Yard signs are now available and are popping up all over town! Join concerned residents at the protest on 10/10 at 10 AM at the Hollywood Beach Community Center to pick up a yard sign. 1301 S. Ocean Drive from 10 am- 12 noon.

The opposition grows! Please read the letters below in regards to the 1301 proposal:

Thank you, Broward County Commissioner Beam Furr! 

Submitted to the Sun Sentinel
By Commissioner Beam Furr, Broward County Commissioner, District Six

Dear Editor:

If you’ve lived in South Florida for a while, you probably have a favorite spot or two. There is probably a good chance this site is on publicly owned land.

It is natural to want to be protective of that place, which is why we get more than annoyed when someone comes in, out of the blue, with a proposal to develop one of those places for their own purposes.

They come in with a big idea, a polished proposal and an agenda, but not necessarily one created with the public in mind. The “unsolicited bid”, which is allowed under Florida Statutes, has become a tool used by developers to take a shortcut to realize their ambitions. That shortcut, unfortunately, usually leapfrogs over a comprehensive needs assessment and sidesteps around other factors important to the community.

Usually, governments go through an arduous process to determine what the residents need and/or want and where it should go. Whether it is a park, a library, a road, a hospital, a wastewater treatment plant or a school, each project requires serious deliberation that takes many factors into consideration. The environment, economic development, traffic, housing, sanitation, and a host of other issues must be examined to try and avoid negative unintended consequences. Requests for proposals usually include within them the requirements expected that satisfy all those concerns.

The writing of these RFPs takes time and analysis by people whose job it is to keep the public interest in mind. The “unsolicited bid” avoids much of that due diligence. That due diligence, however, is where the public has an opportunity to voice its concerns and opinions.

For example, in the City of Hollywood, the proposed Azalea Terrace project on parkland and beachfront property anticipates building a 320-foot luxury condo in exchange for providing community amenities and rent. The public has shown no support for this project, and the fact is that the need for a new park and new community center was never raised when the city recently put on the ballot a General Obligation Bond to renew tired facilities. But the “unsolicited bid” process has taken on a life of its own.

Instead of the issue being what kind of community center might be desired, or what the public thinks is the best use of this land, all the discussion revolves around the height of the condo. The same can be said for an unsolicited bid to redo the Orangebrook Golf Course. This unsolicited bid threw what should have been a very predictable process into anything but in hopes of taking advantage of a local GO bond. Again, time, money and public trust are at stake. The public interest has been glossed over.

Recently, Broward County entertained an unsolicited bid for vacant land and entertained a number of alternative offers afterward. Having voted in favor of one of the proposals, the Broward County Commission is being asked to reconsider the terms and conditions. This probably would not have been the case had the commission determined up front what the best use of that land would be and what would be required of any applicants.

The County also received unsolicited bids for one of the most important project decisions facing Broward, namely our Joint Government Center with Fort Lauderdale. This is a project that will have an impact on Broward County for many generations to come. The Joint Government Center will be a signature building for Broward County that anchors our regional downtown in Fort Lauderdale. The County Commission this time, however, wisely voted against the unsolicited proposal for the Joint Government Center because there had not been a needs assessment done prior to the bid. There wasn’t any way to ensure that everything that was needed would be included.

To accept the unsolicited proposal would have short-circuited the entire process and almost guaranteed that some important considerations would have been missed. It would have also diminished the opportunity for the public to be heard.

Public private partnerships have their place. There are numerous examples where this has expedited projects that are in the public interest. The best of those accomplished their due diligence on the front end. However, the unsolicited bid can be very problematic. It is important for governmental bodies to protect the process, as messy as it may be, to ensure that not only the public is heard, but that the right project is built in the right place.

______________________________________

Letter from Bob Glickman, Hollywood Beach Coalition:

Dear Mayor & Commissioners,

The Hollywood Beach Coalition and its members have been following as
many presentations and meetings as possible on this project.
We have been listening to all the voices, the developer, city staff,
comments from the commission, comments from the residents of Hollywood and the community at large.

We are of the opinion and have concluded that this project is not in the
best interest of Hollywood or its residents and we are opposed to it.

We share many of the same concerns and join all the other organizations
and scores of other individual residents and taxpayers that you already
have heard from, in opposing this project, as presented.

Below are some of the points that have been brought to the Hollywood
Beach Coalitions attention and why we are against this P3 project:

We do not believe that the height of this project conforms to the
surrounding area and certainly is against the “bookend” plan that city
staff has previous put forth for beach building heights in the CRA
district. This project will dwarf surrounding buildings.

We believe the city did not do their due diligence when they did not get
an appraisal for the property particularly in light of the fact that
other assemblages of property on the barrier island are for much greater
prices than what is being offered by this project, in our opinion.

There is concern about a 99 year lease and the possible renewal of
another 99 year lease term at its end. Clearly, this would be a sale and
not a lease. Who would evict the condo owners if the lease was not paid? Who would pay to demolish the building and return the property to as is condition, at the end of the lease? Would the city really evict 190 condo owners for nonpayment of the lease
payments?

Parking for the beach community center would be problematic for the many older or disabled residents that continually use this facility and they
would have to compete to get a parking space with the proposed condo
residents, beach users and those that would use the proposed restaurant
and community center. Look at what happened at Margaritaville where the hotel has taken over the public parking spaces.

The issue of how the developer would transfer title to the condo
association is still unresolved as the P3 state statute does not appear
to address or allow this type of transfer or assignment. A comprehensive agreement would not be able to supersede the state statute. This question remains unanswered.

We believe the original deed transfer is quite clear to its purpose and
we do not see how a condo project built on this land qualifies as a
public purpose, as it will be closed to the public and we do not see how
it comports to the P3 statute with an ensuing transfer of ownership from
the developer to a condo association.

We also heard that there were known defects of the beach community
center since 2018 which were not divulged to the public and monies were
not put on the GO Bond to maintain and update this beach community center. These defects are now being used as an excuse and driving force about getting a new beach community center. This is very problematic to the community at large. Either pass a new GO Bond, take savings from the GO Bond, have the Beach CRA pay to renovate, remodel or build a new community center or look for other financing methods.

There were no Beach CRA projects on the GO Bond list and this is
certainly something that should have qualified.

This is some of the last beachfront property that the city owns.

This is prime beachfront property that Hollywood should keep and utilize
for the enjoyment and use of future generations of Hollywood residents
and taxpayers.
Once gone, it cannot be replaced.

We hope that you will move on from this project as presented, as it
seems most of your electorate is in agreement that this is not a project
for Hollywood.
If you doubt this statement, please put it out for vote to the community
at large.

Thank you,

Bob Glickman
On Behalf of the Hollywood Beach Coalition

______________________________________________

Letter from Frank DeRisi, President of the Hollywood Beach Civic Association: 

September 28, 2021
 
Dear Mayor and Commissioners,
 
I hope that this email finds you all doing well. The Hollywood Beach Civic Association (HBCA) would like to thank you for all your hard work and focus in leading our city into the future.
 
Over the past year, the HBCA Board has followed the proposals for development at 1301 South Ocean Drive with extreme attention. This included watching numerous commission meetings, many interactions with unit owners, residents, and neighbors of the project. The HBCA board has maintained an open mind throughout the entire PPP process. We have refrained from taking a position or making a statement to give the City and developers the benefit of completing the process. We now feel the time has come for our board to weigh in on this critical issue. We have concluded that the majority of the residents on the barrier island oppose the Related proposal. 
 
On Tuesday, Sept 14, 2021, the HBCA board, echoing the unquestionable majority, voted not to support the Related proposal.  
 
Below are some of the concerns and relevant points brought to the HBCA about the proposal:
 
This City-owned property has been considered as the People’s Place. The community is open to a revamp of the Cultural Center, Parking and the Harry Berry Park. However, the proposal subjugates these primary uses to minor items. Parking will be a challenge for residents attending meetings as they will need to compete with restaurant patrons and beachgoers. 
 
The proposed building, as a result of its height, will energetically impose itself on the community. The proposal, at 30 stories, is a significant variation from adjacent buildings. It would dwarf everything around it. Most people that we interacted with, or who commented on, this proposal made it clear that they do not want Ocean Drive to become a wall of tall buildings. Sunny Isles is most referenced as a planning system to be avoided.
 
People have expressed concern with the apparent complexities that arise with a 99-year lease and 190 private condominium owners. It might be prudent to sample other condominium projects that have been built on long term lease property to determine what issues were encountered.
 
Lastly, with the real estate market as strong as it is now, why doesn’t the Related group acquire market rate land and develop a market-rate product. Why does Hollywood always need to give something away when we have one of the best beaches in Florida. The HBCA supported the PPP at the Margaritaville property because we saw that as a catalyst for growth in Central Beach. This project is not in a blighted area, and the City should maintain its land assets for Hollywood generations to come.
 
We thank you again for your work and that your priority will be the best for Hollywood now and in the future.
 
Frank De Risi
On behalf of the HBCA Board of Directors

________________________________________________

Opportunity to comment virtually or in-person (at City Hall):

The Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA) Meeting will take place on Wednesday, October 6, 2021 at 9:00 a.m. Citizen Comments are Agenda Item 4 and it is an opportunity to express your opinion about the 30 story private tower on our public 1301 S Ocean Drive property. (The City Commission is the CRA Board, so you can speak to Mayor Levy and all of the commissioners).

The public may participate by indicating they wish to provide comments virtually via the Webex Virtual Meeting App or provide in-person comments during the meeting at City Hall.

Register here: http://fl-hollywood2.civicplus.com/FormCenter/City-Clerk-12/CRA-Meeting-10621-267  

Register to provide comments virtually via the Webex Virtual Meeting App. You must be able to join the meeting virtually from an internet connected device with a web camera and microphone such as a personal computer, smart phone, or tablet.  Those who register to provide comments virtually will receive the Webex meeting link by e-mail the day before the meeting. OR- Register to provide in-person comments during the meeting (capacity limits and social distancing requirements apply).

Registration to participate in the meeting virtually or in-person (at City Hall) must be received by 12:00 p.m. on Tuesday, October 5th for the CRA meeting.

Citizen Comments are Agenda item 4.

____________________________________

CRA Meeting: 9 AM on Oct. 6th at City Hall

Protest: 10 AM on Oct. 10th at 1301 S. Ocean Drive

Citizen Comments: 5 PM on October 20th at City Hall

THANK YOU!