B and B

Express-News exposes developer tricks to evade tree preservation law

From front page of the Sunday Express-News:

When the City Council approved San Antonio’s first tree-preservation ordinance in 1997, there was no question the rules applied to real estate developers.

But what happens when a property owner claims he’s not a developer, and hundreds of acres of trees are bulldozed on his land as part of a ranching operation?

In the case of Hugo Gutierrez Jr., the answer is: nothing. The tree ordinance didn’t apply to him — and it might not apply to developers who try the same thing.

The case highlights a potential loophole in the preservation standards that can be used by other real estate developers, many of whom criticize the city’s rules as excessive and expensive.

Environmentalists complain San Antonio’s tree canopy is rapidly disappearing. They said Gutierrez’s case illustrates a way around the city tree ordinance, which requires developers to save trees and pay mitigation costs.

As if the state legislature hasn't hobbled local communities enough with the vast loopholes that fit under "vested rights."  Read on for the gory details, and plenty of them.

The response today, from Mayor Phil Hardberger:

"My suggestion of what we'll do, and I intend to talk to our City Council about it, is that we create, by ordinance, a provision that when an agricultural property is cleared of trees, and then sold to a developer, then that becomes a taxable event. So that you have to pay the mitigation damages. Because it's no longer being used for agricultural land."

Hardberger acknowledged his proposal will be challenged in court by the real estate community.

"It's certainly possible it will be challenged," the mayor said. "I would anticipate it would be challenged because it's a pretty sweet deal now."

Hardberger said he will also ask Bexar County legislators to write a bill that would amend Texas law to help the city's cause.

"I doubt when the Legislature was trying to protect agricultural land, I doubt if they envisioned that (ranchers will) clear all the trees and sell it to a developer. That probably was not envisioned. I think there will be legislators who will be willing to close that loophole."

Hardberger said he will also direct lobbyists who represent the city to support such legislation.

"One thing I'm not going to do is just to sit here for the last year of office and watch trees be cleared on a grand scale and feel like there's nothing we can do but wring our hands," Hardberger said. "I'm not going to do that. I'm going to take action."

Will the Legislature block any attempts to rein in the bad practices of real estate developers yet again?

Developers' land-trashing behavior near San Antonio now threatens U.S. Army's Camp Bullis

The rate of land-trashing by real estate developers in northwest Bexar County has reached the stage where it threatens the continued existence of an amy training ground, Camp Bullis.  This threat has compelled both the City of San Antonio and the U.S. Army to act, which, finally, has brought some attention to the issue -- though, alas, not in a general sense.  Plenty of formerly beautiful Hill Country terrain and wildlife habitat has been scraped and blasted into nothingness in recent years without raising much alarm from anyone but those of us in the immediate area.

From the San Antonio Express-News over the weekend:

A federal judge Friday ordered a San Antonio-area developer to cease road-clearing operations for a new subdivision adjacent to Camp Bullis, giving wildlife experts time to evaluate the project's impact on golden-cheeked warbler habitat.

U.S. District Judge Xavier Rodriguez granted a temporary restraining order against INTCO-Dominion Partnership and set a hearing for 10 a.m. Wednesday on an environmental group's request for a permanent injunction that would halt development next to the range.

The lawsuit, filed Friday by Aquifer Guardians in Urban Areas, contends that INTCO is destroying dense trees and brush that are home to the endangered migratory bird that nests each spring and summer in the Hill Country. Destroying warbler habitat is a violation of the Endangered Species Act.

“This is an early victory. It's not the end,” Aquifer Guardians President Enrique Valdivia said. “But if we didn't get the restraining order, the bulldozers might work through the weekend and there wouldn't be anything left to litigate over.”

INTCO has been clearing trees and brush on the 340-acre site near Bullis as it prepares to build a road for a high-end subdivision. The company's Austin-based attorney, Allen Glen, said it was “a safe assumption” his client would follow the order and suspend work.

...

Critics of INTCO say the project, and others like it, are driving the warbler onto Camp Bullis, and that if the trend isn't stopped the Army will be unable to train on the 27,994-acre range. As growth has exploded in the area, the warbler population on Bullis has nearly doubled from 672 in 2001 to 1,086 in 2007.

Fort Sam and top city and county leaders say any reduction of training area raises the risk of the Army moving 37,250 military and civilian workers to be on the post by 2011.

“The issue is bigger, of course, than the fate of the warbler. It's concern about development around Camp Bullis and, of course, the impact on the aquifer recharge zone,” Aquifer Guardians' Valdivia said.

Federal law and Defense Department policy forbid the Army from taking legal action, forcing it to rely on groups such as the Aquifer Guardians and the Greater Edwards Aquifer Alliance, which had considered seeking the restraining order.

...

Post spokesman Phil Reidinger said court action is the only way to stop work on the site while biologists take a closer look, and added that Fort Sam “cannot shoulder the conservation burden alone” — a view shared by its advocates.

“The really big problem with this is Camp Bullis is really the only one in the area that is observing the law,” Greater Edwards Aquifer Alliance Executive Director Annalisa Peace said. “If everybody was observing the law, it probably wouldn't be a problem for Camp Bullis.”

Mayor Hardberger and SAWS take a stand against rampant development over the Edwards Aquifer

San Antonio Mayor Phil Hardberger and the board of the San Antonio Water System took a stand against the rampant development of the Hill Country landscape earlier this week.  This is a decision that deserves wider recognition.

From the Express-News, Dec 5:

Taking a rare stand against a developer to protect a pristine watershed that drains into the Edwards Aquifer, trustees of the San Antonio Water System unanimously rejected an agreement Tuesday to provide water to a planned subdivision in the remote hills northwest of the city.

Baruch Properties wanted water for the Hills of Castle Rock, a 1,766-acre property near Texas 16 and Park Road 37 in Medina County. The nearest SAWS water main is 7.5 miles away.

Environmentalists and neighbors argued that SAWS water service would allow high-density development that otherwise is not likely to occur because of a lack of available water supplies.

High-density development, they said, would bring polluted runoff and downstream flooding to San Geronimo Creek and an on-site wastewater treatment plant whose effluent would be added to the creek that drains into the aquifer a few miles downstream.

“Density development in a sensitive zone simply is not a good thing for the citizens of San Antonio, for our city, for our neighbors or for our water,” said Mayor Phil Hardberger in explaining his motion to deny the request.

...

Hardberger said he recognized that to get a SAWS water main to the site, the developer made concessions such as scaling back from 3,500 homes to 2,700, but he said the city's policy should not be to diminish the harm but to do good.

He said the city's “irreversible mistakes” in planning over the aquifer's sensitive areas are on display by driving out Loop 1604 North and U.S. 281.

Later in the article, the developer suggests they can simply go the state agency (TCEQ) and leave San Antonio and SAWS out of the process entirely.  Given how the state government works, they would be likely to get their way via that route, so I am unsure how this battle is going to work out.

But I am happy to see that the city government of San Antonio is in no mood to encourage  destructive development of the Hill Country and the Edwards Aquifer.

Canyon Lake Gorge carved during flood of 2002 opening for public tours

Those of us who lived in the San Antonio and, particularly, the Hill Country north and northwest of San Antonio, will never forget the flood of early July 2002, when a large area here received 30 inches or more of rain in less than a week.   

As a result of those tremendous rains, Canyon Lake, a mid-size reservoir on the Guadalupe River, rose dramatically.  Soon, tremendous amounts of water started pouring over the wide, grassy spillway for the first time in its history (Canyon Dam was built in the 1960s).

The rains were over in a week, but the water continued to rampage through the spillway for weeks thereafter.  When the lake finally dropped and the spillway dried out, a brand new, stunning, gorge was revealed.

I've been aware of this new geologic feature since shortly after the floods.  I have even had the opportunity on at least two occasions to take a private tour, but have unfortunately yet been unable to visit.

Now, more than five years later, the general public will finally get their chance to examine the Canyon Lake Gorge, as the Express-News reports that it opens for Saturday guided tours starting today.

Via this article, I also discovered the Gorge Preservation Society, apparently a "local citizen's group" that has joined with the Guadalupe-Blanco River Authority and the Army Corps of Engineers to develop long-term plans for the new gorge.

The newness of the geology is one reason why visitors are not allowed to visit unattended, as it is still unstable, and thus both dangerous and in need of extra protection.

I certainly plan to take advantage of these public tours soon, and plan to report back here with pictures.

Update:  Maybe I won't be able to go so soon.  From a longer article via AP comes crucial info that the Express-News left out:

Early demand for the 3-hour tours is so high they are booked for at least six months. Rhoad said the authority hopes to train more docents so dates can be added.

New mayor of Helotes throwing wrench into establishment of town's first park

Expres-News columnist Jaime Castillo reports that the newly narrowly-elected mayor of Helotes, the one bankrolled by real estate developers, is now throwing a wrench into the process of establishing Helotes' first public park. 

Never mind that, up to now, the park proposal has been a shining example of a private-public partnership to save precious Hill Country green space and to honor a 33-year legislator.

Pulte Homes ponied up $225,000, while the nonprofit Helotes Parks Foundation raised $120,000 toward the purchase price of the 33-acre site. The rest of the $686,000 land deal was all set to come from $1.125 million in matching funds set aside by the Legislature.

Basically, all the city had to do to get the ball rolling was extend the option period on the land purchase, which was put under contract by the previous City Council headed by former Mayor Jon Allan.

But that's where the story gets sticky. To make a long story short, development interests that were chafing under Allan's administration bankrolled the candidacies of Schoolcraft and two other successful council candidates.

Allan and his like-minded colleagues had fought off the placement of a Wal-Mart store in the community and had toughened development rules before being voted out of office in May.

So, when two council members formerly aligned with Allan tried to put an item on a recent council agenda to discuss appointing someone to negotiate an extension of the expired land deal, Schoolcraft blocked them against the advice of the city attorney and common sense.

Schoolcraft said he did it because the two council members didn't provide enough necessary documentation.

When asked what documentation, Schoolcraft graciously told an Express-News reporter, "I don't need to explain it to you."

I see that Mr. Schoolcraft is off to an even worse start than I could have imagined.

Forces promoting uncontrolled development want to take back Helotes

Two years ago, a battle over the development of a Super Wal-Mart divided the small town of Helotes, on the outskirts of San Antonio's sprawling suburbs and a gateway to the Hill Country.  The municipal elections ended up with the anti-Wal-Mart forces, led by mayoral candidate Jon Allan, ekeing out a victory by a handful of votes, ousting three council incumbents who had supported the Wal-Mart development.

Within months, Wal-Mart had given up on their plans in Helotes. 

Now, election season has returned, the Great Helotes Mulch Fire has come and gone, and, while Wal-Mart has left, the forces promoting the continued tearing up and paving over of the countryside have decidedly not. 

The Express-News reported yesterday (via Dig Deeper Texas):

The amount of money contributed this year to municipal election campaigns here is markedly higher than in previous years, due in part to $10,000 in contributions made by an area developer.

On March 19, Alfred "Tom" Rohde gave a total of $10,000 to three candidates who are running against three City Council incumbents. Tom Schoolcraft is challenging Mayor Jon Allan, Jeff Ellis is running against Place 3 Councilwoman Linda Boyer-Owens and Rich Whitehead is seeking to unseat Place 5 Councilman Stuart Birnbaum.

Rohde contributed $4,000 to Schoolcraft's campaign and gave $3,000 each to Ellis and Whitehead. Their most recent contribution reports indicate Schoolcraft received a total of $5,460.28, while Ellis and Whitehead each received a total of $3,355.14.

"I felt it was time for a change," Rohde said when asked about his contributions. He added he won't contribute any more money to the races.

Unlike San Antonio, Helotes does not have ordinances governing the amount of money that can be contributed.

"I have looked at records, (and) numbers like this are unheard of," Allan said. "In past elections, (Helotes) candidates have usually not received more than $1,000, total."

The proponents of uncontrolled development also apparently are not letting city law get in the way of their expressions of support, as the Express-News reported a couple days ago:

A couple of unconventional campaign signs may cause hefty fines for the owners of the property where they are displayed.

The electronic signs, resembling those used to announce traffic hazards, display political advertisements for the candidates challenging three City Council incumbents, including Mayor Jon Allan.

"The signs are in violation of the Section 66-117 of the city's sign ordinance that governs political signs," said City Attorney Habib Erkan. "They are too big, too high and they are lit internally — none of which is allowed for political signs, according to the ordinance."

The signs are causing tension in an already heated election season, officials said.

...

The signs flash advertisements for Tom Schoolcraft, Jeff Ellis and Rich Whitehead. Schoolcraft is challenging Allan, Ellis faces Place 3 Councilwoman Linda Boyer-Owens and Whitehead faces Place 5 Councilman Stuart Birnbaum.

Schoolcraft said he was unaware of any potential violation when the signs went up.

"I understand the city is contacting the landowners, but I have not heard anything or received anything in writing. It is up to the landowners to decide what they will do," he said.

One of the signs is at FM 1560 and Bandera Road on the property of Daryl Zumwalt, and the other is off Bandera Road on a tract owned by REOC Partners Ltd. Representatives for both said they had no comment.

Zumwalt.  That name sounded familiar to me.   Oh, yes, that huge mulch pile--a result of the uncontrolled development in the surrounding area--that made such a big stink so recently was on land owned by a fellow named Henry L. Zumwalt, not far from where that illegal political sign is now.

What further surprises do the Zumwalts and developer Rohde have in store for Helotes?

April in Texas: Wildflowers, snow, and ice

Yesterday was an odd day in central Texas.  Early April, spring well-underway, yet the mid-day temperature was in the 40s and, at times, it was actually snowing!  That would be unusual here even in the depths of winter.

With my parents visiting from Chicago, we had planned to take them on an excursion to the Fredericksburg area to witness the amazing wildflower display that we had seen a portion of last weekend.  Despite the cold and sleet more reminiscent of their home than ours, we went anyway, and were not disappointed.  Even more flowers had come out in the intervening week, and they did not appear troubled by the freakish weather.

Below are some pictures.  The last one may appear to be one of our ice storm pictures from January snuck into this post, but it was taken yesterday in Gillespie county along with all the others.