Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutDocumentation_Regular_Tab 6C_5/10/1990 vC VILLAGE OF TEQUESTA :Z' Post Office Box 3273 • 357 Tequesta Drive ��.� Tequesta, Florida 33469-0273 • (407) 575-6200 'M� r FAX: (407) 575-6203 TEQUESTA DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT TASK FORCE MEETING MINUTES APRIL 2 0 , 1 9 9 0 I . The Tequesta Downtown Task Force held a regularly scheduled meeting at the Village Hall , 357 Tequesta Drive, Tequesta, Florida, on Friday, April 20, 1990 . The meeting was called to order at 4 : 00 P.M. by Carlton Stoddard, Chairman. Other Task Force members present were Jim Pilz and Dr. Stanley Jacobs . Also in attendance were : Village Manager , Thomas G. Bradford and Wendy Harrison , Assistant to Village Manager, Ed Nelson, former Task Force member ; Village Planner, Jack Horniman ; Mayor Joseph Capretta, Ed Howell , Earl Collings , William Burckart, Councilmembers . Also in attendance were , Pete Pimentel , Executive Director, Northern Palm Beach County Water Control District , Tracy Bennett , representing Northern Palm Beach County Water Control District , William Shannon , John Giba , Rev . Tom Vengayil , and Rev . Ed Campbell , representatives for St . Jude ' s Church , Jerry Brownlee , representative for Palm Beach County Library, and Gary Van Brock . II . APPROVAL OF AGENDA The Agenda was approved as submitted. III . APPROVAL OF MINUTES A) Task Force Meeting of March 26 , 1990: Dr. Jacobs moved to approve the above-referenced Minutes as submitted. Jim Pilz seconded the motion. The vote on the motion was: Dr. Jacobs - for Chairman Stoddard- for Jim Pilz - for the motion was therefor passed and adopted and the above- referenced Minutes were approved as submitted. Downtown Development Task Force Meeting Minutes April 20 , 1990 Page 2 IV. REPORT FROM PETE PIMENTEL RELATIVE TO HIS FINDINGS CONCERNING CREATION OF AN INDEPENDENT SPECIAL TAXING DISTRICT WITHIN THE MASTER PLAN AREA. Pete Pimentel presented a Report for the Task Force ' s review. He gave a brief overview of that Report : The first part was an introduction of the Northern Palm Beach County Water Control District (NPBWCD or District) , who they are, what their powers are, and the members of their Board. The Report gives an evaluation of how the District might assist Tequesta in developing its Master Plan. When the District was created, a portion of Tequesta was included in its boundaries . This area did not include Tequesta' s Master Plan area. The only way the Master Plan area could become part of the District is through State Legislature . Though it is now too late to have that happen this year, Tequesta could be annexed into the District for the next session of Legislature . This does not mean, however, that all activity regarding downtown development would cease . There are ways to utilize the time to accomplish some major steps between now and June 1991 : 1 ) The landowners and/or the Village could contribute some advance funding , which would be refunded with Bond funds , to start the program; 2 ) Delay the closing and delivery of Bond funds for up to two years . Under this scenario , the District would do nothing until the Legislative Bill became law (June 1991 ) . Mr . Pimentel reported he had talked with some of the landowners of the downtown Tequesta area , as well as having talked with some others , regarding buying into all , or parts of, the Master Plan project : 1 ) DORNER: Mr. Dorner was very interested in the District getting involved, selling tax exempt bonds , and advancing the infrastructure needs. He had some concerns about the project being market driven ( i .e . , one that would sell ) . He would like to talk further with the Village Council regarding some of his own ideas. 2 ) Mr. Pimentel was not successful in making contact with Lighthouse Plaza owners . 3 ) FALHABER: Mr. Pimentel reported the Publix lease to the Tequesta Plaza area is holding up any activity on Falhaber's part. The lease will be up in the fall of 1992 . Julie Falhaber was not willing to talk a lot, but was interested in the concept of the District, mainly because of the benefit it would offer the Tequesta Plaza area. Ms. Falhaber felt she would be willing to sit down and discuss in more detail if Village Council adopted this concept. Downtown Development Task Force Meeting Minutes April 20 , 1990 Page 3 4 ) ST. JUDE ' S CHURCH : Mr. Pimental talked with Bill Shannon , representative for St . Jude ' s Church . The Church has some reservation to being part of a taxing unit . Mr . Pimentel explained to them that once the infrastructure is set in place , the District would levy a special assessment against the properties , based on the benefits received. The Church stated they would not be willing to participate to that extent. Under the District ' s law, they are not exempt . If they are part of the unit, they would pay their pro rata share of the improvements that benefit that property. Mr. Pimentel stated that he talked with some people who would be willing to invest into the Project, but they