SEARCH RESULTS

22 July 2009

City traffic bureaucrats reject Ashby again

The River Oaks Examiner reports that the City of Houston has, for the tenth time, rejected plans from the Ashby high-rise developers:

Plans for the Ashby high-rise were rejected for the 10th time Tuesday with the city saying its own traffic evaluation now shows the projects impact would push the Bissonnet Street at Shepherd Drive intersection to nearly an “F” level.

[snip]

The rejected plans were submitted April 7, making the three months until they were returned to the developers unusually long.

Developer Matthew Morgan had said Friday the length of time that passed was “somewhat unorthodox” and that Buckhead partners would resubmit plans prior a receiving decision from the Public Works Department.

It's interesting that this development has effectively been put on hold by the city's traffic bureaucrats because Level of Service (LOS) allegedly declines to F for one intersection, yet the city's traffic bureaucrats remain mute on unbelievable METRO traffic estimates that lane closures, turn restrictions, interlining, and signal issues will have NO impact on downtown traffic mobility (see Coming soon to downtown: A train-traffic-pedestrian-infrastructure adventure only METRO could love).

Unfortunately, this is what can happen when what should be a technocratic bureaucracy begins to serve political interests instead of the public interest. It's not a good precedent that has been set by the White Administration.

BLOGVERSATION: Swamplot.

Posted by Kevin Whited @ Ashby again"> 07/22/09 10:13 PM | Houston Miscellany | Technorati | Comments (7)

01 March 2009

Swamplot: Ashby high-rise developers rejected again

The invaluable Swamplot blog posts an update on the Ashby high rise project, whose developers saw their latest proposal rejected (unsurprisingly) by city bureaucrats who understand very well that Mayor White doesn't want the plans approved.

Swamplot notes that the Chronicle's Mike Snyder has blogged that since one definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result, perhaps the developers have just been trying to build a record for a lawsuit all along. Well, Snyder doesn't quite blog that -- rather, unnamed "observers" are said to feel this way. Snyder further notes,

The developers are portraying this case as an example of heavy-handed and inequitable city regulation that all developers should worry about.

A more thoughtful criticism is that some of us are worried about non-transparent government that seemingly changes the rules in the middle of the game because certain elites in the city have the mayor's cellphone number and don't want high-density development in their neighborhood.

Swamplot also notes that in contrast to Snyder, the Houston Business Journal does not downplay the changes proposed by the developers:

In order to address traffic concerns, Buckhead recently made some changes to the project design and commissioned an expanded traffic study.

Under the new plan, the Ashby driveway would only be used as an emergency exit. Buckhead also relocated the main driveway on Bissonnet to the center of the project, instead of having it on the east end of the site.

“It optimizes the traffic movements in and out of the driveway from both directions,” Morgan says.

All quibbling about the extent of the changes aside, we do concur with Snyder's characterization in this sense: it is indeed insane to think that any bureaucrat is going to sign off on the last roadblock to this project so long as Mayor (Boss Hogg?) White remains in office and he (and fellow elites) remain opposed to it. We know how The Houston Way works.

Posted by Kevin Whited @ Ashby high-rise developers rejected again"> 03/01/09 08:43 PM | Houston Miscellany | Technorati | Comments (0)

05 February 2008

Anti-Ashby high-rise ordinance might not stop high-rise, pleases no one

The Chronicle's Mike Snyder reports that nobody seems very happy over the current status of legislation that Mayor White rushed forward in response to the demands of affluent political constituents:

The city of Houston's high-density development ordinance, the focus of intense lobbying and hundreds of hours of work over the past three months, doesn't satisfy either the development or neighborhood interests helping to write it.

A look at its latest version shows that the measure wouldn't stop the Ashby high-rise, the project that inspired it. It wouldn't apply to any other planned development project in Houston, although it might affect future projects. Some of the developers and neighborhood activists working on it say it has little value.

Late last week, city officials decided the measure needs additional work and delayed its presentation to the City Council for two weeks and perhaps as long as a month. The council had been expected to review the measure this week.

"It seems to me that the current draft is going to make no one happy," said Kendall Miller, a shopping center owner who serves on a committee advising the city about the ordinance.

Jane Cahill, a neighborhood activist who also serves on the panel, said the costs of enforcing the latest draft would far outweigh any benefits.

Cahill said she was dismayed to hear Andy Icken, a deputy city public works director, say recently that the ordinance represents a "rifle" rather than a "shotgun" approach to development issues.

"A rifle aims a single bullet at a single target," Cahill said. "Aiming an ordinance at a single project is not a good way to develop public policy."

No, it is not.

But certain well-connected constituents demanded that Mayor White jump, and jump he did. We happen to think the mayor is pretty shrewd -- maybe he figured all along that this approach wasn't going to be all that effective, but that he'd still get credit for trying.

BLOGVERSATION: Off the Kuff, Inside Central Houston.

Posted by Kevin Whited @ Ashby high-rise ordinance might not stop high-rise, pleases no one"> 02/05/08 12:45 AM | Houston Miscellany | Technorati | Comments (8)

13 January 2008

Mayor White warns Council to stick with his agenda

Did you see Carolyn Feibel's post last week on Chron.com's City Hall blog, about Mayor White's warning to the new city council?

Bill White began today with a little lecture to the newly-constituted council. He laid out three rules of diplomacy for everyone to follow, while half-apologizing if he came off as schoolmarmish.

Nevertheless, White made clear he wants council members to do their homework, read reports, go to committee meetings, and traffic in specifics, not loose rhetorical generalities.

His strongest admonition: don't exaggerate!

When giving examples of unacceptable exaggeration, White seemed to be alluding to the growing controversy over the 23-story Ashby high-rise proposed near Rice University, and the city's consideration of a traffic ordinance to limit its density.

