Lake Worth Beach City Limits

Friday, September 23, 2011

TRNA | Upcoming Candidate Forum

On Monday, October 3, 2011 at 7pm the Tropical Ridge Neighborhood Association will be hosting a Candidate Forum at Compass Community Center. This is the 1st in a series of meet-and-greets offered by the Neighborhood Associations with the finale being the Candidate's Debate hosted by The Neighborhood Associations' Presidents Council (NAPC) debate on Monday, October 24, 2011 at the Lake Worth Playhouse.
Candidates for the Mayor, District 1 & District 3 Commission seats will be introducing themselves and taking some questions from the audience. This is a great opportunity to get to know the people who want to represent you.
This event is open to everyone. We look forward to seeing you there!
Please note that we will be selling some beautiful, amazing, awesome, fantastic, super cool, you-know-you-want-one Tropical Ridge t-shirts at the event. Members - $12 Non-members - $15
For questions, please contact jessica@tropicalridge.org

Up Coming Events! VOLUNTEERS NEEDED :-)

WE have several events coming up and wanted to keep our groups informed so please forward the following dates on to your emails contacts and neighbors as well!

This Saturday, September 24th @ 8:30 am

We will be at 501 8th Street South

Lake Worth

Doing touch up trim painting

Need additional 3 people Currently have Robert & Carmello

From the file marked: "Solutions in Search of a Problem..."

As the Commission stumbled all over itself yesterday in a vain attempt to find a solution to a real problem regarding the beach renovation budget, rest assured that the city is busy providing solutions to non-existent problems on a regular basis throughout the city.

I've been waiting for a time to point out one example of this phenomena not far from where I reside. At 16th Avenue and North Dixie Hwy, southeast corner, there is a business there called the MadHatter, a local neighborhood watering hole. A similar business has been at this particular corner for as long as anyone can remember. The current owners have owned the establishment for 8 years this coming March.

Like many businesses along the east side of Dixie Hwy, the shallow depth of the lot doesn't allow for much, if any, on-site parking. This establishment has relied on on-street parking for its entire existence. People park their cars starting along the north side of building, on 16th and, on busier times, cars can stretch along 16th to J Street in a parallel fashion. Like I said, this situation has gone on forever. The current owners cannot recall anytime where there was an accident of some sort at that corner or on the street related to the parking situation. Apparently, neither can PBSO.

Now comes an unknown resident that lives somewhere farther east that rings or e-mails the City Manager. From what I understand, the City Manager then dispatches the sheriff to come inspect the situation since the person complained about the possibility of people hitting the rear end of the car parked closest to Dixie Hwy. as they turn on to 16th. The owners were concerned about the potential too and cooperated with the sheriff when they came out to look at the situation.

The sheriff said that as long as the rear of the westernmost car was twenty feet from the corner, there wouldn't be an issue. They brought the spray paint out and marked that spot on the pavement. The owners of the business even thought that an extra five feet would be a good idea.

See mark by sheriff made on the curb/gutter.

Well, now here comes the city's crew out one day, given other direction by staff (?) and spend all day painting a "no parking" area along the south side of the street a total of 60 FEET from the corner (see part of the white stripes above.) The owners couldn't believe what they were seeing as it was counter to the sheriff's recommendation and complete over-kill. The city, realizing that it went too far, then came back and painted black paint over the easternmost 20 feet of the no parking area. Then, like a cherry on top of the sundae, they came back with a special sign indicating no parking between there and Dixie Hwy.

Here are an assortment of pictures taken of the situation. I think that the underlying reason for this over-reaction by city staff is evidence of the turf war between the city and PBSO - expect to have situations like this used as an example of the problems having an "independent" law enforcement agency in charge of things here. Just sayin'...

How is this lane width here legal? Is this a new, more serious problem?

The VW Passat is parked in the area "blacked out" later by the city.

What one of our municipal cousins is doing to inform the public...

Joe Kroll: The Voice of Reason and a "Get it done" person is leaving...

Thursday, September 22, 2011

Lake Worth commissioners give inital approval to fire pension assessment on homes and businesses

The word from Willie. Click title for link.

Lake Worth's problem: $2 million price tag for parking lot lights for renovation project

The grim truth revealed at the end of the WPTV piece:

"There's no word on when this issue will be resolved."

Click title for link.

And YAY Peggy!

Former Howard Johnson's near Lake Worth Beach to become real estate office

Not in Lake Worth, but about as near as you can be without being in it. This is next door to "Ye Olde Bridge Park." Click title for link to article.

Notes from last night's Planning and Zoning workshop on NSP2-funded artist lofts...

Check out the previous post for back-up material on the project. The total number of units proposed is 13, with the possibility of going down to 12. A total of 20 units would be allowed by existing zoning. Silverblatt, Chair Mahoney, Waples and McNamara were there - Jennings arrived at 6:55 p.m. This was a "cursory" review of the project so that concerns could be identified. The project may be ready to come back in a month for formal review and approval/denial. Notice there are three floor plan options - but it is thought that most would have studio space on the first floor. It could not be a retail storefront - it has to be purely residential. Sales of art on premise may be able to be accommodated through a code amendment.

