HomeMy WebLinkAboutDocumentation_Regular_Tab 12M_4/10/1997 Memorandum
To: Village Council DICTATED BUT NOT READ TO
From: Thomas G. Bradford, Village Manager EXPEDITE.
Date: March 27, 1997
Subject: Village Council Position on Palm Beach County Request
to Move Forward with Western Connector "Shoney' s
• Extension" ; Agenda Item
At the March 26th Regional Roadway Mediation Meeting,
Commissioner Karen Marcus once again requested a consensus from
the participants as to their willingness to allow Palm Beach
County to proceed with a Comprehensive Plan Amendment to the Palm
Beach County Thoroughfare Right-of-Way Identification Map (TIM)
to provide for the "Shoney' s Extension" . The Shoney' s Extension
is actually an extension of the "Western Connector" . On the TIM,
the "Western Connector" is actually shown as the Church Street
Extension. Palm Beach County simply wishes to provide for the
much talked about extension of the Western Connector to somewhere
anticipated to be near Shoneys on Indiantown Road to relieve
anticipated traffic from development in -the surrounding area from
the Limestone Creek Community.
While\ there is virtually unanimous consensus that the., Shoney' s
Extension would be good for the preservation of the Limestone
Creek Community, I objected to Palm Beach County moving forward
at this time since the question, in all fairness, should be part
of the mediation process that is anticipated to result in a final
Accord. As you recall, I objected to Palm Beach County moving
forward with the speed humps on Loxahatchee River Road and Church
Street. I did so because it was done during the mediation
process . I have always felt that these things should be properly
negotiated and finalized prior to taking action. But, now that
Palm Beach County has moved forward with the construction of
speed humps and roundabouts in the area subject to mediation,
this opens the door for any local government, including Tequesta,
to pursue the same absent a final Accord.
As a compromise, I suggested that Palm Beach County find a way to
proceed with their TIM Amendment, conditionally subject to the
same being a part of the final Accord from the regional roadway
mediation process . Commissioner Marcus and Assistant County
Attorney Barbara Alterman seemed to indicate that this was a very
real possibility that Palm Beach County could pursue.
At the Regional Roadway Mediation Meeting it was requested that
both Tequesta and Jupiter take this question back to their
respective governing bodies to receive proper direction from them
so that this information could be transmitted to Palm Beach
County, who is scheduled to have its Land Use Advisory Board
,j
consider the question of amending the TIM to approve the Shoney' s
Extension at their Meeting on April 11, 1997 .
It is my recommendation, in light of the desire to reach a final
Accord with the other local governments on the regional roadway
mediation process, that Tequesta either:
• Not concur to the Palm Beach County desire to move
forward with the Shoney' s Extension, or
• Offer no objection to the same in the event that Palm
Beach County conditions its action on the same being
subject to inclusion in the anticipated final Accord.
In other words, if the Shoney' s Extension does not end
up in the final Accord, the Palm Beach County
Comprehensive Plan Amendment would be nullified.
Commissioner Marcus indicated that she would abide by the
respective wishes. of the various governing bodies in this regard.
Commissioner Marcus and the regional roadway mediation
participants will be advised of the Tequesta Village Council
position on this question.
TGB/krb
council\032797.sam
2
� ai-e oCOUNTY LINE ROAD
000
I
o q,5 � • ivito9rC \ m I o
UFF\ m TEOUESTAk Dj
\ Urn 1111111111111,a p1 p
‘41V4v? in C?PICTI1C6.)
will
10 \�
=1" �ROEBU�CL( 1
*44‘
RD. 701 Olt
�►�� � (50,) o ENTER STREET
ST. fX . / (80') �7/� (60 ) 1 O ) \
I r1
INDIANTOWN RD \\
,w \
.40
,... . _ r li).7 V). TONEY PENNA ROAD ■ 6
n ■ d� \
0 - INDIAN CREEK PARKWAY ■ \
.0
e.it % 1 X ..
�•
• 1 •
■ \
1,
1
� FREDERICK ■ \
1/ II SMAEE
i
% lik S1 ■ 9% '\
1 \
I ., . \\.
LEGEND
GRADE SEPARATION
1
EXPRESSWAY MIMI.INTERCHANGE
240� "mnu1l
.,. 2 2 0' lamoliwa .
20Q' il
1d0' ■111111E•1111isn
14 0' iii iiii-iie
120'
TEN 110' -
lkd .110.••••••WaMINEF.....• i
1• PROPOSED DELETIONS i1111111111111111 FIGURE 3
L PALM BEACH COUNTY
THOROUGHFARE RIGHT OF WAY
r IDENTIFICATION MAP
L ❑_ 2❑ aw A� � ,it.
NOT TO SCALE 4428T.04
•
2. Item: Western Corridor(Staff: Fernando de Arag6n)
.
This item has evolved from the County's previous consideration of the Western Corridor in
Amendment Round 95-2. The primary issue involves the Western Corridor alignment
connecting Washington/Church St.directly with Indiantown Rd. Presently the Thoroughfare
Identification Map (TIM) includes right of way from the Martin County line to
Washington/Church St. along Roosevelt Ave.,just west of the Jupiter Community Park. This
alignment would load additional traffic onto Church St. There is general consensus that
Church St. should not have additional traffic impact and there is a need for a Western
Corridor to connect directly to Indiantown Rd. At this time, the alignment study for this
project is substantially complete and staff recommends initiation in round 97-2.
3. Item: FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT-Residual Parcels
Location: Future Land Use Element
Change: Add a new policy to discourage the creation of"residual parcels" resulting
from the omission of properties from planned development districts which are
located adjacent to the PUD.
Description: A"residual parcel"is a tract of land,usually at an intersection of two major
roadways,which has been either purposefully or accidentally left out of a development.The .
proposed amendment will seek to encourage the functional integration of these parcels by
stressing that PUDs be reasonably compact,as well as linked in terms of traffic circulation
systems and architectural styles.
C. TEXT AMENDMENTS based on the Evaluation and Appraisal Report(EAR)
The Evaluation and Appraisal Report, completed early this year, recommended extensive
revisions to all of the Comprehensive Plan's 22 Elements. As a result of these
recommendations, many elements will be completely reorganized and rewritten, and some
will bedeleted entirely. The majority of the recommended amendments were completed in
Round 97-1. with the remainder to be completed in 97-2. The following summaries highlight
the key areas to be amended within each element. For a complete description of the
corrective amendments,please refer to the EAR.
1. Item: COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP SERIES -Revise and update the Map Series
(Staff: Steve Morales)
Location: Comprehensive Plan,Map Series.
Change: 1)modifications and updates to existing maps; 2)creation of new maps.
Description: These map amendments are based on the findings of the Evaluation and
Appraisal Report,and op existing and new 9J-5 requirements. The amendment only includes
maps which are required to be adopted with the Comprehensive Plan.
Attachment A. -97-2 Item Summary A-4 \ March 31, 1997
TOTAL P.02