Wednesday, August 2, 2017

The Casino settlement last night was passed by the City Commission.


UPDATE: The City Commission passed the settlement agreement last night with Morganti and REG to fix the Casino structure at the Beach. By the way, one of the lawyers thought the Casino has a Certificate of Occupancy (CO). It doesn’t. The building has a Temporary CO and has for 4 years now. Is this actually a Permanent Temporary CO?

One of the lines last night was, “at no cost to the city”. What about all the lost revenue for all these years because the 2nd floor was not leased?

What happened last night is this current City Commission now owns the Casino and all the problems that preceded them. The previous commission has now been given a “pass go” and all their mistakes wiped clean. That’s good news for them.

However, the biggest problem of all remains. Here is a blog post from last Monday.

The Lake Worth Casino (see image below) is almost completely east of the Coastal Construction Control Line (CCCL). Questions:
  • Has the Casino structure received Florida LEED Certification?
  • Or will that certification be forthcoming once the settlement terms have been completed?
  • Can the Casino even be LEED certified because it’s not constructed on pilings?
  • Has the seawall east of the Casino been inspected properly?
Click on this link: a video from a Commission meeting last May vis-à-vis the pool discussion at the Beach.

This image is from the meeting last May.
The red line is the CCCL.
Note the ‘newly renovated’ Casino is mostly east of the CCCL. The previous structure was actually 94% demolished in June 2011.

The previous Casino structure at the Beach.


At the City Commission meeting on May 23rd this year, David Stewart, P.E., structural engineer from Kimley-Horn, gave the presentation regarding the structural and building issues related to the now-condemned pool at the Lake Worth Beach and, “the impact of the Coastal Construction Control Line on necessary permits.”

Mr. Stewart also briefly addressed these “Out Of Scope Considerations” about the pool:
The CCCL, “Functional design and layout” and “Financial feasibility”. Shouldn’t these issues be In Scope Considerations about the Casino structure?

No comments: