EcoCentre under construction 2007
Almost adjacent to City Hall is the EcoCentre. Not only is this building interesting in its own right, it's interesting to residents of Lake Worth because of the height referendum coming up in the March 2013 special election, a delayed vote and a political decision made by this "visionary" commission that is costing us $21,000. It is also interesting to all of those who visit our city and shop and dine in our downtown who like its small town charm.
The EcoCentre, located east of the railroad tracks near the foot of the residential neighborhood, has been used as a comparison as to why taller buildings could be designed with an acceptable end product according to some who believe that allowing taller buildings is a plus for our downtown. They never tell us why it is a plus other than bigger buildings would generate more taxes. They don't tell you that the CRA would get most all of the taxes as the downtown is in the CRA district.
Greg Rice has said that the building is 65 feet, the same height as The Lucerne. The Eco Centre may not be a 65 foot building as this contributor suggests below. This analysis is being offered for your perusal and something to consider as no plans or permits have been scrutinized by this blogger.
The following projected assumption shows that the EcoCentre is 10 feet higher than what the referendum is calling for west of Dixie on Lake and Lucerne or 35 feet. This area is adjacent to single family residences.
In the photo above, the contributor to this analysis wants you to take notice that there are 7 layers of scaffolding. If you use the average measurement for scaffolding, then there are 6.5 feet between each layer. If you multiply 6.5 feet by 7 layers, the total is 45.5 feet. As you can see, it is almost to the top of the building. In addition to the 45.5 feet, there is an enclosed structure for "mechanicals" on the top of the building that is set back and can't be detected at ground level. We do know, with no uncertainty, that this building is 4-1/2 stories.
Doesn't Rice live in the Lucerne? He wants higher buildings, why? Does he own downtown property?
ReplyDeleteOne of the principals of Treasure Coast Regional Planning Assn. said, during the charettes at the Shuffleboard Courts, that it was surprising that a building with such mass and without setbacks as it rose could have been approved so close to our City Hall.
ReplyDeleteIt just shows what you can do in Lake Worth if you are connected.
are you talking about the EcoCentre?
ReplyDeleteLynn, if you're going to use me to help rally your troops you should not miss-quote me. I, along with another poster on your blog at the Mango Groves event last Saturday said that John Szerdi said the building was that tall. I said Stevie Wonder could see the building was over 45' tall. Don't drag me into this debate. None of us who are involved in current events in LW are going to be persuaded by blog post or door to door campaigners. We've already made up our minds.
ReplyDeleteCommissioner John Szerdi who designed the building said the building is 65'. If the proposed charter amendment was to pass we would not have the opportunity to have other buildings of that calliber in our quaint downtown. We'd still have an old one story medical office building there.
ReplyDeleteSounds like to me you are 100% in agreement with Szerdi. So, you are in the debate.
This is not as tall as the lucerne. End of story. Greg, get real.
ReplyDeleteIt does not matter if it is 45 feet, or 65 feet, It is obviously to tall for your liking Lynn, or you would stop harping about it.... This is the third or forth blog about this building since the wine tasting at the eco...
ReplyDeleteSo??????????????????
ReplyDeleteYour point????????????????????????
Other people, besides those looking to grow our city vertically, read this blog.
I'm not in 2 political action committees for nothing nor did I help Respectful Planning PAC for MY health but for what I believe to be the overall welfare of this city sans developers whose only objective is to make money for themselves at the expense of LW.
Probably, you will be reading more as we progress and as opportunity arises.
ReplyDeleteas long as there is no more deception as to what the City might look like that is fine with me, but remember the Hotel District that the city commission is talking about is east of federal, and the Gate way to the beach, Where tall buildings already exist. Not the "Quaint " Downtown Shopping District.
I went to the building department this morning to check out the plans for this building. Following are the results of my findings:
ReplyDelete1. The building is 46 feet to the top of the slab. So, the person who gave the projections on height were on the money other than one-half a foot off.
2. It is 61.8 feet to the top of the roof that houses all the mechanicals that are set- back from the main building.
John Szerdi, the architect for the building says it's 65' tall. The scaffolding doesn't take into account to arched ceiling above the main center area.
ReplyDeleteThe building is, in your words "stunning". And it is not in the quaint downtown district.
So therefore, buildings can fit in to our city that are stunning and 65' and lower, the area East of Federal, which has many taller buildings can support similar height buildings IF they are NOT next to single story residences.
And very short buildings such as that recently built at the corner of D and 17th Ave. North CAN be ugly.
Now... can't we have a grown up discussion about appropriateness being the main objective of approving a new building complex, not just height?
Lynn, You said; "So, the person who gave the projections on height were on the money". I know you'll have the last word, since this is your blog. Being off by almost 30% sounds like something The White House might say when they are trying to spin under-reporting inaccurate information in hopes of making people think they're side is right. 61.8' is a lot closer to 65' than it is to 45'. Commercial buildings aren't measured to ceiling hight. Thanks for going over and finding out just how high The Eco Centre actually is, 3' shorter than The Lucerne. That's about how much taller Nichole Kidman is than me.
ReplyDeleteI just gave you the dimensions, anonymous.
ReplyDeleteThe building at D and 17th was a garage that never should have been allowed to be built.
Because we have some tall buildings east of Federal does not mean we need any more of them.
Could we have that grown-up discussion or does it mean that you just want your way and anyone with a different view should drop dead??
Greg--if you measure the ground to the top of the 4th floor or right below the cornice, it is 46 feet. That's the building height to me--that is the space that is being occupied, for the most part, not the mechanical room that is set-back and no one can see it and where the measurement grows to 61.8 feet. I doubt if there will ever be another building such as this again around here.
ReplyDeleteSo, the height is deceiving here and that's a good thing. It's a 4 story building and designed well to hide all the height over the 4th floor.
We are asking for 3 story buildings in that area. It's the public benefit that I worry about that will allow a developer to go even higher.
Ask yourself (anyone) one thing. What would be the purpose of raising downtown to 65 feet? The buildings are already established and built. The only motivation to raise it to 65ft would be to tear down historical buildings to redevelop our Historical Downtown. Historical Downtowns all around the country are a draw to tourism and visitors from neighboring cities.
ReplyDeleteIf you want taller the West Dixie hwy corridor is perfect for it in certian spots and with in reason and then the wonderful far future project of the business park west of the city.
That's where I'm wrong. I've always thought measurements were from the bottom to the top. I have always failed to omit the measurements from the cornice to the top of the roof.
ReplyDeleteThe grown up discussion I referred to is that which calls us a historically or otherwise "low rise" city, or that passes out graphic depictions of "what could be built" as boxes without setbacks, step-backs, or cornices.
The historic Gulfstream was built at our inception close to 100 years ago. Who knows, maybe our founding fathers thought differently about how the core of the city should look and they initiated the height limit way back then that we have today. Oh, no. What's that you say? The present majority voted to LOWER the historic height in our quaint downtown from 65 feet to 45 feet?
Why, yes they did, but we wanted it lowered to 35 feet. And they didn't lower it at all in the area where all the other tall buildings, like the Gulfstream are located! That is just unacceptable.
What's that? They voted to lower the maximum height you can build West of Dixie from 100 feet to 45 feet? Why yes they did vote to LOWER them from 100 feet down to 45 feet, but we wanted them even lower. 10 feet lower to be exact.
Then the same visionary trio also lowered the maximum heights in the Park of Commerce to 45 feet from 100 feet? Say it ain't so!!!
All this over a charter change to make you feel good.... Guess what, wait a couple of years and a simple majority of commissioners can put the charter change right back on a ballot. Just like one did about 19 years ago when we all voted to up the heights.
So you may win one for the anti development stagnation crowd in March, but Lake Worth is the real loser because good developers will go where they are wanted. Where the potential for growth and prosperity is.
Lake Worth will still be back here sucking hind teet.
Can anyone count? iT'S 4 stories.
ReplyDeleteWhy don't people move to Delray or fort Lauderdazle or even Miami beach if tghey wantg tall. Why do people come into town and wANT TO CHaNGE OUR CITY?
ReplyDeleteAccording to Lynn, it's 4 -1/2 stories. It is close to 62 feet in height. If it were 2 stories, it would still be 62 feet tall.
ReplyDeleteWhy don't YOU move to a trailer park? I've been here longer and we have ALWAYS had buildings higher than 45 feet. ALWAYS!!!
The knee jerk reaction to the Lucerne is to ban all buildings that high. Other buildings have been built high as the Lucerne, Ecocenter and the Lofts for two. Nobody is complaining about them.
