Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes_Special Meeting_04/09/1992 VILLAGE OF TEQUESTA Post Office Box 3273 • 357 Teyuesta Drive Tequesta, Florida 33469-0273 (407) 575-6200 FAX: (407) 575-6203 V I L L A S P E C I A L M E E A P G E O F T E V I L L A G E T I N G M I N R I L 9, 1 Q U E S T A C O U N C I L U T E S 9 9 2 I. The Tequesta Village Council held a scheduled meeting at the Village Hall, 357 Tequesta Drive, Tequesta, Florida, on Thursday, April 9, 1992. The meeting was called to order at -5:00 P.M. by Mayor Earl L. Collings. A roll call was taken by the Recording Secretary, Fran Bitters. Councilmembers present were: Mayor Earl L. Collings, Vice-Mayor Edward C. Howell, William E. Burckart, Ron T. Mackail and Joseph N. Capretta. Village Manager Thomas G. Bradford, Village Clerk Joann Manganiello, and Village Attorney John C. Randolph were also in attendance. Staff members present were Bill Kascavelis, Finance Director, Scott D. Ladd, Department of Community Affairs and Lt. Steve Allison of the Tequesta Police Department. II. INVOCATION AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Councilmember Ron T. Mackail gave the Invocation and led those in attendance to the Pledge of Allegiance to the American Flag. III. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Vice Mayor Howell moved to approve the Agenda as submitted. Councilmember Mackail seconded the motion. The vote on the motion was: Earl L. Collings - for Edward C. Howell - for Joseph N. Capretta - for Ron T. Mackail - for William E. Burckart - for the motion was passed and adopted and the Agenda was approved as submitted. LJ Recycled Paper • special Village Council Meeting Minutes April 9, 1992 Page 2 IV. AUTHORIZATION TO TRANSMIT STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS RELATIVE TO THE PROPOSED MARTIN COUNTY SECTION 28 DEVELOPMENT (NORTHFORR). Staff Recommends Approval. Mayor Collings commented that at the last Special Village Council meeting at which there was standing room only, many citizens gave some valuable communications to the assembled group of Village Council, Palm Beach County Commissioner Karen Marcus, Martin County Commissioner Walt Thom, Jupiter Mayor Karen Golonka, and Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council Representative, Michael Busha. Some things stated by Commissioner Thom were: o he would be sure to get all communications to the Martin County Commissioners; o that Tequesta should keep out of Martin County business • and not try to tell Martin County what to put in its Comprehensive Plan; Throughout the Florida Growth Management Act appear the words 'cooperation' and 'communication' between counties and municipalities. It is the intent of this Act passed in 1986 to encourage and ensure coordination of planning development activities between and amongst municipalities and counties. In response to comments at the last Special Village Council Meeting, the Letter of Communication to Martin County Commissioners regarding Section 28 has been edited and refined. The overriding points are: 1) it is worthwhile for a mature, controlled development to appear in this community, as long as it does not burden adjacent communities; and 2) the main problem foreseen by many is the actual and perceived traffic increase on Tequesta Drive. Village Manager Bradford reviewed the Letter of Communications to be sent to Harry King, Acting Director of Growth Management of Martin County, which included everything listed at the last Special Village Council Meeting. Councilmember Burckart felt the Northfork Project, as conceived, would have an adverse traffic impact on Tequesta, • and that the Connector Road, if built, would avoid any traffic impact on Country Club Drive or Tequesta Drive. Special Village Council Meeting Minutes April 9, 1992 Page 3 ------------------------------- Councilmember Mackail felt the Northfork Project has the potential to have an adverse traffic impact on Tequesta. Mr. Mackail was surprised at Commissioner Thom's comments to Tequesta to stay out of Martin County business, and felt that Martin County must take ownership of the problem of south Martin County impacting other communities. He felt also that the density issue must be re-visited, and it was his suggestion that Commissioner Thom, developers of Northfork, and the Village of Tequesta need to confer together to alleviate any shortfalls in traffic in Tequesta. Councilmember Capretta disagreed with Councilmembers Burckart and Mackail and felt the Letter of Communication to Martin County needed to be strengthened - not toned down. It was his position that the letter would merely be discarded and ignored by those receiving it. He felt the Connector Road was an "old story" and didn't expect that anything would progress on that issue, and that Martin County has no intention of cooperating with Tequesta. He felt legal action should be taken by • Tequesta to do whatever it could to minimize density and to cause Martin County to pay impact fees to Tequesta. Regarding Tequesta Park, Mr. Capretta pointed out that Commissioner Thom has no intention of participating in the costs of the park, though he had previously committed to that, even though south Martin County residents use the park. Vice Mayor Howell felt the issue was growth vs. no growth and that any objections by Tequesta was an exercise in futility. He endorsed the Letter of Communication to Martin County, taking any legal action, if necessary. He felt the outcome of the problems would finally depend upon cooperation by Martin County. Mayor Collings stated it is obvious that the sins of the fathers are often visited upon the children, i.e., years ago when Turtle Creek was platted, there was a land use pattern to which no one paid much attention. In recent years there have been more than 100 homes built there, from which Tequesta now suffers. Tequesta is obligated to fight with Martin County Commission in every possible way to resolve the debated issues. The Letter of Communication must be taken as a step in a not necessarily kindly, but positive direction. The Council agreed to hear citizens' comments before voting • on the Letter of Communication to Martin County. Special Village Council • Meeting Minutes April 9, 1992 Page 4 V. 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 project must be 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 Turtle Creek 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. Dorothy Campbell asked if the sentence which previously stated 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 • special Village Council Meeting Minutes April 9, 1992 Page 5 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. special Village Council Meeting Minutes April 9, 1992 Page 6 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. Mayor Collings suggested that the golf course be dedicated only for that purpose be added to the Letter of Communication. Council concurred. Vice Mayor Howell moved that the Letter of Communication, with the above-referenced amendment, be forwarded to Martin County. Councilmember Mackail seconded the motion. The vote on the motion was: Earl L. Collings - for Edward C. Howell - for Joseph N. Capretta - for Ron T. Mackail - for William E. Burckart - for the motion was therefore passed and adopted. VI. ANY OTHER MATTERS There were no other matters before the Council. Special Village Council Meeting Minutes April 9, 1992 Page 7 ------------------------------- VII. ADJOURNMENT Councilmember Mackail moved that the meeting be adjourned. Councilmember Capretta seconded the motion. The vote on the motion was: Earl L. Collings - for Joseph N. Capretta - for Ron T. Mackail - for Edward C. Howell - for William E. Burckart - for the motion was passed and adopted and the meeting was adjourned at 5:50 P.M. ATTEST: J ann Mangani to Village Clerk DATE APPROVED: Respectfully submitted, ~`~~„~~ Fran Bitters Recording Secretary ~~