Commissioner Mulvehill's Revisionist History

Commissioner Suzanne Mulvehill is using FaceBook to promulgate misinformation such as the following statement and example.  This was in response to a resident who questioned the ability of someone to assemble smaller parcels of land that would be necessary to bring about the unattainable example that is being shown around town by the Respectful Planning PAC.  Apparently, this group does not respect the truth.

"Here's an example of a project where they were putting parcels together in the historic Bryant Park Neighborhood Association in 2006 to build 60 foot buildings from Lakeside Drive to Palmway on 3rd Avenue South running up several parcels. They were going to buy the parcels from the residents. You said that it can't be done - this shows it can be done. built."   Commissioner Suzanne Mulvehill, June 23, 2012

I happened to be chairman of the Planning, Zoning and Historic Resource Preservation Board at the time that this project appeared before us.  In the article, it references how the board DENIED a request to abandon an alley in July of 2006.  You can find the minutes of the meeting here.  It was one of the few times that I came late to a meeting due to another professional commitment, but you can see the detail of the board's action in the minutes - along with hearing what was said by those in the neighborhood about the project. The abandonment of the alley was a required precedent to the original unacceptable design of the project.  The project returned again in September (subject of the article) - I am unable to find the minutes of this meeting on the city's website, which unfortunately is not unusual.  The developer came back with a proposal to have a "catwalk" over the alley (to link two buildings) that was the subject of the previously denied abandonment request.  I remember the board, in response to neighborhood concerns as well as possible precedent setting an "alley crossover" - turned the project around again and sent it back for revisions.  It was never approved and it was never built. And, for what it is worth, the proposal was for a multi-family residential mix of three to five story buildings - not a monolithic 60 foot high building as depicted by the deceptive graphic being produced and distributed by our Commissioner Suzanne Mulvehill.

What actually happened is an example of the complexities of land assembly - there were parcels where owners were not willing to sell which contributed to the odd, unworkable design of the project.  It is also an example of a process where the private sector presented an application to change the built environment on a series of properties - which in the United States we are allowed to do.  Lake Worth is part of the United States of America.  There are people, however, that would like to deny the right of people to even apply for a change in the character of a property - see "champion tree" property.  Furthermore, it is an example of the interactive dialog that takes place between a developer, the public and the board appointed to protect the interests of the community.  Here it worked - this poorly designed and assembled project did not pass the test.  It died a quiet death - and without having the city being sued.

You will not hear the real story from Commissioner Mulvehill and her disciples - since this referendum is about dividing and scaring the public and giving her a position to grandstand during her upcoming re-election campaign.  If the referendum as written went into effect, the only likely difference would be that the 5 story portion would be limited to 4 stories - and one would think that the developer's incentive to have a 3 story portion may be less.  We would likely end up with a four story monolith.  A vast improvement?  No.