As so many people have been wondering about The Gulfstream Hotel, here is the latest, unless something has happened since February. As far as I can gather, it is being marketed for sale. Angel Investment Network put out the following. Rumor has it that there is an interested party--The Gulfstream Hotel entertainment Hotel Complex on the market:
Gulfstream Hotel-- A Boutique Hotel in Lake Worth, FL, relating to 1940's era Jazz club theme would bring high tourism, revenue and employment to this community. There is no competitive competition locally. Community needs a place for socializing.
Required Amount: $10,000,000
Minimum Investment: $10,000,000
Region: Out-of-State
Industry 1: Real Estate
Industry 1: Leisure, Tourism & Hotels
Company/product Stage: Pre-Startup/R&D
Investor Role: Silent
Amount Invested: $40,000
Investment Reason: Finance Acquisition
Package Selected: Investor Referral
Posted: February 3, 2012
Back in July 2005, Schlesinger bought the historic hotel for $12,910,000 paying over double what it sold for only two years before. The hotel is 13,500 sq. ft. situated on 0.399 acres directly across from the Intracoastal Waterway and Bryant Park. It has 106 rooms in 65,456 square-feet and most rooms have a water view.
This is a hotel that survived the Great Depression but did not survive the financial depression we had just a few years ago. Asset Holding Company 5 LLC filed a foreclosure lawsuit against CSC Lake Worth Limited Partnership (Schlesinger) on August 11, 2010 in Palm Beach County Circuit Court. The lawsuit seeks repayment of a $12 million loan, plus the foreclosure of the hotel property." Read more about it HERE.
The Gulfstream Hotel was added to the National Register of Historic Places in 1983--
(added 1983 - - #83001435)
1 Lake Ave. , Lake Worth
This property and its owners have been given favors through waivers and approvals over the years in order to make their investment more valuable. Of course, if you speak with a former P&Z member, it was all done in order to "move the project forward."
Here is a blast from the past where a city manager was willing to sell our public sidewalk to the owners of the Gulfstream Hotel in spite of the fact the city attorney told him he couldn't and that it was illegal. He was going to go forward with it anyway because the commission wanted to do it. Even back in 2007, when the owner wanted to construct a modern looking hotel and spa, a former Chair of our P&Z was retained by him to do background research on his application. These same people are still influential in Lake Worth politics. There are many who still want to build to 100 feet and change the entire appearance of our city.
The Gulfstream Hotel was built around the same time as our original casino. Hopefully, the hotel will be sold soon and the new owner will restore it to a full-fledged hotel that is sorely needed in Lake Worth to get the city prepared for the international tourism we will generate once our Casino is rebuilt to its historical look and feel of the 1920's.
17 comments:
If I remember correctly the Gulfstream Hotel was once owned by a Finnish Group. To bad we Lost that group to Lantana, maybe the New C.M. can get them back in Lake Worth.
Someone stopped by the inn about 6 weeks ago to tell us that he was buying the hotel and was going to make it a high end jazz club/hotel with big named stars coming in. He claimed to have worked with Michael Jackson. He later sent me an email to say that his offer was rejected and he did not think they could come to terms.
My, how snide. Last I looked... The Gulfstream is East of Dixie in an area that a 60% majority of voters changed our Charter making the height limit 65 ft. Why would you mention 100 ft?
She is a grand old building with very small rooms and could be a cool boutique hotel but for the location and height limited thinking people.
We still have vagrants in the park and a third world country to pass through to the West. Things are changing back and with the new CM, we may start real progress.
Let's hope we can get back to where our Charter means something unlike the recent past.
How snide? YES YOU ARE.
Do you listen to Wm Waters when he says that we can not build that high. Does any of that matter to you at all? I thought not. Ignorance is bliss in LW. Corruption is still here. Is it just a matter of time before all of you get your way in LW. What does Bornstein have to do with any of this? Do you believe that he will be easily persuaded to the developer point of view and not to the 32,500 rest of the population? Is that what you are hoping for? A weak pussy?
