OCEAN CITY — The iconic Ocean City Lifesaving Station Museum at the foot of the Boardwalk could see a significant expansion with a proposed two-story facility, but it might take a change in state law to accommodate it.
For decades, the Ocean City Lifesaving Station Museum has sat on the south end of the Boardwalk, offering a glimpse of life in the resort dating back a century or more with various exhibits and displays. The building was a working lifesaving station in the early 1900s and was moved to the end of the Boardwalk where it was converted to a museum.
It has remained unchanged for decades, however, and while the building maintains its quaint charm, the facility has somewhat outgrown is usefulness as a public museum. There are ADA issues that need to be addressed and the historic building is often bursting at the seams with various exhibits, offices, restrooms, a gift shop and other uses.
To that end, the Museum Society Board this week proposed a new two-story facility adjacent to and connected to the historic lifesaving museum at the foot of the Boardwalk. However, the new two-story facility is proposed for construction east of the Boardwalk and the existing museum, which will likely result in a complex approval process.
Current state law prohibits new construction east of the Boardwalk and might have to be changed to accommodate the project as proposed. There could also be an opportunity to construct the new facility to the north of the existing museum in an area along the east side of the Boardwalk between the museum and the tram station.
The new facility would allow for more exhibit space for artifacts and other pieces of Ocean City history that the board can’t fit into the cramped older building. Moving some of the exhibits currently warehoused into the new facility, along with moving the offices, the restrooms and the gift shop, and even some of the aquariums on site, could allow for the historic lifesaving station to be restored to its original purpose as a glimpse at a different era in the resort.
Museum Board President Nancy Howard explained the existing museum facility was in need of significant ADA upgrades with an estimated cost of $500,000. The proposed new facility would cost an estimated $1.8 million, which would be paid for with a commitment from the city, a variety of state grants and an aggressive capital campaign to solicit donations from the private sector. Howard explained the town will likely have to invest $500,000 in the ADA improvements, but a $600,000 commitment from Ocean City would likely help jumpstart the proposed new facility.
“The Museum Society board thought it would make more sense to leverage that amount into a two-story addition that will include the improvements as well as accommodate all current non-exhibit space in the museum building,” she said. “The two-story addition will also allow for a conference area on the second floor to accommodate meetings, classes, demonstrations and seminars. The envisioned addition will meet several recommendations outlined in the strategic plan.”
Museum Board member John Fager helped pitch the idea to the Mayor and Council. He said the lifesaving museum was an asset to the resort, but expanding with the new two-story addition could only enhance its value was cultural destination.
“The museum is a gem,” he said. “Ocean City has a lot of history, but much of it hasn’t been displayed. Basically, this facility has been the same for about 40 years. We need more exhibit space. We have offices that need to go, we have an aquarium that should more appropriately be somewhere else and we have a souvenir shop. All of that needs to go so we have more space for exhibits that are warehoused.”
Fager said tentative designs for the new facility had been prepared by architect Jeff Schoellkopf of The Design Group with an eye on the resort’s historic past.
“He grew up here,” he said. “He understands the history of Ocean City. He is the right guy for this project.”
For his part, Schoellkopf said the Ocean City Lifesaving Station Museum was in dire need of an expansion. He also said bumping the expansion out to the east would impact the Inlet parking lot somewhat, but not to a great extent.
“It’s probably the most iconic building in town, if not, certainly top five,” he said. “It’s been well cared for and it’s really more like the history of Ocean City museum. It’s also in a gem of a location and the views are spectacular. It’s a fairly small portion of the parking lot that would be impacted.”
Fager explained the proposed new facility would include about 7,000 square feet with 3,500 square feet on the first floor and 3,500 square feet on the second floor. The first floor would have some exhibit space, but also an expanded souvenir shop and other amenities. The second floor would have considerable space for changing exhibits or traveling exhibits. It could also be utilized as a catering space to accommodate up to 150 people for special events, receptions of exhibit openings, for example.
“We’re trying to do something to let that historic building stand on its own more,” he said. “We want to do something spectacular with the new building to highlight the ocean and everything Ocean City. That would free up the lifesaving museum to be more uncluttered and restored more to what is was originally.”
