Comment Up
The Boynton Beach commission voted in a four story Holiday Inn out near Leisureville and Ocean Drive. Those residents who have spoken out against a commercial enterprise next door to their neighborhood have hired Ralf Brookes attorney. He is a legal expert in land use and development litigation.
If you recall, Mr. Brookes is also the attorney for Laurel Decker who was chair of the Respectful Planning Political Action Committee whose efforts kept the downtown of Lake Worth to 45 feet east of Dixie and 35 feet west to the Loop when the vote was won on March 12, 2013 by 55.86%. At this moment no one can build higher than 45 feet in downtown Lake Worth.
As one Leisureville resident, Sandy Peterson-Hardt, said, "It is the job of those (elected officials) who listen to the people to present their (residents) ideas to the developer...they have to determine what is right or wrong...that didn't happen." Sandy, we feel your pain. Elected officials represent themselves or come up with all sorts of excuses why a developer can do what he wants. The biggest one is "we can't stop development on private property."
Why can't cities tighten up their land development regulations, stop giving waivers and exceptions and protect residential neighborhoods as well as our waterfront skylines ( the chapel By the Sea in West Palm Beach comes to mind)? How do elected officials totally ignore people they represent and especially, in the case of Lake Worth, the vote?
I am not in favor of above 45 feet anywhere in the downtown and residential areas except for hotels in our hotel district. We need tourism dollars. But because of crime and blight I do not think hotels are in our immediate future. I wish Laurel would spend less time on heights and more on blight.
ReplyDeleteLaurel spent her time and money defending the majority of the voters on heights and the commission who went against the vote. Your remark is totally unfair.
ReplyDeleteAs far as blight, we have a cracker jack sheriff's department that is "fighting" crime in order to reduce some of the slum and blight that breeds crime. Look to them and your new 35 code ordinances in Code that are supposed to give this problem some teeth. Laurel didn't ask for blight and slum. No one in this city did.
So instead of putting down a citizen who actually put her money where her mouth is and did NOT use city tax dollars to stand up for principle, our LEADERS should be the ones coming up with solutions, not fighting private citizens who have the right to defend and protect our city from egregious acts of elected officials, a right given by the Constitution.
Lynn, your attacking someones respectful opinion gives your argument less credibility. I was not putting Ms. Decker down. I think the city has much greater problems than worrying about developers rushing to build. Put down! Read some of your sarcastic comments
ReplyDeleteInstead of getting into a hissy about this, your opinion was sarcastic towards Laurel Decker and I said it was unfair. You don't like that? You don't agree with that? Your right. Post under your name. Your opinion was respectful in your eyes only. Decker has every right to do what she did and to be concerned about heights in our downtown.
ReplyDeleteSo, as far as credibility is concerned, you are still anonymous. So much for credibility. You just didn't like my answer. Sorry about that.
The right and the outcome of a vote certainly is the most important thing. No matter what side you are on, you should admit that one truth.
ReplyDeleteI too am for the ability to go higher than 45 feet in our hotel district and nowhere else. (ok, maybe the Park of Commerce)
ReplyDeleteThat said, I am also in huge support of Laurel getting the opinion she seeks as to the validity of a law passed that is applied retroactively.
It is not the fault of the commission. They stated all along what they were for and we elected them with that platform.
The misguided idea that "they could have honored what the voters voted for" even when they were told by their legal advisor that they had every legal right to pursue what they voted 4 to 1 to accomplish, is absurd.
Lying liars and their lies on BOTH sides.
I'll support the judge's ruling.
Isn't this the same guy that got authorization to go to 65 feet but only wants to stay with what the property can do BY RIGHT? 45feet?
ReplyDeleteAnd if it is only 45 feet, what's the big complaint? It is perfectly situated off I-95 right you'd expect a hotel to go.
This is pure and simple NIMBY.
1. name the lies once and for all and don't give some bull.
ReplyDelete2. the Judge' ruling, whichever way it goes, does not negate the outcome of the vote because the commission could make it 45 feet right now--regardless, and you know it. So the Judge will make it all A-ok for you? This is not about Rick Scott and HB 357. It is about keeping our downtown a low-rise city.
