Newport council must consider new hall proposal

We are not about to say that the Newport Beach City Council should decide to build a new city hall on land above the Central Library. But is it unreasonable to take a look at the site?

During the past few weeks, Newport Beach architect Bill Ficker has been circulating a plan for a modest city hall building on land that is set to become a city park off Avocado Avenue ? an appalling idea to the good people in the city who have fought long and hard to keep parks and open space from being gobbled up as the city developed.

This land, 12 acres of natural habitat that one opponent of Ficker’s plan calls “an oasis,” came to the city from the Irvine Co. as part of an agreement that allowed the company to build in other parts of town. In a trade of sorts, open space activists got a little bit of “oasis” in exchange for losing it elsewhere. In a city where parks and open space are precious and too few, environmentalists thought here, at least, they had won the battle.

The City Council, while searching for possible sites for a new city hall, ruled out the Avocado site back in December ? understandably so. The city has committed to building a park there, and a donor even has come forward willing to cover much of the cost of construction. It is a commitment, like any, that should not be broken lightly.

But should it be broken nonetheless? Times, and needs, change. The city needs a new city hall, and Ficker’s proposal, if it could really be done for free and if it really had overwhelming support from the community, demands serious consideration. Perhaps at this point, a city hall on part of the land ? while keeping as much as possible open and filled with natural plant life ? is in the best interest of the city. Perhaps it is not.

Ficker’s plan certainly has put this question into play, where it wasn’t before ? certainly not back in December when the council dropped the land from consideration. Is it reasonable to ask that question? We think so.

We also think that it is not a question city leaders should linger over for long. We understand that delays on beginning construction will cost money, and we know that the City Council is set to go ahead with plans for a new city hall at the present site on the Balboa Peninsula. That decision could come as soon as Tuesday night.

At that meeting, however, city leaders should make it clear why Ficker’s plan is not the way they want to go ? if that is what they decide. The reasons should be substantive, honest and worthy of the community they represent.

Just as city leaders have shown good faith with the supporters of the planned park, they need to demonstrate good faith with those in the community who back Ficker’s plan.