Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes_Miscellaneous_04/16/1995 F � `��� VILLAGE OF TEQUESTA ; , , Post Office Box 3273 • 357 Tequesta Drive `' Tequesta, Florida 33469-0273 • (407) 575-6200 ° � J � Fau: (407) 575-6203 ; o m 4 f,C COUN PUBLIC WORK5 COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES APRIL 16, 1995 I. CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL The Village of Tequesta Public Works Committee held a regularly scheduled meeting at the Village Hall, 357 Tequesta Drive, Tequesta, Florida, on Tuesday, April 16, 1996. The meeting was called to order at 4:32 P.M, by Chair Elizabeth Schauer. A roll call was taken by Betty Laur, the Recording Secretary. Commi_ttee members present were: Chair Elizabeth Schauer and Co-Chair Michael R. Meder. Also in attendance were Village Manager Thomas G. Bradford, Village Clerk Joann Manganiello, and Department Heads. Councilmember Carl C. Hansen, who was present at the meeting, was invited by Chair Schauer to sit at the table with the Committee members. II. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Co-Chair Meder moved that the Agenda be approved as submitted. Chair Schauer seconded the motion. The vote on the motion was: Elizabeth Schauer - for Michael R. Meder - for The motion was therefore passed and adopted and the Agenda was approved as submitted. III. COMMCTNICATION FROM CITIZENS (non Agenda Items) Chair Schauer announced that cards to sign in to speak were l:e�vc(r�d Pnp��, PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE MEE T ING MINUTE S APRIL 16, 1996 PAGE 2 ---------------------- now located at the table near the door. There were no comments frQm citizens. IV. SAFE NEIGHBORHOOD IMPROVEMENT DISTRICTS A} COMPREHENSI�E PLAN C�NSISTENCY REVIEW Village Manager Bradfard explained that at the last meeting of the Public Works Committee, the Committee members had raised two important questions when considering the recommendation of an planning ordinance for creation of a Safe Neighborhood District: 1) What type of review or impact upon the Comprehensive Plan would a planning ordinance create, and 2) Could the Village have the power to limit the size of a Safe Neighborhood District if that were the prerogative of the Council? Village Manager Bradford explained that the Village Planning Consultant had reviewed the Comprehensive Plan for consistency relative to a proposed Safe Neighborhood District Planning Ordinance, and had found that the creation of such a district would not be inconsistent with anything currently in the Comprehensive Development Plan of Tequesta. B) DISCUSSION OF SAFE NEIGHBORHOOD DISTRICT SIZE LIMITATION� The Village Manager reported that the �Tillage Attorney's office had advised that the Village could not limit the size of a Safe Neighborhood District. Village Manager Bradford commented that the question of size would arise according to the option chosen for creation of a Safe Neighborhaod District, and that the planning ordinance, for example, could not limit a Safe Neiqhborhood District to a specific subdivi.sion or to a specific number of acres. The Planning Ordinance would state which af the four alternatives under Florida Statutes would be allowed for use in creating a Safe Neighborhoad District. PUBLIC WORKS CONIlrlITTEE MEETING MINUTES APRIL 16, 1996 PAGE 3 ---------------------- C) REVIEW OF DRAFT ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE CREATION OF SAFE NEIGHBC?RHOOD IMPROVEMENT DISTRICTS Village Manager Bradford explained that the draft ordinance cantained the four alternatives for the creation of a Safe Neiqhborhood District, and that his interpretation of concerns raised pr2viausly led him to believe that the Village might want to limit the alternatives to the third alternative, Florida Statutes SeCtion 163.511, Special Neighborhood Districts Creation by Referendum. If this avenue were chosen, when a request was made to the Village Council for creation of a Safe Neighborhoad District, an ardinance would be passed and then a referendum called; however, variables would be addressed in the ordinance, so that if the Village Council did not agree that the size of the district was proper they could vote down the ordinance and it would not go to referendum. If the ordinance were passed by the Village Council, a referendum would be called to ask the people residing within the proposed district whether they favored approval of the district and the levy of up to two mills of ad valorem taxes by the proposed district. The Village Manager reviewed the four alternatives available under Florida Statutes: 1} The Village Council can create a Safe Neighborhood District by ordinance. 2) The Village Council can, create a new or piggyback an existing property owners association. 3) Referendum. 4} Piggyback of a Community Redevelopment Agency, which does not currently exist in the Village of Tequesta. The Village Manager commented that m.any residents might want a Safe Neighborhood District but might not be aware of the associated costs, so that it might be very important to use the referendum alternative. Co-Chair PIJ�LIC WORKS COMMITTEE MEETING MINL3TES APRIL 26, 1996 PAGE 4 Meder questioned why the Village would want to limit itself. Discussion ensued during which the Village Manage� further explained the alternatives and that under the referendum alternative the Village Council would still have the powe� to turn down a request by voting against the ardinance required before going to referendum. The alternatives were clarified as Florida Statute 163.506, Village Coun,cil creates a district; Florida Statute 163.508, crea�tes either a new or piggybacks an existing property own.ers association; Florida Statute 163.511, the people come to the Council with a petition and there is a referendum, or Florida 5tatute 163.512, Community Redevelo�ment Agency. Cauncilmember Hansen recommended that this matter go to the entire Village Council as �oon as possible with the alternatives written up in a clear form so that the Council could study the altern.atives and decide which would be best. Co-Chair Meder agreed that this should go to the Villaqe Council as soon as possible and recommended that all options be kept open by including all of the four alternatives in the planning ordinance. Gail Auguste, 262 Tequesta Circle, introduced Steve Mathison, an attorney in Palm Beach Count�. Steve Mathison, 5606 PGA Blvd., Palm Beach Gardens, expla�ned that he had worked with several homeowners associations and other groups as well as lacal governments regarding Safe Neighborhood Districts, and stated that the record of such districts showed that they cou.ld be very effective for communities for crime prevention, safety planning, and things which could bind the communities together to have a more effective neighborhood group. Mr. Mathison recommended that the planning ordinance retain all of the alternatives, and commented that he would work with Viilage Manager Bradfoxd as this matter progressed. Tom Little, 486 Dover Road, questioned whether he would be restrictecl to three minutes far an item on the agenda. Wk�en the respon.se was "yes", Mr. Little stated he did not PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES APRIL 16, 1996 PAGE 5 ---------------------- think that was right, and left the podium. Joan Marshall, 343 Country Club, explained that she had been Vice Chair of the task force wl�ich was appointed to laok into the traffic problems for the whole Village, and stated that this was not just a Country Club Drive issue. Mrs. Marshall commented that the prime recommendation of the task force had been to pass a planning ordinance which would allow creation of Safe Neighborhood Districts for the benefit of everyone, and urged the Committee to proceed with this ordinance. Co-Chair Meder made a motion to go foxward to the Village Council with the Ordinance as presented. Chair Schauer seconded the motion. The vote on the motion was: Elizabeth Schauer - for Michael R. Meder - for The motion was therefore passed and adopted. Village Manager Bradford commented that when this item was scheduled on an agenda that a summary of each of the four alternatives would be given. V. COUNTRY CLUB DRIVE TRAFFIC CONTROL OPTIQNS Chair Schauer explained that the Committee was looking at the conclusions and recommendations which the task force had made to the Village Council. Chair Schauer explained that she had met with the Chair of the task force, Gary Collins, several times since the task force had sunset, and that the main thing the task force had wanted the Village to do was to initiate a way to reduce trips on Country Club Drive, Tequesta Drive, Seabrook Drive, and throughout the Village. The task force had recommended adoption of an ordinance allowing creation of Safe Neighborhood Districts; making Country Club one-way north from the Turtle Creek entran.ce to the Martin County line after meeting with Turtle Creek Association and Martin County to reach agreement for a second Turtle Creek gate just north of Tequesta Village for access to Country Club Drive; and to install speed humps on Country Club Drive from Tequesta Drive to the Martin County PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES APRIL 16, 1996 PAGE 6 ---------------------- line. Chair Schauer announced that she, Mr. Collins, Mrs. Marshall, Village Manager Bradford and the Village traffic engineer had attended a meeting with Martin County Commissioner Gettig and others from her area; however, nothing beneficial had resulted from that zn.eeting. Chair Schauer reported that she had suggested to Commissioner Gettig that the landscaping be extended south along Country Club Drive into Martin County, to which she had not yet responded. Martin County residents at the meeting did not want Country Club Drive to be made one