It is likely 100 feet was mentioned for 2 reasons:
Mayor Romano tried to sneak a 100 foot height for the entire Gulfstream block past the Commission and the voters in a 2004Charter Amendment, pretending that it was to insure the ability of the Gulfstream to rebuild should the edifice be damaged in a hurricane or fire.
An alert citizen, Tom Norris read the Amendment carefully, told Peter Timm, who told the Commission and this amendment (buried among 6 others on the ballot) was withdrawn.
When Adam Schlesinger bought the hotel his first proposal was for a 100 foot structure on the western Gulfstream lot.
He then proposed at least 2 other plans for which the P and Z voted for several variances that did not meet the hardships required to grant a variance.
It's odd that Frank Palen, former chair of P and Z was Mr. Schlesinger's attorney and had been the author of the 100 foot charter amendment several years earlier.
Our former city manager is the one who set us on the right path to turn this city around.
As far as the Charter goes, yes, heights were approved back in the late 1990's. Professionals now in the field of sustainability have told us that we cannot build that high unless we want to jeopardize the city and its resources. Times change when facts and realities change. Laws change all of the time. So, the Charter is respected but as in all laws, amendments are made from time to time to make things better.
And just like the needs of the populous has changed over 80 years to wanting larger rooms, with lots of closet space and beautiful bathrooms, this hotel needs to be updated to the standards that customers want and demand.
Yes she is a grand old building with small rooms. Height has nothing to do with modernizing this hotel to make the rooms larger, install closets and baths and to bring it up to today's standards.
It is a lovely building, I always enjoyed the eating at the grille. Over the years I had family stay there when they were visiting me and they always enjoyed it.
Yes the rooms are small, but that is true for the Boca Resort and even the Breakers as well.
I hope a good group buys it, although I think the price is out of step for the market, but the last purchaser way overpaid so now the bank is trying to recoup some of that.
The modern addition proposed by the last owner, never made any sense to me.
Just be vary wary if Mulvehill starts a campaign to "save" it.
L>OL
Well, I don't know what your rub is with Commissioner Mulvehill. If it were not for she, we either would 1) not have a casino at all or 2) it would have been built down by A1A.
As she "saved" it, it is being built where it has always been since 1922 and the only successful place for it. You should be thanking Suzanne Mulvehill. Instead you want to knock her down. Why do you do that?
That comment was meant in humor and I'm glad you took it that way. I just can't help but laugh when I remember her Straticon guy saying that the building is structurally sound.
You are most likely correct, though, that if it were called a tear down and replacement, it would have required much more work and cost. Allowing us to "..... renovate....." the structurally sound building back to it's original design (which it is not), kept it in it's current location and without the need for pilings.
But once you fudge the major parts, as we have seen, it's easy to fudge the "other" major parts, like "oh, you want water, sewer and electricity to your new building?" or "Oh, do you want parking lights for your new parking lot?".
Everyone plays selectively dumb on many of the project's details. But, yes, we will have a new building.
Maybe we can get Mulvehill to form a circle around the parking meters up there to save them. They need major renovation too. :-)
The building was PROVED to be structurally sound, something we said all along. It was proved, once and for all, by the forensic done by Taurinski. I suspect that the contractor found it cheaper to build new but save just enough of the original building to allow it to stay right where it is today.
The building is old and outdated in its present condition. Doesn`t it fall under the existing building codes, Fire codes, Elevator codes, Handi-cap codes, Electrical codes and off street parking codes?
It is true Lynn, I dont live in the city anymore but it still holds my interest as to what goes on. If all of the existing codes have to be met before opening, it will cost a fortune to do just that. I think the people that have bought and sold it finally figured those cost out and not a good investment. Even if it is brought up to date, Do they have to pay any city/county taxes? Does it stll remain as a historic building?
I think you are right, Richard. It will cost an equal amount to ready the building for occupancy...a large fortune for an investor.
To the first poster, I would much rather have the Finns, than the drunks, drug users, and anarcists we now have. Let's hope that the New CM can help us get them back
The Gulfstream doesnt have the amenities like the Breakers in Palm Beach. The Breakers still loses millions to operate each year.
The Gulf stream doesn't have the amenities also no trained staff for their respected guests as well..
Post a Comment