Captn_Ag05 said:
Is the video posted somewhere?
Northage Development + Petition
29,866 Views |
249 Replies |
Last: 1 day ago by oklaunion
AggiePhil said:Captn_Ag05 said:
Is the video posted somewhere?
It was a packed house. Excellent feedback!
My opinions are mine and should not be construed as those of city council or staff. I welcome robust debate but will cease communication on any thread in which colleagues or staff are personally criticized. I must refrain from comment on posted agenda items until after meetings are concluded. Bob Yancy 95
Can someone who was at the meetings give a summary for those of us who weren't there? I did watch the first video but you could hear the answers to the questions from the speaker, but not the questions themselves, so it was confusing...
Tailgate88 said:
Can someone who was at the meetings give a summary for those of us who weren't there? I did watch the first video but you could hear the answers to the questions from the speaker, but not the questions themselves, so it was confusing...
This meeting was an "existing conditions report." Lots of data about the area, tax base, some public safety stats, how the land is zoned, what's happening in the outlying area beyond Northgate proper.
I believe staff did a wonderful job of setting the table for more detailed discussions to come later.
Respectfully
Yancy
Thanks. Uploaded it to YouTube in case anyone wants to watch it on their phone or something
Brian Alg
Brazos Coalition for Responsible Government and Moderator Restraint
Brazos Coalition for Responsible Government and Moderator Restraint
@Bob Yancy
I didn't read through this entire thread, so maybe this was asked:
Can you let us know where each council person and the City Manager stand in regards to what they want to happen to Northgate area?
For example, are there council members or city manager who want to keep the main bars, etc of Northgate like it is, and are there council members/Manager who are on the side of "let's get rid of it".
I would hope each council member and the city manager would be willing to let the citizens know where each one stands on this topic, since they all work for us.
thanks!!
I didn't read through this entire thread, so maybe this was asked:
Can you let us know where each council person and the City Manager stand in regards to what they want to happen to Northgate area?
For example, are there council members or city manager who want to keep the main bars, etc of Northgate like it is, and are there council members/Manager who are on the side of "let's get rid of it".
I would hope each council member and the city manager would be willing to let the citizens know where each one stands on this topic, since they all work for us.
thanks!!
91_Aggie said:
@Bob Yancy
I didn't read through this entire thread, so maybe this was asked:
Can you let us know where each council person and the City Manager stand in regards to what they want to happen to Northgate area?
For example, are there council members or city manager who want to keep the main bars, etc of Northgate like it is, and are there council members/Manager who are on the side of "let's get rid of it".
I would hope each council member and the city manager would be willing to let the citizens know where each one stands on this topic, since they all work for us.
thanks!!
I can't speak for my colleagues. I can only tell you what happened:
Staff first wanted conditional use permitting in Northgate, which would remove the established right to start a new bar and make the approval of a bar conditional based on council approval on a case by case basis as new bars came in, or existing ones tried to renovate. The ordinance also had a nuclear option whereby conditional use permits of existing businesses could be pulled.
The conditional use permitting went before Planning & Zoning and a P&Z commissioner (now councilmember) made a motion for a good compromise whereby NG-1, which is Northgate proper, was carved out. That motion passed.
When it came before council though, staff made a different presentation, this time based on public safety, in an effort to get the policy passed for the entire area. It worked, and the P&Z compromise was thrown out. From internal discussion, I know some staff feel there are too many bars and there is a desire to cut the number in half. If that is indeed the preference, I felt we should have led with that from the start in the interest of transparency. Transparency is why I engage on this platform, and others.
Next came the high rise on the city parking lot, and everyone knows that story. Staff wanted the high rise passionately, and put on a full court press to make it happen in what I believe, as one member of council, is an over involvement in city policy and steerage. My belief is that policy and strategic direction is council's exclusive domain, just as day to day operations of the city is the domain of staff.
Citizens rose up in opposition. The high rise failed.
