Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutDocumentation_Regular_Tab 6A_4/10/1997 3rn A J VILLAGE OF TEQUESTA ROADWAY ISSUES Background Information for Village of Tequesta (VOT) residents/businesses ► Responsible government requires responsible citizenry. VOT property owners need to become familiar with the issues concerning their roadways and those of the surrounding areas. They also need to understand some of the background and be able to provide responsible input to the Village Council regarding what actions they would like to see happen. ► It is in the best interest of the property holders of the VOT to have a consistent presentation of concerns and proposed solutions so that the Village Council can support a realistic course of action and so the mediation effort can be effective. ► The mediation effort should continue with responsible and coordinated input from the VOT property owners. ► Some independent actions are required at this time to calm the road traffic on Tequesta roadways. ► Country Club Drive is a connector road on the VOT, Palm Beach County, and State of Florida Comprehensive Road Plans. As such, this roadway is important not only for the normal flow of vehicular traffic, but also for emergency vehicles and area evacuation when necessary. ► With so few roadways around the Loxahatchee River, Country Club Drive, at this time, forms an important link in the area road system. As areas around the River continue to be built out, traffic will continue to increase unless some positive action is taken to keep the volume in some type of control. ► Several local area road adjustments are being looked at through a multi-participant mediation process. Most of these adjustments would occur in south Martin County and in north Jupiter along Loxahatchee River Road, and the general area where Loxahatchee River Road connects to Island Way. • The concern of VOT residents in these mediation meetings seems to be that not enough will be done by Jupiter, Palm Beach County, and Martin County to provide new roadway connections, and hence, to substantively improve (i.e. reduce) the volume of traffic on Tequesta roadways. Village of Tequesta Roadway issues, tsacic_grouna inro: ueccuzucL w, a77 # L ay ► Another fear is that, even if all the connections being proposed are agreed to and implemented, the traffic volume on Tequesta roadways will still be unacceptable, and, as far as VOT residents are concerned, still out of positive control. ► Thus far this discussion has focused on traffic volume, but that is not the whole story. Traffic speed is also an important factor. Although the speed limit on Country Club Drive was reduced in April 1994 from 30 mph to 25 mph, the speed limits are still often being exceeded by a substantial amount. ► VOT police are doing a good job of patrolling the roadway when they are available. However, there are many times of the day when the police are not available and the traffic volume is high. The speed by some is dangerously excessive and trucks are passing through the area into, or out of, Martin County. ► With higher volume and speed also comes increased traffic noise. Residents along Tequesta Drive and Country Club Drive have long been noting that the traffic noise has reached the point where many feel they can no longer keep their front doors open for fresh air. ► Increased traffic volume, speed, and noise have caused property values along Tequesta Drive and Country Club Drive to decrease by as much as $10,000 versus comparable properties just off these roadways. ► As traffic continues to increase on Tequesta roadways, there is also an increasing area crime problem. The bounds of this problem are not well defined, but any increase in crime in our area is cause for grave concern from all VOT property owners. ► Consideration must also be given to the businesses that operate within and around the VOT area, including the medical plaza on Tequesta Drive just north of Seabrook Drive and the Gallery Square North,& South shopping plazas. When Country Club Drive was closed for some months in order to build the VOT gateway at the Martin County Line, a number of local businesses were questioned as to the impact to their customers and their revenues. This inquiry was done in conjunction with VOT Country Club Drive Task Force which studied the traffic problem earlier in 1996. The inquiry found that most all businesses sensed no impact to either customers or revenues as a result of the temporary closure of the roadway. • • VILLAGE OF TEQUESTA ROADWAY ISSUES Presentation • The Village of Tequesta, in conjunction with Palm Beach County, Martin County, and possibly the town of Jupiter, is participating in a Mediation effort regarding roadway issues in the area around the North and Northwest forks of the Loxahatchee River in both Palm Beach and Martin Counties. The Mediator has asked the various stakeholders to present to the assembled group specific information regarding: 1. Interests of each stakeholder group, 2. Interests of others affected by the interests of each stakeholder group, 3. Root causes of Tequesta's interests, and 4. Proposed Tequesta Stakeholders Group solutions a. Regional Solutions b. Tequesta Solutions 1 Interests of Tequesta Stakeholders Group The current volume of traffic in the Village of Tequesta, on Tequesta Drive, and on Country Club Drive is unacceptable. Estimates for increases in traffic volume on these roadways aggravates the problem even further. Action must be initiated now to reduce the traffic volume. ► Traffic volume in the next 5-7 years is expected to exceed 10,000 trips per day on Country Club Drive, and exceed 16,000 trips per day on sections of Tequesta Drive. ► With the increased traffic comes an unacceptable level of traffic noise and an unacceptable level of vehicles exceeding the speed limit. ► With the increased traffic comes an increased potential for crime. ► Many homes directly along both roads have straight driveways. This means that residents must back out of their driveways onto roadways with increasingly higher traffic levels. This is a major safety concern. • Re-sales of Tequesta area homes are bringing younger families into the area, and with these families come an increasing number of children. This is also a significant roadway safety concern. Village of Tequesta Roadway Issues: December 6, 1996 Page 2 ► Increased traffic, speed, and noise have caused property values along Tequesta Drive and Country Club Drive to decrease by as much as $10,000 versus comparable properties just off these roadways. 2. Interests of Others Affected by Above Interests ► Solutions to above interests will affect other stakeholder groups throughout South Martin County, Jupiter, Palm Beach County, and residents on several Tequesta roads. ► Solutions that will help Tequesta should have a positive affect on other Stakeholders. 3. Root Causes of Tequesta's Interests ► Over the past 20 years the daily volume of traffic on Tequesta roadways has steadily increased. The property area of the Village of Tequesta (VOT) has been built out for some time. Therefore, traffic seems to be increasing from outside the contiguous VOT area. Traffic studies done over the years point to several root causes of these increases: 1. The continuing development of residential property in south Martin County and other surrounding areas, and 2. Cut-through traffic from south Martin County and the northern Jupiter area on the western side Northwest fork of the Loxahatchee River, including the traffic traveling between A 1 A/US 1 to 1-95. ► The "traffic" in question is comprised of: 1. Privately-owned autos, 2. Commercial trucks, delivery vehicles and vans, and 3. School buses ► To fairly represent the situation it is necessary to differentiate between traffic using Tequesta roadways that is: 1. From the VOT area, and 2. From outside the VOT area Village of Tequesta Roadway Issues: December 6,. 1996 Page 3 ► Martin County appears to have two principle sources of traffic using Tequesta roadways. Traffic comes from: 1. South Martin County north of Country Club Drive, and 2. Turtle Creek • Although prohibited by VOT statutes, commercial trucks use Tequesta roadways as a cut-through from Palm Beach County into Martin County. ► Martin County school buses are coming south from Stuart on Route 1, west on Tequesta Drive, north on Country Club Drive, and into Martin County to pick up Martin County students. • Turtle Creek traffic, which is in Martin County and outside the VOT area, also contributes to the problem. Since Turtle Creek is essentially fully built out, its traffic consists mostly of Turtle Creek residents, visitors, and commercial deliveries. Over the years, two gateways into Turtle Creek, that would have reduced traffic on Country Club Drive, have been closed. The only current access to Turtle Creek is on Country Club Drive in the Village of Tequesta, and this entrance is a public road that has been gated by Turtle Creek residents. • The bottom line: V . 1. . Most recent traffic studies on Country Club Drive found that more than.h alf of the traffic is coming from outside the VOT area, and 2. Most of this "outside the VOT area" traffic is due to either Turtle Creek residents, other Martin County residents, or cut-through traffic. ► The Tequesta Drive bridge poses an additional concern. This.bridge has a projected life based upon a certain level of utilization per unit time. As traffic volume increases ahead of estimates, the time period between maintenance actions becomes shorter. Major bridge maintenance is planned for sometime within the next 7-10 years and will have a substantial cost associated with it. To pay the cost for this major maintenance, VOT property owners should reasonably expect an additional assessment on top of all other assessments currently being levied or proposed. The cost for this major maintenance will be fully borne by VOT property owners even though a substantial volume of traffic using the Tequesta Drive bridge comes from outside the VOT area. Village of Tequesta Roadway Issues: December 6, 1996 Page 4 4A. Proposed Tequesta Stakeholders Group REGIONAL Solutions ► Establish a western corridor road from Northfork south via Church Street, Longshore Drive, or any other connection to Indiantown Road and I-95 that can be agreed upon. ► Complete the South Martin County Line Connector Road to eliminate two 90° turns through Little Club and encourage trucks and cut-through traffic from US 1 to I-95 to use County Line Road. ► Establish County Line Road as an alternative east/west road link from US 1 to Island Way, primarily for truck traffic, thus taking truck traffic and some car traffic off Tequesta Drive and Country Club Drive. ► Open a second Turtle Creek gate on Country Club Drive just north of the Tequesta Village limits. This would result in 100-300 fewer daily trips on Country Club Drive. All Turtle Creek truck and commercial vehicle traffic should enter and leave through this gate. ► Martin County should continue to appeal the Section 28 density decision. i \ Village of Tequesta Roadway Issues: December 6, 1996 Page 5 4B. Proposed Tequesta Stakeholders Group TEQUESTA Solutions ► Roadway studies have shown VOT stakeholders that, even if all of the Regional solutions being proposed are implemented, the traffic flow on Country Club Drive and Tequesta Drive would still be at unacceptable levels. The traffic condition would continue to worsen unless additional independent actions are taken by VOT. ► The following actions are proposed for phased implementation: . 1. Install speed humps-on Country Club Drive and consideration of speed humps on sections of Tequesta Drive, Riverside Drive, Golfview Drive, and River Drive as traffic increases. NOTE: Unlike speed bumps, speed humps work without causing any inconvience because there is no need to slow down if you are traveling within a few miles of the posted speed limits. Speed humps are a gradual rise in the road and can be set at any limit to control speed. A vehicle exceeding the set speed of a hump design will feel a definite bump which increases in severity with a corresponding increase in speed 2. Place STOP signs along Country Club Drive at all intersections. 3. Install a round-about at the intersection of Country Club Drive, North Place, and the entrance to Turtle Creek. 4. Review landscaping plans for Country Club Drive to create a narrowing tunnel effect to slow traffic. 5. Increase Police patrolling on the Tequesta peninsula to strictly enforce speed limits and limit unauthorized commercial traffic. ► The following solutions should be considered for phased implementation if the Regional and Tequesta solutions discussed above do not reduce the traffic throughout Tequesta to an acceptable level: 1. Limit access to Country Club Drive by gating the southbound lane at the north entrance. 2. Replace the VOT gateway on Country Club Drive at the county line with a toll gate. The tolls should generate VOT revenues in a special fund to compensate for the cost of the toll gate and for VOT road and bridge maintenance. Village of Tequesta Roadway Issues: December 6, 1996 Page 6 3. If a second Turtle Creek gate cannot be, or is not, opened, consider installation of a toll gate on VOT property along Country Club Drive, and across Turtle Creek Drive, for traffic entering the VOT. 4. Only as a last resort, if all else fails, close Country Club Drive to all but emergency and evacuation traffic. 5. Summary and Conclusions There is currently an unacceptable volume of traffic in the Village of Tequesta, specifically on Tequesta Drive and Country Club Drive. In addition, traffic is projected to increase dramatically over the next 5-7 years. This situation requires regional actions to establish alternate routes that will redistribute traffic away from Tequesta Drive and Country Club Drive. In conjunction with these regional actions, the Village of Tequesta will initiate its own actions in a phased implementation to reduce and manage traffic on its residential streets. These actions will take place over a period of time to permit determination of their impact on traffic volume. It is our sincere hope that these actions, in conjunction with the regional actions previously described, will reduce traffic throughout the Village of Tequesta to an acceptable level. In doing so, we strive to retain the residential nature of the area, maintain it as a safe-neighborhood, and protect the stated interests of Village of Tequesta residents without the need to close any Tequesta roadways. End of the VOT Stakeholders Mediation Presentation Village of Tequesta Roadway Issues: December 6, 1996 Page 7 Village of Tequesta Proposed Phased Implementation Schedule Phase 1: (Speed humps) Begin improvements by April 1997. When improvements are completed, test effectiveness for 3 months. After 3 months of implementation, set a firm date for review of findings. After review of findings, set a firm date to decide whether to proceed further. Phase 2: (STOP signs) Begin improvements in August 1997. When improvements are completed, test effectiveness for 3 months. After 3 months of implementation, set a firm date for review of findings. After review of findings, set a firm date to decide whether to proceed further. Phase 3: (Round-about) Begin improvements in December 1997. When improvements are completed, test effectiveness for 3 months. After 3 months of implementation, set a firm date for review of findings. After review of findings, set a firm date to decide whether to proceed further. Phase 4: (Landscaping) Begin improvements in April 1998. When improvements are completed, test effectiveness for 3 months. After 3 months of implementation, set a firm date for review of findings. .After review of findings, set a firm date to decide whether to proceed further. Phase 5: (Restrict southbound traffic) Begin improvements in August 1998. When improvements are completed, test effectiveness for 3 months. After 3 months of implementation, set a firm date for review of findings. After review of findings, set a firm date to decide whether to proceed further. Phase 6: (Add toll gates) Begin improvements in December 1998. When improvements are completed, test effectiveness for 6 months. After 6 months of implementation, set a firm date for review of findings. After review of findings, set a firm date to decide whether to proceed further. Phase 7: (Close road) Begin improvements in June 1999.