The Martin County
Defender
The e-newsletter for aware citizens – No. 54
CRA Developers 1 – Motorists 0
COMMISSION APPROVAL OF TCEA EXEMPTION WILL CREATE MORE TRAFFIC JAMS
To understand this story fully, let’s look at a few definitions:
“Concurrency” is one of the guiding legal principles for achieving growth that does not ruin our quality of life. Concurrency requires that for any development to be approved, the public infrastructure needed to support that development must be in place or scheduled to be in place when the development occurs.
“Level Of Service” or LOS, is a measure of when the required public service is concurrent. This story relates to automobile traffic, so there are numbers, like cars per hour, that define the LOS. Reducing the LOS, or exceeding the traffic load, means that there are more cars than the road was supposed to handle.
“Community Redevelopment Area (CRA)” is a selected area in which some normal development and zoning rules are changed to allow greater density and intensity, thereby encouraging development. Tax gains are plowed back into the CRA. Originally, the concept was to revive blighted areas. Then it was broadened to include older neighborhoods in decline, or in need of revitalization. In each CRA, there is a Neighborhood Advisory Committee (NAC) appointed by the commission to represent the CRA residents. Often NACs are dominated by pro-developer people who own businesses and property in the CRA.
We admire CRA goals. It was good to hear NAC chairmen and Countywide Committee director Jeff Oris discuss the following subjects at their 4/30/08 meeting: sewer lines; landscaping; parking spaces; sidewalks, building improvement, cleanup; road resurfacing; stormwater retention; and affordable housing. Such urban infill upgrades that revitalize neighborhoods make much more sense than rural clusters or extending utilities beyond the primary urban services boundary.
HOWEVER …..
….. when CRA development objectives over-ride quality of life considerations for residents both in and out of the CRA, it’s time to say STOP!
What happens when the traffic load on roadways in the CRA is greater than the LOS allowed? Common sense would tell you that you can keep building if you cut back on development density or the type of development. However, that would not please the developers enjoying more accommodating rules in the CRA. So, as the old joke goes, you don’t have to raise the bridge; just lower the river.
In essence, that is the kind of thinking that the Martin County Commission did on April 29, 2008. They approved a “TCEA” – Transportation Concurrency Exception Area comp plan amendment (CPA #08-11) for the 800-acre Port Salerno CRA. This essentially wipes out concurrency requirements for road LOS, taking a limit off the maximum amount of homes, stores and factories that can be built in the CRA. And there is no sunset or time limit on this abandonment of sensible transportation planning.
They put a little lipstick on that pig, with vague requirements about monitoring, seeking alternative transportation modes, and identifying traffic issues at some future date. However, TCEA still means traffic jams. So the greater opportunities for developers in the CRA is bought at the price of reduced quality of life for drivers. To Commissioner Valliere, who voted for TCEA along with DiTerlizzi, Smith and Weberman, “It’s a sacrifice we all have to make.” Really!
DiTerlizzi demonstrated his sympathy for the motorists stuck in traffic when he said: “If you don’t want to sit in traffic, then don’t go downtown.” But what about the many residents who must pass through downtown? There are about 16,000 vehicles on Dixie Highway passing through Port Salerno every day. Not only will even greater traffic caused by development be a Port Salerno bottleneck, but it will adversely impact feeder roads inside and outside the CRA.
Commissioner Heard, who voted against the TCEA, pointed out several serious shortcomings with this CPA. A couple of them were addressed by modifying the proposal, but most were ignored. Why these flaws were not recognized by county staff, the consultant or the other commissioners is a puzzle worth pondering.
THE TRAFFIC MESS GOES COUNTYWIDE
If the traffic problem were limited to Port Salerno, it would be bad enough. However, based on Florida Statute 163, Part III, the Martin County Commission set up the Countywide Community Redevelopment Plan years ago with the Commissioners sitting as the CRA Board. Seven older neighborhoods were designated as suitable for redevelopment: Port Salerno, Jensen Beach, Hobe Sound, Rio, Golden Gate, Old Palm City and Indiantown.
The county staff report notes that “within the County’s seven CRAs, staff noted that the roads were physically or policy constrained similar to SE Dixie Highway.” So we can expect some or all of the other CRAs to come up with TCEA proposals, causing traffic jams all across the county. Before too long the score will be:
CRA Developers 7 – Motorists 0
+++++
CofC activities not Rose-y in Jensen Beach
Jensen Beach Chamber of Commerce Exec Director Ron Rose sent an e-mail to members concerning your editor’s recent Martin County Consensus poll of 1,500 county residents. Poll results were published in the Stuart News (“Citizen report card flunks County Commission”) on 4/24/08, and in Defender issue No. 53. By design or accident, Mr. Rose failed to send his memo to certain CofC members who oppose Commissioner Doug Smith.
Without a shred of evidence, Mr. Rose erroneously claimed that “the sample does not appear to be representative of the opinions held by Martin County voters at large and may have been skewed to reflect the group’s political agenda.” In addition, Mr. Rose asked members to report to him if they had received our Consensus questionnaire.
To be helpful in case few members responded to his request, I made the following offer to Mr. Rose because his members were fully represented in the poll sample: “If you let me know the e-mails who report that they received my questionnaire, I will give you a batch of addresses of your members who received them, but did not report it to you.”
Mr. Rose has not yet responded to my offer.
+++++
For a free subscription to The Martin County Defender, send request with “Subscribe” in the subject line to:
mc-defender@comcast.net
Comments and requests to unsubscribe may be sent to this same address.
Al
Al Forman, Editor 5/3/08
The Martin County Defender is published and Copyright 2008 by WordsmithAmerica, Box 1828, Palm City, FL 34991. All rights reserved. No part of this issue may be reproduced or transmitted in any form by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying and recording for public or private use, or by any information storage or retrieval system, without the prior written permission of the publisher. NOTICE: All correspondence not bearing legal copyright notice which is sent to the Defender or its editor is subject to being edited and published.
Sphere: Related Content
