLAT KNOWN AS "GRANGE PLAT NO.1" AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND 

VILLAGE CLERK TO EXECUTE THE PLAT; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. 

E. RESOLUTION AC2009-07 (WANDERER'S CLUB (aka WELLINGTON GOLF & COUNTRY 

CLUB) LAKES A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF THE ACME 

IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT APPROVING THE AGREEMENT TRANSFERRING TITLE 

BETWEEN THE WANDERER’S CLUB LLC AND THE ACME IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT 

FOR THE RECONFIGERATED LAKES ABUTTING GOLF COURSE PROPERTY OWNED 

BY THE WANDERER’S CLUB LLC; PROVIDING FOR THE EXECUTION OF THE 

AGREEMENT 

TRANSFERRING PROPERTY RIGHTS BY THE BOARD PRESIDENT AND 

SECRETARY; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. 

Mr. Schofield presented the Consent Agenda recommending approving with the exception 

A motion was made by Councilman Willhite, seconded by Councilwoman Benacquisto, and 

unanimously passed (5-0) with the exception of Item 6C, Resolution No. R2009-66 (Amending a 

Fee Schedule for Building Permitting Fees) which had been moved to the Regular Agenda as 

Item 8B. 

7. PUBLIC HEARINGS 

Mr. Schofield announced that the Mystic Equestrian items, Ordinance No. 2009-10 and Resolution 

No. R2009-47 are quasi-judicial and anyone wishing to speak to either of these items would need to 

be sworn in. Mr. Kurtz administered the oath to those people who indicated that would be speaking 

on these items. 

Mr. Schofield proposed a combined public hearing and staff presentation for items (A) and (B) since 

they both deal with Mystic Equestrian; however, separate motions were needed for each of them. 

A. ORDINANCE NO. 2009-10 (MYSTIC EQUESTRIAN) AN ORDINANCE OF THE VILLAGE 

COUNCIL OF THE VILLAGE OF WELLINGTON, FLORIDA RELATING TO REZONING FOR 

PETITION NUMBER 2007-005 REZ 1, ALSO KNOWN AS MYSTIC EQUESTRIAN; 

PROVIDING FOR THE REZONING OF A PARCEL OF LAND, CONSISTING OF 4.2 ACRES, 

MORE OR LESS, WHICH IS LOCATED ALONG THE WEST SIDE OF SOUTH SHORE 

BOULEVARD, IMMEDIATELY NORTH OF PIERSON ROAD, AS MORE SPECIFICALLY 

DESCRIBED HEREIN; FROM AGRICULTURAL RESIDENTIAL (AR) / SPECIAL 

EXCEPTION (SE) / PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (PUD) TO AGRICULTURAL 

RESIDENTIAL (AR) / SPECIAL EXCEPTION (SE) / PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (PUD) 

/ EQUESTRIAN OVERLAY ZONING DISTRICT (EOZD); PROVIDING FOR REVISIONS TO 

THE ZONING DISTRICT MAP; PROVIDING A SAVINGS CLAUSE; PROVIDING A 

REPEALER CLAUSE; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. 

B. RESOLUTION NO. R2009- 47 (MYSTIC EQUESTRIAN) A RESOLUTION OF THE VILLAGE 

COUNCIL OF THE VILLAGE OF WELLINGTON, FLORIDA, APPROVING A


DEVELOPMENT ORDER AMENDMENT AND MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT, FOR 

PETITION NUMBER 2007-005 DOA 2 AND 2007-005 MPA 2, AMENDING THE 

DEVELOPMENT ORDER OF THE WELLINGTON PUD MASTER PLAN TO DESIGNATE 

ONE DWELLING UNIT FOR CERTAIN PROPERTY KNOWN AS PARCEL “H” OF 

GREENVIEW SHORES NUMBER TWO (MYSTIC EQUESTRIAN), TOTALING 4.2 ACRES, 

MORE OR LESS, LOCATED ALONG THE WEST SIDE OF SOUTH SHORE BOULEVARD, 

IMMEDIATELY NORTH OF PIERSON ROAD, AS MORE SPECIFICALLY DESCRIBED 

HEREIN; PROVIDING A CONFLICTS CLAUSE AND ASEVERABILITY CLAUSE; AND 


Mr. Schofield read the Ordinance and Resolution titles for the Mystic Equestrian items. He 

noted that Mr. David Flinchum, Manager, Planning & Zoning, was present to give the staff 

presentation. 

Public Hearing 

A motion was made by Vice Mayor Priore, seconded by Councilwoman Benacquisto, and 

unanimously passed (5-0) to open the Public Hearing for Ordinance No. 2009-10 and Resolution No. 

R2009-47. 

Mr. Kurtz asked the applicant or anyone opposing the applications if they had any objection to a 

combined public hearing. There were no objections raised. 

There being no public comments, a motion was made by Vice Mayor Priore, seconded by 

Councilwoman Benacquisto, and unanimously passed (5-0) to close the Public Hearing. 

At this point, Mr. Kurtz pointed out that there was someone in the audience who wanted to speak to 

the issue, but who didn’t understand that he had to fill out a card in order to speak on this item. 


unanimously passed to reopen the Public Hearing. 

1. Dale Showell, 13901 Pierson Road. Mr. Showell indicated that he had been sworn in. He 

addressed the resolution that requests turning Parcel H into a one residential unit parcel. Mr. 

Showell stated that he has been in his home for ten years, and he has been engaged in a 

business dealing with Mystic Equestrian for the past several years where they planned to subdivide 

the property and build homes; however, they now want to change it to equestrian which is 

what he had wanted some time ago. Mr. Showell was concerned that he has a lawsuit against 

Mystic Equestrian for specific performance and some contractual problems. He presented an 

Exhibit concerning that. Mr. Showell said that this is a law suit that was moving forward where he 

is claiming that the residence, 13901 Pierson Road sits on one portion of Parcel H which is a little 

more than an acre, and the second portion is the section that they had plans to sub-divide into 

high-end housing for equestrians. He said that at the point when the sub-division was approved, 

the house was to revert back to Mr. Showell. Mr. Showell further stated that there was a Judge 

who signed an order stating that he would have to review any transactions with this property prior 

to any action taken by Mystic. He said that the Judge’s reason for this was because he saw that 

the case had merit. Mr. Showell submitted that as Exhibit 2. He said that the question is who 

actually owns 13901 Pierson and the house located on it. He said if Council decides that Parcel H 

will forever have one residential unit which he didn’t believe was a prerequisite to the Equestrian 

Overlay designation being approved, then he is left with no house. Mr. Showell said that if Council 

takes this action, he felt that his case would then be in jeopardy. He said that his understanding is


that the designation for this property was being changed to Residential B which allows one (1) unit 

per acre which is how it was originally platted. He asked that Council postpone taking any vote 

limiting this property to one residential unit until this case works its way through the court system. 

2. David Carpenter representing the Applicant. Mr. Carpenter noted that he had been sworn in. Mr. 

Carpenter indicated that the attorney for Mystic Equestrian LLC was present as well as one of the 

partners. He pointed out that Mr. Showell has been in attendance at previously held meetings 

regarding this issue; however, he was only now voicing his opinion. Mr. Carpenter felt that the 

Council needed to hear from Mystic Equestrian’s attorney relating to Mr. Showell’s position with 

them as far as he is an owner of the property. 

3. Paul Lane, Counsel for Mystic Equestrian. Mr. Lane said that he was in attendance at the hearing 

when the Judge issued that order making it very clear that Mr. Showell had no ownership or any 

other right to prevent the sale or other use of the property which is why he entered the order 

releasing the Lis Pendens which prevented him from doing it. He said that he brought the Motion 

to Release that Lis Pendens. Mr. Lane pointed out that Mr. Showell has been living on the 

property without paying out funds with all of the expenses being paid by the other partners. He 

said that Mr. Showell didn’t raise one item addressing a copy of an e-mail that he received from 

him in November 2008 confirming that Mystic was going to apply for inclusion in the Equestrian 

Overlay Zoning District and that he was going to make an application for a tent on the premises. 

Mr. Lane felt that the reason this was the first time that Mr. Showell has raised any objections to 

this despite being in attendance at every meeting was because he was trying to delay this. He 

reiterated that the Court by its order made it very clear that Mr. Showell had no rights although the 

Judge’s order did state that if they were going to sell the property the Judge wanted to see it first. 

He did not say the parties had no rights or could do nothing. Mr. Lane felt that Mr. Showell had no 

rights on the property except that he may have some profit potential on the sale. He was of the 

opinion that Mr. Showell was trying to get the Council to do what the Judge said could not be 

done. 

There being no further public comments, a motion was made by Councilwoman Benacquisto, 

seconded by Vice Mayor Priore and unanimously passed (5-0) to close the Public Hearing. 

Mr. Kurtz explained that when someone makes an application for a rezoning or a development order 

amendment, they have to be a record title owner or have the consent of the record title owner. He 

said that Mr. Showell has not provided anything to the Village that indicates that anybody other than 

Mystic Equestrian LLC is the record title owner of this property. He said that whatever rights Mr. 

Showell may or may not have or whether there are any mortgages on the property, the Village did no 

need the consent of those people in order to move forward with this type of application. With regard 

to Mr. Showell’s contention that there are presently two lots on Parcel H, Mr. Kurtz said that, to the 

best of staff’s knowledge and in reviewing their records, there is only one lot of record. He further 

stated that whether or not there is a separate tax identification parcel does not change the fact that 

from the Village’s perspective there is one lot of record which is Parcel H which presently exists and 

any attempt to build something separate and apart from that would require a replat of the property. 

Mr. Kurtz said that as he had indicated at the Agenda Review meeting, it is within Council’s right to 

continue this matter if they feel more information is needed; however, neither he nor staff was of the 

opinion that there was a problem for Council to move forward and consider the application as it is 

being presented. 

Mayor Bowen was of the opinion that it appeared that whatever the dispute is that it is between Mystic 

LLC and Mr. Showell and the Village is not a part of that. He said that the Village has done everything 

possible to determine who the owner of the property is, and if it is Mystic LLC then the Village should


be dealing with their application. Mayor Bowen felt that their dispute needs to go to court because 

Council does not have any jurisdiction or responsibility in this matter, and that they needed to move 

forward on this. 

Councilman Coates said that his understanding was that both sides are relying on an order that was 

entered by the Circuit Court who both claim provides them with certain rights. He asked Mr. Kurtz if 

he had an opportunity review that order to determine if there was anything that precluded the Council 

from taking the action they are being asked to take regarding this matter. Mr. Kurtz said that the order 

only indicates that the court will review the potential sale prior to it being consummated. Councilman 

Coates requested to see the order. Mr. Kurtz further stated that there was no indication that there 

was a Motion to Enjoin these proceedings which he felt would have been the proper action for them to 

take if they wanted to stop this on the basis of that lawsuit. 

Councilman Willhite concurred with Mayor Bowen that it is an unfortunate situation; however, it 

appeared that there is a dispute between the potential owners or a deal that they had amongst 

themselves regarding this property. He said that this parcel of property had come before Council on 

at least four occasions; and each time it came forward, staff worked diligently with the owners to 

proceed with their request for their property. Councilman Willhite said that Council was only moving 

forward with staff recommendation and with the owner of title’s request for what they want done to 

their property. He noted that as everyone has said it is very fitting for this property to be included in 

the Equestrian Overlay Zoning District. Councilman Willhite said that his previous concerns were with 

on-going temporary tenting on the property; however, it appeared that was not going to happen with 

the current owner, and hopefully it will be a permanent structure which will benefit everyone. 

Councilman Willhite didn’t feel that Council should get in the middle of this dispute. He noted that the 

ordinance is before Council on second reading pointed out that the petitioner only came forward this 

past Saturday. 

Councilman Coates said that he agreed with Council’s comments to a point; however, he said that he 

would still have a problem approving an applicant’s request if they were clearly in violation of a court 

order and there was no injunction in place. He then read a portion of the court order that was 

submitted into the record by Mr. Showel, and explained that his understanding of the order is all that it 

did was require approval of the sale, and it did not remove any of the rights that the applicant would 

have since he is the existing owner of the property. He said that absent from seeing any of that type 

of direction, he agreed that there was nothing to stop Council from moving forward on this item. 

With regard to Ordinance No. 2009-10 and Resolution No. R2009-47, Vice Mayor Priore asked if it 

had anything to do with the prevention or opportunity for a sale. He asked if approving the ordinance 

would have any impact on the sale of the property. Mr. Kurtz responded negatively. 

Approvals 

Ordinance No. 2009-10 

A motion was made by Vice Mayor Priore, seconded by Councilman Willhite, and unanimously 

passed (5-0) approving Ordinance No. 2009-10 on Second Reading as presented. 

Resolution No. R2009-47 


unanimously passed (5-0) approving Resolution No. R2009-47 as presented.


C. ORDINANCE NO. 2009-16 (SIGN CODE ZTA) AN ORDINANCE OF THE VILLAGE 

COUNCIL OF THE VILLAGE OF WELLINGTON, FLORIDA, PERTAINING TO ZONING; 

AMENDING THE LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATION CODE OF THE VILLAGE OF 

WELLINGTON BY AMENDING ARTICLE 7, CHAPTER 14, “SIGN REGULATIONS;” 

AMENDING SECTION 7.14.4, “DEFINITIONS,” REGARDING DEFINITIONS FOR 

COMMERCIAL MESSAGE, EXEMPT SIGNS, SCHOOL, ELEMENTARY OR SECONDARY, 

SIGN, A FRAME, SIGN, DIGITAL, SIGN, ELECTRONIC MESSAGE BOARD, SIGN, 

EXEMPT, SIGN, FREESTANDING ENTER IDENTIFICATION, SIGN, FREESTANDING 

MULTIPLE TENANT, SIGN, ON-SITE DIRECTIONAL, SIGN, ON-SITE INFORMATIONAL, 

SIGN, POLE BANNER, TEMPORARY, SIGN, POLE BANNER, PERMANENT, SIGN, 

SANDWICH OR SANDWICH BOARD, VILLAGE, AND WINDOW AREA; SECTION 

7.14.5, REGARDING “COMPLIANCE WITH BUILDING CODE;” AMENDING SECTION 

.14.7, “PROHIBITED SIGNS,” REGARDING MOVING SIGNS, LIVE ANIMALS, SANDWICH 

BOARDS AND AFRAME SIGNS, AND MURALS; SECTION 7.14.8, “EXEMPT SIGNS,” 

REGARDING PUBLIC SIGNS, VILLAGE SIGNS, SIGNS WITHIN A BUILDING, 

RESIDENTIAL WORKS OF ART, PUBLIC NOTICE SIGNS, INTERIOR SIGNS, AND 

FEDERAL BANKRUPTCY SIGNS; AMENDING SECTION 7.14.9, “PERMITS REQUIRED,” 

REGARDING APPLICATION REQUIREMENTS, AND PROHIBITED SIGNS; AMENDING 

SECTION 7.14.11, “SIGN REQUIREMENTS FOR COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL 

USES,” REGARDING ENTRY FEATURES AND FREESTANDING CENTER 

IDENTIFICATION MONUMENT SIGNS, MULTIPLE TENANT MONUMENT SIGNS, 

WINDOW SIGNS, MONUMENT SIGNS FOR COMMERCIAL OR INDUSTRIAL 

OUTPARCELS OR FREESTANDING BUSINESSES, GAS/SERVICE 

STATION/CONVENIENCE STORE SIGNS, DIGITAL SIGNS, WORKS OF ART, A FRAME, 

PERMANENT NONRESIDENTIAL REAL ESTATE SIGNS, PERMANENT POLE 

BANNERS, AND INTERNAL DIRECTIONAL SIGNAGE; AMENDING SECTION 7.14.12, 

“SIGN REQUIREMENTS FOR INSTITUTIONAL USES,” REGARDING 

IDENTIFICATION SIGNS, SCHOOL SPONSOR SIGNS, PROJECT GRADUATION SIGNS 

AND PERMITTED DISPLAY, ELECTRONIC MESSAGE BOARD SIGNS, AND MURALS; 

AMENDING SECTION 7.14.13, “TEMPORARY SPECIAL EVENT SIGNS,” REGARDING 

TEMPORARY POLE BANNER SIGNS, SEASONAL EQUESTRIAN EVENT SIGNS AND 

FLAGS, TEMPORARY BANNERS IN THE MEDICAL COMMERCAL PLANNED 

DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT, AND TEMPORARY UTILITY POLE BANNERS; AMENDING 

SECTION 7.14.20, “SIGNS FOR PROJECTS WITHIN THE LS/MU LAND USE OVERLAY,” 

REGARDING REGIONAL SHOPPING CENTERS, DIRECTIONAL SIGNS, MEDIAN 

ENTRANCE SIGNS, PROJECT IDENTIFICATION SIGNS, SIGN REQUIREMENTS FOR 

MULTIPLE USE PLANNED DEVELOPMENTS (MUPDS), MONUMENT SIGNS FOR 

COMMERCIAL OR INDUSTRIAL OUTPARCELS OR FREESTANDING BUSINESSES, 

MONUMENT SIGNS FOR SHOPPING CENTERS/PRIMARY TENANTS, AND EXTERNAL 

FREESTANDING POINT OF PURCHASE SIGNS; AMENDING SECTION 7.14.21, 

“ENFORCEMENT;” PROVIDING A REPEALER CLAUSE; PROVIDING A SAVINGS 

CLAUSE; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. 

Mr. Schofield read the ordinance title. He announced that Mr. Marty Hodgkins, Director, 

Strategic Planning and Economic Development would be addressing this item. 

Mr. Hodgkins explained that he had distributed a document that addressed both the remaining 

items that need to be discussed as well as those items that had been previewed been reviewed 

that required no further discussion. 

Exemption for Village from Sign Code.


With regard to this item, Councilman Willhite wanted to ensure that this did not include neon 

signs. He wanted to make certain that the entrance signs to the Village are some type of LED 

sign and not neon signs. 

Councilwoman Benacquisto thought that the protection should be included because if it states 

that the Village is exempt from the Sign Code, it opens up the possibility that neon signs could 

be installed in the Village. She felt that rather than just saying that the Village is exempt from 

the Sign Code, it should say that the Village is exempt from the Sign Code with certain 

parameters. 

Mayor Bowen pointed out that presently there are many neon signs in the Village. 

Vice Mayor Priore further explained that the Village’s Code presently allows a business to have 

a neon sign if it is set back from the glass inside of a business and hung within a designated distance 

from the window. He felt that the Village to some extent has to be exempt from the Sign Code 

because there may be emergency cases where they have to go beyond what that portion of the Code 

allows. 

Councilman Willhite referred to a picture of City Furniture that had a digital background. He wanted to 

ensure that the Village did not install informational entry signs with that brightness in the middle of the 

roadway which he felt would be distracting to drivers. 

Mayor Bowen didn’t believe that Council would agree to approve something like that, and hoped that 

would hold true for future Councils, but he could not guarantee that. 

Councilwoman Benacquisto stated that Council all agreed that they would not want to see that type of 

sign; however, she thought that Councilman Willhite was requesting to have it memorialized in the 

policy that it was not acceptable. 

As a point of clarification, Mr. Kurtz said that the sign that Councilman Willhite was referring to was a 

digital sign and not a neon sign. He further stated that if the ordinance stated that the Village was 

going to be exempt from the Sign Code with the exception of neon signs, they would not cover this 

circumstance and they would have to add digital signs. 

Councilman Willhite asked for consensus that Council would not allow the Village to install something 

like that in the Village even though they are exempt. 

Councilman Coates said that he understood the concern, but he felt the Village would be better 

served if it was exempt from the Sign Code. 

Council consensus was that they would not approve such a sign being installed. Mr. Schofield stated 

that unless the Council changes in the future, he did not see any circumstance where staff would 

recommend that type of sign to Council. 

Multiple Tenant Monument Signs 

Mayor Bowen said that Council had discussed allowing one principal entrance which means there is a 

median cut. 

Mr. Schofield said that the issue that was discussed was that some properties could be long enough 

and might need more signage. He said that Council also discussed the principal entrance which


would include median cuts. He said that they had gone to the shopping center at Wellington Trace 

and Greenview Shores and both of those centers have single principal entrances on both of those 

roads. Mr. Schofield said that they could say, for example for the Mall at Wellington Green where 

there are multiple principal entrances that have median cuts and signals, have more. 

Councilwoman Benacquisto asked if Council just wanted to have the signs 75 feet away from each 

other. Mayor Bowen voiced his agreement. 

Councilman Willhite said that staff was proposing a separate single monument sign that only said “For 

Lease.” He said that Council thought it was overpowering to have a sign that only said that, and 

thought it would be better to have a second sign that included advertising for the businesses with a 

small section that says “For Lease.” He thought this would provide other tenants with the ability to 

advertise their business in the case where a plaza had more tenants than the amount of space to 

advertise on the one monument sign. 

Mayor Bowen agreed with Councilman Willhite’s recommendation. 

Mr. Hodgkins explained that the issue that was previously discussed was to allow the current 

permitted monument signs which would be the typical sign or the multiple tenant sign to include the 

“For Lease” and that the second sign just to advertise leasing opportunities would not be permitted. 

He said that by doing this, they would reduce the amount of monument signs by one per frontage. 

Vice Mayor Priore felt that the signs needed to be designed so that the existing monument signs allow 

for removable names. Mayor Bowen indicated that those signs already exist. Mr. Hodgkins then 

showed examples of those signs. He said that the intent is to allow the sign language to be 

replaceable. Vice Mayor Priore requested that between the First Reading and Second Reading, he 

wanted them to review if there are more tenants than the sign allows for, that there is some provision 

is made for the other tenants whose names can’t be listed. He felt that they needed to give that right 

to every individual who leases space. 

Councilman Benacquisto disagreed stating that the tenant may pay an additional fee to the landlord 

for their name to be included on the sign, and that this issue is between a landlord and a tenant. 

Mayor Bowen explained that in most cases, it is the principal tenants that are included in the sign. 

Vice Mayor Priore said that he understood that; however, if the sign only allows for a certain number 

of names, the person who may want to buy a space on the sign cannot do so which is where he has a 

concern. Mayor Bowen pointed out that the example that was being show is of a shopping center that 

probably has at least 30 tenants and not all of them were listed. 

Mr. Hodgkins believed that there were either two or three of these signs, and the tenants don’t all 

have to be the same on each sign. Using the Marketplace Shopping Center as an example, he said 

that there would be one sign on Wellington Trace that could have up to eight tenants, and the sign on 

Greenview Shores could have eight different tenants. He further stated that they are also trying to 

avoid the ubiquitous gang signs that are in many unincorporated areas of Palm Beach County which 

include an abundance of names making it difficult to read any of the names. 

Councilman Coates asked what the physical limitations of this particular sign would be. Mr. Hodgkins 

explained that the proposed maximum size for the sign is 8 feet high by 10 feet wide and the sign 

area shall not exceed 32 square feet. He further noted that the Wellington Green Mall has its own 

Sign Code by virtue of the Development Order that was issued for the Mall which was then 

subsequently amended about a year and a half ago.


Councilman Coates supported reducing the number of signs particularly the “For Lease” sign; 

however, he suggested that there could be some side sign attached that advertises the space for 

lease and doesn’t take up the tenant space which wouldn’t disrupt the normal contour of the sign. 

Mayor Bowen disagreed explaining that if the landlord wanted to advertise “For Lease” that they 

should include in the space on the sign because he didn’t believe it was logical to have side signs. He 

said that from his experience, anyone looking for space would go into the shopping center itself to see 

if space was available. He further noted that he has been involved in the negotiations to put his name 

on a monument sign many times, and many times he has not be able to get space while other times 

he has. Mayor thought that this was a common thing that tenants were aware of. 

Councilman Coates thought it would be a cost to the landlord to have to list the “For Lease” rather 

than to list a tenant. 

Councilwoman Benacquisto said that the ordinance didn’t articulate how the Village wanted the 

temporary signs to look like, and if people are given the ability to do that, then that would open the 

door for other temporary signs. Councilman Coates said that he thought the side sign could be a 

permanent addition. Councilwoman Benacquisto said that she preferred not to do that. Vice Mayor 

Priore said that it is the landlord’s decision whether or not to include the For Lease in the sign rather 

than a tenant’s name. 

Window Signs 

Mayor Bowen was of the opinion that the landlords of the shopping centers should make their own 

decisions regarding window signs. He said that this is a requirement that has never been enforced 

very well, nor would the Village want to enforce it because some businesses are more conducive to 

having their windows almost completely covered, i.e.., restaurants. He didn’t believe that the Village 

would enforce such a requirement regardless of the percentage of the coverage. 

Vice Mayor Priore said that he did not want to see a proliferation of out of business signs or other sign 

of that type on windows that never come down. He didn’t believe that this was conducive to the way 

the Village wants to look. Although he understands that economic times are difficult and he wouldn’t 

want to hamper anyone’s businesses, but at the same time, he had a problem not regulating the 

percentage of window coverage. Vice Mayor Priore said that agreed with the 45%; but thought it 

would be simpler to say that not more than 50% of the window can be covered with signs which he felt 

would be enforceable. 

Councilman Willhite said that his concern with the percentage is that it is not only unattractive, but the 

Village keeps adding signs, overhead sign, flags, etc. He also was of the opinion that completely 

covering a window poses a safety aspect making it difficult for the Sheriff in the event something was 

happening in the store which they weren’t able see. He said he was looking for a compromise. 

Councilman Willhite envisioned the stores doing 55% of the bottom half of the windows and leaving 

the top half empty which will still give the appearance like it is completely covered particularly since 

the ordinance doesn’t delineate that the coverage be on a certain area of the window. 

Councilwoman Benacquisto said that she supported the 50% or 55%; however, she didn’t feel it 

beared all that much importance. 

Council consensus was that no more than 50% of the window should be covered. 

Gasoline Price Posting


Vice Mayor Priore was of the opinion that gasoline signs should be posted noting that there are 

several stations within the Village who post their prices while many others do not. Mr. Kurtz said that 

Council had previously asked the question whether there was a State law requiring that gasoline 

prices be posted. He advised Council that there is no State law requiring that gas stations post their 

prices. Mr. Kurtz explained that the provision in the ordinance states that space that is dedicated for 

that purpose must be used for that purpose and should not be used to advertise other items, i.e., sale 

items, car washes, etc. 

Digital Signs 

Council consensus was that digital signs should be deleted. Councilman Willhite said that should 

include SR80. 

Works of Art 

As he had previously been discussed by Council, Vice Mayor Priore believed that works of art should 

be treated as a totally separate entity, and should not be part of the Sign Code. He thought that when 

works of art are considered, they should come before Council for further determination so that they 

have total control over that decision to place pieces of art in the community. 

Mayor Bowen asked for a ruling by Mr. Kurtz as to whether that could be done. In response, Mr. 

Kurtz said that Council now has a situation where by definition of what a sign is, works of art would 

constitute a sign. From a technical perspective because they are not allowed as a permitted sign, 

they are not allowed. Mr. Kurtz said that the goal of this Code provision was: (1) provision that for 

works of art, residents can have whatever they want on their private property, and (2) for commercial 

property there was a requirement that they go before the Architectural Review Board and that the 

works of art be part of a master sign plan for the property. He said that doesn’t provide the Village 

control over exactly what the work of art is or whether it is acceptable to Council; however, it does 

provide Council with some frame of reference that it has to be compatible with the overall plans. In his 

opinion, Mr. Kurtz said that when dealing with works of art, they could say that no works of art will be 

allowed or they will be allowed and the government cannot determine whether or not something is an 

acceptable work of art; however, an obscenity provision can be included. He said that whether 

something is good or bad art or if it is acceptable is a matter of opinion. 

Mayor Bowen questioned whether the Council could approve works of art on a case by case basis. 

Mr. Kurtz said that Council could be the reviewing body and could consider whether it is compatible 

and appropriate with its proposed location or if its size is acceptable, however, Council cannot make 

the determination to reject something because they don’t consider it to be art. 

Councilman Coates asked if they could just redefine works of art and leave it as something to be 

determined outside of the scope of the ordinance. He referred to the Horse statue being shown 

stating that he had trouble considering that a sign. 

Vice Mayor Priore suggested that they remove works of art from the Sign Code and treat it as a 

separate entity. 

Mr. Kurtz asked Council if someone had a statue of Ronald McDonald out in front of McDonald’s and 

it was painted as Ronald McDonald, would Council consider it a work of art or a sign. Councilman 

Willhite was of the opinion that he viewed it as an advertisement for that business. Mr. Kurtz 

explained that under the Village’s definition of sign anything that is intended to draw attention to the


business. In that light, the Horse Statue from an equestrian perspective would be viewed in the same 

way as the statue of Ronald McDonald. 

Councilwoman Benacquisto disagreed because she did not feel that art could be constituted as a 

sign. 

Vice Mayor Priore was of the opinion that this could then become a judicial issue, and he did not want 

to be afraid to approve something because he was fearful of what might happen judicially. 

Mayor Bowen agreed that works of art for commercial property should be removed and that Council 

could always revisit it at a later date. 

Mr. Schofield said that staff would bring something back to Council that specifically deals with works 

of art. 

Garage Sale Signs 

Mayor Bowen questioned whether garage sale signs were included in the ordinance. Mr. Kurtz 

explained that the garage sale signs are prohibited and there was no change to allow them. He 

believed that when discussing the garage sales, Councilman Willhite had pointed out that they could 

be a kin to the A-frame, and Mr. Kurtz didn’t believe that he was advocating that garage sale signs 

should be legalized. 

Mayor Bowen said that he was advocating that those signs should be legalized, and had no problem 

with them being out on Saturday mornings. 

With regard to the garage sale signs, Vice Mayor Priore didn’t believe there was a problem with 

garage sale signs if the Village’s Code is complied with and the signs are immediately removed at the 

end of the garage sale. He believed that the issue is when the signs are left out and have to be 

removed by someone else. 

Councilman Willhite said that his discussion related to #18 – Day of Event Information and Directional 

A-Frame Signs being allowed; however, garage sale signs were not allowed. He questioned what 

signs would be okay noting that he did not want to open the flood gates for this. He said he had 

received some questions from residents who said that the Village was now allowing illegal signs, but 

they were not permitted to have a garage sale sign. Councilman Willhite said that he was not 

advocating that they add the garage sale sign, but he questioned what the parameters of the sign 

would become once this is opened up. 

Vice Mayor Priore recalled a time when the Village had standard approved garage sale signs, and the 

residents had to come by the Village and pick one up and then return at the conclusion of the sale. He 

said that he could understand people putting up a sign on Saturday or Sunday morning for a garage 

sale. Vice Mayor Priore was of the opinion that the small “going out of business” signs or anything of 

that nature that are just placed in the medians, swales, etc., were all illegal. He said that the result is 

that the Village has to go out and pick up those signs. 

Councilman Willhite said that he was just verifying that the Village was identifying this as a potential 

code enforcement issue. 

Mr. Hodgkins referred to page 245, line 23 of the Agenda noting that the Village does allow garage 

sale signs with a provision for size, number and posting. The Village does not require a permit.


Councilman Willhite asked if any type of penalty is imposed if the homeowner does not remove their 

signs. He said that the concern he was hearing is that it is an expense to the Village because they 

have to send people out to pick up those signs that are left out. In response, Mr. Hodgkins said that 

theoretically it is a code violation, but the code would be remedied by the homeowner going out and 

picking up the signs. 

Councilwoman Benacquisto asked if citations are issued to those businesses that put out a multitude 

of signs on Saturday mornings. Mr. Hodgkins explained that typically those businesses don’t receive a 

citation; however, in those situations where the Village knows that there is egregious behavior, the 

owners are contacted and informed that they need to cease and desist. 

Mr. Schofield explained that the problem the Village encounters with most of those signs is that they 

are put up by businesses that are not located in Wellington so there is no recourse against them. He 

said that when the Village cannot get those businesses to stop putting out their signs, then staff talks 

with the Palm Beach County Sheriff’s Office and has their environmental deputies cite them for 

littering. 

School Sponsor and Temporary House of Worship Signs 

Councilman Coates said that rather than changing the Village’s existing policy to allow the sponsor 

signs to be turned outward facing the road that instead they provide the schools with something along 

the “Project Graduation” sign as a model to indicate their sponsors. He said that since everyone is 

concerned about appearance this would be a better solution for Wellington. Councilman Coates said 

that he supported the different sports team soliciting private sponsorships, but he felt that it was 

dependent on how the Village controlled the presentation of that. He said that he had no problem with 

how the signs were historically placed facing inward so that the visitors to the sports games could see 

who the sponsors which was the original intent. 

Mayor Bowen requested that the Village meet with some of the Booster Clubs and school 

representatives to discuss this issue. He thought that they may support something like the Project 

Graduation Sign because it would be less of an expense to them; however, he questioned whether 

they would still be able to sell the signs for the same amount of money as is presently being done. 

Councilman Willhite said that Mr. Schofield had previously indicated that he had a verbal agreement 

from the principals that they wouldn’t have the signs visible from road, and questioned why they were 

talking about possibly discussing this with the Booster Clubs who don’t have control over the 

placement of the signs. He understood that they are the entities who sell the signs, but he believed 

that the school principals have the ultimate responsibility for their facilities. Councilman Willhite was 

of the opinion that the Village should go back to the principals and advise them that what they agreed 

to wasn’t being complied with. He felt that these signs would not be so unsightly if they were equally 

lined up which they are not. 

Mayor Bowen said that he did not want to jeopardize the sponsorship program without first meeting 

with these parties and trying to come up with a solution that will work for everyone. He said that funds 

for the sports programs are tight, and sometimes they are barely able to put the teams on the field, 

and he didn’t want the Village to be the cause of the teams not being able to play because the sign 

ordinance is so strict. 

Councilwoman Benacquisto thought that the issue is that the signs are left up year-round. Mayor 

Bowen said that they are left up as the different entities pay for the advertising. Councilwoman


Benacquisto thought that a compromise could be that the signs are left up facing the road during the 

sports season, i.e., football season, baseball season. She said that she agreed with Mayor Bowen 

because she supported any way that the schools can raise money, support the children and keep 

them in a safe environment. She said that she didn’t believe that the Village gets an inordinate 

amount of complaints regarding these signs. Mayor Bowen questioned whether the Village does 

receive complaints about the sponsorship signs at Wellington High School or Palm Beach Central 

High School. 

Mr. Schofield informed Council that the Village does receive complaints about the signs more about 

Palm Beach Central than any other school. 

Councilman Willhite pointed out that the Village’s Sign Ordinance is not complaint-driven, but is a set 

of standards that holds people or entities accountable. He said that he understood that the 

sponsorship signs are probably not that unsightly, but the Village has a Sign Code that the schools 

need to abide by. He asked if staff could meet with the principals within the next two weeks and bring 

this back in time for Second Reading. Mr. Schofield said that staff would meet with the Area 

Superintendent and their Planning Director noting that they had previously met with them and arrived 

at an agreement. He said that staff will talk to them about enforcing the current agreement. 

Mayor Bowen thought that Councilman Coates’ idea of a more permanent sign like the one used for 

Project Graduation could be the solution because then there would be one sign which includes the 

names of all of the sponsors that may look better and could possibly satisfy everyone. 

Councilwoman Benacquisto suggested that they hold off on making a decision regarding this item, 

and allow staff to negotiate this with the schools. 

Murals 

Mr. Schofield pointed out that Murals comes under “Art” and Council has already provided direction 

for that. 

Seasonal Equestrian Signs and Flags 

Council directed Village staff to prepare an overall approach for Village-sponsored signage in support 

of all equestrian activities and facilities, located within public rights-of-way. 

Day of Event Information and Directional A-Frame Signs 

Mayor Bowen said that Council had agreed that those signs would be utilized for directional signs for 

the 2009-2010 season until a decision is made on the creation of the permanent signs. 

Councilman Coates asked for clarification on the Seasonal Equestrian Signs and Flags. He said that 

he thought that Council had previously discussed permanent, Village-installed signs with directions to 

major event facilities. Mayor Bowen said that this related to the flags and temporary signs; however, 

the Village will be moving away from the temporary signs. 

Mr. Hodgkins explained that this area includes both signs of this nature in the public rights-of-way as 

well as including provisions for allowing flags to be placed along the roadway. 

Vice Mayor Priore believed that there was consensus on the flags issue; however, he felt that the 

Seasonal Equestrian Signs should be a separate entity since Council hasn’t resolved how to handle


signs that are on easements and on public property. He said that Council all agreed on the flags 

going on the poles and such. 

Councilman Willhite his suggestion at the Agenda Review Meeting was to put something of a 

permanent sign in that location similar to the one at Aero Club and Binks Forest that has a Village of 

Wellington branding, but it advertises the Binks Forest Golf Course, with directional and naming the 

two equestrian industries in that area. He thought that the telephone numbers and other information 

for the equestrian entities could go in front of their business. He said that this would just be a 

branding of the Village of Wellington “Welcome to the Equestrian Area” pointing to the locations of the 

International Polo Club and the Equestrian Center. Councilman Willhite further stated that something 

similar could also be done at the intersection of 120 th and Lake Worth Road. He questioned who the 

owner was of the sign located at the roundabout at 120 th and Pierson Road, and if the Village could 

do something similar at that location. 

Mr. Schofield said that it is staff’s recommendation that the sign at that location and at least two other 

locations which would be 120 th and Lake Worth Road and Lake Worth and South Shore that those 

signs be placed in Village rights-of-way, they own them and maintain them. He said that the Village 

could choose to have them paid for through the Wellington Community Foundation; however, they 

have to be things that the Village owns to prevent that off-site signage issue and they would be more 

generic to the equestrian events. 

Councilman Willhite believed doing this will provide Wellington with some branding and it shows the 

community and visitors that the Village is embracing the equestrian community in advertising for them. 

He thought the signs should be permanent structures to help advertise the equestrian industry. 

Councilman Willhite said that the daily advertising signs for the equestrian events should be located in 

front of their individual businesses. 

Councilwoman Benacquisto was supportive of that; however, she thought that if the Village was going 

to fashion a permanent sign at the Pierson Road and South Shore location that it should include the 

dates of the seasonal equestrian activities and contact information about the entity, i.e., telephone 

number or web address that is listed in a tasteful way. She said that if someone didn’t drive down 

Pierson Road, they would not know that the equestrian center was located there which is why she 

supported including the contact information. 

Vice Mayor Priore felt that doing that would change the concept of what they were doing. 

Mayor Bowen thought that Council needed to approve the flags as was discussed, and the equestrian 

signs needed to be revisited because he thought the details were far too complicated for Council to 

make a decision on that night. 

Vice Mayor Priore thought that they should separate the categories into: (1) flags and (2) Village 

Monument signs. 

Councilman Willhite said that with regard to the Day of Event Information and Directional A-Frame 

Signs that the Village didn’t allow the equestrian industry to put advertisement on there. He said that 

those signs were merely intended to be wayfinding signs for them. He further stated that the Village 

will do wayfinding signs and this will be in addition to that as well as the potential for the equestrian 

entities to have their own signs. Councilman Willhite said that the Village is only indicating that this is 

the Equestrian Overlay Zoning District, these are the Village’s equestrian industries and the 

partnership between the Village. He didn’t believe that the intent was for the Village to advertise for 

those entities, but rather to only welcome people to the equestrian area.


Councilwoman Benacquisto believed it was incumbent upon the Village to do everything possible to 

ensure that people know how to get in contact with the equestrian entities to purchase tickets and to 

attend the shows. She said that since Council has discussed trying to help the equestrian industry to 

be successful, she supported putting a telephone number or a web site address. 

Vice Mayor Priore said that what was being discussed is that these signs are located on public 

property. If the signs include telephone numbers and dates of events, those signs no longer become 

signage addressing the fact that someone is entering the Equestrian Preserve area. Vice Mayor 

Priore further stated that what it then becomes is an advertisement type of sign, and Council had 

indicated earlier that those types of signs should be on the property of the individuals doing the 

advertisement. He said that he didn’t mind the arrow directing people in one direction to the 

Equestrian Center and in the other direction to the International Polo Club. 

Councilman Willhite said that his concern is that the sign is on public-owned right-of-way which gives 

the appearance that the Village is giving a monopoly to FTI whereas there are actually two equestrian 

industries; however, at this time, the International Polo Club isn’t being given the opportunity to 

advertise on publicly-owned property. 

Councilwoman Benacquisto agreed that this could be brought back for further discussion noting that 

she only wanted to be as helpful as possible to both entities to make them successful. 

Councilman Willhite said that Mr. Schofield was now talking about the Village assuming the 

maintenance of this sign. As such, they were now not only using publicly-owned land, but using tax 

dollars to maintain it as well. He said that he agreed with Vice Mayor Priore in that this was not a 

place for the Village to do the advertising for the equestrian entities. 

Mayor Bowen questioned whether the Village could charge rent at least to cover the maintenance 

costs. In response, Mr. Kurtz said that the Village could open this up for the purpose of charging rent; 

however, the problem becomes that if the Village gets into that business then being a governmental 

entity, they could not control the content. 

Councilman Coates believed that perhaps there could be a universal number on the sign that could be 

called for more information for different equestrian events. He said that it could be a Village number 

which tells the caller who they can call for more information. He said that it provides a person with a 

contact number that they could utilize during the season which he felt could be a compromise. 

Council supported this idea. 

With regard to the Seasonal Equestrian Signs and Flags, Mr. Hodgkins said that the question had 

been raised at the Agenda Review meeting whether or not the Council wanted to allow something of 

this sort on the property of the major equestrian facilities. He said if Council wanted to do that, then 

staff would need some direction to draft some standards. 

Councilman Willhite thought that Mr. Hodgkins would be creating another category for this which 

would outline the definition of the signage that the entities could have at the entrance of their personal 

property. Mayor Bowen thought that was a good idea because this was not discussed by Council. 

Mr. Kurtz added that this would not necessarily just be at their entrance because some of the entities 

have a lot of frontage on South Shore, a related property on the other side of South Shore.


In addition, also under this category, Mr. Hodgkins said that Council discussed the potential to create 

some sort of sign program for the upcoming season and asked if they wanted staff to pursue that at 

all. Mayor Bowen said that he wanted staff to work on what they were going to do there. 

Councilwoman Benacquisto was of the opinion that the Village should devise a way to do this right. 

Back to the discussion on the Day of the Event signage, Councilman Willhite said that he didn’t 

believe there was a benefit for those signs to be located at the corner of Greenview Shores and 

Wellington Trace pointing out that the residents of Wellington don’t really attend the events. He felt 

that these signs needed to be at the exterior and perimeter of the Village as a means to entice people 

to attend the equestrian events. Councilman Willhite felt that these signs needed to be directional and 

not advertisements because this is only for directional purposes. 

Mayor Bowen pointed out that everyone wants these signs to be directional and not advertisements. 

He said that these signs should go up the day before the event and come down the day after. 

Mr. Hodgkins said that this item was recommended by PZAB which appeared on page 289 of the 

Council Agenda. He said that it does have some prohibitive locations principally just to preserve 

vehicular and pedestrian safety. He said that the information to be conveyed is the name or type of 

event, the word “today,” the start time of the event and a directional arrow. The maximum size would 

be 2x3 feet. Their recommendation was that the signs be placed on the day of the event and 

removed not later than 10:00 p.m. following the day of the event. There is also a proposal that if there 

are related events occurring on a Saturday or Sunday that they be allowed to remain in place for that 

period. 

Councilman Willhite questioned whether there could be two or three signs out on the same 

intersection if there are multiple events occurring simultaneously. 

Councilwoman Benacquisto thought that was a good point noting that should there be an equestrian 

event and a polo match occurring on the same day both entities would want to put up their signs. Mr. 

Hodgkins agreed that is something that could happen. 

Councilwoman Benacquisto said that she wanted staff to look at all of the monument entrance signs 

at the entrances to the Village to possibly say “Welcome to Wellington, Home of the International Polo 

Club and Home of the Equestrian Sports Productions” particularly if they want to show people who the 

Village is and what is special about the community. 

Councilman Willhite said that the point he was trying to make about the multiple signs was because 

last season these signs were placed at almost every intersection of the Village. 

Vice Mayor Priore thought that Councilman Willhite thought the signs should only be placed at South 

Shore and Forest Hill Blvd., Fairlane Farms and Forest Hill Blvd, Lake Worth Road and 120 th , Lake 

Worth Road and 441 not at some of the other entrances to the Village such as Binks Forest. 

Councilwoman Benacquisto questioned what the process will be for people to have their signs 

approved. She questioned whether these signs will be allowed if there is a baseball tournament being 

held in town, or if there is a community garage sale, etc. She felt that the real determinant was who 

could qualify for these signs and expressed concern at how crowded the medians could become with 

signs if this became standard practice. In response, Mr. Hodgkins said that the authorization for 

placement for the day of event signage shall be permitted only in conjunction with a Special Use 

Permit; however, it would be for seasonal equestrian use, temporary cultural, sporting, entertainment,


religious or similar events with an anticipated significant impact. Councilwoman Benacquisto said that 

they will probably keep a watch on that as they move forward. 

Mayor Bowen was of the opinion that once the Village’s monument and directional signs are in place 

that there will be fewer of the small signs because these signs would have far less significance. 

Temporary Banners in Medical Center Planned Development District 

Mayor Bowen noted that Council had discussed deleting this as a permitted sign. 

Councilman Coates stated that he didn’t find the sign to be obnoxious, and he did not have a major 

issue with it if it is being used for a community-related purpose. He said that most of the banners that 

have been erected have been community-related and if the Village restricts the banners to that it will 

be something that benefits Wellington as a whole. Councilman Coates said that the concern that was 

discussed at the Agenda Review meeting was the commercialization of the use of that sign. 

Mayor Bowen said that Council has been advised many times by Mr. Kurtz that the Village cannot do 

anything about the content of a sign. Mr. Kurtz added that the signs have to be content neutral and 

not content based. Mayor Bowen questioned whether there was a State Statute regarding that. In 

response, Mr. Kurtz said that there is a great deal of case law that deals with that issue. 

Vice Mayor Priore said that if the signs are for the community’s benefit which they have been more 

times than not, he felt that they did serve a purpose. 

Councilman Coates was of the opinion that what the Village is trying to accomplish for the equestrian 

community that this was the best place in Wellington to advertise the equestrian events. He felt that 

would be depriving the community with the ability to display an equestrian event if they did not permit 

this signage. 

Councilman Willhite wanted a request to be made to the President of the Hospital that they attempt to 

make the banners they put out related to community events. 

Mayor Bowen said that Council consensus was that they did not oppose this banner. 

Mr. Hodgkins advised Council that he had a meeting that afternoon with a representative of the 

Hospital who presented an overall proposed sign plan not only for the hospital, but looking towards it 

as the basis for the Medical Arts District signage. He said that the Hospital would like to have the 

banner and would like to have digital signs on SR7. 

Councilwoman Benacquisto noted that Council had dealt with the banner issue. Vice Mayor Priore 

added that he wanted to take that up in conjunction with the Village moving forward with the Medical 

Arts District and make that a part of that decision process. 



unanimously passed (5-0) to open the Public Hearing. 

1. Dean Turney, 13410 South Shore Blvd. Mr. Turney spoke representing the Equestrian Alliance. 

He said that he had been working with Village staff and tourism staff on branding efforts in an 

effort to bring awareness of the equestrian industry particularly for spectators. With regard to the


Sign Code, he said that he has been having a dialogue with International Polo and the 

International Equestrian Center, and one of the issues is the temporary A-frames/directional 

signage. Mr. Turney provided Council with the language that they were requesting relative to the 

limitations on the size and information of the signs. He said that they were looking for very limited 

and basic information to be included on the signs. He reminded Council that there are many 

international people who are coming to Wellington to see these events, and these types of signs 

are particularly helpful to them as well as to others. Mr. Turney commented on the sign at South 

Shore and Pierson Road particularly on Council’s discussion that the signage should possibly be 

only directional in nature. He said that he viewed that as an informational sign as well as 

directional, and he thought that the inclusion of the web site address and telephone number was 

very appropriate. 

Mayor Bowen pointed out that the language presented by Mr. Turney was almost exactly what was 

included in the Sign Code. 

Mr. Turney said it was very similar; however, one of the differences is that this specifies that the 

signs can go out no more than 24 hours; however, the previous language had said they couldn’t 

go out until the morning of the event. He said that during the discussion with Village officials and 

the two major venues, some other issues arose; however, they were not offering suggestions, but 

that he wanted the Council to be aware of them: (1) some people suggested that the logos be 

allowed on the signs; and (2) others suggested that some type of message be given to the public 

that they are invited. He said that what they had been discussing was something like “Welcome to 

Wellington” in the same script as the Wellington logo. 

Councilman Coates asked Mr. Turney if there was a web site that listed the equestrian events which 

he felt could be handled in the same manner as a universal telephone number. 

Mr. Turney said that there is not a single web site that lists the equestrian events noting that 

presently there is the web site for the Equestrian Sports Productions and one for the International 

Polo as well as for some others. 

Mayor Bowen believed that putting together one web site for this purpose would not be impossible 

since there is enough cooperation between the venues. 

Mr. Turney advised Council that the Equestrian Alliance and the two major venues were here to 

work with the Village on all of these issues. 

2. Michael Stone, 14440 Pierson Road. With regard to the A-Frames, Mr. Stone said that Polo and 

the Equestrian Sports Productions are now working very closely on this issue. He pointed out that 

there wouldn’t be multiple signs for the two venues on any median. He spoke about how easy it is 

for people to get lost going to the showgrounds noting that people coming from Palm Beach and 

those areas have a very difficult time finding either venues because of the lack of signage. Mr. 

Stone felt that this was detrimental to their entities, to the Village and to everyone. He agreed that 

the small signs should be removed quickly, and he apologized if they were remiss in doing that. 

