Tequesta Notes
an initiative for the citizens of Tequesta
Paradise Park is zoned Mixed Use
Sunday, May 23, 2021
The Council To Discuss
Paradise Park
Monday, May 24, the Council will discuss a proposal by Mayor d'Ambra to purchase three parcels at Paradise Park. We offer the following considerations and context for that discussion.
First, let's set out the order of battle. Since last week, we think that we are moving in the right direction. But it's useful to clarify the sequence of steps:
1) The Village must establish a clear understanding of what the plan would be in acquiring and developing the space at Paradise Park. This would include a reasonable understanding of the acquisition, development, maintenance, and potential opportunity costs. After we have a good sense of this plan, then we would be in a position to consider the next step.
2) Is the plan even in the realm of possibility from a financial perspective? Can the Village afford to pursue the plan? And in this determination, we should be clear that the Village should not sell any of its land because that land is all an increasingly valuable asset to the Village and also the Village has a desperate need for that land as we have discussed. If the Village determines that the plan is good and also that the Village can afford the plan without compromising Village finances (or other land), then we would be in a position to consider the next step.
3) Is this plan actually preferable to the alternative: to let this space be developed without the Village purchasing it but in full conformity with the long term interests of the Village, which are protected by the Code and the Comprehensive Development Plan and enforced by the Council? Only after we determine that the Village has a good acquisition plan and also that this plan is better than the alternative, should the Council take the next step of spending any money or resources on a negotiation process.
Second, let's consider the framework for the alternative. Mr Bradford has explained on several occasions, that this framework is apt greatly to benefit the Village (at no cost to the Village) so that the acquisition plan would have to be spectacular in order to justify our pursuing it. We should be clear that we should pursue the acquisition plan only because we have a better plan and absolutely not on the pretext that if the Village does not purchase the land then someone else might build a monstrosity there. This motivation, based in fear, is deeply flawed. Because if this apprehension is the main reason, then the solution is not to purchase the land but rather to fix the defective Code, the whole purpose of which is to ensure for the Village a healthy and beautiful community—assuming the Council does its job enforcing the Code. That's the purpose of the Code. And that's why some few towns are beautiful but most are ugly. It's the difference between a leadership that defends the municipal interest in reviewing development projects and a leadership that does not. Of course the beautiful towns are much more valuable for everyone who lives and does business there. And that great value flows from good municipal leadership.
The Paradise Park property is zoned Mixed Use. See the image at the top of this page showing Paradise Park in the Tequesta zoning map, the legend of which is provided here below.
zoning map legend
Let's consider a few elements of what this entails as described in the Code. Tequesta Code section 78-180 governs a Mixed Use district:
The purpose and intent of the MU mixed-use district is to establish a village center which creates a vital, diverse core for the principles which utilize mixed-use development concepts and which permit a combination of usually separated uses within a unified development district area. Natural features should be enhanced and environmental conditions carefully assessed. Commercial uses are intended to be limited to specialty small scale retail sales and services, business services and professional services primarily designed to serve residential neighborhoods of the village. Orientation to and compatibility with neighborhoods to be served are essential. Residential uses are intended to encourage the accomplishment of a more complete residential living environment through the application of imaginative approaches to development which establish neighborhood identity and community focus. It is further the purpose and intent of this area to provide lands for a range of residential uses from lower density single-family to higher density residential uses. Traffic circulation should not only accommodate vehicular traffic, but provide for the efficient movement of pedestrian and bicycle traffic. Teq. Code s. 78-180(a).
This sounds pretty good for this location, don't you think? Wouldn't a good architect love to make something really beautiful here? Notice also:
such [Mixed Used] developments are to be in compliance with the village comprehensive development plan ... . Teq. Code. s. 78-180(b).
And there are many important policies articulated in the Comprehensive Development Plan. It is the duty of the Council to ensure that any development project complies with these legally binding policies. Including policies directed to protecting critical environmental, health, and aesthetic interests of the Village. That's the whole point of this plan: that we build a healthy and beautiful Village.
A few other elements of note:
Building height. The maximum building height allowed shall be four stories or 50 feet above average finish grade. 78-180(d)(5).
Site plan review. In adherence to Policy 1.12.1 of the village comprehensive development plan future land use element, all proposed development plans for the mixed-use district shall be subject to review and approval by the village council. 78-180(e).
Under this Code provision, the Council, must review and approve the site plan. Important: If the plan does not serve the long term interests of the Village, the Council should not approve it. If it is ugly (for example of it features broad sheets of glass or concrete), the Council should not approve it. If it provides inadequate park space, the Council should not approve it.
It is the Council's duty to defend the long term interests of the Village. The Council has the authority to do this so that Tequesta can be healthy and beautiful. The Council must negotiate something beautiful and thereby much more valuable. This is, by the way, why being steadfast in our commitment to the health and beauty of the Village is a win for developers as well as for residents. This is how the Council can create extraordinary value for Tequesta: by defending the long term interests of the Village. The Council should not settle for inferior development proposals.
Important: notice also that there is a "minimum landscaped/open space" requirement of 25% (25% for commercial and 25% for residential). 78-180(m). Given the Council's latitude in reviewing and approving the site plan, the Council should think of how it would like this green space to be arrayed in the plan for the uses that would most benefit the Village.
Consider some of the principles that the Code sets out:
Urban design principles. The following urban design principles shall be considered as guidelines in all development proposals of the mixed-use district:
(1) That mixed use promotes economic and social well-being.
(2) That streets serve the needs of the pedestrian and the automobile.
(3) That proposed squares and plazas provide collective identity and a place for social activity and recreation.
(4) That public buildings, facilities, and spaces are symbols of the community and convey identity and pride through their architectural clarity and civic functions.
(5) That carefully placed buildings delineate and define public spaces and lots and blocks.
(6) That streets are designed and act as amenities to the development and as quality public space. 78-180 (f).
Urban design objectives. The following urban design objectives shall be considered as guidelines in all development proposals of the mixed-use district:
(1) To bring many of the activities of daily living, including dwelling, shopping and other activities, within walking distance.
(2) To reduce the number and length of automobile trips to relieve traffic congestion.
(3) To provide internal vehicular circulation to relieve traffic impact on arterial roads.
(4) To provide defined public spaces and streets that allow the citizens to observe and watch over the collective security.
(5) To provide sites for civic buildings.
(6) To provide flexibility for the development strategies that evolve over time. 78-180 (g).
There are many other items in this Code section. And also in other Code sections and in the Comprehensive Development Plan. All of this legal infrastructure is intended to enable the Council to make sure that development in the Village creates more value for all residents by securing a healthy and beautiful community. The Village doesn't need to purchase anything for that. But the Council must defend the long term interests of the Village by enforcing the Code.
This is Tequesta. The Council should tell developers that project plans must be fantastically beautiful and feature a lot of green space, not concrete and glass. And not like some of the unfortunate site plans we have seen in recent years, we can do much better.
Let's spotlight a few critical points.
First, the 25% open space requirement under the Code for this land is a minimum requirement. The Village should not aspire to be a mediocre Village, however, but rather a great Village and so especially given the dire lack of green space in the Village, the need of the Village to have a space in the Village center for social and community events, and all the policies stated in the Comprehensive Development Plan—and the Code's requirement for any plan to be subject to the Council's review and approval—it is perfectly reasonable for the Council only to approve a plan that would provide more open space. If the Village ensures a beautiful green space there, this will increase the value of all the nearby retail, commercial, and residential assets. Which leads to the second point to emphasize:
If the Council would simply stand firm on the requirements in the Code and in the Comprehensive Development Plan in exchanges with developers and not approve ugly designs (concrete or glass façades) and not do things like acquiesce in a developer's request to amend the Comprehensive Development Plan, for example, to increase density allowable for the developer's lot—if the Council would simply enforce the Code to protect the long term interests of the Village—then the Council would be building into the Village ever greater value for everyone: for the residents and also even for developers. Life value and property value go hand in hand.
By affirming the long term interests of the Village, the Council makes a healthy and beautiful Village and so future development projects will be more valuable and more prized and the Village will see the quality of the proposals increase. In contrast, when the Council (and administration) fail to defend the interests of the Village by conceding to developer requests that undermine long term interests, they cheapen the Village and we see terrible projects such as those that stuff units into a parcel like sardines. Those kinds of projects hurt the value of the Village overall and very likely they will hurt other important Village interests. Those proposals neglect the long term interests of the Village.
Maybe the Council should be looking out for smart developers who recognize the historic opportunity and value that will flow from making something great here by prioritizing the long term interests of this Village. There must be developers who would be happy to build with that vision.
This website is dedicated to topics important to residents of the Village of Tequesta. If you have information concerning important issues for Tequesta or its government (or corrections or suggestions for anything on this website), please email hello@TequestaNotes.org.
TequestaNotes.org