3. The commission never once talked about heights in our downtown nor did they run on that platform. It was after they were in that they fired the entire P&Z board and put in their own people.
4. Your absurdity is not mine. what is absurd is the political game being played by this commission.
". I wish Laurel would spend less time on heights and more on blight."
ReplyDeleteExcuse me? WTF ?!
I WISH that jerks like YOU were more concerned about elected officials that spent 25, 000 dollars to prevent the citizens of Lake Worth from having a say on what the city that they pay taxes in looks like. I wish that JERKS like you cared more when previously mentioned PUBLIC SERVANTS ignore the majority of the voters in Lake Worth and tell all of us little peons to go screw themselves. Big brother and Sis know best.
I wish that VERY HIGHLY paid employees like Joan Oliva of the CRA (who spent millions on two county roads and forgot about the blighted neighborhoods surrounding these special roads) would carry out the CRA's mission, and Not the mission of her friends the developers that hang around this city like jackals.!
Laurel has donated countless hours of her time to sit on boards in this city. What the hell have YOU done? Facilitate the under the table payoffs that swirl around this "blighted" city? Laurel is not a paid employee of this city. She was never elected in this city to carry out the will of the people. BUT, Laurel is doing a hell of a lot better job of listening to the people than the paid city staff, the elected officials or YOU.
Katie Mcgiveron
" name the lies once and for all and don't give some bull."
ReplyDeleteI've named them several times and each time your bunch dismisses them as "bull". Lies like "unless you vote yes, you can have a 6 story building right next to your house" or "this will protect the whole city from those evil greedy developers" or "this won't affect the Gulfstream PROPERTY" (not the existing building because it's grandfathered.... duh)
So you can mince words as much as you want and call these assertions bull. You muddied the waters as much as anyone else.
" the commission could make it 45 feet right now--regardless, and you know it"
There you are right. But since they were against your proposal and feel the people were lied to in order to get your desired votes, they were within their legal rights to do what they did. If you don't like it, put some loser anarchist communist up again to kick them out and watch Lake Worth start declining again.
Yes, the Judge's decision will make it a-ok with me. It apparently is ALL about Rick Scott and the law that was passed.
It has very little to do with our "downtown" which is West of Federal Hwy. That is now at 45 feet and the only place 65 feet can happen is East of Federal Hwy.... not downtown. And THEN.... ONLY for a hotel and NO OTHER STRUCTURE. That is how it stands NOW.
If the judge rules in your favor, you will have won keeping a hotel virtually out of the picture for Lake Worth for the foreseeable future. You were told by professionals that we have blocks that are too small to build a adequate hotel with amenities and parking at 4 stories. (I guess they are liars too)
It IS a shame that we now have a P&Z board that has professionals in the fields that pertain to Planning and Zoning, and not a bunch of tree huggers and an avowed anarchist who voted against anything not an open space park that feeds poor people. Now the complaint is that the board is made up of greedy developers. This city needs to continue to build out and up to its potential, not dumb down further. We are already close to passing Belle Glade as the bottom of the barrel thanks to Jennings, Golden and Mulvehill. Varella and Clemons didn't help either. Oh, excuse me, didn't the three stooges put in their own people on the P&Z board too? Or did they just show up there?
Absurd is a good adjective.
Katie, what developer are you ranting about? You should have some proof for your wild allegations. I say worry about blight not height. Your comments were immature........Helen Dell
ReplyDeleteLies like "unless you vote yes, you can have a 6 story building right next to your house. That is a true statement.
ReplyDelete5:01, I disagree with just about everything you said and honestly and can't waste my time on this.
didn't the three stooges put in their own people on the P&Z board too? Or did they just show up there?
ReplyDeleteWho were the 3 stooges?
Immature? That's the best you can do? Really? I just shed a little tear for your incredible and obviously inescapable mediocrity. My comments were an incredibly insightful statement on the increasingly stinky state of affairs that this city is mired in. Letting the CHIPS fall where they may, it's a crying shame (and AGAIN a little tear is shed for you )that you can't get your head out of your ass, excuse me, I meant THE PAST Is there anything that you need to blame ex-Mayor Marc Drautz for?
ReplyDeletethe three stooges are Wes Blackman, Loretta sharp, and glen rice,,that's for starters.
ReplyDeleteTo WTF?!, you must have been having a meltdown when you wrote your comments. People in this city are concerned about crime and blight not a 6 story hotel.
ReplyDeleteWTF at 9:08. You guys are so confused that you don't know WTF you stand for. You fight the heights with lies and illegal banners, you postponed and moved the election 4 months later so that you could turn the tide. You almost did with lies. Sickening bunch of retards. People are more than concerned about slum and crime. Get your elected friends to do something about it. They have had 2 years now and have not done one damn thing. As far as heights, this city belongs to the people, not developers and their friends. So go smoke that in your funny little pipe.
ReplyDeleteTo wtf, I am not happy at all with our electeds. But I choose to be rational about it. What concerns me is leases at the casino, electric contract with Orlando, crime, slums, that it took channel 12 for the city to take action on blight and pot holes and citizens such as yourself all riled up about fictitious payoffs and developers at the gate. Maybe if you rode around the city 65 feet would not look so bad. You love the word lies but seem to hate the truth...... Helen Dell
ReplyDeleteHelen, let's start with truth--your real name? Don't know you.
ReplyDeleteThose who won the vote understand what they want and it was NOT for our downtown to grow higher. That is truth.
Lynn, yes you do write about crime and blight but that is overshadowed by your heights stance. You arguing about 20 feet is comical when the city is falling apart from neglect not development.....Helen Dell, maiden name.
ReplyDeletekatie, be careful, your comments are beginning to sound like dee.
ReplyDeleteComical? Tell that to all those who voted to keep our downtown low. Nothing comical about it. It is the bigger picture, Helen and the future. I take a stand on all issues. Heights is one of them but I believe I have written more on slum, blight and crime or even Obama. There is nothing comical about any issue we face either on a local level, state or national. Everything is serious and every decision brings consequences for you and for me.
ReplyDeleteThe city IS falling apart but development is not changing the slum, the blight and the crime. The CRA just spent $23 million and as said before, it did not make a dent on our problems. All it did was put money in the pockets of the developers, contractors, etc.
P.S. It was this commission that argued and wanted the additional 20 feet by changing the LDR's to 65. Tell them that they are comical and allow the vote. Thanks.
Lynn, you and I seem to agree on many things, except some height issues. My family who have been here since 1953 were against the Towers and the condos around the Gulfstream. So, yes we are against 65 feet everywhere except the hotel district. Grudgingly, we would support a 65 or 75 foot hotel as long as the cra had no stake in it. Our leaders have put us in a helluva hole. Affordable housing, electric contract, code neglect, leasing city owned buildings for little or no rent or utilities,making the casino unprofitable probably for decades, not including the pool in any plans, and the total neglect of streets etc. during the money years. Besides new leaders where do we start?
ReplyDeleteWhen we had all these fancy auditors, and during the out of whack inflationary period where we were bringing in tons of money, why didn't we follow the trail. How come so much of it went missing? How come, to this day, we still do not know what's going on at the utility as an example.
ReplyDeleteWe had better be damn careful with any new general obligation bond. I can see it now--all the renters and those with low property values who won't be affected will vote the damn thing in. The joke is on the few.
I am amazed to here people talk about a "hotel district" like that is the only issue that we were voting on when it came to height. This "hotel district" extended up and down lake and lucerne and north up to 2nd Ave. North and south to 2nd Ave. South threatening those of us who live in this area with a 6 story building next to a one story historic home.
ReplyDeleteWe don't need tall buildings in our single family historic neighborhoods. We already have a hotel and if that hotel needed a carve out for the lot directly to the west, well then that could have been proposed but that was not the proposal.
City voters voted and the commission ignored the will of the people.
1,800 original signatures 1,200 votes. With a little more light shed on your propaganda you would have ended up with 500 votes. There is not going to be any hotels or any buildings over 65 feet and your smart friends know it. They are just using you like a tool to keep this nonsense going until the next election so they can use it as yet another wedge issue because without wedge issues candidates like Jennings, Golden, Mulvehill, Mcoy and the previously mentioned carpetbagger drautz could never get elected.
ReplyDeleteWell it definitely pointed out what an unethical piece of work you were!! Even fined? Too bad it wasn't for much more money.
ReplyDelete