did not want to do so until they were certain Council was going to act. Mr. Pimentel further explained to the Task Force that once the District' s water management plan for the downtown area is submitted, there are several 30-day time periods of appeals that go through each process . Each time a plan is changed, that court process is started over again. Every re-start causes further delay. If Tequesta chooses NPBWCD to do the infrastructure, it is necessary for the two parties to sit down to have some hard discussions in order to begin to develop a plan. Councilmember Collings asked what portions of Tequesta were included in the District ' s boundaries? Mr. Pimentel answered, a small portion to the west , just touching parts of Tequesta. The Tequesta Country Club area is included . The District does not need contiguous areas to annex properties , since each unit is self- sufficient and stands alone . The area basically east of the North Fork of the River is not included. Mr. Pilz stated that though everyone should understand how the District builds the roads , sewers, and floats the Bonds , they also needed to know how it separates what happens after that point. Mr. Pimentel answered that when the District builds something, and pledges a special assessment against the land, for instance, as in the Gardens Mall case -- that is a small part of a larger unit, but all owned by the Foundation. The District built all the roads and lakes on the site, and sold tax exempt Bonds. Bach year the District determines what their debt service is, and a special assessment is levied against each acre of property within that site. That develops the tax per acre. Downtown Development Task Force Meeting Minutes April 20, 1990 Page 4 The District does not need to own the facilities it builds . They can be given to another governmental entity, in that the land is the collateral against which the District can build the property. In the Village ' s case , the facilities could be given to the Village , and the sewer system to Encon. If Tequesta wanted the roads or the drainage system, those could be given also . Whatever the District keeps , there is an operating expense which would be levied in addition to the debt service . These facilities cannot be given to a private entity; only to another public entity. The District operates under the same rules that the Village operates under , except the District does not have any police powers . The District cannot zone property, or decide land use, or subdivide property. The District simply builds public infrastructure . In order to do that, they have to have permission from the Village . They are looked on, by the Village , as another developer, who has to get the same permits , with the Village always maintaining the same controls as they would over any developer. Dr . Jacobs asked if it would be possible, under the District's scenario, to buy up everything , put it in one package , and develop according to the Master Plan? Mr . Pimentel explained that is not the purpose of the District . The purpose is to have a group of landowners get together and decide collectively if they want to use an entity to build the infrastructure and agree to have themselves be taxed. The advantage to the landowners is that they do not have to individually come up with the money, and secondly, all they are paying for a 20-year period while they own the land is the debt service. They only have to come up with their percentage . Also, the District can sell the system as tax-exempt Bonds - they get cheaper money than the landowners could. If the landowners are not interested in developing the land under the District, the District has power of eminent domain, just as the Village does . Councilmember Collings asked why the District had taken so long to come forth? Mr. Pimentel answered that : 1 ) Tequesta is not within the present boundaries of the District, and 2 ) the District is not promoting itself. Once their services are solicited, then they move ahead. Mayor Capretta felt it did not look positive for Lighthouse Plaza to want to be part of this plan, since, if they participated, their taxes would increase. In light of their present circumstances , he felt they probably would not be interested in the near future. Mr. Pimentel explained that he had had a response from Lighthouse Plaza, but they were not able to touch base because they were playing "telephone tag" . He further explained how the program could be an advantage to the owners of Lighthouse Plaza: Downtown Development Task Force Meeting Minutes April 20, 1990 Page 5 Assume the Village wants the District to do the infrastructure , and the landowners are just not coming together , and the Village is willing to commit a minimal amount of up-front monies (which is reimbursable upon the sale of the Bonds ) to get the program started. Under scenario 1 ) presented in NPBWCD' s Report, that would be 1 . 5 years away from any obligation. NPBWCD would structure the Bond issue for perhaps 1 . 5 years , and gives 1 . 