He also explained a unique feature in the proposed design.
“It will have a flat roof, which could be used as an observation deck at some point,” he said. “The views are spectacular of the ocean, the Inlet and Assateague. We’re also cognizant of our neighbors. It’s going to be a destination and an asset for Ocean City and the entire state.”
Fager said the total cost estimate for the expanded museum facility was around $1.8 million. He said the museum board was seeking a $600,000 commitment from Ocean City along with commitment from the town to be the facilitator for a plethora of possible state grants available for the project. The town would also work with the Maryland Department of Natural Resources (DNR), for example, on gaining approval to develop east of the Boardwalk.
“Timing is everything,” he said. “Right now, we have a situation that is optimal. There’s a lot of energy surrounding this project. People in Annapolis are very friendly to Ocean City right now and they are predisposed in a positive way to support this.”
Fager said at this point in the project, the board was looking for a financial commitment from the town along with an agreement to be the facilitator for possible state grants and the go-between with the DNR on the proposal to build the facility east of the Boardwalk.
“We need Ocean City to be the lead applicant,” he said. “The timeline for some of these grants is June or July. We have to have the city apply for the grants for us. This time for this is now. It’s been the same for 40 years.”
While the Mayor and Council certainly seemed receptive to the concept, they collectively had some issues and questions with the proposal, not the least of which was the plan to build to the east of the Boardwalk.
“The museum is an asset for Ocean City,” said Council President Lloyd Martin. “I’m just not sure about building east of the Boardwalk. I think that’s an important first step. We need to know if this can be done before we commit to it.”
Fager said it would likely require legislation, but didn’t anticipate any real pushback.
“The state law would have to be changed, but there is precedent for it,” he said. “We don’t anticipate any real opposition to this, but it will have to be changed legislatively. It can’t be done administratively by the DNR.”
Councilman Tony DeLuca said the Mayor and Council were preparing to work on a new strategic plan and tough decisions would have to be made on investing in capital projects.
“In two months, we’re going to start working on our strategic plan and for the first time ever, we’re going to have a financial strategic plan,” he said. “We haven’t really prioritized our capital projects plan, whether it’s a firehouse replacement, tram replacements or a new museum. It might be the right time in Annapolis, but it might not be the right time for our budget.”
Fager said even a tacit agreement or acknowledgement from the city would allow the project to go forward and any financial contribution could be determined at a later date.
“We’re just asking for a commitment and it can have any contingencies you want on it,” he said. “It can be subject to any conditions you wish. We just need a commitment so we can continue to go forward.”
Councilman Dennis Dare agreed there were some issues to consider, not the least of which was the town’s potential financial commitment at a time when other weighty capital projects were in the pipeline.
“We’re at a crossroads right now,” he said. “We just put off a firehouse replacement we’ve been planning for four years. I would submit two alternatives to the DNR including moving out to the east or you might want to consider that location to the north. Secondly, we have to consider the parking impact. We’re looking at 20 to 30 parking spaces that generate $40,000 to $50,000 per year. That has to be included in our equation.”
Councilman Wayne Hartman said any deeper discussion was contingent on getting approval to build the proposed expansion to the east. He made a motion to give the town’s blessing to the board to explore gaining approval to build the new facility east of the Boardwalk, a motion that passed unanimously.
“Every action as a reaction,” he said. “For us to try to figure this out today isn’t realistic. Finding out if it can even be done at that location to the east is an important first step.”
Delegate Mary Beth Carozza (R-38C) who represents Ocean City, agreed to be the facilitator for any effort to seek state grants and also the sponsor for any legislation that might be needed to allow construction east of the Boardwalk.
“This lifesaving museum is a gem,” she said. “I want to assure you wherever we are with this, I am committed to being the liaison with the state. I agree figuring out where to site it is a necessary next step. If Ocean City will make a commitment, I will go back to the state and explore all of the funding sources. If it does require legislation, those bills take a lot of time and effort, but wherever I can be helpful, I’m committed to doing that.”
