Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutDocumentation_Regular_Tab 5C_11/30/1989 v irm i PP-7 VILLAGE OF TEQUESTA 0, ` �''. Post Office Box 3273 • 357 Tequesta Drive Tequesta, Florida 33469-0273 • (407) 575-6200 11.410 ° FAX: (407) 575-6203 TEQUESTA DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT TASK FORCE MEETING MINUTES NOVEMBER 3 , 1 9 8 9 I . The Tequesta Downtown Task Force held a regularly scheduled meeting at the Village Hall , 357 Tequesta Drive, Tequesta, Florida, on Friday, November 3 , 1989 . The meeting was called to order at 9 : 30 A.M. by Carlton Stoddard, Chairman. Other Task Force members present were : Dr. Stanley Jacobs , and Edwin Nelson. Jim Stergas and Jim Pilz were not in attendance . Village Manager, Thomas G. Bradford was the Village Official in attendance. Also in attendance was the Village Planning Consultant, Jack Horniman. Others present were : Gary Van Brock, Faye Schrecengost of Lighthouse Gallery, John Giba, William Rodger, Al Berry, and Laurie Ombres, Secretary of the Tequesta Country Club Association Board. II . APPROVAL OF AGENDA Village Manager Bradford announced that Jim Pilz had left a statement with Mr . Bradford before leaving town and asked that it be stated at this meeting for consideration. With this addition , the Agenda was approved as submitted. III . APPROVAL OF MINUTES A) Task Force Meeting of October 24, 1989 : On page 4 , line 9 , change " insistance" to "insistence" . On page 6 , last line , change "vise" to "vice" . With the above changes , the Task Force Meeting Minutes of October 24 , 1989 were approved as submitted. Downtown Development Task Force Meeting Minutes November 3 , 1989 Page 2 IV. REVIEW AND PRIORITIZATION OF THE VARIOUS ELEMENTS OF THE PROPOSED MASTER PLAN . • Gary Van Brook asked if he could make some comments in general since it effected the basic thoughts of the Master. Plan itself . He commented that he felt there was no flexibility in building length • or design and that buildings were not. interchangeable . He felt mixed use was okay, but, it shouldn ' t be jumbled . In order to gain • flexibility, Mr . Van Brock felt the street network needed improvement . He displayed his version of a feasible street network . He felt. the Master Plan as it stands presently is unworkable , without proper flexibility. He proposed that roads which , on the Master Plan , cut through buildings such as Alex - -C+'e6ster ' s RestaurantA and the old K-Mart building, be changed to a • single main north-south artery (as displayed on his drawing ) , so • that it would not cut through any existing buildings . His street design formed a. cross with the north=south artery linking Tequesta • Drive with Village Boulevard, and the east-west street linking U. S . Highway I with Old Dixie . He felt his street network was more logical and stated that more cooperation was needed. Mr . Van Brock also felt that no porches belonged on the front of buildings - perhaps on the back. More flexibility was needed in architectural style . He stated that when the market is limited to specific design as to what will be allowed in an area, the situation becomes economically unfeasible . Chairman Stoddard asked Mr . Van Brock if he had shared his concepts with the Charrett.e Design Team. He answered that the design team did not give his architect time for input . Mr . Van Brock also did not like the lagoons and pools that were proposed on the Master Plan . His viewpoint was that. the South Florida Water Management District would not allow it , and they are the governing body. Mr. Bradford explained that when the Task Force was created it was to address the problems of the Village ' s central business district . At that time Mr . Van Brock presented an original drawing that did not integrate the Dorner property with the surrounding properties . Chairman Stoddard pointed out that the original Dorner plan had no interior streets , walkways or pathways . The Task Force , soon after it was organized , formulated a Mission Statement that was basically a call for a Town Center planning concept . The Mission Statement stated that the area needed to be developed in a Downtown Development Task Force Meeting Minutes November 3 , 1989 Page 3 • mixed-use fashion , that there would be proper pedestrian planning , that there would be easy access from the residential areas outside the central town area , and that it would be a centerpiece f7)r Tequesta . The Design Team took those basic concepts and created the Master Plan . Being professionals , Image Network was able to look at. that and realize that the town center planning concept , in essence , is what is being done more and more today. The Master Plan is the direct result of Image Network ' s development of those concepts . It is important to remember that there are many ways to accomplish the concepts . For instance , the residential specifics probably need to be more flexible . However, the Task Force still agrees with the basic concepts . The memo (attached) dated October 31 , 1989 regarding "Listing of the Elements of the Proposed Tequesta Town Center Master Plan" is an extention of the thought that Mayor Capretta had when he was in attendance at the • last Task Force meeting : Basically, that the Task Force should look at. the Plan as a whole, starting from broad based concepts down to minute details and ascertain which items , if any, they felt could not be compromised, indicate items that were somewhat, important but negotiable , and other items that were nice to have , but could be eliminated or postponed . With that thought the following listing was made and discussed. o Mixed use zoning (commercial and residential ) . No discussion - all agreed it was important . o A street network, each having a variable level of importance, serving the needs of the pedestrian and the automobile . . All agreed. Chairman Stoddard added that the importance of the street network was to correlate and coordinate the entire 90 acres to accomplish the increased circulation of pedestrian and automobile traffic . Dr . Jacobs amplified by saying he disagreed with Gary Van Brock ' s comment that the road would go through the middle of Alex Webster ' s Restaurant and agreed with the general overall street network concept . o Well-defined plazas and squares for social activity and recreation. All agreed - no dissent . • Downtown Development Task Force Meeting Minutes November 3 , 1989 Page 4 o Provision of public buildings and spaces : a) City Hall Ed Nelson felt this was negotiable . Chairman Stoddard suggested the terminology be changed from City Hall to Village Government Building . Gary Van Brock debated the location on the Master Plan . Jack Horniman explained the intention was to provide a Village Center wiTh a building that is central in importance to the Village . Dr. Jacobs felt this space on the Master Plan ought to be designated for a government building . b) Fountain All agreed it would be a key feature . c) Post Office All agreed it will have to be expanded in the near future . d) Library Chairman Stoddard asked if there had been any response to the Master Plan from Jerry Brownlee of the Palm Beach County Library. The answer was no . Dr. Jacobs suggested the Library might fit better near the Cultural Center than on Old Dixie Highway. Gary Van Brock stated the Library had given him a letter of intent indicating where they wanted to be located which entailed about 3/4 acre on Old Dixie Highway south of the Post Office . Mr . Van Brock • objected to the location of the library on the Master Plan . Mr. Nelson suggested the Library be approved, with site to be determined. Mr . Bradford reminded the Task Force of Mark Schimmenti ' s comment that , if the County insists that the Library be on the site south of the existing Post Office , the whole Master Plan could be adjusted to make it fit properly. It just needs to be properly coordinated. e) Bandstand The Task Force agreed to delete this item . f) Covered walkway north of eco-zone site Expendable . g) Eco-zone site? Chairman Stoddard stated that the southern two acres of the eco-zone woods , owned by St . Jude' s Church , is negotiable with the County, if the land is needed for a Cultural Center . Jack Horniman reminded the Task Force that in the Comprehensive Plan the Village Council adopted an alternative locan environmental preservation plan more applicable to the Village , as opposed to generalized environmental standards being established Countywide . yr . Bradford asked , if this has to remain as a preserved site , would the Task Force prefer it to be a public site , or is it. irrelevant? The area is ecologically sensitive , and if the Village doesn' t do something with it , the County will probably pass an ordinance causing the area to fall under County domain. If the occurs , the Village can opt out . Mr . Nelson suggested it be left as an eco-zone site and allow whoever owns it to do what is economically feasible , and in the best interest of Tequesta. The Task Force agreed. • Downtown Development Task Force Meeting Minutes November 3 , 1989 Page 5 o Landscaping or streetscaping of the public domain. All agreed it is necessary and desirable . o Platting that provides development flexibility depending on future market conditions . It was agreed' that platting should remain flexible . • o Aesthetic water rentention. All agreed it is important to retain water on the land to recharge the water table , reduce drainage runoff , and provide attractive pools and lagoons . o Provision of multi-purpose alley ways . To remain negotiable . o Architectural standards which include loggias and porches . Allow as a permitted use - but not mandated. o Provision of a Cultural Center and Fine Arts Auditorium. All agreed it was important to plan for an expanded cultural center. o Provision of A Senior Citizen High Rise Building . Not mandatory. Low rise residential type buildings , rather than high rises , could provide a more livable Retirement Center , residential , rather than institutional , in character. o