Being there last night, I didn't hear much "positivity" coming from the dais. I am ready to start referring to Chair Mahoney as "Madame No." And gurrrl, I need you to do my hair like you had yours last night! Get in touch!

McNamara noted that this project wasn't like anything in Lake Worth, which was an observation. He didn't like the tiny windows and thinks that the murals could incorporate the windows in creative ways. Joan Oliva, Executive Director of the CRA, mentioned that there would be a mural program and local artists or residents of the project would be solicited to complete them. Mahoney didn't like the use of the roof, even though it was a "green" roof - she was concerned about noise coming from the roofs and impacting the neighborhood. She wondered if any artists were there that night and questioned whether artists would leave where they are living now to live in these units. Oliva said that there were no price points yet, but that the project would have to meet the parameters of the grant.

William Waters, Community Development Director, brought up the need to identify suitable street trees. He had been working with the team on different options - some of what he would suggest would be too expensive for this type of project. He would like to pick up a commercial property next to the units on Lake - but commercial property is excluded from project funding requirements of the grant. He mentioned that there would be no more than 4 townhouses in a row (which was also part of the zoning-in -progress we put in place during the boom period and has since expired now.) Sliverblatt asked if we need more townhouses since many of them are empty now and bringing down prices (not sure about this assumption.) Mahoney said she wonders if it really is a "build it and they will come."

Oliva said that artists would get preference and floor plans are flexible. Waters added that there was some space to evolve over time and provide for a family situation. Oliva said that market studies were underway.

Cara arrived at 6:55 p.m. and immediately complained about not having back-up material - but she wasn't there for the presentation, so we had to hear what transpired beforehand, again. The entire dais differed to her after her arrival. I half expected to see a carriage with two white horses out front upon leaving with a "Queen Cara" sign on it. I am sure she will say that she was at a funeral so that it is inappropriate to comment that she came late to the meeting.

Herman Robinson noted the negativity present on the board with his comments. He said that the comments from the board were dampening enthusiasm for the project. and what he was hearing was negative vibes. Suzanne Cabrera, with the Housing Leadership Council and who helped get the grant in the first place, reminded everyone that this was a competitive process and if we don't use the money by certain deadlines, we will lose the unspent funds. Any change of program, like not doing these units, could also jeopardize the grant. Cost reasonableness is part of HUD funding so there is no money for amenities like saunas...if the city wanted them, they would need to come up with money for them.

Jennings said that the buildings were unattractive and did not relate to the surrounding neighborhood. She did not like how they all looked the same. She said that it interrupts the "flow" of the neighborhood. It was a serious planning issue for her that there was no open space and she would rather see open space here than this project. She said that she could see 10 units max instead of 12 or 13. Oliva said that under 12 units, the project doesn't work financially. She really stressed the need for open space. Oliva pointed out that HUD money couldn't be used to buy open space, but once the project is successful, there might be a revolving loan fund created that could fund things like that. But, the project would have to come first.

There was a lot of bashing of townhouses in general and that for this and other reasons this project was not appropriate here. I see this project having problems when it comes before them formally next month - there seems to be no sense of urgency with this money - like the city doesn't want to spend it. But you can bet it will still be used in campaign materials.

For live link to 2 p.m. City Commission Work Session on Beach Budget

Click here. For complete back-up, click here. I'm juggling a few things today and will be listening, commenting off and on. By the way, in each of the last two meetings I have been a part of or attended in the Commission chambers, the power has gone off for about five seconds twice. This entails a re-set of the Internet feed, so the stream may stop and start again, at times.

They are fumbling around trying to figure out when and how the lighting part of the budget ($2.8 million, including some water improvements) came on the scene - they seem to think that it came after the County's agreement. They are saying that the lighting and the water needed to be done anyway regardless of whether there was a project or not - and that would have been funded by the utility eventually. Now, they are talking about what type of lighting they will require. Waterman wants to know if the $90,000 was for turtle lights and what was originally spec'd for that figure. Kimley Horn says that was an allowance, but directed towards the actual beach - no real estimate that went along with that figure. They thought that they could use some other "contingency" monies.

The construction documents have been submitted to the city, but not final since the scope of the project is not finalized (?). Maxwell is asking about leases and what sorts of operating hours are being discussed and if there is any liability the city may have if it doesn't have enough lighting during those hours. Johnny Longboats wants to stay open to 1 a.m. The pier is open until 10 p.m.

The casino building will have a sprinkler system, the old one did not. A fire pump is not included, there is adequate water pressure. Maxwell is asking if there is anything related to the building that would require additional water pressure - staff responded that there are other facilities now that weren't there before. Stanton is saying that these water improvements need to be done anyway. Commissioner Golden says that he would be getting a straight answer if he asked a straight question (meow!)

Maxwell is making the point that everyone knew about the lights way back when. Stanton says we didn't know the exact type or quantity. The $90,000 was undefined. Maxwell said that it was for turtle light by the beachfront. Stanton says it should have been a CIP item as part of the utility budget. Stanton says that you don't necessarily need lights by the casino building - that up until a few months ago businesses were operating there at night without parking lot lights and she thinks that is o.k. Maxwell is making the point that this was an oversight and needed to be known. Mulvehill says that the only lighting was talked about and included was lighting along the beachfront. She is surprised and wonders if they could have design a $3 million project plus lights. McVoy says that lighting wasn't needed because it was a "park" and not a commercial use.

Maxwell is wondering if the tenants know this and they know the conditions that they will operate at night. Stanton says that they know it. Part of the enticement of the project is its ocean location (fish don't shop Ms. Stanton.) Golden says there are gigantic lights there and that turtles would go back out to the ocean if they saw them. (Ms. Golden, the thing about turtle lights is that they are shielded for when hatchlings come out of their eggs - that they go towards the ocean and not towards the artificial lighting on shore. Bright lights do not prevent turtles from laying eggs or make them go somewhere else.)

Now they are trying to analyze the amount of clientele that would be going there at night. Waterman just thinks we need 100 lighted spaces near the casino. (What does the business plan say about parking revenue assumptions?) The lights have gone in for DEP permitting and the permit has not been issued yet. Maxwell thinks that he has been misled on the costs of both projects and wants to know who knew what when. Stanton says that ultimately it is she that he should aim her concerns. He is asking for a special meeting on both projects and review the project to find out how we got where we are today. McVoy says that there might not be consistent interpretations of what happened.

Stanton says that this is coming down to a "gotcha" contest by people who want to say that we shouldn't have gone ahead with this project in the first place. (GAG) Looking at either project like this wouldn't be productive. Waterman says that this is just the natural progression of the project and the lights are now something they have to decide whether or not to approve them and what type. Mulvehill says she can't see lights on previous plans but now we know they are an issue.

Jason Bregman says that they looked at the issue when they worked on the project in 2009. City staff at the time didn't know if there would be night time use of the beach at the time. They met with DEP at the time too. Stanton says that we are treating this like street lights since it would benefit the entire community. Maxwell is critical of the background preparation and has a low confidence level of the staff. Stanton says that he has been critical of the project all along. Waterman cut them off and goes back to the 100 space idea. Mulvehill says we have to think long term and that we need something for the long term and that 100 spaces would not be enough. Waterman says maybe they use regular lights and just use them during the non-turtle season of the year for larger events. She is being told that we can't leave the lights that are there now - the city has been told to take the existing ones down as part of the permitting for the project. McVoy is trying to get around the requirement (the state will not let you - they don't trust that the wrong lights would be on at the wrong time anyway.)

It still sounds like they are confused and talking in circles. Waterman is asking when the leases will generate a profit so that they could use that money to supplement lights in the future. Maxwell says that we need to incorporate everything into the leases and it may not be attractive to tenants. (They are forgetting the ballroom - which should be a money maker for the city and would require people being there at night - no one has mentioned this.)

Maxwell is very disappointed that his colleagues are willing to pay anything for these lights. Waterman said G-D lights - oops. She says she is not saying that. McVoy says that we could choose not to have lights. Maxwell says that we don't know a lot of things. Stanton says that we don't have leases yet, no bids yet, etc. Mulvehill finally recognizes the ballroom - I wonder if they are reading this blog from the dais. Waterman corrected herself. If not, someone could be relaying this.

Now they are talking about foot candles and "luminosity" - Golden says that we still have the moon to deal with. Please. It sounds like they are going ahead with the "rough in" for the lights now. Waterman is saying they will be going on and filling in what is needed over time as the building makes money.

Margoles says that the staff has been working on the numbers, figures on the various items up until this morning, so not everything ended up in the packet.

Wind Turbines - Mulvehill asks if there is some private/public partnership to pay for them or share the cost. They are currently add/alternates if they had the money. McVoy doubts that someone would go for that but they could be given mention in quarter inch high letters (?)

It turns out that people from the county were at the meeting and left. Now they would like them there since they are talking about eliminating the playground, which is part of the interlocal agreement.

Meeting over at 5:35 p.m. with little accomplished that I could tell.

Urban Arts Lofts

These pictures were part of the "cursory" review of the artist loft project presented to the Planning and Zoning Board last night by the CRA. These units are to be funded by the NSP2 grant - which specifically includes the provision for artist lofts/affordable housing as part of the cultural renaissance program - now called LULA. Not doing this could jeopardize the entire grant since it was one of the reasons the CRA was awared the $23 million grant for neighborhood stabilization. Click here for more information on the artist loft project. Click here for a link to the Lake Worth CRA NSP reports/webpage. The CRA needs to spend half of the grant money by Feburary 2012 - or the difference between what has been spent and that 50% amount would be taken back by the federal government.

See chart below for summary to date. There is a general concern that the city is not moving fast enough in turning some of its surplus properties over to the program.