Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutDocumentation_Special Meeting_Tab 5_4/9/1992 // f. ' I. zv �:r fi + _ VILLAGE OF TEQUESTA ,.t, ,; Post Office Box 3273 • 357 Tequesta Drive ���,.;�. ° Tequesta, Florida 33469-0273 • (407) 575-6200 ,11�� 'm , o ,° FAX: (407) 575-6203 ,CN COUSI VILLAGE OF TEQUESTA SPECIAL VILLAGE COUNCIL CITIZENS COMMENTS APRIL 9 , 1 9 9 2 COMMUNICATIONS FROM CITIZENS William Murphy, appointed as representative of the Jupiter- Tequesta-Juno Beach Chamber of Commerce by the Executive Board, stated the feelings of the Board: 1) is the proposed Northfork land improvement viable; and 2) what is the impact on the Village of Tequesta. 1) The Jupiter-Tequesta-Juno Beach Chamber of Commerce supports the development of Section 28 . They feel the proposed density of approximately 1 unit/acre is environmentally sound for that area, and would probably be classified as a low-density residential development, all done by one Developer. At this time, with a shortfall of tax revenue, a well thought out residential --pro ect�muses fully supported. This project will have a positive economic impact on all surrounding businesses and communities. This project will cause an improvement in agricultural wetlands and even provide a public golf course. 2) The Chamber of Commerce Board feels the impact of the Northfork Project on the Village of Tequesta will be minimal, since traffic studies can be slanted either way. Most residents of the Northfork area would travel north and south, not through Tequesta. A lot of traffic from that area entering Tequesta would be from those who would shop or work in Tequesta. Some Tequesta traffic may even be alleviated by travelers from Little Cfeek area using Island Way Bridge to access I-95. If there was a slight increase in traffic through Tequesta, it may bring much needed business to Tequesta ' s merchants. Recycled Paper Dorothy Campbell asked if the sentence stating that the existing land use designation for Section 28 should remain as is has been deleted. Mayor Collings confirmed that it had been deleted. Also deleted from the letter was the wording in number 7) which stated that impact fees "be used for the widening of Tequesta Drive to Seabrook, if necessary" . Mrs. Campbell pointed out further that the description of 1 house per acre was not exactly accurate since development would take place all in one section with a public golf course still to be existing. She stated she had problems with: 1) one house per acre which includes acreage of a golf course, and the golf course not being dedicated; 2) problems with the golf course being a public one and generating much traffic; 3) reminded that Country Club Drive and Tequesta Drive are municipally owned and maintained roads. Maintenance costs should be shared if these streets are to be shared with traffic from other municipalities. Susan Brennan asked if any studies have been done regarding the effects of the Northfork Project on Tequesta ' s water table. She felt an additional 2 , 500 residents in the area, including another golf course which would need to be watered would have an adverse effect on Tequesta ' s water table. Mayor Collings stated the requested DRI study or the requested Regional Planning Council study will cover the subject of water. It has been treated and discussed in several COG (of which a representative of South Florida Water Management is a member) meetings without the formality of a study. John Palace, managing general partner of Northfork Development, stated unregulated growth is a concern of Northfork Developers as well , and the 1985 Growth Management Act serves as a control, in that it promotes environmentally sound and physically responsible development. Mr. Palace felt the Village staff did not have enough data to make density recommendations since a presentation of the Site Plan has never been before Tequesta 's Village Council . He felt the traffic impact on Tequesta would be minimal and he did not understand Tequesta ' s comments regarding significant regional impact. The only issue the Developer ever discussed with Tequesta was regarding traffic to which there is a reality and a perception. Reality to the traffic impact of Northfork on Tequesta is minimal . The Developer' s traffic consultant reported that traffic would increase 1% in Tequesta as a result of the Northfork Project. There is no additional level of service necessary for Country Club Drive. If the Northfork Development was located in Tequesta, the request would be for the lowest residential zoning Tequesta has, and absolute concurrency under traffic. This land is an environmental disaster with 400 acres of agriculture with 12 wells, drawing down the water table drastically; there is direct runoff and pollution into the park and a tremendous invasion of exotic vegetation. The Project has been reduced from 810 units to under 700 units. Mr. Palace reassured that the Project is getting closer to 1 unit per acre. He pointed out what he felt were immeasurable benefits of the Project: 1) cement the boundary to Jonathan Dickinson Park; 2) environmental devastation will be stopped; 3) exotic seed sources will be eradicated; 4) preservation of 80 acres of the only remaining upland vegetation on the site will take place; 5) proposal of an elementary school site for south Martin County residents; 6) two miles of county road will be built by the Developer; 7) giving the public a golf course which will generate $8-$8M in revenue; 8) the community will be impacted to the tune of $130M of sensible growth. Mr. Palace felt there was no abusive development here. He asked the Village Council to not make the recommendation regarding the density, since the density is already low.