way. In response to a member of the audience, Chair Schauer explained that the task force had consisted of residents and business people from all over the Village. �Tillage Manager Bradford explained that the recommendations of the task force which had been accomplished were reduction of the right-of-way on Country Glub Drive to prevent 4- laning in. the future; and in.stallation of a 4-way stop at the corner of Country Club Drive and mequesta Driue for safety and to slow traffic, creatin.g an awareness of entering a slower 25 mph zone. Another item under consideration was a 4-way stop at the entrance to Turtle Creek and the north gate of the country club, which traffic counts would allow; however, traf�ic engineers had advised that the intersection must first be aligned by moving the exit lane out of Turtle Creek to the west. Co-Chair Mede� suggested that a 3-way s�op at that intersection would slow traffic on Country Club Drive and create a safe exit from Turtle Creek, which might not require realignment of the roadway. Police Chief Rode�ick explained that the volume ot traffic coming from Narth Place did not warrant a stop siqn, to which Co-Chair Meder responded that a yield sign might be placed there. The Palice Chief explained that Federal guidelines must be followed and that the volume of traffic from North Place would not warrant a 3�-way stop. Co-Chair Meder requested that he be allowed to see the guidelines. Chair Schauer commented that when she had first become a member of the Public Works Committee that all of her suggestions to help alleviate traffic problems could not be accomplished because they were not in accordance with the Federal guidelines. The designation of urban collector road was discussed. Chief Roderick was requested to provide the Committee with a copy o� the Federal guidelines. PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES APRIL 16, 1996 PAGE 7 ---------------------- Councilmember Hansen commented that the Village had to work with other governments to accomplish some of the ta�k force recommendations; however, there were several that could be accomplished by the Village itself, and suggested that the Committee recommend some of those items to the Village Council for their consideration. Co-Chair Mede� suggested a stop sign at Tradew.inds Circle, to which the response was there was not enough traffic. Chief Roderick responded that 200 vehicles per hour from Tradewinds Circle and 500 per hour an Country Club Drive for 8 hours was the required Federal criteria. A member of the audience questioned how West Palm Beach could have stop sign.s every few blocks in some areas, ta which Chair Schauer responded that had been done under a Safe Neighborhood District. Another member of the audience questioned the necessity of installing speed bumps when the speed limit was only 25 mph. Chair Schauer requested that former task force Chair Gary Collins address the criteria recommended by the task force. Mr. Collins explained that the task force had consisted of members from many areas of Village who had reviewed all of the traffic studies conducted by various entities during the past few years; had reached the conclusion that the present level of traffic was unacceptable; and had projected that in the next five �to seven years traffic on Tequesta Drive would increase from 11,000-13,000 trips per day to 14,000-18,000. Village Manager Bradford explained that in Palm Beach County 4-laning was required if traffic exceeded 13,300 trips per day. Mr. Collins stated that Country Club Drive would increase to 10,000-11,000 in that period, and the residents of the Village needed to decide if they wanted to do anything about the problem. Mr. Collins described meetings with Martin County where no cooperation had been received, and expressed concern that residents did nat seem to care unless their homes were involved. Village Manager Bradford reported that traffic had increased by another 100 trips per day since the task force had made their recommendations. Mr. Collins expressed concern over the traffic increases which would be brought about by Northfork and Abacoa. Mr. Col�ins stated that he wished to clear up the miscanception held by some T�zrtle Creek residents that the task force had suggested one way traffic on Country Club Drive so that the PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE MEETSNG MINUTE5 APRIL 16, 1996 PAGE 8 Turtle Creek entrance would be closed; and explained that was untrue and that the suggestion had been to start one way traffic north of the Turtle Creek gate so that Turtle Creek �esidents could come and go at any time. Mr. Collins reported that the Country Club Drive residents had made it known that they did not want the one way option. Mr. Collins urged that people cooperate and decide whether they wanted to do something about the traffic, and nat try to crucify the task force members for their