|
| |
04/13/08 His
latest victim isn't likely to roll over and take it.
 |
|
No, DallasArena.com has not become the all-Neil
Emmons all the time website. It's just some of the most egregious wrong
doings at City Hall of late are directly tied to lying Emmons. He may get
away with his bad acts, but at least the spot light is shining bright on his
shady doings, and he doesn't like it. |
I'm going to respond to 4 different reports on what lying Emmons did on the St
Regis zoning case, and then tell you about my lengthy conversation with David
Thurman of FOCH, the St Regis developer.
Down-and-Dirty Developers Want Into the Inner City
by Jim Schutze, DallasObserver.com,
UnFairPark:
4/10/08
Somebody
always says,
"Don't look a
gift horse in
the mouth."
Sure. But I have
a motto too.
Make sure you
can tell a gift
horse from a
damn wolf.
I'm talking
about the way
the city council
handles zoning
issues and about
those idiots
over at The
Dallas Morning
News editorial
page. Last week
they ran an
editorial with
the headline,
"Dallas City
Council should
abandon
fiefdoms."
Fiefdoms. You
know what that
means? It means
East Dallas, Oak
Lawn and North
Oak Cliff—all of
the urban areas
where there is
renewed
development
interest—should
prostrate
themselves
before the same
kind of
down-and-dirty
developers who
screwed these
areas 30 years
ago.
In the inner
city, we have
long memories.
... But
there is such a
thing as good
development. I
have written
about Henderson
Avenue and the
great
re-development
there by the
Andres brothers
("Downtown
Apostate,"
November 29,
2007). There is
also such a
thing as
wrong-headed,
overly
recalcitrant
neighborhood
resistance to
development,
where
neighborhoods
dig in their
heels and refuse
to accept
anything new. In
a dicey urban
environment,
that's another
good way to
create Camp
Crack Head.
Generally
speaking, the
inner city goes
up or it goes
down. In the
inner city,
nothing stands
still.
Taken
together, what
all of this
means is that
the creation and
nurturing of
strong urban
communities,
both residential
and commercial,
is a very
complicated and
delicate
balancing act. I
would argue that
the single most
important reason
why the inner
city of Dallas
is beginning to
do so well is
that the people
of the inner
city—smart
homeowners and
good developers
alike—have
learned a lot
about how to do
the balance.
But all of
that balancing
comes eventually
to the desks of
two people—the
member of the
plan commission
who represents
the district
where a proposed
development
would take place
and the city
council member
from that
district. Those
are the two
people who know
the skinny on
any given
development
project that
involves zoning.
... So
where do we go
with all of
that, when we
get stirred up?
Easy. We go
straight to Neal
Emmons, our plan
commission
member, and to
Angela Hunt, our
city council
member. They try
to strike a
balance between
our demands in
the
neighborhoods
and the city's
need to
encourage good
new development.
But between the
two of them,
they are the
fulcrum.
It's that way
in every city
council
district. That
is why, except
in the most
extreme cases,
the city council
almost always
honors the
wishes of the
council person
from the
district where a
proposed zoning
change would
happen.
At the March
26 Dallas City
Council
briefing, Mayor
Tom Leppert and
North Dallas
council member
Ron Natinsky
tried to bust
the rule. They
asked the
council to vote
down Angela Hunt
on a routine
zoning matter.
Hunt was
actually in
favor of the
development in
question but
wanted to send
it back to the
plan commission
for tweaking.
With
Leppert's
backing,
Natinsky moved
that the council
refuse to send
it back. He and
Leppert were
defeated in a
10-5 vote, and
the issue went
back to the plan
commission.
... On
April 1, the
Morning News
editorial page
castigated the
council for not
going along with
Natinsky and
painted the
council members
who had voted
against him and
with Hunt as
crumby little
ward-heelers:
"Unfortunately,
the
independent-minded
still appear to
be in the
minority on the
council," the
editorial
sniffed. "Too
many city
leaders are
loath to rock
the boat on
issues in other
districts, lest
their colleagues
interfere with
their own pet
projects."
The most
important point
here is that
zoning questions
in the inner
city are not the
pet projects of
council members.
They are my pet
projects. My
neighbor's pet
projects. We
watch this stuff
like hawks, all
of us, and you
better believe
we let Emmons
and Hunt know if
we don't like
what we see.
...
|
For some reason, Schutze is
very defensive about lying Emmons, who is doing the same kind of abuse of office
as Bill Blaydes tried to do against Jack Pierce (Hollywood Overhead Doors) (see
DallasArena.com's
Council thwarts Bill
Blaydes' land grab plans).
The Good Laura
is one of the best stories Schutze has ever done, which was about how Mayor
Miller and Councilman Rasansky blocked Blaydes and a couple of other council
members from forcing a 50 year old company off its property because Blaydes
coveted that land for a Crow development. It was in Blaydes' district, and
he was plenty steamed to have Laura interfere. His siding with
Blaydes in that wrong doing, probably cost Ed Oakley the Mayor's race.
As for the Fairfield project Schutze refers to, most of the nearest homeowners
were in favor of the project. We're not talking about bulldozing a
single-family neighborhood. It's bulldozing a neglected apartment complex
to be replaced with a fancy multi-use apartment/condo development. I guess
those East Dallas neighborhood people don't matter to Schutze because they sure
didn't matter to lying Emmons and not much to their own Councilwoman Hunt.
What Project Will Neil Emmons Ruin Next?,
a blog by Trey
Garrison, DMagazine.com, FrontBurner, responds to Schutze's defense of Lying
Emmons:
4/11/08
In one of his
rare misses, Jim Schutze’s column this week
argues that plan commissioners and
city council members should be the sole
gatekeepers on green-lighting development projects
within their given district. The idea, I gather, is
these the gatekeepers — one at least elected and
answerable, the other unelected and unanswerable — are
better informed and wiser about what happens in a
neighborhood than anyone else.
My immediate
response is a punchline from an old Bill Cosby bit about
the guy who justifies his cocaine use by saying, “It
enhances your personality.” Cosby asks, “Yes, but what
if you’re an ***hole?”
Which brings
me to Neil Emmons, the city plan commissioner for
District 14. Jump for more on this.
Emmons, who has
been on the commission maybe too long, is a bit of a
development tease. He’s got a habit of talking sweet
with developers with ambitious projects, making them
wine-and-dine him, and then blindsiding them in Plan
Commission hearings.
(Fairfield, anyone?) He
wields the “denied with prejudice” ax more readily than
any other member, and in so doing sets himself up with
more power than was ever intended.
The “with
prejudice” option is meant to deal with developers who
refuse to act in good faith or cooperatively — a shield,
not a club. Appealing a “denied” vote to the city
council only takes a simple majority vote. Appealing a
“denied with prejudice” vote takes a two-thirds
majority, and when that almost inevitably fails, there’s
a two-year moratorium on going before the Plan
Commission.
So there’s
the problem you get when any one person gets too much
power in this kind of setting. If they act like little
Chicago ward-heelers or petty dictators — and too many
attracted to planning and zoning bodies do — no one’s
interest is being served. Except the ego and appetites
(figurative and literal) of the gatekeeper.
This isn’t
just personal conjecture colored by my skepticism about
any elected or appointed official.
“Neil sabotages good development in Dallas and he
undermines the Oak Lawn Committee,” says Mark Shekter, a
designer, Realtor, and member of the Oak Lawn Committee
for 25 years. “His actions are a power play. It’s about
building power for himself, not what’s in the best
interest of Dallas.”
Schutze
lectures that:
The most
important point here is that zoning questions in the
inner city are not the pet projects of council
members. They are my pet projects. My neighbor’s pet
projects. We watch this stuff like hawks, all of us,
and you better believe we let Emmons and Hunt know
if we don’t like what we see. …
It means
people who don’t get our part of town at all will
ram cheap development down our throats, undo decades
of hard-fought progress, scoop up quick profits and
then run for the border.
Which brings
me back to that headline question.
St. Regis Hotel has
been courting the city in general and Emmons in
particular about the
vacant lot at 2728 Cedar Springs,
over across from the Texas de Brazil and next door to
the new Gables Residential.
The developer for the project is FOCH Investments Inc.,
and what they envision is a $250 million, five-star
hotel along with high-end condominiums averaging $2
million a pop. Parking and loading docks would be
underground to aid the aesthetic, and on the side facing
the Katy Trail there will be two brownstones. They
aren’t asking for any abatements or money from the city.
Not exactly cheap development, and given the state of
the market, it’s a pretty ambitious project that would
be a boon for Dallas. The problem is, to achieve the
high-density design that puts parking underground, the
developer wants to exceed the current zoning that allows
199 feet and push the height to 299 feet.
Neighbors
aren’t exactly up in arms. ...
The Mansion Residences, Texas de Brazil, and the The
Gables support the project.
Even better,
the Friends of the Katy Trail — do you know how
scrutinizing those folks are? — support the St. Regis
Hotel project.
But guess who
doesn’t? Despite whispering sweet nothings in FOCH’s
ears, Emmons used the fiefdom tradition on April 3 to
have the case “declined with prejudice.” Sabotaged
again.
Here’s the
funny part: because of the way the property is zoned and
because of the design alternatives, FOCH Investments can
go ahead and build their hotel, only it will be shorter
by 100 feet since that’s what existing zoning calls for.
And the parking — 1,000 space — will be aboveground.
(Who doesn’t love a big old, open parking lot?) The
loading docks and the big garbage bins will abut the
Katy Trail.
That would be
good for the neighborhood. Go, Neil.
Or April 23,
the Council can vote to overturn the Plan Commission’s
April 3 denial. Unlike the district’s plan commissioner,
the district’s council member, Angela Hunt, is
pro-development while balancing the desires and wants of
her constituents. (Schutze nailed that fact in his
column, and Hunt has demonstrated time and again she’s
not in the game to glorify herself.) With any luck
she’ll see the problem with killing the FOCH Investments
project, avoiding the specter of having another fight
over whether council members should have sole say on
zoning and development in their district. And avoiding
garbage bins along the Katy Trail. Or worse, Dallas
losing St. Regis Hotel as a new neighbor altogether.
Of course,
that would undercut Emmons’ position, but weeds need to
be trimmed. We’ll see next week. The question remains:
what deal will Emmons FOCH up next?
More to come
…
|
Don't forget, lying Emmons
promised Woodard Paint & Body their business would be protected if they didn't
fight the Ross Ave. overlay. See
Why is City Hall
doing Woodard Paint & Body wrong?
Now, this 60 year
old Dallas business may lose their right to do what they have done at their
current location for 30 years because Neil Emmons lied to them.
When the Money Men Are Out to Get Ya, You're Usually on
the Right Side
by Jim Schutze, DallasObserver.com, UnFair Park,
responds to Trey Garrison:
FrontBurner has posted a long
essay by Trey Garrison on why
Dallas City Plan Commission
member
Neil Emmons is the Great Satan.
Garrison cites several major
development projects he says
have been unfairly sabotaged by
Emmons.
Garrison clearly is a lot
more familiar with the details
on these projects than I am, and
his arguments are cogent and
clearly expressed, so I can’t
use my usual screw-you rebuttal
for all things
D.
Besides, Our Boy Merten has many
interesting details regarding
the St. Regis Hotel project
about which Trey writes; he’ll
be along before the end of the
day.
Till them, let me just say
this:
Somebody with some
serious money has been
ginning up a big get-Emmons
campaign for the last few
months. I get calls every
day from the
Everybody-who-gets-paid
crowd, telling me why Neil
Emmons is a bad guy.
Not once have I heard
from anybody whose word I
would take seriously about
this -- that is to say,
neighborhood leaders. Every
single person who has called
me, with one exception, has
been somebody who either
gets paid or goes along with
people who get paid.
I have been to a county
fair and a hog auction
before. I smell paid
vendetta in this. It’s
simple.
Somebody with a big
project wants Emmons out of
the way. Their problem --
what they don’t get -- is
that Emmons stays right with
the homeowners.
So let’s say they succeed
in getting him trashed out
of there. Angela Hunt, the
city council person in
District 14, is just going
to appoint somebody else who
will stay right with the
homeowners. And whoever it
is who thinks his ox is
getting gored will just get
gored again the same way.
Show me some homeowner
groups who are mad at
Emmons, and we’ll talk.
Until then, I look at all
this, and I think, “Somebody
rich is pissed.”
And then I think, “Good.”
|
Schutze's blog ticked me off,
and I called him. I took his comments personally because we have had
several conversations about lying Emmons. I have no problem with Angela
appointing a REAL neighborhood person to replace lying Emmons, who is a faux
human being, much less a neighborhood person. For the record, the Oak Lawn
Committee is a 25 year old neighborhood group, and they support the St Regis
zoning case. The OLC has always had the rule that anyone can join if they
live in, work in or own property in Oak Lawn. Unlike some groups, the OLC
wants all Oak Lawn stakeholders at their table. The Oak Lawn Committee is
plenty mad at lying Emmons.
Lesse. Do You Want the Katy Trail or an
"Attractive Alley"?
by Sam Merten,
DallasObserver.com, UnFair Park, responds to Trey Garrison:
4/11/8
As Schutze pointed out
earlier, Trey Garrison
posted his thoughts on
FrontBurner about a zoning case
involving City Plan Commissioner
Neil Emmons -- something about
him being
a Blue Meanie or some such.
I’ve been following this issue
as well and came up with a
different perspective, mostly
because I talked to the man
himself, Big Bad Neil.
Garrison essentially explains
how Emmons denied an awesome
residential-hotel mixed-use
project, including
a St. Regis Hotel, near the
Mansion Residences in Uptown,
leaving Dallas stuck with a
small, crappy boxed development
with dumpsters bumping up to the
Katy Trail. He provided links to
letters of support from nearby
buildings, threw in a Bill Cosby
reference and wrote there was
“more to come.”
Emmons says the reason for
his denial was easy, pointing to
an adopted land-use policy from
1983 called The Oak Lawn Plan.
He says the premise of this
compromise between residential
and business communities was
that everyone would redevelop
within the existing, allowable
densities. Emmons added that the
current zoning in that area is
some of the most generous in the
city.
“At the end of the day, I
just looked at it and
thought, you know, we got a
plan. It’s served us well,”
Emmons tells Unfair Park.
“The land is so valuable and
so sought-after because we
have predictability and you
know darn well what your
neighbor can and can’t do.”
So what’s the big
argument? Well, the
developer, Los Angeles-based
FOCH Investments/Deveopments,
which
acquired the property in
2005 from Sofitel, is
asking for a building height
of 271 feet, while the
existing zoning allows for
196 feet. It also wants to
increase the allowable
square footage from 341,000
to 426,000. The developer
argues that its property is
surrounded by zoning that
would allow for 240 feet,
and paints a bleak picture
of what will be developed if
it is forced to build the
hotel under the current
zoning. I’ve seen the
architectural renderings,
and using the requested
zoning it’s a beautiful
building. Using the current
zoning, it’s a butt-ugly,
white building with no
windows.
Emmons says he doesn’t
buy into the argument that
the commission's "no" will
result in the hideous
alternative; he says there's
just no way St. Regis will
attach its name to an ugly
project. FOCH is using a
scare tactic -- just like
threatening to put dumpsters
next to the Katy Trail.
Garrison attacked Emmons
for denying this case with
prejudice, which means it
will take 12 council members
instead of eight to overrule
him when this hits the
council April 23, and the
developer would have to wait
two years to reapply for a
zoning change if the denial
is upheld. Theresa
O’Donnell, director of the
city’s department of
development services, says
denying cases with prejudice
is actually the default way
of denying zoning cases. She
adds that plan commissioners
must give an explanation for
denying a case without
prejudice.
The Plan Commission and
city staff work hard to find
a compromise to get a
favorable recommendation 99
percent of the time,
according to O’Donnell.
“Usually," she tells Unfair
Park, "we don’t get to the
point where the entire thing
is so distasteful that you
just have to deny it.”
When the item was before
the City Plan Commission
last week, the only folks to
speak in favor of the
project were St. Regis
representatives, including
Los Angeles-based Richard
Doherty of FOCH Investments.
But several locals spoke
against, including Cay Kolb,
one of the authors of The
Oak Lawn Plan, and Linda
Marcus, widow of Stanley
Marcus.
Lee Cullum also wrote a
letter in opposition of the
proposed development.
"It will set a precedent
by violating The Oak Lawn
Plan," says Harriet Rubin,
who lives on Turtle Creek
Parkway and also spoke
against the proposal last
week. "We're absolutely not
against the development. I
want the St. Regis to be
there. I just want it to be
there within the existing
property rights. And we told
them that. ... The biggest
problem is the Katy Trail
will become a long, urban
canyon with huge walls on
both sides, and everyone
will feel closed in. I went
to the city archivist and
got the Turtle Creek
Environmental Corridor
Summary written in 1974, and
on the last page it says,
'To ignore the need for
guidelines in this area is
to assure the development of
an "attractive alley," a
parkway enclosed on two
sides by 200 feet high walls
with views that lead to
nowhere and a static
lifeless boulevard that more
resembles an open subway
tunnel than a parkway.' Just
substitute parkway for Katy
Trail."
O’Donnell, of course, is
a fan of the project,
calling it “an excellent
design.” City staff liked it
too, although it recommended
a lower height (240) and
square footage (341,000)
than the developer is asking
for. O’Donnell cited letters
of support from the Mansion
Residences and the Oak Lawn
Committee, and she says of
the 18 letters received from
nearby residents, nine were
in favor of the project and
nine were against it.
Although she’d prefer to
only allow a rise to 240
feet, if it was a sticking
point, she said she’d
support the developer’s
request of 271 feet.
“This is a really quality
development. We’d hate to
see the alternative of
losing the quality on the
project just so that they
can develop under the
existing zoning,” she tells
Unfair Park. “I think we’d
entertain either
application. It’s certainly
nice to have something of
this high quality near the
Katy Trail.”
Emmons says the threat
from developers of offering
up the ugliest thing
possible is usually the No.
1 argument for these kinds
of zoning changes. He has
little doubt that this
project will happen under
the current zoning and
thinks what winds up being
built will be good for the
city. Emmons also points out
that approximately 900,000
square feet of development
available in the two blocks
surrounding the proposed
development, and it could be
2.4 million under the
allowable zoning.
This leads to what I
think is his most convincing
argument. Over the next 50
to 100 years, many of the
properties will be rebuilt
to the maximum zoning
allowed. And if 271 feet is
allowed on this project,
then how can the Plan
Commission say no to others
wanting to build using that
standard? This, Emmons says,
could turn the Katy Trail
into the Katy Canyon. I’m
not sure what Garrison has
upcoming, as he mentioned at
the end of his post, but
based on what I know,
I
don’t think Emmons is the
bad guy in this particular
case.
Dallas is gonna get its
St. Regis one way or the
other.
Emmons says the developer
admitted that the hotel
would be built using the
current zoning, but wants it
bigger to increase its
profits. And no one
has a problem with a
developer trying to make a
few extra bucks, but it’s
not like having a taller
building is gonna do much
for Dallas. I’m not even
sure why the city needs yet
another hotel. Maybe they
can call up Mayor Tom and
get themselves into the
convention center hotel biz.
I’m sure he’d let them build
the sucker as high as they
want.
--Sam Merten
|
This one really disappointed
me. Sam has been covering Neil's hanky panky on several cases, and has
written several stories about it. Why would he suddenly fall for an
Emmons lie? I called Sam, too. I asked if he bothered to call the
developer because I had. No, he just took lying Emmons' untrustworthy
word.
This is what the big fight is about.
Really looks beautiful to me. Tower is narrow to Turtle Creek and
the Katy Trail, and there would have been 2 brownstone condos facing the
Katy Trail.
Here are a few of the things the developer, David Thurman, told me in our
telephone conversation. His group has been meeting and talking with Neil
Emmons since June, 2007. Lying Emmons told him he hated above-grade
parking and would support their project if they would put the parking
underground. They redesigned the project with underground parking.
Lying Emmons did not keep his word. |
|
 |
 |
Here are a few of the things the developer, David Thurman, told me in our
telephone conversation. His group has been meeting and talking with Neil
Emmons since June, 2007. Lying Emmons told him he hated above-grade
parking and would support their project if they would put the parking
underground. They redesigned the project with underground parking.
Lying Emmons did not keep his word.
Lying Emmons told them he would support their request if the Mansion Residences'
Board approved it, but he didn't think they would. They are
supporting it. Lying Emmons did not keep his word.
Lying Emmons asked them to delay it from the 3/6 hearing to get all the final
points worked out. They agreed. Lying Emmons did not keep his word.
They met with Lying Emmons on April 2nd before the April 3rd Plan Commission
hearing. They left that meeting with the understanding Emmons was
supporting their request. Lying Emmons did not keep his word.
|
|
|
Instead, at the hearing Lying Emmons announced he was denying the case, which is
an automatic "with prejudice", claiming David Thurman said they were going to
build St Regis anyway. What he failed to tell the rest of the Commission
is David Thurman said if they don't get the zoning request, they will build the
hotel under the current zoning limits without any of the 16-17 points the
community had requested. That would include building a squatty fortress
like building with SURFACE PARKING and the dumpster and delivery at surface and
visible from the Katy Trail. It's got to go somewhere. |
| |
|
|
ST. REGIS PROJECT
ENHANCEMENTS
1) LEED certified designation.
2) Guaranteed building form which preserves and enhances view corridors.
3) Height concentrated in the core of the site away from Katy Trail.
4) Additional lower height zone near Katy Trial.
5) Reduction of allowable height on approximately 78% of site.
6) Increased required parking for multi-family uses.
7) All parking, except for 25 spaces, is required to be below grade.
8) Prohibition from using compact spaces for the residential condos.
9) All primary entrances from motor court area.
10) Limitation on height of attached signs.
11) Prohibition for attached signs facing Katy Trail.
12) Specific prohibition on non-premise signs.
13) Guaranteed landscape plan in conformity with Oak Lawn standards.
14) Katy Trail connectivity.
15) Monument signs on Carlisle limited to 15’.
16) Maximum effective area of all attached signs is limited to 750
square feet of effective area. |
Lying Emmons may think Thurman
is bluffing because that's what Emmons would do. David Thurman assured me
he is not bluffing. They need to get this hotel built and operating before
the Super Bowl, and they have wasted enough time trying to accommodate Neil
Emmons, only to have him sucker punch them at the hearing.
As disappointed as I was in Sam Merten's baseless defense of Lying Emmons,
reading Councilwoman Hunt's blog supporting Emmons was outright painful. I
have been very upfront and candid with her about the problems Lying Emmons is
causing. You can tell from her comments how much she cares about anything
I said.
Neil Emmons wasn't
pro-neighborhood to the people on Harry Hines. Developers aren't
"frustrated" with Neil Emmons. They are DISGUSTED with Neil Emmons.
He has the time to "work very hard" because he's not employed. If he is
employed, will someone tell us what Emmons does for a living or where he gets
his funding?
|
|
|
Speaking of questions -- who is paying Lordi Palmer to interfere with this
Dallas zoning case? She apparently has been hired by someone on the
anti-St. Regis side. We hear she is setting up appointments with the City
Manager and others to make a case against St. Regis. |
Here's another point Councilwoman Hunt ignores in the St. Regis debate.
They are not asking for 1˘ from the city, no tax abatements -- nothing.
They want to invest in our city. How much has Lying Emmons invested in our
city?
I want to remind Councilwoman Hunt that she voted FOR the Ray Hunt $6.3 million
tax abatement for a building for which he had already bought the land on Woodall
Rodgers and invested in architectural plans. Ray Hunt was going to "build
anyway", but Councilwoman Hunt and most of the council ignored Mayor Miller and
voted to give him a $6.3 million tax abatement. $6.3 million would fund a
bunch of new police officers or maybe improve several city parks.
|
As I have told Councilwoman Hunt, most are not going to complain to her about
Lying Emmons because they assume he is doing what she wants. Her blog
response confirms that any criticism of Lying Emmons will fall on deaf ears with
her. This is not a good sign. |
|
|
|
|
The only light at the end of the tunnel is that Lying Emmons must go off the
Plan Commission next year because he is termed out. That's not good
enough. He has proven how much harm he can do in a short time.
Giving Lying Emmons a year to continue his mayhem is unacceptable.
While I'm in the reminding mode, Turtle Creek has had high rise residential
towers since the 60's, very successful residential towers that have kept their
value and popularity. The height of the towers allows for large setback
and planting areas along Turtle Creek. There is a walled community on one
block of Turtle Creek (believe it's @ Irving) with 2-3 story McMansions behind a
huge brick wall. I fought that project and wanted to keep the original
high rise zoning on that site for that very reason. Rather than a nice
tall building that allows open space and a deep set back, there's a wall that
almost starts at the sidewalk. It gives Turtle Creek Blvd. the feel of an
alley at that location.
Another high rise on Turtle Creek would be an addition to what is the norm,
apparently the preferred norm factoring in the cost of those homes and their
popularity. A low rise fortress structure will overwhelm the site and the
adjacent area of the Katy Trail. To get the density the hotel needs for
profitability, they will max out everywhere they can legally. There will
be no reason for them to show any sensitivity to Turtle Creek Blvd or the Katy
Trail.
