I remember at a city council meeting three years ago when the city was debating the town center issue (again) there was a fifth grader who talked and the mayor commended her for her arguments.

By way of background, when we first received the notice regarding the proposed Super Block, I sent an open records request to the City for all communications on the subject. I specifically asked for e-mails between it and the Church. The City responded promptly and here’s what I learned by reviewing those documents.
At the risk of disagreeing with my good friend Brennan Reilly, the bad actor in this affair is the Church. Sometime last Spring, the Church approached the City with its plans to build a youth center on the lots it owns on Milton, closest to City Hall.

Let’s be clear what this means. The Church proposed to build a very tall, two story structure directly behind the Sweeney’s and Olin’s homes. More than that, it proposed to do so on property that is zoned single family. The next step was to be the Church turning into parking lots the two properties it owns on University—between the Olin’s home and ours, as well as the lot behind our house. Again, properties zoned as single family and truly in the City’s “front door.” In other words, the Church wants to completely change the character of the west end of the 3800 blocks of University and Milton from the kind of homes that makes West U so special to an expanded Church campus.

From my review of the documents, it was in response to this that City came up with Super Block plan to “protect” the City’s front door and the four private property owners in that area from the Church’s incursions.

That said, the City is not without fault in all of this. But the blame that I place on the City—and I place it robustly—is the City’s lack of will of enforcing its zoning regulations against the Church. I attribute this failure to the all too cozy relationship between the City and the Church, undoubtedly driven by the Church’s success in placing its members on City Council.

In short, I was quoted in the Village News as saying that the Church is the bad actor in all of this and that I’d prefer to have the City as a neighbor than the Church. Having had plenty of opportunity to consider these subjects in the last few weeks, I’m more convinced of that than ever. Unless the City develops the political will to enforce its zoning regulations against the Church, from the narrow point of view of a property owner in the disputed area, the proposed Super Block is the better of two less than perfect choices.

I understand that the city has hired a consultant that has suggested the city “swap” the land where the current library and community buildings are but keep them in place for 10 years. This is a sham. Within those 10 years, the neighborhood will change- with many new residents coming in and old going out. The new residents will not have a clue about the future plan of the city until they wake up one day to the sound of the wrecking crew demolishing the library and community center.

It’s all too sneaky.

The church says they are potentially going to build the youth center on land they own Amherst that used to be residential houses (that they bought in the past I suppose). Aren’t those lots zoned residential then? How can the church have the right unilaterally to build a youth center on residential zoned land? We wouldn’t let them build a gas station there (I’d hope, but who knows with the sway they seem to have)?

Also, moving public works to the Westpark location for a land swap with the church makes terrible economic sense. The Westpark land is in City of Houston and so (correct me if I’m wrong here), West U has to pay property taxes to City of Houston for that land (in perpetuity), while the land they would be giving to the church would continue to be untaxed. Seems better to sell the Westpark land and retain the existing public works footprint which is better for Heavy Trash days and more centrally located for the provision of services.