5 years to start building the program. At that point in time, Lighthouse Plaza would owe their first tax payment. They would only pay their share of the pro rata debt service , and notice what has happened to the value of their land. Mayor Capretta understood it increased the value of their land, but wondered if it added to the value of the buildings , and stated that he really desired to stay away from Lighthouse Plaza until they solve some of their issues . Mr . Pimentel explained another option: Decide upon a boundary to annex, form sub-units within that area; those would become sub- taxing units , and those areas that are developed first would be the only ones paying the first phase . As the infrastructure grows , other sub-units can be formed. Mayor Capretta stated that though there is lots of optimistic talk about developers who are interested in Tequesta' s Master Plan, he has only seen those who are interested in Tequesta putting up money first , before the developer . Therefore , the Village must first be certain of the marketability before proceeding . Mr . Pimentel explained that since the District puts their name on the bottom line for selling the Bonds , they first do a market analysis study to be certain, first of all , that the market IS feasible . They bring their own financial people to do an assessment . Another option, where the District does not have to use Village money is, under NPBWCD law, if the Tequesta downtown lands were included in the District boundaries, NPBWCD has the right of initiative to levy a one-time tax to do the Plan. If it is not feasible, the unit is dissolved. Mr. Bradford: Mayor Capretta suggested that if Lighthouse Plaza had a higher tax assessment, that might encourage them to resolve some pending issues, since their overhead would be on the rise. Is the opposite true? Is it possible to let the Village assume, or pay for, part of the assessments that represent a percentage of the infrastructure that can be associated with the public good, therefore causing the cost to perhaps be even lower for the property owners? Mr. Pimentel answered it was possible, and would strengthen their Bonds , but it is not necessary. Downtown Development Task Force Meeting Minutes April 20 , 1990 Page 6 Mayor Capretta asked how the District deals with railroads , and suggested a landscaped berm camouflaging the railroad from the developed area? Mr . Pimentel suggested that could be included in the cost of the infrastructure . The District would own the berms and maintain them. Mayor Capretta stated he liked the idea of the District doing a financial analysis of the Plan and putting their name on the Bonds before the Village does . At this point, Mr. Pimentel introduced Tracy Bennett of Mock Roos & Associates engineering firm, who was in attendance to listen and offer help to the Village . Mr. Pimentel explained that if the project succeeds, the District succeeds . Mr . Pilz asked what kind of body, from an administrative point of view, would represent Tequesta to work along with NPBWCD? Mr. Pimentel answered that once NPBWCD receives the Plan from the Village Council , staff involvement would be minimal , until such time as construction plans evolved. At that point , the Building Department would become involved, just as with any developer . The program would go to NPBWCD, they would develop the construction plan , bid the job, supervise the construction, and certify its completion to the Village . The Plan basically would come right out of the Village shop in the NPBWCD shop. Chairman Stoddard stated it is incumbent upon the Task Force to make a recommendation to the Village Council , but perhaps that needs to be reserved until after the field trip to Ft . Pierce next week to study a Community Redevelopment Agency. V. REVIEW OF LANDOWNER/USER CONCERNS REGARDING FACILITY LOCATION AND RIGHT-OF-WAY. A) St. Jude's Church: Mr. Bradford gave an overview: Bill Shannon, representing St. Jude' s Church, contacted Mr. Bradford and stated to him that he would like to address some of St. Jude's concerns relative to the Master Plan infrastructure, particularly the roadways. Mr. Shannon explained to him that the Church was in the process of selecting its architectural consultants and that a number of concerns had come up regarding the east-west roads which the Village Council had instructed to be preserved by way of a right-of-way protection ordinance. Mr. Shannon has already Downtown Development Task Force Meeting Minutes April 20 , 1990 Page 7 presented the Church ' s plea to the Village Council . The Church has problems not only with the east-west road at the north of the Church property, but also with the potential east-west roadway to the south of the Church property. Mr . Shannon , and some of the Fathers of the Church , are present today. Mr. Shannon explained St. Jude ' s is in the process of building a new church for their property. In discussing these plans with potential architects, the architects brought to the attention of the Church some of the problems with the proposed roadways . The Church has no problem