LAST STAND

 
 
 

Visit us on Facebook

 
 

Home

About Us

Hot Topics

Calendar

Donations  

Join Us!

What's New?

Our Stands

Green Links

Last Stand Blog

The City of Key West is considering a new financing approach for development of the Truman Waterfront, but the design/build concept comes with the drawback of reducing local (i.e. community) control.  If turned over to investors, are there safeguards to make sure it's predominantly recreation and parkland?  If so, is it lucrative enough to attract competent investors?  Many questions remain.  The proposal is described in this September 20 Keynoter article:

City looks to private sector for funds

Truman site development getting started

By Christie Phillips cphillips@keynoter.com

Searching for an extra $18 million that Key West doesn’t have, the city is considering an unprecedented approach to developing the Truman Waterfront.

City officials are looking at the idea of venturing into a public-private joint partnership for the design and development of the land, which the U.S. Navy officially deeded to the city this summer.

The partnership would alleviate much of the development costs for the city.

"We’re not changing the concept and the land use that the citizens selected and creating something entirely new," city Port Director Raymond Archer was quick to point out. "We’re taking all those items and creating criteria in which this piece of property can be developed.

"But instead of the city hiring an architect/engineer and paying them to come up with a master plan, then having the city lay the infrastructure, then seeing who’s interested in building the marina, the retail space, etc., we would stand back and say, ‘OK folks, we have a conceptual plan and it has certain conditions. Given this criteria, what would you propose?’ "

The process would be a bit like the reality TV shows where three interior designers give their visions of a room and the featured homeowners choose which one they like the best.

The city would put the project out to private designers and developers and they would propose a master plan for the site as they envisioned it, provided it met with all the requisite criteria established over the past several years.

"The city could then look at the proposals and say ‘I like that, I like that,’ or we may not like any of them," Archer noted. "But this would get the master plan done at no cost to the city, and probably help pay for infrastructure of the site and some other development."

"This creates a competitive process among potential partners," Mark Lawson, consultant for the city on possible funding alternatives for the waterfront development, said at the City Commission meeting Tuesday.

City Port Operations and the Finance Department made a presentation to the commission on the status of the proposed development.

"It brings private sector ideas to your project, so you can see a series of vision plans, and maximizes the opportunity to have the private sector participate in this process," Lawson said.

The partnership could save the city the $1.5 million budgeted for engineering and design services for the Truman Waterfront, officials said.

"There’s no guarantee that we’re going to go out and have our doors beaten down by a number of different parties interested in this," Archer cautioned. "This is not a big, attractive development site where there are plenty of opportunities for businesses to make big investments."

The site would mostly consist of parkland and recreation areas, with public access to the waterfront and multiple ingress/egress points into the property for the general public. Some economic development is zoned for the construction of retail space and affordable housing units, as well as a marina site.

"It’s the intention of the city and the residents that the primary focus of this land is recreation and parkland, and that’s what it’s going to be," Archer said.

A private partnership does have drawbacks.

"We would lose a bit of control because we’d have an investor," Archer said. "And the big question with all these set criteria attached to the project is, Is this going to be attractive enough to get interested parties to participate?"

The alternatives would be for the city to fund the project over time, developing the site piecemeal as money arises, or to fund the site though bonds, which may impose further restrictions on the site plans.

The City Commission has asked for a more thorough review of the public-private partnership option to be presented at its next meeting, scheduled for Oct. 8.

 

 RETURN TO HOT TOPICS

RETURN TO HOME PAGE