Comment Up
This was just another meeting that lasted 3 hours and 20 minutes that went no where. Commissioner Jennings had been trying to get the heights addressed in our Comprehensive Plan for a year now. Her presentation was thorough and reflected what the people want for this city--low density. It is always the same old thing—delay from the Delay Master himself. They say that we don't have a strong Mayor but at times it seems as if we do. And tonight was his birthday.
Phil Spinelli, Vice Chair of Planning & Zoning called Commissioner Jennings a liar—not once but three times. LIAR, LIAR, LIAR, he said. The Power Grab Group was there in force. I just can’t understand why they want high buildings. I had to hear how height restrictions will ruin their business. We all had to listen to every excuse they could dream up in order to get their way on more density. None of it convinced me.
If you just take The Lucerne Condominium as an example of how things can go wrong, then lower density is definitely in order. I liked the idea that was brought up of eliminating the public benefits option for a developer. We already see how the Lucerne benefited us. Just take it out of there at least for our downtown.
The Mayor, after five years of this stuff, wanted a “lot more study.” The City Manager just wanted to submit what we had to the DCA. With the motion, Staff will report back in one week regarding residential heights and establish a height for new construction in order to transmit to the DCA. The vote was 3 to 2 with Clemens and Lowe dissenting. I just can’t imagine why anyone would vote against that motion.
Jeff Clemens had better not even bat AN EYELASH at anyone in the audience after the disgusting outbursts that he allowed from Phil Spinelli last night.The moment the out of control jerk (Spinelli,not Clemens )pointed at Commissioner Jennings and shouted liar, Jeff should have kicked Spinelli's ass out of the building. When a fellow Commissioner makes a motion ,is it protocol for the Mayor to start talking ? And Jeff, we GET IT !!! You don't like height limits! We got it for THREE FRIGGIN HOURS !!!!And Joann, Cara, or Suzanne, would one of you PLEASE demand the gavel next time Jeff-the- bully starts to do his thing ?Joann, Suzanne,why did you two sit there like a couple of wooden dummies when Cara made the motion? Why no second ?Joann, why in the hell am I walking my neighborhood through heat and rain with your literature? It sure as hell isn't to watch you sit up on the dais like an unresponsive lump (or Retha Lowe,take your pick ).The Jeff Clemens/Susan Stanton "jerk-em-around"duet was in full swing last night. Stanton knows about how to word height restrictions. She was a city manager for 16 years, remember ?Unbelievable Katie Mgiveron
ReplyDeleteLynn,
ReplyDeleteI agree with you that we do need to have more decorum during the commission meetings. Phil seemed to let his emotions over ride his good sense during the meeting that I thought would never end. The height issue is a very personal thing for a lot of people in LW. With numbers and statistics you can spin just about everything in the direction you want with a little creativity. I also agree that no one wants LW to turn into downtown WPB. But if you counted the number of people who got up and spoke at Monday nights meeting (not filled out comment cards and left) the majority did not want the 25’/35’ limits Commissioner Jennings is suggesting. So should we say that that is what the majority of people want? You see it’s all in the way you spin the numbers. Once again I could not defend Phil finger pointing to Ms Jennings Monday night but I am saying that her public statement that The Lucerne was 82’ high was not true. The Lucerne is 65’ tall to the top of the parapet wall. Perhaps if you added the depth of the footer you might get a total of 80’, but you know, and she knows that that measurement has nothing to do with how tall a structure is, but once again its personal and political spin. So was Commissioner Jennings telling the truth about The Lucerne or was that,,, spin? Trying to focus more negative attention to the only new, energy efficient building built in our downtown in years. While we’re talking about The Lucerne, Laurence Mc, got up and publicly tried to once again make The Lucerne look out of place by stating that 50% of the units where either rentals or in foreclosure. Well, in the entire city LW more than 65% of dwellings are rentals, and if we added in foreclosures that percentage would be higher I’d bet. So once again more political spin. Wish we spent half as much time working on what people really seems to want instead of what the politician tell us what they think we want. Maybe then we could do something that the people really want; a clean, safe, affordable city that utilizes and maintains its resources for their intended and zoned uses.
Greg Rice
Thanks, Greg, for your response.
ReplyDeleteThe politically packed chamber was a direct result of Erin Allen's e-mail for her friends of like mind to attend the meeting and speak their concerns about height restrictions. Jennings did not do that the other night. She reserves her "packed chambers" to the illegal alien issue.
I thought that it was Golden who said it was 82" tall. Anyway, that was the original plan that was challenged by Mr. McNamara who got it down to 65 feet.
I don't agree with you that pointing out all the foreclosures and or rentals in The Lucerne is political spin. It is a fact.
This is an example of a building height that is inconsistent to our downtown and something that the majority feel is inappropriate there. It is where a developer promised certain things and did not deliver.
I am all for tall buildings at our Park of Commerce, taller buildings on Dixie. I am all for 3 stories from Dixie to Federal on Lake and Lucerne and for 4 stories west of Dixie on those roads. The Eco Centre looks perfect. But I am only one.
Anything smaller is better than taller in my opinion.
We have miles of road on Dixie where builders can come in. Let's see the Dixie Highway corridor and the Park of Commerce developed and leave our downtown heights lower.
I would point out that both Commissioner Jennings and Commissioner Mulvehill sent out mass e-mailings telling "their side of the story" and encouraging people to come to the meeting or e-mail the Commission.
ReplyDeleteWhile I cannot be sure, I believe that their e-mails reached more people than Erin Allen's e-mail. So I cannot accept that they too were not trying to pack the house.
By the way I believe, like you, that there are some places where taller buildings are appropriate and some places, where they are not. That is the crux of my problem with Commissioner Jennings proposed changes, they are too broad for well thought out development.
Tom McGow
To the people who fought so hard against the Super majority-Give yourselves a great big hug. You made the up coming height limits that will be in our Comp plan possible.We always wanted changes that were big enough to go into a Comp plan to be approved by a 4-1 vote,not a simple majority.Go give Tom and the chamber a big hug from me. Katie
ReplyDelete