Stunning, right Lynn?
Look at the poor design of a garage on North D Street. That was approved without even asking the visionaries. So let's get petitions against ugly garages on the ballot as a charter amendment.
Whatever.
ReplyDeleteWhat lofts are you talking about, anonymous?
Take out your little graphic of boxes filling every property from the bridge to the shuffleboard courts making us look like downtown Miami. It's the box directly across the street, West of the Dollar General Highrise. That lovely quaint, one story low rise thrift store on the gateway to our quaint little town. Can't see it in your fly-by? Because it's surrounded by 6 and eight story buildings..... in our quaint little low rise community.
ReplyDeleteThank you Ms. Sarcasm.
ReplyDeleteAdmitted, we do have a dozen at most taller buildings throughout the 6 square miles of our city. For the most part, these were built before we had rules in place. Thank God (ooops, forgot, you liberals don't like God) the EcoCentre built the set back on the roof or that building would be looming over everything down there. In stead, it is 4.5 stories to the eye, unusually attractive and different on the inside but the exterior of the building is ho hum.
We just don't want any MORE OF THEM, at least those who signed the petition said so.
So have a nice day. Stop your hit and runs.
No hit and runs here. I'm here for the long haul, like you. Thanks for recognizing my sarcasm pointing out the hypocracy of the argument that we can't have "stunning" landmark properties with this gem..."We just don't want any MORE OF THEM, at least those who signed the petition said so."
ReplyDeleteBecause landmark buildings of significance tend to be more than two or three stories.
The set back you refer to on the ecocenter is actually a "step back" which adds architecturally to most buildings going more than two stories. So you are correct that step back requirement, which is now in place and why a Lucerne could never be built again, serves to address your complaint of the city looking like the graphic depiction put out by the elegant one.
In other words, we can have taller buildings that don't look that tall from the street or black out the sunshine. We could actually have MORE "stunning" buildings in Lake Worth.
If you post anonymously, you ARE a hit and run.
ReplyDeleteI doubt if buildings will have a requirement to have a "step back" as the one at the Eco houses all of their "green" features I would suppose and a necessary requirement of its design.
Next, not sure if I am here for the long-haul. This city can be sickening especially when I get the sarcasm you so eloquently interject. I will be here for awhile, however...thanks Wes.
how do you figure that a recessed building on the top would not block out the sun in our downtown?That makes no sense.explain it.
ReplyDeleteRE: 8:21 above "So you are correct that step back requirement, which is now in place and why a Lucerne could never be built again".
ReplyDeleteYou are wrong, this commission did not vote for 'step backs'. Remember, they did not pass the ZIP nor the recommended LDRs!!
If you think they did then prove it show the commission meeting minutes when it took place.
As it was explained to me by William Waters, the "step back" along with set backs are in the proposed LDRs. The approval of the LDRs, when they take place will require ANY building higher than two stories, if built close to the property line to be "stepped back" much like the Ecocenter is above the 4th story.
ReplyDeleteThe effect allows the building to look like a two story building from the street but address the density issues that allow for cities like ours to further become destinations.
I get slammed each time I make a comment like that, but look at what the street level of the Lucerne has done for that area. While I don't care for the mass boxiness of the building, you cannot dispute the business it has brought to that block.
Through set backs and step backs,(smart building design) your issues are addressed unless you are just absolutely against any type of development or a Citizens Against Virtually Everything er.
" The approval of the LDRs, when they take place will require ANY building higher than two stories, if built close to the property line to be "stepped back" much like the Ecocenter is above the 4th story."
ReplyDeleteOnce the agreed upon at the Tri-Meeting LDRs are approved then there will be agreement.
The proposed new house at 302 North Lakeside does not meet those LDRs.
I was at that meeting for the appeal and feel certain I heard William Waters say the house meet all the requirements. With the exception of the use of the word "adjacent" the owners had jumped through all the hoops. William did have a tough time trying to re-define that word. But they weren't supposed to be re-hear the whole case, only to see if the board erred in its decision.
ReplyDeleteWhat specifically do you mean?
The world will not end when these neighbors wind up with a beautiful new home in the neighborhood. Even if it is 2 stories.
The Charter allows 100 ft west of Dixie and 65 ft east of Dixie at present. Federal is not in the charter.
ReplyDelete