Part I: Reflections on the "New" Beach Proposal

I thought it would be good for me to let the "New" Proposal for the Beach gestate in my mind for a while before I start offering a response to it. For easier reference, I created a new topic called "New" Beach Proposal on the list of topics on the right hand side of the blog. The "New" is in quotes as this is only the latest in uncountable versions of what should be done at our 18+ acre oceanfront property, known as the Lake Worth Beach, spanning a period of 30+ years. "New" in quotes is also appropriate since the version that Straticon et al have put forward has what could be considered an "old" look to it, but in actuality it is actually more "new" than "old" as I will explain further.

Right now, the status is that the City is waiting for an "RFP" - request for proposals - to be prepared by an engineering firm. This is expected by the end of January and then the RFP would go out to architectural and engineering firms that would respond by the end of February. It's my understanding that, according to the proposal but together by Straticon and from the comments by the City Commission at the December meeting when this was discussed, that the proposal will entail rebuilding the existing structure in some manner, in the same location. At the one regular December meeting, the Commission directed that a feasibility for the site work also be part of the proposal.

You can refer to the post summarizing the Straticon proposal but the basics are a building of 50,000 s.f. with an estimated cost of $10,000,000. A feasibility study is underway for a possible bond issue, as well.

My comments to the City Commission at the time were that by doing this they are saying that the building is o.k. in this general location and that there isn't a better location for it on the property. With the proposed expansion of the existing building footprint to the east, there could be real issues related to the Coastal Construction Control Line. I reminded them that they did have to go out for bid for architectural services and couldn't just sign up Straticon without going out for bids from other firms/teams. I also urged them to consider what will happen with the entire site and not just the building. I thought that the sitework might well equal the $10,000,000 estimated for the building. Also, the financial workings of the project - what the lease rates will be for the tenants and what subsidy that represents needs to be calculated and made part of the overall equation. I then suggested, as I have here, that if they really want a "green" project on this public property, they should eliminate or greatly restrict the amount of parking on the property itself. Parking for the beach could be provided downtown and then a shuttle arrangement could be devised so that the portal to get to our beach would be through our downtown commercial district - encouraging beach traffic to stop in our downtown, hopefully spending money there along the way. It would also provide surplus parking for visitors to the downtown in the "non-peak" times of beach usage - i.e., at night. This would coincide with the peak parking demand in the downtown due to the number of restaurants we have there.

Now, a couple of comments regarding this quote from Mayor Clemens in the January 1, 2009 edition of the Lake Worth Herald. Here is the quote:

"It's the beach - always the beach." Mayor Jeff Clemens says, "But at least we have everybody approaching from the same angle and I think we will really get something accomplished this time."

You know, dictatorships are one of the more efficient ways to govern. Democracies are by nature, inefficient. I am not sure that "everybody" even knows what is being proposed. Didn't we have many public meetings, subcommittees, workshops, design charrettes on the more recent proposals? So far, there has been one meeting regarding this proposal.

I also think it is too early to say that the City gets a free pass in voting to terminate the public/private partnership with Greater Bay. What is to say that Greater Bay wasn't capable of doing the same plan that is envisioned here? I am not an apologist for Greater Bay, but I think it is foolhardy to think that we have heard the last from them.

The next installment: Part II: The Three "Rs" of Historic Preservation.