The beach parking garage is back on the agenda. The city wants to revive the contract with Gallo Architects "for the Architectural Feasibility Design for a Multi-Use, Multi-Level Parking Garage."

A design contract was initially entered into last year with Gallo after a competition involving several architectural firms. It was withdrawn after the 2002 election in which voters approved a charter amendment that imposed size limitations on the design of a parking garage built on the Main Beach Parking Lot.

Many people who oppose the parking garage plan hoped that the amendment would put an end to it forever, although the amendment as such did not preclude advancing with the project as long as it was within the dimensions specified in the charter. One of the arguments against proceeding with the garage was that the amendment's limitations were so severe that it would be difficult to design a facility large enough (that is, producing enough new spaces over and above the 300+ spaces that would be taken for the construction of a new garage) to justify the cost to taxpayers.

However, city planners still want to go ahead with this, which they now see as an integral part of the "Ocean Way" project which includes the new northbound A1A lane and the 21st Avenue streetscape proposal. They do not seem to acknowledge the fact that voters do not support development of the Main Beach Parking Lot, and by any reasonable analysis of the previous votes, strongly oppose it.

1986. Voters approve a bond issue to purchase ocean front land between S.E. 1st and 2d Streets for the purpose of building a ground-level parking lot that will accommodate 234 vehicles. This becomes the Main Beach Parking Lot.

1998. A Canadian developer, René Lepine, makes a grand proposal in a formal presentation to the city commission. He wants the city to grant him a long-term lease on the Main Beach Parking Lot. Lepine proposes to build a hotel and retail/restaurant complex on the property. He also promises to build a multi-level parking facility to replace the lost public parking spaces.

The proposal seems to come out of nowhere and city commissioners say they are as surprised by the plan as anyone, although they seem receptive to the idea. In fact, there are reports that the city staff had been hawking the Lepine proposal to local business owners for weeks before the first public presentation. Many people suspect that some of the commissioners knew about the "Ocean Grand" before the meeting. Almost everyone else did.

Local media support the Lepine proposal. The Observer editorializes that redevelopment of the Main Beach Parking Lot would drive out "undesirables" from the beach area. Presumably, these are city residents who use the parking lot to go to the beach.

There is a running battle between local residents who like the beach the way it is and those who advocate "upscale" development. People who speak out against this plan are put down as a "negative minority."

In fact, there is an unexpectedly vocal and hostile reaction to the proposal by local beach activists. The commission says they will enact an ordinance that the land will not be sold or leased without voter approval.

Notwithstanding, citizens form a political action committee and get a charter amendment on the November 3d ballot. The referendum wins by a two-thirds majority.

Section 7.09 of the City Charter now provides that the sale, gift, trade, transfer or lease of city property having a value of more than $750,000 shall not be made without the approval of a majority of voters in a general or special election.

Lepine withdraws the hotel/parking garage proposal for the Main Beach Parking Lot.

1999. The city establishes the Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA) which covers much of the beach area and a largely commercial section of the city west of the Intracoastal. A principal feature of the CRA plan is to realign A1A by creating a new northbound-only lane. The entrance to the parking garage, if built, would probably connect to this new road. This innocuous looking plan could pave the way for extensive commercialization of the beach front area.

2000. The city proposes "Ocean Park," which would combine a parking structure with a commercial plaza large enough to accommodate 20 retail fronts. The plan also calls for a small park with an amphitheater and interactive fountain. The project would be developed by an unspecified private developer on the parking lot. A referendum is set for November, 2000.

The Ocean Park Referendum is defeated by a 60-40 voter margin. The city manager says the vote implies increasing public support for development of the Main Beach Parking Lot.

2001. Voters return all of the commissioners to office. (One did not run for re-election and two were unopposed.) They declare themselves, along with City Manager Larry Deetjen, the "Dream Team." Noland says her narrow victory, 41% against three opponents, is a clear victory for the city's vision for redevelopment of the beach area.

At the inaugural meeting of its new term, the mayor instructs the city manager not to conduct any more secret meetings with developers.

2002. A private investment group proposes to build a parking garage/retail complex on the former bank property near the beach business district. However, there is a deal with the city to take over the parking facility part of the project. The deal has been worked out secretly by City Manager Deetjen. When this deal comes to light, the plan implodes.

A new city plan calls for an 800+ space parking garage that would straddle the Main Beach Parking Lot and the Fire Station Lot. A contract is given to Gallo Architects to design the facility. Gallo is the business partner of Mayor Capellini in unrelated enterprises.

In the general election, two years from the date the Ocean Park proposal was defeated, voters pass another charter amendment that would limit the size of any parking garage built on the Main Beach Parking Lot to one story above ground. The amendment passes with close to a 75% majority.

At first, the commission refuses to acknowledge the vote. Finally, with Capellini and Trinchitella absent, they certify the election results and withdraw the design contract with Gallo. A citizens' group files suit against the Original Save Our Beach political organization and the city to overturn the amendment.

2003. The city commissions a traffic and parking study. Even though the report is not due until later in the year, the city decides that it is time to reinstate the contract with Gallo Architects. The vote has been delayed.

While the stated justification for a multi-level parking structure is usually couched in terms of parking requirements at the beach, the fact is that the project has no relationship to any present need for additional parking.

A look at the two previous proposals for the Main Beach Parking Lot and an analysis of conceptual plans developed with the CRA prove this. Neither the Lepine proposal nor "Ocean Park" would have provided a substantial net gain of parking spaces for beach users, but the projects themselves would have increased the demand for parking because of lodging and/or commercial features incorporated into the plans. It is clear that the purpose of a parking garage in this location, in combination with the new A1A northbound lane that would connect into it, is to accommodate the traffic that would be generated by increased, essentially commercial, activity in the area of the beach front from the North Pavilion south to S.E. 2d Street.

In the case of "Ocean Park" in particular, the claim by supporters that the complex would provide additional parking for the beach was as much a fraud as was the claim that the project was a public park.

In the first place, no one can honestly say that more parking is needed at the beach. No one can prove scientifically that more parking is needed the beach. Last year, we, with the help of some local residents, conducted a parking study of our own to determine if there was any basis for the widely-held belief that there is a shortage of parking at the beach.

We counted 773 public parking spaces at the beach. Since our study, additional spaces have been metered. We also found vacant lots, already city-owned land, that could accommodate as many as 70 additional public parking spaces at ground level. There are private or commercial spaces not included in this survey, and more are proposed.

We discovered, by an examination of parking meter revenues, that even the parking spaces available now to the public were utilized less than 15-25%, depending on which hours of the day are included in the calculation. That is to say, utilization is greater during the day hours than at night. Most public spaces remain open until 11 o'clock.

One thing that our study group was not equipped to look at scientifically is traffic on the barrier island and the causes of congestion. Obviously, the beach generates traffic, but it would be a leap in logic to conclude that a lack of parking generates traffic. A substantial increase in available parking opportunities at the beach would more likely induce traffic and aggravate congestion.

There are other things that contribute to traffic congestion. One is the pass-through traffic on A1A between Pompano Beach and Boca. Another is the "S" curve, the kink in the traffic hose. Third is the draw bridge, its capacity, its operation, and its location near other traffic bottlenecks. A large parking garage in this vicinity, on top of the private garages proposed for this area, is going to do nothing to alleviate these problems.

The real tragedy of the parking garage (you might say, well it's just a garage) is that once ground is broken, it is forever. Deerfield's beach, as most of us who have lived here for many years know it, will be lost. The relative peace and tranquility that makes the beach the exception may be a thing of the past as that area is commercialized.

On the political side of it, the relevant question is how many more times the current regime can defy the public will, and be excused. The plaque on the side of that parking garage, if it is built, could well be the epitaph for Mr. Deetjen and his city commission.

The results of our private parking study have been made public and are published on this web site. For those of you interested in knowing more about this subject, and in the sticky ethical issues in granting a major city contract to a business associate of the mayor, we invite you to read the following: