Swamplot Archives by Category: Development Regulations

Thursday, July 16, 2009

Comment of the Day: The Midtown CVS Domino Effect

   

“. . . CVS didn’t follow Post Midtown’s urban scale approach even though its lot was right across the street and the collective wisdom at the time was that Gray and Bagby would be built out with mid-rise, mixed-use developments right up to Main and the new rail line. It seemed so obvious and for those who longed for true urban living in this town, it was a dream coming true. CVS didn’t play ball simply because they didn’t have to. No code required them to build in any way, shape, or form that might have benefited the collective vision of Midtown. So be it, that’s Houston. However, after CVS bucked the urban trend, so did most every developer after them. So instead of all or most of Midtown being walkable, populated with street life like just the 3 blocks developed by Post ultimately became; Midtown’s blocks are populated with suburban style apartments complexes with no street life whatsoever, just block after block of gates and fences. If Houston had had the guts to enact urban design strategies then, Midtown would be the success that similar areas have become in Dallas, Atlanta and other cities. Houston punked out and we are all the losers for decades to come. Ironically the very same developers who fought urban guidelines in Midtown were building successful urban properties in all those other cities at the same time. . . .” [John, commenting on Cul de Sac City: Houston’s Ban on New Street Grids]

Read more about: , , , , , , ,
Tuesday, July 14, 2009

Cul de Sac City: Houston’s Ban on New Street Grids

Working from a remote and undisclosed location, the now-expatriate Houston engineer known as Keep Houston Houston puts together a rough diagram identifying the city’s “traditional” walkable neighborhoods, and comments:

Houston has no shortage of gridded, walkable, mixed-use neighborhoods. Thing is, they’re all kind of squished together. And with a couple of exceptions, they were all platted out before 1935. What’s there is there. We’re not adding to it.

Why?

Developer conservatism plays a role, but is ethereal, subject to evaporate as soon as *someone* steps up and proves that suburban [Traditional Neighborhood Development] is sufficiently profitable. But several city standards and rules are standing in the way.

Are Houston’s development rules really the obstacle?

Keep Houston Houston scans through the city’s development ordinance, then throws together a quick design for a residential neighborhood following the basic requirements. What does that end up looking like?

Continue Reading This Story >

Read more about: , , ,
Friday, July 10, 2009

Apartment Inspections in Sugar Land

   

Sugar Land requires single-family rental units to be inspected each year. And the city council has just voted to require the same for multifamily apartments: “The multifamily ordinance must be approved on second reading at a future meeting to become law. If approved, the measure will require apartment owners to pay an annual fee of $8 per rental unit. Sugar Land Community and Environmental Director Mike Goodrum told City Council members on Tuesday that the fee would equate to an annual cost of about $2,000 to $2,400 for the typical apartment complex in the city. Most of those complexes, he said, are owned by Gables Residential of Atlanta, Ga., which was consulted during creation of the new proposed policy. . . . Since apartment complexes typically have somewhat rapid tenant turnover, city inspectors would annually inspect those units that are vacant on the day the inspector schedules a visit, Goodrum indicated.” [Fort Bend Now]

Read more about: , , , , , ,
Tuesday, June 30, 2009

No Local Sprinkler Controls for Texas

   

That ordinance passed by West University’s city council that would have required sprinklers in all new West U homes won’t go into effect — despite the lobbying efforts of local fire chiefs. Earlier this month Governor Perry went ahead and signed a bill that takes away the right of local municipalities to create sprinkler requirements. An amendment to the bill was added shortly after West U’s ordinance passed, but is retroactive to the first of the year. [Off the Kuff; previously on Swamplot]

Read more about: , , , ,
Monday, June 29, 2009

The New Inner Loop Townhome Poster Child

   

“Density hasn’t been kind to Cottage Grove, a small neighborhood with narrow streets, few sidewalks, poor drainage and scarce parking for the owners of its many new homes and their guests. Like many neighborhoods inside Loop 610, Cottage Grove in recent years has experienced a flurry of construction of large townhomes that loom over 80-year-old cottages next door. Two or three dwellings crowd sites where one house stood previously. Streets are cluttered with vehicles parked every which way. Water stands in the streets after heavy rains. ‘It was shocking to see this jewel of a neighborhood in this condition,’ said former Pittsburgh Mayor Tom Murphy, a senior fellow with the nonprofit Urban Land Institute who toured Cottage Grove two years ago. ‘It was about the ugliest thing I’d ever seen, to be honest with you.’” [Houston Chronicle]

Read more about: , , , ,
Thursday, June 18, 2009

Comment of the Day: How a Form-Based Code for Bellaire Might Work

   

“In the interests of improving the community as a whole do you think it would be possible for the City of Bellaire to call a moratorium on the building of faux Tuscan McMansions? Or perhaps a number of turrets per home limit?” [Jimbo, commenting on Crossing That Thin Baby Blue Line]

Read more about: , , , , , ,
Tuesday, June 16, 2009

Comment of the Day: Where Should Those Little Lots Go?