He said that they will work quickly in removing the signs in the future, and they will work very 

closely with Polo to ensure that signs are not placed everywhere throughout the Village. Mr. 

Stone thanked Council for their efforts to try and regulate this situation. 

Councilman Willhite pointed out that the Village has attempted to get rid of all of their A-frames 

because permanent monument signs are being installed. He said that the Village will be installing 

new wayfinding signs as well as additional monuments signs welcoming people to the Equestrian


Preserve Area. He said that although he understood that A-frames have been a benefit in the past, 

this effort is to replace them with the monument and wayfinding signs as a means to add information 

and directions for visitors and residents who live in Wellington. 

3. Ernie Zimmerman, 860 Caraway Court. Mr. Zimmerman said that he didn’t have a problem with 

the new Code; however, he thought that staff had excluded the “human” signs from the ordinance. 

He thought that this type of signage was becoming more and more common which he saw as a 

distraction to the drivers and increased the possibility of accidents. Mr. Zimmerman said that this 

was included in the old Sign Code where the Code Officers issued citations. 

Mr. Kurtz noted that those signs are not presently allowed. He said that the way that the Sign Code 

works unless the sign is identified in the Code as a permitted sign or an exempt sign then it is 

prohibitive so those signs are prohibited. 

Councilman Coates questioned the case of people wearing shirts with political content which is not 

considered a sign, but if the person is actually carrying something that is part of your clothing. Mr. 

Kurtz said that non-commercial speech is different. 

4. Al Bennett, 1600 Firethorn Drive. Mr. Bennett spoke on behalf of the Wellington Chamber of 

Commerce, and thanked the Village Council and staff for their cooperation in working with the 

Chamber on the Sign Ordinance. He expressed special thanks to Marty Hodgkins for bringing the 

ordinance to the Wellington Business Development Board and listening to the needs of the 

Wellington Chamber. 

5. Anna Cottrell. Ms. Cottrell noted that she is a Planner and Consultant for the Wellington Regional 

Medical Center, and explained that the new Sign Code was of particular interest to the Hospital. 

Ms. Cottrell noted that last month the Council had approved a Master Plan and Rezoning for the 

Medical Commercial District for the Hospital. She said that the Hospital is now completing the 

plans for the aesthetic elements of the campus design and the signage will be an important 

element of that design. She further stated that they were pleased with the approval of the banner 

sign because they felt that it is an opportunity for the announcement of community serving events 

and it does serve a public purpose. Ms. Cottrell said that a draft of the sign plan has been 

submitted, and explained that she had met with Mr. Hodgkins regarding this and appreciated the 

amount of time he spent with them on this plan. She pointed out that their plan was drafted with 

the anticipation that digital signs could be included in the sign ordinance. She said that because 

of the Hospital’s location, she thought it was appropriate for some digital signage particularly on 

SR7. Ms. Cottrell said that she was not prepared to address it that evening, and that since 

Council may find the inclusion of those signs somewhat objectionable, she wanted to keep the 

discussion open and have the opportunity to continue to work with Council and staff to show how 

those signs work in the context of an overall master signage plan for the Hospital. She requested 

the opportunity to present their plan to Council over the next two weeks. 

Councilwoman Benacquisto said that Council had agreed that the Hospital signage would come back 

in the context of the Medical Arts District, and not be included as a part of the Village’s Sign 

Ordinance. 

Ms. Cottrell expressed concern that the Medical Arts District is still in the conceptual planning 

stage, and the Hospital intends for the campus signage to be in place by the time the expansion is 

completed in about 1 – 1 ½ years. With that being the case, she felt that it may be a little in 

advance of the design elements for the overlay district, and she wanted to see if they could further 

discuss the digital signage and begin to incorporate the aesthetics concerns with the Overlay.


Vice Mayor Priore explained to Ms. Cottrell that if the Council began discussing the digital signs as 

part of the Village’s Sign Ordinance, there are properties in Wellington located along SR7 that would 

immediately also want to be allowed that type of signage. 

Ms. Cottrell further stated that she appreciated Council’s concerns about the precedent that may be 

set; however, she thought she could demonstrate the merits of that if they were able to show the 

Council in the context of the overall Hospital needs what is particular to this campus. She didn’t 

believe that these were the typical commercial signage which she thought presented a unique use 

and appropriateness for the digital signs. 

Councilman Benacquisto said that Council consensus was that they were not ready to discuss the 

Hospital’s signage at this point in time. She said if Ms. Cottrell wanted to come and make the 

presentation in two weeks, Council would be willing to hear that, but they would not open that up at 

this time to discuss digital signage exclusive for the Medical Arts District as a whole. 

Ms. Cottrell stated that they looked forward to presenting that presentation. 

Mr. Schofield said that Council recently received a copy of the Hospital’s Master Signage plans; 

however, staff has not had an opportunity to evaluate it. He said that they certainly will have the time 

over the next two weeks, and could make a recommendation to Council. 

Vice Mayor Priore said that his understanding of what Ms Cottrell was saying was that this application 

be applied to the current process that Council is undertaking and not in conjunction with the approval 

of the Medical Arts District. He said that he had no problem hearing Ms. Cottrell’s approach of how it 

will be applicable to the entire Medical Arts; however, he did not feel it was appropriate to include it at 

this time. He supported reviewing it in conjunction with the Medical Arts District, and if it is 

appropriate at that time, to support it. Vice Mayor Priore said that in addressing the digital signs in the 

Sign Ordinance, Council could not approve deleting them with the exception of Wellington Regional 

Medical Center. 

Ms. Cottrell said that their concern was with when the entire sign package is constructed that a 

change not be made in another year or two, but that these proposed digital signs are the campus 

identification signs. She thought that if they were in place by the time the hospital expansion 

opens that will still may be advance of what the Village is planning for the Medical Arts District. 

Vice Mayor Priore reiterated and stressed that the digital signs were deleted and were not acceptable 

anywhere in the Village. He asked Ms. Cottrell if she was asking that they be added back in. 

Ms. Cottrell asked Council to keep an open mind and allow them to do a presentation that shows 

all of the signage for the campus in the context of the particular needs of the hospital itself. She 

thought if they could do that presentation, they could show the merits of that proposal. 

Councilman Willhite said his understanding was that currently the digital signs will not be allowed; 

however, he was not opposed to Ms. Cottrell making her presentation in two week to see if she was 

able to sell the Council on her idea. 

Ms. Cottrell said that was what she was asking for. 

There being no further public comments, a motion was made by Councilman Willhite, seconded by 

Vice Mayor Priore and unanimously passed (5-0) to close the Public Hearing.



unanimously passed (5-0) approving Ordinance No. 2009-16 on First Reading as presented and 

including the consensus direction of Council. 


A. REVISIONS TO COUNCIL CALENDAR 

Mr. Schofield presented the Agenda item. He explained that there had been some previous 

discussion about changing the November meetings. He said that what is presently proposed is to 

keep the meetings as scheduled for November 10 th and November 24 th with a December meeting on 

the 8 th . Mr. Schofield said that the only change to the normal meeting schedule proposed is to move 

the March meetings to the first and third Tuesdays so that they do not conflict with the municipal 

election. 

Councilman Willhite noted that he would not be in attendance at the November 24 th meeting. 

A motion was made by Vice Mayor Priore, seconded by Councilman Willhite, approving the 

Council calendar as prepared, and unanimously passed. 

B. RESOLUTION R2009-66 (AMENDING A FEE SCHEDULE FOR BUILDING PERMITTING 

FEES) RESOLUTION OF THE VILLAGE COUNCIL OF THE VILLAGE OF WELLINGTON, 

FLORIDA ADOPTING A REVISED FEE SCHEDULE FOR BUILDING PERMITTING FEES; 

AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. 

Mr. Schofield read the Resolution title. He noted that Mr. Jacek Tomasik, Director, Public Services 

was present to address any of Council’s questions. 

Mr. Tomasik said that yesterday he had presented a comparison of the Village’s fees with other 

municipalities. 

Councilman Coates complimented Mr. Tomasik on the thorough job he had done in putting the report 

together. He said that he had requested that this be moved from the Consent Agenda to the Regular 

Agenda to provide the public with the opportunity to comment on it. 

Councilman Willhite explained that this isn’t an effort to increase revenue as the Building Department 

is a revenue-neutral department, but is only an avenue for the Village to cover their costs. He said 

that his only concern as was previously expressed is that the Village was not going to make it any 

harder on any resident or contractor due to the four-day work week since the Village is no available on 

Friday and charging them additional fees. He said that staff has suggested that they will do flex time 

for the inspectors on a Friday if needed. Councilman Willhite didn’t believe that the Village should 

charge a project additional costs because of the schedule change. He said that he appreciated 

Councilman Coates’ request to move this to the Regular Agenda in order to allow the public to 

comment on it. 

Vice Mayor Priore said that the calls that he receives have been very complimentary of the way that 

the Building Department handles these issues. He also appreciated the personal attention that Mr. 

Tomasik has given on so many cases. 

Mr. Tomasik appreciated Vice Mayor Priore’s comments. He explained that the Building Department 

always tries to work with the contractors and homeowners by maintaining an open door policy. Mr.


Tomasik pointed out that these fees will only cover costs and follows the direction of the State Statute 

which states that any fees collected for permits should be for enforcement of the Florida Building 

Code. 

A motion was made by Councilman Coates, seconded by Vice Mayor Priore, and unanimously 

passed (5-0) approving Resolution No. R2009-66 as presented. 


Mr. Kurtz: Mr. Kurtz said that he had several updates to present to Council. 

� The deposit for the contract for purchase that the Village has for the Temple on the surplus 

property went “hard.” He said that it appears as though the Temple will be moving forward with 

the closing that is scheduled for the beginning of January. 

� At the beginning of the year, the Council approved the “Red Light” ordinance, and also 

approved giving the Village Manager and Village Attorney the authority to negotiate a contract 

with ATS to implement that ordinance. Mr. Kurtz explained that ordinance has not been 

implemented, and the Village has not entered into a contract with ATS because during the 

negotiations the issue of indemnification arose. He further explained that the basic problem 

was that in the event of a challenge or the overturning of the Red Light ordinance, the Village 

was asking ATS to fully participate in any adverse judgment. He explained that the way the 

contract was going to be set up was that a percentage of the ticket would be going to ATS. He 

said that if the judgment was reversed, then the people would be entitled to the return of their 

money from the Village and they wanted ATS to participate in that which ATS was not willing 

to do. Mr. Kurtz said that there has been ongoing litigation regarding the Red Light ordinance, 

and noted that a challenge has been made against people who have implemented these 

ordinances. Mr. Kurtz said that at this time it did not appear that this issue will be resolved in 

the courts before the next legislative session. During the next session, the Village should try 

to get their legislators to clarify the Statutes and ensure that this method of enforcement is 

legal and remove the pre-emption argument that is out there. He hoped that the State would 

not try to participate in the revenue collection, but allow municipalities to enforce their 

ordinances in this manner and retain the revenue. Mr. Kurtz said that, at this time, absent 

further direction, he and Mr. Schofield are continuing in the same manner and, until and unless 

ATS, were to fully agree to participate in the indemnification in the event of an adverse ruling, 

they would not move forward with the contract. 


Mr. Schofield: Mr. Schofield presented the following report: 

� The next Regular Village Council meeting will be held at 7:00 p.m. on November 10, 2009 at 

the Wellington Community Center. 

� Residents should check the Village’s web site or Channel 18 to learn of some of the Village’s 

upcoming events. 

� The Veterans Day Ceremony will be held on November 11 th . The parade will commence at 

8:45 a.m. followed by the program at 9:00 a.m. 

� The Village has received confirmation that they will be receiving a $750,000 grant for the 

Neighborhood Stabilization programs.


� The Village has also received confirmation on an Energy Grant for $450,000 for windows and 

doors at the Municipal Complex. 

� The Village anticipates that they will be notified shortly by FEMA that there is another 

$250,000 for hardening of the building. He said that there is about $700,000 in grants money 

that will be used for the Municipal Complex. 


Councilman Willhite: Councilman Willhite reported on the following: 

� He acknowledged the Village’s new weed control machine which he felt would be a useful tool 

to work on the Village’s canals and lakes. 

� Councilman Willhite stated that an employee recently saved the Village approximately 

$150,000 by fabricating a piece of equipment. He said that he was not suggesting a monetary 

reimbursement to that employee, but perhaps offering him some time off. He said that the 

Village could set up parameters so that if an employee designs a way to cut costs for the 

Village, a certain percentage of the savings could be tied to a certain number of vacation time. 

Councilman Willhite felt that this would be an incentive to the employees as well as a benefit to 

the Village, and it could be another way to recognize the Village employees above the 

Employee Recognition Award that is currently in place. He thought that perhaps staff could 

formulate some type of policy regarding this so that besides the Village just expressing their 

thanks to their employees, a certain number of vacation hours would be given to them. 

Mr. Schofield said that the Village would be grateful for the opportunity to do some type of incentive 

program for the employees because there are many people doing many things these days designed 

to save the Village money. With regard to the savings of $150,000, Mr. Schofield explained that the 

Village is doing an interconnect with Palm Beach County, and the Distribution Supervisor designed a 

way to save the Village that money by bringing the work in-house rather than paying an outside 

contractor to do that work. 

Mayor Bowen felt that this should be included as part of the Employee Recognition program. 

Council supported this incentive program. 

� He said that he was working on a “Patriot’s Day Memorial” for the Village of Wellington. 

Councilman Willhite’s hope was that the memorial would be located at the entrance to the new 

Village Complex as there is some vacant property there that is not being utilized. Councilman 

Willhite noted that he had some verbal commitments from businesses in the community to 

start funding that program. In addition, he has already made contact with the Wellington Art 

Society to start potentially drafting some designs for some type of monument, statue or 

something of that nature. Councilman Willhite said that he wanted to add this into the 

Wellington Community Foundation as a in an effort to raise funds for this project. He said that 

he has almost half of the funds already pledged to cover the costs of it. Councilman Willhite 

said that it is an important day to memorialize because it started the way that the country 

currently lives. 

Councilwoman Benacquisto thought that this was a good idea. She requested that prior to the 

Wellington Art Society putting a great amount of effort into its design, she wanted the Council to meet


as a group to discuss how they all envision this to look and what should be included so that no one is 

disappointed at the outcome. She hoped that they would all develop the idea together. 

Councilman Willhite said that his idea with the Wellington Art Society was for them to devise a 

contest where artists would develop an idea which would then be presented to Council for their 

selection. 

Councilwoman Benacquisto asked that they discuss this at the next Agenda Review and discuss what 

they envision it to look like, and then to put it out as a contest. 

Councilwoman Benacquisto: Councilwoman Benacquisto presented the following report: 

� She reported that, at the MPO meeting, the Village was successful in obtaining approximately 

another $850,000 for the Forest Hill improvement project. She was thankful for the MPO’s 

support in helping Wellington to obtain that money. 

� The Village received a joint letter from the Palm Beach County School Board, the Palm Beach 

County Commission and the League of Cities regarding their wellness campaign. She 

requested that they have representatives come to the next Council meeting or whichever one 

meets their schedule to present their program to Council. She thought that the Village does a 

lot of things as a community and as an employer regarding wellness and prevention. 

Councilwoman Benacquisto said that she wanted to see how the Village could partner with 

those entities to do something additional in the community. 

Councilman Coates: Councilman Coates presented the following report: 

� He asked Mr. Schofield to present at status report at one of the upcoming meetings on the 

Village’s dealings with the Boys & Girls Club regarding moving the site. He felt that they were 

at the point where the Club may be prepared to move forward and they are looking for some 

direction from the Village. 

� He said that the Village is still working very hard on getting the Local Preference Policy noting 

that he has been working with staff and has met with the Chambers. 

Mr. Schofield said that the Local Preference Policy should be coming before Council on November 

10 th . 

Vice Mayor Priore: Vice Mayor Priore presented the following report: 

� He said that the Florida League no longer has their Cities of Excellence Awards, but does 

have three specific awards that are given for projects that are being done by cities. He felt that 

the Village’s Neighborhood Revitalization projects would qualify for one of the awards. Vice 

Mayor Priore thought that at this point in time, the Village should document the process with 

before and after photographs so that next August the Village could enter that recognition 

process. He was confident that this would be a project that would certainly reach the finals. 

� On Wednesday, October 28 th , the Palm Beach County League of Cities is doing a joint 

meeting between the League of Cities, School Board and Palm Beach County. He explained 

that they try to meet annually to discuss issues that are important to all of them. He thought 

that the wellness issue would be raised and would be included in their discussion. Vice Mayor


Priore said that there are issues that will impact everyone and Wellington needs to be a part of 

that. 

� Vice Mayor Priore thought it was time to recognize and thank the Citizens Volunteers 

Organization noting that he was referring to the residents who go out and volunteer at the 

different Village events. 

Mayor Bowen: Mayor Bowen presented the following report: 

� He recognized the Wellington Chamber and the Palm Beach Chamber noting that the Fall 

Festival was a great success. 

� He encouraged everyone to attend the Wellington Chamber luncheon which was scheduled 

for the next day because the topic will be tourism. He then asked Mr. Dean Turney to provide 

Council with a brief overview of this program. 

Mr. Turney explained that at the Noon luncheon of the Wellington Chamber at Binks Forest, Roger 

Amidon, Executive Director, Palm Beach County Tourist Development Council, Jorge Pesquera, 

Executive Director, Palm Beach County Convention and Visitors Bureau, Rena Blades, Palm Beach 

County Cultural Council, Michelle Hillery, Palm Beach County Film and Television Commission and 

Gerry Baron, Palm Beach County Sports Commission will be describing their overall efforts regarding 

tourism and specifically projects that Wellington can and has been involved in. 




There being no further business to come before the Village Council, the meeting was adjourned at 

9:45 p.m. 

Approved by: 

_____________________________ 


_____________________________ 

Awilda Rodriguez, Village Clerk


MINUTES 






Tuesday, November 10, 2009 

7:00 p.m. 

Pursuant to the foregoing notice, a Regular Meeting of the Village Council was held on Tuesday, 

November 10, 2009 commencing at 7:00 p.m. at the Wellington Community Center, 12165 W. Forest 

Hill Boulevard, Wellington, FL 33414. 




Attorney, and Awilda Rodriguez, Village Clerk 





3. INVOCATION - Deacon Al Payne, St. Therese de Lisieux Catholic Church, Wellington, delivered 

the Invocation. 


Mr. Schofield presented the Agenda for approval with the following amendments: (1) Postpone 

Agenda Item 5A Presentation regarding the Countywide Wellness Initiative; (2) Postpone Agenda 

Item 5B Proclamation Recognizing Gene Mische, President, Stadium Jumping, for his Contributions to 

the Equestrian community; (3) Move Consent Agenda Item 6G Resolution No. R2009-82 (Renewal of 

Agreement for Tennis Professional Services with Cheatham, Inc.) to the Regular Agenda as Item 8D; 

and (4) Add the Purchase of 1068 Goldenrod Road to the Regular Agenda as Item 8E. 

Councilwoman Benacquisto requested that the Countywide Wellness Initiative come back before 

Council at the November 24, 2009 Village Council meeting. 

A motion was made by Councilwoman Benacquisto, seconded by Councilman Willhite and 

unanimously passed (5-0) approving the Agenda with the following amendments: (1) Postpone 

Agenda Item 5A Presentation regarding the Countywide Wellness Initiative to the November 

24, 2009 Agenda; (2) Postpone Agenda Item 5B Proclamation Recognizing Gene Mische, 

President, Stadium Jumping, for his Contributions to the Equestrian community; (3) Move 

Consent Agenda Item 6G Resolution No. R2009-82 (Renewal of Agreement for Tennis


Professional Services with Cheatham, Inc.) to the Regular Agenda as Item 8D; and (4) Add the 

Purchase of 1068 Goldenrod Road to the Regular Agenda as Item 8E. 


A. PRESENTATION REGARDING COUNTYWIDE WELLNESS INITIATIVE Postponed 

B. PROCLAMATION OF THE VILLAGE COUNCIL OF THE VILLAGE OF WELLINGTON, 

FLORIDA RECOGNIZING GENE MISCHE, PRESIDENT OF STADIUM JUMPING INC., FOR 

HIS CONTRIBUTIONS THE EQUESTRIAN COMMUNITY Postponed 


A. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR VILLAGE COUNCIL MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 29, 2009. 

B. RESOLUTION R2009-80 (APPROVAL OF PALM BEACH COUNTY PARATRANSIT 

INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT ($40,000) A RESOLUTION OF THE VILLAGE COUNCIL OF 

THE VILLAGE OF WELLINGTON, FLORIDA, APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING THE 

MAYOR AND VILLAGE CLERK TO EXECUTE AN INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT WITH 

PALM BACH COUNTY TO PROVIDE TRANSPORTATION SERVICES FROM OCTOBER 1, 

2009 THROUGH SEPTEMBER 30, 2010; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. 

C. PRELIMINARY AND INTERMEDIATE ENGINEERING DESIGN SERVICES FOR WATER 

TREATMENT FACILITY IMPROVEMENTS - ARCADIS/RMA 

D. APPROVE AUTHORIZATION OR “PIGGYBACK” OF THE MANATEE COUNTY 

CONTRACT FOR: CARBON DIOXIDE LIQUID, BIOXIDE, ODOFREE, SODIUM 

HYDROXIDE & SODIUM HYPOCHORITE 8%. 

E. AWARD BID FOR THE PURCHASE AND DELIVERY OF NEW 2010 FORD VEHICLES TO 

HUB FORD, TROPICAL FORD AND WORLD FORD 

F. APPROVE BID #034-09/BJJ FOR THE SUPPLY AND DELIVERY OF REVERSE OSMOSIS 

ANTI-SCALENT 

G. RESOLUTION R2009-82 (RENEWAL OF AGREEMENT FOR TENNIS PROFESSIONAL 

SERVICES WITH CHEATHAM, INC.) RESOLUTION OF THE VILLAGE COUNCIL OF THE 

VILLAGE OF WELLINGTON FLORIDA, APPROVING THE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 

AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE VILLAGE OF WELLINGTON AND TOMMY CHEATHAM, A 

TENNIS PROFESSIONAL CHEATHAM, INC.) AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE 

Moved to the Regular as Item 8D. 

H. CONSTRUCTION INSPECTION SERVICES (CIS) AWARD RECOMMENDATION FOR 

FOREST HILL BOULEVARD 

I. WCC POOL AND AQUATIC BUILDING 040-09/JWV AWARD TO THE COLLAGE 

COMPANIES 

J. RESOLUTION R2009-81 (AMENDMENT NUMBER 2 TO THE AGREEMENT BETWEEN 

THE VILLAGE OF WELLINGTON AND KIMLEY-HORN AND ASSOCIATES, INC. FOR 

DESIGN OF SOUTH SHORE BOULEVARD PHASE II) 

A RESOLUTION OF THE VILLAGE COUNCIL OF THE VILLAGE OF WELLINGTON, 

FLORIDA APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND VILLAGE CLERK TO 

EXECUTE AMENDMENT NUMBER 1 TO THE AGREEMENT WITH KIMLEY-HORN AND 

ASSOCIATES, INC., FOR THE ENGINEERING DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION OF SOUTH 

SHORE PHASE II; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. 

K. APPROVE AUTHORIZATION OR “PIGGYBACK OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH’S BID 

#2002-37 FOR SANITARY SEWER MANHOLE INTERIOR RENOVATION


L. APPROVE AUTHORIZATION TO UTILIZE OR “PIGGYBACK” PALM BEACH COUNTY 

TERM CONTRACT #06-123/PR FOR RECYCLED CRUSHED CONCRETE, ASPHALT AND 

STONE 

M. APPROVE AUTHORIZATION OR “PIGGYBACK OF STATE OF FLORIDA CONTRACT 

#252-001-09-01 FOR: LARGE ACCOUNT RESELLER FOR MICROSOFT SOFTWARE, 

LICENSES AND MAINTENANCE. 

Mr. Schofield presented the Consent Agenda recommending approval with the exception of 6G 

Resolution No. R2009-82 (Renewal of Agreement for Tennis Professional Services with Cheatham, 

Inc.) which was moved to the Regular Agenda as Item 8D. 

A motion was made by Councilman Willhite, seconded by Councilwoman Benacquisto and 

unanimously passed (5-0) approving the Consent Agenda with the exception of Item 6G 

Resolution No. R2009-82 (Renewal of Agreement for Tennis Professional Services with 

Cheatham, Inc.) which was moved to the Regular Agenda as Item 8D. 

7. PUBLIC HEARINGS - None 


A. RESOLUTION NO. R2009-83 (EDWARD BYRNE JUSTICE ASSISTANCE GRANT FUND 

ACCEPTANCE AND RELATED BUDGET AMENDMENT 2010-001) 

Mr. Schofield read the Agenda title. He explained that this is a formula grant, and one of the 

requirements of the grant is that there is an opportunity for Council to entertain public comments 

relating to this item. Mr. Scott Kline, Project Manager, was present to address any questions. 

At this time, Mayor Bowen opened the floor for public comments; however, no one from the public 

expressed the desire to speak on this item. 


unanimously passed (5-0) approving Resolution No. R2009-83 for the Edward Byrne Justice 

Assistance Grant Acceptance and the related Budget Amendment # 2010-001. 

Councilman Willhite noted that this was a new grant. Mr. Kline stated that Councilman Willhite’s 

comments were correct and that this grant was in addition to the $66,000 that was previously awarded 

to the Village. 

B. DISCUSSION OF PROPOSED PURCHASING REVISIONS 

(a) Local Preference Policy 

(b) Penalties for Prospective Vendor Withdrawing Bid Proposal 

Mr. Schofield introduced the Agenda item. He asked Council if they preferred having staff make a 

brief presentation of to give a brief status summary. 

Mayor Bowen requested that Ms. Francine RamagIia, Assistant Village Manager, provide a recap 

from the notes she had taken at the Agenda Review meeting. 

Ms. Ramaglia explained that Council had discussed the different decision points with respect to a 

Local Preference Policy. Before addressing the decision points, she further explained that staff had 

surveyed other cities and counties to see how they handle this issue, and their findings were


incorporated in the key decision points. Ms. Ramaglia said that staff also had a lengthy discussion 

with both the Chambers, and they would be revisiting this with the Wellington Chamber at their 

Government Affairs meeting that was scheduled for the following day. 

At this point, Ms. Ramaglia highlighted each of the decision points. She said that the first and most 

important point is the definition of a “Local Business.” She explained that the discussion at the Agenda 

Review meeting gave two levels of a definition for a local business: (1) Palm Beach County: all 

businesses that would apply in Palm Beach County would be given local preference. (2) “Super Local 

Preference” would also be given to businesses in Wellington and that preference would provide those 

companies with the opportunity to meet the lowest price if this was a price-based competitive 

selection. She said if it was a qualitative-competitive selection, it would be based on a point scale and 

the points would be five points out of 100 or 5% whether it is points for qualifications or 5% on price if 

it is a straight bid or a priced-based selection. Ms. Ramaglia said that in the event of a tie, the 

process would be to first go to the lowest priced local preference vendor who would be offered the 

opportunity to match the lowest price out of all the bids that were received if there was a non-local low 

bid. 

Councilwoman Benacquisto asked Ms. Ramaglia for clarification. In response, Mr. Kurtz explained 

that because there are two tiers, it is simpler to think of it in the following terms: if there is an out-of- 

County low bid, and if there is a Palm Beach County proposer who is within 5%; they would have the 

opportunity to meet that low bid. If there was a Palm Beach County non-Wellingtonian low-bid and 

there was a Wellingtonian bid that was within 5%, the Wellingtonian bid would be given the first 

opportunity to match the low price. He said it was his understanding that the Village was only going to 

give the opportunity to match the bid to whoever was the lowest in one of those categories for the 

local preference, be it Palm Beach County or Wellington, assuming it was within 5%. 

Councilwoman Benacquisto asked what would happen if there were two low bidders who were both 

within 5%. Mr. Kurtz said that it would then be the lowest between the two bidders. Ms. Ramaglia 

added that what had been discussed at the Agenda Review meeting was that they would start with 

the lower of the two who would be given the first opportunity to match the low price. She further 

explained that if there were two Wellington low bids that were equal, then they would have to resort to 

the tie breaker. Ms. Ramaglia said that possible tie breakers could be if the company has a drug-free 

workplace or any special conditions in the proposal that staff could go back and relook at that would 

be relevant to this particular solicitation. In addition, other tie breakers that could be used were: 

drawing of lots or the coin toss. She said that staff had also discussed looking at the number of 

employees, but the tie-breaker issue had never actually been finalized. 

Councilman Willhite said that the tie-breaker would have to be utilized if the bids were equal. He 

reiterated that Council hadn’t really discussed the tie breaker issue noting that he had some concern 

about using the number of employees because he didn’t know how that could be measured. 

Councilwoman Benacquisto said the question would also be where the employees were based. She 

further stated that she also was not in favor of using a coin toss as a tie breaker. 

Vice Mayor Priore said that the prevailing issue was that they were discussing what would be 

appropriate for a price only award. He said that the entire concept changes when a price plus 

qualifications concept is added. Vice Mayor Priore thought that this needed to be divided into two or 

three categories: (1) price only; i.e., bidding for automobiles, etc; (2) price plus qualifications; and (3) 

asking the winning bidder if they are from out of the area to utilize sub-contractors or contractors that 

are based within the area which is also important to the Village. Vice Mayor Priore said that in many 

cases, there are not many individual companies within this community that could qualify or do a $10


million job on their own, but they may have to combine with others, and by utilizing this third option, 

they would be given the opportunity to utilize their services in some element of the project. 

Mayor Bowen was of the understanding that the Village was already encouraging the use of local 

contractors. Vice Mayor Priore responded affirmatively, but noted that the Village did not have such a 

policy. Mayor Bowen didn’t believe that the Village could make contractors have to use local subcontractors 

because they would then be forced to change their bid to a different price. Ms. Ramaglia 

said that could be accomplished by including points in the scoring. 

Councilwoman Benacquisto said that companies could be given additional percentage points for using 

Wellington-based sub-contractors which she supported more than giving people the opportunity to 

look back at a bid and try to match it which she had concerns with. 

Vice Mayor Priore concurred noting that was the issue that he had a major controversy with because 

he thought that would discourage people from bidding in Wellington. 

Councilwoman Benacquisto said that when they awarded the bid for the Municipal Complex, in 

addition to price, staff also looked at qualifications when selecting the company; however, the Village 

does place a huge emphasis on the price. She thought that if they were going to use price and 

qualifications that they really needed to define the distinctions between one type of project from 

another. She reiterated that she personally had concerns with providing people with the opportunity 

to look back at a bid. 

Vice Mayor Priore said that a majority of the Village’s business is done strictly on price, but when they 

deal with price plus qualifications, they have to look at that with a completely different viewpoint. 

Councilman Coates said that he was in favor of separating the combination of awarding contracts 

based on qualifications, background resume and price because he believed, as was discussed at the 

Agenda Review meeting, that puts the Village in the untenable position of paying more for services 

with companies that can do the job equally if the original criteria of qualifications came first, and then 

there was a price determination. He said that he has been concerned about that since serving on 

Council especially after seeing how many awards are made and how much is flowing out of this 

Village from the standpoint of what could be put back into this local economy. He said that he is a big 

proponent of finding a way to make this work, but he wanted to be careful in terms of how this is 

approached because he didn’t want to give the local preference to Wellington businesses and 

Wellington residents on the one hand, but in doing so, create a situation where they lose business 

from the surrounding communities. Councilman Coates thought that if the Village was going to have a 

point system in terms of how the local preference is given which is factored into the scoring, then he 

thought that a local company needs to be something a little bit broader than Wellington. He thought 

that the sister communities of Royal Palm Beach, and perhaps Greenacres should be included to the 

extent that they are west of the turnpike. Councilman Coates’ feared that if that wasn’t done, then the 

other communities would have some type of policy penalizing the contractors in the Village. He also 

thought that could be avoided by just defining the boundary of what is local to the western 

communities which he believed was the genesis of how this idea began. He said that when they talk 

about a local preference and what that really means, it is very important to emphasize that the idea 

was never to put the Village in the position where they are paying more because a local company is 

being selected. The intent is only that they are giving that local company the opportunity to meet a bid 

and put Wellington people and western communities’ residents to work in this community. 

Councilman Coates stressed that this is something that should never cost the Village more money. 

With regard to concerns raised by Councilwoman Benacquisto, he said that at last night’s Agenda 

Review meeting, Council discussed the overall contracting process and how sometimes the Village


ends up having to pay more because design and resume qualifications puts them in a position where 

the lowest bid is not being accepted. Councilman Coates said that one of his thoughts was if the 

process was modified so that the design and resume qualifications create a sub-set of universal 

contractors who were allowed to bid where they then bid on price. He thought that under that scenario 

the price should be the low price bid awarded every time. He also believed that they could do 

something like that in the context of the local preference policy as well. 

Mr. Kurtz explained that with regard to the discussion regarding the design concept if Council was 

talking about engineers, architects and planners doing design work, they could not interject price 

directly into that. He further explained that, for example with the circumstance that they recently 

encountered with the Municipal Complex which was a design/build, it is when they get into the 

building stage that price becomes a factor. Mr. Kurtz said that if the only thing that they are looking at 

is a design firm, then what they are left with in most projects is what is known as the CCNA 

(Consultants Competitive Negotiation Act) which requires a determination to be made based on their 

qualifications regardless of price, and then when the firm who is deemed most qualified is selected, 

then the Village would negotiate a contract with them. He said that if the issue of price cannot be 

resolved, then they would move to the second proposer. At this point, the Village would not have in 

hand how much the second proposer will charge. 

Councilman Coates thought that if the Village’s process is tweaked, they would be able to avoid the 

situation that had recently occurred where the Village had selected a firm where they were paying 

substantially more for services based on subjective determinations in the qualification process. 

Mr. Kurtz explained that what they were dealing with was whether the qualification aspects were going 

to be more than just a minimum qualification. If the qualifications were going to be weighed, then they 

would have a point system which could result in the Village not getting the cheapest price. He said 

that it was determined that to be the best bid because the price consideration were overridden by the 

qualification consideration. Mr. Kurtz said that Council could look at those types of situations and 

could say that they are going to eliminate the qualifications aspect other than that for minimum 

qualifications. He pointed out that Village staff already does that on a regular basis depending on the 

particular type of contract and they make a determination as to whether or not qualifications is an 

important enough component that it should be weighed as a part of the evaluation system. 

Councilman Willhite said that as Vice Mayor Priore had indicated at the Agenda Review meeting, they 

almost have to have a two-tier process where a Request for Qualifications is put out, and then a 

Request for Proposal is put out in order to address the price aspect. He further stated that when the 

aspect of price is put out that is when they could begin giving the local preference. He didn’t believe 

that someone should be awarded a bid who has no qualifications or history of designing or building 

the designated project just because they have the lowest price because he believed that the Village 

would be paying more in the long run. Councilman Willhite said the Village may unfortunately end up 

paying more, but they know they will get a good product, and that they won’t have to rebuild the 

project in two years or repair it in three years. Secondly, with regard to the boundaries for the local 

preference which they had discussed at the Agenda Review meeting, he questioned where they 

would draw the boundaries because he believed that one of the Chambers has said Palm Beach 

County is the boundary. 

Mayor Bowen noted that he had suggested that the local preference be Palm Beach County. 

Councilman Willhite said that he believed that the Wellington Chamber had also made that 

recommendation to the Village. He said that as they talk about the Turnpike, West Palm Beach 

comes west of the Turnpike, but Greenacres isn’t west of the turnpike so how would that be


considered to be in the Western Communities. Councilman Willhite said that the boundaries become 

problematic unless they specifically name them or it just becomes Palm Beach County. 

Councilwoman Benacquisto expressed concern about using Wellington exclusively as the boundary 

because there are not a significant amount of large businesses in Wellington especially construction 

companies. She questioned what the net effect of instituting such a policy would have been when 

many businesses that would do the types of things that the Village will bid on don’t exist in Wellington. 

She said that she would feel more comfortable if they designate the boundaries as the western 

communities or Palm Beach County because they would then actually get to affect the whole 

economy. 

Vice Mayor Priore voiced his agreement. He noted that Council had approved an award of bid that 

night for the purchase of automobiles, and they had a local company who was within 5% of the lowest 

bid. He said that they wouldn’t award the bid to them at the higher price, but if the local preference 

was in place, they could offer that company an opportunity to match that price and then the contract 

for the sale of those vehicles would stay within Palm Beach County. He said that the process 

becomes more complex once the award of bid goes beyond just price. Vice Mayor Priore thought that 

there are two areas where this would apply: (1) where it is directed primarily at price; and (2) a policy, 

not a preference, which says that if you are going to do business with the Village that the company 

must seek local companies within the community to compare their services and determine if they are 

able to provide that service for them if they are awarded the contract. He asked Council to keep in 

mind that when doing a design/build project, the basis of the whole process is that it has to include 

price. He explained that if they were doing architectural and then build, then they would have the 

RFQ and they could then go back to the process; however, he did not want to relinquish the ability to 

do design/build because there is too much cost savings involved with this process. Vice Mayor Priore 

thought that if they were going to do anything that they should focus on price opportunities and on the 

preference policy, and they then go back and at a workshop discuss and work this through with staff 

to determine how to make it less controversial from the standpoint of selecting the winners by a 

subjective methodology which is difficult to do. Vice Mayor Priore explained that when an RFQ is 

done, even though there are sets of point, it still ultimately becomes subjective and there is no true 

objectivity in the final decision. 

Councilwoman Benacquisto questioned what would happen if the Village bid out a project where the 

low bidder was from outside of Palm Beach County, but there was a Palm Beach County company 

that was within the 5%. She said that they could technically go back to that company and ask them if 

they wanted to match the price, and if so the bid could be awarded to them. Councilwoman 

Benacquisto asked if that would be a requirement of the process or would it be a decision made by 

Council at that time to give that person the other opportunity. 

Vice Mayor Priore thought that the Village would need to have an established policy in order to do 

that. He said that companies spend a great deal of money in preparing and submitting their bids, and 

if a decision was made outside of a policy to give a local company the opportunity to match a lower 

bid, then he didn’t believe that companies would ultimately want to bid on anything in Wellington. 

Councilman Willhite agreed with Vice Mayor Priore. He speculated that it cost the top bidders for the 

Municipal Complex between $50,000 to $100,000 which is a substantial amount just to bid on a 

project. He questioned whether the Village would actually be getting the best quality project for the 

price if they were to give a Wellington company or a company who was within 5% of the bid the 

opportunity to match the lowest bid. He thought that process would work when the Village has put 

out bids for smaller items such as automobiles, materials, or other tangible goods; however, he didn’t 

think that could be done for longer-term capital projects. Councilman Willhite felt that they would need


to devise a two-tier system or that they only set the parameters for a local preference for certain types 

of projects. 

Ms. Ramaglia said that she understood what Councilman Willhite was suggesting. She explained that 

one of the things that staff had discussed was possibly setting a dollar threshold for this, and also that 

it would be easier to employ such a policy on commodities because it is a strict price-driven selection. 

Councilwoman Benacquisto said if the Village had that policy in place when the proposal for the 

Municipal Complex was put out, but the policy applied to everything but the Municipal Complex, she 

thought that there might be people involved in the process who would have questioned why the 

Municipal Complex was excluded from the policy. In response, Ms. Ramaglia said that she thought 

that Vice Mayor Priore’s point of having a requirement for local sub-contractors to the extent that you 

can will show up in the scoring for the qualifications. In addition, the Village does include in many of 

their different solicitations a requirement that a company must have an office in the western 

communities or in Palm Beach County. Ms. Ramaglia said that they could build that into the process 

without exactly specifying the same kind of local preference policy that it would be easy to employ on 

a straight price-type of bid. She said that staff could accomplish both of these goals. Staff always 

believed that there had to be a second tier for the qualification-based selection, and they are trying to 

do that in the point system. She said that staff could come back with something a little bit more 

specific. 

Councilwoman Benacquisto asked if companies would get a bonus during staff’s analysis if they 

employed the local preference for sub-contractors. Councilman Willhite asked if that would be a 

qualification aspect. Ms. Ramaglia responded affirmatively. She said that the determination whether 

the company would get extra points would be made prior to that information being presented to 

Council. 

Vice Mayor Priore said that at the onset of the bidding process, companies would be aware that is 

part of the Village’s policy and that they could gain benefits from using local sub-contractors. He used 

the comparison that if someone applied for a job and they had served in the military, they may get four 

or five extra points on their final score because of their prior military service. 

Mayor Bowen thought that different points could be allocated to a local company as opposed to a 

company who used sub-contractors. Councilman Willhite thought if a company was headquartered in 

the community, they would get a designated number of points, and they would also get additional 

points if they also used local sub-contractors. Mr. Kurtz compared it to receiving bonus points or extra 

credit. 

Mayor Bowen agreed that something like that could be developed, but he thought that it was obvious 

that this needed a little more work. 

Councilman Coates expressed concern that he had heard from Council’s discussions that the 

suggestion that this local preference somehow will lead to the conclusion that the Village is looking at 

unqualified or less than qualified bidders and companies to do the work; however, that certainly is not 

the intent of the local preference policy. He said that he would leave it up to the Village staff to ensure 

that initially everybody is qualified. Councilman Coates said that he had no problem with the 

suggestion of a two-tiered system where you are looking at qualifications and then price. Councilman 

Coates did not want to delay making a decision on this because he has sat on the Council for the past 

10 months and he saw millions of dollars going out of this community that the taxpayers pay for 

capital improvements and for other purchasing items for this Village. He said that he wanted to be in 

a position where a policy was at least put in place that provides some guidance to the Council in how


to measure the local preference noting. He noted that he was uncomfortable when the issue 

regarding the local preference was raised during the award of the contract for the Municipal Complex. 

He said it is difficult, especially when there is no such policy, in place not to be sympathetic when a 

company comes before them who claim they are a local company who employs many Wellington 

residents whose jobs are at stake if they are not awarded the bid. Councilman Coates said that he 

didn’t want to be in that position again when deciding on awarding a large contract. 

Councilwoman Benacquisto thought that when setting the parameters of the local preference policy it 

was important to set a firm standard of what they will consider which they must adhere to. She said 

that they still would have heard the same thing from companies about their local influence; however, 

Council would have been in the same position because those companies were greater than the 5% 

difference in price. Councilman Coates said that in such a case, the Council would have to firmly say 

that the policy is 5%. 

Councilwoman Benacquisto said that she understood that, but thought Council would get the same 

pressure from companies, but at least they will have an established policy regarding that. She said 

that she didn’t mind moving forward with this policy, but thought that Council needed to define the 

geographical boundaries as well as to determine what the two-tiered system would look like. 

Councilwoman Benacquisto thought that staff needed to be provided with the comfort level that what 

Council says they all clearly mean and they are comfortable with moving forward with a new policy for 

the Village. She then asked staff when was the next time that there would be large purchases on the 

Agenda, and if two weeks additional discussion time would be sufficient to institute a local policy that 

would affect those decisions. 

Ms. Ramaglia explained that the Village expects a number of large items to come before Council in 

the next three to six months. She thought it would be best if they spent the time discussing this so that 

everything is in place prior to any selections being made. She said that staff has been discussing 

trying to delay some of their solicitations until a policy was actually in place. 

Councilwoman Benacquisto said that although they are trying to change it, Wellington is still a 

bedroom community which means that Village’s residents work in companies up and down the coast 

or in Palm Beach County. She questioned how they address that noting that they may be giving 

important benefits to companies who although they are local may employ people from outside of 

Wellington. She further questioned how they would give credence to those companies who are 

bidding on a Wellington contract who are located outside the area, but who employ many people who 

live in Wellington. Councilwoman Benacquisto said that she was shocked to see how many 

employees who live in Wellington worked for Weitz. 

Mayor Bowen said that there were two different things to look at: (1) the employees who live in 

Wellington; and (2) the company that is located here where the profits and reinvestment stays within 

the community. He felt that is one of the reasons why he believed there needed to be two levels. The 

first level would cover all of Palm Beach County because most of the Village’s residents work for 

companies located within the County. Although some may work in other areas, this would cover the 

majority of them. Mayor Bowen thought that there should be some point level assigned to this. 

Secondly, he believed that if the company was located in Wellington, there should be a higher point 

level assigned because then you keep not only employees, but the profits are kept and reinvested in 

the community. He said that many times, that is greater than any other part of the whole contract. 

With regard to designating the boundaries for the local preference, Councilwoman Benacquisto 

questioned whether they wanted it to be Wellington, the Western Communities or Palm Beach 

County.


Councilman Coates thought that they should make Palm Beach County the territory to define local. 

He said that he would support that rather than not having any policy at all. However, he did think that 

within Palm Beach County there should be a super local preference for the Western Communities. 

Vice Mayor Priore concurred with Councilman Coates. He said that there is a concerted effort to try 

and develop and improve the economic development of the area which he considered to be west of 

the Turnpike. In light of that, he thought that they needed to place a strong emphasis on utilizing those 

businesses and also to encourage additional businesses to come in. He said that the Village shows 

that support by saying to businesses, come here, open your business, and we will give you an 

opportunity to do business with the Village. Vice Mayor Priore thought that set the tone for what their 

intentions are. He said if the Village is one of the top businesses in the community businesses will 

want to come out here and establish either their corporate offices or their operating offices that will 

benefit the Village. 

Councilman Willhite said that he would support the Palm Beach County aspect of the policy as long 

as there was something of a super point system for Wellington. 

Councilwoman Benacquisto questioned whether it should be for Wellington or the Western 

Communities. Councilman Willhite thought it should cover the Western Communities. 

Mayor Bowen said he was willing to define it as being those areas west of the Turnpike, and thought 

that they just needed to define a northern and a southern boundary. He said that he thought that 

Council all agreed to go all the way up to Palm Beach County’s western border. Mayor Bowen also 

questioned what they would designate as the southern border for the super preference. 

Mr. Schofield suggested that the northern and southern boundaries for super preference could be 

Okeechobee Blvd and Lake Worth Road. 

Mayor Bowen said that he concurred with Okeechobee Boulevard, but thought they needed to go a 

little further south than Lake Worth Road as was suggested by Mr. Schofield. Council agreed that they 

would extend the boundary to Lantana Road. 

Councilwoman Benacquisto also said that the other issue that was raised was when a company bids 

on something stating that they have the qualifications, is awarded the contract, but then withdraws 

saying that they couldn’t follow through on it. She questioned whether the Village should preclude 

them from bidding on something in the future or take points away from them in the future. She said 

she believed that was the second aspect of this local preference policy that Council had discussed. 

Mayor Bowen asked if staff needed any additional direction from Council to proceed on the policy. 

Ms. Ramaglia stated that staff received clear direction from Council on a two-tier policy. She said that 

with regard to qualifications, they were going to give value for a location in Palm Beach County or 

Western Communities as well as an opportunity to match the lowest bid. Ms. Ramaglia said the policy 

would read: The option to our local vendor to match, if within 5% of the lowest and best non-local bid 

is in a two-tier local preference: (1) Palm Beach County, and (2) Western Communities as defined 

west of the Turnpike and Okeechobee Blvd. to Lantana Road.” She noted that this would be strictly 

for a price selection and that in no case, will the Village pay more for goods in order to provide local 

preference.


Vice Mayor Priore thought that this was a good starting point. He said that he wanted to work on it a 

little between now and the next meeting. He said that he wanted to hear from the Chamber which is 

beginning this Economic Development issue in order to determine what they consider to be the areas 

of concern. Vice Mayor Priore asked if staff would be able to bring this back by the next meeting. 

Ms. Ramaglia said that they could come back by the next meeting. She said that the one other point 

that has to be clarified is the tie breaker. She said that staff would try to come back with a shorter list 

of possible tie breakers. 

With regard to the boundaries, Councilman Willhite asked if Belle Glade, South Bay and Pahokee are 

considered part of the Western Communities. Ms. Ramaglia said that they would be included as the 

boundaries went to the County line. 

Ms. Ramaglia said that there was another issue that Council had discussed at the Agenda Review 

meeting that was not yet discussed that being how they wanted to handle co-ops and piggybacks and 

whether they are excluded from this policy or would the Village seek to have a local business match 

that price. 

Vice Mayor Priore said that the Village was already fundamentally doing that. He said that Mr. 

Schofield had indicated that staff always looks to see if the piggyback is the best price that the Village 

can obtain. Mr. Schofield said that Council will only get a request to piggyback if that is the lowest 

price that staff could find after a search is done. 

Councilman Coates said that the idea then is that this will be applied as broadly as possible. Ms. 

Ramaglia believed that was Council’s direction. She said that staff could come back with something 

very simple at the next Council meeting. 

Mr. Kurtz said that he had one suggestion for Council which he wanted to get their input on. He 

explained that initially there will have to be a time frame for people to register and become aware of 

the process, but that there usually is a requirement for these types of preferences where the company 

makes known their eligibility for local preference on an annual basis, not on a contract for contract 

basis. Mr. Kurtz said that if Council wanted to consider this, he suggested that the company would 

have to sign up by October 1 st which is the beginning of the fiscal year. He said that this will provide 

staff with the opportunity to confirm that the business meets the criteria of being a local business. He 

said that by doing this, the bidding process will be held up by waiting for companies to submit their 

information prior to the mandatory pre-bid. Mr. Kurtz said that those companies will receive copies of 

the Village’s solicitations. 

Vice Mayor Priore said that he didn’t want to create a situation where they precluded some company 

that may have just come in to the Village from being able to offer businesses with them because they 

hadn’t signed up on October 1 st . Councilman Willhite added that he thought this moves towards a CM 

at Risk process in that they would be pre-qualified before a company bids on something. 