suggestions. A member of the audience questioned why Mr. Collins' comments had not been restricted to three minutes, to which Chair Schauer responded he h�d spoken at her invitation and was speaking for the Committee, and had not been speaking as a communication from a citizen. Mr. Berube questioned why speaking on agenda items was limited to three minutes, and commented that the agenda stated non-agenda items for public comments were limited to three minutes, which inferred that more time would be allowed to speak on agenda items. Chair Schauer responded she had been under the impression that the limit was three minutes for all speakers. Mr. Berube responded that people had come ta the meeting who needed more than three minutes to speak on items which were on the agenda, and questioned whether they would be allowed to speak. Chair Schauer responded that earlier in the meeting Mr. Little had not allowed the Committee the opportunity to extend his time since he had elected not to speak. Mr. Berube responded he was not referring to Mr. Little. Chair Schauer stated she had used Mr. Little as an example. Dana Hoffman, 237 Golfview Drive, explained that she was SAC Committee Chairman at Limestone Elementary and used Country Club Drive to go to the school, the park, to businesses in town, and objected to either closing or making that road one way. Ms. Hoffman commented that Martin County residents used the road to go to Tequesta businesses, and urged the Committee to keep Country Club Drive open and to work with Martin County. Ka.thy Basquill, 92 Yacht Club Plaae, reported her home backed up to Country Club Drive and she was affected by the noise level, which had been reduced by lowering the speed limit. Ms. Basquill commented that the avenues being pursued by the Village with Palm Beach County, Martin PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES APRIL 16, 1996 PAGE 9 ---------------------- County, and Jupiter seemed to be dead ends, and if lanes on that street had to be increased, at that point she would favor closing the road; however, �elt it was very valuable to the Village. Marie Crum, 240 Fairway East, stated she was present in her capacity as President of the PTO at Limestone Creek, the Village's neighborhood school, and objected to closing Country Club Drive because it was needed to get to the school. Ms. Crum stated she was a 15-year resident and did not see much difference in traffic on Country Club Drive than 15 years ago, and commented that traffic would go down when. the season was over. Laurie Ombres, 219 Fairway East, commented that she was an 11-year resident who had not purchased a home on Coun.try Club Drive because of anticipated future traffic. Ms. Ombres stated that Tequesta did not provide ball fields and parks and the road was needed to get to the schools and JCP, and closing or making Country Club Drive would create a hardship. Ms. Ombres stated that the community had changed over the past 10-15 years from a sleepy town to a town. with a lot of young families with children. Ms. Ombres suggested waiting until different officials were elected in Martin County and trying to work with them. Jill Rippe, 218 Fairway West, expressed the opinion that closing or making Country Club Drive one way would create hardships for Tequesta residents and businesses which would be greater than the benefits. Ed Resnik, 392 Country Club Drive, a 17-year resident, supported establishment of a Safe Neighbo�hood District to reduce speed and traffic on Country Club Drive, and stated that the amount of traffic was not as much of a problem as speeding, Mr. Resnik expressed support for speed bumps, stop signs, and trees to create a canopy effect, but not for one-way unless the one way was into Tequesta. Mr. Resnik stated that something must be done, that there were chilciren living all around and he worried that they would be involved in an accident. Wade Griest, 494 South Dover Road, explained that he was a 22-year resident, and clarified that three re�idents on the PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES APRIL 16, 1996 PAGE 10 ---------------------- task force Iived on Country Club Drive: Mr. Hartley, Mr. Tracey, and Mrs. Marshall. Mr. Griest explained he had not purchased his home on Coun.try Club Drive because realtors had advised it would be a major traffic artery in the future. Mr. Griest commented that Jupiter, Palm Beach County, Martin County, and the State of Florida were all bigger and had more money than Tequesta, which made it difficult far Tequesta to combat them, and they had made it obvious they would not cooperate. Mr. Griest stated there was no question something must be done, but no one had a satisfactory answer. Sandy McKee, 291 Country Club Road, questioned whether the task force had consid�red reducing the speed limit to 20 mph. Co-Chair Meder responded he had tried to get the speed limit on his dead end street lowered to 20 mph, and had learned that the State would not a11aw a speed limit lower than 25 mph. Ms. McKee questioned whether that would apply under a Safe Neighborhood District. Co-Chair Meder read a fax from Ben and Carol Dyke, 318 Country Club Drive, in which they related traffic problems which had not allowed their children to play in front of their house and had not allowed them to keep their windows open because of the noise, and explained how their home's value had declined. Mr. and Mrs. D�rke had expressed their opinion that the only solution would be to limit access at the Martin County line with a guard and arm barrier or closing access at that location. Councilmember Hansen reported that the task force had conducted a sam�ling of businesses and found that l0o had no knowledge of the traffic problem, 45o had knowledge but little interest, 34% had knowledge and expressed some concern but did not consider it a major factor, and 14% had knowledge but no interest at all. Co-Chair Meder questioned what options could be considered at this meeting that could be done. Village Manager Bradford responded that the street could probably be made one way if Martin County cooperated; that prabably speed humps could be installed; that he did not believe posting Tequesta Drive at 8 tons and requiring bonding permits for through trucks was legal. Co-Chair Meder commented that PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES APRIL 16, 1996 PAGE 11 ---------------------- Martin Coun�y had posted their bridge for 8 tons. Village Manager Bradford responded that was in contravention to FDOT requirements for bridge posting and in order to change that, someone would need to take legal action against them. Village Manager Bradford suggested that increased police presence, enforcement of speed limit, and no through truck ordinance could be accomplished by using tax mone� obtained through a Safe Neighborhood District. Co-Chair Meder questioned whether those items could be don.e without going through a Safe Neighborhood District, to which Village Manager Bradford responded that only funding was needed. The Village Manager commented regarding the task force suggestion to install traffic signals or 4-way stop signs at the south end of Country C1ub Drive and the ent�ance to Turtle Creek that traffic signals could not be accomplished since the Palm Beach Cou�ty criteria for traffic signals could not be met, and the 4-way stop could only be done if the intersection were realigned. In response to a question from a resident, Chair Schauer commented that if a Safe Neighborhood District was established that the people within the district would have control of the road and could install stop signs since they would not be bound by the present restrictions. Several other questians regarding a Safe Neighborhood District were answered. Chair Schauer stressed the importance of educatin.g the public before a referendum regarding a Safe Neighborhood District was held. Village Manager Bradford explain.ed that if the goal was to close the road that forming a Safe Neighborhood District might not accomplish that because the road was designated as � an urban collector, an exit road for emergeneies, and was on the hurricane evacuation route. Discussion ensued during which several options were discussed, including a temporary closing of Country Club Drive in order to force Martin County to address the problem. It was brouqht out that privatization was completely different than establishing a Safe Neighborhood District. Co-Chair Meder commented that privatization was an option under the Safe Neighborhood Ac�. The question was raised why Martin County was not forcing developers to install roads, to which the Village Manager responded that the infrastructure was not required to be expanded outside a development unless a certain threshold was reached, however, impact feas were required and Martin County was using those fees in the northern part of the PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES APRIL 16, 1996 PAGE 12 ---------------------- county. Co-Chair Meder questioned whether Little Club Way was at capacity. Mrs, Marshall commented that the reasan Martin County could avoid concurrency requirements was they were not impacting their own roads, bu� were impacting Tequesta's roads. A member of the audience commented that the problem was not only traffic, but crime and pollution brought into Tequesta as a result of the increased traffic; and that if Country Club Drive were closed all the property values on Country Club Drive would go up, which would contribute to Tequesta's tax base. Further discussion included comments that the increased police presence had improved the truck traffic, however, the police force was limited and could not be there all of the time, and truckers took advantage of the times when there were no patrols. The point was raised that the school