   

“Allowing reduction of the minimum lot width to 15 feet, if an average lot width of 18 feet is maintained within the subdivision may be reasonable and desirable in terms of providing a diversity of residential style and price in large-scale developments, where an aesthetic mix can be achieved, and where infrastructure and amenities are incorporated into the plan for the benefit of the residents. But, think about how this reduced lot size might work and what the cumulative impact would be of applying this one-size-fits-all regulation with 15 and 18 foot wide lots to multiple, small, infill “subdivisions” in neighborhoods where infrastructure and amenities are already less than adequate. . . . If your neighborhood has no deed restrictions, and your block has not petitioned for and received minimum lot size and set-back protection, this would be the time to put that process in motion.” [TxTom12, commenting on Chapter 42 of the Houston Development Story: Letting Out That Urban Belt A Notch]

Read more about: ,
Monday, June 15, 2009

Registered Agents for Condos

   

A bill recently passed by the Texas Legislature — inspired by problems encountered in contacting the 150 separate owners of Candlelight Trails in northwest Houston — would make it a whole lot easier for the city to demolish decrepit condo complexes. “The bill by Rep. Sylvester Turner, D-Houston, applies only to Houston. It requires every condo development to maintain a registered agent to accept service of legal papers; if any development fails to do so, the Texas secretary of state automatically becomes the agent. The law will take effect Sept. 1 if Gov. Rick Perry signs it or allows it to become law without his signature. Perry will review the measure carefully before deciding, spokeswoman Katherine Cesinger said. Current law requires each owner to be served either in person or through a legal notice in a newspaper. Defendants served through publication have two years to file a motion for a new trial. ‘It is extremely time-consuming, expensive and allows the substandard and often dangerous conditions to continue while the city struggles to obtain personal service on each owner,’ Ann Travis, Mayor Bill White’s governmental affairs director, said in a background document explaining the bill.” [Houston Chronicle]

Read more about: , , , , , , ,
Wednesday, June 10, 2009

Chapter 42 of the Houston Development Story: Letting Out That Urban Belt A Notch

Of all the changes the Planning Dept. has in mind for Chapter 42 — the ordinance that governs development in the city — perhaps the most dramatic is the one that moves the city’s “urban” boundary. Chapter 42 currently labels the area inside the 610 Loop as “urban,” and the area outside of it “suburban.” The latest proposed draft would expand the “urban” zone all the way to Beltway 8. You’ll have to get past that to reach the burbs.

What do the urban and suburban designations mean? A lot of little things. And, perhaps, a lot of little lots: In certain circumstances, the proposed amendments would allow developers to subdivide “urban area” land into lots of less than 1400 sq. ft. and as narrow as 15 ft. wide.

Oh, but there’s a whole lot more to it than that.

Continue Reading This Story >

Read more about:
Tuesday, June 9, 2009

West U’s Short-Lived Sprinkler Requirement

   

Late last month the West University City Council passed an ordinance requiring all new homes built in the city to have fire-protection sprinklers. This apparently did not sit well with Texas Rep. John Otto, who represents Dayton, a small town in Liberty County more than 40 miles to the northeast. An amendment to a bill sponsored by Otto, which was originally meant to address the licensing of plumbers, takes away the right of a municipality to require sprinklers — retroactive to the first of this year. The bill passed the legislature shortly after the West U ordinance: “The bill, not yet signed by Gov. Rick Perry, was created at the urging of the Texas Association of Builders, citing potentially increased home costs. Monday, [West U Fire Chief Steve] Ralls was flanked by fire chiefs from Austin and Dallas, along with city of Houston Assistant Chief Karen Dupont, at an event one block away from the Governor’s Mansion, which was devastated by fire one year ago. ‘We’ll do whatever it takes to make our ordinance stick,’ said Ralls. [West University Examiner; more at Texas Politics]

Read more about: , , , ,
Friday, May 1, 2009

Comment of the Day: Inner Loop Townhome Shared Driveway Building Line Special

   

“To detail what Red said, this means that if the units share a driveway, the building can go to the lot line provided there is a fire wall. This is why it is so important people know that they can file for minimum setbacks and minimum lot size, one side of a block at a time (or more). This is avaialbe to EVERYONE in the loop and has been for about two years.” [finness, commenting on A Setback for Jackson Hill]

Read more about: ,
Thursday, April 23, 2009

The City Runaround and a City Council Run: Where Does It Say That the Heights Is Dry?

The proprietor of the Heights’ Beer Island writes in, breathlessly and at length, to report on difficulties he’s encountered getting a beer-and-wine license for the Trail Mix Café, a second establishment he’s trying to establish just a few blocks west:

I am opening a new cafe on White Oak Drive by the new trail and was given a permit from City of Houston for the approval of address to be able to serve beer and wine. After i picked up legal document from permitting office i went to receive stamp from state comptrollers office, than went to city of secretary, received stamp, went to county secretary, clerk placed notification in paper, pd fee, picked up application after 2 weeks had gone by, than took to TABC and they reviewed application, was given window notification sign, I placed in window, 3 weeks go by, checked w/ TABC to make sure no problem, no one called me but thank goodness I called, found out a hold on license, went to TABC to meet w/2 representatives from TABC, they informed me that City of Houston had reversed their approval on location . . .

. . . because the café was in a “dry area.”

So . . . the owner of the new establishment at 3202 White Oak, next door to the Montrose Skate Shop, wants to know: Where, exactly, does it say that the Heights is dry?

Continue Reading This Story >

Read more about: , , ,
Wednesday, April 8, 2009

Neighborhoods Not Paying for No Front-Yard Parking Notices

   

Civic clubs won’t have to shell out thousands of dollars for postage if they want to apply for a front-yard parking ban after all, the Chronicle’s Bradley Olson reported last week: “After the neighborhoods balked, the planning department purchased equipment that will allow it — instead of neighborhoods — to send bulk mailings. The department estimates it will pay $15,000 to $20,000 in mailing costs in the first year and $125,000 over five years for the bulk mailing equipment. ‘I’m really excited that the administration listened to the voices of the homeowners and the civic associations,’ said Councilman James Rodriguez, who pushed for city to revise its stance. As of [last] Thursday afternoon, the planning department had received four applications, all from neighborhoods in the Spring Branch area.” [Houston Chronicle, previously in Swamplot]

Read more about: , , ,
Friday, March 27, 2009

Ashby Highrise: The 9th Is the Time for Charm

Plans for the Ashby Highrise were rejected by the city for the 9th time last week. But . . . this rejection appears to be a bit kinder than the others have been.

How much kinder? The West U Examiner’s Michael Reed explains:

. . . the tone of the city engineer’s remarks seemed less perfunctory than in the project’s recent permit denials.

In his comments dated March 16, Mark Loethen said “conflicts in drawings sets have been addressed and revised” since the previous rejection Feb. 13.

Saying the city is still concerned about the distance between a proposed entrance on Bissonnet Street and the Dunlavy Street intersection and the volume of left-turns during peak traffic hours, Loethen offered a potential solution.

“Increasing distance between (the) entrance driveway and Dunlavy along with other mitigation measures may be considered,” his comments read.

That sure makes it sound like a building permit for the 23-story highrise — which developer Buckhead Investment Partners still insists on calling 1717 Bissonnet isn’t that far away from actual city approval. Can’t these tiny remaining details just be worked out in a friendly little get-together?

Continue Reading This Story >

Read more about: , , , , , , , , ,
Friday, February 27, 2009

Ashby Highrise: Shifting Driveways and the Insanity Offense

The Chronicle’s Mike Snyder comments on the the Ashby Highrise’s latest failing grade:

Since March of last year, [Matthew] Morgan and [Kevin] Kirton have submitted various versions of their permit application eight times, and the city has rejected it eight times.

Since one definitition of insanity is taking the same action repeatedly and expecting a different result, some observers have speculated that the developers were building a record for a lawsuit. The language in their timeline shows they’re prepared to take this step, whether or not it’s been part of their strategy all along.

The developers are portraying this case as an example of heavy-handed and inequitable city regulation that all developers should worry about. How much support they’ll get from their industry colleagues if they choose to go to court remains to be seen.

But Jennifer Dawson, writing in the Houston Business Journal, notes that Buckhead Investment Partners has been fiddling with those plans they keep submitting:

Continue Reading This Story >

Read more about: , , , , , , , , , ,