Mr. Kurtz said that he wanted Council to understand that on an individual basis they have increased 

the time a little bit. 

Mayor Bowen said that he preferred to do that rather than to preclude anyone from participating in 

bidding on a contract with the Village. 

Vice Mayor Priore reiterated that they may get a business who comes in that is just starting up, but 

that under that procedure, they would have been eliminated from being able to do business with the


Village. He then recommended that Council wait to discuss this item again until the December 8 th 

meeting since there will not be a full complement of Council on November 24 th . Council was in 

agreement with that. 

Councilwoman Benacquisto asked if they were doing away with the requirement that someone has to 

have an office in the area for a year. 

Councilman Coates was of the opinion that staff was going to compile a list of criteria for being a local 

company. In response, Ms. Ramaglia said that requirement was originally included as criteria. A 

company would have to provide the Village with certification that they are a local business. In 

addition, staff also thought about having some type of either an occupation license or registration six 

months to a year before the actual solicitation; however, if Council wants to give everyone an 

opportunity, they can certainly remove that criteria. 

Mayor Bowen thought that there needed to be some time period delineated because then everyone 

will apply for an occupational license when they submit their package. Ms. Ramaglia said that staff’s 

original recommendation was that a company would be required to have the appropriate local 

licensing and registration six months to a year prior to the solicitation. 

Councilman Willhite suggested that the requirement stay closer to six months. Council agreed with 

the shorter time limit. Councilman Willhite then questioned what would preclude a company from 

opening an office or a PO Box and saying that is their headquarters. Mayor Bowen said that there will 

need to be more proof then that which needs to be defined. 

Ms. Ramaglia said that staff will bring this back to Council on December 8 th . She then indicated that 

there was a second part to this policy which addresses the withdrawal of a bid or if a company is 

unable to perform the contracted services. 

Ms. Mireya McIlveen, Director, Administrative & Financial Services, explained that the recommended 

language for the withdrawal of bids or for any vendor who does not perform according to the contract 

was on page 359 of the Agenda packet. She further explained that essentially this stated that the 

Village will require a bid deposit of 5% of the net bid for any bid in excess of $24,999 or $25,000 and 

up. Should that vendor or prospective vendor not perform, not sign the contract or not comply with any 

of the requirements of the bid, the bid bond will be retained by the Village, and, in addition, the 

company will be further precluded from bidding for the time period of one year on any other Wellington 

project. Ms. McIlveen said that is the recommended language; however, it is Council’s decision 

regarding the actual time period or if the amounts are substantial. 

Councilman Willhite said keeping in mind all of the work and staff time that is devoted to the bidding 

process, he supported the one year time frame to preclude a company from bidding. 

Councilwoman Benacquisto asked if the 5% deposit was required when the bid is submitted or if it is 

awarded. In response, Ms. McIlveen said that the 5% is due at the time the bid is submitted. 

Councilwoman Benacquisto questioned how many municipalities and counties require a bid deposit. 

Ms. Ramaglia explained that the Village actually requires bid deposits based on the type of solicitation 

that is being done; however, she said that is a threshold that they can change. She further stated that 

they were only making it equal to the threshold that is required to do the competitive selection so it 

applies equally. Mr. Kurtz noted that the requirement for the bid deposit is a relatively common 

feature.


Councilwoman Benacquisto pointed out that if someone had to submit a 5% deposit on the Municipal 

Complex, it would have amounted to a $500,000 deposit which she thought was almost cost 

prohibitive just to try and obtain work. 

Mr. Kurtz explained that there are bonding companies that handle that. He further explained the 

companies don’t generally put up cash themselves although it is always an alternative. Ms. Ramaglia 

said that it very uncommon to receive cash for this. 

Vice Mayor Priore questioned whether there would be any financial loss to the bidder when they 

withdraw from a bid after the Village has gone through the process and awards the bid. Ms. McIlveen 

said that the financial loss would be the 5% deposit which the Village retains. Vice Mayor Priore 

questioned what would happen for bids less than $25,000. Ms. McIlveen said that the Village doesn’t 

usually go out for bid on items less than $25,000. Vice Mayor Priore asked what the recourse would 

be for the Village if a company withdraws from a contract. Mr. Schofield explained that on most 

purchases under $25,000, the Village receives quotes for the strict lowest price from a number of 

proposers, and it doesn’t undergo a formal process noting that this does get posted on DemandStar. 

Councilwoman Benacquisto asked if the process could be structured where the company is awarded 

the bid and they have three days to submit a 5% bid deposit after they have been selected. She said 

that she was concerned with asking people to provide a bid deposit just to try to do business with the 

Village. In response, both Mr. Kurtz and Ms. Ramaglia stated that doesn’t create a problem for 

companies on these levels of bids. Mr. Schofield reiterated that it is common practice and the Village 

occasionally does require bid bonds. 

Councilwoman Benacquisto questioned whether the Village had required it for the Municipal Complex 

and Utilities projects. In response, Ms. Ramaglia responded affirmatively. She said that the Village 

currently requires bid deposits and performance bonds on almost all of their contracts. 

Council consensus was in support of the bid deposit and the one year preclusion clause. 

C. APPOINTMENT OF A COUNCILMEMBER AND A SENIOR STAFF MEMBER TO THE 

PALMS WEST CHAMBER OF COMMERCE’S CENTRAL WESTERN COMMUNITIES 

ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT TASK FORCE. 

Mr. Schofield introduced the Agenda item. 

A motion was made by Councilwoman Benacquisto, seconded by Councilman Willhite, and 

unanimously passed (5-0) appointing Vice Mayor Priore as the Councilmember to serve on the 

Palms West Chamber of Commerce’s Central Western Community Economic Development 

Task Force and for Mr. Paul Schofield to serve as the Senior Staff member to that Task Force. 

Councilwoman Benacquisto suggested that they look at how many appointments each of the 

Councilmembers have so that it is spread out evenly. 

D. RESOLUTION R2009-82 (RENEWAL OF AGREEMENT FOR TENNIS PROFESSIONAL 

SERVICES WITH CHEATHAM, INC.) RESOLUTION OF THE VILLAGE COUNCIL OF THE 

VILLAGE OF WELLINGTON FLORIDA, APPROVING THE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 

AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE VILLAGE OF WELLINGTON AND TOMMY CHEATHAM, A 

TENNIS PROFESSIONAL CHEATHAM, INC.) AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. 

Mr. Schofield introduced the Agenda item.


Councilman Willhite stated that he had requested that this item be moved from the Consent Agenda 

to the Regular Agenda noting that he had calls that day from several concerned residents. He stated 

that among the Village’s 16 courts, there were only two courts that were held for Wellington residents. 

Councilman Willhite’s concern was that even if someone was a member of the tennis club and a 

Wellington resident there was no guarantee that they would get to use the courts. He thought that it 

would seem to be more logical if a greater percentage of the courts could be offered to Wellington 

residents. 

Vice Mayor Priore pointed out that the two courts that are available provide an opportunity for anyone 

even if they are not a member of the club to play tennis. He said that every Wellington resident is 

eligible to use all 16 courts through the process of membership. Vice Mayor Priore wanted to clarify 

that so it doesn’t give the impression that Wellington residents are just limited to the use of two courts. 

Councilman Willhite felt that it was a double usage explaining that if the person is a Wellington 

resident and a club member that they have a greater opportunity to use the courts, but they are also 

paying twice as much. He thought if they are paying for their club membership as well as their tax 

dollars are going to provide this service, why should there only be two courts available to them. 

Councilwoman Benacquisto concurred with Vice Mayor Priore stating that if someone is a Wellington 

resident as well as a tennis club member, that person is part of the group who can use all of the 

courts and they don’t have to rely on the availability of the two courts. 

Councilman Willhite further contended that if 28 non-Wellington residents use the courts, even though 

someone is a Wellington resident and a member of the club, they would not be able to use those 

courts. He said that it appears that the Wellington resident who is also a member of the club is paying 

twice. 

Vice Mayor Priore questioned how many members of the tennis club were not Wellington residents. 

Councilman Willhite questioned what overall size of the club’s membership was. In response, Ms. Ivy 

Fivey, Director, Community Programs, said that there were 300 passes, but she didn’t know exactly 

what percentage of that was for Wellington residents. She further explained that the purpose of 

having the two courts open at any time is to allow someone the opportunity to play who only paid the 

daily rate. She said that for those people who play regularly or more often, it would be more 

economical for them to do the pass option. Ms. Fivey further stated that with regard to the Wellington 

resident membership, the number that the Village receives from Mr. Cheatham is 2,100 uses for those 

daily participants and roughly 30,000 participants over the course of the year which also includes 

tournament numbers. 

Councilman Willhite noted that every contract that Council has voted on which included caveats for 

renewals have been 12 month contracts; however, the length of Mr. Cheatham’s contract is for 18 

months which he believed was included because of the building of the Village’s Municipal Complex. 

He said that he didn’t feel that the building of that complex should have any bearing on any of the 

contracts. Councilman Willhite thought that a standard 12-month contract should be applicable to this 

contract as was previously done. 

Councilman Willhite also expressed concern regarding the free lease for the Tennis Pro. He thought 

that this was a prime location that the Village could potentially utilize. Councilman Willhite felt that the 

Tennis Pro Shop should be moved downstairs to the old Legal Services Office which is located just 

outside of the tennis courts. He said that this access could be for only for tennis and it would not be


necessary for them to have access to the rest of the building particularly because the tennis program 

is being operated as a private entity. 

Councilwoman Benacquisto did not agree with moving the Pro Shop downstairs noting the large 

number of children who participate in the tennis program particularly during the summer months and 

the safety issue of having the children dropped off and picked up. 

Vice Mayor Priore agreed with Councilwoman Benacquisto further noting that he felt that the location 

of the Tennis Pro Shop presents itself as the appropriate location because the observation area is 

adjacent to it. He thought that having the present location of the Pro Shop being used for something 

else would be disturbed by the noise and the activity of the people on that observation area. He did 

concur with Councilman Willhite’s recommendation for a 12-month contract; however, he felt it should 

start from the time that the contract is signed. 

Councilman Willhite also believed that there could be a conflict with the Village’s rental of the 

Wellington Community Center and the people utilizing the tennis facilities especially when weddings 

and receptions are being held. 

Councilwoman Benacquisto was of the opinion that the Wellington Community Center is a community 

facility, and when people rent it, they understand the dynamics of the building. 

Vice Mayor Priore pointed out that for many of these people, tennis is the only recreational sport that 

they are involved with. He said that they not only pay for it as a facility through their taxes, but they 

also subsequently pay for it as a membership. He said that this is the same as the Village’s other 

sports programs which are also subsidized by the Village. 

Councilman Willhite said his intent was not to take anything away from the people involved in tennis, 

but only to move the Pro Shop to a different location in the building. 

Councilman Coates thought that the Village needed to be clear and consistent in how the third party 

providers are treated. He said that he was shocked in looking at the agreement from a business 

standpoint because the Village is essentially allowing a business to operate on public facilities with no 

opportunity for the Village to recapture any of the $120,000 it spends in overhead. Councilman 

Coates’ concern was that this was just a bad business deal. Secondly, he said when an issue arose 

last year with Travel Baseball using the baseball fields; the Village charged them a hefty fee. He 

noted that those parents and organizations worked hard to raise the funds to pay the Village. He felt 

that there was a dichotomy of inconsistency here that he could not reconcile, and as such the Village 

needs to look at how they treat all third party providers. He said that he did recognize that the Village 

subsidizes many of the third party providers; however, his understanding was that many of those 

providers are not-for-profit businesses that are operating a youth league or something of that nature. 

Councilman Coates’ understanding was that the tennis program was different in that profits were 

being made. He thought that part of the process with this is to discuss whether the Village is treating 

everyone the same. He said that no one comes in as a larger group than the baseball parents, and 

there would be uproar if they had to pay $25,000 to use the baseball fields while a business is 

operating the tennis courts which the Village provides $120,000 funding to maintain. 

Councilwoman Benacquisto pointed out that the Village also pays to maintain the ballfields. She said 

that she understood Councilman Coates’ concern about all of the revenue from the annual passes, 

tournament fees, etc. going to Mr. Cheatham. In light of that, she requested a breakdown of what it 

had cost the Village in the past for the professionals, Pro Shop and Administration maintenance under


the old system. She said that after comparing dollars for dollar, they could then see if there is actually 

a net savings as was being determined by staff. 

Mayor Bowen thought that these questions and concerns could be solved by the Village doing a 

Request for Qualifications. He asked when the Village last did an RFQ for this project. Mr. Schofield 

said that he wasn’t aware that an RFQ was ever done for this project. Mayor Bowen questioned why 

that was never done in a for-profit situation. 

Councilwoman Benacquisto felt that there would be uproar in the community because people are 

happy with Mr. Cheatham and the tennis program. 

Vice Mayor Priore said that the same scenario arose when Mr. Cheatham moved from the Wellington 

Club West to this facility. He said that those people who were members of the Wellington Club 

followed Mr. Cheatham to the new facility. He said there was an opportunity to go out for a bid at that 

time; however, there was an outcry from residents who opposed doing that and supported awarding 

the contract to Mr. Cheatham. Vice Mayor Priore said that it was decided to award the contract to Mr. 

Cheatham and see how it worked out. He noted that it has apparently worked fine because the 

contract was originally awarded to Mr. Cheatham in the 1990’s. Vice Mayor Priore said if it was the 

decision of the Council to move in the direction of putting out an RFQ, then in the next year they could 

work on the criteria, their expectations, as well as to do some research of other city-operated facilities, 

etc. 

Although it didn’t have any bearing on this process, Councilwoman Benacquisto disclosed that Mr. 

Cheatham’s wife was her daughter’s school teacher several years ago. Vice Mayor Priore said that 

he believed she also taught one of his grandchildren, but noted that was not the issue rather the issue 

was whether this was the process the Village wanted to continue with. 

Councilman Coates said that he was not suggesting that the program was being poorly operated, but 

his problem was that Council was being presented with a contract that doesn’t appear to have been 

negotiated at all to devise a better deal for the Village which is where his problem arises. 

Councilman Willhite agreed that this is a well-run program that is utilized by many residents. He 

thought that the $57,000 savings for the program comes from a Village employee who retired and that 

Mr. Cheatham will now be responsible for the services that were being provided by that employee so 

he wasn’t sure whether or not this was truly a savings. 

Vice Mayor Priore felt that it was a $57,000 savings in tax dollars. He further stated that the Village 

was paying $120,000 to maintain the courts as well as $57,000 to a Village employee; however, that 

employee has retired so the Village no longer has that expense. 

Councilman Willhite said that in negotiating the contract, the Village could have taken that employee 

and moved her elsewhere. Secondly, when they reviewed the Village’s budget and in their 

discussions about the four-day work week, tennis was potentially the area where some improvements 

would not be done if that work scheduled was not successful. He also believed that there was a 90day 

caveat to withdraw from the contract. 

Vice Mayor Priore and Councilwoman Benacquisto said that they had no problem with changing this 

to a 12-month contract. Vice Mayor Priore reiterated that he only wanted it to be 12 month from the 

time the contract is signed.


Mayor Bowen preferred that the Village put out a Request for Qualifications because he felt that they 

could still keep the program, but would know what it is worth at that point. Additionally, they could 

also say to the tennis club members that if they want to pay a little bit more money as was done with 

baseball, they could keep the program as it presently exists. However, if that is not the case, then the 

program will have to be changed. Mayor Bowen pointed out that the Village will be facing some very 

serious budget cuts in the near future. 

Councilwoman Benacquisto stated that the baseball scenario did not work out noting that they were 

not renewing and the Village was not getting the $25,000 next year. 

Councilman Willhite questioned who the residents would pay more to, i.e., more in their taxes, to Mr. 

Cheatham for a membership, or would they write a check to the Village to play there. 

Vice Mayor Priore said that if the Village went to those people and told them they had to pay more 

money, they would argue that they pay the same amount of taxes as everyone else yet they are now 

being asked to pay more to make up the Village’s cost to the program of $120,000. He said that they 

would say that the Village subsidizes every other recreational program in the Village yet why wouldn’t 

they want to subsidize their tennis program. 

Mayor Bowen said that he was not suggesting that the Village not subsidize the program at all, but 

only that he wants to determine whether the Village is subsidizing the correct amount. 

Vice Mayor Priore said that anyone who has a contract with someone has the right to ask them for 

their revenue and expenses. Mayor Bowen said that was not the information he was seeking noting 

that information could be determined by simply doing a Request for Qualifications. 

Councilwoman Benacquisto said they were looking at two different things: a Request for 

Qualifications versus a Request for a Proposal which is about dollars. Mayor Bowen agreed that it 

should be a Request for a Proposal. 

Councilman Willhite noted that the Village has been without a contract since September 30 th and 

there is still a 90-day release clause so they could still approve a 12-month contract and put out an 

RFP. He didn’t think it made sense to say that they would put out an RFP and not go through with the 

contract. 

Vice Mayor Priore thought that the simplest way to see the true cost would be to see Mr. Cheatham’s 

pro forma. Mayor Bowen said that he was not interested in that. 

Councilman Coates said that if the Village did an RFP, there may be some proposals where money 

was given back to the Village to cover the fixed costs. While, Councilwoman Benacquisto thought 

they could also get someone who doesn’t operate the program well. 

Vice Mayor Priore pointed out that no one has actually gone to Mr. Cheatham to try and negotiate the 

contract with respect to the money it is costing the Village to fund the program. He said if the 

$120,000 cost to the Village is the big concern, then the individual with the contract tells the Village 

how much it costs them to actually operate the program. He said that since it has been said by 

Council that this is a business, then Mr. Cheatham has to make a living from it. He said that several 

years back, several Councilmembers had been very emphatic that the swimming pool, the tennis 

facility and the Wellington Community Center should be revenue neutral. He questioned whether they 

are and if they could be. Vice Mayor Priore noted that if the contractor were asked to provide funds to


the Village to help cover the costs, those costs would then have to be passed down to someone else. 

In light of that, the residents would then complain about the rising cost of their membership. 

Councilwoman Benacquisto thought that the simple solution would be to ask Mr. Cheatham to provide 

calculations for the money that is generated from the passes and the tournaments, the daily fees and 

lessons. She thought that they could negotiate a contract to offset some of the $120,000. 

Councilwoman Benacquisto said the question is whether or not the Council wanted to move forward 

with Mr. Cheatham’s contract. 

Vice Mayor Priore was of the opinion that they should not change the program in mid-stream, and 

wanted them to move forward with a 12-month contract with Mr. Cheatham. During that time period, 

they would be able to determine how the program is working, what it is costing and if they wanted to, 

they could send out an announcement to tennis professionals to bid on the 16 court program and 

elaborate on their costs and what they would provide to the city to utilize the facilities. 

Councilwoman Benacquisto noted the tennis club members’ loyalty to Mr. Cheatham when he left the 

Wellington Club West to come to the Village, and questioned what would happen if the same thing 

happened if the Village terminated his contract. 

Councilman Coates said that Council has spent a great deal of time debating products and services to 

obtain the best quality at the lowest price yet they haven’t followed that process in this regard. He said 

that this has nothing to do with quality because it was his understanding that quality is very good, but 

they haven’t done their duty to ensure that the Village is getting the best price. 

Councilwoman Benacquisto said that she would support asking staff to bring this item back in two 

week or some other designated time period to see if they can negotiate a better deal with Mr. 

Cheatham to help offset the Village’s costs. Councilman Coates said that he would feel better if that 

was done. Councilwoman Benacquisto felt that would be the prudent step to take if that was 

Councilman Coates’ concern. 

Vice Mayor Priore thought that was a great idea which he would support; however, he said that they 

would hear from those 300 people that they appreciate what they are doing, but they are taxpayers 

and that is the enjoyment that they receive as taxpayers in the community. He said that the Council is 

saying they want a better deal yet they aren't looking for a better deal from all of the other operators 

who do business with the Village. Despite the other Councilmembers comments that the Village 

already does that, Vice Mayor Priore said that the Village does that with respect to doing business 

with companies who trade them a commodity, but it isn’t done in situations to where the taxpayers 

either through themselves or their children participate in these events. He questioned whether or not 

the Village negotiates with the soccer group to get more money from them, but do it with an 

organization that does not have a foundation in Wellington. Mayor Bowen noted that those 

companies were not-for-profit which was a completely different thing. 

Public Comments 

1. Alan Medoff. Mr. Medoff expressed his feelings about the contract which he believed was a good 

deal for Mr. Cheatham and a bad one for the Village. He spoke about the Village’s facility which is 

worth between $1 million to $2 million if not more, that all of the maintenance is being paid by the 

Village including all of the maintenance cost, and in turn, Mr. Cheatham receives income equal to 

100% of the annual passes, 100% of the hourly rates for court time, 100% of the lessons, 100% 

money taken in from tournaments and 100% from tennis camps yet Wellington stands to receive 

not one dollar from income. He thought that this was an insane contract noting that he had


protested some original contract which was negotiated approximately 10 years ago which he didn’t 

feel was equitable at that time. Mr. Medoff noted that his brother is a well-respected American 

Tennis Professional for over 20 years and that he had spoken to him about the proposed contract; 

and his brother thought that it was a very good deal for Mr. Cheatham. He further stated that it did 

not feel right to him for the Council to pass the contract without going out for an RFP to get 

proposals from others. He further stated that this was the sweetest deal he had ever seen. He 

said that not everyone was happy with Mr. Cheatham, and after speaking with several residents 

and asking them to come to the meeting, one resident who is an avid tennis player would not 

come because she feared retributions if she spoke up. With regard to Councilman Willhite’s point 

about there being only two open courts for Wellington residents, he said that assuming that only 

residents are using the courts, if Mr. Cheatham decides that he is going to utilize 14 of those 

courts from 7:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m. every single day to give tennis lessons, he is within the terms of 

the contract. Mr. Medoff stressed that this is a very bad contract for Wellington. 

Councilwoman Benacquisto said that given the Council’s concern about no monies coming to the 

Village to offset some of the Village’s maintenance costs, she asked Mr. Schofield if he could meet 

with Mr. Cheatham regarding that. Mr. Schofield said that he would be happy to meet with Mr. 

Cheatham; however, he wanted to make it clear that it wasn’t that long ago that the Village was 

paying significantly more for the tennis facility. He noted that every instructor who worked for Mr. 

Cheatham and Mr. Cheatham himself were being paid salaries by the Village of Wellington in addition 

to keeping most of those monies. In terms of other providers, i.e., WCFL, Wellington Wave Soccer, 

there is a $25.00 maintenance fee. He said that he will bring those numbers to Council and will get the 

annual operating costs and how they have declined over the year. In terms of where the Council 

wants to proceed with this, Mr. Schofield said that staff will take Council in any direction they want to 

go. 

Councilwoman Benacquisto said if in the analysis WCFL pays $25.00 per player to offset 

maintenance costs, there is a number attached to that and it goes towards the Village’s budget. Mr. 

Schofield said that staff will provide the corresponding costs for those facilities as well. 

Councilwoman Benacquisto said that she didn’t want to send the message that the Village was getting 

involved in all of those other entities at the moment. 

Mr. Schofield offered a solution because he felt there was no easy way to do this and agreed with 

Councilman Coates that there is a hodge podge of agreements that date back some prior to 

incorporation. He said that trying to bring a consistency to those agreements has been difficult. Mr. 

Schofield said that staff will be before Council in April with the evaluation of the four-day work week. 

He explained that part of that decision will be whether the Village should invest money into those 

tennis facilities noting that staff would not be able to bring back numbers regarding the tennis facilities 

in two weeks that would allow them to make a decision regarding this. He recommended that they 

extend the term of the contract until the staff comes back to Council in April which will allow them time 

to assemble that, but doesn’t extend it so long that Council is uncomfortable with it. 

A motion was made by Councilman Coates to immediately do an RFP for the contract. 

Mr. Kurtz asked Councilman Coates if he wanted to enter into the contract knowing that there is a 90day 

termination clause and the RFP process itself will most likely take more than 90 days so that 

there is someone under contract at this point in time and someone is obligated to operate the facility. 

Councilman Willhite felt that you would almost have to do that. Councilman Coates said that he had 

no problem in doing that.


Councilwoman Benacquisto suggested that they take the approach of doing the contract concurrently 

while the contract continues on a month-to-month basis and allow staff to do the analysis that Council 

is requesting. 

Councilman Coates said that he was not supportive of approving a contract that was bad from a 

business standpoint. 

Mr. Kurtz pointed out that Mr. Cheatham is not contracted under a month-to-month situation. He said 

that at this time, there is no contract, and he is currently operating outside the contract noting that Mr. 

Cheatham has collected annual passes monies for the entire year and he believed that he has every 

intention of honoring the terms of the contract and operating as if the contract were in place. At this 

time, from a legal standpoint, there is no contract in place. 

Councilman Willhite said that if the new contract started at the expiration of the old one which is 

approximately 6 weeks, there is a 90-day clause, and that it will take staff approximately 90 days to do 

an evaluation on this. He further pointed out that they are almost one year into this even if you move 

forward with an RFP and go forward with a contract. He felt that the Village needed to have someone 

provide the service at this facility at this time. 

Councilman Coates thought that the RFP process should start that night. 

Councilman Willhite agreed, but said that even if this contract was backdated to when the other 

contract expired, there is a 90 day caveat to terminate the contract. He said that they would be 4 ½ 

months in the year contract. 

Since there was no second on the motion, Councilman Coates then made the following 

motion: 

A motion was made by Councilman Coates, seconded by Vice Mayor Priore, to approve the 

contract as written for one year, subject to staff immediately putting out an RFP, and subject 

to legal advice from Council that the Village can legally pull out of the contract within 90 days 

if the RFP process provides a better contract. 

Vice Mayor Priore felt that this was not a true RFP because the Village first had to determine their 

criteria. He questioned whether the Village would run an advertisement in the tennis journal about 

bidding on this. He thought that this would be a very specific RFP and they would need to clarify what 

they were asking for. 

Mr. Kurtz said if the motion was approved and staff began working on it, they would have to come 

back to Council to show them the RFP. He didn’t think they would want to put this out without Council 

first reviewing it. 

Vice Mayor Priore was of the opinion that the Village would have to contact some tennis professionals 

or providers to find out what the criteria should be. 

Councilwoman Benacquisto said that she couldn’t support approving a contract that necessitates 

someone hiring employees if the Village is just going to terminate them in three months. She said that 

she supported approving the contract for 12 months and during the next three months for Council to 

work with staff to determine if it was going to be bid out, what would be bid out, develop an RFP and 

then do that six months later for a renewal that happens at the conclusion of the 12 months.


Councilman Willhite thought that was what is normally done with their projects. He said if the Village 

is looking for a better price, they put the bid out towards the end of a contract so that the start date 

would be where the contract date ends. 

Mayor Bowen questioned why the contract had not come before them prior to it expiring. Councilman 

Coates added that they were hearing that their hands were tied because they were 1 ½ months out of 

contract. Councilman Willhite said that unfortunately the contract should have come before them prior 

to the expiration date; noting that, in most cases, staff starts working on the contract in ample time 

prior to them expiring so if a contract is started with a new contract, there is a seamless transition 

period. Councilman Willhite agreed with Councilwoman Benacquisto in how they could negotiate the 

contract and then terminate it in 90 days. He thought that they should go with a 12 month contract, 

have staff begin looking at an RFP, but not that it should be done immediately. 

Councilwoman Benacquisto said she wanted to ask staff to try and negotiate with Mr. Cheatham for a 

better deal closer to what the Village was looking for, and then bring that back with Mr. Cheatham 

having the understanding that the Village will be working towards the process over the next year to 

put it out for RFP. She said if it is done this way, Mr. Cheatham understands that the Village wants to 

have some remuneration for the maintenance that the Village is paying for the courts that are being 

used. 

Councilman Coates said the low price was only a part of it, but it was also about opening up the 

process. He said that his concern is that this process appears to be fairly closed. 

Councilwoman Benacquisto pointed out that the Village doesn’t open up the process for WCFL, 

Wellington Wave and many other things. 

Councilman Coates said that the Village should be doing that; however, those organizations are notfor-profit 

businesses. He said that Mr. Schofield had previously confirmed that this is the only 

example in the Village where a for-profit business is running this type of service. 

Councilman Willhite asked for an explanation of what a “better deal” is. Councilman Coates thought 

that any deal would be better than this deal. Councilman Willhite said that the costs are the hard 

costs regardless of who has the contract, i.e., electric, water of the courts. He said that the $120,000 

costs for maintenance are the hard costs and will not change. He said that the change would be the 

lease on the building, the revenue from the passes, lessons, etc. Councilman Willhite thought that 

perhaps the better deal would be if the tennis professional was willing to give the Village a percentage 

of those things. 

Councilwoman Benacquisto said that the question was not whether the individual was willing, but 

rather if the Village was going to ask for those things. Councilman Willhite said those are the only 

things they could ask for a better deal because the Village doesn’t know what type of deal to ask for if 

it is unknown what they are presently getting. He said that the only thing that is certain at this time is 

that the Village is paying the hard costs, and offering a facility for the residents to use. 

Vice Mayor Priore asked whether the Village set any criteria at all in the utilization of the facility. He 

questioned whether there was any established criteria to where they would have to perform or 

provide, i.e., must have Wellington residents. He said that the other possibility is that certain criteria 

have to be set where the Village gets the $120,000. Vice Mayor Priore said that the other alternative 

is to relinquish the facility and say that the person could come in and run the facility; however, the 

Village wants a designated amount for the operation of the facility and something of that nature. He 

said that the other alternative is to try and negotiate with the individual that the Village has been doing


business with for 10 years and advise him of the situation and ask him what he could do to improve 

upon it. Vice Mayor Priore said that was why he had asked earlier what the actual operational costs 

were. He thought that they might find out that there is a very close number. 

Mr. Schofield suggested that if the Council was going to extend the contract that it is extended to the 

end of the fiscal year. He said if they are going to direct staff to do an RFP, it has to be done and 

completed in the April timeframe so that it can be worked in with the May budget proposals that are 

given to Council. Mr. Schofield said that this was the first Council who has been willing to address 

these questions. He said that the tennis program has cost the Village significantly more money in the 

past. He said that staff will provide to Council operating instructions and will bring it all back to 

Council as quickly as possible. Mr. Schofield said that if Council was not going out for an RFP and 

were going to extend the contract, he wanted to go to September 30 th which is the end of the fiscal 

year. Mr. Schofield said they will go to Mr. Cheatham and will discuss his program and then staff will 

develop a set of criteria for an RFP. 

Councilman Willhite asked Councilman Coates if he was amenable to that because his motion was to 

begin the RFP immediately, and Mr. Schofield was saying to do it within the normal process. Mr. 

Schofield explained that it would take him several weeks to develop an RFP, and by the time that it is 

put out and back, it will be mid-November. He said that it would not be out on the street until probably 

January or first of February, and it won’t be back until the end of February. The RFP process will start 

the next day. Mr. Schofield said that if the RFPs come in significantly different, there is still the 90-day 

opt out. 

Vice Mayor Priore said that he also wanted the staff to do research and determine how these 

contracts are filled by professionals so that the Village has the correct information. Mr. Schofield said 

that they would probably be visiting Delray Beach in the next couple of days. 

Councilman Coates amended his motion to include that the Mr. Cheatham’s contract 

be approved with an expiration date of September 30, 2010, that concurrently, staff will 

discuss the present tennis program with Mr. Cheatham, prepare an analysis of the 

program, i.e., costs, number of residents, other programs, etc., and work to develop 

criteria for an RFP which will be brought back to Council in the April timeframe. Vice 

Mayor Priore, who seconded the motion, agreed to the amendment. 

The motion was voted on as amended and was unanimously passed (5-0). 

E. RESOLUTION NO. 2009-85: PURCHASE OF 1068 GOLDENROD ROAD PROPERTY. 

Mr. Schofield read the Resolution title. He reminded Council that he had spoken to them the previous 

week about property that had come on the market. Mr. Schofield explained that the purchase amount 

is beyond his normal purchasing ability. There is also a requirement in the Code of Ordinances that 

says that the Village will get appraisals, and this would allow the waiver of the appraisal price, and 

that the property could be purchase at not more than the listed price. Mr. Schofield said that what was 

seen in the comparables for this property is just over $276,000, and the listing price is $199,000. The 

Village’s last offer was $181,000. In the interest of full disclosure, the bank did not accept the 

Village’s offer because they would not buy the property without inspection. Subsequently, someone 

offered the same price as the Village and was willing to purchase the property without an inspection. 

Mr. Schofield said that he needed to present this to Council to ratify what was done and to ensure if 

these circumstances arise again; the Village Council is cognizant of the situation. Mr. Kurtz said this


was also being done in the event the contract falls through. Mr. Schofield further stated that if the 

contract that was accepted falls through, the Village is prepared to continue with the purchase of this 

property. 

A motion was made by Vice Mayor Priore, seconded by Councilman Coates, and unanimously 

passed (5-0) approving Resolution No. R2009-85 as presented. 


Mr. Kurtz: Mr. Kurtz reported that Council should be receiving his Monthly Report in their transmittals 

on Thursday. Once Council has had the opportunity to review the format and the information, Mr. 

Kurtz said that he will be contacting Councilmembers individually to see if it meets their expectations. 

He said that he will continue to work on that process. 


Mr. Schofield presented the following report: 

� The next Village Council meeting will be held on Tuesday, November 24, 2009 at 7:00 p.m. at 

the Wellington Community Center. 

� On Wednesday, November 11, 2009, the Village will be honoring all Veterans with a parade 

beginning at 8:45 a.m. at the Wellington Community Center and the ceremony will begin at 

9:00 a.m. at Veterans Memorial. 

� The Village is partnering with a local organization hosting a Holiday Food Drive to benefit 

families in need. This event will run through November 20 th . Drop off locations are at the Safe 

Neighborhoods Office. They can be contacted at 791-4196. 

� The first of the Management Service projects will be held on Friday, November 13, 2009 with 

staff meeting at the Safe Neighborhoods Office. 

� A benefit softball tournament will be held on Sunday, November 15, 2009 at the Village Park to 

benefit a deputy who was injured in a motorcycle accident as well as a deputy’s wife who has 

cancer. Any support would be appreciated. 


Councilman Willhite: Councilman Willhite presented the following report. 

� He addressed the Village’s new “Great Hometown Award” and felt that it was a phenomenal 

thing to award a paid day off to someone who saved the Village a significant amount of 

money. 

� Councilman Willhite thanked Ms. Fivey for the Village of Wellington’s Parks & Recreation 

recognition. He felt that something needed to be done to recognize that. 

� He noted that there actually are a high number of people who utilized the gym on Fridays. Mr. 

Schofield explained that due to higher number of attendees than was previously calculated, 

the gym would be open on Fridays from 4:00 p.m. to 10:00 p.m. The costs will be covered by 

unfilled positions in that department. 

� Councilman Willhite reported that he had received a letter from a resident regarding the 

astronomical capital projects. In light of that, he asked staff to put forward public education on 

the Village projects that are being funded by capital, grant money and stimulus monies 

� With regard to the groundbreaking ceremony for the Municipal Complex, Councilman Willhite 

thought that it should be a monumental event. He suggested the Council convene the meeting 

outside at the proposed site, they then conduct the groundbreaking ceremony followed by a


short break, and then they reconvene the meeting inside the Council Chambers. Council 

agreed with Councilman Willhite’s suggestion. 

� Councilman Willhite encouraged residents to come out to the Veterans Day Ceremony. 

Councilwoman Benacquisto: Councilwoman Benacquisto presented the following report: 

� She encouraged residents to come out to the Veterans Day Ceremony 

� Councilwoman Benacquisto expressed her sympathy to the family of Matthew Kornya. 

Councilman Coates: Councilman Coates presented the following report: 

� He expressed a Happy Birthday to all Marines noting that November 10 th is their day. 

� Councilman Coates reported that he was looking forward to the Village’s Veterans Day 

celebration. 

� He then spoke about the loss of Matthew Kornya and how a one minute mistake can cost 

someone their life which he believed starts with the failure to wear a seat belt. Councilman 

Coates asked the Captain Richter and the Fire Rescue Department to refocus its efforts in 

educating children about the importance of wearing a seat belt. Councilman Coates extended 

his sympathy to Matthew’s family and also to the children of Wellington who are hurting from 

this loss. He hoped that they could turn this negative experience into something positive in 

order to save a child in the future. 

Vice Mayor Priore: Vice Mayor Priore presented the following report: 

� Vice Mayor Priore acknowledged a letter that Council received from a 10 year old boy who 

was concerned about safety in his neighborhood. Mr. Schofield said that staff was responding 

to that. He noted that staff has already done traffic studies, their engineers went out there, 

and staff has even met in the neighborhood. Mr. Schofield said that he would further discuss 

that with Vice Mayor Priore. 

� He noted that on October 28, 2009, the annual meeting of the Palm Beach County League of 

Cities, Palm Beach County School District and the Legislative Delegation was held. The 

Legislative Delegation also attended the meeting. Vice Mayor Priore reported that this was a 

very interesting and open meeting, and many issues were discussed. He said that one issue 

that was discussed which might have immediate impact is that after many school bus 

violations, the Legislative Delegation is considering amending the law to enhance penalty 

violations. In addition, they will also look at changing, along with Palm Beach County, Palm 

Beach County Days because of its continued conflict with the cities of Palm Beach County and 

their ability to attend. Vice Mayor Priore said that the School District referenced a number of 

issues, i.e., class size reduction, youth violence, etc. He said that the County noted that the ½ 

cent school tax will sunset next year in December which will be loss of a considerable amount 

of money although it would not have a big impact if they continue with no construction. Vice 

Mayor Priore further reported that the cities’ comments were working together with the County 

and with the State on issues which impact everyone. He said that there was also an issue with 

the constitutional amendments that were on the ballot, and how they will impact the cities. 

Mayor Bowen: Mayor Bowen presented the following report: 

� Mayor Bowen recapped the groundbreaking ceremonies that were held the previous week: (1) 

Scott’s Place, funded with private donation, (2) Amphitheatre, funded by Palm Beach County,


and (3) Ribbon Cutting for Park & Ride lot, funded by Department of Transportation, Palm 

Tran and Palm Beach County. 

� He invited everyone to attend the Veterans Day activities. 


Mr. Schofield expressed personal condolences to Councilman Willhite. 


There being no further business to come before the Village Council, the meeting was adjourned. 


1. Jose Gonzalez, 4101 Revenswood Road. Mr. Gonzalez stated that he was the President of CIMA 

Engineering who was the lowest bidder for the Construction Inspection Services contract; 

however, the Village approved the second bidder as the winner for that proposal. He noted that 

his company underwent the appeal process through the Village Manager and then to the Council 

to hear their statement. Mr. Gonzalez contention was that this was an RFP which included (1) 

qualifications and (2) bid. He said that the intent of the RFP was to allow for a quick process in 

acquiring a professional consultant. He said that his understanding was that the lowest bidder 

would win the project which is what they were. Mr. Gonzalez said that his company’s 

qualifications meet and exceed the requirements in the RFP. He said that he had extended his 

request for Council to hear his appeal because he wanted Council to know that his company was 

the lowest bidder and most qualified to do the job yet they were not awarded the bid. 

Mr. Kurtz said that his office sent correspondence to the company informing them that they did not 

raise an appealable issue. He said that the RFP included specific criteria as to how those bids would 

be analyzed. Mr. Kurtz read the bid criteria to substantiate why the selection was made. Mr. Kurtz 

said that the evaluation of that RFP was not just based on price. Although Mr. Gonzalez’ company 

had the lowest price and received the highest scores in that particular category; there were other 

categories, as was stated in the RFP. Although that company met the minimum criteria, the Selection 

Committee determined that there were other proposers who were better qualified and had more 

experience. Mr. Kurtz reiterated that Mr. Gonzalez has tried to file an appeal, and he has been told on 

several occasions that it is a non-appealable issue. 

Mayor Bowen said that the Village has followed its policy which currently is based on points, and 

unfortunately the other contractor had a higher point score. 

Councilman Coates said that although he was not happy with the outcome of the award, one of the 

things can’t be done is to change the rules in the middle of the game. He further stated that one of 

the things that has touched him about this is that the Village needs to change the process to remove 

the situation where subtle distinctions and qualifications and resume-based criteria can essentially 

result in the Village paying $40,000 more for a service. Councilman Coates advised Mr. Gonzalez that 

he hears his concerns and understands his frustration, and he will work to change the process so that 

the Village deals with qualifications and resume subjective criteria first that gives them a universe of 

qualified bidders and then those bidders compete for a low price. He felt they will essentially eliminate 

the situation that has occurred with this bid if that procedure is followed. 

Mr. Gonzalez then addressed a reference in Mr. Kurtz’ correspondence regarding case law which 

he didn’t believe was relevant to his situation. He thought they were comparing him to a situation


that wasn’t even similar to what they did. Mr. Gonzalez reiterated that they are a qualified 

company and even though they may not have presented themselves correctly in their proposal to 

the particular reviewers, their qualifications exceeded number two who won the bid noting that 

they have more experience in this business. Mr. Gonzalez said that he accepted Council’s 

decision and thanked them for their volunteer time. He further stated that the Village needed to 

qualify a bid when dealing with professionals. Mr. Gonzalez then stated that he didn’t believe that 

the Village had followed the federal funds guidelines that had been set forth by the RFP, and also 

referenced the requirements of the DOT that state that the Village has the ability to go to the 

lowest bidder. 

Mr. Kurtz said that he would be happy to discuss this further with Mr. Gonzalez particularly to explain 

the case law that was addressed in his correspondence. . With regard to the Mr. Gonzalez’ 

contention that the Village had not followed the DOT’s guidelines, Mr. Kurtz stated that the criteria 

was followed because the requirement was that there had to be a stated written policy for selection 

which the Village had. 

Approved: 

_________________________________ 


_________________________________ 



MINUTES 






Tuesday, November 24, 2009 

7:00 p.m. 

Pursuant to the foregoing notice, a Regular Meeting of the Council was held on Tuesday, November 

24, 2009 commencing at 7:00 p.m. at the Wellington Community Center, 12165 W. Forest Hill 

Boulevard, Wellington, FL 33414. 


Benacquisto, Councilwoman, and Howard K. Coates, Jr., Councilman. Matt Willhite, Councilman was 

not in attendance. 


Attorney, and Awilda Rodriguez, Village Clerk 



3. INVOCATION - Tom Amburgey, First Baptist Church, Greenacres, delivered the Invocation. 


Mr. Schofield presented the Agenda recommending approval. 

A motion was made by Councilwoman Benacquisto, seconded by Councilman Coates, and 

unanimously passed (4-0) approving the Agenda as presented. Councilman Willhite was not in 

attendance at the meeting. 

5. PRESENTATIONS AND PROCLAMATIONS - None 


A. RESOLUTION 2009-89 (APPROVAL OF HEALTH INSURANCE) A RESOLUTION OF THE 

VILLAGE COUNCIL OF THE VILLAGE OF WELLINGTON, FLORIDA, APPROVING A 

RENEWAL OF VILLAGE EMPLOYEE HEALTH PLAN WITH CIGNA HEALTH CARE 

UNDER A MINIMUM PREMIUM ARRANGEMENT; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE 

DATE. 

B. RESOLUTION R2009-88 (APPROVING THE LOCAL AGENCY PROGRAM AGREEMENT 

WITH FDOT FOR IMPROVEMENTS TO FOREST HILL BOULEVARD) A RESOLUTION OF 

THE VILLAGE COUNCIL OF THE VILLAGE OF WELLINGTON, FLORIDA, APPROVING 

AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND VILLAGE CLERK TO EXECUTE A LOCAL 

AGENCY PROGRAM AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE VILLAGE AND FLORIDA 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION PROVIDING 3.83 MILLION DOLLAR OF FUNDING


TO ASSIST THE VILLAGE WITH FOREST HILL BOULEVARD IMPROVEMENTS; 

PROVIDING AND EFFECTIVE DATE. 

Mr. Schofield presented the Consent Agenda recommending approval as presented. 

A motion was made by Councilman Coates, seconded by Councilwoman Benacquisto, 

and unanimously passed (4-0) approving the Consent Agenda as presented. 

Councilman Willhite was not in attendance at the meeting. 

7. PUBLIC HEARING 

A. ORDINANCE NO. 2009-16: AN ORDINANCE OF THE VILLAGE COUNCIL OF THE 

VILLAGE OF WELLINGTON, FLORIDA, PERTAINING TO ZONING; AMENDING THE 

LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATION CODE OF THE VILLAGE OF WELLINGTON BY 

AMENDING ARTICLE 7, CHAPTER 14, “SIGN REGULATIONS;” AMENDING SECTION 

7.14.4, “DEFINITIONS,” REGARDING DEFINITIONS FOR COMMERCIAL MESSAGE, 

EXEMPT SIGNS, SCHOOL, ELEMENTARY OR SECONDARY, SIGN, A FRAME, SIGN, 

DIGITAL, SIGN, ELECTRONIC MESSAGE BOARD, SIGN, EXEMPT, SIGN, 

FREESTANDING CENTER IDENTIFICATION, SIGN, FREESTANDING MULTIPLE TENANT, 

SIGN, ON-SITE DIRECTIONAL, SIGN, ON-SITE INFORMATIONAL, SIGN, POLE BANNER, 

TEMPORARY, SIGN, POLE BANNER, PERMANENT, SIGN, SANDWICH OR SANDWICH 

BOARD, VILLAGE, AND WINDOW AREA; SECTION 7.14.5, REGARDING “COMPLIANCE 

WITH BUILDING CODE;” AMENDING SECTION 7.14.7, “PROHIBITED SIGNS,” 

REGARDING MOVING SIGNS, LIVE ANIMALS, SANDWICH BOARDS AND A-FRAME 

SIGNS, AND MURALS; SECTION 7.14.8, “EXEMPT SIGNS,” REGARDING PUBLIC 

SIGNS, VILLAGE SIGNS, SIGNS WITHIN A BUILDING, RESIDENTIAL WORKS OF ART, 

PUBLIC NOTICE SIGNS, INTERIOR SIGNS, AND FEDERAL BANKRUPTCY SIGNS; 

AMENDING SECTION 7.14.9, “PERMITS REQUIRED,” REGARDING APPLICATION 

REQUIREMENTS, AND PROHIBITED SIGNS; AMENDING SECTION 7.14.11, “SIGN 

REQUIREMENTS FOR COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL USES,” REGARDING ENTRY 

FEATURES AND FREESTANDING CENTER IDENTIFICATION MONUMENT SIGNS, 

MULTIPLE TENANT MONUMENT SIGNS, WINDOW SIGNS, MONUMENT SIGNS FOR 


GAS/SERVICE STATION/CONVENIENCE STORE SIGNS, DIGITAL SIGNS, WORKS OF 

ART, A FRAME, PERMANENT NONRESIDENTIAL REAL ESTATE SIGNS, PERMANENT 

POLE BANNERS, AND INTERNAL DIRECTIONAL SIGNAGE; AMENDING SECTION 

7.14.12, “SIGN REQUIREMENTS FOR INSTITUTIONAL USES,” REGARDING 

IDENTIFICATION SIGNS, SCHOOL SPONSOR SIGNS, PROJECT GRADUATION SIGNS 

AND PERMITTED DISPLAY, ELECTRONIC MESSAGE BOARD SIGNS, AND MURALS; 

AMENDING SECTION 7.14.13, “TEMPORARY SPECIAL EVENT SIGNS,” REGARDING 

TEMPORARY POLE BANNER SIGNS, SEASONAL EQUESTRIAN EVENT SIGNS AND 

FLAGS, TEMPORARY BANNERS IN THE MEDICAL COMMERCAL PLANNED 

DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT, AND TEMPORARY UTILITY POLE BANNERS; AMENDING 

SECTION 7.14.20, “SIGNS FOR PROJECTS WITHIN THE LS/MU LAND USE OVERLAY,” 

REGARDING REGIONAL SHOPPING CENTERS, DIRECTIONAL SIGNS, MEDIAN 

ENTRANCE SIGNS, PROJECT IDENTIFICATION SIGNS, SIGN REQUIREMENTS FOR 

MULTIPLE USE PLANNED DEVELOPMENTS (MUPDs), MONUMENT SIGNS FOR 


MONUMENT SIGNS FOR SHOPPING CENTERS/PRIMARY TENANTS, AND EXTERNAL 

FREESTANDING POINT OF PURCHASE SIGNS; AMENDING SECTION 7.14.21,


“ENFORCEMENT;” PROVIDING A REPEALER CLAUSE; PROVIDING A SAVINGS 

CLAUSE; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.ORDINANCE NO. 2009-16 (SIGN CODE 

ZTA) 

Mr. Schofield read the Ordinance title. He announced that Mr. Marty Hodgkins, Director, Strategic 

Planning and Economic Development, would be presenting this item. 

Mr. Hodgkins reported that Ordinance No. 2009-16 reflected changes made at the workshops and the 

First Public Hearing, and that he would answer Council’s questions. Mr. Hodgkins also noted that 

there were several individuals in the audience who had questions or comments regarding the Sign 

Code. 



unanimously passed (4-0) to open the Public Hearing. Councilman Willhite was not in attendance at 

the meeting. 

1. Mr. Gary Koolik, 7900 Glades Road, #320, Boca Raton. Mr. Koolik spoke on behalf of the 

Wellington Green Mall. He stated that he had two comments regarding the Sign Code. His first 

comment related to Section 7.14.19:B4(f)(i). He read the current language: “One (1) additional wall 

sign, not to exceed fifty percent (50%) of the maximum square footage allowed for the principal 

wall sign shall be permitted if the store is located on the end of the shopping center structure.” Mr. 

Koolik’s request was to add: “or if the store is located on an outparcel and the rear wall faces 

other stores in the MUPD.” He noted that this is in the LSMU section of the Sign Code which is 

specific to the Mall. Mr. Koolik explained that the Mall has a ring road which is surrounded by the 

shopping center, and this change will allow some of the outparcels to face into the shopping 

center and see the users of the outparcel. In addition, the signage won’t be visible from outside of 

the shopping centers. 

Mayor Bowen asked if Council had discussed this at their Agenda Review meeting. In response, Mr. 

Hodgkins said that it had been discussed and there was no objection to the proposed amendments. 

Mayor Bowen noted that this will be one of the new changes to the Sign Code. 

Councilwoman Benacquisto asked if this articulated that the sign will be of the same type and quality 

as the front of the building. Mr. Koolik noted that this also has some side limitations and things of that 

nature and its purpose is only to allow identification for those parcels. Mr. Kurtz noted that this must 

comply with the Master Sign Code. 

Vice Mayor Priore said that the key issue is that it must be a quality sign and not a banner or another 

type of temporary signage. 

Mr. Koolik continued. He said that his second request that was also discussed by staff that had no 

objections was on 7:14:19:B(4)(g). He noted that it currently read: “Signs located on a rear wall 

…” They were requested that the verbiage be changed to read: “Signs located on a rear and side 

wall…” He explained that the way the ring road circles the Mall property; it is very difficult for 

some tenants to be seen. In addition, this sign won’t be seen outside of the Mall property or 

anywhere on the main peripheral roads and is only for internal circulation purposes and visibility. 

Mr. Koolik noted that these signs would be consistent with the requirements of the Sign Plan. 

Council had no objections to this addition. Mr. Hodgkins also noted that staff had no objection to this.


He said that as any sign installed would be consistent with the overall Sign Plan for the Mall and 

would be a quality sign. 

2. Mark Bellissimo, 3560 Ambassador Drive. Chief Executive Officer, Equestrian Sport Productions 

owners and operators of the horseshow. He applauded the Village for their efforts in increasing 

the signage for the equestrian industry. He said that he was aware that the Village is interested in 

creating some type of generic signs throughout Wellington relative to the equestrian events. He 

said that the sign on the corner of Pierson Road and South Shore Blvd. is of significant importance 

to them and is critical to their success especially since they don’t have direct frontage. Mr. 

Bellissimo said that the nature of their events is critical that they have the ability to promote their 

particular events on the signage at that location. He further stated that he wanted to understand 

whether there was an opportunity for them to maintain the ability to have a promotional sign at that 

corner. He noted that it wasn’t clear reading through the material whether or not that is a 

possibility. 

Mayor Bowen told Mr. Bellissimo that as he had indicated earlier, at the conclusion of the season, the 

Village and the equestrian entities will all meet and work on that policy. He noted that this Sign Code 

does not address that issue. 

Councilwoman Benacquisto felt that it is incumbent upon the Village to do all they can to support the 

efforts of Mr. Bellissimo’s company and the International Polo Club. She said that she wanted that 

sign to be more permanent and attractive, and to also allow the International Polo Club with the 

opportunity to post some events there as well because it is almost the gateway to their event as well. 

She felt that was something that could be worked out at the end of the season and it could be done in 

partnership with the entities. Councilwoman Benacquisto was also of the opinion that including the 

ticket information and telephone numbers on the sign was important and they should be able to retain 

that right. 

Mr. Bellissimo asked if there was nothing in the proposed Sign Code which precludes them from 

having specific events, times, signage, etc. 

Mr. Schofield said that the Village does not have a clear idea exactly what those signs will be at this 

time. He said that because they are on public property, the Village wants them to be more permanent 

and more grandiose. Mr. Schofield said that the sign will have something that says: Village of 

Wellington, Home of the Winter Equestrian Festival. He further explained that the discussion was that 

they should be able to do some event-specific things, but he didn’t know how that would be 

accomplished. Mr. Schofield said that Council’s direction to him was to meet with the venue owners 

and work out a system of signage that works to support their events. 

Vice Mayor Priore said that he had noted the previous evening that he felt it was too late at this time 

to make any changes for this season. He thought that once the season gets settled, the Village 

needs to meet with the two major sports entities in the community and work with them to find a way to 

enhance and improve the signage and for the Village to do whatever is necessary to ensure that the 

businesses thrive. He said that his goal is for an equitable arrangement to be reached so that people 

not only know where the events are, but the signage will also say that these entities are important to 

Wellington who is supportive of them. Vice Mayor Priore said that he wants to discuss what needs to 

be done in order to achieve that goal. 

Mr. Bellissimo said that he was comfortable with that, but he heard varying views of what is 

proposed to be done. He said that it appears as though they will have an opportunity to frame 

this policy as it relates to their business. He said that he wanted to hear on record that no


decisions were made in terms of precluding them from using the signage. 

Vice Mayor Priore said that Council had come to the conclusion that this is important and it must be 

done. 

Councilman Coates said that he didn’t want to commit that any final decisions were made on what is 

actually going to be on the signage. He said that the last thing that any Councilmember would want to 

do is to install a sign that does not work and doesn’t benefit the equestrian events. Councilman 

Coates said that he was in favor of the Village promoting the specific events on the signs, but it is a 

decision that he did not want to make without first having the input from Mr. Bellissimo and from the 

equestrians who have an interest in these signs. He said that given the goal of the Council, this will 

work out very favorably for the equestrian industry. 

Mr. Bellissimo thanked Council for their time noting that he looked forward to working with them on 

this issue. 

3. Kevin DiLallo, 1300 Wood Dale Terrace, Chief Executive Officer, Wellington Regional Medical 

Center. 

Prior to Mr. DiLallo speaking, Mayor Bowen suggested that Mr. Hodgkins or Mr. Schofield summarize 

how the Village was going to look at the signage for Wellington Regional Medical Center. He thought 

that may answer Mr. DiLallo’s questions noting that there was nothing in the proposed Sign Code 

which deals with Mr. DiLallo’s requests as they will be addressed when the Medical Arts area is 

discussed. 

Mr. Schofield said that the issue of the banners is addressed in this proposed Sign Code, and within 

reasonable limits, it addresses Mr. DiLallo’s concern regarding them. With regard to the LCD or 

digital signs, he said that staff intends to bring those forward as a part of the Medical Arts District 

noting that they are only several months away from bringing those specific regulations for that District 

forward. He said by doing that, the regulations will apply only within the Medical Arts District which is 

when the LCD or digital signs will be addressed. 

Mr. Kevin DiLallo, CEO of Regional Medical Center, showed a PowerPoint presentation showing 

the hospital and the banner which supports different events in the community. He explained that 

there is a schedule for the signs that are erected. He said that a sign schedule is discussed at 

the beginning of the year which is presented to Hospital’s Committee showing what they will be 

supporting for the coming year. He named those community events that are on their banner 

schedule and stated that they continue to support the community by putting the sign on the 

hospital. Mr. DiLallo said that he didn’t want the Council to think that they were doing this for 

personal reasons, but rather were doing this in an effort to help the community understand what is 

going on as they come through the intersection into the Village. With regard to the LCD sign, he 

said that it was something that he wanted to include in the sign package, and that he did 

understand the Village’s concerns about it. He showed an example of the LCD signage that they 

wanted to be included either in the sign package or in the Medical Arts District which they would 

like to have on SR7 and Forest Hill Blvd. He said that the sign would be used to promote 

screenings, lectures, community seminars at the hospital and other things of that nature. Mr. 

DiLallo asked Council to consider this, and said that he wanted to move forward if not in this 

ordinance then in the Medical Arts District. 

There being no further public comments, a motion was made by Councilwoman Benacquisto, 

seconded by Vice Mayor Priore and unanimously passed (4-0) to close the Public Hearing.


Councilman Willhite was not in attendance at the meeting. 

A motion was made by Vice Mayor Priore to approve Ordinance No. 2009-16 on Second 

Reading including all of the approved amendments and comments. 

Mr. Hodgkins reminded Council that they had discussed at the Agenda Review meeting the temporary 

A-Frame signs/day of event signs. He said there was a request to allow those signs to be placed 24 

hours in advance of the specific event and also to include a logo on the A-Frame sign. 

Vice Mayor Priore said that was inclusive in his motion. The motion was seconded by 

Councilwoman Benacquisto, and unanimously passed (4-0). Councilman Willhite was not in 

attendance at the meeting. 

8. REGULAR AGENDA - None 


Mr. Kurtz: Mr. Kurtz wished everyone a Happy Thanksgiving. 


Mr. Schofield: Mr. Schofield presented the following report: 

� The next Village Council Meeting is scheduled for Tuesday, December 8, 2009 at 7:00 

p.m. Immediately prior to that meeting, the groundbreaking ceremony for the Village 

Hall will be held at 6:30 p.m. in the area adjacent to the tennis courts. 

� Village Park will begin its new operating hours effective December 4, 2009. The 

indoor gymnasium will be open on Fridays between 4:00 p.m. and 10:00 p.m. 

� He reminded the residents that the Village’s offices will be closed on Thursday and 

Friday in observance of the Thanksgiving holiday. 

� He also reminded residents that between Christmas and New Years the Village offices 

will be closed as the employees will be on an unpaid furlough. 

� He wished everyone a happy holiday season. 


Councilwoman Benacquisto: Councilwoman Benacquisto thanked everyone from the 

WCFL, the CVO and the Safe Neighborhoods Office for all of the food that was collected that 

was delivered to needy families in the community. She believed that over 90 families would 

receive a turkey dinner courtesy of those groups. She wished everyone in the community and 

at the Village a very Happy and safe Thanksgiving. 

Councilman Coates: Councilman Coates wished everyone a Happy Thanksgiving. 

Vice Mayor Priore: Vice Mayor Priore wished everyone a Happy Thanksgiving. He also 

reported that he and Mr. Schofield had attended a Palm Beach County Workshop regarding 

transportation that had been held that day. He said that they presented to the County the 

Village’s position concerning working with them along the SR7 Corridor regarding the


properties that are currently owned by the County where they wish to join with them and find 

an equitable way for the Village to make those properties be a part of the Medical Arts 

District. 

Mayor Bowen: Mayor Bowen wished everyone a Happy Thanksgiving. He invited everyone 

to attend the groundbreaking of the Municipal Complex on December 8 th . 



There being no further business to come before the Village Council, the meeting was 

adjourned at 7:25 p.m. 


1. Seth S. Brier, 9338 Glidden Court. Mr. Brier's attorney was also in attendance representing him. 

Mr. Brier’s attorney said that she was representing him on behalf of the Wellington Feed and 

Supply LLC. She said that they were present seeking to impose conditions on a Special Use 

Permit application that was submitted by the Equestrian Sport Production LLC, permit #2008-017 

SPU. She said that she had a letter of representation with some proposed language that she 

wanted to have admitted into the permit. 

Mr. Schofield explained that Council does not approve those permits. He asked that they see Mr. 

Barnes or Mr. Hodgkins regarding this. He reiterated that process is not one that comes before 

Council. 

Mr. Kurtz also stated that this was not the proper forum to discuss this matter. 

Approved by: 

____________________________ 


____________________________ 

Awilda Rodriguez

6. B 




AGENDA ITEM NAME: Approve the Renewed Annual Contract for the Cooperative Purchase of 

Bulk Quicklime 





FIRST READING 


REQUEST: Council authorization to renew the annual contract for the cooperative purchase of bulk 

pebble quicklime from Chemical Lime Company of Alabama, Inc. Bid #005-2821-09/JA was 

awarded to Chemical Lime by City of Boynton Beach, acting as the lead agency on behalf of co-op 

participants. 

EXPLANATION: The Water Treatment Facility uses bulk pebble quicklime to soften the potable 

water which it produces. The City of Boynton Beach let Bid #080-2821-07/JA for “Annual Co-Op 

Bulk Quicklime” purchase on behalf of themselves, Wellington, City of Delray Beach, City of Lake 

Worth, City of Riviera Beach, City of West Palm Beach, and South Central Regional Wastewater 

Plant. Bids were received from Carmeuse Lime & Stone, Chemical Lime Company of Alabama, Inc., 

and Southern Lime Company. 

DELIVERY PRICES TO WELLINGTON (FY 2008-2009) 

Chemical Lime $227.56 per ton 

Carmeuse Lime $256.50 per ton 

Southern Lime $278.37 per ton 

Boynton Beach City Commission awarded the bid to Chemical Lime at their December 16, 2008 

meeting. The contract was awarded through 12/15/2009 with the option to renew for three (3) 

additional one (1) year periods. The contract was renewed through 12/15/2010. Delivery prices 

during the renewal term will be $235.98 per ton, still substantially less the initial bid prices given 

by Carmeuse and Southern. 

FISCAL IMPACT: 

Funding is allocated in the FY2009/2010 budget for this purchase in the amount of $270,000 in 

the Water Treatment Supplies line item. Approximately $268,500 was expended in FY 2009.


RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that Council approve the purchase of bulk pebble 

quicklime from Chemical Lime of Alabama, Inc. off the renewed “Annual Contract for Co-Op 

Bulk Quicklime”, as presented. 

� 

Protecting our Investment 

Protecting our Investment 

� Respecting the Environment 

� Economic Development 

� Responsive Government

Village Council Regular Meeting - January 12, 2010 Page 73 of 421
















































6. C 




AGENDA ITEM NAME: RESOLUTION NO. R2010- 07 (TEMPLE B’NAI JACOB OF 

WELLINGTON) 

A RESOLUTION OF THE VILLAGE COUNCIL OF WELLINGTON, FLORIDA ACCEPTING AND 

APPROVING THE PLAT KNOWN AS “TEMPLE B’NAI JACOB OF WELLINGTON” AUTHORIZING 

THE MAYOR AND VILLAGE CLERK TO EXECUTE THE PLAT; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE 

DATE. 





FIRST READING 


REQUEST: The petitioner is requesting approval of a proposed plat for Temple B'Nai Jacob of 

Wellington (a replat of Tract “R” of The Isles at Wellington Plat I). 

EXPLANATION: This application was submitted by Temple B’Nai Jacob of Wellington as 

contract purchase of the property, concurrently with a Development Order Amendment (2009- 

010 DOA 1) and Master Plan Amendment (2009-010 MPA 1) to change the property designation 

to “Civic Site” and add a new point of ingress / egress; and a Development Order Amendment 

(2009-010 DOA 1) to allow requested uses for a house of worship and daycare. 

The effect of granting a plat approval for Temple B'Nai Jacob of Wellington (a replat of Tract “R” 

of The Isles at Wellington Plat I) located within the Orange Point Planned Unit Development 

(PUD) Master Plan will be to add a point of ingress / egress on Lake Worth Road and Barefoot 

Lake Drive for the proposed place of worship and day care center. 

The execution and recordation of the plat will only occur following title being vested in temple 

B’Nai Jacob of Wellington adoption/approval per the purchase agreement. 

FISCAL IMPACT: N/A 

RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of Resolution No. R2010-07 approving as 

presented.


� 

Responsive Governement 

� Respecting the Environment 

� Economic Development 

� Responsive Government 

Protecting our Investment


RESOLUTION NO. R2010-07 

A RESOLUTION OF THE VILLAGE COUNCIL OF THE VILLAGE OF 

WELLINGTON, FLORIDA ACCEPTING AND APPROVING THE PLAT 

KNOWN AS “TEMPLE B’NAI JACOB OF WELLINGTON” AUTHORIZING 

THE MAYOR AND VILLAGE CLERK TO EXECUTE THE PLAT; AND 


WHEREAS, the proposed replat of Tract R, the Isles at Wellington Plat 1 according to the 

plat, thereof as recorded in Plat Book 85, Pages 87-96, Public Records of Palm Beach County Florida 

has been reviewed and found to be consistent with the preliminary plat approval for Technical 

Compliance; and 

WHEREAS, all necessary dedications and fees have been supplied to the Village; and 

WHEREAS, the Planning, Zoning and Building Department and Village Engineer recommend 

that Council accept and approve the proposed plat. 

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE VILLAGE COUNCIL OF THE VILLAGE OF 

WELLINGTON, FLORIDA that: 

SECTION 1. The foregoing recitals are herby affirmed and ratified as being true and correct. 

SECTION 2. The Council hereby accepts and approves the plat known as “Temple B’Nai 

Jacob of Wellington” a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit “A”, and hereby authorizes the 

Mayor and Village Clerk to execute the plat to be recorded. 

SECTION 3. The plat shall, not be recorded unless and until title to the property, which is the 

subject of the plat, has been transferred to Temple B’Nai Jacob of Wellington. 

SECTION 4. Upon recordation of the replat, any prior plat encompassing this property shall 

be automatically and simultaneously vacated and annulled. 

SECTION 5. This Resolution shall become effective immediately upon adoption. 

PASSED AND ADOPTED this _____ day of ___________________ 2010 

ATTEST: WELLINGTON, FLORIDA 

BY:__________________________ BY:_____________________________ 

Awilda Rodriguez, Village Clerk Darrell Bowen, Mayor


APPROVED AS TO FORM AND 

LEGAL SUFFICIENCY 

BY:__________________________ 

Jeffrey Kurtz, Village Attorney









6. D 




AGENDA ITEM NAME: A RESOLUTION NO. R2010-01 (APPROVAL OF THE 2010 SUSAN P. 

BRADFORD ART IN PUBLIC PLACES PROGRAM) 

A RESOLUTION OF THE VILLAGE COUNCIL OF WELLINGTON, FLORIDA APPROVING AND 

AUTHORIZING THE VILLAGE MANAGER TO EXECUTE ART DISPLAY AGREEMENTS AND 

DONATION AGREEMENTS IN ORDER TO FACILITATE THE VILLAGE'S ART IN PUBLIC 

PLACES PROGRAM; PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. 





FIRST READING 


REQUEST: Staff requests approval of the 2010 annual public art plan authorizing the display of art 

pieces selected by the Public Art Advisory Panel on November 18, 2009. 

EXPLANATION: Pursuant to the Wellington’s public Art Program the Public Art Advisory Panel 

is to present an annual public art plan for Council consideration and approval. At their 

November 18, 2009 meeting, the Public Art Advisory Panel finalized their review of applications 

and selected artwork to be displayed in the Village’s facilities and public places under the Susan 

P. Bradford Art in Public Places Program. The following art selections are recommended for 

approval: 

Rick Hallberg Painting - "Heading for Shade" 

Joanne Baker McLeod Painting - "Kapok Tree of Palm Beach" 

Joanne Baker McLeod Painting - "Bougainvilla Arbor" 

Marianne Davidson Painting - "Spirit" 

Marianne Davidson Painting - "War" 

David Redelheim Painting - "Branches above,Branches Below" 

Jo Ann Tonks Painting - "Birds of Paradise" 

Leslie Pfeiffer Painting - "Orchid Blush" 

Cecile Eskin Painting - "Island Girl" 

Cecile Eskin Painting - "Lake Como" 

Cecile Eskin Painting - "Pillows" 

Corinne Ingerman Painting - "Wellington" 

Kathryn Morlock Painting - "Afternoon Shadows - Cottage in the Keys" 

Kathryn Morlock Painting - "Palm on the Beach"


Joyce Rogers Painting - "Perfect Day" 

Joyce Rogers Painting - "Whispering Palms" 

Ursula Fernandez Painting - "Welcome to Paradise Island" 

Charlotte Fein Painting - "Kalanchoe in the Sunlight" 

Ilene Adams Painting - "Birds View of Lake Wellington" 

Chari Rocafull Painting - "Fire's Dance" 

Benjamin Kenagen Photography - "A Mothers Touch" 

Benjamin Kenagen Photography - "Trio at the Steeplechase" 

Sue Oakes Hibiscus 

Aileen Jaeger Siracusa Free standing Tableau - Inner City 

Aileen Jaeger Siracusa Wall hanging - Night Blooming Flower 

Rick Evans Painting – “Life is a Beach” 

Claudia Jane Klein Sculpture - "Tango" (Horse Sculpture) 

FISCAL IMPACT: Insurance premium to cover estimated value of artwork will be approximately 

$1,000. The total estimated value of all the selected pieces is $43,169.00. In addition, Claudia 

Jane Klein’s sculpture “Tango” would be placed in the triangle median at the intersection of 

Forest Hill Boulevard and South Shore Boulevard (across from Veterans Memorial). This would 

require construction of a concrete base with approximate costs totaling under $1,155.00. 

RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that Council authorize the Manager to execute Art 

Display Agreements for those selections made by the Public Art Advisory Panel.




WELLINGTON, FLORIDA APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING THE VILLAGE 

MANAGER TO EXECUTE ART DISPLAY AGREEMENTS AND DONATION 

AGREEMENTS IN ORDER TO FACILITATE THE VILLAGE’S ART IN PUBLIC 

PLACES PROGRAM; PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. 

WHEREAS, Wellington has established a Public Arts Program reflected in Article III of Chapter 56 of 

Wellingtons code of ordinances; and, 

WHEREAS, the Public Art Advisory has developed their Annual Public Art Plan for Council 

consideration, and 

WHEREAS, at their November 18 th , 2009 meeting, the Public Art Advisory Panel finalized their review of 

applications and selected artwork to be displayed in the Village’s facilities and public places under the Art in 

Public Places program; and 

WHEREAS, staff recommends that Council authorize the Manager to execute Art Display Agreements 

(a sample is attached hereto) with art owners desirous of lending Wellington artwork to be displayed in 

Wellington’s facilities and public places; and 

WHEREAS, staff recommends that Council authorize the Manager to execute Donation Agreements (a 

sample is attached hereto) with art owners desirous of donating to Wellington artwork to be displayed in 

Wellington’s facilities and public places; and 


WELLINGTON, FLORIDA, that: 

SECTION 1. The foregoing recitals are hereby affirmed and ratified as being true and correct. 

SECTION 2. The Council hereby approves the public art plan for 2010 and authorizes the Manager to 

execute Art Display Agreements as per the sample attached hereto as Exhibit “A”, with art owners desirous of 

lending Wellington artwork to be displayed in Wellington’s facilities and public places and donation Agreements as 

per the sample attached hereto as Exhibit “B”, with art owners desirous of donating to the Village artwork to be 

displayed in Wellington’s facilities and public places. 


PASSED AND ADOPTED this _____ day of January, 2010. 


BY:_____________________________ BY:______________________________ 

Awilda Rodriguez, Village Clerk Darell Bowen, Mayor 



BY:__________________________ 

Jeffrey S. Kurtz, Village Attorney


AIPP Council Present 

John Bonde – Deputy Manager 

Francine Ramaglia – Assistant Manager 

Ivy M. Fivey – Community Programs Director 

Susan P. Bradford 

Art In Public Places Meeting Minutes 

November 18, 2009 

5:00 p.m. 

Meeting Minutes: 

First item up was a summary of total number of applications submitted. In total, 44 Art in Public 

Places applications were submitted. Value of artwork totals $52,644. 

Among council present at November meeting, it was unanimously decided to accept 27 artwork 

entries. 

Recommendations where made to keep artwork located in the following areas; Wellington Community 

Center, Village Park, Wellington Municipal Complex, Planning and Zoning, Wellington PBSO office, 

and Wellington Fire Rescue. 

It was requested to keep all equestrian themed artwork together. 

Location of artwork will be determined by project manager. 

Approved to go to council on January 12, 2010. 

Items Discussed: 

Confirm official council approved name of program.


Art in Public Places Entries 200 

Name of Artist Type of artwork Loan or Donation Approval Value of Artwork 

Rick Hallberg Painting - "Heding for Shade" Loan 6 months $12 

Joanne Baker McLeod Painting - "Kapok Tree of Palm Beach" Loan 6 months $40 

Joanne Baker McLeod Painting - "Bougainvilla Arb Donation $40 

Marianne Davidson Painting - "Spir Loan 6 months $1,0 

Marianne Davidson Painting - "War" Loan 6 months $50 

David Redelheim Painting - "Branches above,Branches Below " Donation $795 

Jo Ann Tonks Painting - "Birds of Paradis Loan 6 months $45 

Leslie Pfeiffe Painting - "Orchid Blush Loan 6 months $35 

Cecile Eskin Painting - "Island Gi Loan 6 months $35 

Cecile Eskin Painting - "Lake Como" Loan 6 months $175 

Cecile Eskin Painting - "Pillows" Loan 6 months $175 

Corinne Ingerman Painting - "Wellington 

Painting - "Afternoon Shadow s - Cottage in th 

Donation $80 

Kathryn Morlock Keys" Loan 6 months $350 

Kathryn Morlock Painting - "Palm on the Bech" Loan 6 months $35 

Joyce Rogers Painting - "Perfect Da Loan 6 months $1,20 

Joyce Rogers Painting - "Whispering Palms" Loan 6 months $1,8 

Ursula Fernandez Painting - "Welcome to Paradise Island" Loan 6 months $80 

Charlotte Fein Painting - "Kalanchoe in the Sunligh Loan 6 months $80 

Ilene Adams Painting - "Birds View of Lake W ellington Loan 6 months $750 

Chari Rocafull Painting - "Fire's Danc Loan 6 months $32 

Benjamin Kenagen Photography - "A Mothers Touch" Loan 6 months $20 

Benjamin Kenagen Photography - "Trio at the Steeplechase Loan 6 months $20 

Sue Oakes Hibiscus Loan 6 months $475 

Aileen Jaeger Siracusa Free standing Tableu - Inner City Donation $90 

Aileen Jaeger Siracusa Wa ll hanging - Night Blooming Flower Donation $90 

Claudia Jane Klein Sculpture - "Tango" (Horse Sculpture) Loan 6 months $25,000 

Rick Evans Painting - "Life is a Bech" Loan 6 months $3,600 

Total Value $43,169 

Page 1

6. E 




AGENDA ITEM NAME: Approve Award of Bid #031-09/JWV for Lease and Laundering of 

Employee Uniforms 





FIRST READING 


REQUEST: Approve award of Bid #031-09/JWV to Unifirst Corporation for lease and laundering of 

employee uniforms. 

EXPLANATION: Wellington provides a set of nine shirts, nine pants, and one jacket to 

approximately one hundred forty employees. The type of uniform worn varies among 

departments depending upon their particular responsibilities. Once each week, uniforms are 

picked up for cleaning and freshly laundered uniforms are delivered that same day. Bid #031- 

09/JWV was let on 11/18/09 and opened on 12/8/09. Four Vendors picked up bid documents 

with only Unifirst, our current provider submitting a proposal. 

The majority of uniforms provided to employees consist of a standard pant (washable permanent 

press), standard shirt (permapress quality, 65% polyester and 35% cotton), and standard jacket. 

The initial term of the contract is for two years with the option to renew for one additional year. 

LEGAL SUFFICIENCY: (select one) 

FISCAL IMPACT: FY 2008-09 annual expenditures totaled $80,000. The estimated annual 

expenditure under the new bid award is estimated to total $70,000. 

Funding for employee uniforms is allocated in the FY 2009-2010 budget under Purchasing 

Operating Supplies/ Uniforms & Shoes in the amount of $114,000. 


RECOMMENDATION: Award Bid #031-09/JWV to Unifirst Corporation for Lease and 

Laundering of Employee Uniforms, as presented.










6. F 




AGENDA ITEM NAME: Approve Award of Bid #037-09/BJJ for Supply and Delivery of Janitorial 

Supplies 





FIRST READING 


REQUEST: Council approval of award of Bid #037-09/BJJ for supply and delivery of janitorial 

supplies to All American Poly, AmSan Interline, Dade Paper, Glocecol LLC, Gold Coast Chemical, 

W.W. Grainger, Pyramid School Products, and South Florida Janitorial. 

EXPLANATION: A variety of janitorial supplies are required for Wellington operations. Bid #037- 

09/BJJ was let on November 16, 2009 requesting proposals to provide forty-five different janitorial 

products. Fourteen vendors submitted proposals, which resulted in the distribution of low bid prices 

among eight bidders. Staff recommends award to all eight bidders in order to allow purchases from 

the vendor providing the lowest bid price, as long as specifications are met. 

In addition to regular janitorial supplies, comparable alternative green products were also solicited. 

Only five alternative green products were proposed, all by AmSan. Three of the green products 

actually cost less than the regular specified item. If comparable to regular items and reasonably 

priced, the option to purchase alternative green janitorial supplies is requested. 

The term of the contract is for one year from the date of Council award with the option to renew for 

one term years up to two years. 


FISCAL IMPACT: Funding is allocated in the FY2009/2010 budget under materials and cleaning 

supplies accounts in the amount of $37,000. Approximately $35,000 was expended in FY 2009. 

VILLAGE GOAL: Protecting Investment 

RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that Council approve award of Bid #037-09/BJJ for 

supply and delivery of regular janitorial supplies to All American Poly, AmSan Interline, Dade 

Paper, Glocecol LLC, Gold Coast Chemical, W.W. Grainger, Pyramid School Products, and


South Florida Janitorial, as well as approve purchase of alternative green supplies from AmSan, 

as presented.








6. G 




AGENDA ITEM NAME: Authorization for staff to piggyback the following contracts: County of Los 

Angeles, CA contract #MA-IS-42595-19 from Office Depot, Pasco County, FL contract #08-086 from 

Office Max and Palm Beach County, FL contract #06001B from Halsey & Griffith for the purchase of 

office supplies. 





FIRST READING 


REQUEST: Approval for the puchasing dept. to utilize the following piggyback contracts for the 

purchase of office supplies: 

Agency Contract # Vendor Name Exp. Date 

County of Los Angeles, 

January 1, 

CA MA-IS-42595-19 Office Depot 

2011 

June 23, 

Pasco County, FL 08-086 Office Max 

2013 

April 30, 

Palm Beach County, FL 06001B Halsey & Griffith, Inc 2010 

EXPLANATION: It is more cost effective and economically advantageous for Wellington to utilize 

multiple contract(s) for the purchasing of Office Supplies as Purchasing can purchase the particular 

item at the lowest price. Wellington purchases Office Supplies for Wellington-wide usage. The 

Purchasing Department has performed cost comparisons of similar items and verified by awarding 

the contract to multiple vendors (listed below) maximizes Wellington’s buying power significantly. 

● County of Los Angeles, CA contract #MA-IS-42595-19 purchase of Office 

Supplies through Office Depot Corporation 

● Pasco County, FL contract #08-086 allows the purchase of Office Supplies 

through Office Max 

● Palm Beach County, FL contract #06001B allows the purchase of Office 

Supplies & OEM Toner through Halsey & Griffith, Inc. which is local vendor 

(West Palm Beach). 

The effective date(s) of the County of Los Angeles contract is January 2, 2009 through


Village Council Regular Meeting-January 12, 2010 Page 158 of 421 

January 1, 2011; the Pasco County, FL contract is June 24, 2008 through June 23, 

2013; the Palm Beach County, FL contract is May 1, 2009 through April 30, 2010. 

**Due to the volume of pages a full list of prices and discounts are available for review upon 

request** 

Staff searched for office supply vendors in Wellington and located none. Two Palm Beach County 

vendors are included in the award (Office Depot and Halsey & Griffith). Staff will utilize the vendor 

offering the lowest item price. If the non-local vendor offers the lowest price, staff will contact the 

local vendor with the option to match. 


FISCAL IMPACT: Within various Office Supply line Items throughout Wellington’s annual budget. 

Wellington spends approximately $120,000 annually in office supplies. 


RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the use of the following contracts as 

presented and any renewals thereafter, contingent upon legal approval as presented: 

● Office and Classroom Supplies #MA-IS-42595-19 – County of Los Angeles, CA 

● Office Supplies #08-086 – Pasco County, FL 

● Office Supplies & OEM Toner #06006B – Palm Beach County, FL


Village Council Regular Meeting-January 12, 2010 Page 159 of 421






































































6. H 




AGENDA ITEM NAME: RESOLUTION R2010-10 (AMENDMENT NUMBER THREE (3) TO THE 

AGREEMENT BETWEEN WELLINGTON AND KIMLEY-HORN AND ASSOCIATES, INC. FOR 

DESIGN OF SOUTH SHORE BOULEVARD PHASE II). 

A RESOLUTION OF THE VILLAGE COUNCIL OF WELLINGTON, FLORIDA APPROVING AND 

AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND VILLAGE CLERK TO EXECUTE AMENDMENT NUMBER 

THREE (3) TO THE AGREEMENT WITH KIMLEY-HORN AND ASSOCIATES, INC., FOR THE 

ENGINEERING DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION OF SOUTH SHORE PHASE II; AND 






FIRST READING 


REQUEST: Council Approval of Resolution No. R2010-10, Acceptance of Amendment Number 3 to 

the Agreement with Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. for the Design of South Shore Boulevard 

Road Widening - Phase II (27,500). 

EXPLANATION: At the August 25, 2008 Council meeting, Council approved Resolution No. 2008- 

94 for the Agreement between Wellington and Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. for the Design of 

South Shore Boulevard Road Widening, Phase II in the sum of $412,000. The project scope 

consisted of roadway plans for South Shore Boulevard to include the construction of a 2-lane 

divided highway with sidewalks and equestrian trails (approximately 1.10 miles). Subsequent to this 

agreement, it was determined that a number of revisions to the existing Scope of Services would be 

required. Amendments 1 and 2 were adopted in April and November of this year to modify the 

roadway section to reflect the actual right-of-way width of 120’, to realign the fire station driveway 

with Santa Barbara Drive and to provide for additional lighting at the entrances to the park and 

adjoining residential communities. 

Amendment #3 authorizes the preparation of landscaping, electrical, lighting and irrigation plans for 

the medians of this corridor. These plans will be bid as an “alternate” to the bid set for the roadway 

improvements and included in the award only if the costs are within our budget. The original scope 

did not include a landscape plan but staff is recommending this be bid to take advantage of the 

reduced construction pricing we have experienced on other capital projects. In addition, the 

amendment calls for the survey work required to locate existing utilities and to design improved 

staging areas and advanced warning lights at the equestrian crossing at Pierson Road. The original



agreement for design anticipated a crossing of South Shore near the Fire Station but with the design 

change to provide for the possibility of future four laning and present access not directly available to 

the horse show, from that area, it was determined that Pierson Road would remain the primary 

crossing point for horses. This being the case, the engineer will develop design alternatives to 

improve the staging area for horses crossing South Shore from both sides of the street. 

LEGAL SUFFICIENCY: Approved 

FISCAL IMPACT: The proposed increase in the amount of the contract is for $27,500 ($17,400 

for the planting design, accent lighting and irrigation, $4,800 for the electrical design, $1,950 for 

the survey work and $3,350 for the relocated equestrian crossing design to Pierson Road and 

plan for staging areas). There is currently a budget balance of $5,290,197 CIP/South Shore 

Phase I and II (135-2022-541.65-16). 

VILLAGE GOAL: Protecting Our Investment 

RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends Council approval of Resolution R2010-10 authorizing 

the execution of Amendment No. 3 dated January 12, 2010 with Kimley-Horn and Associates, 

Inc. for the Design of South Shore Boulevard Road Widening – Phase II in the sum of $27,500; 

and authorizing the provision of optional and/or additional services in compliance with the 

applicable policies and procedures of the Purchasing and Procurement Manual, as presented.




A RESOLUTION OF THE VILLAGE COUNCIL OF THE VILLAGE OF WELLINGTON, FLORIDA 

APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND VILLAGE CLERK TO EXECUTE 

AMENDMENT NUMBER THREE (3) TO THE AGREEMENT WITH KIMLEY-HORN AND 

ASSOCIATES, INC., FOR THE ENGINEERING DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION OF SOUTH 

SHORE PHASE II; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. 

WHEREAS, though passage of Resolution 2008-94 that the Council formally awarded RFP #07- 

05/JWV to Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. and approved the Agreement for Engineering, Design, 

and Construction of South Shore Phase II. (Herein after referred to as Agreement); and 

WHEREAS, on April 14, 2009 through the passage of Resolution R2009-29 the Council approved 

Amendment One (1) to the agreement; and 

WHEREAS, on November 10, 2009 through the passage of Resolution R2009-81 the Council 

approved Amendment Two (2) to the agreement; and 

WHEREAS, the opportunity to landscape the medians, provide lighting and irrigation to these 

medians has arisen and the improvement of staging area at the equestrian crossing across South 

Shore Boulevard at Pierson Road has been identified; and 

WHEREAS, staff recommends the Council approve Amendment Number Three (3) to the Agreement 

which provides for additional design services to provide a landscape planting design, accent lighting, 

irrigation and electrical to the medians, perform additional survey work and provide designs for 

staging area improvements and advanced warning lights at the equestrian crossing at Pierson Road, 

a copy of the amendment is attached. 



SECTION 1. The foregoing recitals are hereby affirmed and ratified as being true and correct. 

SECTION 2. The Council hereby approves Amendment Number Three (3) to the Agreement for 

Engineering Design and Construction of South Shore Phase II, between Wellington and Kimley-Horn 

attached hereto as Exhibit “A” for a lump sum fee of $27,500, and hereby authorizes the Mayor and 

Village Clerk to execute the Amendment. 


PASSED AND ADOPTED this _____ day of January, 2010.




BY:____________________________ BY:__________________________ 




BY:______________________________ 




EXHIBIT ‘A’ 

SCOPE OF SERVICES 

PROJECT UNDERSTANDING 

The project is located within the South Shore Boulevard right-of-way between Pierson Road and Lake 

Worth Road and is currently under final stage of engineering design. In order to improve the final 

product, minimize future costs and in anticipation of future needs along the corridor, the Owner 

requested the addition of landscape, irrigation, accent lighting, improved equestrian crossing at 

Pierson Road intersection and survey of utility pothole locations. 

Landscaped areas shall be limited to the pervious spaces delineated on the project site plan and will 

address edge of road and median plantings as desired by the Owner. The irrigation system will be 

designed to provide appropriate coverage for the project’s landscaped areas, to be watered within 

current restrictions set forth by the South Florida Water Management District. We understand that a 

design prepared by another CONSULTANT will be the basis for the design of median plantings and 

will help establish the project plant palette, landscape lighting equipment, and irrigation equipment. 

Due to the nature of the expedited schedule there will only be one formal plan submittal to the Owner 

for review prior to submittal of final plans and one informal meeting to review design ideas and 

marked up plans to receive Owner’s input in that meeting. 

Consultant will secure a subconsultant professional survey firm to survey utility pothole locations. 

Consultant will provide two alternative designs for the equestrian crossing to define staging areas at 

the intersection corners and include as bid alternates in the project. 

ASSUMPTIONS 

� Planting and irrigation design will be limited to pervious spaces within the South Shore 

Boulevard right-of-way. 

� Level of plantings and the planting palette will be very similar to the one developed for Forest 

Hill Blvd and Greenview Shores which have been established as the Owner’s standard for all 

future landscaping. 

� Irrigation source will be existing reclaimed/IQ utility available on site. 

� Public meeting participation or preparation will not be required. 

SCOPE OF SERVICES 

This scope of services is to be performed as outlined below. 

Task 1 - Landscape Architectural Construction Drawings 

CONSULTANT will prepare construction drawings for landscape improvements based upon the 

Owner’s design input and construction budget, as described below: 

A. Kick-off meeting at the project site to observe existing conditions, review designs prepared by 

others, and photograph the site for future reference. We will observe surrounding properties,



existing above-ground utilities, and environmental conditions. We will invite the Owner to 

participate in this meeting to solicit their design input. 

B. Preparation of 75% and 100% or final construction documents for those components described 

and resolved through Owner input. CONSULTANT will prepare planting plans, organized 

according to Owner’s bid phasing and construction schedule. Planting plans for this package will 

delineate plant material, plant quantities, plant schedules, specifications and project-specific 

planting details for the following, as directed by the Owner: 

� Right-of-way plantings along the roadside, designed to avoid conflicts with utilities (above 

grade and below grade) as well as accommodate pedestrian and equestrian trail users. 

� Median plantings, to incorporate design schemes and plant palettes developed for previouslycompleted 

projects. 

C. Drawings for these items will be of sufficient detail for bidding and construction of the landscape 

improvements. 

D. Attendance at up to two (2) meetings with the Owner, coinciding with project milestone submittal 

and/or at the Owner’s request. After the 75% project milestone meeting, Owner feedback and 

comments will be incorporated into the construction drawings for further development. 100% or 

final construction drawings and specifications will be submitted to Owner as bidding instruments. 

E. Submittal revisions to plans based on Owner comments are limited to a total of two (2) resubmittals 

at the project milestone submittal. (75% and 100%) 

F. Coordination between project milestones or meetings will be facilitated through one informal 

meeting, phone conversations, and emails. Additional meetings and preparation of plans and 

exhibits for such meetings beyond those specified will be considered an additional service. 

Task 2 – Landscape Lighting Layout 

CONSULTANT will prepare layout plans for landscape lighting improvements based upon the 

Owner’s design input and construction budget, as described below: 

A. Landscape lighting layout, based on fixtures recommended or selected by the Owner. Landscape 

lighting will be limited to approximately 30 fixtures that highlight trees and palms in the medians. 

B. Drawings for these items will be of sufficient detail for bidding of the landscape accent lighting 

improvements. 

C. Submittal revisions to plans based on Owner comments are limited to one re-submittal at the 

project milestone submittal (100%).



Task 3 - Irrigation Design and Construction Documents 

CONSULTANT will prepare irrigation plan drawings and details for a master irrigation system designed 

to provide 100% irrigation coverage for all landscaped areas associated with the above-mentioned 

task. 

A. We will begin this task after the 50% planting plans have been informally reviewed and accepted by 

the Owner in order to proceed with a finalized design. CONSULTANT will provide the following 

irrigation design services: 

� Coordination with Owner to determine preferred equipment, installation detailing, and other 

factors that will affect the irrigation design. 

� Calculation of irrigation system requirements based on water application per week and water 

window availability as determined by local municipality and within parameters of then-current 

Water Management District watering restrictions. 

� Determination of project irrigated acreage. 

� Irrigation mainline and sub-mainline sizing with recommended routing. 

� Coordination with project civil engineer for sleeve and mainline routing, as applicable. 

� Evaluation and recommendation for locations and sizes of irrigation sleeves to be utilized for 

mainlines, lateral lines and control valve wiring. 

� Master central control evaluation and recommendation. Includes analysis of system operation. 

A conceptual irrigation operation schedule for the development will be included. 

� Recommendation for irrigation controller location. 

� Preparation of irrigation details such as irrigation controllers. 

� Preparation of material legend of all components. 

� Preparation of head layout, schedule, notes and specifications for irrigation system. 

B. Drawings for these items will be of sufficient detail for bidding and construction of the landscape 

improvements. 

C. Submittal revisions to plans based on Owner comments are limited to a total of one re-submittal at 

the project milestone submittal (100%). 

Task 4 - Electrical Design and Construction Documents 

CONSULTANT will engage the services of a professional electrical engineer subconsultant to prepare 

lighting design plan drawings and details for irrigation controllers and for landscape lighting associated 

with the project. 

A. CONSULTANT will begin this task after the 50% planting plans have been informally reviewed and 

accepted by the Owner in order to proceed with a finalized design. The following services will be 

provided: 

� Electrical service and distribution design for up to two (2) service locations in the corridor to 

provide power to the landscape lighting systems and irrigation system controllers. 

� Wiring and equipment controller design for landscape lighting features.



� Conduit design for electrical features. 

� Preparation of material legend of all components. 

� Preparation of details and specifications, as required. 

� Coordinate with FPL for electrical power service(s) as necessary throughout the project 

location. 

� Prepare an opinion of probable construction cost estimate. 

B. Drawings for these items will be of sufficient detail for bidding and construction of the electrical 

improvements. The design shall be in accordance with Illuminating Engineering Society standards, 

the National Electrical Code and applicable local codes. 

C. Submittal revisions to plans based on Owner comments are limited to a total of one re-submittal 

per project milestone submittal (100%). 

Task 5 Survey of Utility Exploration Pothole Locations 

1. Recover the horizontal and vertical control for use during the locations. 

2. Locate the potholes for location and elevation. 

3. Plot the potholes in CADD file. 

The survey work will be performed at one time based on the identified locations in the utility conflict 

matrix prepared in October 2009. Any new locations or revisions to already identified locations 

requiring the surveyor to make a new trip to the field will be considered additional services.



Task 6 Equestrian Crossing Design at Pierson Road Intersection 

The scope consists of upgrading the current design of the east-west equestrian crossing which runs 

along the South side of Pierson Road across South Shore Blvd. The area of the work is defined as the 

southwest and southeast corners of the intersection. The scope consists of providing design for an 

equestrian staging area at each of those corners. Due to right-of-way constraints, CONSULTANT will 

provide two alternate designs one for staging or waiting areas within existing right-of-way and the 

other with minor encroachments outside road of right-of-way. The two designs will be included in the 

construction plans as bid alternates. Existing right-of-way in this scope is defined as the road right-ofway 

lines shown on the 65% phase plans or any right-of-way revisions provided by Owner through 

title search or other means prior to start of staging area design. This scope doesn’t include title search 

or further research on existing right-of-way lines. Any revisions to existing right-of-way lines after 

design had commenced requiring redesign of staging areas will be handled as an additional service. 

CONSULTANT will also provide design of advanced warning flashing lights on horse crossing sign on 

South Shore Blvd. north and south of the intersection. The lights will be designed to operate with the 

signal at the intersection so that when the equestrian intersection crossing signal is actuated and 

South Shore Blvd traffic is stopped at the red light, the advanced warning lights will turn on. The 

staging area design will consist of a wider waiting area to allow equestrians to wait just before 

crossing. Those areas will receive fence and ground cover vegetation treatment where appropriate. 

The design will be concentrated on the areas behind the proposed curb and gutter as shown on the 

65% phase plans. Roadway, traffic lanes and bridal path geometry along South Shore Blvd will 

remain as currently proposed. The design when completed will be included on the roadway plan 

sheets and construction plans and submitted with the project’s next phase submittal. The signal plans 

will be revised to include the advance warning lights. The scope does not include any public meetings. 

Major revisions to the design of the staging area design will be considered additional services. 

ADDITIONAL SERVICES 

CONSULTANT will remain available to provide additional services at the request of the Owner as per 

the Contract’s Rate Schedule. Additional services CONSULTANT can provide include, but are not 

limited to, the following: 

� Revisions to plans due to substantial changes in project scope or budget, or substantial 

changes to the site after the 75% construction plans have been submitted. 

The Owner and CONSULTANT will mutually-agree on the completion of the 75% construction 

plans after same level of drawings has been presented to the Owner. 

� Design along side or intersecting streets outside of South Shore right-of-way. 

� Additional Submittals, beyond the two (2) submittals included in the scope above, based on 

comments generated by Owner. 

� Attendance at meetings beyond those accounted for in the landscape architectural services 

listed above. 

� Construction phase services. 

� Irrigation pump and well sizing and specification 

� Hardscape design and associated construction documents for site features such as: 

decorative specialty paving, trellis, fountain, seatwall, boardwalk, or other Owner-requested 

feature not accounted for in the scope of services above.



� Preparation of “record” drawings. 

� Permit applications or processing beyond those necessary for site plan approval. 

� Arboriculture services. 

� Signage, wayfinding standards and/or design. 

� Irrigation meter permit submittal or water use permit submittal to SFWMD or governing 

municipality. 

� Additional equestrian crossing treatments. 

SCHEDULE 

CONSULTANT will complete the scope of services by February 19, 2010. 

FEE AND BILLING 

CONSULTANT will provide the services described in the scope of services will be performed for a 

lump sum fee as shown below. 

Task 1 Planting Design $8,800 

Task 2 Accent Lighting Design $2,900 

Task 3 Irrigation Design $5,700 

Task 4 Electrical Design $4,800 

Task 5 Survey of Utility Potholes $1,950 

Task 6 Equestrian Crossing Design $3,350 

Total: $27,500


6. I 




AGENDA ITEM NAME: Approval of agreement with Sweetwater Environmental Inc. for Sludge 

Hauling Services 





FIRST READING 


REQUEST: Approve the request by the Utilities Department to award Bid#041-09/BJJ "Sludge 

Hauling Services" to Sweetwater Environmental, Inc. located in Sebring, FL. 

EXPLANATION: Wellington solicited bids for the hauling/disposal and monitoring of wastewater 

bio solids, which includes safe disposal of Wastewater Treatment Bio Solid Sludge product. On 

November 17, 2009 Wellington sent out bid specifications to twenty five (25) prospective bidders 

through DemandStar. Wellington received four (4) responses (H & H Liquid Sludge Disposal, 

Sweetwater Environmental, Terra Renewal & T. Wayne Hill Trucking). The Purchasing 

Department reviewed all proposals and determined they met the required specifications. The 

Selection Committee met and evaluated the proposals and recommends awarding the contract 

to the highest rated bidder, Sweetwater Environmental Inc. Additionally, Sweetwater 

Environmental Inc. offered the lowest price with an estimated annual cost of $201,435.00. 

LEGAL SUFFICIENCY: Yes 

FISCAL IMPACT: Sufficient Funding is allocated in the FY 2010 budget in the Treatment Plant 

Maintenance line items. 

VILLAGE GOAL: Protecting our Investment 

RECOMMENDATION: Council approval to award sludge hauling services to Sweetwater 

Environmental, Inc. as presented, contingent upon funding and legal approval as presented.





WELLINGTON, FLORIDA APPROVING AN AWARD OF A CONTRACT FOR 

SLUDGE HAULING SERVICES TO SWEETWATER ENVIRONMENTAL 

SERVICES, INC. CONTINGENT ON THEIR DEMONSTRATION TO THE 

UTILITIES DIRECTOR THEY HAVE PERMITTED ACCESS TO APPRORIATE 

DISPOSAL SITES ON OR BEFORE FEBRUARY 19, 2010, PRIMARILY THAT 

IN THE EVENT SWEETWATER ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES, INC. IS 

UNABLE TO SECURE ACCESS TO SUCH DISPOSAL SITES WITHIN THE 

TIMES SPECIFIED, WELLINGTON STAFF SHALL AWARD THE CONTRACT 

FOR SLUDGE HAULING SERVICES TO THE CURRENT VENDOR TERRA 

RENEWAL; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. 

WHEREAS, Wellington solicited a request for proposals Bid# 041-09/BJJ “Sludge Hauling 

Services”; and 

WHEREAS, a selection committee determined that Sweetwater Environmental 

Services, Inc. was the highest ranked proposer and the current vendor Terra Renewal, 

the second highest ranked vendor; and 

WHEREAS, in order to provide sludge hauling services it is necessary as reflected 

in §3.10 “Disposal Site” of the Invitation to Bid’s General Conditions to have FDEP 

approved disposal site(s) available to the contractor to dispose of the sludge material; 

and 

WHEREAS, as of the date of this contract award, Sweetwater Environmental 

Services Inc. has not secured access to the necessary FDEP approved disposal sites; 

and 

WHEREAS, the parties anticipate that permits to utilize approved sites will be 

forthcoming; and 

WHEREAS, the Sweetwater Environmental Services Inc. is to begin providing 

sludge hauling services on March 1, 2010; and 

WHEREAS, in the event Sweetwater Environmental Services, Inc., has not 

demonstrated to the Utilities Director, by February 19, 2010 that they have secured 

access to approved FDEP disposal sites, than this contract award shall be null and void; 

and 

WHEREAS, the current vendor Terra Renewal does have access to approved 

disposal sites; and 

WHEREAS, Terra Renewal was the second highest ranked vendor.





SECTION 1. The above recitals are true and correct and adopted herein. 

SECTION 2. The award of the sludge hauling services contract to Sweetwater Environmental 

Services, Inc. shall become effective March 1, 2010 through February 28, 2011 and 

approved and the Mayor and Village Clerk are authorized to execute the Agreement for 

sludge hauling services provided that as a condition precedent to the effectiveness of the 

contract Sweetwater Environmental Services, Inc. shall demonstrate to the Utilities 

Director’s sole and exclusive satisfaction that they have secured access to FDEP 

approved disposal sites on or before February 19, 2010. 

SECTION 3. In the event Sweetwater Environmental Services, Inc. is unable to 

demonstrate to the Utilities Director they have complied with the condition precedent to 

their providing services, the contract shall be deemed null and void and the Mayor and 

Village Clerk are authorized to execute a contract for sludge hauling services for the 

period of March 1, 2010 through February 28, 2011 with Terra Renewal, in accordance 

with the proposal they submitted as the second highest ranked responder to Bid# 041- 

09/BJJ “Sludge Hauling Services”. 


PASSED AND ADOPTED this _____ day of January, 2010. 


BY:__________________________ BY: ___________________________ 




BY:__________________________ 




AGREEMENT FOR 


THIS AGREEMENT is made this ____ day of ________, 2010, by and between the Village of 

Wellington, a municipal corporation (hereinafter referred to as “WELLINGTON”), whose address is 

14000 Greenbriar Boulevard, Wellington, Florida 33414 and Sweetwater Environmental, Inc. 

(hereinafter referred to as “VENDOR”), whose address is 2367 Us Highway 27 S, Sebring, Fl. 33870. 

WHEREAS, VENDOR bid on that certain specifications and bid documents for Sludge Hauling 

Services, bid number 41-09 (hereinafter referred to as “Project”), issued by WELLINGTON; and 

WHEREAS, VENDOR has been deemed to be the responsive bidder, and WELLINGTON 

desires to award the agreement to VENDOR on the terms and conditions more particularly described 

below and as contained in the specifications and bid documents for Sludge Hauling Services, bid 

number 41-09, and VENDOR’S response thereto, all of which are hereinafter incorporated by 

reference and are referred to as “Specifications and Bid Documents”; and 

WHEREAS, VENDOR is desirous of entering into the agreement with WELLINGTON pursuant 

to the terms and conditions more particularly described herein and pursuant to the Specifications and 

Bid Documents. 

NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual promises contained herein and other good 

and valuable consideration of which the parties hereto acknowledge, the parties agree as follows: 

1. The above recitals are true and correct and are incorporated herein by reference. 

2. VENDOR shall perform the services and duties as provided for in the Specifications and Bid 

Documents and comply with all of the terms provided for in the Specifications and Bid Documents. 

3. The contract period is effective March 1, 2010 through February 28, 2011, with the option to 

renew for up to two (2) additional one (1) year periods. As a condition precedent to the contract being 

effective VENDOR shall demonstrate, to the satisfaction of Wellington’s Utility Director, by February 

19, 2010, that VENDOR has secured disposal sites for the sludge material. In the event VENDOR is 

unable to demonstrate that it has permitted sites available to VENDOR, this agreement shall be null 

and void. The determination of the Utilities Director, shall be put in writing and shall be final and non 

appealable. In the event the Utilities Director determines the sites are unsuitable or unavailable to 

VENDOR, VENDOR shall have no recourse or rights under this agreement and shall have no claim 

for damages against Wellington. 

4. The Agreement term shall be in accordance with the Specifications and Bid Documents. The 

Agreement amount shall be in accordance with the Specifications and Bid Documents, and all 

services and products to be purchased and work to be performed shall be done via a purchase order 

in such form as determined by WELLINGTON. Nothing herein, however, shall prevent WELLINGTON 

from seeking a budget amendment should it require additional sums of money for this Project and a 

change in the scope of services. All purchases pursuant to this Agreement shall be done in 

accordance with WELLINGTON’S Purchasing and Procurement Manual and procedures thereto. All 

purchases shall be evidenced by such approved purchase orders. 

5. VENDOR shall provide to WELLINGTON all services, work, and products that are necessary 

to fulfill its obligations pursuant to the Project and the Specifications and Bid Documents. All prices for 

the items and work herein shall be in accordance with VENDOR’S response to the Project and in



accordance with the Specifications and Bid Documents. All purchases shall be evidenced by a 

purchase order from WELLINGTON. 

6. VENDOR shall maintain all insurance as is required by the Specifications and Bid Documents. 

Prior to commencing any work, performing services, or supplying products, VENDOR shall provide to 

WELLINGTON such insurance coverage that WELLINGTON has requested in the Specifications and 

Bid Documents. In addition, VENDOR agrees to provide to WELLINGTON such other insurance 

coverage requested by WELLINGTON’S Department of Risk Management and with such coverage 

amounts and deductibles as is requested by such Department. In addition, prior to commencing any 

work or supplying any products pursuant to the Project or the Specifications and Bid Documents, 

VENDOR agrees to provide to WELLINGTON Payment and Performance Bonds written on such 

forms that are provided by WELLINGTON and in such amounts so as to cover and assure the faithful 

performance of VENDOR pursuant to the terms herein and in the Specifications and Bid Documents. 

The amount of such bonds and the form of such bonds shall be determined by WELLINGTON and 

shall be in conformance with Section 255.05, Florida Statutes, if applicable. 

7. All renewals of this Agreement shall be pursuant to the Specifications and Bid Documents. 

This Agreement and any renewals thereto are subject to annual appropriations by Wellington, and 

this Agreement is subject to fiscal funding out by WELLINGTON. 

8. VENDOR agrees, warrants, covenants, and represents that all products, work, and services 

that it shall perform pursuant to this Agreement, the Project, and the Specifications and Bid 

Documents as it relates to WELLINGTON, including any work done by its subcontractors or at its 

direction, shall be free from all defects and done in a workmanlike manner. VENDOR warrants the 

merchantability and fitness of the products and services as contemplated in this Agreement, the 

Project, and the Specifications and Bid Documents. VENDOR agrees to warrant the products, work, 

and services for a period of one (1) year from the date of acceptance of the work by WELLINGTON or 

for such warranty period as provided in the Specifications and Bid Documents, whichever is greater. 

9. VENDOR agrees to supply to WELLINGTON adequate personnel to provide timely completion 

of all projects and support contemplated by this Agreement and pursuant to the Project and the 

Specifications and Bid Documents. The parties hereto agree that time is of the essence, and 

VENDOR agrees to pay such liquidated damages as are provided for in the Specifications and Bid 

Documents and as are determined by WELLINGTON for failure to comply with such timelines as 

provided for therein. 

10. VENDOR agrees to indemnify and hold harmless WELLINGTON, its officers, and employees 

from any and all liabilities, damages, losses, suits, actions, claims, and/or matters, including costs and 

reasonable attorney’s fees, to the extent caused by the negligence, gross negligence, or intentionally 

wrongful conduct of VENDOR and any other persons or entities employed or utilized by VENDOR in 

performance of this Agreement, the Project, and the Specifications and Bid Documents. This 

indemnification is in addition to the indemnification found in the Specifications and Bid Documents. 

11. In performance of its obligations hereunder, VENDOR agrees to comply with all applicable 

laws, rules, regulations, orders, codes, criteria, and standards, whether state or federal. 

12. WELLINGTON reserves the right to accept the use of a subcontractor or to reject the selection 

of a particular subcontractor. If a subcontractor fails to perform as required by this Agreement and it is 

necessary to replace the subcontractor in order to provide services as required, VENDOR shall 

promptly do so, subject to acceptance of the new subcontractor by WELLINGTON.



13. The parties to this Agreement understand that WELLINGTON is a tax-exempt organization; 

nothing herein, however, shall exempt VENDOR from paying all of its taxes pursuant to this 

Agreement. 

14. In addition to any other termination provisions found in the Specifications and Bid Documents, 

this Agreement may be terminated by VENDOR upon thirty (30) days’ prior written notice to 

WELLINGTON in the event of substantial failure by WELLINGTON to perform in accordance with the 

terms of this Agreement through no fault of VENDOR. In addition to any other termination provisions 

found in the Specifications and Bid Documents, this Agreement may be terminated by WELLINGTON, 

with or without cause, upon thirty (30) days’ written notice to VENDOR. Unless VENDOR is in breach 

of this Agreement, VENDOR shall be paid for services and products rendered to WELLINGTON’S 

satisfaction up to the date of termination. After receipt of a termination notice, and except as otherwise 

directed by WELLINGTON, VENDOR shall stop work on the date specified. VENDOR shall not be 

entitled to any claim of loss of profits from a termination by WELLINGTON. 

15. Neither WELLINGTON nor VENDOR shall be considered to be in default of this Agreement if 

delays in or failure of performance shall be due to Uncontrollable Forces, the effect of which, by the 

exercise of reasonable diligence, the nonperforming party could not avoid. The term “Uncontrollable 

Forces” shall mean any event that results in the prevention or delay of performance by a party of its 

obligations under this Agreement and which is beyond the reasonable control of the nonperforming 

party. It includes, but is not limited to, fire, flood, earthquake, storms, lightning, epidemic, war, riots, 

civil disturbance, sabotage, and governmental actions. 

Neither party shall, however, be excused from performance if nonperformance is due to forces which 

are preventable, removable, or remediable, and which the nonperforming party could have, with the 

exercise of reasonable diligence, prevented, removed, or remedied with reasonable dispatch. The 

nonperforming party shall, within a reasonable time of being prevented or delayed from performance 

by an uncontrollable force, give written notice to the other party describing the circumstances and 

uncontrollable forces preventing continued performance of the obligations of this Agreement. 

16. This Agreement shall be construed in accordance with the laws of the State of Florida. Should 

any dispute arise from this Agreement, venue shall lie in Palm Beach County, Florida. 

17. This Agreement shall not be construed against the party who drafted the same as all parties to 

this Agreement have had legal and business experts review the adequacy of the same. 

18. This Agreement is binding upon the parties hereto, their heirs, successors, and assigns. 

19. VENDOR warrants and represents that all of its employees are treated equally during 

employment without regard to race, color, religion, gender, age, or national origin. 

20. A waiver by either WELLINGTON or VENDOR of any breach of this Agreement shall not be 

binding upon the waiving party unless such waiver is in writing. In the event of a written waiver, such 

a waiver shall not affect the waiving party’s rights with respect to any other or further breach. The 

making or acceptance of a payment by either party with knowledge of the existence of a default or 

breach shall not operate or be construed to operate as a waiver of any subsequent default or breach. 

21. The invalidity, illegality, unenforceability of any provision of this Agreement, or the occurrence 

of any event rending any portion or provision of this Agreement void shall in no way affect the validity 

or enforceability of any other portion or provision of the Agreement. Any void provision shall be 

deemed severed from the Agreement, and the balance of the Agreement shall be construed and



enforced as if the Agreement did not contain the particular portion or provision held to be void. The 

parties further agree to reform the Agreement to replace any stricken provision with a valid provision 

that comes as close as possible to the intent of the stricken provision. 

The provisions of this section shall not prevent the entire Agreement from being void should a 

provision, which is of the essence of the Agreement, be determined to be void. 

22. WELLINGTON and VENDOR agree that this Agreement sets forth the entire agreement 

between the parties, and that there are no promises or understandings other than those stated herein. 

This Agreement supersedes all prior agreements, contracts, proposals, representations, negotiations, 

letters, or other communications between WELLINGTON and VENDOR pertaining to this Agreement, 

whether written or oral. None of the provisions, terms, and conditions contained in the Agreement 

may be added to, modified, superseded, or otherwise altered, except by written instrument executed 

by the parties hereto. 

23. This Agreement may not be modified unless such modifications are evidenced in writing, 

signed by both WELLINGTON and VENDOR. Such modifications shall be in the form of a written 

amendment executed by both parties. 

24. Any notice, demand, communication, or request required or permitted hereunder shall be in 

writing and delivered in person or sent by certified mail, postage prepaid as follows: 

As to WELLINGTON: 

Manager 

Wellington 

14000 Greenbriar Blvd. 

Wellington, FL 33414 

As to VENDOR: 

_________________________ 

Notices shall be effective when received at the addresses as specified above. Changes in the 

respective addresses to which such notice is to be directed may be made from time to time by either 

party by written notice to the other party. Facsimile transmission is acceptable notice effective when 

received; however, facsimile transmission received (i.e., printed) after 5:00 p.m. or on weekends or 

holidays will be deemed received on the next business day. The original of the notice must 

additionally be mailed as required herein. 

Nothing contained in this section shall be construed to restrict the transmission of routine 

communications between representatives of VENDOR and WELLINGTON. 

25. This agreement shall automatically become null and void on January 31, 2010 if vendor fails 

to: 1) Secure permitted land application sites suitable for the land application of Wellington sludge and 

provide documentation for same and 2) Secure trailers and other equipment in accordance with the 

bid documents suitable for hauling and land applying Wellington sludge.



IN WITNESS WHEREOF, WELLINGTON and VENDOR have executed this Agreement all as 

of the day and year first above written. 


By:_____________________________ By:_____________________________ 


APPROVED AS TO FORM AND (SEAL) 


By:_____________________________ 

Village Attorney 

WITNESS: VENDOR 

________________________________ By:_____________________________ 

________________________________ 

(CORPORATE SEAL)



INVITATION TO BID 

The Wellington Village Council is requesting sealed bids from qualified contractors to furnish 

all labor, equipment and expertise to haul and dispose of sludge for the Utilities Department in 

Wellington. 

All Bids must be received in sealed envelopes with a signed original and three (3) copies in the 

Village Clerk’s Office, no later than 3:00 p.m. local time on Monday, November 17, 2009 at which 

time all Bids will be publicly opened and read. Receipt of a response by any Village office, 

receptionist or personnel other than the Purchasing Department does not constitute “receipt” as 

required by this solicitation. 

BID #041-09/BJJ “SLUDGE HAULING SERVICES” 

Copies of this Bid Document may be obtained on DemandStar at www.demandstar.com or by 

contacting the Purchasing Department at 561 791-4101 

All bids must be sealed when submitted and be delivered or mailed to: 

Village of Wellington 

Village Clerks Office 



A Bid Bond of $4,000.00 must be submitted with Bid 

ACCEPTANCE AND REJECTIONS 

The Village reserves the right to accept or reject any or all Bids (in whole or in part) with or without 

cause, to waive any technicalities, irregularities or formalities, or to accept the Bid(s) which in its 

judgment best serves the Village. 

Publish: Palm Beach Post/November 4, 2009 

Account #9-657448 


BID #041-09/BJJ



TABLE OF CONTENTS 

General Conditions 8 pages 

Special Conditions 4 pages 

Performance Specifications 4 pages 

Bid Bond 3 pages 

Performance Bond 3 pages 

Proposal Check List 1 page 

Bid Form 3 pages 

Vendor Service Information 1 page 

Contract Experience 1 page 

References 1 page 

Equipment & Disposal Site Location 1 page 

Drug Free Workplace Form 1 page 

Agreement 5 pages




1.0 GENERAL CONDITIONS 

BID #041-09/BJJ 

1.1 SEALED BIDS: 

Original copy of Bid Form as well as any other pertinent documents must be returned in order 

for the Bid to be considered for award. All Bids are subject to the conditions specified herein 

and on the attached Special Conditions, Specifications and Bid Form. 

The completed Bid must be submitted in a sealed envelope clearly marked with the Bid Title 

and number to the Purchasing Department, Village of Wellington, 14000 Greenbriar Blvd. 

Wellington, Florida 33414 on date due. 

1.2 EXECUTION OF BID: 

The Bid must contain a manual signature of an authorized representative in the space provided 

on the Bid Form. Failure to properly sign Bid shall invalidate same and it shall NOT be 

considered for award. All Bids must be completed in pen or be typewritten. No erasures are 

permitted. If a correction is necessary draw a single line through the entered figure and enter 

the corrected figure above it. Corrections must be initialed by the person signing the Bid. Any 

illegible entries, pencil Bids or corrections not initialed will not be tabulated. The original Bid 

conditions and specifications CANNOT be changed or altered in any way after submitted to the 

Village. 

1.3 PRICES QUOTED: 

Deduct trade discounts and quote firm net prices. Give both unit price and extended total, when 

requested. Prices must be stated in units of quantity specified in the Bid specifications. In case 

of discrepancy in computing the amount of the Bid, the UNIT PRICE quoted will govern. All 

prices must be F.O.B. destination, freight prepaid (unless otherwise stated in special 

conditions). Discounts to be given for prompt payment. Award, if made, will be in accordance 

with terms and conditions stated herein. Each item must be proposed separately and no 

attempt is to be made to tie any item or items in with any other item or items. Cash or quantity 

discounts offered will not be a consideration in determination of award of Bid(s). All prices 

quoted shall be guaranteed for 60 days from Bid date unless otherwise specified in Special 

Conditions. 

1.3.1 TAXES: 

The Village of Wellington is exempt from all Federal Excise and State taxes. The 

applicable tax exemption number is shown on the Purchase Order. 

1.3.2 MISTAKES: 

Bidders are expected to examine the specifications, delivery schedules, Bid prices 

and extensions and all instructions pertaining to supplies and services. Failure to do so 

will be at the bidder’s risk. 

1.3.3 UNDERWRITERS’ LABORATORIES: 

Unless otherwise stipulated in the Bid, all manufactured items and fabricated 

assemblies shall be U.L. listed or re-examination listing where such has been 

established by U.L. for the item(s) offered and furnished. 

1.3.4 BID’S CONDITIONS: 

The Village reserves the right to waive irregularities in Bids or to reject all Bids or any 

part of any Bid deemed necessary for the best interest of the Village of Wellington, 

Florida.



1.6 EQUIVALENTS: 

NOT USED 

1.7 NON-CONFORMANCE TO CONTRACT CONDITIONS: 

Items may be tested for compliance with specifications. Any item delivered, not conforming to 

specifications, may be rejected and returned at bidder’s expense. These items and items not 

delivered as per delivery date in Bid and/or purchase order may be purchased on the open 

market. Any increase in cost may be charged against the bidder. Any violation of these 

stipulations may also result in Bidder’s Name being removed from the vendor list. 

1.8 SAMPLES: 

NOT USED 

1.9 DELIVERY: 

NOT USED 

1.10 INTERPRETATIONS: 

Unless otherwise stated in the Bid, any questions concerning conditions and specifications 

should be submitted in writing to the Purchasing Department, 14000 Greenbriar Boulevard, 

Wellington, Florida 33414 Facsimile (561) 791-4740. 

1.11 AWARDS: 

The Village of Wellington reserves the right to reject all Bids or any portion of any Bid deemed 

necessary for the best interest of the Village; to accept any item or group of items; to acquire 

additional quantities at prices quoted on the Bid Form unless additional quantities are not 

acceptable, in which case the Bid Form must be noted “BID IS FOR SPECIFIED QUANTITY 

ONLY”. All awards made as a result of this Bid shall conform to applicable Florida Statutes. 

1.12 BID OPENING: 

Bids shall be opened and publicly read in the Purchasing Department, 14000 Greenbriar, 

Wellington, Florida 33414 on the date and at the time specified on the Bid Form. All Bids 

received after that time shall be returned, unopened. 

1.13 INSPECTION, ACCEPTANCE & TITLE: 

NOT USED 

1.14 PAYMENT: 

Payment will be made by the Village after the services awarded to a bidder have been 

performed and found to comply with award specifications, and properly invoiced. 

1.15 DISPUTES: 

Any actual or prospective Bidder, proposer, offeror or Contractor who is aggrieved in connection 

with a solicitation or award of a Bid or Contract may avail themselves of the procedures 

contained in Ordinance 98-36 in order to resolve disputed matters or complaints. 

The Purchasing Director shall post a tabulation of the Bid results with intended award 

recommendations. Posting shall be in the office of the Village Clerk and shall be on display for 

public viewing. All bidders, proposers, offerors or contractors affected by the proposed award of 

contract will also be notified by the Purchasing Director at the time of posting, via telefax or 

other means, of the intended award. 

Any actual or prospective bidder, proposer, offeror, or contractor who is aggrieved in connection 

with the solicitation or award of contract may file a written protest to the Purchasing Director. 

Protestors shall file their written protests with the Purchasing Director between the hours of 8:00 

a.m. and 5:00 p.m. Protests shall contain the name, address and phone number of the 

petitioner, name of petitioner’s representative (if applicable), the name and bid number of the


. 


solicitation. The protest shall specifically describe the subject matter, facts giving rise to the 

protest and also the action requested from the Village. 

The written protest must be received no later than 72 consecutive hours (excluding Saturdays, 

Sundays and legal holidays) from the time of initial posting. Failure to file a timely formal written 

protest within the time period specified shall constitute a waiver by the vendor of all rights of 

protest under this Bid/Proposal Protest Procedure. 

In the event of a timely protest, the Village shall not proceed further with the solicitation or with 

the award of the bid/contract until all administrative remedies have been exhausted or until the 

Village Manager determines that the award of the bid/contract without delay is necessary to 

protect the public health, welfare or safety. 

1.16 LEGAL REQUIREMENTS: 

Federal, State, county and Village laws, ordinances, rules and regulations that in any manner 

affect the items covered herein apply. Lack of knowledge by the bidder will in no way be a 

cause for relief from responsibility. 

1.17 INDEMNIFICATION: 

Regardless of the coverage provided by any insurance, the successful bidder/proposer shall 

indemnify, save harmless and defend the Village, its agents, servants, or employees from and 

against any and all claims, liability, losses and/or causes of action which may arise from any 

negligent act or omission of the successful bidder/proposer, its subcontractors, agents, servants 

or employees during the course of performing services or caused by the goods provided 

pursuant to these bid documents and/or resultant contract. 

1.18 PATENTS & ROYALTIES: 

The bidder, without exception, shall indemnify and save harmless the Village of Wellington, 

Florida and its employees from liability of any nature or kind, including cost and expenses for, or 

on account of, any copyrighted, patented, or unpatented invention, process, or article 

manufactured or used in the performance of the contract, including its use by The Village of 

Wellington, Florida. If the bidder uses any design, device or materials covered by letters, 

patent, or copyright, it is mutually understood and agreed, without exception, that the Bid prices 

shall include all royalties or cost arising from the use of such design, device, or materials in any 

way involved in the work. 

1.19 OSHA: 

The bidder warrants that the product and services supplied to the Village of Wellington, Florida 

shall conform in all respects to the standards set forth in the Occupational Safety and Health Act 

of 1970, as amended, and the failure to comply with this condition will be considered as a 

breach of contract. Any fines levied because of inadequacies to comply with these 

requirements shall be borne solely by the bidder responsible for same. 

1.19A SAFETY PRECAUTIONS: 

The bidder shall, if required, maintain suitable and sufficient guards and barriers and, at night, 

suitable and sufficient lighting for the prevention of accidents and all minimum safety standards 

required by municipal, County, State and Federal ordinances and laws shall be strictly met by 

the bidder 

1.20 SPECIAL CONDITIONS: 

Any and all Special Conditions that may vary from these General Conditions shall have 

precedence. 

1.21 ANTI-DISCRIMINATION:



The bidder certifies compliance with the non-discrimination clause contained in Section 202, 

Executive Order 11246, as amended by Executive Order 11375, relative to equal employment 

opportunity for all persons without regard to race, color, religion, sex or national origin. 

1.22 QUALITY: 

NOT USED 

1.23 LIABILITY, INSURANCE, LICENSES AND PERMITS: 

Where bidders are required to enter or go onto Village of Wellington property to deliver 

materials or perform work or services as a result of a Bid award, the successful bidder will 

assume the full duty, obligation and expense of obtaining all necessary licenses, permits and 

insurance and assure all work complies with all Palm Beach County and Village of Wellington 

building requirements and the Florida Building Code. The bidder shall be liable for any 

damages or loss to the Village occasioned by negligence of the bidder (or agent) or any person 

the bidder has designated in the completion of the contract as a result of the Bid. 

1.24 BID BONDS, PERFORMANCE BONDS, CERTIFICATES OF INSURANCE: 

Bid Bonds, when required, shall be submitted with the Bid in the amount specified in Special 

Conditions. After acceptance of Bid, the Village will notify the successful bidder to submit a 

performance bond and certificate of insurance in the amount specified in Special Conditions. 

1.25 DEFAULT/FAILURE TO PERFORM: 

The Village shall be the sole judge of nonperformance, which shall include any failure on the 

part of the successful bidder to accept the award, to furnish required documents, and/or to fulfill 

any portion of this contract within the time stipulated. 

Upon default by the successful bidder to meet any terms of this agreement, the Village will 

notify the bidder three (3) days (weekends and holidays excluded) to remedy the default. 

Failure on the contractor’s part to correct the default within the required three (3) days shall 

result in the contract being terminated and upon the Village notifying in writing the contractor of 

its intentions and the effective date of the termination. The following shall constitute default: 

A) Failure to perform the work required under the contract and/or within the time required or 

failing to use the subcontractors, entities and personnel as identified and set forth, and to 

the degree specified in the contract. 

B) Failure to begin the work under this contract within the time specified. 

C) Failure to perform the work with sufficient workers and equipment or with sufficient 

materials to ensure timely completion. 

D) Neglecting or refusing to remove materials or perform new work where prior work has been 

rejected as non conforming with the terms of the contract. 

E) Becoming insolvent, being declared bankrupt, or committing act of bankruptcy or 

insolvency, or making an assignment renders the successful bidder incapable of performing 

the work in accordance with and as required by the contract. 

F) Failure to comply with any of the terms of the contract in any material respect. 

In the event of default of a contract, the successful bidder shall pay all attorney’s fees and court 

costs incurred in collecting any damages. The successful bidder shall pay the Village for any 

and all costs incurred in ensuing the completion of the project. 

1.26 CANCELLATION: 

The Village of Wellington reserves the right to cancel this contract by written notice to the 

contractor effective the date specified in the notice should any of the following apply: 

A) The contractor is determined by the Village to be in breach of any of the terms and 

conditions of the contract and/or to have failed to perform his/her services in a manner 

satisfactory to the Village. In the event the contractor is found to be in default, the 

contractor will be paid for all labor and materials provided as of the termination date. No



consideration will be given for anticipated loss of revenue or the canceled portions of the 

contract. 

B) The Village has determined that such cancellation will be in the best interest of the Village 

to cancel the contract for its own convenience. 

C) Funds are not available to cover the cost of the services. The Village’s obligation is 

contingent upon the availability of appropriate funds. 

1.27 BILLING INSTRUCTIONS: 

Invoices, unless otherwise indicated, must show purchase order numbers and shall be 

submitted in DUPLICATE to Accounts Payable, Village of Wellington, 14000 Greenbriar, 

Wellington, Florida 33414. 

1.28 SUBSTITUTIONS: 

NOT USED 

1.29 FACILITIES: 

NOT USED 

1.30 BID TABULATIONS: 

Bidders desiring a copy of the Bid tabulation may request same by enclosing a self-addressed 

stamped envelope with the Bid. 

1.31 APPLICABLE LAW AND VENUE: 

The law of the state of Florida shall govern the contract between the Village of Wellington and 

the successful bidder and any action shall be brought in Palm Beach County, Florida. In the 

event of litigation to settle issues arising hereunder, the prevailing party in such litigation shall 

be entitled to recover against the other party its costs and expenses, including reasonable 

attorney fees, which shall include any fees and costs attributable to appellate proceedings 

arising on and of such litigation. 

1.32 CLARIFICATION AND ADDENDA TO BID SPECIFICATIONS: 

If any person contemplating submitting a Bid under this Invitation for Bid is in doubt as to the 

true meaning of the specifications or other Bid documents or any part thereof, the Bidder must 

submit to the Village of Wellington Purchasing Contract Manager at least seven (7) calendar 

days prior to scheduled Bid opening, a request for clarification. All such requests for 

clarification must be made in writing and the person submitting the request will be responsible 

for its timely delivery. 

Any interpretation of the Bid, if made, will be made only by Addendum duly issued by the Village 

of Wellington Purchasing Contract Manager. The Village shall issue an Informational 

Addendum if clarification or minimal changes are required. The Village shall issue a Formal 

Addendum if substantial changes which impact the technical submission of Bids is required. A 

copy of such Addendum will be sent to each Bidder receiving the Invitation for Bid. In the event 

of conflict with the original Contract Documents, Addendum shall govern all other Contract 

Documents to the extent specified. Subsequent addendum shall govern over prior addendum 

only to the extent specified. 

1.33 AWARD OF CONTRACT: 

A) A contract may be awarded to the lowest responsive, responsible Bidder(s) whose Bid(s), 

conforming to the Invitation for Bid, is most advantageous to the Village of Wellington. The 

lowest responsive, responsible Bidder(s) will be determined in conjunction with the method of 

award which is described in the Special Conditions. Tie Bids will be decided as described 

herein.



B) The Village shall award a contract to a Bidder through action taken by the Village Council or 

the Village Manager of the Village of Wellington, Florida. 

C) The General Terms and Conditions, the Special Conditions, the Technical Specification, and 

the Bidder’s Bid are collectively and integral part of the contract between the Village of 

Wellington and the successful Bidder. 

D) While the Village of Wellington may determine to award a contract to a Bidder(s) under this 

Request for Bid, said award may be conditional on the subsequent submission of other 

documents as specified in the Special Conditions. The Bidder shall be in default of any 

conditional award if any of these documents are not submitted in a timely manner and in the 

form required by the Village. If the Bidder is in default, the Village, through the Purchasing 

Contract Manager, will void its acceptance of the Bidder’s offer and may determine to select the 

second lowest responsive, responsible Bidder or re-solicit Bids. The Village may, at its sole 

option, seek monetary restitution from the defaulting Bidder as a result of damages or excess 

costs sustained and/or may prohibit the Bidder from submitting future Bids for a period of one 

year. 

E) The Village reserves the right to exercise the option to renew a term contract of any 

successful Bidder(s) to a subsequent optional period; provided that such option is stipulated in 

the Special Conditions and is contained in any contract ultimately awarded in regard to this Bid. 

F) The Village reserves the right to automatically extend any contract for a maximum period not 

to exceed ninety (90) calendar days in order to provide Village departments with continual 

service and supplies while a new contract is being solicited, evaluated and/or awarded, 

provided this is expressly made a part of any contract awarded in regard to this Bid. 

1.34 ASSIGNMENT: 

The contractor shall not assign, transfer, convey, sublet or otherwise dispose of any contract, 

including any or all of its right, title, or interest therein, or his or its power to execute such 

contract to any person, company or corporation without prior written consent of the Village of 

Wellington. 

1.35 LAWS, PERMITS AND REGULATIONS: 

The bidder shall obtain and pay for all licenses, permits and inspection fees required for this 

project; and shall comply with all laws, ordinances, regulation building code requirements 

applicable to the work contemplated herein. 

1.36 OPTIONAL CONTRACT USAGE: 

NOT USED 

1.37 SPOT MARKET PURCHASES: 

NOT USED 

1.38 PUBLIC ENTITY CRIMES: 

As provided in Section 287.133(2) (a), Florida Statutes, a person or affiliate who has been 

placed on the convicted vendor list following a conviction for a public entity crime may not 

submit a Bid on a contract to provide any goods or services to a public entity, may not submit a 

Bid on a contract with a public entity for the construction or repair of a public building or public 

work, may not submit Bids on leases of real property to a public entity, may not be awarded or 

perform work as a contractor, supplier, subcontractor or consultant under a contract with any 

public entity, and my not transact business with any public entity in excess of the threshold 

amount provided S.S. 287.017 for CATEGORY TWO for a period of 36 months from the date of 

being placed on the convicted vendor list.



1.39 CONFLICT OF INTEREST AND CODE OF ETHICS: 

The award is subject to provisions of State Statutes and Village policies. All Bidders must 

disclose with their Bid the name of any officer, director, or agent who is also an employee of the 

Village of Wellington. Further, all Bidders must disclose the name of any Village employee who 

owns, directly or indirectly, an interest of 5% or more in the Bidder's firm or any of it's branches. 

If any Bidder violates or is a party to a violation of the code of ethics of the Village and the State 

of Florida with respect to this Bid, such Bidder may be disqualified from performing the work 

described in this Bid or from furnishing the goods or services for which the Bid is submitted and 

shall be further disqualified from bidding on any future Bids for work or for goods or services for 

the Village. A copy of the Village and State Ethics Codes is available at the office of the Village 

Clerk, Village of Wellington, 14000 Greenbriar Blvd, Wellington FL 33414. 

1.40 NON-COLLUSION: 

Bidder certifies that this offer is made without prior understanding, agreement, or connection 

with any corporation, firm or person submitting an offer for the same materials, services, 

supplies, or equipment and is in all respects fair and without collusion or fraud. 

No premiums, rebates or gratuities are permitted, either with, prior to or after any delivery of 

material or provision of services. Any violation of this provision may result in the Contract 

cancellation, return of materials or discontinuation of services and the possible removal from the 

vendor Bid list(s). 

1.41 FLORIDA PUBLIC RECORDS ACT: 

All material submitted regarding this bid becomes the property of the Village. Bids may be 

reviewed by any person ten (10) days after the public opening. Bidders should take special 

note of this as it relates to any proprietary information that might be included in their offer. 

Any resulting contract may be reviewed by any person after the contract has been executed by 

the Village. The Village has the right to use any or all information/material submitted in 

response to this bid and/or any resulting contract from same. Disqualification of a bidder does 

not eliminate this right. 

1.42 TIED BIDS/DRUG FREE WORKPLACE PROGRAMS: 

In the event of an identical tied bid or proposal, preference will be given to local vendors. If none 

of the vendors are local, preference shall be given to the business, submitting proof of Drug-Free 

Work Place (DFW) programs. A public drawing of lots will be held in the event all apply. 

1.43 CONE OF SILENCE 

From the time of advertising until an award of the proposal, any Proposer or any of their 

representatives or agents are prohibited from any communication with the Village Manager, Mayor 

and Village Council. All communication shall be restricted to the Purchasing Department. This 

does not apply to oral presentations before Selection Committees, contract negotiations, or public 

presentations made to the Village Council during any duly noticed public meeting. Violation of 

these provisions shall render any RFP proposal or RFP award by to the violator voidable.



2.0 SPECIAL CONDITIONS 


BID #041-09/BJJ 

2.1 PURPOSE: 

The purpose of this solicitation is to establish a contract, by means of sealed bids, for the 

furnishing of all labor, equipment, and expertise as required to haul and dispose of sludge as 

specified herein, from a source(s) that will give prompt and efficient service. 

2.2 TERMS OF CONTRACT: 

The term of the contract will be for two (2) years from date of award with the option to renew for 

two (2) additional two (2) year periods. 

The Village of Wellington reserves the right to exercise the option to renew annually (subject to the 

appropriation of funds), not to exceed a maximum of six (6) years. Pricing of the initial two (2) year 

contract will remain fixed. No price increase will be accepted during the initial contract period. 

Annual renewals will be based on the successful bidder agreeing to the same terms and 

conditions and by filing written notice to the Village not less than ninety (90) days prior to renewal 

date of any requested adjustment in the contract amount. 

Renewal terms allow for a request for an increase at the time of renewal based on bidder’s cost 

increase and documentation to substantiate the need for a price increase. Contract renewal shall 

be based on satisfactory performance; mutual acceptance; and determination by the Village of 

Wellington that the renewal contract is in the best interest of the Village of Wellington. 

No more than one price increase will be accepted during each the renewal period. 

2.3 METHOD OF AWARD: 

Award of this contract shall be based on an objective and subjective criteria. Following the 

review of all Bids, recommendations will be based on the following weighted criteria: 

(a) Total and Balanced Bid Price 0 – 35 

(b) Description of Experienced Personnel & Equipment to Perform Work 0 – 20 

(Based solely on resumes and equipment lists submitted with bid) 

(c) Location of proposed FDEPA approved site(s) 0 – 30 

(Based on submitted approved site(s)) 

(d) Proper Licenses and Permits 0 – 05 

(Based solely upon copies submitted with bid) 

(e) Evidence of Proper Insurance 0 – 05 

(Based solely upon certificates submitted with bid) 

(f) Contractor’s ability to perform contract, no sub-contractors will be allowed 0 – 05 

(Based solely upon information submitted with bid) 

100



SELECTION PROCESS 

Bids received by submittal deadline will be reviewed by the Purchasing Department to 

determine if each Bidder has submitted the required information and met all mandatory 

requirements. Those Bid(s) found to be non-responsive may be rejected from further 

consideration. 

The scoring will be based on all factor(s) as identified in the Evaluation Criteria, and all other 

pertinent data submitted. The total estimated annual quantities provided on the bid form are 

estimates used only for selection. Unit prices provided on the bid form shall provide the basis 

for payment regardless of actual quantities. A grand total score shall be computed by adding 

each score together. The firm with the highest grand totals shall be the award recommendation. 

The Village may award this contract to a primary and a secondary contractor so as to ensure 

hauling and disposal of sludge service is never interrupted. 

Successful bidder awarded shall ensure that proper and sufficient staff, equipment, organization, 

etc. will be provided for this contract to meet the specifications denoted herein at a paramount 

level. 

2.4 PAYMENT: 

Invoices for payment will be submitted per tonnage and/or gallons on a monthly basis for the 

duration of the contract. Invoices will be subject to verification and approval by the Utilities 

Department’s representative. Tonnage and/or gallon tickets must be approved for each haul. No 

partial payments will be made. 

Due to the environmental concerns regarding disposal and hauling, continued unsatisfactory 

services, by the successful bidder, will result in the contract being cancelled upon written notice. 

2.5 SET TIME/RESPONSE TIME: 

Subsequent to complete fill of a dump trailer the Village’s representative shall notify the contractor 

to remove the loaded dump trailer from the Village’s yard. Response time to remove same shall 

be within a minimum of twelve (12) hours maximum of twenty-four (24) hours. A loaded trailer 

shall not remain on the yard longer than twenty-four (24) hours without prior approval from the 

Village’s representative. The Village reserves the right to relocate the loaded trailer outside the 

yard. The Village shall accept responsibility for any liability for the trailer or any attached 

accessories. 

Failure to respond within said response time shall constitute a potential disqualification for future 

requests for service and subsequent payment for said service. 

2.6 ADDITIONS/DELETION OF FACILITIES: (NOT USED)



2.7 PRICES SHALL BE FIXED AND FIRM FOR TERM OF CONTRACT: 

If the bidder is awarded a contract under this solicitation, the prices quoted by the bidder on the 

Bid Form shall remain fixed and firm during the term of this contract; provided, however, that the 

bidder may offer incentive discounts from this fixed price to the Village at any time during the 

contractual term. 

2.8 PRE-BID CONFERENCE: (NOT USED) 

2.9 INSURANCE: 

Bidders must submit with their bid, proof of insurance meeting or exceeding the following 

requirements or a letter of intent to provide the following requirements if awarded the contract: 

2.9.1 Worker’s Compensation Insurance – must meet the minimum statutory limits in 

compliance with the Workers Compensation Law of Florida. This policy must include 

Employers Liability with the following limits: 

� $500,000 for each accident 

� $500,000 each disease 

� $500,000 aggregate by disease 

The Village of Wellington will not accept filed certificates of exemption forms for 

Worker’s Compensation Insurance. 

2.9.2 Employer’s Liability Insurance - $500,000 per occurrence, $500,000 disease policy limit, 

and $500,000 disease each employee 

2.9.3 General Liability Insurance - $500,000 general aggregate,$500,000 per person, 

$500,000 each occurrence and $500,000 per accident for bodily injury 

2.9.4 Automobile Liability Insurance - $500,000 annual aggregate, $500,000 per occurrence, 

$500,000 per accident for bodily injury and $500,000 per accident for property damage 

The required insurance coverage shall be issued by an insurance company authorized and 

licensed to do business in the State of Florida, with the minimum rating of B+ or better, in 

accordance with the latest edition of A.M. Best’s Insurance Guide. 

The successful bidder must submit, no later ten (10) days after award and prior to commencement of 

any work, a Certificate of Insurance showing the Village of Wellington as additional insured. 

2.10 CONTACT PERSON: 

For any additional information regarding the specifications and requirements of this bid, contact: 

Jim Volkman, Contract Coordinator, 561-791-4101, e-mail: jvolkman@wellingtonfl.gov 

Facsimile: (561) 791-4740. 

2.11 BID CLARIFICATION: 

Any questions or clarifications concerning this Bid shall be submitted in writing by mail or facsimile 

to the Purchasing Department, 14000 Greenbriar Boulevard, Wellington, Florida 33414, FAX: 

(561) 791-4740. The bid title/number shall be referenced on all correspondence. 

All questions must be received no later than 3:00 p.m., Wednesday, November 11, 2009. All 

responses to questions/clarifications will be sent to all prospective bidders in the form of 

an addendum. NO QUESTIONS WILL BE RECEIVED VERBALLY OR AFTER SAID 

DEADLINE.



2.12 BID/PERFORMANCE BOND: 

All offers must be accompanied by a Bid Bond or Cashier’s Check in the amount of four thousand 

dollars ($4,000.00), made payable to the Village of Wellington, as a guarantee that the bidder, if 

awarded the contract, will within ten (10) consecutive calendar days after being notified of the 

award, enter into a contract with the Village of Wellington in accordance with the specifications 

and provide the necessary bond requirements. The Bond or Cashier’s Check, of all unsuccessful 

bidders will be returned after bid award. The successful bidder will be required to furnish to the 

Village of Wellington, a Performance Bond in the amount of one hundred thousand dollars 

($100,000.00), to be in the form of a Cashier’s Check, made payable to the Village of Wellington; 

a bond written by a surety company authorized to do business in the State of Florida and shall 

comply with State Statute 287.0935; or an Irrevocable Letter of Credit. If the latter is chosen, it 

must be written on a bank located Palm Beach County, be in the amount of the contract and 

should clearly and expressly state that it cannot be revoked until express written approval has 

been given by the Village of Wellington. The Village, to draw on same, would merely have to give 

written notice to the bank with a copy to the successful bidder. 

2.13 SPOT MARKET PRICING(NOT USED) 

2.14 LIQUIDATED DAMAGES: 

If the successful vendor fails to deliver/removal of the required trailers within the time stated 

herein, it is understood that $100.00 per calendar day will be deducted, as liquidated damages, for 

each day the delivery/removal has not occurred. 

2.15 COMPLETE PROJECT REQUIRED: 

These specifications describe the various items or classes of work required, enumerating or 

defining the extent of same necessary, but failure to list any items or classes under scope of the 

several sections shall not relieve the contractor from furnishing, installing or performing such work 

where required by any part of these specifications, or necessary to the satisfactory completion of 

the project. 

2.16 BID SUBMITTAL: 

All bids submitted shall include the completed Bid Form and all required product information and 

any other items as indicated on the Bid Form. Offers will be considered “Non-Responsive” if the 

required information is not submitted by the date and time specified. 

Before submitting an offer, each bidder shall make all investigations and examinations 

necessary to ascertain if any addendums were issued by the Purchasing Department. 

2.17 BIDDER QUALIFICATIONS: 

In order for the bid to be considered, bidders must submit with their bid, evidence that they are 

qualified to satisfactorily perform the specified work. Evidence shall include all information 

necessary to certify that the bidder; maintains a permanent place of business; has technical 

knowledge and practical experience in the type of equipment included in this scope of work; have 

available the organization and qualified manpower to do the work; has adequate financial status to



meet the financial obligations incident to the work; and has tested and service similar type, size 

and complexity of such projects. The evidence will consist of listing disposal and hauling of 

sludge, for the last five (5) years. 

2.18 LATE BIDS: 

The Village of Wellington cannot be responsible for bids received after opening time and 

encourages early submittal. 

2.19 EXCEPTIONS TO SPECIFICATIONS: 

Exceptions to the specifications shall be listed on the Bid Form and shall reference the section. 

Any exceptions to the General or Special Conditions shall be cause for the bid to be considered 

non-responsive. 

2.20 COMPLETE INFORMATION REQUIRED ON BID FORM: 

All bids must be submitted on the attached Bid Form and all blanks filled in. To be considered a 

valid offer, the ORIGINAL AND THREE COPIES of the Bid Form pages must be returned, 

properly completed, in a sealed envelope as outlined in the first paragraph of the General 

Conditions. 

.



3.0 PERFORMANCE SPECIFICATIONS 


BID #041-09/BJJ 

3.1 PURPOSE: 

The purpose of this proposal is to establish a contract by means of sealed proposals for a 

licensed contractor experienced in the disposal and hauling of sludge. Contractor shall be 

responsible for supplying labor, materials and equipment, intended for this purpose. 

The Village of Wellington owns and operates a 4.75 MGD wastewater treatment plant with an 

average daily flow of approximately 3.3 MGD. 

The Village of Wellington anticipates completing a plant expansion to 6.25 MGD within the next 

24 months. 

Lime stabilized sludge production is estimated to be 25 tons per day over a seven (7) day per 

week run time, which may increase with growth. 

Sludge de-watering is accomplished in one building, conveyed to the Solids Handling Building 

where lime is mixed and thence to the Load-Out Building. The Load-Out Building will 

accommodate a 40 foot dump trailer having a typical load capacity of 30 cubic yards more or 

less. 

3.2 LOCATION: 

Wastewater Treatment Plant is located at 11860 Pierson Road, Wellington, Florida. 

3.3 SAFETY STANDARDS: 

3.3.1 All vehicles and operators (drivers) shall be in full compliance with all Federal and State 

of Florida laws and regulations that apply to the type and class equipment being 

provided. This shall include but not limited to: Federal MVSS, OSHA, and EPA 

standards and Florida requirements for external noise control that apply to the type and 

call equipment being provided. 

3.3.2 Prior to the onset of this contract, the Village may require Contractor’s vehicles be 

independently inspected to verify that the vehicles meet safety standards at 

Contractor’s expense. 

3.4 GENERAL LOCATION OF WORK: 

3.4.1 If property (public or private) is damaged performing work specified or is 

removed for the convenience of the work, it shall be repaired or replaced at the 

expense of the Contractor in a manner acceptable to the Village of Wellington. 

Such property shall include but not be limited to: walls, fencing, pavement, 

covered structure, curb and gutters, etc. 

3.4.2 Contractor shall notify the Village’s Authorized Representative in writing of any 

pre-existing damage to facility, perimeter walls, landscaped areas, etc. Failure 

to do so shall obligate the contractor to make repairs per section. 3.4.1. 

3.5 PROTECTION: 

3.5.1 The successful contractor shall be solely responsible for pedestrian and 

vehicular safety and control within the work site and shall provide the necessary 

warning devices, barricades and ground personnel needed to give safety, 

protection, and warning to persons and vehicular traffic within the area. All



safety devices must have suitable and sufficient lighting for the prevention of 

accidents. All minimum safety standards required by Municipal, County, State 

and Federal ordinances and laws shall be strictly met by the contractor. 

3.6 CLEANING: 

3.6.1 The contractor shall keep the premises clean of all rubbish and debris generated by the 

work involved and shall leave the premises neat and clean. All surplus material, 

rubbish, and debris shall be disposed of by the contractor at the contractor’s expense. 

3.6.2 The Village is not responsible for theft or damage to the contractor’s property. 

3.7 EQUIPMENT/OPERATION: 

3.7.1 Contractor shall furnish 40 ft. dump trailers w/ 30 cu. yd dump capacity, tractors and 

any and all other hauling apparatus necessary to fully provide disposal and hauling of 

the sludge (de-watered or wet) produced by the Village’s Wastewater Treatment Plant. 

3.7.2 Contractor shall provide a minimum of one (1) dump trailer inside the load-out building 

and two (2) spare empty trailers on-site. A total of three (3) trailers at all times. 

3.7.3 Village’s representative shall notify the contractor when to remove the full trailers. 

3.7.4 When full trailers are removed from facility, an empty trailer must be delivered. 

3.7.5 Load-out trailer shall be properly positioned under the drop chute. The pull-tractor 

disconnected, brakes set, and end gate secured. 

3.7.6 The spare empty shall be positioned likewise in the yard. 

3.8 OTHER EQUIPMENT FURNISHED: 

3.8.1 It shall be the Contractor’s responsibility to furnish any and all equipment necessary to 

off-load at the Contractor furnished disposal site and dispose of the (de-watered or wet) 

sludge in accordance with required conditions of his permit. 

3.8.2 Tanker trucks (wet sludge) shall accommodate a minimum of 6,000 gallons. 

3.8.3 The Village advises that it would be prudent for the contractor to maintain an off-loading 

storage pit to “free-up” dump trailers in the event of wet field conditions. Obviously, 

other handling equipment would be necessary, such as: front-end loaders, 

spreaders, etc. Wet field conditions shall not operate as a valid reason for the 

Contractor to not have the required dump trailers at the Villages load-out site. 

3.8.4 Any sludge residue remaining in the dump trailer after dumping is the responsibility of 

the contractor and shall be removed at the disposal site. Dump trailers are not to be 

cleaned out at the Village Wastewater Treatment Facility. 

3.9 HOURS OF OPERATION: 

3.9.1 Currently the Village anticipates a seven (7) day per week sixteen (16) hours/day 7:00 

A.M. – 11:00 p.m. operation requiring a minimum of one (1) 40 ft dump trailer per day in 

the load-out building. 

3.10 DISPOSAL SITE: 

3.10.1 Throughout the duration of this contract the Contractor shall provide a FDEP approved 

disposal site. 

3.10.2 The acquisition, lease, and/or use of any Contractor furnished site shall be the entire 

responsibility and liability of the Contractor. The Village shall have no jurisdiction over 

the site or the operation thereof, except that the Village warrants the content of the 

sludge to be as it is represented according to appropriate guidelines of regulatory 

agencies and these specifications. 

3.10.3 The site (or sites) being used by the Contractor shall be in accordance with all 

guidelines, rules, and permit conditions of all appropriate regulatory agencies. Whether 

the site (or sites) is used during inclement weather is of no consequence to the Village



and “wet field conditions” shall not serve as an excuse by the Contractor to the 

Village for a shortage of dump trailers at the Village’s load-out point. 

3.10.4 The Contractor shall, together with the disposal site (or sites), furnish the following 

subject to approval by FDEP. 

(a) An updated Agricultural Use Plan to be submitted 2-3 weeks prior to start of 

contract. 

(b) A Site Plan Package. 

Each item shall be submitted for the primary disposal site and each additional alternate 

site. 

3.10.5 If the contractor has secured an approved alternate wet weather site then that site will 

be used until the primary site is available again. Contractor can bill for additional 

mileage granted that additional charges are specified in bid documents. If wet weather 

site is the same distance or closer than primary site then the flat rate will apply. If 

primary site and wet water site are unavailable then contractor will take sludge to landfill 

for disposal. The Village will then pay the standard rate plus additional fees charged by 

the landfill. All landfill fees will be charged through the contractor with proper receipts 

provided to the Village. No additional fee shall be paid by the Village to the contractor 

for new/changes of disposal site locations other than wet weather issues. 

3.11 SLUDGE QUALITY – DE-WATERED: 

3.11.1 The Wastewater Treatment by-product is characterized as domestic wastewater sludge, 

Class B, de-watered and lime stabilized meeting EPA 503 regulations. 

3.11.2 The Village of Wellington Utilities has no industrial customers and very few light 

commercial customers. The wastewater is almost exclusively domestic produced by a 

typical “bedroom community”. In the de-watered state the sludge contains 

approximately 12%-18% solids. With the addition of lime, the water content is further 

removed by hydration. The lime-stabilized sludge is handled by a conveyor belt system 

to the load-out chute and is in an appropriate dry state suitable for hauling in this 

manner. 

3.12 SLUDGE QUALITY – WET (LIQUID): 

3.12.1 In emergencies or the inability to operate the de-watering facilities, contractor shall haul 

“wet” sludge to the disposal site. The unclassified wet sludge will contain 1%-3% 

solids; to will be pumped into tanker trucks approximately 6,000 metered gallons per 

tanker. 

3.12.2 The Village shall notify the contractor of emergencies twenty-four (24) hours in 

advance. 

3.12.3 All conditions for hauling de-watered sludge shall comply for hauling wet sludge, i.e. 

transportation, labor, site disposal, etc. 

3.13 PAYMENT/MEASUREMENT: 

3.13.1 For de-watered sludge, measurement shall be on a per ton basis. 

3.13.2 Each dump trailer (or haul unit) supplied by the Contractor shall be numbered the empty 

weight (with tractor) shall be weighed by a certified scale for gross empty weight. Each 

loaded haul unit shall pass over the certified scale and a load ticket (print-out) produced 

showing clearly the net weight in tons of sludge which shall be a true indication of the 

difference in loaded haul unit and empty haul unit, thereby establishing a correct value 

and being identified by the correct haul unit number. 

3.13.3 The Village shall pay monthly progress payments by the value shown (in tons) on 

accumulated weigh tickets. 

3.13.4 In the event a load (or loads) unavoidably is wetted by rain or is excessively greater 

than normal due to other causes not attributable to the Village, the Village shall pay on 

the basis of the average weight of loads for each load unit over the past months 

operations. The Village shall have sole jurisdiction as to determining whether a load (or 

loads) is excessively greater than normal, and shall be subject to final approval by the 

Utility Director.



3.13.5 For wet sludge, measurement shall be on a per 1,000 gallon basis. 

3.13.6 The Village’s representative will load a tanker to approximately 6,000 gallons, which 

should be within legal load limits. The Village shall not be responsible should greater 

loading occur that may exceed the legal load limit or should greater loading occur due 

to hauler insistence. 

3.13.7 Wet sludge will be metered as it is pumped into the tanker. The Village will keep careful 

records of quantities and issue to the truck driver a duplicate ticket indicating the 

quantity of sludge pumped. 

3.13.8 The Village shall pay monthly progress payments by the value shown (in gallons) on 

accumulated haul tickets. 

The remainder of this page intentionally left



BID BOND 

KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS, that we,____________________________ as Principal, 

hereinafter called Contractor,and_______________________________as Surety, are held and firmly 

bound unto the Village of Wellington, Florida, as a municipal corporation of the State of Florida, 

hereinafter called the Village, in the sum of four thousand dollars ($4,000.00) of: 

(Written Dollar Amount) 

dollars ($___________________) lawful money of the United States of American, for the payment of 

which well and truly to be made, we bind ourselves, our heirs, executors, administrators, successors, 

and assigns, jointly and severally by these presents. 

WHEREAS, the Contractor contemplates submitting or has submitted, a Bid to the Village for the 

furnishing of all labor, materials, equipment, machinery, tools, apparatus, means of transportation for, 

and the performance of the Work covered in the Proposal Documents which include the Project 

Manual, the detailed Plans and Specifications, and any Addenda thereto, for the Bid # 041-09/BJJ 

Entitled, “SLUDGE HAULING SERVICES” 

WHEREAS, it was a condition precedent to the submission of said Proposal that a cashier’s check, 

certified check, or Bid Bond in the amount of Four Thousand Dollars ($4,000.00) be submitted with 

said Offer as a guarantee that the Offerer would, if awarded the Contract, enter into a written Contract 

with the Village for the performance of said Contract, within ten (10) consecutive calendar days after 

notice having been given of the Award of the Contract. 

NOW, THEREFORE, THE CONDITION OF THIS OBLIGATION IS SUCH, that if the Contractor 

within ten (10) consecutive calendar days after notice of such acceptance, enters into a written 

Contract with the Village and furnishes the Performance and Payment Bonds, satisfactory to the 

Village, each in an amount equal to one hundred percent (100%) of the Contract Price, and provides 

all required Certificates of Insurance, then this obligation shall be void; otherwise the sum herein 

stated shall be due and payable to the Village of Wellington and the Surety herein agrees to pay said 

sum immediately, upon demand of the Village, in good and lawful money of the United States of 

America, as liquidated damages for failure thereof of said Contractor. 

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the above bounded parties have caused this Bond to be executed by their 

appropriate officials of the_______________________ day of ____________________, 20______. 

WITNESS: PRINCIPAL: 

(If sole Proprietor or partnership) 

____________________ ___________________________________ 

(Firm Name) 

BY_________________________________



COUNTERSIGNED BY 

RESIDENT FLORIDA 

AGENT OF SURETY: SURETY: 

____________________________________ 

Title: (Sole Proprietor or Partner) 

PRINCIPAL (If Corporation) 

___________________________________ 

(Corporate Name) 

BY_________________________________ 

(President) 

Attest:_____________________________ 

(Secretary) 

(CORPORATE SEAL) 

________________________ ________________________________ 

(Copy of Agent's current 

License as issued by State 

of Florida Insurance By:____________________________ 

Commissioner Attorney-in-fact 

(Power of Attorney must be attached) 

CERTIFICATES AS TO CORPORATE PRINCIPAL 

I, ______________________, certify that I am the Secretary of the Corporation named as 

Principal in the foregoing bond; that ______________________ who signed the said bond on behalf 

of the Principal, was then _______________________ of said Corporation; that I know his signature, 

and his signature hereto is genuine; and that said bond was duly signed, sealed, and attested for and 

in behalf of said Corporation by authority of its governing body.



STATE OF FLORIDA 

COUNTY OF 

______________________ 

Corporate Secretary Seal 

Before me, a Notary Public, duly commissioned, qualified and acting, personally appeared 

_________________________ to me well known, who being by me first duly sworn upon oath, says 

that he is the Attorney-in-Fact, for the _____________________________ and that he has been 

authorized by ______________________________ to execute the foregoing bond on behalf of the 

Contractor named therein in favor of the Village of Wellington, Florida. 

Subscribed and sworn before me this ______ day of _____________, 20____ A.D. 

(Attach Power of Attorney) ___________________________________ 

Notary Public 

State of Florida-at-Large 

My Commission Expires: ____________



KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS: 

PERFORMANCE BOND 

that________________________________________________________________as Principal, 

(Here insert full name and address or legal title of contractor) 

called Contractor, and __________________________________________________________ 

(Here insert full name and address or legal title of Surety) 

_____________________________________________________ as Surety, hereinafter called 

Surety are held and firmly bound unto Village of Wellington, 14000 Greenbriar Boulevard, 

Wellington, Florida 33414 as Obligee, hereinafter called Owner, in the amount of 

__________________________________________ Dollars ($_______________) for the 

payment whereof Contractor and Surety bind themselves, their heirs, executors, administrator, 

successors and assigns, jointly and severally, firmly by these presents. 

WHEREAS, 

Contractor has by written agreement dated ________________ , 2009, entered into a contract 

with Owner for ____________________________________________________ in accordance 

with drawings and specifications prepared by ___________________________________, which 

contract is by reference made a part hereof, and is hereinafter referred to as the Contract. 

NOW, THEREFORE, THE CONDITION OF THIS OBLIGATION is such that, if Contractor shall 

promptly and faithfully perform said Contract, then this obligation shall be null and void; otherwise it 

shall remain in full force and effect. 

The Surety hereby waives notice of any alteration or extension of time made by the Owner. 

Whenever Contractor shall be, and declared by Owner to be in default under the Contract, the Owner 

having performed Owner's obligations thereunder, the Surety may promptly remedy the default, or 

shall promptly: 

1. Complete the Contract in accordance with its terms and conditions, or 

2. Obtain a bid or bids for completing the Contract in accordance with its terms and conditions, and 

upon determination by Surety of the lowest responsible bidder, or, if the Owner elects, upon 

determination by the Owner and the Surety jointly of the lowest responsible bidder, arrange for a 

contract between such bidder and Owner, and make available as Work progresses (even though



there should be a default or a succession of defaults under the contract or contracts of completion 

arranged under this paragraph) sufficient funds to pay the cost of completion less the balance of 

the contract price; but not exceeding, including other costs and damages for which the Surety may 

be liable hereunder, the amount set forth in the first paragraph hereof. The term "balance of the 

contract price," as used in this paragraph, shall mean the total amount payable by Owner to 

Contractor under the Contract and any amendments thereto, less the amount properly paid by 

Owner to Contractor. 

Any suit under this bond must be instituted before the expiration of one (1) year from the date on 

which final payment under the Contract falls due. 

No right of action shall accrue on this bond to or for the use of any person or corporation other than 

the Owner named herein or the heirs, executors, administrators or successors of the Owner. 

This bond is issued in compliance with Section 255.05, Florida Statutes (1987), as may be amended. 

A claimant, except a laborer, who is not in privity with the Contractor and who has not received 

payment for his labor, materials, or supplies shall, within 45 days after beginning to furnish labor, 

materials, or supplies for the prosecution of the Work, furnish the Contractor with a notice that he 

intends to look to the bond for protection. A claimant who is not in privity with the Contractor and who 

has not received payment for his labor, materials, or supplies shall, within 90 days after performance 

of the labor or after complete delivery of the materials or supplies, deliver to the Contractor and to the 

surety written notice of the performance of the labor or delivery of the materials or supplies and of the 

nonpayment. No action for the labor, materials, or supplies may be instituted against the Contractor 

or the surety unless both notices have been given. No action shall be instituted against the 

Contractor or the surety on the bond after 1 year from the performance of the labor or completion of 

delivery of the materials or supplies. 

Signed and sealed this _______ day of __________________, 2009. 

______________________________________ 

Principal (Seal) 

______________________________________ 

Witness 

______________________________________ 

Title 

______________________________________ 

Surety (Seal) 

____________________________________ 

Witness 

______________________________________ 

Title



BID PROPOSAL CHECK LIST 

Please check each item and make sure that all required information is included in your bid 

submission. Failure to submit this information may result in your bid being rejected as being 

a non responsive and responsible Bid. 

YES___ NO___ 1. Copy of Occupational License & Palm Beach County License 

YES___ NO___ 2. Proof of, or ability to obtain, insurance 

YES___ NO___ 3. Bid Submittal 

YES___ NO___ 4. Bid signed by authorized representative 

YES___ NO___ 5. Vendor Representative Contact Information 

YES___ NO___ 6. References with Phone & Fax Numbers 

YES___ NO___ 7. Service Contracts Experience 

YES___ NO___ 8. Equipment and Disposal Site 

YES___ NO___ 9. (1) Original and (3) Copies of Bid Submitted 

YES___ NO__10. Drug Free Workplace 

The blank spaces in the Bid forms must be filled in, and no change shall be made either in the phraseology of, or 

in the items mentioned in the Bid form. All blanks contained in this bid submittal must be filled in, if any item is 

not applicable to your company place the letters N/A on that form or blank space.



BID FORM 

Bid of __________________________________________________________ to provide the labor 

and 

(Vendor) 

equipment to haul and dispose of sludge, employing DEP approved policies, procedures and 

regulations, from the Village of Wellington Wastewater Treatment Plant to a contractor 

furnished DEP approved disposal site. To perform all Work in accordance with the 

requirements of the Specifications and Bid/Contract Documents. 

To: 

Purchasing Department 




Gentlemen: 

The undersigned Bidder has carefully examined the Specification requirements, Bid/Contract Documents and is 

familiar with the nature and extent of the Work and any local conditions that may in any manner affect the Work 

to be done. 

The undersigned agrees to provide the contractual services called for by the Specifications 

and Bid Documents, in the manner prescribed therein and to the standards of quality and 

performance established by the Village for the unit Bid price stated in the spaces herein 

provided. 

The undersigned agrees the right of the Village to hold all Bids and Bid guarantees for a period 

not to exceed ninety (90) days after the date of Bid opening stated in the Request for Bid. 

The undersigned accepts the payment policies specified in the Bid. 

The undersigned submits the bid pricing below with the understanding that the total estimated 

annual quantities provided in the table below are estimates used only for selection. Unit prices 

provided in the table below shall provide the basis for payment regardless of actual quantities. 

Service 

No. 

Description Estimated 

Annual 

Quantity 

1 Haul and Dispose of 

Dewatered Sludge 

2 Haul and Dispose of 

Wet Sludge 

9,500 Tons 1 Ton 

50,000 

Gallons 

Unit Unit Price Total 

Annual 

Price 

1,000 

Gallons 

TOTAL ANNUAL PRICE 

Accompanying this Bid is a certified or cashier's check or a bid bond in the amount of 

$____________________ (not less than $4000.00) made payable to: Village of Wellington, 

which is to be forfeited as liquidated damages, if, in the event this Bid is accepted, the



undersigned fails to execute the agreement and furnish and pay for satisfactory performance 

and payment bonds under the conditions and within the time specified in the Bid; otherwise 

said certified or cashier's check or bid bond is to be returned to the undersigned. 

The undersigned agrees that within ten (10) days from the date of acceptance of this Bid, to 

execute the agreement and furnish and pay for satisfactory performance bond, in the full 

amount of one hundred thousand dollars ($100,000.00) and recorded in the public records of 

Palm Beach County, guaranteeing the faithful performance of the work. Bonds shall be written 

by a surety company, acceptable to the Owner, licensed to do business in the State of Florida, 

and listed in the Department of Treasury Federal Register. All bonds shall be countersigned by 

a Florida resident agent. 

Dated this________ day of____________________________, _____________ 

(Month) (Year) 

INDIVIDUAL, FIRM OR PARTNERSHIP 

By:___________________________________________/____________________________ 

(Signature) (Print name) 

Address: __________________________________________________________________ 

__________________________________________________________________ 

__________________________________________________________________ 

Telephone: (_____) ________________________ Fax: (_____) _________________________ 

Social Security Number (OR) Taxpayer Identification Number (TIN): 

_________________________ 

CORPORATION 

By:___________________________________________/____________________________ 

(Signature) (Print name) 

Address: __________________________________________________________________ 

__________________________________________________________________ 

__________________________________________________________________ 

Telephone: (_____) ________________________ Fax: (_____) _________________________ 

Taxpayer Identification Number (TIN): _________________________



State Under Which Corporation Was Chartered: ____________________________________ 

Corporate President: __________________________________________________________ 

(Print Name) 

Corporate Secretary: __________________________________________________________ 

(Print Name) 

Corporate Treasurer: __________________________________________________________ 

(Print Name) 

CORPORATE SEAL 

Attest By: __________________________ 

Secretary 

Bidder acknowledges the receipt of Addenda No.'s: (please list the date received in the square 

below) 

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10



VENDOR SERVICE REPRESENTATIVE INFORMATION 

The following individuals are the designated contacts assigned to the Village: 

REGULAR WORK HOURS: 

Name: 

Address: 

Telephone: ( ) 

AFTER WORK HOURS, WEEKEND & HOLIDAYS: 

Name: 

Address: 

Telephone: ( )



SERVICE CONTRACTS EXPERIENCE 

As specified in the Specifications of this Bid Document, Bidders are to present the details of 

service contract experience. It is mandatory that all service contracts for governmental 

entities be included (Additional contracts may be submitted on a separate sheet in this format) 

CONTRACTING COMPANY NAME, ADDRESS, 

CITY, STATE, ZIP 

PHONE & FAX NUMBER 

1. Company Name: 

Address: 

E-mail address 

Contact Name: 

Phone: Fax: Principal in Charge: 


Address: 


Contact Name: 



Address: 


Contact Name: 



Address: 


Contact Name: 

DATE OF CONTRACT, LOCATION AND BRIEF 

DESCRIPTION OF WORK PERFORMED 

PRINCIPAL IN CHARGE OF CONTRACT 

1. 

2. 

3. 

4.




REFERENCES 

As specified in the Specifications of this Bid Document, Bidders are to present the details of a 

minimum of three (3) references of similar work. (Additional references may be submitted on a 

separate sheet) 

Company Name: 

Address: 


Contact Name: 

COMPANY NAME, ADDRESS, CITY, STATE, ZIP 

PHONE & FAX NUMBER 

Phone: Fax: 

Company Name: 


Contact Name: 

Phone: Fax: 

Company Name: 

Address: 


Contact Name: 

Phone: Fax: 

Company Name: 

Address: 

E-mail address


Contact Name: 

Phone: Fax: 

EQUIPMENT & DISPOSAL SITE LOCATION 

List all equipment which will be dedicated to the Sludge Hauling Services and the disposal 

sites available to fulfill the specifications as listed in this bid document. (Additional equipment 

may be submitted on a separate sheet in this format) 

1. 

2. 

3. 

4. 

5. 

6. 

7. 

8. 

9. 


10. 

11. 

12. 

EQUIPMENT LIST 

NUMBER 

AVAILABLE FOR 

THIS CONTRACT 

1. 

2. 

3. 

4. 

DISPOSAL SITE LOCATIONS



DRUG FREE WORKPLACE 

Preference shall be given to businesses with drug-free workplace programs. Whenever two or more Bids which 

are equal with respect to price, quality, and service are received by the Village for the procurement of 

commodities or contractual services, a Bid received from a business that certifies that it has implemented a 

drug-free workplace program shall be given preference in the award process. Established procedures for 

processing tie Bids will be followed if none of the tied vendors have a drug-free workplace program. In order to 

have a drug-free workplace program, a business shall: 

1. Publish a statement notifying employees that the unlawful manufacture, distribution, dispensing, possession, 

or use of a controlled substance is prohibited in the workplace and specifying the actions that will be taken 

against employees for violations of such prohibition. 

2. Inform employees about the dangers of drug abuse in the workplace, the business’s policy of maintaining a 

drug-free workplace, any available drug counseling, rehabilitation, and employee assistance programs, and the 

penalties that may be imposed upon employees for drug abuse violations. 

3. Give each employee engaged in providing the commodities or contractual services that are under Bid a copy 

of the statement specified in subsection (1). 

4. In the statement specified in subsection (1), notify the employees that, as a condition of working on the 

commodities or contractual services that are under Bid, the employee will abide by the terms of the statement 

and will notify the employer of any conviction of, or plea of guilty or novo contender to, any violation of chapter 

893 or of any controlled substance law of the United States or any state, for a violation occurring in the 

workplace no later than five (5) days after such conviction. 

5. Impose a sanction on, or require the satisfactory participation in a drug abuse assistance or rehabilitation 

program if such is available in the employee's community, by any employee who is so convicted. 

6. Make a good faith effort to continue to maintain a drug-free workplace through implementation of this section. 

As the person authorized to sign the statement, I certify that this firm complies fully with the above requirements. 

Signature:______________________________ 

AGREEMENT FOR 

SLUDGE HAULING SERVICES



THIS AGREEMENT is made this ____ day of ________, 2009, by and between the Village of 

Wellington, a municipal corporation (hereinafter referred to as “WELLINGTON”), whose address is 

14000 Greenbriar Boulevard, Wellington, Florida 33414 and Terra Renewal Services (hereinafter referred 

to as “VENDOR”), whose address is P.O. Box 3036 Russellville, Arkansas, 72811. 

WHEREAS, VENDOR bid on that certain specifications and bid documents for Sludge Hauling 

Services, bid number 53-03 (hereinafter referred to as “Project”), issued by WELLINGTON; and 

WHEREAS, VENDOR has been deemed to be the responsive bidder, and WELLINGTON desires 

to award the agreement to VENDOR on the terms and conditions more particularly described below and 

as contained in the specifications and bid documents for Sludge Hauling Services, bid number 53-03, 

and VENDOR’S response thereto, all of which are hereinafter incorporated by reference and are referred 

to as “Specifications and Bid Documents”; and 

WHEREAS, VENDOR is desirous of entering into the agreement with WELLINGTON pursuant to 

the terms and conditions more particularly described herein and pursuant to the Specifications and Bid 

Documents. 

NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual promises contained herein and other good 

and valuable consideration of which the parties hereto acknowledge, the parties agree as follows: 

1. The above recitals are true and correct and are incorporated herein by reference. 

2. VENDOR shall perform the services and duties as provided for in the Specifications and Bid 

Documents and comply with all of the terms provided for in the Specifications and Bid 

Documents. 

3. The contract period is effective November 12, 2009 through November 11, 2010 

4. The Agreement term shall be in accordance with the Specifications and Bid Documents. The 

Agreement amount shall be in accordance with the Specifications and Bid Documents, and all 

services and products to be purchased and work to be performed shall be done via a purchase 

order in such form as determined by WELLINGTON. Nothing herein, however, shall prevent 

WELLINGTON from seeking a budget amendment should it require additional sums of money 

for this Project and a change in the scope of services. All purchases pursuant to this 

Agreement shall be done in accordance with WELLINGTON’S Purchasing and Procurement 

Manual and procedures thereto. All purchases shall be evidenced by such approved purchase 

orders. 

5. VENDOR shall provide to WELLINGTON all services, work, and products that are necessary to 

fulfill its obligations pursuant to the Project and the Specifications and Bid Documents. All 

prices for the items and work herein shall be in accordance with VENDOR’S response to the 

Project and in accordance with the Specifications and Bid Documents. All purchases shall be 

evidenced by a purchase order from WELLINGTON. 

6. VENDOR shall maintain all insurance as is required by the Specifications and Bid Documents. 

Prior to commencing any work, performing services, or supplying products, VENDOR shall 

provide to WELLINGTON such insurance coverage that WELLINGTON has requested in the 

Specifications and Bid Documents. In addition, VENDOR agrees to provide to WELLINGTON 

such other insurance coverage requested by WELLINGTON’S Department of Risk Management 

and with such coverage amounts and deductibles as is requested by such Department. In 

addition, prior to commencing any work or supplying any products pursuant to the Project or 

the Specifications and Bid Documents, VENDOR agrees to provide to WELLINGTON Payment 

and Performance Bonds written on such forms that are provided by WELLINGTON and in such 

amounts so as to cover and assure the faithful performance of VENDOR pursuant to the terms 

herein and in the Specifications and Bid Documents. The amount of such bonds and the form



of such bonds shall be determined by WELLINGTON and shall be in conformance with Section 

255.05, Florida Statutes, if applicable. 

7. All renewals of this Agreement shall be pursuant to the Specifications and Bid Documents. 

This Agreement and any renewals thereto are subject to annual appropriations by the Village 

of Wellington, and this Agreement is subject to fiscal funding out by WELLINGTON. 

8. VENDOR agrees, warrants, covenants, and represents that all products, work, and services 

that it shall perform pursuant to this Agreement, the Project, and the Specifications and Bid 

Documents as it relates to WELLINGTON, including any work done by its subcontractors or at 

its direction, shall be free from all defects and done in a workmanlike manner. VENDOR 

warrants the merchantability and fitness of the products and services as contemplated in this 

Agreement, the Project, and the Specifications and Bid Documents. VENDOR agrees to 

warrant the products, work, and services for a period of one (1) year from the date of 

acceptance of the work by WELLINGTON or for such warranty period as provided in the 

Specifications and Bid Documents, whichever is greater. 

9. VENDOR agrees to supply to WELLINGTON adequate personnel to provide timely completion 

of all projects and support contemplated by this Agreement and pursuant to the Project and 

the Specifications and Bid Documents. The parties hereto agree that time is of the essence, 

and VENDOR agrees to pay such liquidated damages as are provided for in the Specifications 

and Bid Documents and as are determined by WELLINGTON for failure to comply with such 

timelines as provided for therein. 

10. VENDOR agrees to indemnify and hold harmless WELLINGTON, its officers, and employees 

from any and all liabilities, damages, losses, suits, actions, claims, and/or matters, including 

costs and reasonable attorney’s fees, to the extent caused by the negligence, gross 

negligence, or intentionally wrongful conduct of VENDOR and any other persons or entities 

employed or utilized by VENDOR in performance of this Agreement, the Project, and the 

Specifications and Bid Documents. This indemnification is in addition to the indemnification 

found in the Specifications and Bid Documents. 

11. In performance of its obligations hereunder, VENDOR agrees to comply with all applicable 

laws, rules, regulations, orders, codes, criteria, and standards, whether state or federal. 

12. WELLINGTON reserves the right to accept the use of a subcontractor or to reject the selection 

of a particular subcontractor. If a subcontractor fails to perform as required by this Agreement 

and it is necessary to replace the subcontractor in order to provide services as required, 

VENDOR shall promptly do so, subject to acceptance of the new subcontractor by 

WELLINGTON. 

13. The parties to this Agreement understand that WELLINGTON is a tax-exempt organization; 

nothing herein, however, shall exempt VENDOR from paying all of its taxes pursuant to this 

Agreement. 

14. In addition to any other termination provisions found in the Specifications and Bid Documents, 

this Agreement may be terminated by VENDOR upon thirty (30) days’ prior written notice to 

WELLINGTON in the event of substantial failure by WELLINGTON to perform in accordance 

with the terms of this Agreement through no fault of VENDOR. In addition to any other 

termination provisions found in the Specifications and Bid Documents, this Agreement may be 

terminated by WELLINGTON, with or without cause, upon thirty (30) days’ written notice to 

VENDOR. Unless VENDOR is in breach of this Agreement, VENDOR shall be paid for services 

and products rendered to WELLINGTON’S satisfaction up to the date of termination. After 

receipt of a termination notice, and except as otherwise directed by WELLINGTON, VENDOR 

shall stop work on the date specified. VENDOR shall not be entitled to any claim of loss of 

profits from a termination by WELLINGTON.



15. Neither WELLINGTON nor VENDOR shall be considered to be in default of this Agreement if 

delays in or failure of performance shall be due to Uncontrollable Forces, the effect of which, 

by the exercise of reasonable diligence, the nonperforming party could not avoid. The term 

“Uncontrollable Forces” shall mean any event that results in the prevention or delay of 

performance by a party of its obligations under this Agreement and which is beyond the 

reasonable control of the nonperforming party. It includes, but is not limited to, fire, flood, 

earthquake, storms, lightning, epidemic, war, riots, civil disturbance, sabotage, and 

governmental actions. 

Neither party shall, however, be excused from performance if nonperformance is due to forces 

which are preventable, removable, or remediable, and which the nonperforming party could 

have, with the exercise of reasonable diligence, prevented, removed, or remedied with 

reasonable dispatch. The nonperforming party shall, within a reasonable time of being 

prevented or delayed from performance by an uncontrollable force, give written notice to the 

other party describing the circumstances and uncontrollable forces preventing continued 

performance of the obligations of this Agreement. 

16. This Agreement shall be construed in accordance with the laws of the State of Florida. Should 

any dispute arise from this Agreement, venue shall lie in Palm Beach County, Florida. 

17. This Agreement shall not be construed against the party who drafted the same as all parties to 

this Agreement have had legal and business experts review the adequacy of the same. 

18. This Agreement is binding upon the parties hereto, their heirs, successors, and assigns. 

19. VENDOR warrants and represents that all of its employees are treated equally during 

employment without regard to race, color, religion, gender, age, or national origin. 

20. A waiver by either WELLINGTON or VENDOR of any breach of this Agreement shall not be 

binding upon the waiving party unless such waiver is in writing. In the event of a written 

waiver, such a waiver shall not affect the waiving party’s rights with respect to any other or 

further breach. The making or acceptance of a payment by either party with knowledge of the 

existence of a default or breach shall not operate or be construed to operate as a waiver of any 

subsequent default or breach. 

21. The invalidity, illegality, unenforceability of any provision of this Agreement, or the occurrence 

of any event rending any portion or provision of this Agreement void shall in no way affect the 

validity or enforceability of any other portion or provision of the Agreement. Any void 

provision shall be deemed severed from the Agreement, and the balance of the Agreement 

shall be construed and enforced as if the Agreement did not contain the particular portion or 

provision held to be void. The parties further agree to reform the Agreement to replace any 

stricken provision with a valid provision that comes as close as possible to the intent of the 

stricken provision. 

The provisions of this section shall not prevent the entire Agreement from being void should a 

provision, which is of the essence of the Agreement, be determined to be void. 

22. WELLINGTON and VENDOR agree that this Agreement sets forth the entire agreement between 

the parties, and that there are no promises or understandings other than those stated herein. 

This Agreement supersedes all prior agreements, contracts, proposals, representations, 

negotiations, letters, or other communications between WELLINGTON and VENDOR pertaining 

to this Agreement, whether written or oral. None of the provisions, terms, and conditions 

contained in the Agreement may be added to, modified, superseded, or otherwise altered, 

except by written instrument executed by the parties hereto.



23. This Agreement may not be modified unless such modifications are evidenced in writing, 

signed by both WELLINGTON and VENDOR. Such modifications shall be in the form of a 

written amendment executed by both parties. 

24. Any notice, demand, communication, or request required or permitted hereunder shall be in 

writing and delivered in person or sent by certified mail, postage prepaid as follows: 

As to WELLINGTON: 

Village Manager 




As to VENDOR: 

_________________________ 

Notices shall be effective when received at the addresses as specified above. Changes in the 

respective addresses to which such notice is to be directed may be made from time to time by 

either party by written notice to the other party. Facsimile transmission is acceptable notice 

effective when received; however, facsimile transmission received (i.e., printed) after 5:00 p.m. 

or on weekends or holidays will be deemed received on the next business day. The original of 

the notice must additionally be mailed as required herein. 

Nothing contained in this section shall be construed to restrict the transmission of routine 

communications between representatives of VENDOR and WELLINGTON. 

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, WELLINGTON and VENDOR have executed this Agreement all as of the 

day and year first above written. 

ATTEST: VILLAGE OF WELLINGTON, FLORIDA 

By:_____________________________ By:_____________________________ 

Awilda Rodriguez, Village Clerk Darrel Bowen, Mayor 

APPROVED AS TO FORM AND (SEAL) 


By:_____________________________ 

Village Attorney 

WITNESS: VENDOR 

________________________________ By:_____________________________



________________________________ 

(CORPORATE SEAL)












7. A 





WELLINTGON) 

A RESOLUTION OF THE VILLAGE COUNCIL OF WELLINGTON, FLORIDA, APPROVING A 

DEVELOPMENT ORDER AMENDMENT AND MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT , FOR PETITION 

NUMBER 2009-010 DOA 1 AND 2009-010 MPA 1, AMENDING THE DEVELOPMENT ORDER 

AND MASTER PLAN OF THE ORANGE POINT PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (PUD) TO 

CHANGE THE PROPERTY DESIGNATION FROM PUBLIC CIVIC SITE TO CIVIC SITE, AND 

PROVIDE A NEW POINT OF INGRESS / EGRESS ON LAKE WORTH ROAD AND BAREFOOT 

LAKE DRIVE (WELLINGTON SHORES DRIVE), THE CIVIC SITE TOTALING 2.82 ACRES, MORE 

OR LESS, IS LOCATED AT THE SOUTH WEST CORNER OF LAKE WORTH ROAD AND 

BAREFOOT LAKE DRIVE (WELLINGTON SHORES DRIVE) AS MORE SPECIFICALLY 

DESCRIBED HEREIN; PROVIDING A CONFLICTS CLAUSE AND A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; 






FIRST READING 


REQUEST: The petitioner is requesting to change the property designation to “Civic Site” and add 

new point of ingress / egress for Tract “R” of The Isles at Wellington Plat I within the Orange Point 

Planned Unit Development (PUD) Master Plan . 

EXPLANATION: Staff notes this application was submitted concurrently with a Development Order 

Amendment (2009-010 DOA 2) to allow requested uses and a replat of Tract “R” of The Isles at 

Wellington Plat I. This petition is for a Development Order Amendment (2009-010 DOA) and Master 

Plan Amendment (2009-010 MPA 1) to the Orange Point Planned Unit Development (PUD) Master 

Plan changing the property designation from “Public Civic Site” to “Civic Site” and add a new point 

of ingress / egress on Lake Worth Road and Barefoot Lake Drive for Tract “R” of The Isles at 

Wellington Plat I. 

LEGAL SUFFICIENCY: The Land Development Regulations do not distinguish between Public 

Civic Site and Civic Site as all Wellington’s regulations simply address “Civic” PUD’s within PUD’s. 

FISCAL IMPACT: N/A



RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of Resolution No. R2010 – 05 (Development 

Order Amendment 2009-010 DOA 1 and Master Plan Amendment 2009-010 MPA 1) to change the 

designation from “Public Civic Site” to “Civic Site” and add new point of ingress / egress on Lake 

Worth Road and Barefoot Lake Drive for Tract “R” of The Isles at Wellington Plat I (a.k.a. the Civic 

Site) within the Orange Point Planned Unit Development (PUD) Master Plan, subject to conditions of 

approval. 

� 

Responsive Government 




RESOLUTION NO. R2010- 05 


APPROVING A DEVELOPMENT ORDER AMENDMENT AND MASTER PLAN 

AMENDMENT , FOR PETITION NUMBER 2009-010 DOA 1 AND 2009-010 MPA 1, 

AMENDING THE DEVELOPMENT ORDER AND MASTER PLAN OF THE ORANGE 

POINT PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (PUD) TO CHANGE THE PROPERTY 

DESIGNATION FROM PUBLIC CIVIC SITE TO CIVIC SITE, AND PROVIDE A NEW 

POINT OF INGRESS / EGRESS ON LAKE WORTH ROAD AND BAREFOOT LAKE 

DRIVE (WELLINGTON SHORES DRIVE), THE CIVIC SITE TOTALING 2.82 ACRES, 

MORE OR LESS, IS LOCATED AT THE SOUTH WEST CORNER OF LAKE WORTH 




WHEREAS, the Council, as the governing body of Wellington, Florida, pursuant to the 

authority in Chapter 163 and Chapter 166, Florida Statutes, and the Land Development Regulations, 

as adopted by Wellington, is authorized and empowered to consider petitions related to zoning and 

land development orders; and 

WHEREAS, the notice and hearing requirements as provided in Article V of the Land 

Development Regulations (LDR), as adopted by Wellington, have been satisfied; and 

WHEREAS, the subject site was previously approved on the Orange Point PUD Master Plan 

as a Public Civic Site; and 

WHEREAS, the proposed Development Order and Master Plan Amendments of the Orange 

Point Planned Unit Development was reviewed by the Wellington Planning, Zoning and Adjustment 

Board at a public hearing conducted on December 10, 2009; and 

WHEREAS, the Council has considered the evidence and testimony presented by the 

Applicant and other interested parties and the recommendations of the various Wellington review 

agencies and staff; and 

WHEREAS, the Council has made the following findings of fact: 

1. The proposed amendment to the Development Order and Master Plan of the Orange Point 

PUD are consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. 

2. This request is consistent with the purpose and intent of the LDR. 

3. The requested Development Order and Master Plan Amendments are consistent with the 

surrounding land uses and zoning districts. 

4. There are no adverse impacts to the natural environment expected to occur as a result of the 

approval of the Development Order and Master Plan Amendments. 

5. There are public services and facilities in place to support the anticipated impacts on traffic,



water and sewer services. 

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE VILLAGE COUNCIL OF WELLINGTON, 

FLORIDA that: 

SECTION 1. The Development Order Amendment (Petition 2009-010 DOA 1) and Master Plan 

Amendment (Petition 2009-010 MPA 1) of the Orange Point PUD, the petition of Temple B’Nai Jacob 

of Wellington, Inc., Contract Purchaser, and Sexton Engineering Associates, Inc., Agent, to amend the 

previously approved Orange Point PUD Master Plan for the following described real property is hereby 

approved subject to the conditions of approval described herein, which are in addition to the general 

requirements otherwise provided by ordinance. 

LEGAL DESCRIPTION: 

A PARCEL OF LAND IN SECTION 26, TOWNSHIP 44 SOUTH, RANGE 41 EAST, PALM BEACH 

COUNTY, FLORIDA; SAID PARCEL BEING MORE SPECIFICALLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: 

ALL OF TRACT “R”, AS SHOWN ON PLAT OF THE ISLES OF WELLINGTON PLAT NO. 1, 

ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF THE CLERK OF CIRCUIT 

COURT IN AND FOR PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA, AS RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 85, 

PAGES 87-96, PUBLIC RECORDS OF PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA. 

CONTAINING 2.82 ACRES MORE OR LESS. 

SUBJECT TO EASEMENTS, RESTRICTIONS, RESERVATIONS AND RIGHT-OF-WAY OF 

RECORD. 

SECTION 2. The Orange Point PUD Master Plan attached as Exhibit “A” is hereby amended to 

change the property designation from Public Civic Site to Civic Site and provide a new point of ingress 

/ egress on Lake Worth Road and Barefoot Lake Drive. 

SECTION 3. The Development Order Amendment and Master Plan Amendments are approved with 

the following conditions: 

1. The ingress / egress driveway on Lake Worth Road for the Civic Site shall be limited to right in 

and right out only. 


PASSED AND ADOPTED this ______ day of __________________, 2010.



BY: BY: 




BY: 









I. Petition Description 

Petitions: 

STAFF REPORT 

WELLINGTON 

PLANNING & ZONING DIVISION 

A.) Development Order Amendment and Master Plan Amendment 

2009-010 DOA 1 and MPA 1 

B.) Development Order Amendment 

2009-010 DOA2 

Petitioner: Temple B’Nai Jacob of Wellington, Inc. 

12794 West Forest Hill Boulevard, Suite 23 


Agent: Sexton Engineering Associates, Inc. 

110 Ponce de Leon Street 

Royal Palm Beach, FL 33411 

Request: The agent on behalf of the petitioner is requesting: 

A.) A Development Order Amendment and Master Plan Amendment to 

the Orange Point Planned Unit Development (PUD) Master Plan 

changing the property designation from “Public Civic Site” to “Civic 

Site” and add a new point of ingress / egress on Lake Worth Road 

and Barefoot Lake Drive. 

B.) A Development Order Amendment to allow requested uses for a 

place of worship (synagogue) and day care center (general) for the 

proposed Civic Site totaling 2.82 acres located within the Orange 

Point Planned Unit Development (PUD) Master Plan. 

Location: The Public Civic Site totaling 2.82 acres more or less is located at the 

southwest corner of Lake Worth Road and Barefoot Lake Drive 

(Wellington Shores Drive) within the Orange Point Planned Unit 

Development (PUD) Master Plan. Exhibit “A” is a location map and 

Exhibit “B” is the legal description of the subject property. 

II. Site Data 

Existing Use: Vacant 

Proposed Uses: Place of worship and day care center 

Parcel ID: 73-41-44-26-01-018-0000 

Parcel Size: 2.82 acres more or less



Future 

Land Use 

Designation: Institutional/Public Facilities/Utilities 

Zoning: Planned Unit Development (PUD) 

III. Land Use and Zoning 

EXISTING LAND USE, FUTURE LAND USE & ZONING 

Existing Use Future Land Use Zoning 

Subject site Vacant Institutional/Public 

Planned Unit 

Facilities/Utilities 

Development (PUD) 

North Single-family homes Residential C (max 3 units/acre) Planned Unit 


East Single-family homes Residential C (max 3 units/acre) Planned Unit 


South Single-family homes Residential C (max 3 units/acre) Planned Unit 


West Single-family homes Residential C (max 3 units/acre) Planned Unit 


IV. Site History 

The Orange Point Planned Unit Development (PUD) Master Plan was originally approved by Palm 

Beach County Board of Commissioners in the 1980’s. The Orange Point PUD includes a portion of 

Section 23 and all of Section 26 and 34. This overall PUD has been amended by the County and 

Wellington. 

The subject site is the “Public Civic Site” (a.k.a. Tract “R” of The Isles at Wellington Plat I) on the 

Orange Point PUD Master Plan. Wellington accepted conveyance of this property from Lennar 

Land Partners with Resolution 2005-47 on April 5, 2005. 

Wellington declared the “Public Civic Site” surplus property and authorize the sale to the petitioner 

Temple B’Nai Jacob of Wellington, Inc., on July 14, 2009 per Resolution 2009-61 (Exhibit “C”). 

Pursuant to subsequent direction of the Council at their meeting of August 25, 2009, a contract for 

sale and purchase agreement was entered into on September 8, 2009 between Wellington and 

petitioner for the development of the site as a synagogue, pre-school and related uses. (a copy of 

the Contract is attached as Exhibit “ G “). 

The agent Sexton Engineering Associates Inc., on behalf of Temple B’Nai Jacob of Wellington 

Inc., has requested a Development Order Amendment / Master Plan Amendment (2009-010 DOA 

1 and MPA 1) to the Orange Point PUD Master Plan and a Development Order Amendment 

(2007-010 DOA 2) for requested uses to allow a proposed place of worship (synagogue) and day 

care center (general). 

V. Staff Analysis 

The petitioner is requesting:



A.) A Development Order Amendment / Master Plan Amendment (2009-010 DOA 1 and MPA 

1) for the Orange Point PUD Master Plan to change the existing property designation from 

“Public Civic Site” to “Civic Site” and provide a new point of ingress / egress on Lake 

Worth Road and Barefoot Lake Drive for the Civic Site totaling 2.82 acres; and 

B.) A Development Order Amendment to allow the requested uses for a place of worship 

(synagogue) and day care center (general) for the proposed Civic Site totaling 2.82 acres 

located within the Orange Point Planned Unit Development (PUD) Master Plan. 

The existing Orange Point PUD Master Plan indicates the subject site is designated as a Public 

Civic Site. The petitioner is requesting to amend this designation on the master plan to “Civic Site” 

and update the Site & Tabular Data to “Civic – Synagogue & Preschool.” 

The Land Development Regulations (LDR) requires that all places of worship which include a day 

care front on a collector or arterial street. Lake Worth Road is an arterial street. The proposed 

request is to provide a new ingress / egress on Lake Worth Road for the proposed place of 

worship and day care/preschool use. The ingress / egress driveway on Lake Worth Road is limited 

to right in and right out only. This new access on Lake Worth Road will significantly reduce the 

potential traffic impact on Barefoot Lake Drive and the adjacent residential properties. A second 

access on Barefoot Lake Drive is also requested to provide alternative circulation to the parking lot 

and a separate access to the south for service and deliveries. The petitioner is proposing to 

restripe the centerline and turn lanes on Barefoot Lake Drive and at the intersection of Lake Worth 

Road to maintain adopted levels of service. Exhibit “D” is the amended Orange Point PUD Master 

Plan indicating the new access points to Tract R. 

Places of worship and day care uses within a Planned Unit Development Zoning District are 

Requested Uses (LDR Sec. 6.8.1 Table 6.8-2) and require a DOA approval per the Land 

Development Regulations (LDR). This place of worship and day care center are proposed within a 

20,300 square foot building in the south portion of the site with a 6,000 square foot outdoor play 

area in the southwest corner of the property. The Temple B'Nai Jacob of Wellington conceptual 

site plan is attached as Exhibit “E.” The petitioner has agreed to submit for site plan review and 

approval from the Wellington’s Development Review Committee prior to permitting of this project. 

The site plan for this project shall comply with all relevant and appropriate portions of the LDR. 

The proposed day care center/preschool shall be limited to a maximum of 80 children/students at 

any one time. 

Wellington’s Traffic Consultant letter dated October 26, 2009 (Exhibit “F”) requires this project be 

limited to the following square footage: 6,500 square foot for the synagogue, 6,000 square foot for 

the day care center and 7,800 square foot for the social hall; and with a recommended condition 

the social hall not be utilized when the synagogue is in use. 

Consistency with Comprehensive Plan: 

The proposed change to the Orange Point PUD Master Plan is consistent with Wellington’s 

Comprehensive Plan including but not limited to preserving and protecting the characteristics of 

the communities in Wellington; neighborhood compatibility policies; and Land Use, Transportation 

and Infrastructure Elements.



Objective 1.2 of the Land Use Element requires Wellington to direct future growth into areas 

served by urban services that have adequate capacity. The proposed use of a place of worship 

with an accessory day care facility is consistent with Policy 1.3.19 (Institutional/Public 

Facilities/Utilities Land Use) and permitted on a Civic site. 

Policy 1.1.9 of the Transportation Element requires Wellington to enact and enforce land 

development code standards and control roadway access point, on-site flow and on-site parking. 

The additional ingress / egress to this site were reviewed by DRC and were determined to meet or 

exceed Wellington’s code requirements. With the proposed new access points the intersection of 

Lake Worth Road and Barefoot Lake Drive should operate within adopted levels of service without 

improvements to the existing Lake Worth Road intersection. 

Policy 1.6.1 of the Infrastructure Element requires Wellington to direct growth to areas within 

Wellington’s established Urban Service Area to maximize the use of existing and future 

infrastructure. A place of worship and day care use within a Planned Unit Development Zoning 

District are Requested Uses and consistent with the goals, objectives and policies of Wellington’s 

Comprehensive Plan. 

Conformity with Zoning Standards: 

The proposed petitions are consistent with the LDR zoning and shall be applicable to development 

standards such as minimum setbacks, maximum building heights, and landscape buffering 

standards. This project should not adversely impact the existing residential properties. The 

petitioner is required to submit a site plan for the place of worship and day care facility that will be 

reviewed to ensure compliance with the LDR. 

Compatibility with Surrounding Land Uses: 

The Institutional/Public Facilities/Utilities Land Use is already approved on Wellington’s Future 

Land Use Map and the site was designated as Civic on the Orange Point PUD Master Plan. The 

Institutional/Public Facilities/Utilities Land Use and Civic designations are consistent with the 

proposed place of worship and day care facility. Staff is recommending limiting the square footage 

of uses proposed on the property and no occurrence of simultaneous events in the synagogue 

and social hall to minimize potential impact on adjacent residential properties. 

Environmental Resources: 

There are no adverse impacts to the natural environment expected to occur as a result of this 

request. 

Adequacy of Public Services: 

The site has potable water, sanitary sewer and trash disposal all available from Wellington. 

Wellington’s Traffic Consultant determined this project is in compliance with the County traffic 

performance standards and Wellington’s adopted Level of Service. 

VI. Development Review Committee (DRC)



The Development Order Amendment /Master Plan Amendment for the Orange Point PUD Master 

Plan and Conditional/Requested Uses, were certified at the October 14, 2009 Development 

Review Committee meeting. 

VII. Public Notification and Public Hearings 

Planning Zoning and Adjustment Board (PZAB): 

Mailings November 19, 2009 

Newspaper Advertisement November 23, 2009 

Posted Signs November 19, 2009 

PZAB Hearing December 10, 2009 

Staff did not receive any phone calls or inquires regarding the mailing, newspaper advertisement 

or posted signs for this petition as of November 25, 2009 when the PZAB report was published. 

Village Council: 




Village Council Meeting January 12, 2010 

Staff received several phone calls, e-mails and front counter inquires prior to the December 10, 

2009 PZAB meeting which had a capacity attendance. 

On December 3, 2009 a small group of homeowners from The Isles at Wellington, Grand Isles and 

Bluff Harbor meet with staff regarding concerns with the proposed facility and possible impact to 

adjacent residential properties. 

The LDR requires certified mailing to each property owner (as it appears on the last approved tax 

roll) within a designated radius of subject property. The petitioner provided certified mailing 

envelopes with returned receipts, list of owners with mailing addresses and tax radius maps for 

300 and 500 feet on September 22, 2009 from the Palm Beach County Property Appraiser. Staff 

received return receipts for Grand Isles, Bluff Harbor and Wellington Shores Homeowners 

Associations and two returned to sender envelopes for the Isles at Wellington Community 

Association from United States Postal Service. 

VIII. Planning, Zoning and Adjustment Board Action 

At the December 10, 2009 Planning, Zoning and Adjustment Board (PZAB) meeting homeowners 

from The Isles at Wellington, Grand Isles, Bluff Harbor and Wellington Shores voiced substantive 

concerns of possible traffic impacts, access on Barefoot Lake Drive, proposed size and location of 

the building, location of the dumpster, day care (preschool) use. Several residents also raised a 

procedural objection claiming the homeowners associations and some affected residents had not 

received mailed notification from Wellington for the public hearings. A review of the file revealed 

that notice’s had been sent to all residents and homeowners associations. Letters to the Isles at 

Wellington Community Association, when were sent to the management company listed in the 

property appraiser’s office, were returned unclaimed. Notice was sufficient and in accordance with 

Wellington’s LDR requirements. 

The petitioner’s agent also requested Condition 6 be modified to allow an extended build out date 

for Phase 2 until 2020.



The PZAB approved (4-1) the Development Order Amendment 2009-010 DOA 1 and Master Plan 

Amendment 2009-010 MPA 1 (Resolution No. R2010 – 05); and Development Order Amendment 

2009-010 DOA 2 (Resolution No. R2010 – 06) with the staff recommended conditions. 

IX. Village Council Action 

The Council meeting is scheduled for January 12, 2010. 

X. Staff Recommendation 

A.) Based on the findings contained within this staff report and consistency with both 

Wellington’s Land Development Regulations and the Comprehensive Plan, the Planning 

and Zoning Division recommends approval of the Development Order Amendment 2009- 

010 DOA 1 and Master Plan Amendment 2009-010 MPA 1 (Resolution No. R2010 – 05) for 

the Orange Point PUD Master Plan to change the designation from “Public Civic Site” to 

“Civic Site” and provide a new point of ingress / egress on Lake Worth Road and Barefoot 

Lake Drive. The Civic Site totaling 2.82 acres (a.k.a. Tract “R” of The Isles at Wellington 

Plat I) is recommend for approval with the following condition: 

1. The ingress / egress driveway on Lake Worth Road for the Civic Site shall be limited to 

right in and right out only. 

B.) Based on the findings contained within this staff report and consistency with both 



010 DOA 2 (Resolution No. R2010 – 06) to allow requested uses for a place of worship and 

day care center for the proposed Civic Site totaling 2.82 acres (a.k.a. Tract “R” of The Isles 

at Wellington Plat I) located within the Orange Point Planned Unit Development (PUD) 

Master Plan with the following conditions: 

1. This approval is based on a conceptual site plan designated “Temple B'Nai Jacob of 

Wellington" prepared by Sexton Engineering Associates, date stamped October 19, 

2009. 

2. The uses of this site shall be limited to a maximum of: 

� 6,500 square foot / 210 seats for the synagogue 

� 6,000 square foot / 80 children for the day care center / preschool 

� 7,800 square foot / 210 seats for the social hall 

3. The 7,800 square foot social hall shall not be utilized when the 6,500 square foot 

synagogue is in use. 

4. The day care center / preschool shall be limited to a maximum of 80 children/students at 

any one time. A request to increase the number of children/students will require a 

Development Order Amendment that must be approved by Council. 

5. Any change in use or occupancy type shall be considered an amendment to the 

requested use approval and require Wellington review and approval. Conversion from a 

place of worship or day care center will require Council approval and compliance with



Wellington’s Comprehensive Plan and the Land Development Regulations (LDR). 

6. The build out dates for this project are: 

� Phase 1 – December 31, 2014 {maximum of 13,800 square foot (combined) for the 

synagogue, day care center / preschool and social hall} 

� Phase 2 – December 31, 2020 {maximum of 6,500 square foot for future 

construction of the eastern wing to be used exclusively for synagogue services} 

7. The owner or operator shall obtain all appropriate federal, state and local permits / 

licenses for the day care center. 

8. A site plan review and approval is required for this site from the Development Review 

Committee prior to permitting. 

9. Prior to commencing site development, the owner/applicant shall obtain all required 

building and engineering permits. 

List of Exhibits



Exhibit “A” Location Map 

Exhibit “B” Legal Description 

Exhibit “C” Sale of Tract R to Temple B’Nai Jacob of Wellington Resolution 2009-61 

Exhibit “D” Amended Orange Point PUD Master Plan 

Exhibit “E” Conceptual Site Plan for Temple B'Nai Jacob of Wellington 

Exhibit “F” Village Traffic Consultant Letter 

Exhibit “G” Sale Contract












































7. B 





WELLINGTON) 

A RESOLUTION OF THE VILLAGE COUNCIL OF WELLINGTON, FLORIDA, APPROVING A 

DEVELOPMENT ORDER AMENDMENT APPLICATION FOR PETITION NUMBER 2009-010 

DOA2 ALSO KNOWN AS TEMPLE B'NAI JACOB OF WELLINGTON; TO ALLOW REQUESTED 

USES FOR A PLACE OF WORSHIP AND DAY CARE CENTER IN THE ORANGE POINT 

PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT; SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS; THE CIVIC SITE TOTALING 2.82 

ACRES, MORE OR LESS, IS LOCATED AT THE SOUTH WEST CORNER OF LAKE WORTH 








FIRST READING 


REQUEST: The petitioner is requesting approval to allow requested uses for the proposed Civic 

Site within the Orange Point Planned Unit Development (PUD) Master Plan. 

EXPLANATION: Staff notes this application was submitted concurrently with a Development 

Order Amendment (2009-010 DOA) and Master Plan Amendment (2009-010 MPA 1) to change 

the property designation to “Civic Site” and add a new point of ingress / egress and a replat of 

Tract “R” of The Isles at Wellington Plat I. 

The approval of this petition for a Development Order Amendment (2009-010 DOA 2) will allow 

requested uses of a place of worship (synagogue) and day care center on the proposed Civic Site 

(a.k.a. Tract “R” of The Isles at Wellington Plat I). As detailed in the staff report, the applicant’s 

proposed development complies with the Land Development Regulation requirements associated 

with the requested uses. 

FISCAL IMPACT: N/A 

RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of Resolution No. R2010 – 06 (Development 

Order Amendment 2009-010 DOA 2) to allow requested uses for a place of worship 

(synagogue) and day care center for the proposed Civic Site (a.k.a. Tract “R” of The Isles at



Wellington Plat I) within the Orange Point Planned Unit Development (PUD) Master Plan, 

subject to conditions of approval. 

� 

Responsive Government 




RESOLUTION NO. R2010 - 06 


APPROVING A DEVELOPMENT ORDER AMENDMENT APPLICATION FOR 

PETITION NUMBER 2009-010 DOA2 ALSO KNOWN AS TEMPLE B'NAI JACOB OF 

WELLINGTON; TO ALLOW REQUESTED USES FOR A PLACE OF WORSHIP AND 

DAY CARE CENTER IN THE ORANGE POINT PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT; 

SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS; THE CIVIC SITE TOTALING 2.82 ACRES, MORE OR 

LESS, IS LOCATED AT THE SOUTH WEST CORNER OF LAKE WORTH ROAD 

AND BAREFOOT LAKE DRIVE (WELLINGTON SHORES DRIVE) AS MORE 



WHEREAS, the Council, as the governing body of Wellington, Florida, pursuant to the 

authority in Chapter 163 and Chapter 166, Florida Statutes, and the Wellington Land Development 

Regulation is authorized and empowered to consider petitions related to zoning and development 

orders; and 

WHEREAS, the notice and hearing requirements as provided in Article V of the Land 

Development Regulations (LDR), as adopted by Wellington, have been satisfied; and 

WHEREAS, the subject site is located within a Planned Unit Development Zoning District; and 

WHEREAS, the subject site has been approved on the Wellington Future Land Use Map as 

Institutional/Public Facilities/Utilities; and 

WHEREAS, the Wellington Land Development Regulations Article 6, Section 6.8.1 Table 6.8-2 

states a place of worship and day care center (general) within a Planned Unit Development Zoning 

District are Requested Uses; and 

WHEREAS, the request to allow a place of worship and day care center (general) within a 

Planned Unit Development Zoning District was reviewed by the Planning, Zoning and Adjustment 

Board at a public hearing conducted on December 10, 2009; and 

WHEREAS, the Council has considered the evidence and testimony presented by the 

Petitioner and other interested parties and the recommendations of the various Wellington review 

agencies and staff; and 

WHEREAS, the Council has made the following findings of fact: 

1. Environmental Considerations: There are no environmental issues or concerns. 

2. Surrounding Use Considerations: The proposed modification have been found to be 

compatible with surrounding uses. 

3. Utilities: The proposed water, sanitary, sewer, and drainage 

systems will meet code requirements subject to final 

permitting. There are adequate public facilities available 

to serve the subject site.



4. Concurrency Considerations: The Wellington Traffic Consultant has stated there are no 

objections to the proposed modifications subject to 

conditions. 

5. Comprehensive Plan Considerations: The modifications requested are consistent with the 



FLORIDA, that: 

SECTION 1. The Development Order Amendment Petition 2007-010 DOA 2, the petition of 

Temple B’Nai Jacob of Wellington, Inc., Contract Purchaser, and Sexton Engineering Associates, Inc., 

Agent, is hereby approved on the following described real property; subject to the conditions of approval 

contained herein, which are in addition to the general requirements otherwise provided by ordinance. 

LEGAL DESCRIPTION: 

A PARCEL OF LAND IN SECTION 26, TOWNSHIP 44 SOUTH, RANGE 41 EAST, PALM BEACH 

COUNTY, FLORIDA; SAID PARCEL BEING MORE SPECIFICALLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: 

ALL OF TRACT “R”, AS SHOWN ON PLAT OF THE ISLES OF WELLINGTON PLAT NO. 1, 

ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF THE CLERK OF CIRCUIT 

COURT IN AND FOR PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA, AS RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 85, 

PAGES 87-96, PUBLIC RECORDS OF PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA. 

CONTAINING 2.82 ACRES MORE OR LESS. 

SUBJECT TO EASEMENTS, RESTRICTIONS, RESERVATIONS AND RIGHT-OF-WAY OF 

RECORD. 

SECTION 2. The Requested Uses for a place of worship and day care center are approved 

with the following Conditions of Approval: 


Wellington" prepared by Sexton Engineering Associates, date stamped October 19, 2009. 









Development Order Amendment that must be approved by Council.



5. Any change in use or occupancy type shall be considered an amendment to the requested 

use approval and require Wellington’s review and approval. Conversion from a place of 

worship or day care center will require Council approval and compliance with Wellington’s 

Comprehensive Plan and the Land Development Regulations (LDR). 






7. The owner or operator shall obtain all appropriate federal, state and local permits / licenses 

for the day care center. 



9. Prior to commencing site development, the owner/applicant shall obtain all required building 

and engineering permits. 

SECTION 3. This Resolution shall become effective immediately upon adoption.



PASSED AND ADOPTED this _____ day of __________ 2010. 


BY: __________________________ BY:_____________________________ 



LEGAL SUFFICIENCY: 

BY: __________________________ 




XI. Petition Description 

Petitions: 

STAFF REPORT 


PLANNING & ZONING DIVISION 

C.) Development Order Amendment and Master Plan Amendment 

2009-010 DOA 1 and MPA 1 

D.) Development Order Amendment 

2009-010 DOA2 

Petitioner: Temple B’Nai Jacob of Wellington, Inc. 



Agent: Sexton Engineering Associates, Inc. 

110 Ponce de Leon Street 

Royal Palm Beach, FL 33411 

Request: The agent on behalf of the petitioner is requesting: 

C.) A Development Order Amendment and Master Plan Amendment to 

the Orange Point Planned Unit Development (PUD) Master Plan 

changing the property designation from “Public Civic Site” to “Civic 

Site” and add a new point of ingress / egress on Lake Worth Road 

and Barefoot Lake Drive. 

D.) A Development Order Amendment to allow requested uses for a 

place of worship (synagogue) and day care center (general) for the 

proposed Civic Site totaling 2.82 acres located within the Orange 

Point Planned Unit Development (PUD) Master Plan. 

Location: The Public Civic Site totaling 2.82 acres more or less is located at the 

southwest corner of Lake Worth Road and Barefoot Lake Drive 

(Wellington Shores Drive) within the Orange Point Planned Unit 

Development (PUD) Master Plan. Exhibit “A” is a location map and 

Exhibit “B” is the legal description of the subject property. 

XII. Site Data 

Existing Use: Vacant 

Proposed Uses: Place of worship and day care center 

Parcel ID: 73-41-44-26-01-018-0000 

Parcel Size: 2.82 acres more or less



Future 

Land Use 

Designation: Institutional/Public Facilities/Utilities 

Zoning: Planned Unit Development (PUD) 

XIII. Land Use and Zoning 

EXISTING LAND USE, FUTURE LAND USE & ZONING 

Existing Use Future Land Use Zoning 

Subject site Vacant Institutional/Public 

Planned Unit 

Facilities/Utilities 


North Single-family homes Residential C (max 3 units/acre) Planned Unit 


East Single-family homes Residential C (max 3 units/acre) Planned Unit 


South Single-family homes Residential C (max 3 units/acre) Planned Unit 


West Single-family homes Residential C (max 3 units/acre) Planned Unit 


XIV. Site History 

The Orange Point Planned Unit Development (PUD) Master Plan was originally approved by Palm 

Beach County Board of Commissioners in the 1980’s. The Orange Point PUD includes a portion of 

Section 23 and all of Section 26 and 34. This overall PUD has been amended by the County and 

Wellington. 

The subject site is the “Public Civic Site” (a.k.a. Tract “R” of The Isles at Wellington Plat I) on the 

Orange Point PUD Master Plan. Wellington accepted conveyance of this property from Lennar 

Land Partners with Resolution 2005-47 on April 5, 2005. 

Wellington declared the “Public Civic Site” surplus property and authorize the sale to the petitioner 

Temple B’Nai Jacob of Wellington, Inc., on July 14, 2009 per Resolution 2009-61 (Exhibit “C”). 

Pursuant to subsequent direction of the Council at their meeting of August 25, 2009, a contract for 

sale and purchase agreement was made on September 8, 2009 between Wellington and 

petitioner for the development of the site as a synagogue, pre-school and related uses. (a copy of 

the Contract is attached as Exhibit “G “). 

The agent Sexton Engineering Associates Inc., on behalf of Temple B’Nai Jacob of Wellington 

Inc., has requested a Development Order Amendment / Master Plan Amendment (2009-010 DOA 

1 and MPA 1) to the Orange Point PUD Master Plan and a Development Order Amendment 

(2007-010 DOA 2) for requested uses to allow a proposed place of worship (synagogue) and day 

care center (general). 

XV. Staff Analysis 

The petitioner is requesting:



C.) A Development Order Amendment / Master Plan Amendment (2009-010 DOA 1 and MPA 

1) for the Orange Point PUD Master Plan to change the existing property designation from 

“Public Civic Site” to “Civic Site” and provide a new point of ingress / egress on Lake 

Worth Road and Barefoot Lake Drive for the Civic Site totaling 2.82 acres; and 

D.) A Development Order Amendment to allow the requested uses for a place of worship 

(synagogue) and day care center (general) for the proposed Civic Site totaling 2.82 acres 

located within the Orange Point Planned Unit Development (PUD) Master Plan. 

The existing Orange Point PUD Master Plan indicates the subject site is designated as a Public 

Civic Site. The petitioner is requesting to amend this designation on the master plan to “Civic Site” 

and update the Site & Tabular Data to “Civic – Synagogue & Preschool.” 

The Land Development Regulations (LDR) requires that all places of worship which include a day 

care front on a collector or arterial street. Lake Worth Road is an arterial street. The proposed 

request is to provide a new ingress / egress on Lake Worth Road for the proposed place of 

worship and day care/preschool use. The ingress / egress driveway on Lake Worth Road is limited 

to right in and right out only. This new access on Lake Worth Road will significantly reduce the 

potential traffic impact on Barefoot Lake Drive and the adjacent residential properties. A second 

access on Barefoot Lake Drive is also requested to provide alternative circulation to the parking lot 

and a separate access to the south for service and deliveries. The petitioner is proposing to 

restripe the centerline and turn lanes on Barefoot Lake Drive and at the intersection of Lake Worth 

Road to maintain adopted levels of service. Exhibit “D” is the amended Orange Point PUD Master 

Plan indicating the new access points to Tract R. 

Places of worship and day care uses within a Planned Unit Development Zoning District are 

Requested Uses (LDR Sec. 6.8.1 Table 6.8-2) and require a DOA approval per the Land 

Development Regulations (LDR). This place of worship and day care center are proposed within a 

20,300 square foot building in the south portion of the site with a 6,000 square foot outdoor play 

area in the southwest corner of the property. The Temple B'Nai Jacob of Wellington conceptual 

site plan is attached as Exhibit “E.” The petitioner has agreed to submit for site plan review and 

approval from Wellington’s Development Review Committee prior to permitting of this project. The 

site plan for this project shall comply with all relevant and appropriate portions of the LDR. The 

proposed day care center/preschool shall be limited to a maximum of 80 children/students at any 

one time. 

Wellington’s Traffic Consultant letter dated October 26, 2009 (Exhibit “F”) requires this project be 

limited to the following square footage: 6,500 square foot for the synagogue, 6,000 square foot for 

the day care center and 7,800 square foot for the social hall; and with a recommended condition 

the social hall not be utilized when the synagogue is in use. 

Consistency with Comprehensive Plan: 

The proposed change to the Orange Point PUD Master Plan is consistent with Wellington’s 

Comprehensive Plan including but not limited to preserving and protecting the characteristics of 

the communities in Wellington; neighborhood compatibility policies; and Land Use, Transportation 

and Infrastructure Elements.



Objective 1.2 of the Land Use Element requires Wellington to direct future growth into areas 

served by urban services that have adequate capacity. The proposed use of a place of worship 

with an accessory day care facility is consistent with Policy 1.3.19 (Institutional/Public 

Facilities/Utilities Land Use) and permitted on a Civic site. 

Policy 1.1.9 of the Transportation Element requires Wellington to enact and enforce land 

development code standards and control roadway access point, on-site flow and on-site parking. 

The additional ingress / egress to this site were reviewed by DRC and were determined to meet or 

exceed Wellington’s code requirements. With the proposed new access points the intersection of 

Lake Worth Road and Barefoot Lake Drive should operate within adopted levels of service without 

improvements to the existing Lake Worth Road intersection. 

Policy 1.6.1 of the Infrastructure Element requires Wellington to direct growth to areas within 

Wellington’s established Urban Service Area to maximize the use of existing and future 

infrastructure. A place of worship and day care use within a Planned Unit Development Zoning 

District are Requested Uses and consistent with the goals, objectives and policies of Wellington’s 


Conformity with Zoning Standards: 

The proposed petitions are consistent with the LDR zoning and shall be applicable to development 

standards such as minimum setbacks, maximum building heights, and landscape buffering 

standards. This project should not adversely impact the existing residential properties. The 

petitioner is required to submit a site plan for the place of worship and day care facility that will be 

reviewed to ensure compliance with the LDR. 

Compatibility with Surrounding Land Uses: 

The Institutional/Public Facilities/Utilities Land Use is already approved on Wellington’s Future 

Land Use Map and the site was designated as Civic on the Orange Point PUD Master Plan. The 

Institutional/Public Facilities/Utilities Land Use and Civic designations are consistent with the 

proposed place of worship and day care facility. Staff is recommending limiting the square footage 

of uses proposed on the property and no occurrence of simultaneous events in the synagogue 

and social hall to minimize potential impact on adjacent residential properties. 

Environmental Resources: 

There are no adverse impacts to the natural environment expected to occur as a result of this 

request. 

Adequacy of Public Services: 

The site has potable water, sanitary sewer and trash disposal all available from Wellington. 

Wellington’s Traffic Consultant determined this project is in compliance with the County traffic 

performance standards and Wellington’s adopted Level of Service. 

XVI. Development Review Committee (DRC)



The Development Order Amendment /Master Plan Amendment for the Orange Point PUD Master 

Plan and Conditional/Requested Uses, were certified at the October 14, 2009 Development 

Review Committee meeting. 

XVII. Public Notification and Public Hearings 

Planning Zoning and Adjustment Board (PZAB): 




PZAB Hearing December 10, 2009 

Staff did not receive any phone calls or inquires regarding the mailing, newspaper advertisement 

or posted signs for this petition as of November 25, 2009 when the PZAB report was published. 

Village Council: 




Village Council Meeting January 12, 2010 

Staff received several phone calls, e-mails and front counter inquires prior to the December 10, 

2009 PZAB meeting which had a capacity attendance. 

On December 3, 2009 a small group of homeowners from The Isles at Wellington, Grand Isles and 

Bluff Harbor meet with staff regarding concerns with the proposed facility and possible impact to 

adjacent residential properties. 

The LDR requires certified mailing to each property owner (as it appears on the last approved tax 

roll) within a designated radius of subject property. The petitioner provided certified mailing 

envelopes with returned receipts, list of owners with mailing addresses and tax radius maps for 

300 and 500 feet on September 22, 2009 from the Palm Beach County Property Appraiser. Staff 

received return receipts for Grand Isles, Bluff Harbor and Wellington Shores Homeowners 

Associations and two returned to sender envelopes for the Isles at Wellington Community 

Association from United States Postal Service. 

XVIII. Planning, Zoning and Adjustment Board Action 

At the December 10, 2009 Planning, Zoning and Adjustment Board (PZAB) meeting homeowners 

from The Isles at Wellington, Grand Isles, Bluff Harbor and Wellington Shores voiced substantive 

concerns of possible traffic impacts, access on Barefoot Lake Drive, proposed size and location of 

the building, location of the dumpster, day care (preschool) use. Several residents also raised a 

procedural objection claiming the homeowners associations and some affected residents had not 

received mailed notification from Wellington for the public hearings. A review of the file revealed 

that notice’s had been sent to all residents and homeowners associations. Letters to the Isles at 

Wellington Community Association were sent to the management company listed in the property 

appraiser’s office, returned unclaimed. Notice was sufficient and in accordance with Wellington’s 

LDR requirements. 

The petitioner’s agent also requested Condition 6 be modified to allow an extended build out date 

for Phase 2 until 2020.



The PZAB approved (4-1) the Development Order Amendment 2009-010 DOA 1 and Master Plan 

Amendment 2009-010 MPA 1 (Resolution No. R2010 – 05); and Development Order Amendment 

2009-010 DOA 2 (Resolution No. R2010 – 06) with the staff recommended conditions. 

XIX. Village Council Action 

The Council meeting is scheduled for January 12, 2010. 

XX. Staff Recommendation 

C.) Based on the findings contained within this staff report and consistency with both 



010 DOA 1 and Master Plan Amendment 2009-010 MPA 1 (Resolution No. R2010 – 05) for 

the Orange Point PUD Master Plan to change the designation from “Public Civic Site” to 

“Civic Site” and provide a new point of ingress / egress on Lake Worth Road and Barefoot 

Lake Drive. The Civic Site totaling 2.82 acres (a.k.a. Tract “R” of The Isles at Wellington 

Plat I) is recommend for approval with the following condition: 

2. The ingress / egress driveway on Lake Worth Road for the Civic Site shall be limited to 

right in and right out only. 

D.) Based on the findings contained within this staff report and consistency with both 



010 DOA 2 (Resolution No. R2010 – 06) to allow requested uses for a place of worship and 

day care center for the proposed Civic Site totaling 2.82 acres (a.k.a. Tract “R” of The Isles 

at Wellington Plat I) located within the Orange Point Planned Unit Development (PUD) 

Master Plan with the following conditions: 


Wellington" prepared by Sexton Engineering Associates, date stamped October 19, 

2009. 









Development Order Amendment that must be approved by Council. 

14. Any change in use or occupancy type shall be considered an amendment to the 

requested use approval and require Wellington review and approval. Conversion from a 

place of worship or day care center will require Council approval and compliance with



Wellington’s Comprehensive Plan and the Land Development Regulations (LDR). 






16. The owner or operator shall obtain all appropriate federal, state and local permits / 

licenses for the day care center. 



18. Prior to commencing site development, the owner/applicant shall obtain all required 

building and engineering permits. 

List of Exhibits



Exhibit “A” Location Map 

Exhibit “B” Legal Description 

Exhibit “C” Sale of Tract R to Temple B’Nai Jacob of Wellington Resolution 2009-61 

Exhibit “D” Amended Orange Point PUD Master Plan 

Exhibit “E” Conceptual Site Plan for Temple B'Nai Jacob of Wellington 

Exhibit “F” Village Traffic Consultant Letter














































8. A 




AGENDA ITEM NAME: ORDINANCE NO. 2009-17 EQUESTRIAN OVERLAY ZONING DISTRICT 

ZTA 

AN ORDINANCE OF THE VILLAGE COUNCIL OF WELLINGTON, FLORIDA, PERTAINING TO 

ZONING; AMENDING THE LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATION CODE OF WELLINGTON BY 

AMENDING ARTICLE 6, CHAPTER 10,.“EQUESTRIAN OVERLAY ZONING DISTRICT;” 

AMENDING SECTION 6.10.3 REGARDING “DEFINITIONS,” PROVIDING FOR DEFINITIONS OF 

“EQUESTRIAN ARENA, PRIVATE, COVERED,” “EQUESTRIAN AREA, PRIVATE, NOT 

COVERED,”AND FOR “RECREATIONAL VEHICLE;” AMENDING SECTION 6.10.4 REGARDING 

“SUBAREAS” BY CREATING AN NEW SUBAREA E; AMENDING SECTION 6.10.6 REGARDING 

“DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS” BY PROVIDING BY INCREASING THE PERMITTED FLOOR 

AREA RATIO FOR STRUCTURES; AMENDING SECTION 6.10.7.A REGARDING “PRINCIPAL 

AND CONDITIONAL USES” BY AMENDING TABLE C TO CHANGE CERTAIN PERMITTED AND 

ACCESSORY USES; AMENDING SECTION 6.10.7.B REGARDING “ADDITIONAL STANDARDS,” 

PROVIDING FOR ADDITIONAL STANDARDS FOR OUTDOOR AUCTIONS AND BED AND 

BREAKFAST ESTABLISHMENTS; AMENDING SECTION 6.10.8 REGARDING COMMON 

FEATURES INCLUDING EQUESTRIAN AMENITIES WITHIN A CLUSTER DEVELOPMENT; 

AMENDING SECTION 6.10.9 REGARDING “SUPPLEMENTAL DISTRICT REGULATIONS” AND 

PROVIDING FOR ADDITIONAL REGULATIONS FOR TEMPORARY RESIDENCES, ROOFED 

EQUESTRIAN ARENAS, USE OF TENTS AS TEMPORARY STALLS, PARKING ON PUBLIC 

RIGHTS-OF-WAY, STORAGE OF HORSE TRAILERS, AND FENCING; AMENDING SECTION 

6.10.10 REGARDING “BRIDLE TRAILS AND EASEMENTS,” PROVIDING FOR DEDICATION OF 

BRIDLE TRAILS; AMENDING SECTION 6.10.12.D REGARDING “SUPPLEMENTAL 

REGULATIONS FOR BARNS AND STABLES,” ELIMINATING DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 

COMMITTEE FOR CERTAIN SITE PLANS; AMENDING SECTION 6.10.12.E REGARDING 

“ADDITIONAL SITE PLAN REVIEW;” PROVIDING A REPEALER CLAUSE; PROVIDING A 

SAVINGS CLAUSE; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. 





FIRST READING 


REQUEST: Approve amendments to the text of the Equestrian Overlay Zoning District. as 

presented in Ordinance No. 2009-17.



EXPLANATION: Adopt amendments to the existing Equestrian Overlay Zoning District (EOZD) 

regulations, based upon recommendations from the Equestrian Preserve Committee and PZAB. 

FISCAL IMPACT: Not Applicable. 

RECOMMENDATION: Approve amendments to the text of the EOZD regulations as presented 

in Ordinance No. 2009-17. 

Ordinance No. 2009-17 was reviewed and approved by by the Equestrian Preserve Committee 

on October 14, 2009 and by PZAB on November 5, 2009. The ordinance was presented to the 

Council on first reading on December 8, 2009. Based on discussion at that meeting, Councildirected 

amendments to the ordinance are summarized below. 

1. Amending Table D of Sec. 6.10.8.A regarding cluster development, to specify the following: 

(a) minimum lot size of 0.33 acres for cluster development; and (b) maximum density of not 

more than one unit per acre. 

2. Amending the text of Sec. 6.10.8.A regarding cluster development as follows: (a) minimum 

lot size of 0.33 acres; (b) maximum density of not more than one unit per acre; (c) allow only 

detached single family residential dwelling units; and (d) require internal access from each 

unit to equestrian amenities without crossing a road. 

The ordinance has been revised to reflect those amendments. The ordinance also amends the 

EOZD in the manner summarized below. 

1. Creating new definitions for the following terms: “Equestrian Arena, Private, Covered;” 

“Equestrian Arena, Private, Not Covered;” and “Recreational Vehicle.” 

2. Creating a new “Subarea E” within the EOZD, consisting of the Rustic Ranches subdivision. 

3. Increasing maximum floor area ratio (FAR) within the EOZD from 15% to 20%, subject to 

limits established by the Future Land Use Element of the Comprehensive Plan. 

4. Changing various permitted, conditional and prohibited uses within the EOZD, primarily to 

amend the following: (a) allow “B&Bs” as a conditional use within residential portions of a 

PUD;(b) changing “Day Care, General” to a conditional use rather than a permitted use; (c) 

creating “Recreational Vehicle Park” as a conditional use within the Commercial Recreation 

Future Land Use Map category;; and (d) allowing a “Veterinary Clinic” as a permitting use on 

properties with a “Commercial Recreation” designation. 

5. Creating additional standards for “Auction, Outoor.” 

6. Creating additional standards applicable to “Bed and Breakfast” (B&B) establishments 

located within the EOZD. 

7. Prohibiting “Cluster Development” within Subarea E. 

8. Requiring common features, including equestrian amenities associated with a “Cluster 

Development” to be limited for use to residents and property owners. 

9. Allowing recreational vehicles within areas assigned a Commercial Recreation” Future Land 

Use Map designation when a “Recreational Vehicle Park” is created as a conditional use 

when located in association with an approved, permanent equestrian venue. 

10. Creating additional standards for “Covered Equestrian Arenas.”



11. Allowing an extension in the amount of time that temporary tents can be utilized for stabling 

purposed while a permanent barn is being constructed. 

12. Increasing the number of horse trailers that can be parked on residential property, subject to 

existing screening or locational requirements. 

13. Clarifying the procedures for possible dedication of bridle trail rights-of-way. 

14. Eliminating requirement for review of large lot stables by the Development Review 

Committee. 

15. Increasing the percentage for which an “Administrative Variance” can be issued from 10% to 

15%, subject to compliance with all other standards of the EOZD and the subarea. 

Staff recommends adoption of the proposed amendments to the text of the EOZD.



ORDINANCE NO. 2009-17 

AN ORDINANCE OF THE VILLAGE COUNCIL OF THE VILLAGE OF 

WELLINGTON, FLORIDA, PERTAINING TO ZONING; AMENDING THE LAND 

DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS OF THE VILLAGE OF WELLINGTON BY 

AMENDING ARTICLE 6, CHAPTER 10,.“EQUESTRIAN OVERLAY ZONING 

DISTRICT;” AMENDING SECTION 6.10.3 REGARDING “DEFINITIONS,” 

PROVIDING FOR DEFINITIONS OF “COVERED EQUESTRIAN ARENA” AND FOR 

“RECREATIONAL VEHICLE;” AMENDING SECTION 6.10.4 REGARDING 

“SUBAREAS” BY CREATING A NEW SUBAREA E; AMENDING SECTION 6.10.6 

REGARDING “DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS” BY PROVIDING SETBACKS FOR 

ROOFED EQUESTRIAN ARENAS AND BY INCREASING THE PERMITTED FLOOR 

AREA RATIO FOR STRUCTURES; AMENDING SECTION 6.10.7.A REGARDING 

“PRINCIPAL AND CONDITIONAL USES” BY AMENDING TABLE C TO CHANGE 

CERTAIN PERMITTED AND ACCESSORY USES; AMENDING SECTION 6.10.7.B 

REGARDING “ADDITIONAL STANDARDS,” PROVIDING FOR ADDITIONAL 

STANDARDS FOR OUTDOOR AUCTIONS AND BED AND BREAKFAST 

ESTABLISHMENTS; AMENDING SECTION 6.10.8 REGARDING MAXIMUM 

DENSITY AND MINIMUM LOT SIZE REQUIREMENTS AND AMENDING 

PROVISIONS REGARDING CLUSTER DEVELOPMENT; AMENDING SECTION 

6.10.9 REGARDING “SUPPLEMENTAL DISTRICT REGULATIONS” AND 

PROVIDING FOR ADDITIONAL REGULATIONS FOR TEMPORARY RESIDENCES, 

ROOFED EQUESTRIAN ARENAS, USE OF TENTS AS TEMPORARY STALLS, 

PARKING ON PUBLIC RIGHTS-OF-WAY, STORAGE OF HORSE TRAILERS, AND 

FENCING; AMENDING SECTION 6.10.10 REGARDING “BRIDLE TRAILS AND 

EASEMENTS,” PROVIDING FOR DEDICATION OF BRIDLE TRAILS; AMENDING 

SECTION 6.10.12.D REGARDING “SUPPLEMENTAL REGULATIONS FOR BARNS 

AND STABLES,” ELIMINATING DEVELOPMENT REVIEW COMMITTEE FOR 

CERTAIN SITE PLANS; AMENDING SECTION 6.10.12.E REGARDING 

“ADDITIONAL SITE PLAN REVIEW,” PROVIDING FOR REVIEW OF CERTAIN SITE 

PLANS BY THE EQUESTRIAN PRESERVE COMMITTEE; PROVIDING A 

REPEALER CLAUSE; PROVIDING A SAVINGS CLAUSE; AND PROVIDING AN 


WHEREAS, the Council of Wellington, Florida (“Village”), as the governing body, pursuant to 

the authority vested in Chapter 163 and Chapter 166, Florida Statutes, is authorized and empowered 

to consider changes to its land development regulations; and 

WHEREAS, Wellington has determined that the existing Wellington regulations should be 

amended for the Equestrian Overlay Zoning District (EOZD); and 

WHEREAS, the recommended modifications to the EOZD were presented to the Equestrian 

Preservation Committee (EPC) at its public hearing conducted on October 14, 2009, and the EPC 

has made a recommendation to the Planning, Zoning and Adjustment Board; and 

WHEREAS, the proposed modifications to the EOZD was presented to the Planning, Zoning 

and Adjustment Board (PZAB) at its public hearing conducted on November 5, 2009, and the PZAB 

has made recommendations to the Council; and 

WHEREAS, in accordance with the requirements of Chapter 163, Florida Statutes, Wellington 

Planning, Zoning and Adjustment Board, acting as the Land Development Regulation Board, has 

reviewed the proposed Ordinance and has determined that the proposed regulation is consistent with 

Wellington’s Comprehensive Plan; and



NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE VILLAGE COUNCIL OF THE VILLAGE OF 

WELLINGTON, FLORIDA, THAT: 

SECTION 1: Article 6. Zoning Districts, Chapter 2. “Zoning District Purposes” Section 6.2.17. 

of the Wellington’s Land Development Regulations is hereby amended to read as follows: 

Section 6.2.17 EOD EOZD (“Equestrian Overlay Zoning District”) 

The purpose and intent of the EOD Equestrian Overlay Zoning District (EOZD) is to protect and 

enhance the Equestrian Preservation Areas of Wellington, as created by the Comprehensive Plan; to 

preserve, maintain and enhance the equestrian community associated with Wellington; to preserve, 

maintain and enhance the rural lifestyle associated with the equestrian community; to identify and 

encourage types of land uses that are supportive of the equestrian and rural character of the 

Equestrian Preservation Areas; and to preserve, maintain and enhance development patterns which 

are consistent with the overall character of the equestrian community. The EOD is consistent with all 

future land use designations in the Land Use Element in the Wellington Comprehensive Plan. Uses in 

the EOD shall be as provided in the zoning regulations for that district, subject to the supplementary 

standards contained in the LDR. 

SECTION 2: Article 6 “Zoning Districts” Chapter 10 “Equestrian Overlay Zoning District” of 

Wellington’s Local Development Regulations is hereby amended to read as follows: 

Chapter 10. EQUESTRIAN OVERLAY ZONING DISTRICT (EOZD) 

Sec. 6. 10. 1 Purpose and Intent 

The purpose and intent of these Equestrian Overlay Zoning District (EOZD) regulations is: 

Protection 

To protect and enhance the Equestrian Preservation Areas of Wellington, as created by the 


Preservation 

To preserve, maintain, and enhance the equestrian community associated with Wellington. 

Rural lifestyle 

To preserve, maintain, and enhance the rural lifestyle associated with the equestrian 

community. 

Land uses 

To identify and encourage types of land uses that are supportive of the equestrian and rural 

character of the Equestrian Preservation Areas. 

Development patterns 

To preserve, maintain, and enhance development patterns which are consistent with the 

overall character of the equestrian community. 

Sec. 6. 10. 2 Applicability and Conflicts 

The provisions of this Article shall apply to all land located within the Equestrian Preservation Areas, 

as identified on the Future Land Use Map of the Wellington Comprehensive Plan. 

In the event of any conflicts between the requirements of this Article and the requirements of the Land 

Development Regulations, the requirements of this Article shall govern. In the absence of any 

conflict, the requirements of the underlying zoning district and the Land Development Regulations 

shall be applicable and supplemental to the requirements of this Article. 

The provisions of this Article and any amendment hereto shall not affect the validity of any lawfully 

approved development order approved prior to August 27, 2002, if the development order remains



valid. Issuance of subsequent development orders shall be based on the requirements of this Article; 

provided, however that a complete application for development approval received prior August 27, 

2002, shall be reviewed using the criteria that existed on the date of the application. The provisions of 

this Article shall apply to any request to modify any development order or permit; however, only the 

area directly affected by the proposed modification shall be subject to the provisions of this Article. 

Sec. 6. 10. 2 Definitions 

For the purposes of this Article, the following definitions are established: 

A. Cluster Development (Equestrian): a residential development pattern that 

allows a lot size less than the minimum required within the applicable subarea and provides 

common areas for equestrian amenities, open space, preservation of environmentallysensitive 

areas, or similar features consistent with the purpose and intent of the overlay 

district. 

B. Dressage Wall: a structure utilized in dressage training, consisting of a permanent wall 

with a mirror located on one side of the wall and facing a dressage training or practice ring. 

C. Equestrian Amenities: low-impact amenities that serve the purposes of equestrian 

use and training activities, including structural improvements such as fences and dressage 

walls, but not lighting standards or seating, and non-structural improvements such as 

banks, ditches, jumps, paddocks, polo fields, riding arenas, and riding rings. Equestrian 

amenities do not include livestock waste storage areas or similar facilities. 

D. Equestrian Arena, Private, Covered: a roofed structure utilized for 

equestrian purposes, including practice sessions, shows, etc. 

E. Equestrian Arena, Private, Not Covered: a structure utilized for 

equestrian purposes, including practice session, shows, etc. 

F. Equestrian Instruction: instruction related to such equestrian activities as polo, 

riding, dressage, and jumping. 

G. General Store: an equestrian or agriculturally-oriented retail establishment of a 

community-serving nature that sells convenience goods, equestrian-related products, 

agricultural-related products, prepared foods, fresh fruits, vegetables, flowers, and other 

products of a similar nature. 

H. Lot Coverage: the building footprint of all principal and accessory structures 

constructed on a lot or parcel, not including shade houses or opened-sided roofed areas 

such as covered porches or carports. 

I. Recreational Vehicle: a travel trailer, camping trailer, motor home, 

private motor coach, park trailer or fifth-wheel trailer as defined in 

Section 320.01, Florida Statutes, as amended. 

J. Stall: a compartment for a domestic animal in a stable or barn.



Sec. 6. 10. 2 Subareas Established. 

For the purposes of this Article, the following subareas are established and shall be so indicated on 

the Future Land Use Official Zoning Map of Wellington: 

A. Subarea A 

Subarea A, generally consisting of Section 2, Township 44S, Range 41E and Section 35, 

Township 43S, Range 41E, including the area described as “Palm Beach Little Ranches” 

and “Palm Beach Little Ranches East.” 

B. Subarea B 

Subarea B, generally consisting of those portions of the Wellington PUD located in Sections 

8 and 17, Township 44S, Range 41E, including the developments known as Saddle Trail 

Park and Paddock Park No. 2 and Parcel “H”, Greenview Shores No. 2 of Wellington – 

(P.U.D.), according to the Plat thereof, as recorded in Plat Book 31, Page 120 – 136, of the 

Public Records of Palm Beach County, Florida. 

C. Subarea C 

Subarea C, generally consisting of Sections 19, 27, 28, 29, 30, 32, 33, and 34, Township 

4S, Range 41E and Section 25, Township 44S, Range 40E, located south of Lake Worth 

Road and west of 120 th Avenue, including all of Palm Beach Point and that portion of the 

Orange Point PUD located in Section 34. 

F. Subarea D 

Subarea D, generally consisting of portions of Sections 15 and 16 and Sections 20, 21, and 

22, Township 44S, Range 41E, including the Wellington Country Place PUD and the 

Equestrian Club PUD. 

E. Subarea E 

Subarea E generally consisting of Section 13, Township 44 South, Range 40 East, 

commonly known as “Rustic Ranches.” 

Sec. 6. 10. 5. Applications and Development Review Process 

Unless otherwise provided in this Article, the requirements of Article 5 regarding 

applications for development orders shall apply within the Equestrian Preservation Areas. 

All applications within the Equestrian Preserve Area subject to review by the Planning, 

Zoning and Adjustment Board shall be reviewed by the Equestrian Preserve Committee 

prior to review by the Planning, Zoning and Adjustment Board.



Sec. 6. 10. 6. Development Standards 

Minimum setbacks and other development standards for principal and accessory uses 

within the Equestrian Preservation Areas are established in Table A below. 

A. Minimum Setbacks 

Measurement. 

All setbacks shall be measured from property lines or from right-of-way easement 

lines in those subdivisions without dedicated or platted rights-of-way. 

Exemptions. 

Excluding dressage walls, there are no required setbacks for equestrian 

amenities. 

Table A. 

Minimum Setbacks for Principal and Accessory Uses 

Minimum Setback for 

Minimum Setback for 

Principal Structures (1) Accessory Structures 

Setback All 

Equestrian 

Areas 

Other 

Exceptions 

(See Notes) 

Conforming 

Lots 

Nonconforming 

Lots 

Front 100 Feet 

50 Feet (2) 

25 Feet (3) 

100 Feet 100 Feet 

Side, Interior 50 Feet 

25 Feet (2) 

25 Feet (3) 

25 Feet 

15 Feet – 

Structures 

Side, Corner 80 Feet 

50 Feet (2) 

25 Feet (3) 

25 Feet 

25 Feet – 

Structures 

Rear 100 Feet 

25 Feet (2) 

25 Feet (4) 

15 Feet (5) 

25 Feet 

15 Feet – 

Structures 

Notes and Additional Standards for Affected Setbacks. 

(1) Single-family dwellings, barns, stables, covered arenas and similar 

structures are always considered a principal use. 

(2) Setback for Little Ranches No. 2 and Little Ranches East. 

(3) Setback for Paddock Park I and II and Saddle Trail Park and Mystic 

Equestrian (Ordinance 2009-10). 

(4)Setback for barns in Paddock Park I and II and Saddle Trail Park and 

Mystic Equestrian (Ordinance 2009-10). 

(5) Setback for dwellings in Paddock Park I and II and Saddle Trail Park 

and Mystic Equestrian (Ordinance 2009-10). 

B. Development Standards 

All development in the Equestrian Preservation Areas shall comply with the Development 

Standards set forth in Table B below.



Table B. 

Development Standards for Principal and Accessory Uses 

Development Standard Minimum Dimension or Standard 

Minimum Lot Width 

300 feet, or as otherwise provided in a current, 

valid development order. 

Minimum Lot Depth 

300 feet, or as otherwise provided in a current, 

valid development order. 

15% 20%, or as otherwise provided in a current, 

Maximum Floor Area Ratio 

valid development order or as otherwised 

provided in the Future Land Use Element of the 


Maximum Building Height 35 feet. 

Maximum Lot Coverage 

20%, or as otherwise provided in a current, valid 

development order. 

Sec. 6.10.7. Permitted And Conditional Uses 

A. Principal and Accessory Uses 

Uses in the Equestrian Preservation Areas are limited to those uses set forth in Table C 

below. To the extent that Table C conflicts with Tables 6.4-1 and 6.8-2 of the Land 

Development Regulations, the provisions of Table C shall control. 

Use 

Table C. 

Permitted, Conditional and Prohibited Uses 

Properties 

with No 

Current 

PUD Master 

Plan 

Residential 

Pods of 

PUDs 

Commercial 

Comm. Pods 

of PUDs & 

Comm. 

Plnnd. 

Devels. 

Comm. 

Rec. 

Legend 

C = Conditional Use ● P = Permitted Use ● Blank = Prohibited Use 

D = Development Review Committee ● S = Special Permit 

Accessory 

Dwelling Unit 

P P P P 

Agriculture, Bona 

Fide 

P C 

Agricultural Sales 

and Service 

C C 

Agricultural Stand S S 

Agricultural 

Storage, Indoor 

Air Curtain 

P P P P 

Incinerator, 

Temporary 

S S P P 

Airplane Landing 

Strip, Accessory 

Amusements, 

C C 

Temporary and 

Special Events 

S S 

Additional 

Standards 

(§6.10.7.2) and 

this Section 

See Sec. 

6.10.7.B.1 

(1) 

(3) See below 

See 

Sec.6.10.7.B.2



Use 

Arena, 

Auditorium, or 

Stadium 

Assembly, 

Nonprofit 

Institutional 

Properties 

with No 

Current 

PUD Master 

Plan 

Residential 

Pods of 

PUDs 

Commercial 

Comm. Pods 

of PUDs & 

Comm. 

Plnnd. 

Devels. 

Comm. 

Rec. 

Legend 



C C C 

Auction, Outdoor P P P 

Bed and 

Breakfast 

Communication 

Tower, 

Commercial 

Congregate Living 

Facility 

(Community 

Residential 

Home), Type I (6 

or less residents) 

Day Care, Family 

(5 or less 

children) 

Day Care, 

General (More 

than 6 Children) 

Dwelling, Single 

Family, Detached 

Equestrian Arena, 

Commercial 


Private/Not 

Covered 


Private/Covered 

Equestrian 

Instruction 

Equestrian Uses, 

Seasonal 

Excavation and 

Fill (Noncomm.) 

Farrier (Non- 

mobile) 

Feed Store and 

Tack Shop 

P 

C 

C 

C C C 

P P 

P P 

P P 

C C P 

D 

P 

D 

P 

P P 

P P P P 

S S S S 

P P P P 

P P P 

C 

C 

P 

C 

P P 

Additional 

Standards 

(§6.10.7.2) and 

this Section 

See Sec. 

6.10.7.B.3 

See below. 

See Sec. 

6.10.7.B.4 

See below. 

See Sec. 

6.10.9.C



Use 

Properties 

with No 

Current 

PUD Master 

Plan 

Residential 

Pods of 

PUDs 

Commercial 

Comm. Pods 

of PUDs & 

Comm. 

Plnnd. 

Devels. 

Comm. 

Rec. 

Legend 



Fitness Center P P 

Fruit and 

Vegetable Market 

Garage, Yard, or 

Rummage Sale 

P P 

P P 

General Store P P 

Government 

Services, 

Municipal 

Government 

D D D D 

Services, Non- 

Municipal 

D D D D 

Groom’s Quarters P P P 

Guest Cottage P P 

Helipad, 

Accessory 

C D 

Home 

Occupations 

P P P 

House of Worship P P P P 

Kennel, Private 

Landscape 

D 

Maintenance 

Service 

C 

Livestock Raising 

Mobile Home, 

Limited (2 Yr. 

D D D D 

Home Constr., 

Ag. Security & Ag. 

Office) 

S 

Nursery, Retail C C C 

Nursery, 

Wholesale 

D D D 

Park, Passive P P P P 

Park, Public P P P P 

Professional and 

Business Office 

P 

Recreational 

S 

Vehicle Park 

C 

Restaurant, 

General 

P P 

Restaurant, 

Specialty 

P P 

Schools P P P P 

Additional 

Standards 

(§6.10.7.2) and 

this Section 

See Sec. 

6.10.7.B.5 

See Sec. 

6.10.7.B.6 

See Sec. 

6.10.9.A



Use 

Properties 

with No 

Current 

PUD Master 

Plan 

Residential 

Pods of 

PUDs 

Commercial 

Comm. Pods 

of PUDs & 

Comm. 

Plnnd. 

Devels. 

Comm. 

Rec. 

Legend 



Security / 

Caretakers 

Quarters (Bona 

Fide Agriculture 

S S S 

Only) 

Shadehouse, 

Accessory 

P P 

Stables P P P P 

Utility, Minor P P P P 

Veterinary Clinic 

Wastewater, 

D P P 

Water, or 

Stormwater 

Treatment Plant 

C C C 

Additional 

Standards 

(§6.10.7.2) and 

this Section 

B. Additional Standards. 

The following additional standards shall apply to the uses listed in Table C. 

1. Accessory Dwelling Unit. 

An accessory dwelling unit may be used as a security office for any commercial 

equestrian or agricultural activity. 

2. Air Curtain Incinerator. 

Limited only to land-clearing activities pursuant to applicable Wellington permits 

and development orders. 

Auction, Outdoor. 

An outdoor auction shall be held not more than twice four times per 

year at the same location within a residential zoning district. 

There shall be no limit on the number of auctions held on a site with a 

commercial recreation future land use map designation. 

An outdoor auction shall not exceed more than three (3) days in 

length. 

Bed and Breakfast Establishments. 

Bed and breakfasts The establishments shall not exceed five (5) 

bedrooms for rent. 

Meal service shall be limited to guests and shall include only 

breakfasts and wine and cheese functions.



The establishment must be located as part of and attached to the 

principal single family residential dwelling on the property and 

the portion of the dwelling utilized for the establishment shall 

comply with all setbacks for the principal structure. 

The owner of the establishment must reside on the premise on a fulltime 

basis. 

Minimum lot size for an establishment shall be at least three (3) acres. 

Any combination of lots to achieve the minimum lot size shall be 

accomplished by a replat of the affected properties. 

Each establishment shall provide, at a minimum, the number and type 

of parking spaces listed below. 

Two (2) spaces per residential dwelling. 

One space for each room included as part of the establishment. 

At least two spaces for horse trailers. 

All parking areas must be located within 250 feet of the principal entrance of 

the establishment. 

Parking areas may consist of paving, grass, gravel or other materials, 

subject to Wellington’s engineering standards. 

Principal and secondary vehicular access for patrons shall be located 

along a collector or arterial street. Vehicular access for patrons 

shall not be provided via a local residential street. 

An application for approval of a bed and breakfast shall provide 

evidence of adequate water and sewer capacity adequate for the 

proposed establishment. 

Patrons of the establishment may stable horses in a barn or stable 

located on the same parcel as the establishment. 

One sign for the establishment may be installed, and shall comply 

with the following standards: 

maximum size of four (4) square feet; 

maximum installation height of eight (8) feet; 

maximum sign width of two (2) feet; 

maximum sign height of two (2) foot; and 

may indicate the establishment name, address, and logo. 

One establishment shall be separated from another establishment by 

not less than 1,320 lineal feet, measured from the closest property 

line of each establishment. 

General Store.



Outdoor display of fruits and vegetables is permitted, provided such display shall 

not exceed more than ten percent (10%) of gross floor area of the general store. 

Temporary flags, banners, signs, and similar advertising devices are 

prohibited. 

Retail or wholesale sale of gasoline, diesel fuels, and similar 

petroleum products are prohibited. 

Professional and Business Offices. 

Professional and business offices shall be limited to equestrian- and agriculturalrelated 

services. 

Sec. 6. 10. 8. Maximum Density and Minimum Lot Size 

Maximum density and minimum lot size requirements for property within the Equestrian 

Preservation Areas are established in Table D below. 

Table D. 

Maximum Density and Minimum Lot Size Requirement 

Subarea Maximum Density 

Minimum 

Lot Size 

Cluster 

Development 

A 0.2 Dwelling Units per Acre 5 Acres Prohibited 

B 0.5 Dwelling Units per Acre 1 Acre Prohibited 

C 0.1 Dwelling Units per Acre 10 Acres Prohibited 

D 0.5 Dwelling Units per Acre 

Acres 

Permitted 

E 

Note. 

0.2 Dwelling Units Per Acre 5 Acres Prohibited 

1. In a cluster development minimum lot size is 0.33 acres provided that 

overall density of the cluster development shall be not more than one unit 

per two acres. 

A. Cluster Development in Subarea D 

Cluster development in Subarea D shall comply with the standards listed below. 

1. Maximum Density. 

Maximum overall density shall be as provided in Table D. 

2. Minimum Lot Size. 

Minimum lot size shall be 0.33 acres provided that overall density within a cluster 

development shall be maintained at one unit per two acres or less. 

3. Common Features. 

In addition to such common areas as roads, drainage, and utilities, a cluster 

development shall provide common features, including equestrian amenities, 

preserve areas for environmentally-sensitive lands, or similar features consistent 

2 1



with the purposes of this District. Common features shall be reserved for use by 

property owners and residents of such cluster development. 

Dwelling Unit Types. 

Within a cluster development, only single family detached residential dwelling 

units are permitted. 

Planned Development Review. 

A cluster development shall be subject to review as a residential 

planned unit development or as an amendment to an existing 

residential planned unit development. 

As part of the planned unit development master plan, the master plan 

shall include information regarding the type, size, and general 

location of proposed common equestrian amenities, including but 

not limited to stables, rings, paddocks, exercise areas, internal 

equestrian and bridle trails, connections to external equestrian and 

bridle trails, and other improvements to be constructed for 

equestrian or equestrian-related purposes. 

Design, Installation of and Access to Common Equestrian Amenities. 

Common equestrian amenities shall be designed to serve as the 

internal focus or centerpiece of a cluster development. 

Installation of all equestrian amenities included within an approved 

cluster development shall is required prior to the issuance of a 

certificate of occupancy for any residential dwelling unit within 

the development. 

Each dwelling unit shall be provided with direct access to common 

equestrian amenities by a dedicated bridle trail or similar feature. 

This access shall be installed without crossing a road, vehicle use 

area or other vehicle circulation system. 

Deed Restriction. 

Prior to the issuance of a final master plan approval by the Development Review 

Committee, a deed restriction, in a form acceptable to the Village Attorney, shall 

be executed and recorded to limit in perpetuity the use of common equestrian 

amenities to owners and residents of the cluster development. 

Sec. 6.10.9. Supplemental District Regulations 

The requirements listed below shall apply to all uses within the Equestrian Preservation 

Areas. 

A. Temporary Residences and Recreational Vehicle Parks. 

1. Temporary Residence Prohibited. 

The use of recreational vehicles, travel trailers, campers, or similar vehicles as a 

temporary residence within the Equestrian Preserve Areas is prohibited.



2. Recreational Vehicle Park. 

A recreational vehicle park may be established within the EOZD subject to each 

of the standards listed below. 

The park is located within a property that is designated as 

“Commercial Recreation” by the Future Land Use Map or the 

Official Zoning Map. 

The park is located within a property that contains an approved 

permanent equestrian venue consisting of at least 50 acres, 

including the following: 

a commercial equestrian arena; 

an arena, auditorium or stadium; or 

a polo stadium 

The number of recreational vehicles permitted shall not exceed 50% 

of the underlying residential density of the equestrian venue 

parcel. 

The location of all permanent structures associated with the park and 

all recreational vehicles shall comply with the building setbacks 

applicable to principal structures. 

The individual recreational vehicle spaces within park shall be 

provided electrical, potable water and sanitary sewer service as 

indicated below. 

The electrical service connections for the park shall comply with all 

requirements of the Florida Building Code. 

The water service connections for the park are approved by Wellington and 

comply with all requirements of the Florida Building Code and other 

appropriate agencies such as the Palm Beach County Health 

Department (PBCHD). 

The sanitary sewer service is provided by connection to the wastewater 

treatment system or wastewater treatment is provided by a septic tank 

approved by Wellington and the PBCHD 

At a minimum, the park shall be landscaped and buffered as provided 

in Article 7, Chapter 3 of these land development regulations. 

Additional landscaping and buffering may be required when any 

portion of the park abuts property assigned a residential 

designation by the Future Land Use Map or the Official Zoning 

Map. 

Minimum size for a recreational vehicle parking space is 1,500 square 

feet, with a minimum width of 20 feet and a minimum depth of 

40 feet.



B. Dressage Walls 

A minimum of one vehicle parking space per recreational vehicle 

space shall be provided. Additional uses within the park shall 

provide the amount of parking required by Article 7, Chapter 2. 

Permitted accessory uses within a recreational vehicle park are 

indicated below. 

Recreation amenities, restricted to use by park clientele, including pools, 

tennis and shuffleboard courts, recreation rooms, equestrian facilities, 

nature and walking trails, play grounds, tot lots, and similar facilities. 

Gate houses or similar facilities designed to provide security to the park. 

Maintenance facilities. 

Administrative office space necessary for operation of the park. 

Commercial or retail use, restricted to use by park clientele, including 

convenience food and beverage items and recreational vehicle parts. 

1. Setbacks. 

Setbacks for dressage walls shall be ten (10) feet from front, rear, and side 

yards. 

2. Measurement of Setback. 

Setbacks shall be measured from property line or edge of roadway easement, as 

applicable. 

3. Easements. 

Dressage walls shall not be located within easements. 

4. Minimum Lot Size. 

A dressage wall shall be located on a parcel consisting of at least one (1) acre. 

5. Maximum Dimensions. 

A dressage wall shall not exceed the maximum dimensions listed below: 

a. Maximum height shall not exceed ten (10) feet. 

b. Maximum length shall not exceed seventy (70) feet. 

c. Maximum width shall not exceed four (4) feet. 

6. Other Applicable Standards.



a. Dressage walls shall comply with all requirements for sightdistance 

clear zones for rights-of-way. 

b. A dressage wall shall be constructed in a manner consistent with 

the architectural style, color, and materials of the principal 

structure. 

c. The reflective portion of a dressage wall shall be located so as to 

avoid reflecting the glare of the sun or lighting from any adjacent 

light source onto a public or private right-of-way or an abutting 

property. 

d. A building permit shall be obtained prior to construction of a 

dressage wall. 

e. The exterior portion of a dressage wall that is visible from a 

public right-of-way shall be screened with hedges, shrubs, or other 

suitable plant materials. A landscape plan for screening a dressage 

wall shall be submitted with a building permit application, and the 

landscaping shall be installed prior to issuance of a certificate of 

completion for the wall. The plant materials shall be of such 

number and type as to completely screen a dressage wall within 

two (2) years of installation. 

C. Equestrian Arenas, Covered. 

D. Fences 

1. Setbacks. 

Setbacks for roofed equestrian arenas shall comply with the requirements of 

Table A. 

2. Measurement of Setbacks. 

Setbacks shall be measured from property line or edge of roadway easement, as 

applicable. 

3. Design. 

A roofed equestrian arena shall be constructed in a manner consistent with the 

architectural style, color, and materials of the principal structure. 

1. Wire Fences. 

Wire fences, including hog fences, galvanized chain-link, and vinyl-covered 

chain-link fences are permitted only if such fence is covered by hedge located on 

the exterior of the fence. Hedge material shall be installed in such manner to 

cover the fence within two (2) years after planting. In lieu of a hedge, a wire or 

chain-link fence may be screened by the use of a three (3) or four (4) board 

fence. The wire or chain-link fence shall be attached to the board fence.



2. Barbed Wire. 

The use of barbed wire is prohibited. 

3. Thoroughfare Fences. 

Within the Equestrian Preserve, thoroughfare fences shall be natural, clear-coat, 

black, gray, or white-painted, three-rail wooden fences. 

E. Use of Tents as Temporary Stalls 

The use of tents as temporary stalls shall comply with the standards listed below: 

1. Tents Prohibited. 

After June 1, 2003, tents shall not be permitted in Subarea A and the residentialdeveloped 

areas of Subareas B and D, except in conjunction with the 

construction of a barn or stable. Any such temporary tent shall be removed 

within ten (10) working days of the issuance of a certificate of occupancy for the 

barn or stable. 

2. Tents Permitted. 

Tents are permitted in all areas not excluded in Item Sec. 6.10.9.E.1 above, 

subject to obtaining a Special Permit Seasonal Equestrian Use permit for 

temporary stables as provided in Article 5, Chapter 7, Sec. 5.7 of these land 

development regulations. 

a. Tents Permitted During Construction. 

Tents may be permitted, for a period not to exceed twenty-four (24) months, 

during the period when a building permit for a permanent barn or stable has 

been issued and construction is actively proceeding. The Planning and 

Zoning Manager may extend the period during which a tent is permitted by 

a period of time not to exceed to twelve (12) months, based upon active and 

ongoing construction of the permanent stable. 

b. Removal. 

Any tents shall be removed within two (2) weeks of receipt of a certificate of 

occupancy or revocation of building permit. 

Parking on Public Rights-of-Way 

Parking Prohibited. 

Unless otherwise provided herein, Parking of vehicles on public rights-of-way or 

easements within the EOZD is prohibited. 

Parking for Non-recurring Events. 

For the purposes of this section, parking of vehicles on public rights-of-way or 

easements within the EOZD may be permitted for non-recurring events. A 

special use permit shall be obtained prior to the event. 

Horse Trailers 

Parking Permitted. 

Parking of horse trailers anywhere in the Equestrian Preservation Areas shall be 

permitted, subject to the following limitations listed below.



Parking Prohibited in Certain Areas. 

Horse trailers may not be parked in roadway or canal rights-of-way or 

easements. 

Parking Permitted within Urban Service Boundary. 

Parking of horse trailers within those areas of the Equestrian Preservation Area 

which are within the Urban Service Boundary shall be permitted, subject to the 

following limitations: 

One (1) unscreened horse trailer may be parked adjacent to a barn or 

stable on an individual lot, provided that the horse trailer may not 

be parked between the front plane of the primary structure and the 

roadway easement or right-of-way and additional horse trailers 

may be kept provided that: 

The additional trailer(s) shall be screened from the view of adjacent 

roadways and private properties when the lot is 2.5 acres or less 

and the trailers are screened as provided in Sec. 62-9.(b).(1) of 

the Code of Ordinances. For properties in excess of 2.5 acres, not 

more than one (1) trailer per acre may be parked as provided in 

Sec. 6.10.9.G.3.a. 

The screened parking area meets the accessory structure setbacks 

listed on Table A, Minimum Setbacks for Principal and 

Accessory Uses of this section. 

Temporary parking of horse trailers (i.e., trailers on site for 

instructional, show, or other site-specific uses) shall be allowed, 

provided that said temporary parking is not overnight, and trailers 

are not parked in rights-of way or easements. 

Exemption. 

Property within Subarea A and property with a Comprehensive Plan designation 

of Commercial Recreation are exempt from the provisions of this section. 

Stalls per acre 

Within Subarea B, stables shall contain no more than four (4) stalls per acre. 

Fencing 

Exception for Fencing with the Front Setback. 

The entire Equestrian Overlay Zoning District shall be exempt from those 

provisions of Sec. 6.6.4.G.3 of the Land Development Regulations that prohibit 

fencing in front setbacks. 

Fencing Outside the Urban Services Boundary Area 

For those parts of the Equestrian Overlay Zoning District that lie outside of the 

Urban Services Boundary Area, the provisions of Chapter 36, Article II, Sec. 36- 

22 C (c) of the Property Maintenance Standards regarding fence and wall 

maintenance, shall be enforced at 25 percent in lieu of the 10 percent specified in 

that section.



Sec. 6. 10. 10. Bridle Trails and Easements. 

A. Dedication Associated with Development Approval 

To implement the Equestrian Path Circulation System adopted on as part of the Future 

Transportation Map of the Comprehensive Plan, Wellington may require dedication of a 

bridle path easement as part of a development order approval for a conditional use or a 

Development Review Committee approved use or as part of issuance of a building permit 

for a principal equestrian structure or as part of a plat approval within the Preservation 

Areas Equestrian Preserve Area. The requirement for such dedication shall not have the 

effect of reducing the density or intensity of development to which a property owner would 

be entitled if the dedication was not required or caused an increase in a required front, side 

interior, side corner, or rear setback. 

Sec. 6. 10. 11 Commercial Development Standards 

Commercial development shall be limited to those uses intended to serve the needs of the 

surrounding equestrian and agricultural communities and shall be determined by such 

factors as size of the use and types of goods and services to be offered. In addition, 

commercial development shall be designed in a manner that recognizes its location within 

the Equestrian Preservation Areas. Commercial uses may be established subject to the 

requirements of this Article and these land development regulations. All permitted and 

conditional uses within a planned development shall be consistent with the requirements of 

this Section. 

A. Planned Development Rezoning 

A rezoning to a planned development district shall be required if a proposed use consists of 

more than one (1) acre or five thousand (5,000) gross square feet. 

B. Orientation and Scale 

The commercial uses shall be oriented toward agricultural and equestrian uses of a 

community-serving nature. Commercial uses shall be of a scale, intensity, and character 

that are consistent with and compatible to the equestrian community. 

C. Architecture 

The architectural style of commercial buildings and centers shall be of a mass, bulk, and 

style that is consistent with the equestrian nature of the Equestrian Preservation Areas, 

such as barns and stables. Building colors and materials also shall be of a nature that is 

consistent with the equestrian nature of the area. Commercial sites shall integrate a variety 

of pedestrian and equestrian amenities into overall design, including the following: 

1. Pedestrian Circulation. 

An overall pedestrian circulation plan. 

2. Equestrian Circulation. 

An overall equestrian circulation plan. 

Pedestrian Walkways. 

A covered arcade, pedestrian walkway, or similar feature that is a minimum of 

eight (8) feet in width. 

Equestrian-oriented Features.



An overall plan to provide hitching posts, fences, corrals, and similar features to 

provide a temporary location to hold and protect the horses of owners patronizing 

a commercial establishment. 

D. Size 

The gross floor area of any single commercial use shall not exceed twenty thousand 

(20,000) square feet, including indoor storage, administrative offices, and similar areas. 

E. Hours of Operation 

Hours of operation shall be limited to between 7:-00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m., including delivery 

of merchandise, restocking, and after-hours cleanup and maintenance. Hours of operation 

may be extended by either a development order approved by the Council or a response to 

an emergency involving the treatment of human or animal patients. 

F. Lighting 

Parking lot lighting shall not adversely affect adjacent residential uses. Parking lot light 

standards shall not exceed fifteen (15) feet in height. 

G. Outdoor Display and Storage. 

Outdoor display and storage of merchandise is prohibited, excluding outdoor display in 

conjunction with a general store. 

H. Buffers 

Commercial planned developments shall provide extensive landscape buffers as a means 

to integrate commercial uses with the predominant equestrian, residential, and agricultural 

uses present within the EOZD. At a minimum, buffers shall comply with the standards 

listed below. 

1. Perimeter Buffer. 

A perimeter buffer of at least twenty (20) feet in width shall be provided along the 

entire property line. 

2. Opaque Buffer. 

An opaque buffer of at least five (5) feet in height shall be provided along the 

entire perimeter, consisting of any combination of berm, wall, or fencing. 

3. Canopy Trees. 

Canopy trees shall be provided at a rate of not less than one (1) tree per twentyfive 

(25) feet. Trees shall be staggered along both sides of the berm, wall, or 

fence. Trees shall be native and representative of native vegetation of 

Wellington. Minimum tree height shall comply with the requirements of Article 

7.3. 

Hedges. 

Hedges shall be planted at a height and number as required by Article 7.3. 

Native Canopy Trees.



Sec. 6. 10.12 Stables 

Native canopy trees shall be provided within all parking areas at a rate of one (1) 

tree per eight (8) parking spaces. 

A. Purpose and Intent 

The purpose and intent of this Section is: 

Protection and Enhancement. 

To protect and enhance the Equestrian Preservation Areas of Wellington, as 

created by the Comprehensive Plan. 

2. Preservation and Maintenance. 

To preserve, maintain, and enhance the equestrian community associated with 

Wellington. 

3. Rural Lifestyles. 

To preserve, maintain, and enhance the rural lifestyle associated with the 

equestrian community. 

4. Land Uses. 

To identify and encourage types of land uses that are supportive of the 

equestrian and rural character of the Equestrian Preservation Areas. 

5. Development Patterns. 

To preserve, maintain, and enhance development patterns which are consistent 

with the overall character of the equestrian community. 

B. Applicability and Conflicts. 

1. Applicability. 

Unless otherwise specified herein, these regulations shall apply to all stables 

within Wellington. Any stable that was issued a building permit by Wellington or 

Palm Beach County Building Departments prior to the passage of Ordinance 

2003-02 may be built or continue to exist, as originally permitted, regardless of 

any prior or subsequent challenge to the validity or appropriateness of the 

building permit and subject only to its status as a conforming structure. No 

challenges to the issuance of any permit prior to the effective date of Ordinance 

2003-02 regarding the size of any stable structure based on allegations the 

structure failed to comply with the then existing floor area regulations shall be 

permitted. 

2. Conflicts. 

In the event of any conflicts between the requirements of this Section and other 

requirements of the Land Development Regulations, the requirements of this 

Section shall govern. In the absence of any conflict, the requirements of the 

underlying zoning district and the Land Development Regulations shall be 

applicable and supplemental to the requirements of this Section.



C. Effect on Previously Permitted Barns and Stables 

1. Conforming Structures. 

Stables for which a valid building permit was issues prior to the adoption of this 

Ordinance that do not conform to the provisions of the Ordinance shall be 

considered to be legal conforming structures. 

2. Construction. 

Any stable permitted prior to October 8, 2002, which exceeded the restrictions on 

accessory structures but otherwise met the requirements of the LDR, may be 

constructed in accordance with the permit. Any stable constructed in accordance 

with such a permit shall be deemed a legal conforming structure. 

D. Supplemental Regulations for Barns and Stables on Residential Lots 

Barns and stables on residential lots within the Equestrian Preserve Area Overlay 

Zoning District shall be subject to the following limitations provided in Table E.



Table E. 

Supplemental Regulations for Barns & Stables on Residential Lots 

Size of Lot 

Residential 

Unit 

Required (1) 

Less than ½ acre Yes 

Greater than ½ 

acre, less than 1 

acre 

Greater than 1 

acre, less than 3 

acres 


acres, less than 5 

acres 


acres, less than 

10 acres 


acres 

Yes 

Yes 

Yes 

No 

No 

Square Footage 

of Stable 

1,250 square 

feet/acre (2) 

1,250 square 

feet/acre (2) 

1,250 square 

feet/acre (2) 

1,250 square 

feet/acre (2) 

Limited by FAR 

and lot coverage 

in subarea 

Limited by FAR 

and lot coverage 

in subarea 

Number 

of 

Stables 

Approval 

Required (3) 

1 Building permit 




1 

No limit 

Notes and Additional Standards for Affected Types of Required Approval. 

DRC site plan 

Building permit 

DRC site plan 

Building permit 

(1) For the purposes of this section, grooms quarters may shall not be used to meet the 

requirements of a residential unit. 

(2) An administrative variance of up to ten (10) fifteen (15) percent may be approved by the 

Planning and Zoning Manager providing the stable structure complies with all other 

zoning district and subarea regulations. 

SECTION 3: Should any section, paragraph, sentence, clause, or phrase of this 

Ordinance conflict with any section, paragraph, clause or phrase of any prior Wellington 

Ordinance, Resolution, or municipal Code provision, then in that event the provisions of this 

Ordinance shall prevail to the extent of such conflict. 

SECTION 4: Should any section, paragraph, sentence, clause, or phrase of this 

Ordinance be declared by a court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, such decision shall 

not affect the validity of this Ordinance as a whole or any portion or part thereof, other than 

the part so declared to be invalid. 

SECTION 5: The provisions of this Ordinance shall become effective immediately 

upon adoption.



PASSED this 8 th day of December 2009, upon first reading. 

PASSED AND ADOPTED this _____ day of ________________ 2010, on second and final 

reading. 


FOR AGAINST 

BY:________________________________ _______ _______ _______ 


________________________________ _______ _______ _______ 

Dr. Carmine A. Priore, Vice Mayor 

________________________________ _______ _______ _______ 

Lizbeth Benacquisto, Councilwoman 

________________________________ _______ _______ _______ 

Matt Willhite, Councilman 

________________________________ _______ _______ _______ 

Howard K. Coates, Jr., Councilman 



BY: ______________________________ 

Jeffrey S. Kurtz, Esq., Village Attorney 

ATTEST: 

BY: _____________________________ 




TO: Mayor and Village Council 

FROM: Marty Hodgkins 

SUBJECT: Proposed Amendments to Text of the Equestrian Overlay Zoning District 

DATE: December 15, 2009 

I. BACKGROUND 

Ordinance 2009 – 17 contains proposed amendments to the text of the Equestrian Overlay Zoning 

District (EOZD). The initial draft of the text amendments was created by an EOZD Subcommittee 

appointed by the Equestrian Preserve Committee (EPC), consisting of the following members: 

� Chair: Carol Coleman 

� Vice Chair: Don Dufresne 

� Members: Mary Martin, Scott Swerdlin and Myles Tashman 

The proposed text amendments were approved on a 6 – 2 vote by the Equestrian Preserve Committee 

on October 14 th of this year. 

The review of existing provisions of the EOZD was one of the principal tasks set forth in the 

Evaluation and Appraisal Report (EAR) for the Village’s Comprehensive Plan. Adoption of the EOZD 

text amendments by the Village Council will complete that particular task. 

II PROPOSED REVISIONS TO THE EOZD 

Proposed revisions to the EOZD are presented in Ordinance 2009 - 17. Principal changes contained in 

the draft are summarized on Table 1.



TABLE 1. 

PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO THE TEXT OF THE 

EQUESTRIAN OVERLAY ZONING DISTRICT (EOZD) 

SECTION PROPOSED AMENDMENT 

Minor, technical or non-substantive amendments throughout the ordinance to clarify, 

Various 

correct format, etc. 

Creates definitions for “Equestrian Area, Covered,” “Equestrian Area, Not 

6.10.3 

Covered” and “Recreational Vehicle.” 

Creates a new Subarea E comprised of the Rustic Ranches neighborhood. The 

neighborhood recognized as a separate subarea largely due to the fact a separate 

6.10.4.E Neighborhood Plan and a separate “Rustic Ranches Overlay Zoning District” (RROZD) 

has been established. To the extent of any conflict the provisions of the RROZD prevail 

over other land development regulations and the EOZD. 

Table B provides for an increase in the maximum floor area ratio from 15% to 

20% for all buildings and structures within the EOZD, subject to any requirements of the 

6.10.6.B Future Land Use Element of the Comprehensive Plan. 

(Note: The 5% increase equates to an additional 2,178 square feet of buildable area per 

acre.) 

Within Table C, the “Permitted, Conditional and Prohibited Uses” Table for the 

EOZD, the following amendments are proposed: 

1. Accessory Dwelling Unit: minor amendment to include reference to additional 

standards applicable to the use. 

2. Agricultural Indoor Storage: minor amendment to remove reference to 

additional standards, as there are no standards applicable to this particular use. 

3. Air Curtain Incinerator, Temporary: minor amendment to include reference 

to additional standards. 

4. Auction, Outdoor: minor amendment to include reference to additional standards 

applicable to the use. 

5. Bed and Breakfast: (a) major amendment to allow B&Bs as a “Conditional Use” in 

residential pods of PUDs; and (b) minor amendment to include reference to 

additional standards applicable to the use. 

6. Day Care, General: changes the use from a “Permitted” use to a “Conditional” use, 

6.10.7 which requires EPC and PZAB public hearings, and final decision by Village Council. 

(Continued 7. Equestrian Arena, Private/Not Covered: changes the use from a 

to next “Development Review Committee” use to a “Permitted” use, which requires only a 

page) building permit review. 

8. Equestrian Arena, Private/Covered: (a) creates category and provides that the 

use is “Permitted” within the EOZD; and (b) includes reference to additional 

standards applicable to the use. 

9. General Store: minor amendment to add reference to additional standards 

applicable to the use. 

10. Livestock Raising: includes this use, subject to DRC review, in the areas of the 

EOZD not included within a planned unit development. 

11. Professional and Business Office: minor amendment to add reference to 

additional standards applicable to this use. 

12. Recreational Vehicle Park: creates the category and references the standards 

applicable to this use within the Commercial Recreation areas of the EOZD that 

possess an approved, permanent equestrian venue such as a commercial equestrian 

arena or a polo stadium. 

13. Veterinary Clinic: adds this use as a “Permitted” use within the Commercial



SECTION PROPOSED AMENDMENT 

Recreation areas of the EOZD. 

6.10.7.B.3 

6.10.7.B.4 

6.10.8 

6.10.8.A.3 

6.10.9.B 

Amends zoning standards applicable to “Auction, Outdoor.” 

Creates additional zoning standards applicable to Bed and Breakfast (B&B) 

establishments. Allows B&Bs within a residential Planned Unit Development (PUD), 

subject to those specific zoning standards. 

� Table D retains “Cluster Development” as a permitted use within Subarea D and 

establishes minimum lot size and maximum residential density standards. 

� Table D also prohibits cluster development in Subarea E, the newly-created 

subarea consisting of the Rustic Ranches subdivision. 

Amends the zoning standards applicable to “cluster development” to include the 

features listed below. 

1. Common features, including equestrian amenities associated with cluster 

development are to be limited to the property owners and residents. 

2. Minimum lot size of 0.33 acres. 

3. Maximum density of not more than one unit per two acres. 

4. Detached single family as the only permitted dwelling unit type. 

5. Development approval via a residential planned unit development. 

6. Common access to equestrian amenities. 

Creates the use category of Recreational Vehicle Park to be allowed as a conditional 

use in association with permanent equestrian venues located on property with a 

“Commercial Recreation” designation and creates standards for such uses. 

6.10.9.C Provides additional zoning standards applicable to covered equestrian arenas. 

6.10.9.E.2 

6.10.9.F 

Amends provisions regarding use of temporary tents. Permits an extension of 12 

months by the Planning and Zoning Manager for tents located on property on which 

permanent stalls are being constructed. 

Allows parking on public rights-of-way for non-recurring events; requires a special 

use permit for this type of parking. 

6.10.G.b 

Increases the number of horse trailers that may be parked on property, subject to 

screening or locational requirements. 

6.10.9.I Clarifies requirements for fencing within the EOZD. 

6.10.10.A Clarifies procedure for possible dedication of rights-of-way for bridle trails. 

6.10.12.D 

Amendments to Table E provide for the following: (a) removes existing 

requirement for DRC review for barns and stables located on residential lots 

consisting of at least five acres; and (b) allows the P&Z Manager to grant a variance of 

15% rather that 10% for stables that otherwise comply with all other regulations.



III. RECOMMENDATION BY ADVISORY BODIES 

A. Equestrian Preserve Committee 

Vote on Proposed Text Amendment and Cluster Development. 

The EPC voted 6 – 2 to approve the proposed Equestrian Overlay Zoning District text amendments. A 

principal item of EPC concern during the EOZD text amendment process is the current provisions 

allowing cluster development. Cluster development currently is allowed only within Subarea D, and a 

map of the subareas within the EOZD is attached at the end of this document. 

Cluster development is defined as 

“a residential development pattern that allows a lot size less than the minimum 

required within the applicable subarea and provides common areas for equestrian 

amenities, open space, preservation of environmentally sensitive areas, or similar features 

consistent with the purpose and intent of the overlay district.” 

The principal concern expressed about cluster development is the required minimum lot size: within 

the text of the EOZD, a residential lot in a cluster development does not have to comply with the two 

acre minimum lot size for Subarea D. However, cluster development must comply with the two acres 

per unit density established for the subarea. As ultimately recommended by EPC, the existing cluster 

development option is maintained, which provides for the following: 

� a maximum density of one unit per two acres; but 

� no minimum lot size. 

Based on concerns expressed by members of the EPC, additional language has been provided by staff 

to be added to that portion of the EOZD that allows cluster development. The additional language 

limits use of common features, including equestrian amenities associated with a cluster 

development to the residents and property of such development. 

Recommendations Not Included in Ordinance No. 2009 - 17. 

Included in the EOZD text changes approved by the EPC were several amendments that are not 

included in Ordinance No. 2009-17. The draft ordinance presented to Council reflects text 

amendments approved by the PZAB. The EPC amendments deleted by the PZAB are summarized in 

the Planning, Zoning and Adjustment Board section of this report.



B. Planning, Zoning and Adjustment Board 

Vote on Proposed Text Amendments and Cluster Development. 

On November 5, 2009, the Planning, Zoning and Adjustment Board voted unanimously to approve the 

proposed EOZD text amendments. At the PZAB public hearing, there was extensive public comment 

and discussion regarding the proposed amendments. This discussion is summarized below. 

� Bed & Breakfast Establishments. PZAB supported in increase of B&B signs to a 

maximum of four square feet. 

� Cluster Development. A number of public comments were received in opposition to cluster 

development. The PZAB recommended retention of the cluster development option, but also 

recommended creation of a minimum lot size. The PZAB action did not include a 

recommendation for a specific minimum lot size. PZAB also supported limiting use of 

common features, including equestrian amenities associated with cluster 

development to property owner and residents. 

If a minimum lot size is to be created, the result should be a residential development pattern 

that allows sufficient land planning flexibility to consolidate housing on a lesser portion of the 

tract in return for allowing a greater area for equestrian amenities. Based upon the minimum 

density requirement of one unit per two acres, examples of minimum lot sizes that can be 

considered are listed in Table 2. 

Equestrian Preserve Committee Amendments not Supported by PZAB. 

In addition to the discussion of text amendments listed above, the PZAB reviewed several other 

changes suggested by the EPC. The Village staff did not support certain changes, and the PZAB voted 

to concur with staff recommendations. The changes recommended by EPC, but not supported by 

Village staff are summarized below. These proposed amendments are not included in the text of 

Ordinance No. 2009-17. 

� Expansion of Use of Recreational Vehicles (RVs) as Temporary Residences. The 

EPC recommended increasing the potential for property owners to allow use of recreational 

vehicles as temporary residences, intended to assist with housing opportunities during 

equestrian season. The proposed expansion would have allowed additional RVs in both 

residential areas and areas with a “Commercial Recreation” land use or zoning designation. 

Staff and PZAB did not support expansion of RVs as a temporary residence into residential 

areas. Staff did not object to expansion of such temporary residences in areas with a 

“Commercial Recreation” land use or zoning designation, and this language is included within 

Ordinance No. 2009 – 17. 

� Additional Site Plan Review. A recommendation to require EPC review of site plans for 

properties of ten or more acres with a “Commercial Recreation” land use or zoning designation 

was not supported by Village staff. This recommendation would have required an EPC review 

prior to final action by the Development Review Committee (DRC). 

Staff and PZAB did not support the proposed additional site plan review, primarily based upon 

two factors: (a) the increase in time required to complete the DRC review process; and (b) the 

fact that the current Land Development Regulations provide appropriate development 

standards for properties of this nature, including such requirements as parking, landscaping, 

buffering and use limitations.



� Reduced Setbacks for Covered Arenas. The EPC recommended reducing front, side 

corner and rear setbacks for covered arenas. The proposed reductions in setbacks for covered 

equestrian arenas are indicated below. 

Staff and PZAB did not support reducing the setbacks for roofed arenas, based largely upon the 

potential for large structures that may adversely affect adjoining properties due to their 

proximity to shared property lines. 

Setback for Covered 

Arenas 

Current 

Setbacks 

Proposed 

Setbacks 

Proposed 

Setback 

Reduction 

� Front 100 Feet 60 Feet 40 Feet 

� Side, Interior 50 Feet 50 Feet 0 Feet 

� Side, Corner 80 Feet 50 Feet 30 Feet 

� Rear 100 Feet 50 Feet 50 Feet 

C. Action by Village Council 

First reading of Ordinance No 2009- 17 was held on December 8, 2009. At that meeting there was 

extensive discussion of the provision allowing cluster development within Subarea D. The ordinance 

was approved on first reading, subject to the changes indicated below. 

Minimum Lot Size for Cluster Development. 

The minimum lot size for cluster development to be at least 0.33 acres. 

Maximum Density for Cluster Development. 

Maximum density for cluster development established at not more than one unit per two acres. 

Permitted Residential Unit Type in Cluster Development. 

Allows only single family detached dwelling units within a cluster development. 

At the public hearing on December 8 th , there were several speakers who addressed the proposed 

amendments. Mr. Wade Byrd, representing the International Polo Club (IPC) addressed the issue of 

clustering and followed up his remarks with a letter in support of certain elements of cluster 

development. A copy of Mr. Byrd’s letter is attached. 

During the public hearing, reference to both the Equestrian Club Estates and The Equestrian Club 

PUD were mentioned as examples of cluster development. Aerials photographs of both projects are 

attached. 

On December 8, 2009, Ordinance No. 2009-17 was approved unanimously on first reading. 

IV. RECOMMENDATION BY PLANNING AND ZONING STAFF 

Planning and Zoning Division staff recommends approval of the proposed amendments to the text of 

the Equestrian Overlay Zoning District as presented in Ordinance No. 2009 – 17.



Subarea Map – 

Equestrian Overlay Zoning District



Correspondence: 

Mr. Wade Byrd





Aerial Photograph: 

Equestrian Club Estates 

Aeria 

l 

Phot 

ogra 

ph: 

The 

Eque 

stria 

n 

Club 

Plan 

ned 

Unit 

Deve 

lopm 

ent




VILLAGE COUNCIL 

NOTICE OF ZONING TEXT CHANGE 

The Wellington Council proposes to adopt the following Ordinance: 

AN ORDINANCE OF THE VILLAGE COUNCIL OF THE VILLAGE OF WELLINGTON, 

FLORIDA, PERTAINING TO ZONING; AMENDING THE LAND DEVELOPMENT 

REGULATION CODE OF THE VILLAGE OF WELLINGTON BY AMENDING ARTICLE 6, 

CHAPTER 10,.“EQUESTRIAN OVERLAY ZONING DISTRICT;” AMENDING SECTION 6.10.3 

REGARDING “DEFINITIONS,” PROVIDING FOR DEFINITIONS OF “COVERED 

EQUESTRIAN ARENA” AND FOR “RECREATIONAL VEHICLE;” AMENDING SECTION 

6.10.4 REGARDING “SUBAREAS” BY CREATING AN NEW SUBAREA E; AMENDING 

SECTION 6.10.6 REGARDING “DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS” BY PROVIDING SETBACKS 

FOR ROOFED EQUESTRIAN ARENAS AND BY INCREASING THE PERMITTED FLOOR 

AREA RATIO FOR STRUCTURES; AMENDING SECTION 6.10.7.A REGARDING 

“PRINCIPAL AND CONDITIONAL USES” BY AMENDING TABLE C TO CHANGE CERTAIN 

PERMITTED AND ACCESSORY USES; AMENDING SECTION 6.10.7.B REGARDING 

“ADDITIONAL STANDARDS,” PROVIDING FOR ADDITIONAL STANDARDS FOR 

OUTDOOR AUCTIONS AND BED AND BREAKFAST ESTABLISHMENTS; AMENDING 

SECTION 6.10.8 REGARDING MAXIMUM DENSITY AND MINIMUM LOT SIZE 

REQUIREMENTS AND AMENDING PROVISIONS REGARDING CLUSTER DEVELOPMENT; 

AMENDING SECTION 6.10.9 REGARDING “SUPPLEMENTAL DISTRICT REGULATIONS” 

AND PROVIDING FOR ADDITIONAL REGULATIONS FOR TEMPORARY RESIDENCES, 

ROOFED EQUESTRIAN ARENAS, USE OF TENTS AS TEMPORARY STALLS, PARKING 

ON PUBLIC RIGHTS-OF-WAY, STORAGE OF HORSE TRAILERS, AND FENCING; 

AMENDING SECTION 6.10.10 REGARDING “BRIDLE TRAILS AND EASEMENTS,” 

PROVIDING FOR DEDICATION OF BRIDLE TRAILS; AMENDING SECTION 6.10.12.D 

REGARDING “SUPPLEMENTAL REGULATIONS FOR BARNS AND STABLES,” 

ELIMINATING DEVELOPMENT REVIEW COMMITTEE FOR CERTAIN SITE PLANS; 

AMENDING SECTION 6.10.12.E REGARDING “ADDITIONAL SITE PLAN REVIEW,” 

PROVIDING FOR REVIEW OF CERTAIN SITE PLANS BY THE EQUESTRIAN PRESERVE 

COMMITTEE; PROVIDING A REPEALER CLAUSE; PROVIDING A SAVINGS CLAUSE; 


Said public hearing will be held as follows: 

VILLAGE COUNCIL 

Location: Council Chambers 

12165 W. Forest Hill Boulevard, Wellington, Florida. 

Date: January 12, 2010 at 7:00 P.M. or as soon thereafter as may be heard in the orderly course of 

business. The hearing of the request may be continued from time to time as may be found necessary



All interested parties are invited to attend and be heard with respect to the proposed ordinance. 

Copies of all documents pertaining to the proposed ordinance is available in the Planning and Zoning 

Department at the address listed below and can be reviewed by the public, Monday through Thursday 

between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. 

Planning and Zoning Department 


Wellington, Florida, 33414 

(561) 753-2430 

Appeals: If a person decides to appeal any decision with respect to any matter considered at 

such hearing, he/she will need a record of the proceedings and for such purpose may 

need to ensure that a verbatim record of the proceedings is made which record 

includes the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is to be based. All 

appeals must be filed in accordance with the applicable provisions of the Village of 

Wellington Land Development Regulations. 

Pursuant to the provisions of the Americans With Disabilities Act, any person requiring special 

accommodations to participate in this hearing, because of a disability or physical impairment, should 

contact the Village Manager’s Office at (561) 791-4000 at least five calendar days prior to the 

Hearing. 

Dated: December 21, 2009 

Publish: The Post 

December 24, 2009 

Note to Publisher: Pursuant to Florida Statutes, the required advertisement shall be no less than 2 

columns wide by ten inches long, and the headline in the advertisement shall be in a type no smaller 

than 18 point. The advertisement shall not be placed in that portion of the newspaper where legal 

notices and classified advertisements appear.


8. B 




AGENDA ITEM NAME: Acceptance of $490,200 in Energy Efficiency and Conservation Block 

Grant (EECBG) Funds 





FIRST READING 


REQUEST: Acceptance of $490,200 in EECBG Funds and authorization for the Manager to execute 

budget amendment. 

EXPLANATION: As part of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, Wellington was 

awarded EECBG funds to be used to offset $490,200 of the costs of installing energy efficient 

and impact resistant doors and windows in the municipal complex and staff costs in 

administering the grant. 

LEGAL SUFFICIENCY: Yes 

FISCAL IMPACT: The grant funding of $490,200 will offset the cost to Wellington of the Town 

Center project, including administrative staff costs. The General Fund contribution to the project 

cost will be reduced by the full grant amount through interfund transfers. 

VILLAGE GOAL: Economic Development 

RECOMMENDATION: Acceptance of $490,200 in EECBG Funds and authorization for the 

Manager to execute interfund transfers.




A RESOLUTION OF THE VILLAGE COUNCIL OF WELLINGTON, 

FLORIDA ACCEPTING THE ENERGY EFFICIENCY AND 

CONSERVATION BLOCK GRANT FROM THE UNITED STATES 

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY RELATED TO THE CONSTRUCTION 

OF THE MUNICIPAL COMPLEX; AND PROVIDING AN 


WHEREAS, Wellington applied for an Energy Efficiency and Conservation Grant related to the 

construction of the Municipal Complex; and 

WHEREAS, Wellington has been awarded $490,200.00 from the Department of Energy to 

assist in making the building more energy efficient; and 

WHEREAS, staff recommends the Council accepts the Grant (attached hereto as Exhibit “A”). 

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE VILLAGE COUNCIL OF WELLINGTON that: 

SECTION 1. The foregoing recitals are hereby affirmed and ratified as true and correct. 

SECTION 2. The Council hereby accepts the Department of Energy Efficiency and 

Conservation Block Grant (attached hereto as Exhibit “A”). 


PASSED AND ADOPTED this 12th day of January, 2010. 


BY: ____________________________ BY: ____________________________ 




BY:____________________________ 











































































































8. C 




AGENDA ITEM NAME: RESOLUTION R2010-11 (BOYS AND GIRLS CLUB COMMUNITY 

DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT) 

A RESOLUTION OF THE VILLAGE COUNCIL OF WELLINGTON, FLORIDA DIRECTING STAFF 

TO APPLY FOR A GRANT OF $300,000 FROM THE PALM BEACH COUNTY COMMUNITY 

DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT PROGRAM TO ASSIST WITH CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW 

BOYS AND GIRLS CLUB; AND PROVIDINGAN EFFECTIVE DATE. 





FIRST READING 


REQUEST: Council direction to apply for and accept grant funds not to exceed $300,000 from the 

Palm Beach County Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) for the purpose of assisting with 

construction of a new Boys and Girls Club facility. 

EXPLANATION: The grant application must be submitted to the Palm Beach County 

Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) by January 22, 2010. 

LEGAL SUFFICIENCY: N/A 

FISCAL IMPACT: The funds are to be used in conjunction with the following: (a) donations of 

approximately $1.6 million dollars pledged to the Boys and Girls Club; (b) up to $700,000.00 in 

recreational impact fees from Wellington; and (c) additional in in-kind services from Wellington 

generally related to site preparation expenses. The impact fee and in-kind services are in 

addition to the $1.6 million raised by the Boys and Girls Club and the proposed CDBG grant. 

VILLAGE GOAL: Neighborhood Renaissance 

RECOMMENDATION: Approval of Resolution No. R2010 - 11 directing staff to apply for and 

accept grant funds in the amount of $300,000.00 from Palm Beach County CDBG for the 

purpose of assisting with construction of a new Boys and Girls Club facility.


RESOLUTION NO. R2010–11 

A RESOLUTION OF THE VILLAGE COUNCIL OF WELLINGTON, 

FLORIDA DIRECTING STAFF TO APPLY FOR A GRANT OF 

$300,000.00 FROM THE PALM BEACH COUNTY COMMUNITY 

DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT PROGAM TO ASSIST WITH 

CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW BOYS AND GIRLS CLUB; AND 


WHEREAS, the Council has historically supported the activities and programs of the Boys and 

Girls Club due to the many benefits provided to children residing within Wellington, and 

WHEREAS, the Council also has historically provided financial assistance to the Boys and 

Girls Club, including direct annual appropriations of funds from Wellington’s general revenue sources; 

and 

WHEREAS, the is currently working with the Boys and Girls Club to replace and relocate its 

current facilities to property located on Wellington Trace to allow that facility to serve a greater number 

of youth, especially in areas of Wellington where low and moderate income families reside; 

WHEREAS, public notice of the Resolution and grant application was provided via notice in 

the Palm Beach Post newspaper; and 

and 


WHEREAS, the Boys and Girls Club continues fundraising efforts to pay for the new facility; 

WHEREAS, the Council is prepared to expend up to $700,000.00 in impact fee funds and 

additional in-kind services to assist with relocation of the facility and to assist with costs of 

constructing the new facility. 


FLORIDA, that: 

SECTION 1. The Manager is hereby authorized to execute all necessary documents with 

respect to submitting an application to the Palm Beach County Department of Housing and Community 

Development for receipt of Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds in an amount not to 

exceed $300,000.00 for the purpose of assisting with construction of a new facility for the Boys and Girls 

Club on publicly-owned property located on Wellington Trace. 

SECTION 2. The Council hereby determines that the application for and receipt of CDBG 

funds for construction of a new Boys and Girls Club is consistent with and furthers the policies of 

Wellington’s adopted Comprehensive Plan and policies associated with the “Economic Development 

Initiative” adopted by the Council for the purpose of short and long range improvements to the 

Wellington’s neighborhoods. 

SECTION 3. The application supports the Community Development Block Grant National 

Objective of providing a benefit to low-and moderate-income persons by expanding the availability of 

recreational and educational services available via the Boys and Girls Club. 

SECTION 4. This Resolution shall become effective immediately upon adoption.



PASSED AND ADOPTED this 12 th day of January, 2010. 


BY: ____________________________ BY: ___________________________ 




BY: ___________________________ 




TO: Mayor and Village Council 

FROM: Francine Ramaglia, Assistant Village Manager 

Marty Hodgkins, Strategic Planning & Economic Development 

SUBJECT: Application for Grant for Boys and Girls Club 

DATE: January 4, 2010 

I. Background 

Resolution 2010 – 11 expresses the Council’s support of an application for a grant of $300,000.00 to 

assist with construction of the new Boys and Girls Club facility. That facility is to be located at the 

northern portion of the water treatment plant site on Wellington Trace. 

The grant application is to be submitted to the Palm Beach County Department of Housing and 

Community Development (HCD) and seeks an award of the $300,000.00 from the county’s annual 

allocation of Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds. The CDBG funds are to be used in 

conjunction with the following: 

� donations of approximately 1.6 million dollars pledged to the Boys and Girls Club; 

� up to $700,000.00 in impact fees; and 

� additional in-kind services from the Village. 

The application for the CDBG funding is to be submitted to the Housing and Community 

Development Department by January 22, 2010. As part of the submission, authority from the Village 

Council to apply for the grant must be provided. This resolution provides the necessary authority and 

further authorizes the Village Manager to execute all documents in support of the application. 

II. Recommendation 

Staff recommends approval of Resolution No. R2010 – 11 to authorize submission of an application 

for not more than $300,000.00 in CDBG grant funds to support relocation and replacement of the 

Boys and Girls Club.

REGULAR MEETING OF THE WELLINGTON VILLAGE COUNCIL

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?