busses using Tequesta roads because they were not allowed to use Martin County roads and the truck traffic had contributed to the necessity of repairing the bridge on Tequesta Drive. Mr. Berube commented that a way must be found ta make others understand the problem. Another resident commented that all Turtle Creek would have to do was to open their padlacked 2-lane gate to allow eventual access to County Line Road. A suggestion was made to take a couple of years to repair the landscape island on Country Club Drive, which would slow traffic. A resident commented that property values were higher in gated communities. A Country Club Drive resident suggested ather residents bring their lawn chairs and sit to observe the traffic. Mr. Griest commented that if Country Club Drive were closed that the traffic would then increase on Riverside Drive and Seabrook, and also commented that the amount of money that had been spent on Country Club Drive equaled almost half of the entire Village budget. Another resident expressed thankfulness at being able to support schoals. Village Manager Bradford stated that roundabouts were legal; that planting trees to create a tunnel effect was legal; that designation of Country Club Drive as a historical place could be done; however, that it was questionable whether a toll bridge on Tequesta Drive would meet State criteria; and that it was not likely that Country Club Drive could be gated on one or both ends. Village Manager Bradford explained that it was also not likely that privatization of PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTE� APRIL 16, 1996 PAGE 13 ---------------------- Country Club Drive could be accomplished as long as it was designated an urban collector. The Village Manager commented that a gatehouse with a guard, similar to Turtle Creek's guard who could not legally stop anyone to deny access, might be possible under the Safe Neighborhood Act to possibly slow traffic, and explained what the town of Atlantis had done in regard to establishing gatehouses. Co- Chair Meder requested that Police Chief Roderick bring a copy of the statute to the next Council meeting under which the Turtle Creek gatehouse operation was considered illegal. Chair Schauer commented that many Turtle Creek residents did not realize that a portion of their road was owned by the Village of Tequesta. Co-Chair Meder reported that he had asked Public Works Director Preston to consider installing an "Entering Village of Tequesta" sign on the road coming out of Turtle Creek. Co-Chair Meder suggested that if Tequesta had a gatehouse similar to Turt�e Creek at each end of Country Club Drive that it could be manned by an officer who would have the authority to stop trucks, and that option should be available, and requested that costs be researched. Village Manager Bradford explained that such an operation had been discussed as an option under a Safe Neighborhood District so that the cost would be borne by those within the district and not by the entire Village. Village Manager Bradford reported that the final option, closing Country Club Drive to all traffic except emergency vehicles, could probably not be done. Co-Chair Meder commented that of the options presented there were nat many that could be done unless a Safe Neighborhood District was formed, and the cheapest option after a District was in place would be to place a lot of stop signs on Country Club Drive. Village Manager Bradford cautioned there were also problems with stop signs, such as additional noise at each sign and the tendency for traffic to speed up between stop signs. Co-Chair Meder responded that after a short time people would find another route. Councilmember Hansen recommended that all options for Safe Neighborhood Districts be left in the ordinance ta be presented to the Village Council. Frank Hall commented that many Turtle Creek residents did not real.ize they did not live in Tequesta, and that Martin PUBLIC WORICS COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES APRIL 16, 1995 PAGE 14 County would not cooperate with Tequesta. Mr. Hall recommended that Tequesta do somethinq drastic to get Martin County's attention which wauld inconvenience them, such as blocking the road for a period, and if they threatened Court action, open the road. After a period, block the road again. Chair Schauer explained that the Village had objected to the Town of Jtzpiter's action regarding Longshore Drive. In response to Mr. Hall's question whether Tequesta was involved in trying to reduee density in Section 28, Village Manaqer Bradford explained that Martin County had won their appeal and if the Court upheld the appeal that only approximately 125 units would be approved, so that the present developer probably would not continue, and probably a series of developers would come in to develop Section 28. V311age Manager Bradford explained that Tequesta, Jupiter, Palm