Wednesday, April 7, 2010

No wonder Highland Terrace gets no love

Oh, man.

After publishing the meeting on the website, physically delivering newsletters with the meeting time/date to every house on every street in Highland Terrace, and at least one email blast, the neighbors at the neighborhood meeting were in real danger of being outnumbered by the speakers. I'm guessing there were 20 residents there, and half of those were HTNA board members or family of board members). If HT votes in those kinds of numbers it's no wonder the city thinks they don't need our input on projects like the MST Gym.

I would not fault the speakers if they opted not to accept invitations to our meetings; the turnout was so low that I cannot imagine it was worth their time. As a resident of HT I believe it was worth my time to be there, if only to hear the questions submitted by the audience.

Speakers included:

  • HTNA board members who spoke about their respective efforts.
  • Button's policy wonk was there to throw red meat to the right. Fair enough; that's the demographic here (for now).
  • Lanet Greenshaw, RISD Board of Trustees, was there to remind us she's up for re-election (same ballot as the bond election). Don't know anything about her, but she seemed pleasant enough.
  • Amir Omar (Place 7, at large) was there to talk about Tree The Town (April 18th, 2pm @ Galatyn Plaza). Gracious and impressive as always.
  • Steve Mitchell (Place 6, at large) and Bob Townshend (Place 1, our member) both spoke. Mitchell more briefly and Townshend in a bit more detail about things happening on the east side. Don't care what anybody else says: I dig Mitchell's jeans-and-jacket vibe.
  • Bill Keffler had the most speaking time: he was on-hand to provide background information on many land/development deals that came up during Townshend's talk; Keffler did a good job job filling this info in. Keffler also made the "Vote Yes on the Bond" pitch. He kept his cool during the pitch, stopping to answer questions or comments that came up. Audience participation was more civil than recent "baby killer!" or "you lie!" scenarios but there was a bit of heat in some of the tax rate increase comments. Others were very neutral and thought-provoking: "is it common for cities to build water towers on land they do not own?" This was a reference to the UTD land-lease-for-roads deal. I was not swayed to vote Yes on the bonds, but I did come away with a greater respect for Mr. Keffler's encyclopedic knowledge of development in Richardson.
  • Non-speaking attendees of note. From other parts of the city: Nathan Morgan and David (DC). From COR: Assistant city managers Morgan and Thames.
If I forgot anyone, let me know.

7 comments:

TDayTX said...

I didn't realize you were there. I believe Nathan briefly spoke at one point.

T. "Water Tower" Day

frater jason said...

Nathan commented about the [lack of] severity in BMV charges, but since it was an audience comment and not an address I didn't put him in the speaking group.

He does get extra bonus points for helping the HTNA board fellows get the P.A. operational.

Anonymous said...

Re Keffler "he was on-hand to provide background information on many land/development deals"

Did he go back a few years to comment on the City's initial proposal to turn 40 acres of land near the neighborhood into an "Adult Business" zone? No?

Did he mention how the City drove through the once-declined change to Self Storage zoning that will allow the Plano / Beltline LA Fitness property to have a (sure to be mostly vacant) self storage facility?

Self storage has been limited in Richardson to only Industrial zones. This change allows self storage in non-Residential zones. So, look out for self storage permit requests coming to every vacant grocery store and Blockbuster near you. Well, if you're on the East side. I know such will never show up if you're West of Central.

frater jason said...

AFAIK, he did not mention the "adult business zone". I am personally unfamiliar with the issue (I think it predates my moving back to Richardson) but Mr McCalpin presents what appears to be a reasonable discussion of it here:
http://rumorcheck.org/SOBOrdinance.html
I have no particular stance on adult businesses.

I was aware of the self-storage option at plano/beltline for some time. I have no particular stance on this issue either, though if COR is desperate for large interior spaces to house the Gymnastics program perhaps they could have considered that old grocery building.

Anonymous said...

hi mouse
"I have no particular stance on adult businesses." my main stance is "not in my back yard" but I guess that's too blunt, huh?

That old grocery building for a Gymnastics center? It's right next to LA Fitness, a few hundred yards south of Huffhienz Rec Center, and at a convenient intersection. Plus, it would guarantee good traffic for the other occupants of that center.

Naw, that would be too good of an idea. Never work...

frater jason said...

Not blunt, I just don't think that way. Either I am missing the gene for it or it's a function of my own INTJ personality type weirdness.

In my Private Idaho, if the ABZ is ok it's ok no matter whose neighborhood it's near. If it's not ok then we should take action on some higher level. The fault I find with NIMBY is it [effectively] makes policy based on squeaky wheels and neighborhood politics rather than coherent policy.

I do understand that rational people can take NIMBY stances; it seems to be a human reflex. But my natural inclination is to consider decisions on the level of the city rather than the neighborhood. This does not earn many many popularity points at meetings of the local neighborhood association.

frater jason said...

s/b "does not earn me many popularity points"