Translation: Let my communication team set the agenda and the tone for issues, especially divisive ones.

Mayor White has to be especially relieved that Addie Wiseman has been term-limited out of Council.

Mayor White's warning comes off as heavy-handed considering councilmembers are elected by their constituents, not the mayor. Councilmembers answer to their constituencies, not Mayor White. But as we have seen in his previous two terms, Mayor White is a master at building consensus behind the scenes, and if he can't build a consensus (a rarity!), he won't press forward with an issue. Most of all, though, he does NOT appreciate surprises.

White also seemed to make a preemptive statement against those who might contend he is interfering in the Ashby high-rise plan because the neighborhood is home to politically active, influential and affluent residents.

"The most modest citizen and the most humble dwelling has every right of the most powerful citizen, no matter how much money they have," White said, apropos of nothing, it seemed.

Might that be directed at Councilman Jarvis Johnson, who said this when the initial Ashby high rise brouhaha erupted?

But Councilman Jarvis Johnson, who represents District B in northeast Houston, said residents of the poor and working-class neighborhoods he represents had a difficult time getting a sympathetic ear at City Hall when they complained about single-family housing developments with no parks or other amenities.

"The city said there were standards that we set that (the developers) followed," he said. "How can this community (Southampton) push the envelope so much?"

It's not hard to figure out why Southampton residents are getting preferential treatment, no matter how hard Mayor White and his press office try to characterize it otherwise.

Posted by Anne Linehan @ 01/13/08 07:52 AM | Houston Politics | Technorati | Comments (3)

28 July 2008

Chron: White administration abandons density ordinance

The administration of Mayor White, who has made a mockery of due process in the Ashby high-rise matter (while still delivering for the well-heeled on their issue and blocking permits previously issued), has apparently decided to punt on a new ordinance to deal with the issue of dense developments in residential neighborhoods, and stick with an outdated driveway ordinance never designed to deal with the issue:

Last week, however, the official who has been the public face of White's administration during the controversy recommended that the city stop its work on a high-density development ordinance.

Instead, the city should continue to rely on a 60-year-old law governing where driveways connect to public streets, with additional guidelines on how the city will apply the measure to ensure that projects do not cause severe traffic congestion, said Andy Icken, a deputy public works director.

This is leadership?

Posted by Kevin Whited @ 07/28/08 10:53 PM | Houston Miscellany | Technorati | Comments (14)

29 May 2008

More adventures in Ready-Fire-Aim governance

Local media have recently reported on affluent residents of the Rivercrest subdivision who have conveniently (and rapidly!) secured public works improvements to cut down on the riff-raff blowing down their streets.

Mayor White, predictably, denies that the affluent residents of Rivercrest received any sort of special treatment from the city (certainly there's NO precedent for such shocking behavior!).

KTRK-13's Miya Shay, who reports that other local homeowners visited Council yesterday to make their displeasure with the "not-special treatment" known, doesn't seem to be buying into the Mayor's talking points:

Forgive me for being a little cynical about how this was handled... We have a very quiet, expensive street on the west side called E. Rivercrest. The homes are gated, the houses are expensive, and there are some very rich people who live there. About a year ago, we began hearing rumblings that the owners on that street want the road closed off. A number of media did stories on this.

Fast forward to this month, when, all of the sudden, people who live around Rivercrest noticed the street was being closed off! Oh wait.. it wasn't being "closed off" but just a very long egress was being built. It's all meant to cut down on cut-through traffic. While it made homeowners along Rivercrest happy, neighbors on either side of the street are really against it. They turned out in force at City Council. Their main complaint: nobody told us, and now we're getting all their traffic... it's not fair.

Hammered by upset neighbors, Mayor Bill White says the city did not operate "covertly" to help out the homeowners on Rivercrest. I haven't figured out why council member Pam Holm didn't know anything about the project, if it wasn't covert. It's also interesting that both the state representative for the area and his opponent came out against this build out. State Rep. Jim Murphy and Kristi Thibaut both say the build out should be removed. Murphy even sent a letter on state stationary. What happens now? Will the Mayor stand firm, or will the city back track?

The Mayor will stand firm, of course. He doesn't like to be challenged by mere reporters, stakeholders, citizens, state legislators, etc. And he especially doesn't like to be challenged on the more egregious examples of Ready-Fire-Aim governance gone bad (think Ashby and the Center Serving Persons with Mental Retardation). Always keep in mind that Chairman White knows best, and you can pretty much figure out whether he'll back down when challenged on a given issue.

Posted by Kevin Whited @ 05/29/08 09:58 AM | Houston Miscellany | Technorati | Comments (1)

23 August 2009

City notifies media of Ashby highrise decision, neglects to inform developers

Last week, the city's public works department did what many astute political agencies have done over the years, and dropped some controversial news into the perceived weekend media black hole.

In a press release, director Andy Icken informed the developers of the Ashby highrise local media that the most recent revisions to the proposed Ashby highrise development met his approval, sufficiently reducing estimated traffic to allow the developers to move forward. Icken also informed that his decision was partly motivated by the desire to avoid litigation, making it as much a political decision as a technocratic one -- not that the continued politicization of an ostensibly technocratic agency comes as any surprise to blogHOUSTON readers.

Michael Reed, whose reporting on this topic has been invaluable, got this great quote from the developers on Friday:

“We don’t know what kind of mood to be in. It’s kind of bittersweet,” Morgan said. “We found out from you. Thank you for the press release (forwarded from the city).”

Mayor Bill White, of course, came to oppose the development after affluent neighbors voiced their displeasure with him, and his administration managed to delay it for quite some time.

