Monday, December 27, 2010

Front or back?

I've been thinking about the proposed design of the rehabilitated casino building's western facade.  Prior to the hurricanes of the late 1940s, A1A (Ocean Boulevard) was east of the casino building.  The front of the building was designed to face the ocean, although the west side was essentially a copy of the east, only without a tower.  The western frontage had an extension along the north side of the building that was torn down in the early 50s.  
The above is a postcard showing A1A east of the building and a much narrower barrier island.  The width of the island was doubled in the early 1950s by the addition of fill - essentially the area that is now the western parking lot.

Most of the traffic coming to the building will be by travel over the Lake Worth bridge.  Does the western facade as proposed reflect the "front" of a building?  I don't think so - it looks like what it is - a building that's been added on to a lot and one that doesn't make a lot of aesthetic sense.  The front is better, although I am having trouble warming up to the "Tuscan Revival" of the existing two-story session.

I bring this up now as the architectural package will be on the Planning and Zoning Board's agenda of January 5th.  If you share this concern or any other, this might be your only opportunity to voice your opinion prior to the City Commission reviewing the design of the building.  

I'd be interested in knowing your opinion.  To see the entire design package, click here.


Anonymous said...

You are dead on Wes. The view of the building as you crest the bridge should be very pleasing. Maybe even some architectural columns and arches on the West side of the pool would help in that regard.

Anonymous said...

I'm sure all that was throughly discussed and vetted by our crack city commission. I guess only time will reveal the fact the entire process is a sham for campaign purposes only, with the city manager assisting in order to keep her job.
I can hear it now- "We can wait another year for the casino we'll see how the finances are then","the cost overuns for the R.O. plant are $XXXXX resulting in the need to increase utility rates even more, "the consultant assured us it wouldn't cost this much to run the r.o. plant", resulting in the need to increase rates again.
"property taxes decreased 25% percent again this year, due to...don't pay attention to anywhere else in the county", "the closed businesses are a result of the overall economy". "We're the most progressive commision ever".

John Rinaldi said...

I agree that the west face of the building should be very inviting. Cars coming over the bridge or along A1A need to see a lighted building at night that looks great. Right now we have a disgrace.

Wes Blackman said...

As it is designed now, according to this rendering and the facade plan, it looks like someone's backyard and with a hodge-podge of architecture - I don't think it looks like a DESTINATION.

What it looks like know can't be communicated amongst polite company.

Anonymous said...

Please don't complain.It could be much worse. Have you noticed the very large, in fact huge box with Giant Rabbit Ears on Dixie Hwy.Who pray tell approved this monstrosity. Publix submitted Mediterranean Style,
The Planning Board talked about Art Deco and they are building what?

Loretta Sharpe

Anonymous said...

Forget the "look" Loretta, all we need care about is whether the tomatoes are being picked by union people and "paper or plastic" is never uttered at the checkout.

When you have a 35 feet height limit, you cannot produce a nice looking building like Publix has in Lantana. You must have a flat top which leaves ...... Art Deco.

I was reminded that the "ears" DO extend above 35 feet as an exception.