Please don't talk to me about corporate obligations. St. Regis owes this
city nothing. They aren't asking for any tax abatements like Councilwoman
Hunt approved for Ray Hunt. They tried to work with her Plan Commissioner,
who she refuses to reign in or remove, and who lied to them repeatedly.
The St. Regis Hotel at Turtle Creek could have been a tall, thin building with
deep setbacks on all sides, with underground parking, underground deliveries and
trash collection. Instead, we will get something much less.
The only good thing to come out of this mess is that people are finally seeing
Neil Emmons for the liar that he is. Many people have called me over the
past several months to discuss stunts he has pulled. I passed a couple of
those stories on to Sam Merten.
A few weeks ago, I was having lunch with some people at City Hall and the
subject of Neil Emmons came up. One of the men really got angry. He
had a similar story to the St. Regis debacle. His group thought they had
Lying Emmons' support on their zoning request. They thought it because he
told them so, only to have him pull a St. Regis on them, too. They had no
choice but to accept his last minute demands because they knew Councilwoman
would not go against Lying Emmons' P&Z recommendation.
I am personally disappointed in Jim Schutze, Sam Merten and Angela Hunt.
They are all people I respect. Sam knows better than what he wrote.
I am pretty sure Jim and Angela know better, as well.
Your mother probably told you, Actions speak louder than words.
That is true for the sneaky shenanigans of Lying Emmons. Unfortunately,
it's the written words of Sam Merten, Jim Schutze and Angela Hunt that are
reverberating right now. That any of these three smart people would stoop
to defend Lying Emmons is downright shocking.
I talked with David Thurman for almost an hour. I can tell you this man is
not one to make idle threats. He's got a hotel to build. He wanted
something that would enhance the Turtle Creek corridor and the Katy Trail.
Neil Emmons has closed that door. David Thurman will build a hotel without
the 16 concessions requested by the community. It will be a successful
hotel, but it could have been much more.
Angela Hunt can fix this mess, by approving their appeal to council. After
reading her blog cited above, I am not optimistic.
The council could fix this mess, by overriding the Plan Commission's decision,
but that would take a 3/4th vote of the council. Even for a $250 million
project like the St. Regis, I am not optimistic that they will see this other
than another zoning case like Councilwoman Hunt apparently does and protect
their own fiefdoms by supporting her.
I hope you will go to Trey's story and read the attached blog commentaries, as
well as Jim Schutze's and Sam Merten's blogs. The comments are very
interesting. Neil's defenders are pretty desperate to cover his large
rear. All the king's horses and all the king's men can't make Neil Emmons
anything more than lying, evil jerk that his actions expose him to be.
|
|
|
Those who defend his nasty games and brazen lies run the risk of hurting their
own reputations.
|
sb
| |
|
Some developers may criticize Neil, but I can’t tell you how many compliments I receive from residents across District 14 who appreciate the time and care Neil takes with zoning cases. Neil meets exhaustively with residents and developers to get input before making a decision. He educates residents on what can be a very complex and intimidating zoning process. He knows the history of hard-fought zoning battles and is sensitive to those issues. He understands not only the base zoning set out in Chapter 51A, but also the many planned development districts, historic districts, and conservation districts that make up District 14. He recognizes the consequence of increasing FAR from 4.0 to 6.2, reducing residential proximity slopes, eliminating dry overlays, granting SUPs, and canyonizing the Katy Trail.
Yes, Neil is pro-neighborhood. That doesn’t necessarily mean he’s anti-development, but it does mean that he will carefully scrutinize requests for zoning changes, that he will refuse to accept verbal promises from developers, that he will insist on carefully drafted zoning ordinances, and that he will push a developer to get the absolute very best project for the surrounding neighborhood and our city.
Developers may at times be frustrated with Neil, and that is just fine. The fact is, saying “yes” is easy. At the end of the day, District 14 needs a Plan Commissioner like Neil Emmons who will work very hard to find a reasonable solution but who is not afraid to say “no” to flawed zoning proposals even when a developer is threatening to pick up his toys and go home.
Neil and I don’t always agree on every zoning case. But I didn’t appoint him to be a yes-man. I appointed him because he shares my pro-neighborhood values and because I trust him to honestly and carefully evaluate complex zoning cases.
I’m proud to have Neil as the Plan Commissioner representing District 14.