Beach County and Martin County had all agreed to mediate the entire question of roads to find an answer to regional roadway problems, and that the intent was to go into mediation with people from the neighborhoods or people living on the streets, and the mediation would not end until everyone agre�d. Village Manager Bradford stated that several residents present at this meeting would probably be directly involved. Councilmember Hansen commented that if development of Section 28 proceeded that the Village might be able to stop � trucks from going through Tequesta, but could not stop the many workers who would use their private cars to get to work there. Mr. Hall suggested annexing the area of South Martin County below Jonathan Dickenson State Park into Tequesta or Jupiter, or going to Tallahassee, as drastic measures to get attention. Co-Chair Meder reported several people had suggest�d that everything north of the Loxahatchee be taken into Martin County. Mrs. Marshall questioned whether the mediation would be binding, to which Village Manager Bradford responded it would not, but the intent was tha� every government would abide by the findings. Mr. Little suggested Tequesta form its own county. During ensuing discussion, Co-Chair Meder PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES APRIL 16, 1996 PAGE 15 ---------------------- commented that Tequesta must show the other jurisdictions they are serious. Village Manager Bradford explained that if the Planning Ordinance was adopted, even if Tequesta never utilized it, that it would send a message to Martin County and they would wonder what Tequesta was doing. VII. ADJOURNMENT Co-Chair Meder moved that the meeting be adjourned. Chair Schauer seconded the motion. The vote on the motion was: Elizabeth Schauer - for Michael R. Meder - for the motion was therefore passed and adopted and the meeting was adjourned at 6:41 P.M. �J r � �� Respectfull submitted, �. ,, � � 'S 4 , � � a �.Z � ,�y,Z�L:C� c.��rv � � � �,� � J �;. ,� �. � '� ! ' �.�; �:�s',r�,� � Betty Laur � Recording Secretary ATTEST: �-s,.�,,...,�..� _.� �D Jo nn Manganiel o Village Clerk DATE APPROVED: � 9 �4 96 , � Hpi�. 16 '�5 1G:3� KONICA Ff�;�C 22� P. 2 Aprii 16, 199� Ben and Caral Dyk� 31� CQUr�try Club 4rive Tequ�s�a, FL 33469 Village of "Cequesta Pub11c Works �ommi�t�� Village Hali Tequesta, Fl. 33469 G�nt�emen: . As horneowners in the 340 block of Cour�try C1ub Urive, we have come to accep� the apathy af other Tequ�sta C�un�ry Club residents regarding �he traffic �robl�m through aur eommuni�y. We purchased our home 9� years ago virtualTy s�gh� unseen due ta a relocatian from California. Wit�in 2 weeks of 19ving here w��h aur 2 young children and infant son we knew we had made a mistake. �esides the excessfve speed causing a safety i�azard fior our young fam�ly, we were unable �o leave vur windaws open in coo] we�th�r due to �he no�se 1eve1 of vehicles speeding by a11 hours o� �he day and n�ght. We have twice listed our home for sale in the hape of rela�a�ing to a safer street in the �ommunity, but have be�r� unsuccessful at rec�iving an offer af even aur purchase price. With the birth of our 4th chiid we found it necessary �o add a fourth bedroom, or�ly to discover that aur hor�e appraised 1ower t�an the original price paid even after the vaiue of the room addition was considered. We ful�y suppor�ed the reductfon af th� sp�ed lim�t �0 25 mph and have noticed and appreciate the pol�cing of same. This seems ta have slawed traffic cansiderably from Teques�a �rive through Turt1� Creek Ur�ve. 8ut our hom� is loca�ed West of Turtle Creek priv�, on the "stra�ght-away" to th� Mart{n C�unty line 35 mph zone, There has been no rroticable reduction in traffic ar speeding on our block, and have yet to f�e1 comfortabie enough to allow our children to play in their own front yard, or even to ride �hejr bicyc1es on the recent]y lmpraved b9ke path. The issue o�' conver��ng t�te 300 black of �ountry Ctub Drive to a ane-way wil� nvt ease the Westbound Flow of hlgh speed traffic nor benefit ar�y of the residents on our block. We would be accomvdating the 7urtle Creek resid�nts by allowing them �o trav�i £a5�bound and pun- fshing the Country C1ub brive res.idents by restricting the same. If we are ta be s�gregat�cf from the rest af the communl�y, �hen we w�ll lead tttie �ffort to annex our biack into Martin �aunty and benefi� from its tax base. I� is our opinion �hat the �n1y tru� saf�ty measure_would incorporate r Hpr 'yE� 1t�i:,�G k:l_�t FH?t �<�i F'• �' J �age 2 Vitlage of Tequesta limiting acc�ss to Coun�y C1ub Drive at the Martin Caunty line wit� a . guard and arm barrier, or by closing the street at th� Martin County lin�. �le feei that a11 af us as Tequesta Countr,� Club residents wfluld benefit from this action, both in the value of aur parperties and, mare so, the safety of aur children. S�ncerely, �� � Ben D, Dyke �� � Carol Dyke (l