with the proposed road going north-south from Tequesta Drive to Village Boulevard. The Church would create a roadway to access this street so that their parishners would not have to use U.S . Highway One . This Church roadway would be blocked on weekdays or days when not in use for religious services or religious holidays . It would not be a thoroughfare that would go through Church property. The north-south roadway would also increase traffic warrants on Village Boulevard, thereby promoting the need for traffic signals there . It seems to the Church to be a good idea to keep additional accesses off U.S . Highway One . The east-west roadway north of the Church property is located between St . Jude ' s Parish Hall and the commercial structures to the north . Since there is very little distance between those two structures , something would have to give - either the new structures or the Church Parish Hall . This seems to the Church to be a condemnation the Village should not go through. The proposed east-west roadway south of the Church property would meet U.S. Highway One at the Church ' s median. The median there is in a taper, which is for the Church' s stacking lane . The east-west roadway there would reduce the amount of stacking St. Jude ' s presently has going northbound. The Church prefers to keep the main access generally where it is presently located, give or take a small movement that would line it up with Key West Village, to have only one access to U.S. Highway One, and the remaining accesses on the proposed north-south roadway. The Church has no problem with delivering a right-of-way deed to the Village for one-half of the access on the east side of the north-south proposed roadway. St. Jude's Parish is formally objecting regarding the east-west roadways, and will do so in a letter to the Village. In addition, nomenclature like the proposed park in that same vicinity is also Downtown Development Task Force Meeting Minutes April 20, 1990 Page 8 objectionable to the Church . The Church would not agree to the use of that site as a park . The proposed park is vacant Church property. The Church also sees no benefit in their participation with the NPBWCD plan, should the Village choose to go that route . The Church feels it would not impact the infrastructure in any greater degree than is already impacted. Councilmember Collings asked if the objection was equal to both east-west roadways . Mr . Shannon answered it was equal because it limits the Church' s flexibility. Chairman Stoddard asked why the Church had waited so long to object, since they had participated in the Charette and knew all along what the Master Plan entailed? Mr. Stoddard reminded Mr. Shannon that top, professional planners had created this Master Plan, and the traffic pattern was coordinated for all of the people of Tequesta, not just for the Church . Mr. Shannon responded that the Church has the right to object at any point . Mr. Pilz asked if the Church could suggest a good alternate for the east-west roads , since the deletion of them would change the configuration of the entire Master Plan. He also asked Mr. Shannon if his professional expertise and background were in the field of planning . Mr . Shannon answered that the Church did not have an alternate suggestion, and that his expertise and background were in the legal field. Dr . Jacobs pointed out that the park area referred to, at the time of the development of the Master Plan, was designated a sensitive eco-zone by the County. Mr. Bradford added that the County Ordinance requires that 25% of that area be reserved as an eco site. Mr. Pilz suggested that this be taken back to the planners in order to re-check this part of the Plan that concerns the Church, and moved that the Task Force continue on with their planned Agenda at this time. Dr. Jacobs seconded that motion. The vote on the motion was : Dr. Jacobs - for Chairman Stoddard- for Jim Pilz - for the motion was therefor passed and adopted. Downtown Development Task Force Meeting Minutes April 20 , 1990 Page 9 B) Palm Beach County Library. Jerry Brownlee , representative for Palm Beach County Library, explained that after meeting with the Village Council who suggested that the County evaluate three possible sites for the proposed Library, the County had decided upon their location preference , which was south of the existing Post Office . The three locations were: 1 ) north of the present Post Office; 2 ) south of the present Post Office ; or 3 ) on one corner of Village Boulevard and the proposed north-south roadway. The County' s preference on location was quite definite , and for various specific reasons , which are : the infrastructure is already in place, shared parking with the Post Office , and the ability to proceed without having to have decisions finalized as to what is going to happen in the rest of the Master Plan. It is necessary for the County to proceed in a timely manner with the preliminary design adaptations . Mayor Capretta asked if the May 1 deadline date previously given by the County