Provision of three basic housing types in specific locations being: a) Charleston Townhouse Needs clarification. Need to have architectural drawings . b) Philadelphia Townhouse Needs clarification . Need to have architectural drawings . c) Courtyard Apartments Needs clarification . Need to have architectural drawings . The consensus of the Task Force was that. the Master Plan should guide , but not mandate, architectural design. o Provision of specialty retail in specific locations . All agreed the Master Plan should show this . o Railway Station . All agreed it, could initiate a good idea for the future . News reports state that the Tri-County Railway is interested in a new station in north County. o Art School . Should be combined with the Cultural Center . Downtown Development Task Force Meeting Minutes November 3 , 1989 Page 6 o Suburban neighborhood. All agree it belongs in the `Taster Plan . o Covered parking area . Expendable . o Fitness Center . Allowable , but not mandatory. Could have nature "heart trails" in the eco woods . o Fashion Mall Tower. Delete . o Bed and Breakfast . Permissable , but not mandatory. V. FINALIZATION OF ACTION PLAN FOR MASTER PLAN PRESENTATION TO VILLAGE COUNCIL AND TASK FORCE RECOMMENDATIONS RELATIVE TO MASTER PLAN IMPLEMENTATION. (memo attached) Chairman Stoddard read two sentences he wrote on Alternative 1 . " I prefer adopting the Master Plan overall street network with an alternative route around the old K-Mart . Approve the basic concept of land uses , allowing an alternative for Lighthouse Plaza, and building styles and setbacks as permitted , not mandated, uses . Adopt new codes allowing these uses and densities by amending Tequesta' s Planned Residential Development. (PRD) and Planned Commercial Development (PCI)) zoning . Provide an alternate location for the Cultural Center , if needed . " Mr. Nelson felt that was a sensible compromise between Alternative 1 and 2 . Village Manager Bradford asked Jack Horniman how does the Council mandate that the street network will happen . Mr. Horniman replied he tended to steer away from alternative 1 . The ideal Master Plan has been developed, presuming it all gets developed in an integrated way. If this Plan is adopted now, it is contrary to what is on the books and could be constituted as down- zoning of appraised value . This is commercially valued property right now . Mr. Horniman felt the most reasonable way for the Task Force to go is as Mayor Capretta suggested - don' t compromise your • principles - they need to stay in place . Mr. Bradford asked how it can be guaranteed that the principles do not become compromised. Mr . Horniman suggested the POD and PRD be updated to expedite the Master Plan . He also suggested the Task Force study the Master Plan closely to determine whether property value is being lessened by virtue of zoning . It ' s an important issue to consider . Mr . Horniman suggested a "zoning in progress" might be wise . Downtown Development Task Force • Meeting Minutes November 3 , 1989 Page 7 Mr . Bradford stated Mr . Pilz feels that the Master Plan should be accepted conceptually , that time should he granted for an active marketing effort , and that this marketing effort should be done by a professional group of people who know how to do marketing , overseen by the Task Force . Chairman Stoddard concurred , pointing out that this could he done immediately without waiting months for new zoning code standards to be finalized . The marketing program can provide a good test of what phases of the Master Plan are feasible and attractive to blue chip developers . Mr . Bradford asked if the following statement is an accurate summary of how the Task Force feels about the Master Plan : The Master Plan is a good one if it does everything the Task Force thinks ultimately needs to be done . However , the likelihood of that happening , where everything is specifically located, is pretty small , because there will probably never be just one overall owner of the properties involved . Therefore , the Task Force wants to find a way to use that Master Plan as a guideline . The Village can correspondingly change its ordinances to allow for and encourage that type of development . The Master. Plan will be used as a standard to compare whether or not the development proposed has come close to doing the things the Task Force feels are in the best interests of Tequest.a. The Task Force felt that this statement was an accurate summary. It was agreed that the Task Force would hold one more meeting before presenting their thoughts and. recommendations to the Village Council . It was suggested that it is imperative that all. Task Force members be present at the meeting when the Master Plan is presented to Village Council . Mark Schimmenti and Victor should assist in this presentation. Downtown Development Task Force Meeting Minutes November 3 , 1989 Page 8 VI . ANY OTHER MATTERS . There were no other matters before the Task Force . VI . ADJOURNMENT There being no further business before the Task Force, the meeting was adjourned at 12 : 30 P.M. . Respectfully submitted, N.J410416," Fran Bitters Recording Secretary ATTEST: Bill Kascavelis Finance Director/ Village Clerk /fgb Date Approved: VILLAGE OF TEQUESTA ..•`;,. I Q Post Office Box 3273 • 357 Tequesta Drive (l'-6---11:1,.`•:. Tequesta, Florida 33469-0273 • (407) 575-6200 `0�* FAX: (407) 575-6203 MEMORANDUM: TO: Tequesta Downtown Development Task Force Members FROM: Thomas G. Bradford, Village Manager 7 -`,� DATE: October 31, 1989 SUBJECT: Listing of the Elements of the Proposed Tequesta Town Center Master Plan Appearing below is a listing, as I see it, of the various elements of the proposed Master Plan. This listing is intended to be a guide in reviewing the elements and prioritizing the same for the purpose of delineating those elements which are deemed to be critical for the future success of the area and those elements which are compromisable. o Mixed-use zoning (commercial and residential ) o A street network, each having a variable level of importance, serving the needs of the pedestrian and the automobile o Well-defined plazas and squares for social activity and recreation o Provision of public buildings and spaces A) City Hall B) Fountain C) Post Office D) Library E) Bandstand F) Covered walkway north of eco-zone site G) Eco-Zone Site? I Memorandum: Task Force Members October 31, 1989 Page - 2 o Landscaping or streetscapes of the public domain o Platting that provides development flexibility depending on future market conditions o Aesthetic water retention o Preservation of the eco-zone site o Provision of multi-purpose alley-ways o Architectural standards which include loggias and porches o Provision of a Cultural Center and Fine Arts Auditorium o Provision of Senior Citizen Housing o Provision of three basic housing types in specific locations being: A) Charleston Townhouse B) Philadelphia Townhouse C) Courtyard Apartments o Provision of specialty retail in specific locations o Railway Station o Art School o Suburban neighborhood o Covered parking area o Fitness Center o Fashion Mall Tower o Bed and Breakfast TGB/Jmm VILLAGE OF TEQUESTA r� •• `®, Post Office Box 3273 • 357 Tequesta Drive • , Tequesta, Florida 33469-0273 • (407) 575-6200 r: =' FAX: (407) 575-6203 MEMORANDUM: TO: Tequesta Downtown Development Task Force Members FROM: Thomas G. Bradford, Village Manager 1-Z DATE: October 31, 1989 SUBJECT: Action Plan for Master Plan Presentation and Implementation Upon reaching a consensus relative to the proposed Master Plan, or portions thereof, the Task Force must prepare an action plan for formally presenting the consensus Master Plan to the Village Council. Bearing in mind that the Village Council has requested that the presentation be limited to thirty minutes, there may be a great deal of merit in requesting the aid of Image Network in making this presentation. Regardless of the ultimate content of the Master Plan presented, a corollary of the recommended Master Plan should be a recommendation for implementation. As I see it, there are two basic approaches to implementation of the Master Plan which I have listed below: o The Task Force .. can continue to review the various details and elements of the Master Plan until a consensus on every aspect has been derived. The consensus Master Plan can be presented to the Village Council and the Village Council can either accept or reject the same. If accepted, the Master Plan can be formally adopted or implemented through the appropriate legal mechanism, such as an ordinance. Thereafter, the adopted Master Plan can be aggressively marketed, or a laissez-faire approach can be taken allowing the Master Plan area to develop, in time, in accordance with the Plan content. The benefit of this approach is that the agreed to and adopted Master Plan will ultimately be implemented and not be subjected to negotiation and compromise. Memorandum: Task Force Members October 31, 1989 Page - 2 o Upon further review, the Task Force can recommend that certain basic fundamental aspects of the Master Plan be accepted by the Village Council conceptually. This approach foregoes formal adoption of any aspect of the Master Plan. Assuming that the Village Council accepts this approach, the conceptual Master Plan can be aggressively marketed to interested developers. The benefit to this approach, from the developer perspective, is that flexibility is available to them prior to investing in the area. Conversely, a laissez- faire approach may, be taken. The downside to the laissez-faire approach here would be that any developer or property owner could develop any property within the Master Plan area in accordance with existing zoning currently on the books. In fact, the downside to this conceptual Master Plan • approach, even if successfully marketed to developer(s), is that the inevitable process of negotiation and compromise may result in future development having little, if any, resemblance to the proposed Master Plan and/or its fundamental elements. TGB/jmm ' I