A. A Resolution of The Town Council of The Town of Palm Beach, Palm Beach County, Florida, Amending Resolution No. 6-71, The Breakers Planned Unit Development (PUD-A), To Authorize the following:
 
1.  Demolition of and existing two-story structure and construction of new three-story building with basement and overhead pedestrian walkway. 
 
2. Construction of new parking structure with one level of subterranean parking, and surface parking, additional improvement to support buildings, the golf course, and landscape/hardscape. 
 
RESOLUTION NO. 006-2025: A Resolution Of The Town Council Of The Town Of Palm Beach, Palm Beach County, Florida, Amending Resolution No. 6-71, The Breakers Planned Unit Development (PUD-A), As Previously Amended, To Authorize The Demolition Of The Existing Two-Story Family Entertainment Center And The Italian Restaurant And Their Replacement With A New, Three Story Structure With Basement Connected By An Overhead Enclosed Pedestrian Bridge To The Existing Two-Story Beach Club Building, With Related Site Improvements; And To Allow The Construction Of A New Parking Structure Consisting Of One Level Of Subterranean Parking And One At-Grade Surface-Level Parking Area To Replace An Existing Surface Parking Lot.
No matter the legal word salad, the Breakers is operating a members club without required permissions, and not following Town regulations. Keep it simple. Enough intensification of use across the boards in Palm Beach.
Public Comment, Town of Palm Beach Admin
admin
about 1 month ago
Received via email 3.5.2025:
PLEASE DISTRIBUTE TO PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEMBERS
All,
This email is a response to the false allegation in the staff report for The Breakers PUD modification, which is set to be heard by the Planning and Zoning Commission on March 6, 2025, in which staff alleges that “Following submission of this amendment to the Breakers PUD, it was discovered that the Breakers has been operating a private club which approval has not been sought nor granted by the Town Council. In order for the Breakers PUD to maintain consistency with Division 3 of Article V, Planned Unit Development Procedures, an application shall be submitted to the Director of Planning, Zoning and Building and approved by the Town Council.” Unfortunately, this defamatory and false statement is now being repeated by neighborhood campaigns that are soliciting opposition to our project based on false information regarding a non-existent private club.
THERE IS NO PRIVATE CLUB PROPOSED BY OR ASSOCIATED WITH THIS APPLICATION!!!!
Staff’s characterization of the membership program as a private club is not supported by the facts , as set forth below, and no special exception is necessary for the continued operation of a 100 year-old membership program that is a permitted accessory use to the hotel, golf, and tennis facilities. First, The Breakers has existed in the Town of Palm Beach since 1896. They have had “members” at the current hotel property since at least 1926. The membership program has always been characterized by the Town as an accessory use to the permitted golf, tennis, and hotel uses at the property. The membership program allows people who are not staying at the hotel to access hotel facilities such as the golf course, tennis courts, and beach club area. Pursuant to the PUD resolutions and the associated contractual agreements between The Breakers and the Town, accessory commercial uses are permitted to be converted to / from residential dwelling units or hotel rooms. We have addressed this conversion in our LOI, in our supporting documents, and on the record of the February, 2025 meeting of the Planning and Zoning Commission.
Please consider the following:
1. At no point in its 129 year history has The Breakers been asked or required to apply for a special exception due to the fact it has members using accessory hotel amenities. This is because the impacts of the accessory hotel facilities have been reviewed and approved as such during all prior reviews by the Town of proposed improvements at the Property, and membership programs are customarily accessory and incidental to beachfront resort hotels with golf and tennis facilities. As we will demonstrate tomorrow, the Breakers Casino had members that would come and visit the property beginning in the 1920s, continuing on when the original beach club facility was approved. When that facility was demolished for the construction of the new beach club, it was understood that members would be using the new facility.
2. For example, when the current beach club was approved in 1998, there was no requirement to obtain a special exception because “members” could use the beach “club.” That area is primarily for the use of hotel guests and secondarily available to club members. During Town Council’s review of that PUD modification, Paul Leone asked Bob Moore, who at the time was director of planning , zoning, and building, what if anything The Breakers needed from the Town regarding the membership program. Bob asked Mr. Leone to mention the number of members that would use the facilities on the record, but said no formal approvals were required. Mr. Leone disclosed the number of members on the record (See official Town minutes, attached as Exhibit A), and, as is apparent in the resolution approving the PUD modification, no action regarding members was taken or needed. See Resolution 1-98, Attached as Exhibit “B”. The original beach club was an approval of accessory space for hotel guests that could be accessed by members. It is exactly the same type of facility we are discussing as a part of our current application.
3. When the current golf and tennis clubhouse was approved in 2000 pursuant to Resolution 3-00, no approval of a special exception for a membership club was required by the Town, even though the facility was accessory commercial space that was for the use of both hotel guests and golf and tennis members. Like the golf and tennis club, the current FEC proposal is for the use of hotel guest and members, and it was approved as accessory commercial space in the PUD. See Exhibit C.
4. When The Breakers renovated the cabana facilities at the Property pursuant to Resolution 04-05, no special exception for a club use was required, even though the cabana area is for the use of members and guests only. It was approved as accessory commercial space in the PUD. See Exhibit D.
5. When The Breakers constructed a new fitness facility at the Beach Club pursuant to Resolution 11-2014, no special exception was required by the Town, even though the fitness center, like the beach club, is for use of hotel guests and members. It was approved as accessory commercial space in the PUD, which is exactly what we are proposing to do in our current application for the family entertainment center. See Exhibit E.
6. When the new tennis facility was approved pursuant to Resolution 043-2023, no special exception for a club use was required even though the facility is for hotel guests and members. See Exhibit F.
7. When the padel courts were approved pursuant to Resolution 073-2024, no special exception for a club use was required even though the facility is for hotel guests and members. See Exhibit G.
8. The only special exception for a club use that has ever been required is for the “Old Guard” private social club, which received special exception approval from the Town in 1979 because it was for a true private social club that was not operating as an accessory hotel use. See Exhibit H. That the town required special exception for this private club use, and never has required special exception approval for The Breakers membership program, is further proof that the century-old membership program is not a private club and no special exception is necessary.
Finally, when the Fourt Arts recently went through the Town’s approval process, it was not required to obtain special exception approval for its membership program. The “requirement” for a special exception approval should not vary depending on the staff member that is reviewing a project. There is absolutely no justification to ignore 100 years of history, 50 years of contractual relationship, and recent treatment of another applicant in order to falsely allege that The Breakers has been illegally operating a private club. Our application must be processed pursuant to the PUD, which has always treated the membership program as accessory to the golf, tennis, and hotel uses at the property.
We look forward to clarifying the record tomorrow.
Jamie
James M. Crowley, Esq. | Shareholder
Environmental & Land Use
777 S. Flagler Drive, Suite 500 East
West Palm Beach, FL 33401
Received via email 3.4.2025:
Dear Planning and Zoning Commission,
As you deliberate over the massive project coming from the Breakers, please get the facts about how the Breakers is operating before making any recommendations to the Council. The Breakers has been operating a Club without special exception approval in a Commercial-Town Serving district.
In order for it to come into compliance wouldn’t we all like to know the following:
*Has the Breakers Club shown you a membership application with its requirements, fees , residency percentages etc?
* Has the Breakers Club increased its membership substantially in the recent past?
* How many members did Breakers have 10 years ago? _____ 5 years ago______? How many members now _____?
*What percentage are residents of Palm Beach_____?
*How many members are over the age of 60___?
*How many members currently have children _____?
*How many members use the current children’s facilities at the Breakers_____?
*Is there a cap on membership?___? What is that number______?
*Do you have usage data that shows the existing children' facilities are overcrowded and overused justifying the expansion ?
*Did Breakers survey the membership as to whether they wanted the Family Entertainment Center expansion ____?
*What were the results of that survey__?
*Do members have regular meetings with the Breakers about their concerns____?
enter."
The point of asking these questions is to:
1. Make the Breakers Club follow the rules, ask for a special exception approval and outline in a declaration of use all the details relating to membership that the other clubs must comply with.
2. The expansion the Breakers is seeking is in an area of Town already suffering from gridlock and congestion that has angered the residents and frustrated visitors.
Will this application exacerbate these already onerous conditions? And for what? It is simply to monetize more and more of their property for profit.
It seems to me that The Breakers has gotten everything they have asked for from the Town in the past. Only the facade facing County Road is landmarked, but do they get tax benefits for every aspect of work on the resort and not just on the facade? Is their 251 unit PUD making Town decision-makers fearful, and thus permitting things like the white shade tennis and padel court expansion despised by tennis players and towns people?
Parking and traffic are major concerns especially in the Breakers Location within Palm Beach. Parking for members now is insufficient and members cannot find parking on their current designated lot which would lead one to believe there are too many members for the capacity.The underground garage supposedly for employees is not going to make a big dent in the 2500 employees which the Breakers must employee. If members have to use this lot, the walk is quite long to the Beach Club for lunch. The Beach Club is overcrowded. How many more will the resort let in to pay for the underground garage, the tunnel, the way too large "Family Entertainment Center? The project with its “Food Hall, mini golf and sports activities around the historic Hotel reminds me of what it must be like on a huge cruise ship…-24-hour eating in the "food hall” with how many seats? Cafeteria-style? Serving what kind of food? . This expansion seems designed to cheapen the Brand of the Breakers and with it Palm Beach.
Is it true that the Breakers wants to enclose the courtyard making an enormous lobby to accommodate larger conventions and events? Another cheapening of the historic hotel. Who are they catering to? The Planning and Zoning Commission and the Council must realize that Palm Beach as a destination is saturated. We have no more capacity. Renovation in scale at the Breakers can be done in their PUD, but an expansion of the scale and intensity contemplated will be disastrous for our residents and our Town.
Sincerely,
Anne Pepper
Anne C.Pepper
333 Seaspray Avenue
Palm Beach, FL 33480
Received via email 3.5.2025:
Dear Chairwoman Coniglio and members of the Planning and Zoning Commission:
Your March 6, 2025 meeting has two agenda items: (1) The list of permitted and special exception uses in the Commercial-Town Serving (C-TS) districts and (2) The standards for Planned Unit Development (PUD) approval of a requested amendment to the Breakers PUD. Council is asking your Commission for a recommendation.
I’m writing to express concern about the potentially significant traffic and quality of life impacts that will be triggered by the expansion of the Breakers "Family Entertainment Center (FEC)” application and unapproved “Ocean Club”. Despite our updated Comprehensive Plan’s affirmation that Palm Beach is a built-out residential community, increased traffic onto the island, gridlock, parking issues, redevelopment applications and road closures plague us. Town Manager Kirk Blouin stated in the Palm Beach Daily News (3/2/35): “This town is crippled right now.”
As you know, the Breakers operates as “PUD-A “ in a Commercial-Town Serving District and must comply with the associated zoning. Private clubs are not permitted by right in this zone but require a special exception permit. To comply, they must meet standards regulating parking, loading, circulation, design, etc. (Division 4). They must be in compliance with the Comprehensive Plan: by not functioning as region-serving attractions, not creating overuse and congestion on the roadways and by primarily serving the needs of residents.
Why is this important? When the application was submitted, it was discovered that the Breakers has been operating one or more clubs without special exception use approval. How many members do they have? How many are town residents? Is there a cap on membership? How many additional cars come onto the island because of club membership? No one knows.
The Breakers is monetizing a use of their property by operating Clubs without approval and now seeks to make it possible to further monetize the use(s.) This will affect everyone, especially town residents and others who need to along travel North County Rd and Royal Poinciana Way.
We’ve extracted some bullet points from Town Planning, Zoning and Building Director Wayne Bergman’s staff memo to your Commission and have added bold lettering for emphasis and clarity regarding some of the impacts associated with the application:
• Closing of Pine Walk and elimination of the signal at County Road
• Widening of County Road on east side to provide left and right turn lanes
• Widening of the Breakers’ entrance road to four lanes and removal of parking.
• Entertainment Complex to include a new restaurant dining “food hall”
• A pedestrian bridge connecting the third floor to the upper floor of the Beach Club
• Ball backboard, sports courts, mini golf proposed for outdoor area
• Family Entertainment Complex will result in a 31,962 square foot increase
• The Breakers has been operating a private club which approval has not been sought nor granted by the Town Council
• A detailed traffic impact analysis, site traffic circulation analysis and parking evaluation for the Breakers PUD is still pending as of February 26, 2025.
• The proposed Garage will consist of 849 parking spaces, which is an increase of 299 parking spaces
Our Town’s Comprehensive Plan is written to protect our residential quality of life by prohibiting region-serving development, limiting increased intensity of commercial development and seeking to reduce traffic congestion and parking demands in Palm Beach. Unless residents speak up and say, “we’ve had enough, West Palm Beach’s massive redevelopment projects, dangerous over-use of town roads for day-trippers patronizing private clubs, restaurants, fundraising events and an ever-increasing number of amenities will continue to overwhelm our residential town.
It is hoped that you will :
1. To transmit to the Town Council that the Commission cannot support the zoning change that The Breakers is seeking because it violates the Comprehensive Plan.
2. The Breakers’ private club(s) for which they have no permit must be brought into compliance immediately.
3. Overdevelopment in Commercial-Town Serving Districts must stop ( it’s our highest traffic congestion area). We cannot increase capacity and must decrease demand and overuse of our limited roadways.
4. Private Group Use regulations and percentages of resident usage needs to be raised above 50% and enforced.
Thank you
Anne C.Pepper
333 Seaspray Avenue
Palm Beach, FL 33480
Received via email 3.4.2025:
Regarding the Breakers application:
. I oppose the closing of Pine Walk and the widening of County Road
. I see no need and oppose the widening of the Breakers entrance road and especially the removal of parking in that area
. I oppose the ball backboard, sports courts and mini golf projects
. I especially oppose the proposed increase of almost 33,000 square foot to the Family Entertainment Complex
. The Breakers should not be allowed to continue a private club without approval being sought or granted by the Town Council
. I oppose the increase of parking spaces by almost 300.
. Please withhold your vote until a detailed traffic impact, site circulation analysis and parking evaluation for the Breakers PUD is carefully and thoroughly considered.
Palm Beach is a beautiful but built-out residential community as affirmed by our Comprehensive Plan. I agree with Mr. Blouin that we are crippled right now and fear that we must take care that it not worsen. As the Planning and Zoning commissioners we need you work diligently to decrease traffic that only results into maddening gridlock, find a way to make parking much less of a challenge, slow redevelopment applications and decrease road closures…..please.
Eileen Bresnan
202 Angler Avenue
Palm Beach, FL 33480
Received via email 2.9.2025:
Dear Planning and Zoning Board members:
Thank you for the work you do for the town of Palm Beach
I am writing to express my opposition to the Breaker's PUD application. The increase in the volume of traffic along with the disruption construction would cause on Royal Poinciana Way would destroy our quality of life.
The Breakers is becoming exploitative of its location on our cherished island. This type of expansion is unwarranted and it will only benefit the Breakers at a cost to local residents and even to the club members. If we wanted to live at Disney World we would have bought a home in Orlando. This application is simply the creation of an amusement park type of enhancement which will benefit people who are visiting Florida but at a cost to local tax payers and residents.
There must be a balance between the needs of residents versus the needs of private enterprises, in this instance The Breakers, profiting at a cost to our quality of life. Please act on behalf of the people who live here and oppose this unnecessary expansion.
Sincerely Yours,
Mr and Mrs CJ van Hoek
243 Merrain Road
Palm Beach 33480
No matter the legal word salad, the Breakers is operating a members club without required permissions, and not following Town regulations. Keep it simple. Enough intensification of use across the boards in Palm Beach.
Received via email 3.5.2025:
PLEASE DISTRIBUTE TO PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEMBERS
All,
This email is a response to the false allegation in the staff report for The Breakers PUD modification, which is set to be heard by the Planning and Zoning Commission on March 6, 2025, in which staff alleges that “Following submission of this amendment to the Breakers PUD, it was discovered that the Breakers has been operating a private club which approval has not been sought nor granted by the Town Council. In order for the Breakers PUD to maintain consistency with Division 3 of Article V, Planned Unit Development Procedures, an application shall be submitted to the Director of Planning, Zoning and Building and approved by the Town Council.” Unfortunately, this defamatory and false statement is now being repeated by neighborhood campaigns that are soliciting opposition to our project based on false information regarding a non-existent private club.
THERE IS NO PRIVATE CLUB PROPOSED BY OR ASSOCIATED WITH THIS APPLICATION!!!!
Staff’s characterization of the membership program as a private club is not supported by the facts , as set forth below, and no special exception is necessary for the continued operation of a 100 year-old membership program that is a permitted accessory use to the hotel, golf, and tennis facilities. First, The Breakers has existed in the Town of Palm Beach since 1896. They have had “members” at the current hotel property since at least 1926. The membership program has always been characterized by the Town as an accessory use to the permitted golf, tennis, and hotel uses at the property. The membership program allows people who are not staying at the hotel to access hotel facilities such as the golf course, tennis courts, and beach club area. Pursuant to the PUD resolutions and the associated contractual agreements between The Breakers and the Town, accessory commercial uses are permitted to be converted to / from residential dwelling units or hotel rooms. We have addressed this conversion in our LOI, in our supporting documents, and on the record of the February, 2025 meeting of the Planning and Zoning Commission.
Please consider the following:
1. At no point in its 129 year history has The Breakers been asked or required to apply for a special exception due to the fact it has members using accessory hotel amenities. This is because the impacts of the accessory hotel facilities have been reviewed and approved as such during all prior reviews by the Town of proposed improvements at the Property, and membership programs are customarily accessory and incidental to beachfront resort hotels with golf and tennis facilities. As we will demonstrate tomorrow, the Breakers Casino had members that would come and visit the property beginning in the 1920s, continuing on when the original beach club facility was approved. When that facility was demolished for the construction of the new beach club, it was understood that members would be using the new facility.
2. For example, when the current beach club was approved in 1998, there was no requirement to obtain a special exception because “members” could use the beach “club.” That area is primarily for the use of hotel guests and secondarily available to club members. During Town Council’s review of that PUD modification, Paul Leone asked Bob Moore, who at the time was director of planning , zoning, and building, what if anything The Breakers needed from the Town regarding the membership program. Bob asked Mr. Leone to mention the number of members that would use the facilities on the record, but said no formal approvals were required. Mr. Leone disclosed the number of members on the record (See official Town minutes, attached as Exhibit A), and, as is apparent in the resolution approving the PUD modification, no action regarding members was taken or needed. See Resolution 1-98, Attached as Exhibit “B”. The original beach club was an approval of accessory space for hotel guests that could be accessed by members. It is exactly the same type of facility we are discussing as a part of our current application.
3. When the current golf and tennis clubhouse was approved in 2000 pursuant to Resolution 3-00, no approval of a special exception for a membership club was required by the Town, even though the facility was accessory commercial space that was for the use of both hotel guests and golf and tennis members. Like the golf and tennis club, the current FEC proposal is for the use of hotel guest and members, and it was approved as accessory commercial space in the PUD. See Exhibit C.
4. When The Breakers renovated the cabana facilities at the Property pursuant to Resolution 04-05, no special exception for a club use was required, even though the cabana area is for the use of members and guests only. It was approved as accessory commercial space in the PUD. See Exhibit D.
5. When The Breakers constructed a new fitness facility at the Beach Club pursuant to Resolution 11-2014, no special exception was required by the Town, even though the fitness center, like the beach club, is for use of hotel guests and members. It was approved as accessory commercial space in the PUD, which is exactly what we are proposing to do in our current application for the family entertainment center. See Exhibit E.
6. When the new tennis facility was approved pursuant to Resolution 043-2023, no special exception for a club use was required even though the facility is for hotel guests and members. See Exhibit F.
7. When the padel courts were approved pursuant to Resolution 073-2024, no special exception for a club use was required even though the facility is for hotel guests and members. See Exhibit G.
8. The only special exception for a club use that has ever been required is for the “Old Guard” private social club, which received special exception approval from the Town in 1979 because it was for a true private social club that was not operating as an accessory hotel use. See Exhibit H. That the town required special exception for this private club use, and never has required special exception approval for The Breakers membership program, is further proof that the century-old membership program is not a private club and no special exception is necessary.
Finally, when the Fourt Arts recently went through the Town’s approval process, it was not required to obtain special exception approval for its membership program. The “requirement” for a special exception approval should not vary depending on the staff member that is reviewing a project. There is absolutely no justification to ignore 100 years of history, 50 years of contractual relationship, and recent treatment of another applicant in order to falsely allege that The Breakers has been illegally operating a private club. Our application must be processed pursuant to the PUD, which has always treated the membership program as accessory to the golf, tennis, and hotel uses at the property.
We look forward to clarifying the record tomorrow.
Jamie
James M. Crowley, Esq. | Shareholder
Environmental & Land Use
777 S. Flagler Drive, Suite 500 East
West Palm Beach, FL 33401
Received via email 3.4.2025:
Dear Planning and Zoning Commission,
As you deliberate over the massive project coming from the Breakers, please get the facts about how the Breakers is operating before making any recommendations to the Council. The Breakers has been operating a Club without special exception approval in a Commercial-Town Serving district.
In order for it to come into compliance wouldn’t we all like to know the following:
*Has the Breakers Club shown you a membership application with its requirements, fees , residency percentages etc?
* Has the Breakers Club increased its membership substantially in the recent past?
* How many members did Breakers have 10 years ago? _____ 5 years ago______? How many members now _____?
*What percentage are residents of Palm Beach_____?
*How many members are over the age of 60___?
*How many members currently have children _____?
*How many members use the current children’s facilities at the Breakers_____?
*Is there a cap on membership?___? What is that number______?
*Do you have usage data that shows the existing children' facilities are overcrowded and overused justifying the expansion ?
*Did Breakers survey the membership as to whether they wanted the Family Entertainment Center expansion ____?
*What were the results of that survey__?
*Do members have regular meetings with the Breakers about their concerns____?
enter."
The point of asking these questions is to:
1. Make the Breakers Club follow the rules, ask for a special exception approval and outline in a declaration of use all the details relating to membership that the other clubs must comply with.
2. The expansion the Breakers is seeking is in an area of Town already suffering from gridlock and congestion that has angered the residents and frustrated visitors.
Will this application exacerbate these already onerous conditions? And for what? It is simply to monetize more and more of their property for profit.
It seems to me that The Breakers has gotten everything they have asked for from the Town in the past. Only the facade facing County Road is landmarked, but do they get tax benefits for every aspect of work on the resort and not just on the facade? Is their 251 unit PUD making Town decision-makers fearful, and thus permitting things like the white shade tennis and padel court expansion despised by tennis players and towns people?
Parking and traffic are major concerns especially in the Breakers Location within Palm Beach. Parking for members now is insufficient and members cannot find parking on their current designated lot which would lead one to believe there are too many members for the capacity.The underground garage supposedly for employees is not going to make a big dent in the 2500 employees which the Breakers must employee. If members have to use this lot, the walk is quite long to the Beach Club for lunch. The Beach Club is overcrowded. How many more will the resort let in to pay for the underground garage, the tunnel, the way too large "Family Entertainment Center? The project with its “Food Hall, mini golf and sports activities around the historic Hotel reminds me of what it must be like on a huge cruise ship…-24-hour eating in the "food hall” with how many seats? Cafeteria-style? Serving what kind of food? . This expansion seems designed to cheapen the Brand of the Breakers and with it Palm Beach.
Is it true that the Breakers wants to enclose the courtyard making an enormous lobby to accommodate larger conventions and events? Another cheapening of the historic hotel. Who are they catering to? The Planning and Zoning Commission and the Council must realize that Palm Beach as a destination is saturated. We have no more capacity. Renovation in scale at the Breakers can be done in their PUD, but an expansion of the scale and intensity contemplated will be disastrous for our residents and our Town.
Sincerely,
Anne Pepper
Anne C.Pepper
333 Seaspray Avenue
Palm Beach, FL 33480
Received via email 3.5.2025:
Dear Chairwoman Coniglio and members of the Planning and Zoning Commission:
Your March 6, 2025 meeting has two agenda items: (1) The list of permitted and special exception uses in the Commercial-Town Serving (C-TS) districts and (2) The standards for Planned Unit Development (PUD) approval of a requested amendment to the Breakers PUD. Council is asking your Commission for a recommendation.
I’m writing to express concern about the potentially significant traffic and quality of life impacts that will be triggered by the expansion of the Breakers "Family Entertainment Center (FEC)” application and unapproved “Ocean Club”. Despite our updated Comprehensive Plan’s affirmation that Palm Beach is a built-out residential community, increased traffic onto the island, gridlock, parking issues, redevelopment applications and road closures plague us. Town Manager Kirk Blouin stated in the Palm Beach Daily News (3/2/35): “This town is crippled right now.”
As you know, the Breakers operates as “PUD-A “ in a Commercial-Town Serving District and must comply with the associated zoning. Private clubs are not permitted by right in this zone but require a special exception permit. To comply, they must meet standards regulating parking, loading, circulation, design, etc. (Division 4). They must be in compliance with the Comprehensive Plan: by not functioning as region-serving attractions, not creating overuse and congestion on the roadways and by primarily serving the needs of residents.
Why is this important? When the application was submitted, it was discovered that the Breakers has been operating one or more clubs without special exception use approval. How many members do they have? How many are town residents? Is there a cap on membership? How many additional cars come onto the island because of club membership? No one knows.
The Breakers is monetizing a use of their property by operating Clubs without approval and now seeks to make it possible to further monetize the use(s.) This will affect everyone, especially town residents and others who need to along travel North County Rd and Royal Poinciana Way.
We’ve extracted some bullet points from Town Planning, Zoning and Building Director Wayne Bergman’s staff memo to your Commission and have added bold lettering for emphasis and clarity regarding some of the impacts associated with the application:
• Closing of Pine Walk and elimination of the signal at County Road
• Widening of County Road on east side to provide left and right turn lanes
• Widening of the Breakers’ entrance road to four lanes and removal of parking.
• Entertainment Complex to include a new restaurant dining “food hall”
• A pedestrian bridge connecting the third floor to the upper floor of the Beach Club
• Ball backboard, sports courts, mini golf proposed for outdoor area
• Family Entertainment Complex will result in a 31,962 square foot increase
• The Breakers has been operating a private club which approval has not been sought nor granted by the Town Council
• A detailed traffic impact analysis, site traffic circulation analysis and parking evaluation for the Breakers PUD is still pending as of February 26, 2025.
• The proposed Garage will consist of 849 parking spaces, which is an increase of 299 parking spaces
Our Town’s Comprehensive Plan is written to protect our residential quality of life by prohibiting region-serving development, limiting increased intensity of commercial development and seeking to reduce traffic congestion and parking demands in Palm Beach. Unless residents speak up and say, “we’ve had enough, West Palm Beach’s massive redevelopment projects, dangerous over-use of town roads for day-trippers patronizing private clubs, restaurants, fundraising events and an ever-increasing number of amenities will continue to overwhelm our residential town.
It is hoped that you will :
1. To transmit to the Town Council that the Commission cannot support the zoning change that The Breakers is seeking because it violates the Comprehensive Plan.
2. The Breakers’ private club(s) for which they have no permit must be brought into compliance immediately.
3. Overdevelopment in Commercial-Town Serving Districts must stop ( it’s our highest traffic congestion area). We cannot increase capacity and must decrease demand and overuse of our limited roadways.
4. Private Group Use regulations and percentages of resident usage needs to be raised above 50% and enforced.
Thank you
Anne C.Pepper
333 Seaspray Avenue
Palm Beach, FL 33480
Received via email 3.4.2025:
Regarding the Breakers application:
. I oppose the closing of Pine Walk and the widening of County Road
. I see no need and oppose the widening of the Breakers entrance road and especially the removal of parking in that area
. I oppose the ball backboard, sports courts and mini golf projects
. I especially oppose the proposed increase of almost 33,000 square foot to the Family Entertainment Complex
. The Breakers should not be allowed to continue a private club without approval being sought or granted by the Town Council
. I oppose the increase of parking spaces by almost 300.
. Please withhold your vote until a detailed traffic impact, site circulation analysis and parking evaluation for the Breakers PUD is carefully and thoroughly considered.
Palm Beach is a beautiful but built-out residential community as affirmed by our Comprehensive Plan. I agree with Mr. Blouin that we are crippled right now and fear that we must take care that it not worsen. As the Planning and Zoning commissioners we need you work diligently to decrease traffic that only results into maddening gridlock, find a way to make parking much less of a challenge, slow redevelopment applications and decrease road closures…..please.
Eileen Bresnan
202 Angler Avenue
Palm Beach, FL 33480
Received via email 2.9.2025:
Dear Planning and Zoning Board members:
Thank you for the work you do for the town of Palm Beach
I am writing to express my opposition to the Breaker's PUD application. The increase in the volume of traffic along with the disruption construction would cause on Royal Poinciana Way would destroy our quality of life.
The Breakers is becoming exploitative of its location on our cherished island. This type of expansion is unwarranted and it will only benefit the Breakers at a cost to local residents and even to the club members. If we wanted to live at Disney World we would have bought a home in Orlando. This application is simply the creation of an amusement park type of enhancement which will benefit people who are visiting Florida but at a cost to local tax payers and residents.
There must be a balance between the needs of residents versus the needs of private enterprises, in this instance The Breakers, profiting at a cost to our quality of life. Please act on behalf of the people who live here and oppose this unnecessary expansion.
Sincerely Yours,
Mr and Mrs CJ van Hoek
243 Merrain Road
Palm Beach 33480