Commissioner was still the deadline for an answer from the Village Council? Mr . Brownlee responded that a timely decision is still necessary, but a May 2 or 10 decision would not jeopardize the Library. Construction should be starting within the year . Dr. Jacobs wondered why there is so much sudden, undue pressure from the County Commissioner for a decision, when at the Charette it was seen that Tequesta was at the bottom of the County' s list for new library locations . Dr . Jacobs also felt the Library should be part of the cultural center. Councilmember Collings stated the Library needs more space than is available at the proposed cultural center. Mr. Brownlee responded that the Tequesta Branch Library is one of the most crowded and oldest in the system, and a Library was needed as soon as possible . He also reminded the Task Force that this proposed Library has been in the discussion stage for two years . Now, with funds available, it is time to move ahead. Mr. Pilz suggested that if the Library was going to be next to the Post Office, perhaps inside on a parallel road would be better. He suggested the County give an alternate preference. Chairman Stoddard was concerned that a "hatchet job" was taking place with the Master Plan. Mr. Brownlee stated that if the Task Force recommends stalling for a while, and the Council cannot make a decision by May 1 , he would agree to some type of finalization. The Downtown Development Task Force Meeting Minutes April 20 , 1990 Page 10 Library project is becoming real . He stated the County would look at different alternatives and agreed it might be more effective for the Library planners to work and meet with the Master Plan planners in order to come up with some recommendations and suggested that that be arranged. Mr . Bradford reminded the Task Force that there are certain principles, relative to the Library, that should not be compromised: 1 ) it is a public facility to serve as a focal point. Mr. Bradford showed an overhead view of what would happen if the Village should acquiesce and allow the Library to go either north or south of the existing Post Office . The overhead showed the footprint of a building with about 4000sf with 36 parking spaces in the middle, and Old Dixie Highway at the bottom. This is not Town Center Planning ; it is the typical facility as has been constructed in the past , and if the Village chooses this route , they will get more of the same , unless it is done in a coordinating fashion with the Master Plan. There will also have to be at least one east- west roadway between Tequesta Drive and Village Boulevard. It will probably be found that the Library needs to be at the intersection of one of those roads in order to be the focal point in keeping with the basic principles of the Master Plan. Councilmember Collings felt the Master Plan planners must get together with the Library planners in order to coordinate. Mr . Brownlee stated he would be vocally unhappy if the Village tries to put the library in a place where they cannot provide library service , but felt there was no conflict between good master planning and an adequate location for the Library. The Library needs to be where traffic already exists, not put in a place where it will attract traffic . Mr. Bradford asked if the Library's plan of a 4000sf facility would be enough to serve an area as heavily populated as is proposed for the present area, since the plan for this facility was drawn up in 1985 and the area has grown dramatically since that time? Mr. Brownlee answered that 4000sf was the minimum in order to have a functional facility. The design is not expandable - it was not anticipated to be expandable. That does not mean that it is too late to look at that question. But, it does mean that a commitment was made to the people by referendum to build this 4000sf Tequesta Branch Library. The commitment is to build the best quality facility that the County can possibly build, the size that was promised to be built, and built as quickly as possible. Downtown Development Task Force Meeting Minutes April 20 , 1990 Page 11 Mr . Bradford asked if Mr . Brownlee would be willing for his staff to meet with the Master Plan planners . His answer was affirmative . Mayor Capretta stated it is apparent that the real problem is in the south end of the Master Plan area. It is also apparent that at least one east-west roadway is necessary. He would favor the southernmost east-west roadway. He stated he would also like to see the Library built at a corner of road "A" and Old Dixie Highway. Or, once the placement of Main Street is decided, the Library could be placed at the corner of Village Boulevard and Main Street. He agreed a meeting with the planners needed to take place in order to come up with some alternatives . VI . ANY OTHER MATTERS Because of the late hour , no other matters were discussed. VII . ADJOURNMENT. The meeting was adjourned at 6 : 20 P.M. Respectfully submitted, Fran Bitters Recording Secretary ATTEST: Bill Kascavelis Finance Director/ Village Clerk Date Approved: