Category Archives: Sustainable Growth

Booze Expands In Downtown Stuart

Posted on by

Martin County and Stuart are taking baby steps in reopening. Downtown was especially hard hit in the past weeks when businesses were closed due to the pandemic. The City and the downtown business owners have taken great strides over the past 30 years to make the area a destination spot that drew visitors from literally the entire United States.

 

By writing an innovative code that allowed for individual “mom & pop” stores to thrive, the City showed that downtown would be revived and not turn into an outdoor mall with chain stores and too many bars and restaurants. This may now be in jeopardy because of the City government not following its own code.

 

The plan that was initiated for the downtown’s rebirth had mainly two ideas. The first was to limit chains by using design standards. In many instances, this precluded a Talbot’s, for instance, from renting space. This preserved the small-town charm and unique characteristics that have encouraged tourists and others venturing here to have a great experience.

 

The other part of the plan was to limit the sale of alcoholic beverages to not more than 30% of the downtown area. In that way, Stuart would not become a miniature Clematis Street or Delray Beach. Bars and restaurants can afford to pay higher rents. If allowed to multiply, those quaint boutiques would soon be out of business because they would be unable to compete.

 

Both have been instrumental in creating the downtown we have today. Now that is being threatened by either the City Development Office not knowing its own code or willful defiant actions of that code. A business expansion in one case and the signing of a new lease in another will place the City in an untenable situation.

 

The Black Marlin is expanding (with permits) into the Cigar store that was next to it, and Development has allowed the Cigar store to sign a lease in a new space knowing that its plan is to sell alcohol. Those two actions will result in over 30% of the downtown area selling booze in one form or another.

 

It is astounding to me that this could occur. Only the Commission can change an ordinance…not staff. Yet, here is Stuart with two businesses that have spent a substantial amount of money to expand with staff ignoring the 30% rule. What are the next steps?

 

In all probability, the Commission will retroactively allow for these exceptions to avoid possible litigation. The staff will beg forgiveness if pushed, but the Commission may never even know why they are saying yes to the doing away of the 30% rule. Staff is good at the mumble jumble of bureaucratize.

 

There were good reasons why that rule was placed in effect. Maybe it should be changed after discussion and input. That is not the point here. Staff does not make policy. The Commission does.

 

If staff did not know its own code, that is a real problem. If staff ignored the code because they thought they knew best, that is an even bigger problem.

 

A few years ago, this issue came up when the restaurant in the Arcade Building was being refurbished and expanded. Then before going forward, it was vetted by different interest groups such as Downtown Business Association and Stuart Main Street. A solution was found, and there was substantial public input into that result. There has been no input this time.

 

With all the speeches about transparency and involving the people, it seems to me that the City (or least some of the staff) has decided that it finds the citizens, and maybe even the Commissioners, superfluous. This is the bureaucratic boondoggle that citizens complain about.

 

I hope the Commission pushes back. It would be great if downtown boutiques did so. At the very least, citizens have a right to know who is in charge and why this and other similar things have happened recently.  By ignoring what has worked well in maintaining Stuart’s small-town charm, while remaining a destination, we may find ourselves a different place.

Local Government & Affordable Housing

Posted on by

The Stuart City Commission will have a workshop devoted to the topic of housing next week.

 

I hope the Commission does not meander down a predictable path. Will that old chestnut of what to do about affordable housing be brought up? If it is then the entire workshop will be for naught.

 

For some very basic reasons, the City has little it can do to provide more of that type of housing. The physical size of the City is limited. The amount of property available to erect new buildings is minuscule. Florida’s building code, which is a very good one, results in a more expensive product than 20 years ago. The City itself does not have the funds to subsidize rents. While the City’s impact fees can be lessened a bit, those of the County and School Board can add thousands of dollars to the cost of new development.

 

What the City can do is change its zoning and LDRs especially in the urban downtown area and, more broadly, within most of the CRA. One change could be to eliminate new individual townhouses and single-family homes in those areas. That may seem radical to some, but more and more municipalities and states are taking that approach. In the rest of Stuart, all new construction (including for single-family homes) would be required to have an ancillary apartment. There would be no requirement that it be rented. Over time, small units would be available even if only for resident’s children to occupy while starting out.

 

Another change could be to stop basing decisions on the outmoded concept of density. Stuart has setback and height restrictions which guide the overall building measurement within the parcel’s envelope. Counting the number of units that a project can have is senseless. If the code allows a property owner to build 15 units per acre, it currently does not dictate whether those units are studios, one bedroom, or three bedrooms. The density calculation, then, is meaningless. Common sense dictates there will be more people occupying a three-bedroom unit than a one bedroom.

 

Within the downtown area, and the CRA in general, we should stop requiring so many parking spaces per unit. This artificially limits the number of housing units than can be built. The market will determine what amenities are needed to sell or rent a unit. Parking is an amenity. If a buyer or tenant considers it important, then the developer will have that cost and use in his determination of price just as he does granite counter tops or a powder room.

 

There is a misconception in Stuart that there is no affordable housing. If that were true, then why do more than 60% of dwellings within the City pay no real estate tax and only a small fire fee? If an owner pays no tax, then the cost of his property is quite low.

 

Presently, much of the City’s housing stock is considered obsolete. It is old and has lived its useful life. You can buy units for $100,000. This is about as affordable as it gets. It is true those units need work. But mortgages and carrying charges can be $1000.00 a month.

 

Stuart needs to encourage housing period. Supply will quell demand. New units make older units cheaper.

 

There will still be people who will never find units they can afford. This is an American societal problem rather than a Martin County or Stuart problem. The national and state governments need to address this. Localities will never have the funds to build enough units to satisfy this demand.

 

And lastly, the Commission should not be influenced by people who do not live within Stuart’s boundaries. They may have the best intentions, but their input is secondary to that of the people paying taxes, and I do mean paying taxes to the City. There will always be those who will say I can’t find anything to buy or rent within the City. What they really mean to say is that they can’t find a single-family home or apartment with four bedrooms, a pool, new baths, and new kitchen appliances on an acre of property for $275,000 or $1000 per month rent.

 

Caught In The Past

Posted on by

Millions of people visit Colonial Williamsburg each year. I first went there when I was nine or ten and fell in love with the place.

I can trace my love of early American history to that visit. I took my own children there several times. The last time I was there was a decade ago, and I still enjoyed the experience. I noticed they were playing the same film on their informational television station that I had watched as a kid almost 60 years ago.

Nearby Jamestown, settled in 1607, was the first permanent English settlement in North America. It remained the capital of Virginia until the statehouse burned in 1698. The College of William & Mary and other residents of what was then known as the Middle Plantation asked that the capital be moved there.

The Middle Plantation was renamed Williamsburg and became the colonial head of government, remaining Virginia’s capital throughout the period. Governor Thomas Jefferson moved the capital to Richmond in 1780 to avoid English attacks and to be more centrally located to the western counties. Williamsburg became nothing more than a college town, and for the 19th and early 20th centuries, it was a sleepy backwater and fell into ruin.

The City of Stuart was settled in the late 19th century and incorporated in 1914, which predates the creation of Martin County by more than a decade. For many years, Stuart was the population and business hub of the area. The railroad connected it to the rest of Florida, and the farming and fishing industries were integral to its growth.

Like Williamsburg after 1780, Stuart in the 1960s and 1970s began to decline into irrelevance because of suburbanization and the growth of alternative shopping options in Martin County. There was no longer a reason for the City to exist. The railroad ceased picking up passengers and the station was torn down. Downtown mom and pop stores were no longer needed with the growth of chains and big box stores.

Stuart fell into a miasmic state. It withered in its past. We weren’t southern enough to be like Faulkner’s fictional Jefferson nor were we cowboy enough to emulate McMurtry’s Anarene, Texas. We were a proud has-been farm town like so many others.

In the 1920s, Williamsburg had W.A.R. Goodwin to spearhead restoration, using the Rockefeller fortune to do so. For the decades since, Colonial Williamsburg recreated a town based on Tidewater life in the 18th century just before the Revolution. People from all over the world flock to experience and learn from the docents in period costume.

Stuart didn’t have Goodwin or Rockefeller, but it did have Peter and Joan Jefferson and a core group of others that began the rebirth of downtown and the historic preservation of many late 19th and early 20th century properties. Unlike Williamsburg, Stuart could not become a museum but needed to embrace commerce for economic survival.

Through the last two decades of the 20th century, Stuart saved its downtown. Retail stores catering to tourists were opened. Most new downtown restaurants were not accessible to the average Stuart resident because of price. Since economics needed to play a role in what was feasible, Stuart became a make-believe charming and historic downtown.

We saved the real estate for posterity but not with any real vitality. We made a small historic village next to City Hall but then, except for the Stuart Feed Store (Museum), they became rented offices. It cost hundreds of thousands of dollars to rescue questionable historical structures for what purpose? They are antiquated offices for politicians.

Martin County and Stuart recoil at any development. No old property should ever be torn down (historic or otherwise) in some people’s minds. The old Stuart High School building is a case in point. There is nothing architecturally unique inside or out. It is just a physically, economically, and functionally obsolete building. Yet it tugs at the heart because so many generations attended high school there. If the Arts Council gets its way, the “sick” property will remain off the tax rolls as its new home. It will not make way for new housing. No new families will be living there.

Are we using the term historic to mean that nothing should be changed? Every building, empty lot or current use must stay the same? In many minds, Martin County should be like an insect caught in a block of amber, frozen in time. We are Brigadoon without the sleep and striving to be Burroughs’ The Land That Time Forgot.

There is a price to pay for inertia. We are seeing it as Cleveland Clinic concentrates on expanding in St. Lucie County. Apparently, there are not enough babies being born to have even one private practice doing it in Martin. The hospital will, at great expense, continue obstetrics for the time being.  Due to the expanding populations to our north and south, we will have less clout in Washington and Tallahassee after the next census as we become even more of an afterthought for electoral districts.

I have heard the word paradise used to describe our area. And that is an apt description if you are a senior like me, or someone that has an inheritance. For young people or families trying to make a living, it isn’t such a paradise. History teaches us that remaining in a cocoon is not beneficial for having a future.

Stuart and Martin County are not Colonial Williamsburg. Our history is similar to thousands of other former farm towns. Most of our architecture is anything but “historic.” An old family photo may be sentimental, but it probably isn’t historic. We should know and treasure our history. That is different from living in the past with a predilection to a no-change future.

 

OCTOBER 27TH FRIENDS & NEIGHBORS

Posted on by

From this weeks edition:

The Pelican Café packed the chamber with supporters. It appeared that the vast majority of speakers in favor were not Stuart residents. Each spoke as though the City should give the Daly family carte blanche. If a low rent and a long lease were not given, the speakers implied that western civilization would come to an end.

 

The rumors of high rises, big box stores or chain restaurants were rampant. None of which have a scintilla of truth. When it was their turn to speak, Matheson and Meier set the record straight. None of the above was true. As the people’s representatives, they were looking out for the taxpayers. While they all acquiesced to the rent, they were firm in not allowing a 20-year lease if the Dalys were inclined to sell the leasehold.

 

A private landlord would, first, not give a term of 20 years and would want to recapture the premises if the leasehold was sold. Any profit should go to the people. It is unreasonable to have a 20-year term unless you need the long lease in order to sell.

 

Here is the language the City wants to put into the lease for the 20-year extension:

To read the entire newsletter go to:

https://documentcloud.adobe.com/link/track?uri=urn%3Aaaid%3Ascds%3AUS%3A462cefb2-cddc-476a-be70-02b5081ddb7a

Or get it delivered to your mailbox by sending your email address to thomasfcampenni@gmail.com

 

From September 29th Friends & Neighbors Newsletter

Posted on by

THE OLD COURTHOUSE COMES HOME

 

Since 1989, the County has leased the old Courthouse and Gazebo Park to Stuart. The City turned around and then sub-leased the Courthouse to the Arts Council. No money changed hands from Owner to Tenant or Tenant to Sub-Tenant. The only reason the City ever became involved was because the County wanted to tear down the building. With the termination of the old agreement, that all ends.

 

The County has received a $125,000 from the state for a new roof because the structure is historical. The Arts Council will receive $60,000 per year from the County to manage programs at the courthouse. The City will retain a lease on Gazebo Park, but the County can maintain the trees around the building without paying the City the tree trimming fee.

 

Commissioner Heard could not understand how the Arts Council qualifies for free rent and to receive $60,000 per year. She equated it to the BOCC picking winners and losers. On the surface it sounds that way, but Martin County has decided to be responsible for the building because it is an historical structure. The Arts Council is named in the Comp Plan as the County’s local arts agency.

 

There is absolutely no doubt that there are too many nonprofits being funded by nonprofits and or the government. Duplications and similar organizations abound. Perhaps the Arts Council should be combined as part of the Elliot, House of Refuge, and the Stuart Feed store. There can be a debate that joining all these organizations with one Executive Director and Board would make sense economically. But that is not the question being asked.

 

Just like government provides golf courses and parks, they should provide art and music. The Arts Council does that! So it isn’t, at least in this instance, the County picking a winner. This gives us a well-rounded community. A motion was made by Jenkins and seconded by Hetherington for the proposal. It passed 4-1 with Heard dissenting.

 

TO READ THE ENTIRE NEWSLETTER:

https://documentcloud.adobe.com/link/track?uri=urn%3Aaaid%3Ascds%3AUS%3Aacd75f58-c34d-44ba-bbc9-3859645f0dd2

GET THE ENTIRE NEWSLETTER IN YOUR MAILBOX BY SENDING YOUR EMAIL ADDRESS TO THOMASFCAMPENNI@GMAIL.COM

Why Do We Care About Parking?

Posted on by

The bane of planning departments across the United States is how to calculate the parking needs for a new development.

A multi-family project has a requirement for so many spaces per unit. Depending on the retail involved, there could be several different parking requirements. Medical offices may have several depending on specialty. Offices, entertainment venues and single-family homes have other requirements. And what is this based on? Is it science or research?

Parking calculations are driven by the political not the scientific. Even practical considerations are put aside when parking is considered. In this country, the average amount of livable square footage per person is 800 sq. feet while each car has 900 sq. feet of parking. Since the 1950s, America has been more concerned about where to park cars than almost any other requirement that goes into erecting new projects.

This preoccupation with parking has resulted in designing our homes, businesses and entertainment venues for the auto instead of people. When you require setting aside a requisite number of parking spaces for each development, you are substituting bureaucratic planning for market forces. This is proven over and over when you witness the vast empty parking lots around malls and office parks.

Before the beginning of modern America (after 1945), parking requirements were not generally considered in cities. In 1946, 12% of cities with a population of 10,000 or more had parking requirements. In 1952, 22.5% of cities did so and by 1972, 96% of cities had such requirements. This obsession with parking and the automobile “drives” people to have a car. Citizens begin to substitute cars for other alternatives in transportation. An example of this was the tearing up of the streetcar lines in Los Angeles. Patterns in where we work, shop and dine are affected.

Population densities are lower because municipalities demand that builders set aside as much space for autos as people. New York City, one of the cities with higher densities in the U.S., had its first comprehensive zoning plan in 1916 but had nothing on the books about parking until 1950. Since 1982, in most of Manhattan, there is no longer any parking requirement for residential development. New York City has further reduced the amount of municipal parking lots in an effort to discourage cars, especially in its core business areas.

Further studies have proven that having free street parking discourages the use of paid parking. As someone who began driving as a resident of Manhattan, I can tell you that several hours a week were spent finding on-street parking instead of paying.  But is free parking actually free? A study by the Milkin Institute stated that there is a definite monetary value to on-street parking that is not charged for. When parking is not charged by municipalities, all citizens absorb the cost.

San Francisco, which is one of the most expensive cities in which to live, has a parking requirement that adds $22.00 per square foot to construction costs. As to that supposed free spot at the mall, for each 1000 sq. feet of retail space, there are 6 to 8 parking spaces required which translates to more than 1000 sq. feet. So, when the price you pay for an item is calculated, the cost to provide that supposed free parking space is in the mix.

In downtown cores, requiring so much parking per residential unit, office space, or retail store is even more absurd. Buying on-street parking or construction of parking spaces within the project only makes the traffic situation worse. If one were to let the developer determine what parking is needed for his project, the market would decide what is necessary.

Instead of bureaucrats and politicians dictating needs, markets will. This results in the end user, the motorist, paying the cost of the space his auto is occupying. This only works if, in these denser areas, the on-street parking spaces have a cost. By charging for the space, the municipality can use the revenue to help pay for transit or street improvements.

It is not a municipality’s obligation to build garages or other parking amenities. Developers, businesspeople and residents themselves will decide how much parking is needed. This will have the immediate effect of allowing for more density in downtown corridors. It will promote more intermodal use, and, if need be, a private solution to any parking inadequacy by the private sector building parking facilities.

For the past 75 years, our development patterns have been dictated by cars. This has allowed sprawl, less use of mass transit, and a separation of our work, entertainment and residential life. It is imperative that we not have the auto dictate how we function as a society. If we are to have true cities, then we need to have markets decide. If we ignore parking requirements, almost immediately the costs of new projects will be less, allowing more diversity in our housing, retail and office tenancies.

Study after study has proven that there is no such thing as a free parking space. There are unintended, and mostly bad, consequences to our parking obsession. In an effort to foster transparency, let’s make sure everyone knows the facts.

Our Growth Industries

Posted on by

One more self-storage facility is being proposed to be built in Stuart. It is my understanding that there are three such projects in the development stage in the City with several more being built throughout the County. Along with assisted living facilities, self- storage facilities are our growth industries.

In some ways these facilities are dependent on one another. Americans in general love their stuff. I am no different. The only reason I don’t have a unit, is that I have a guest house that is my office and attic. Just like many, I can’t part with my stuff either.

And, as my wife and I come to the point that we need a little extra help and transition into an assisted living facility, what will happen to my stuff? My kids have already said that they don’t want most of it. Will I then put stuff into a storage unit even though I will by that point no longer ever have those things in my living space again?

Perhaps there is a business opportunity here. A developer can construct a combined self-storage and assisted living facility. You pay one price for both. Your stuff may be only a few feet from your living unit. It could be a Martin County innovation.

Martin County doesn’t have many manufacturing jobs. We are not a center for high tech or low tech…we don’t have much tech. The public and nonprofit sectors are our largest employers. It is nice that we have them and they do contribute to monetary circulation. But they rely on donations and taxes. No new money is entering the County.

If what is being built in our little County are storage facilities for both people and stuff that may be what Martin County will come to be known for. Our governmental policies have not encouraged businesses from locating here. Instead we may become the capital of storage units. We could have the distinction of having the most storage units per capita or the most nursing home beds.

But while both those things are needed, those sectors will not employ all our job seekers nor are they high-paying careers. This can’t be our economic strategy. Could it be because we lack a strategy? Government should not give businesses subsidies for locating within their boundaries.  But a no subsidy policy doesn’t mean government should ignore being business friendly.

Martin County has a level of government services that needs to be maintained. The roads are built, water lines and other utilities are existing, parks, libraries, and first responders already in place. Not spreading out the costs of those services to more people makes them more expensive to those already here. This is where we find ourselves.

If a factory is built and hires 200 people in Stuart or Jensen Beach, will it be required that government hire more people to service those jobs? Probably not since the infrastructure is already in place. However, the taxes that will be paid will go towards lessening the overall tax burden on those already in the County.

What would you rather see being built on that lot? A building employing 200 people or one storing stuff? How we accomplish the former instead of the latter is the question.

 

And So It Begins (From The Martin County Taxpayers Association

Posted on by

Here is a piece I wrote for the Taxpayers Association. To read more go to:  https://mctaxpayers.org/articles-2/

The governments of Martin County are beginning their budget processes for the upcoming fiscal year.

As they begin to put together their operating, capital improvement plan, and enterprise fund budgets, the public will see that there will be increases in various taxes and fees.  It is a bit early to tell where and how these increases will manifest themselves. Given the state of the various governments finances and the services they will need to provide, it is hard not to believe that taxes will be higher in the coming year.

The Martin County Taxpayers Association has begun analyzing and gathering information regarding the upcoming budget year for the various governments of the County. It is important that the individual taxpayer understands why increases will be proposed and whether they are justified. The Taxpayers Association can analyze the numbers, but it isn’t always easy to know whether a proposed project is necessary. Further, many times, we do not have the expertise to know whether a less expensive alternative exists.

That is why having more citizen volunteers that can delve into the minutia of a subject is necessary.  For example, if you currently or in a former life worked for a road construction company, perhaps you could look at a proposed road improvement and help us point out a less expensive alternative. As in the private sector, government needs to evolve and improve the way it provides services to their clients, the taxpayers.

The Martin County Taxpayers Association is a volunteer organization that can only be as good as the members willing to help in this work. While we have a dedicated board, the association can always use more help in our legislative, observation and membership committees.

Each resident and citizen is a consumer of government services. Some may take advantage of one service more than other residents (e.g., the library system).  If that library user thinks there is a way to provide all or part of the library services in a more cost-effective way, we would welcome an opportunity to partner with him/her to help determine where potential savings or efficiencies exist. If need be, we could show an interested volunteer where in the budget that item is listed. Our organization is an entirely volunteer group, so our strength comes from having a diversity of expertise and a willingness to use that expertise for the benefit of all taxpayers.

This organization believes that we are a partner with elected officials and their staffs to help provide better government for as low a cost as possible. We are not an anti-tax organization but rather a smart tax organization. Every dollar collected from the taxpayers should be used to buy the best level of service. This is what the citizens of the County deserve.

 

The Future of East Stuart

Posted on by

The East Stuart Neighborhood is uniquely positioned in the City of Stuart.

It is the historic home of the African-American community. As such, it has a rich and storied past that should be remembered and cherished. But the past may be getting in the way of its future. Like many such neighborhoods throughout the United States, most people have refused to see and accept what has changed in the past half-century.

During legal and enforced racial segregation, African-Americans had no choice but to live, work, shop, and play within very confined geography. Doctors, lawyers, teachers, and business owners were the pillars that lived within these communities. No matter how much money, education, or business acumen you had, you were forced to live your life within the confines of that segregated world.

With the end of legal segregation, the need to live in racial isolation is no longer necessary. More and more, economic standing dictates what neighborhood one calls home. African-Americans can now shop and eat wherever they can afford. College-bound students can attend any higher learning institution, not just traditionally black universities.

However, racism has not disappeared…far from it. It rears its ugly head all too easily and often. Slavery, which is America’s original sin, is still a stain upon our collective souls. But that is a moral, ethical, and religious discussion, not an economic one.

The continued hope of a rebirth of African-American businesses in the East Stuart neighborhood is very unlikely under current conditions. Simply put, there are not enough current residents with enough income to support anything more than the few existing stores. The few times that new venues have opened, they have been under-capitalized and under-patronized. Revitalization will only occur when there is an increase of residents who have more income.

There are currently 62 vacant lots within the roughly one square mile of East Stuart. What is also true is that there are substantially more buildings that need repair. Under the direction of Manager Dyess, the City has tried to address that issue with a revamping of the zoning and building code to allow for more flexible development. Unfortunately, he has met with community and political opposition.

Those in the community that believe that change is bad or, conversely, that somehow the government is going to fund some imaginary rebirth are simply dreaming. The City of Stuart has spent hundreds of thousands of dollars on infrastructure to allow the private sector to have the bones of redevelopment. With the proposed code changes, those in the private sector will be able to build a much more flexible product.

In order to be successful, a couple of other things must happen. One is that the Commission must stop pandering to a few and sacrificing the many. No matter what the good intentions are, setting a policy of isolation will only fail. Setting a policy of isolation will only accelerate the decline of East Stuart.

There is a place for low- to moderate-income housing. However, that doesn’t preclude more expensive-style construction. It would be a mistake to target building only for one economic class. If you are hoping for a renaissance of population and businesses, you need to have a more economically diverse neighborhood.

What no one should expect is for the neighborhood to remain exclusively African-American. Like other neighborhoods that began as ethnic enclaves, such as a Little Italy, Chinatown, or even Little Havana, over time other groups take up residence. East Stuart can be known for its African-American vibe. In fact, it can be an economic driver for new businesses and jobs. A restaurant, music, and art scene can be encouraged to enhance the African-American culture to the benefit of all.

Now is the time, with the new code, to build an exciting new future for East Stuart which honors the past but is created for a more wide-ranging future.

 

Waiting for the Train

Posted on by

I am in the Virgin/Brightline Station in Miami waiting for my train to return to West Palm Beach.

Sitting in the station and looking out onto the street, the once neglected neighborhood is being reborn with new rental, office and condo buildings. The station will be the hub for not only transportation but also for revitalization of this neighborhood. Thousands of new residents, businesses and tourists have begun to flock to the area.

No one believes in or wants such massive development in Martin County. However, it wouldn’t be bad thing (on a much-reduced scale) for Stuart. Instead of thousands of apartments, how about a couple of hundred? A hotel of a hundred rooms instead of one of thousands. New businesses would open to service new residents, and the visitors that would come for a day or two.

We went to Miami Beach for the weekend. We had done this in the past and had driven to get there, which was a nightmare. This time we took the train from West Palm and it was cheaper and less aggravating than driving and paying for parking which was $44 per day plus tax at our hotel. The last time we went, we didn’t drive our car once while we were there but rather used Uber or Lyft. We did again this time.

For years, I fought against the train. Now that Martin County has accepted Brightline/Virgin, so have I. It would be foolish to continue a fight that will not be won in the courts. I have taken my own advice and decided to let the market determine the fate of this business.

In the meantime, I believe it is in the interest of Martin County and Stuart to work in partnership with Virgin/Brightline to mitigate any problems. We need to use this as an opportunity to bring residents, businesses, and tourist dollars to the area. Virgin Trains are no more the enemy than the people who want to build Savannah Place or Seminole Bluffs. In those instances, we work with them to achieve the best possible project. The same should be done with this business.

We can have the best possible outcome by taking this more inclusive stance. There are several possible sites for a station to be located which would be to Stuart’s best advantage. For those worried about development of the possible City Hall site, I agree that would be the worst of the options. The peninsula only has one way in or out. That is not where the biggest bang for the buck would be.

Second best would be the fairgrounds. The cons are it is not near downtown nor does it offer the economic advantages that should and could be maximized. When that site becomes available, it should be used in conjunction with the airport to add more light industrial space. These are high-paying jobs, and the more we can cluster them together, the more synergy will be derived.

The ideal spot is the Erneston/East Coast Lumber Yard properties adjacent to MLK Blvd and Dixie Highway. There is the opportunity for finally constructing a parking garage on the Court House parking lot. It would be an economic stimulus for East Stuart and a tie-in to the Colorado Avenue corridor. It is eminently walkable to downtown. We could have the tram meet each train. There is room for new businesses, a hotel and residences without adding to the problems of overcrowding downtown.

As I finish writing this, I am still at the Miami station overlooking newly constructed buildings and a few empty lots. More and more of the area is being relieved of blight in this CRA neighborhood. If Brightline ends up going belly up tomorrow, these buildings will remain. The people that have moved here will stay. The businesses with their offices aren’t going anywhere.

The same would happen in Stuart and Martin County. The developed real estate stays. Most of the economic benefit of the new construction remains. That is why we need to work with this company. It is in our own best interest.