We're not entirely sure why Mayor White, in the last months of his administration and busily campaigning for another office, decided to let this latest proposal go through. Perhaps he decided it will be the next mayor's problem.

City Controller Annise Parker immediately made her bid to be the champion of the well-heeled anti-highrise crowd, criticizing the decision and arguing that a new ordinance is needed to govern such developments. Councilmember Peter Brown took time out from his vacation in France to tweet about the decision. Gene Locke... wants everyone to know he has the endorsement of the Houston Police Officers Union, but perhaps he has since issued a statement and we just missed it*.

NEWS COVERAGE: Chronicle, KIAH-39, KRIV-26, KHOU-11, KPRC-2.

[Read More]

Posted by Kevin Whited @ Ashby highrise decision, neglects to inform developers"> 08/23/09 10:50 PM | Houston Miscellany | Technorati | Comments (3)

24 August 2009

Linkpost: 08/24/09

It's past time to clear out the backlog of local blog links. Have fun clicking!

Posted by Kevin Whited @ 08/24/09 09:17 PM | Houston Blog Talk | Technorati | Comments (0)

13 January 2008

Lack of data won't hinder city's effort to stop Ashby high rise*

As he noted here, Neal Meyer has written a post about a meeting he attended last week regarding the Ashby high-rise ordinance Mayor White is pushing at the behest of Southampton residents. (Did any local media attend the meeting?)

What stands out is how capricious and ill-defined this ordinance seems to be. Not to mention that it will move broad powers from elected officials to the city's public works director -- an alarming thought, indeed, after you read some of the things the public works representative had to say.

Anyway, give it a read, and be glad someone attended the meeting and wrote about it!

(*The title refers to an answer given by an official in response to a question: "We don't know yet. We are limited by the lack of data."

Remember, this is an ordinance Mayor White attempted to fast-track ... when the city lacked data.)

KEVIN WHITED ADDS:

That's a good essay by Neal Meyer that ought to be read in its entirety.

Two snippets in particular really caught my eye, though.

[Read More]

Posted by Anne Linehan @ Ashby high rise*"> 01/13/08 07:36 PM | Houston Politics | Technorati | Comments (1)

28 February 2008

Mayor unveils latest strategy to curry favor with anti-Ashby highrise constituents

One of our early objections to the poorly-considered ordinance that Mayor White proposed when well-heeled constituents demanded he stop the Ashby high rise was the amount of discretionary power that it would have bestowed on unelected bureaucrats.

Since the development of that ordinance has pleased nobody so far, Mayor White has since unveiled an even more capricious plan to use an antiquated driveway law to hinder development that somebody, somewhere, might find objectionable (at least until he can win approval for the other ordinance to empower unelected bureaucrats with discretionary power to hinder development). The Chronicle's Carolyn Feibel reports:

The driveway law dates back to 1940, though its current form began to take shape in 1968. White acknowledged that reviving this broadly worded law might have a "chilling" effect on growth, so he circulated a memo Wednesday with criteria on how it would be applied. The memo said developments that meet three criteria will receive "more intense scrutiny" of their traffic loads. The criteria are:

•A location where 60 percent or more of the properties within a 500-foot radius are residential
•Driveways that feed onto local or collector streets instead of a major thoroughfare
•A net increase of 50 additional vehicles going to and from the development during rush hours.
To mitigate the traffic effects, developers might have to add turning lanes or lights, scale back the number of apartments, or change the type of stores, White said.

Enforcement comes from the city's power to reject a site plan, which shows where driveways connect to public streets.

The city will use these "interim procedures" while gathering public comment through July 1, the memo said. By Aug. 1, the city will issue a new proposal for regulating traffic from high-density developments. But it was unclear if this meant a new ordinance or the adjustment or tightening of current ordinances or policies.

"We are listening to everybody's concerns," Councilwoman Anne Clutterbuck said. "It's an extremely complex process, and one size does not fit all."

Pardon us for being crude for a moment, but a better description of this confused political process actually rhymes with the councilmember's last name.

Alas, this is yet another example of the "leadership" coming from City Hall these days.

Posted by Kevin Whited @ Ashby highrise constituents"> 02/28/08 09:36 PM | Houston Miscellany | Technorati | Comments (2)

29 October 2008

City kills largely ignored bike registration law

City Council today repealed a mostly ignored law requiring citizens to register bicycles. Here is some background on the archaic law:

The law requires owners to register their two-wheelers at a local fire station for $1 and place a little license sticker on the bike.

"This is something that I think is sporadically done," said Randy Zamora, the city's chief prosecutor. "And I think the firemen have better things to do."

Why the law was passed in 1968 remains a mystery, though city officials guess it was meant to deter theft and track stolen bicycles.

[snip]

Police officers do still occasionally write tickets for unregistered bikes, Zamora said. Since April 2006, officers have written 206 citations. The fine is only $5, but includes $67 in court costs. Zamora said he doesn't enforce the law.

"Most of the time the officer doesn't come (to testify), or we dismiss it," he said.

It would be great if even more of the city's archaic and/or ineffective laws could be repealed -- likely including some passed by this mayor, not to mention the archaic driveway ordinance currently being (mis)used to constrain the Ashby high-rise development.

Posted by Kevin Whited @ 10/29/08 10:46 PM | Houston Miscellany | Technorati | Comments (8)

02 March 2008

No Mayor White riding to the rescue?

Not all Houston residents can count on Mayor White to intervene when a developer proposes building a high-density project (via the Chronicle):

A San Antonio developer of low-income, multi-family apartments has plans to build a $26 million complex with 252 one- to four-bedroom units on South Gessner, between West Bellfort and McGee Lane, using $13 million in tax credits and private funding.

Some southwest Houston residents, however, are opposing the plans to build Costa del Rey, citing the approximately 96 apartments already saturating the 3-mile radius of the proposed site with tenants who place a heavy burden on area schools, law enforcement and infrastructure.

[snip]

Elaine Gascamp, president of the Super Neighborhood No. 36 and the city's Super Neighborhood Alliance, and director on the Brays Oaks Management District, said the area is Houston's second-highest in density only to Greenspoint.

She said the new proposal would place the complex in one of the area's most densely populated neighborhoods — on South Gessner across from Welch Middle School and adjacent to Mount Olive Baptist Church.

Gascamp said she was not mollified by NRP's assurances that Costa del Rey would only accept qualified professionals and others who earned near the $27,000 to $47,000 mark, since area schools are already at capacity and local police are stretched to deal with the existing population.

These South Gessner residents must be an example of the "low-income residents who might have less time or inclination to vote and take part in civic affairs" that the Chronicle editors described when they defended Mayor White against charges of favoritism in the Ashby high rise brouhaha. They shouldn't hold their breath that Mayor White will provide any assistance.

Posted by Anne Linehan @ 03/02/08 12:40 PM | Houston Politics | Technorati | Comments (6)

01 November 2009

In defense of growth in Houston

KEVIN KIRTON presents his perspective on Houston growth and planning in a Chron op-ed today. Here's an excerpt:

People often assume there is no plan, and nearly any discussion of this topic these days includes a reference to our project at 1717 Bissonnet, mislabeled by opponents as the "Ashby high-rise," as an example of the need for more rules. What is often overlooked is that there is a plan; there are chapters of existing development regulations. The problem is that, in our case, city leaders have chosen simply not to follow them.

In a letter published in the newspaper earlier this week (scroll down), Kendall Miller of Houstonians for Responsible Growth offered related thoughts:

When it comes to land-use controls, Houston relies primarily on deed restrictions and lets the marketplace steer growth. This seems very odd to those who believe government knows best, but in every other city where land use is strictly controlled by government, three things happen: Prices go up dramatically, unexpected development occurs outside boundary lines, and corruption at City Hall finds an incubator.

Please be sure to click over and read both. These perspectives are sometimes underrepresented in straight news stories, so at least they are getting some play on the Chron opinion page and blogs. It's still surprising that the HRG website hasn't been a more active outlet.

Posted by Kevin Whited @ 11/01/09 09:50 PM | General | Technorati | Comments (0)

11 November 2007

Lifestyles of the well-heeled (cont'd)

Following the big election, Mayor White and his Council got back to business this week, deciding to postpone consideration of an "emergency" ordinance that was hastily crafted by the mayor to placate influential constituents from a wealthy part of town. As Mike Snyder reports for the Chronicle, the decision to postpone the ordinance came in response to the developers agreeing to postpone their efforts:

The council postponed voting on the ordinance after the developers, Matthew Morgan and Kevin Kirton of Buckhead Investment Partners, agreed in writing not to seek any additional permits during the 90-day delay.

Morgan and Kirton said their agreement to halt the project for 90 days was prompted in part by concerns expressed by other developers.

"We believe we have an obligation to other developers in this city, as more and more ad hoc rules continue to be proposed for the development of private property," Morgan said. "We were willing to make this short-term sacrifice for the good of the industry and the community."

The mayor said he had initially put the ordinance on a fast track — it was drafted and placed on the council agenda within a few weeks [1] — because the developers insisted on moving their project forward despite concerns about its impact on traffic. Their agreement to wait, White said, allows time to review parts of the ordinance needing more work.

Morgan and Kirton said Wednesday that other developers had expressed concern about the potential impact of the ordinance on projects they were planning. These concerns were the subject of a meeting White held with several developers and builders last week.

Jeff Gray, president and founder of Grayco Partners, a multi-family development firm, said the Bissonnet project and its reaction at City Hall had generated considerable discussion among some of his industry colleagues. Some developers were concerned that the ordinance gave too much authority to the public works director to require changes in projects, he said. [2]

"If there's going to be a new standard, they just don't want it to be arbitrary and left to the discretion of a city department head," Gray said.

With regard to Note 1: Didn't Mayor White previously insist that the wealthy, politically connected anti-Ashby high-rise people had received no special treatment? Except here, he admits they did. The Mayor's communications team seems to be sending conflicting messages! Of course, even absent the Mayor's admission, it is fairly obvious that the Mayor put this ordinance on an "unusually fast" (to quote the Chronicle) track, bypassing the usual vetting process.

And that takes us to Note 2: In the haste to throw together an emergency ordinance to benefit a wealthy, politically connected constituency, the Mayor and Council seemed ready to transfer a considerable amount of discretionary power to the city's public works director, with no real analysis of potential consequences and ramifications. As we have noted previously, that is not the best way to make policy.

Finally, we see that Mayor White has written to the Chronicle today, to argue with citizens who dare suggest that the hastily crafted anti-Ashby high rise ordinance amounts to special treatment for a wealthy, politically connected constituency:

In this section in the Chronicle, several citizens have asserted that this administration has moved more aggressively on an ordinance to blunt the traffic impacts of high-rise developments because one of those developments threatens a higher-income neighborhood. That is not true. The vast bulk of the neighborhood protection activity during this administration — as measured by spending, personnel and new laws — has dealt with chronic problems in some of the city's most neglected neighborhoods. We moved swiftly, for example, to shut down two apartment buildings with health violations in moderate- to low-income areas.

Note the rhetorical technique employed: "The accusation we have engaged in A is not true, because we have engaged in B." Of course, that formulation falls apart if both A and B can be true. We don't dispute that the White Administration has boosted neighborhood protection activities, as he suggests. But -- back to Note 1 -- even the Mayor admits that he put the concerns of a well-heeled constituency on a fast track. He may even have thought there were important reasons to do so that aren't crassly politically (we aren't mind readers, so we can't claim to know). But the fact is, a well-heeled constituency did receive special treatment, and developers who thought they had followed the pertinent regulations to develop their property have effectively seen the value of their investment reduced because Mayor White produced a punitive (unvetted) ordinance with unprecedented haste in response to the demands of wealthy, politically connected constituents.

At least the delay offers the Mayor and his Council a chance to reconsider the hastily-crafted, punitive ordinance, and to vet it with some semblance of a deliberative process.

Perhaps. The anti-Ashby high rise organizers don't sound too pleased about additional deliberations over their ordinance:

Neighborhood leaders said they were gratified that the mayor had reinforced his determination to block the project. But they were concerned about what might happen during a 90-day delay.

Leaders of other neighborhoods with concerns about negative effects of proposed developments might try to get their issues included in the ordinance, making its impact so broad that it becomes politically untouchable, said Chris Amandes, an attorney who co-chairs a task force of leaders of the Southampton and Boulevard Oaks neighborhoods adjoining the project site.

To quote Slampo: "In other words, Away with your wagon and other nettlesome development issues. This is our ordinance."

And that concludes our latest Lifestyles of the Well-Heeled update.

Posted by Kevin Whited @ 11/11/07 12:55 PM | Houston Miscellany | Technorati | Comments (5)

07 October 2007

Density is great (except when it's in the neighborhoods of the powerful)

The opening of a 4 October Chronicle story by Mike Snyder and Nancy Sarnoff on the fight over a proposed high-rise in an affluent neighborhood provides some entertainment:

Two days after Mayor Bill White pledged support for residents fighting a planned high-rise building near Rice University, city officials withdrew their approval of the developers' traffic impact analysis of the project.

This reversal of the city's position, the mayor's personal involvement and the announcement that prominent attorney Rusty Hardin would represent the opponents have reinforced concerns that affluent, politically connected neighborhoods enjoy an advantage over others in Houston's frequent land-use battles.

[snip]

White and other city officials denied that the Southampton and Boulevard Oaks neighborhoods near the site at 1717 Bissonnet had received any special treatment.

Right!

Just like well-connected Yellow Cab and Jason Yoo received no special treatment in their sweetheart airport deals. *wink*

ANNE ADDS: Yesterday, the Chronicle's editorial board came out swinging for the wealthy and influential:

Influential opponents of the Ashby Tower have won considerable support at City Hall and are represented by prominent litigator Rusty Hardin. Their clout has led some Houstonians to charge favoritism and inequity.

Well, of course. Well-heeled, civically active voters wield more influence than low-income residents who might have less time or inclination to vote and take part in civic affairs. Human nature is not easily repealed, but that's not all bad in a democracy in which politicians are supposed to consider their constituents' concerns.

Wow! It's not often we see that kind of elitism on display!

The problem is that Mayor White apparently hasn't been so willing to consider other constituents' concerns, according to Councilman Jarvis Johnson:

But Councilman Jarvis Johnson, who represents District B in northeast Houston, said residents of the poor and working-class neighborhoods he represents had a difficult time getting a sympathetic ear at City Hall when they complained about single-family housing developments with no parks or other amenities.

"The city said there were standards that we set that (the developers) followed," he said. "How can this community (Southampton) push the envelope so much?"

Because they have money and clout, apparently. Which the Chron's editorial board says is a-okay.

BLOGVERSATION: Slampo's Place, Lose an Eye, It's a Sport (more).

Posted by Kevin Whited @ 10/07/07 05:07 PM | Houston Miscellany | Technorati | Comments (17)

09 August 2009

Witness Mayor White's business expertise

You know how Mayor White loves to talk about how he runs the city like a business?

He's fond of using his management experience as a selling point in his senate campaign. Today's Chronicle story of how the feds raided a Southeast Houston waste facility contains a nice little example of that expertise:

The city sued the company in January, initially seeking to temporarily shut down the Griggs plant.

Houston Mayor Bill White
The two sides settled the next month, with CES agreeing to pay the city more than $100,000 to move some operations away from the facility and to put an end to the odors.

[snip]

Last week, Mayor Bill White defended the city's oft-questioned decision to settle with CES.

“We took action which was pretty aggressive, at least by historical city standards,” he said. As a result of the settlement, CES agreed to move “a significant portion” of its operations to another location.

“I know that various attorneys and inspectors have been on it,” White said. “The aggressive action we've taken has been vindicated.”

He wielded the power of his office to get a little revenue for the city, and then he walked away.* A few months later, after the feds swept in to shut things down, Mayor White became defensive (as he tends to do) when questioned about his administration's handling of the settlement, and used his standard "we were aggressive/tough" line -- a usual indicator that he's been neither.

But hey, he garnered $100,000 for the city. And by "historical" standards, he was aggressive. What more can Texans ask for?

*Perhaps the neighboring residents are not what the Chronicle's editorial board would call "well-heeled, civically-active voters," therefore not as deserving of Mayor White's attention as, say, Ashby high-rise opponents.

Photo of Houston Mayor Bill White by flickr user STANANDLOU, used via a Creative Commons license.

Posted by Anne Linehan @ 08/09/09 04:59 PM | Houston Politics | Technorati | Comments (2)

27 October 2007

Mayor White assists "well-heeled" residents in high-rise fight

As we all know, some wealthy/influential Houstonians are in a tizzy about a high-rise going up in their neighborhood, so Mayor White has sprung into action, proposing a new ordinance aimed directly at cutting the high-rise down in size. Really!

Mayor Bill White's administration has proposed an ordinance that could require developers to reduce the size of a planned high-rise building that's ignited a bitter dispute over what's appropriate to develop in Houston.

The ordinance, distributed to City Council members Tuesday, could be on the council's agenda next week — an unusually fast timetable for a new regulatory law in Houston. Such measures typically take months to work their way through the city bureaucracy.

White acknowledged that the ordinance was drafted in response to a controversial high-rise planned near Rice University that has not yet received a building permit. Residents of the adjoining Southampton and Boulevard Oaks neighborhoods hired a prominent attorney and staged a street protest against the project.

The ordinance would require traffic impact studies of projects on two-lane, two-way streets that include at least 100 dwelling units and increase density 100 percent or more. This description fits the 23-story building that developers Kevin Kirton and Matthew Morgan of Houston-based Buckhead Investment Partners want to build at 1717 Bissonnet.

The measure would give the public works director broad discretion to require steps to ease traffic problems involved. In the case of the Bissonnet project, White said, reducing the building's size would be the most logical solution.

Wow.

New legislation directed at one construction project. Do you think this ordinance could have a wider impact? Of course:

In its current form, the ordinance would have an impact on nearly all multifamily developments, not just high-rises, said Andy Teas, vice president of public affairs for the Houston Apartment Association.

But let's not worry about that right now. Some Houstonians are concerned about their view, and that needs to be addressed, immediately! I mean, it's possible a big shot at the local daily newspaper lives in the vicinity!

Just to emphasize how absurd this is, recall that Councilman Johnson noted his constituents could hardly get anyone to listen when they had complaints about housing developments in their not-quite-as-affluent neighborhoods, a point that didn't impress the Chronicle editors:

Influential opponents of the Ashby Tower have won considerable support at City Hall and are represented by prominent litigator Rusty Hardin. Their clout has led some Houstonians to charge favoritism and inequity.

Well, of course. Well-heeled, civically active voters wield more influence than low-income residents who might have less time or inclination to vote and take part in civic affairs.

Nor have we seen Mayor White propose ordinances to help residents along Metro's University Line. From today's story, here's Mayor White's rationale for the Bissonnet ordinance:

"The development on Bissonnet that will dump more than 2,000 (daily) trips onto a two-lane, two-way street exposed a loophole" in city regulations, White said, explaining why he put the ordinance on such a fast track.

When residents and business owners along Wheeler and Richmond have complained about what the billion-dollar light rail line would do to traffic, Mayor White has ignored their concerns. He says running rail down those streets will ease congestion, contrary to what actual studies have said.

As the Chronicle admits, well-heeled voters wield more influence. We can only conclude this is the case with Mayor White's administration. Something to keep in mind when Mayor White tries to become Governor White.

KEVIN WHITED ADDS: Mayor White previously asserted that no special treatment was being doled out to the well-heeled:

White and other city officials denied that the Southampton and Boulevard Oaks neighborhoods near the site at 1717 Bissonnet had received any special treatment.

We made light of that dubious assertion at the time, and today's story (as highlighted by Anne above) confirms we were right to do so.

The ordinance, distributed to City Council members Tuesday, could be on the council's agenda next week — an unusually fast timetable for a new regulatory law in Houston. Such measures typically take months to work their way through the city bureaucracy.

Clearly, the well-heeled ARE receiving special treatment, and they are receiving special treatment in the form of a punitive, reactionary ordinance that hasn't received proper vetting (committee meetings, input from the public, input from ALL stakeholders, input from municipal and other experts) and thus could have unintended consequences and implications. Even worse, this poorly vetted ordinance moves significant power ("broad discretion" in fact!) from the city's elected officials (Council) to the city's director of public works -- again, without any real vetting or any real guidance.

This is running the city like a business?

Posted by Anne Linehan @ high-rise fight"> 10/27/07 11:17 AM | Houston Politics | Technorati | Comments (12)

27 January 2009

Mayor White says lease at One Park Place, make Houston better!

The Houston Chronicle seems to have decided there might be a future in watchdog reporting, especially watchdog reporting that involves The Houston Way.

Recall that in late December, local reporters Bradley Olson and Carolyn Feibel did some fine reporting on many interesting coincidences (or not) involving prominent local pols (including Mayor White) and politically well-connected developers that eventually resulted in the city taking a small bit of private land for a "public" park that the city's parks director now says he never wanted, but which (coincidentally *wink*) would serve as ornamentation for a planned development.

For the second time in roughly a month, the Chronicle has posted another story that raises questions about the extent to which Mayor White has gone to bat for a politically well-connected developer. Here is an excerpt from the reporting by Bradley Olson, Nancy Sarnoff, and Carolyn Feibel:

The mailing reads like a finely produced marketing brochure, touting the opening of a new downtown apartment tower and urging Houstonians to consider moving there: “One Park Place will be the residence of choice downtown because its 346 residences offer 14 floor plans with finishes typical of high-end condominiums, spectacular views, a nearly one-acre resort-style pool area, a grand terrace overlooking the park and retail spaces.”

Except it is not a marketing brochure. It is a Jan. 16 letter, penned by Mayor Bill White on city letterhead and sent by the developer of One Park Place to hundreds of people and human resources representatives at businesses and organizations across Houston.

Land-use experts and officials in other Texas cities said the letter is highly unusual. Most office holders involved in development and revitalization projects tout improvements in generalities, but rarely, if ever, participate in a marketing effort for a specific business interest.

White said he views One Park Place as a linchpin of the development in the works around Discovery Green, a key element of the plan to revitalize downtown. He also said he would do the same for any major residential development downtown.

City officials in Austin, Dallas and San Antonio were reluctant to weigh in on White’s letter, except to say that they were not aware of their mayors ever taking such a step. Mayors there have spoken publicly about some developments and attended ribbon-cuttings, but none of their staffs were aware of an endorsement on city stationary.

Government watchdogs said such a written endorsement is an inappropriate use of the mayor’s office, most notably because the owner of the development company, Marvy Finger, is a campaign contributor. Finger’s daughter, Jill Jewett, is a former senior staffer of the mayor and left City Hall to work for the Finger Companies.

“It is appropriate for mayors to help promote downtown living, but where you cross the line is where you’re promoting one project and endorsing it and asking people to consider a particular residential tower,” said Tom “Smitty” Smith, director of the Texas office of Public Citizen. “Using city stationary and other trappings of your office to promote a particular building goes beyond the line.”

The amount of the political donation is actually pretty small, but it seems clear that developer Finger is better connected politically than some developers in town (the Ashby high rise developers come to mind). The former mayoral staffer apparently didn't work for Finger long, but again, it's the connection that's the key. The Houston Way is all about the connections!

No less a master of The Houston Way than Bob Lanier is cited by another developer in defense of the unusual letter:

Randall Davis, who redeveloped the Rice Hotel, applauded White for supporting Finger’s project, saying downtown needs the help. Davis also said then-mayor Bob Lanier helped a great deal with his project.

No doubt that's true!

We're having trouble getting too worked up over this, even though turning City Hall into an advertising firm for a local developer does seem a bit unseemly (not to mention clumsy). The Chron.com commenters sure don't seem to like it, though. What do you think?

BACKGROUND: PDF of Mayor White's letter.

BLOGVERSATION: Lose an Eye, It's a Sport, Texas Watchdog, Slampo's Place, Chron Houston Politics.

Posted by Kevin Whited @ 01/27/09 12:22 AM | Houston Miscellany | Technorati | Comments (14)

01 June 2008

Agenda item 29: City will abandon portion of South Post Oak for BLVD Place (updated!)

This city council agenda item's wording is enough to make one's eyes glaze over:

29. ORDINANCE finding and determining that public convenience and necessity no longer require the continued use (1) as public streets of a 13,380 square foot portion of South Post Oak Lane (Parcel SY5-011A) and a 5,238 square foot portion of Skylark Lane (Parcel SY5-011B), both located within Azalea Terrace, a subdivision according to the plat thereof recorded at Volume 33, Page 38, Map Records of Harris County, Texas (“HCMR”), (2) two utility easements on 0.0963 acres of land (Parcel SY5-011C) and 0.1098 acres of land (Parcel SY5-011D), both located within Restricted Reserve “A”, Saks Fashion Center, according to the plat thereof recorded at Volume 340, Page 51, HCMR, and (3) a water line easement on 0.1863 acres of land (Parcel SY5-011E) within Azalea Terrace Annex, according to the plat thereof recorded at Volume 34, Page 61, HCMR; vacating and abandoning said public street rights-of-way and easements to Boulevard Place, L.P., abutting owner, in consideration of the conveyance to the City of a public street right-of-way easement on 66,500 square feet (Parcel AY6-165), payment to the City of $1,500.00, and other good and valuable consideration; approving and authorizing the conveyance to the City by Crescent POC Investors, L.P. of public street right-of-way easements on 5,346 square feet (Parcel AY8-271A), 343 square feet (Parcel AY8-271B) and 526 square feet (Parcel AY8-271C) of land - DISTRICT G - HOLM

TAGGED BY COUNCIL MEMBER HOLM

This was Item 33 on Agenda of May 28, 2008

I see BLVD Place in there, which we posted on previously when the Chron wrote about the city using its eminent domain powers to obtain land for Ed Wulfe's big development.

So how can we find out more about this item?

We have to go and find the "Agenda backup." One has to exit the agenda page, go to the council page, click on "Agenda backup," and download a large PDF file, in this case 122 pages. Then one has to page through to find where the backup is for the particular agenda item of interest. For agenda item 29, the corresponding backup is located starting on page 108 of the pdf file. What one can see in the backup is that the city will be abandoning property valued at $2.45 million, and in return BLVD Place will pay the city $1,500 and convey rights-of-way worth $6.54 million:

Inasmuch as the value of the $1,500 minimum fee plus the street right-of-way being conveyed to the City is greater than the value of the streets and easements being abandoned and sold, it is recommended City Council approve an ordinance authorizing the abandonment and sale of a portion of South Post Oak Lane, a portion of Skylark Lane, two 10-foot-wide utiltiy easements, and a 10-foot-wide prescriptive water line easement in exchange for a consideration of $1,500 plus the conveyance to the city of right-of-way for South Post Oak Lane and Ambassador Way, all located within Azalea Terrace Subdivision, Azalea Terrace Annex Subdivision, Saks Fashion Center, Post Oak Embassy, and/or Fashion Square.

It's too bad there isn't a way to provide links on the online agenda where folks can get more information. And what I didn't see was the reason Councilwoman Holm tagged it.

UBU ROI ADDS: In 2004, the city cut S. Post Oak Ln. (not Blvd.) short and gave Wulfe several parcels of land (where the streets would have been located). In 2006, Council member Holm appears to have been involved in revising the deal; at that time Wulfe agreed to construct the streets around BLVD Place at his expense. The 2008 version frees him from that obligation, at the cost of his giving some of the land back. However, the land he is giving back, in combination with some minor/useless parcels, would re-route the streets, increasing the size of his development. The streets, if built, will be constructed with taxpayer money; Wulfe only has to construct a fire hydrant and cut some water /sewer mains at his expense (approx. $65k).

I'd guess that Pam's not happy that he's going back on the deal; or maybe it's just the difference between treatment of BLVD Place and the Ashby high-rise.

Posted by Anne Linehan @ 06/01/08 08:21 AM | Houston Politics | Technorati | Comments (4)

28 December 2008

The Houston Way paves the way in Galleria-area land taking

Lately, quite a bit of attention has been focused on "the Chicago Way," the complex web of cronyism, patronage, and machine politics that can make (think both of the Mayors Daley) or break (think recent governors) Illinois pols.

Locally, we have The Houston Way, which doesn't factor into our state politics quite as prominently, but is no less intriguing when it comes to cronyism, patronage, and the benefits that always seem to accrue to the city's powerful and well-connected.

As Houston Chronicle reporters Carolyn Feibel and Bradley Olson make clear today in an outstanding followup to a March 2008 story by Mike Snyder on the city's abuse of its eminent domain power, The Houston Way hardly went away when Lee Brown finally was term-limited out of office and Bill White took charge (even though Mayor White's press staff surely loves it when journalists give the impression that White singlehandedly restored ethics to Houston government). Rather, one might say it reverted back to the more refined practices of, say, the Lanier Administration (more refined in the sense that we doubt any White Administration staffers will wind up indicted like various Brown Administration staffers, who were bunglers in The Houston Way really).

Recall back in March that we and other blogs commented on the story by Snyder, which described a lawsuit filed by two brothers contesting the city's effort to take their small Galleria-area property and make it into a so-small-as-to-be-useless "public park" that would conveniently double as ornamentation for a huge planned real-estate development. To recap Snyder's reporting: The brothers had acquired that property in 1982, and had been approached by the Uptown Houston District in February 2004 about selling it for parkland. In April 2004, Wulfe & Co. became interested in acquiring the land, and within a year had announced plans to redevelop a surrounding plot into the multi-acre BLVD Place mixed-use development. In July 2006, Wulfe & Co made a sizable offer for the land, which the brothers declined. In October 2006, the City of Houston said it wanted to acquire the land for a park. In May 2007, the city made an offer for the land, which the brothers declined. In November 2007, the City filed to acquire the property by eminent domain for the Uptown Houston District -- for more than a million dollars less than Wulfe & Co had once offered. At the time, Joe Turner, the City's Parks and Recreation director, said the move was justified, and that there was a "shortage of parks" in the area. The reporting noted that Ed Wulfe had a seat on the Uptown Houston District's board, and "is well-known at City Hall."

At the time, some of us didn't think this passed the smell test.

In today's intricate, detailed followup to the original story, we learn quite a bit more about this deal that makes it smell even worse. In no particular order, here are more of the damning details:

We'll leave it to readers to draw their own conclusions about this smelly, incestuous mess, although we suspect all but the most partisan cheerleaders for Mayor White will at least agree that it's a smelly incestuous mess.

We do take exception with one small part of the otherwise fine reporting by Feibel and Olson:

[C]ritics of City Hall contend that officials too often shape policy and decisions to aid developers.

That's not untrue, but a better description of The Houston Way is that officials too often shape policy and decisions to aid the city's powerful and well-connected (at the expense of the less powerful).

Notable recent examples of The Houston Way in action would include: Mayor White, Council, and Richard Vacar putting an airport shuttle company out of business at the behest of Yellow Cab, which wanted the business to itself; Mayor White's use of an archaic driveway ordinance to continue to frustrate a planned high-rise development (that had seemingly met existing regulatory hurdles) once well-connected supporters demanded it be stopped (this would be a key example of developers NOT shaping policy); Mayor White and Council extending the IAH Terminal C concession for the well-connected Jason Yoo despite the abysmal job he has done; and of course the unsuccessful effort to boot the Center Serving Persons with Mental Retardation from its prime real estate (for developers never named?).

In a town with a columnist like John Kass, we might look forward to many scathing columns in the future about The Houston Way and all of its incestuous relationships and deals. Alas, The Plagiarist is more expert in The San Antonio Way than ours, the Teen Diarist's range is *ahem* limited as well, and the Houston Press gave up trying to write about politics years ago. Too bad.

BLOGVERSATION: Red Ink: Texas, Lose an Eye, It's a Sport.

Posted by Kevin Whited @ 12/28/08 10:32 PM | Houston Politics | Technorati | Comments (10)

06 August 2006

City of Houston Agenda 8-8-06 (updated!)

This week's report is incomplete for now, as the RCA and agenda backup were not available by the close of business on Friday now complete, since I have the RCA in hand... for what it's worth. As a reminder, these are not publicly posted online, but are available only from the city's intranet; I have to obtain them from a computer that is part of the city's network. I should be able to obtain the information on Monday and edit this post late Monday evening to add additional information.

As always, readers are cautioned that I delete what I judge to be extraneous text, and often paraphrase in order to make the legalese a lot more readable; also that comments added are a mix of my own opinions, best guesses, snarking, and judgments, and therefore may not be entirely accurate. Such deletions may accidentally result in a key omission; if you wish to read the original text, please follow this link to the posted agenda.

[Read More]

Posted by Ubu Roi @ 08/06/06 08:04 PM | Houston Miscellany | Technorati | Comments (6)

 SITE MENU

+Home
+About
+Archives/Categories
+BH Commentary (RSS)
+Bloggers
+Blogroll
+Contact Us
+Donate
+Forum
+Local News Headlines
+Syndication
+Twitter

 SEARCH



 ADVERTISING

 DISCLAIMER

All content © 2004-09, blogHOUSTON and the respective authors.

blogHOUSTON.net is powered by Nucleus.

Site design and Nucleus customization are by Kevin Whited.