Riviera Beach CRA hears resident demands for resilience, binding community benefits as developer selection is scheduled

The Riviera Beach Community Redevelopment Agency on Tuesday discussed next steps for selecting a developer for the Marina Village Phase 2 project after an evaluation committee failed to meet, and heard residents call for binding resilience standards, enforceable community benefits and greater local hiring.

Staff told the board the seven-member evaluation committee did not convene because one member did not attend and proposed adding an eighth person as an alternate to avoid future delays. Staff described possible dates for presentations and board selection, referring to Feb. 25 and March 11 as options, and said the board’s role at the decision meeting would be to hear evaluation-committee recommendations, listen to developer presentations and then make a selection.

The meeting’s public-comment period focused on how the Marina project will protect residents and public assets. Julie Botel, a Singer Island resident and member of the board of Sustainable Palm Beach County, urged the CRA to require that developer proposals explicitly reflect the city’s vulnerability analysis and to document which sea-level-rise projections, storm-surge assumptions and design lives drive building placement and elevation. “Are those references tied to specific sea level rise projections and defined design life, and will those standards be clearly documented and required?” she asked.

Resident Robert “Captain Bob” Silva pressed the board to convert aspirational community-benefit language into enforceable commitments. Silva asked whether developers will be required to fund or otherwise contribute to additional affordable or workforce housing beyond what is already planned, to set clear expectations for hiring Riviera Beach residents — not only during construction but for permanent jobs — and to ensure public access to the waterfront. “Community benefits work best when they are clearly defined, contractual, committed, transparency enforced,” Silva said.

Another resident, J.B. Dixon, criticized the board for insufficient public notice when the agenda changed, saying some people planned other obligations and were not informed. Staff replied that the evaluation committee had been established months earlier and that reminders, emails and phone calls were made to invitees; staff said they will work to ensure future meetings proceed with alternates on standby.

A speaker who identified himself as a developer, Dr. Spierdi, told the CRA that federal funding and insurance rules effectively require strict FEMA resiliency standards for coastal projects and suggested the executive director include explicit resiliency requirements in future RFPs and RFQs. “You cannot get… funding of any of these projects if you do not follow the resiliency requirements of FEMA,” he said.

Board members emphasized the need to protect local culture and to make the development benefit Riviera Beach residents and businesses. No final developer was selected at the meeting; staff said they will continue to coordinate scheduling for presentations and the evaluation committee’s work.

Next steps: staff will work with the manager to set a date for the evaluation-committee presentations and selection process and to add an alternate to the committee to preserve quorum; no formal selection vote was recorded at this meeting.