I think the whole matter serves as a cautionary tale for the citizens, council and staff. All of us work for you. It is your money we are spending. You are the boss. Period. But you must pay attention to local deliberations.
It is our duty on council to make the best decisions we can, especially when you're not looking, and lead staff- not acquiesce to every request. Governance is hard. It is also our council duty to ensure you're kept aware of going's on and that we listen to you, rather than ratify policy with minimal, statutory notice on important matters. You elect us as your ambassador and as such it's our duty to proactively reach out and make you aware of what's coming.
Finally, it is staff's job to run the city efficiently, execute the will of the council as dispassionate arbiters, and stay out of the policy sandbox.
If all three parties do their part, local government, which is closest to the people, best serves the people.
My $.02, as one member of council. Respectfully and transparently yours,
Yancy
My opinions are mine and should not be construed as those of city council or staff. I welcome robust debate but will cease communication on any thread in which colleagues or staff are personally criticized. I must refrain from comment on posted agenda items until after meetings are concluded. Bob Yancy 95
Thanks for the thoughtful and transparent reply.
I do not like when council members or staff use the "In the interest of public safety" to try to push their personal agendas.
The number of bars in an area especially northgate where it is in a "Good" section of town is not a safety issue. Anyone pushing that as their reasoning on Staff (especially the highest level of staff) or on the council needs to have their true motives examined closely
I do not like when council members or staff use the "In the interest of public safety" to try to push their personal agendas.
The number of bars in an area especially northgate where it is in a "Good" section of town is not a safety issue. Anyone pushing that as their reasoning on Staff (especially the highest level of staff) or on the council needs to have their true motives examined closely
The city should not try to steer the number of bars in the area unless there is definitive issues with safety which I don't see as existing.91_Aggie said:
Thanks for the thoughtful and transparent reply.
I do not like when council members or staff use the "In the interest of public safety" to try to push their personal agendas.
The number of bars in an area especially northgate where it is in a "Good" section of town is not a safety issue. Anyone pushing that as their reasoning on Staff (especially the highest level of staff) or on the council needs to have their true motives examined closely
The market will determine the number of bars if left alone by government.
Yes. This.
Apparently, bars don't pay property and sales taxes?
Apparently, bars don't pay property and sales taxes?
it almost feels as if someone high-up in the city has an agenda to just get rid of Northgate bar area.
This has been the case for quite a while, this city seems to forget that without the University and its students this place would be the size of Hearne. Anytime a government uses in the citizens best interest and tries to legislate how many businesses are best beware.91_Aggie said:
it almost feels as if someone high-up in the city has an agenda to just get rid of Northgate bar area.
I'd imagine their thinking is something along these lines. The City has to pay quite a few officers to work Northgate any given weekend night. The juice of the tax money, parking, etc. Isn't worth the squeeze of the weekly expenditure.
Hornbeck said:
I'd imagine their thinking is something along these lines. The City has to pay quite a few officers to work Northgate any given weekend night. The juice of the tax money, parking, etc. Isn't worth the squeeze of the weekly expenditure.
I think there's a lot of truth in that. However, passive parks do not pay for themselves. Nor do public safety departments writ large. Cities are not for profit ventures nor are they profit centers. The cost to ensure public safety is the cost to ensure public safety, in my mind. Were cities to analyze ROI and make policy decisions on that alone, they would look quite different than they do today, generally speaking.
Respectfully
Yancy
My opinions are mine and should not be construed as those of city council or staff. I welcome robust debate but will cease communication on any thread in which colleagues or staff are personally criticized. I must refrain from comment on posted agenda items until after meetings are concluded. Bob Yancy 95
australopithecus robustus
Joined:
Oct 23, 2009
Posts:
2,433
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Hornbeck said:
I'd imagine their thinking is something along these lines. The City has to pay quite a few officers to work Northgate any given weekend night. The juice of the tax money, parking, etc. Isn't worth the squeeze of the weekly expenditure.
This is the case in hundreds of other entertainment districts around this great country, and probably thousands in this world. Part of the deal.
Starting from here to the end of the page and into the next I have the council member's positions in their own words from the vote: https://texags.com/forums/35/topics/3521023/replies/69452290
Bob you mentioned City Parks, we have some great parks in this city, but we have a lot that rarely get used. The maintenance has to be a drain. How about repurposing these city parks and selling some of them off for development? We are quick to sell parking lots for development and buy retail space in malls to prevent businesses from moving in so why not look at dumping some parks.Bob Yancy said:Hornbeck said:
I'd imagine their thinking is something along these lines. The City has to pay quite a few officers to work Northgate any given weekend night. The juice of the tax money, parking, etc. Isn't worth the squeeze of the weekly expenditure.
I think there's a lot of truth in that. However, passive parks do not pay for themselves. Nor do public safety departments writ large. Cities are not for profit ventures nor are they profit centers. The cost to ensure public safety is the cost to ensure public safety, in my mind. Were cities to analyze ROI and make policy decisions on that alone, they would look quite different than they do today, generally speaking.
Respectfully
Yancy
Because Lord Crompton is still alive.
If they were to propose that, he'd round up his troops and camp out at a few council meetings.
If they were to propose that, he'd round up his troops and camp out at a few council meetings.
There were 2 councilmen who voted for the high rise. I'd suggest to get their names and vote them out.91_Aggie said:
it almost feels as if someone high-up in the city has an agenda to just get rid of Northgate bar area.
australopithecus robustus
Joined:
Oct 23, 2009
Posts:
2,433
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Yes their names are Mark Smith and William Wright. I'm sure they're decent guys but they are completely unacquainted with the reality on the ground.
australopithecus robustus said:
Yes their names are Mark Smith and William Wright. I'm sure they're decent guys but they are completely unacquainted with the reality on the ground.
They are both good men that care deeply about our city. While I disagreed with the high rise, it's not like there weren't solid reasons to vote the way they did. With that, I have to sign off of this thread now.
Respectfully
Yancy
My opinions are mine and should not be construed as those of city council or staff. I welcome robust debate but will cease communication on any thread in which colleagues or staff are personally criticized. I must refrain from comment on posted agenda items until after meetings are concluded. Bob Yancy 95
cypress-ag said:Bob you mentioned City Parks, we have some great parks in this city, but we have a lot that rarely get used. The maintenance has to be a drain. How about repurposing these city parks and selling some of them off for development? We are quick to sell parking lots for development and buy retail space in malls to prevent businesses from moving in so why not look at dumping some parks.Bob Yancy said:Hornbeck said:
I'd imagine their thinking is something along these lines. The City has to pay quite a few officers to work Northgate any given weekend night. The juice of the tax money, parking, etc. Isn't worth the squeeze of the weekly expenditure.
I think there's a lot of truth in that. However, passive parks do not pay for themselves. Nor do public safety departments writ large. Cities are not for profit ventures nor are they profit centers. The cost to ensure public safety is the cost to ensure public safety, in my mind. Were cities to analyze ROI and make policy decisions on that alone, they would look quite different than they do today, generally speaking.
Respectfully
Yancy
I think the city discussed selling off a few lots considered part of Eastgate Park but I can't imagine closing and selling any parks without any pushback. Which parks would you consider "wasteful"?
Don't think I used the work wasteful just wondering if these parks are a cash drain perhaps we sell of underused locations.PS3D said:cypress-ag said:Bob you mentioned City Parks, we have some great parks in this city, but we have a lot that rarely get used. The maintenance has to be a drain. How about repurposing these city parks and selling some of them off for development? We are quick to sell parking lots for development and buy retail space in malls to prevent businesses from moving in so why not look at dumping some parks.Bob Yancy said:Hornbeck said:
I'd imagine their thinking is something along these lines. The City has to pay quite a few officers to work Northgate any given weekend night. The juice of the tax money, parking, etc. Isn't worth the squeeze of the weekly expenditure.
I think there's a lot of truth in that. However, passive parks do not pay for themselves. Nor do public safety departments writ large. Cities are not for profit ventures nor are they profit centers. The cost to ensure public safety is the cost to ensure public safety, in my mind. Were cities to analyze ROI and make policy decisions on that alone, they would look quite different than they do today, generally speaking.
Respectfully
Yancy
I think the city discussed selling off a few lots considered part of Eastgate Park but I can't imagine closing and selling any parks without any pushback. Which parks would you consider "wasteful"?
I can't think of any "underused" park that's a "cash drain". If the city ever seriously considered that, there would be a major stink raised about it, that's for sure.cypress-ag said:Don't think I used the work wasteful just wondering if these parks are a cash drain perhaps we sell of underused locations.PS3D said:cypress-ag said:Bob you mentioned City Parks, we have some great parks in this city, but we have a lot that rarely get used. The maintenance has to be a drain. How about repurposing these city parks and selling some of them off for development? We are quick to sell parking lots for development and buy retail space in malls to prevent businesses from moving in so why not look at dumping some parks.Bob Yancy said:Hornbeck said:
I'd imagine their thinking is something along these lines. The City has to pay quite a few officers to work Northgate any given weekend night. The juice of the tax money, parking, etc. Isn't worth the squeeze of the weekly expenditure.
I think there's a lot of truth in that. However, passive parks do not pay for themselves. Nor do public safety departments writ large. Cities are not for profit ventures nor are they profit centers. The cost to ensure public safety is the cost to ensure public safety, in my mind. Were cities to analyze ROI and make policy decisions on that alone, they would look quite different than they do today, generally speaking.
Respectfully
Yancy
I think the city discussed selling off a few lots considered part of Eastgate Park but I can't imagine closing and selling any parks without any pushback. Which parks would you consider "wasteful"?
TAMU1990 said:There were 2 councilmen who voted for the high rise. I'd suggest to get their names and vote them out.91_Aggie said:
it almost feels as if someone high-up in the city has an agenda to just get rid of Northgate bar area.
I was thinking more along line of "the highest paid staff position"... not elected officialals.
anyone attend?
A few online. I think there were many physically there. I believe they will make the video available. If they do, I can put it up on YouTube
Brian Alg
Brazos Coalition for Responsible Government and Moderator Restraint
Brazos Coalition for Responsible Government and Moderator Restraint
thank you kind sir.
Andreas my brother and I went, along with our GM Cassidy from The Backyard. The attendance seemed to be about 35 given the poll taking numbers the city put on screen as we progressed through the meeting.Captn_Ag05 said:
anyone attend?
I for one am enjoying attending and the engagement. The City staff worked hard to provide us with a ton of information and statistics to consider when crafting ideas going forward. "Parking" and "Entertainment" were very highly ranked keywords used in the meetings and noted in the presentation. Many other things have been mentioned from "connectivity" to "history and historic preservation".
The city provided tourism visits to Northgate and Century Square as well by apparently using cell phone pings. Very helpful and interesting.
Costa Dallis
President
The Backyard on Northgate
La Bodega Baja Taco Bar
Burger Mojo
Eccell Enterprises LLC
Thanks for that report. I dearly hope this process leads to the preservation of the Northgate historic district, and that we will never have to walk out the back door of the Backyard, the Chicken or Duddley's and be staring at the base of another 20 story building.Costa and Andreas said:Andreas my brother and I went, along with our GM Cassidy from The Backyard. The attendance seemed to be about 35 given the poll taking numbers the city put on screen as we progressed through the meeting.Captn_Ag05 said:
anyone attend?
I for one am enjoying attending and the engagement. The City staff worked hard to provide us with a ton of information and statistics to consider when crafting ideas going forward. "Parking" and "Entertainment" were very highly ranked keywords used in the meetings and noted in the presentation. Many other things have been mentioned from "connectivity" to "history and historic preservation".
The city provided tourism visits to Northgate and Century Square as well by apparently using cell phone pings. Very helpful and interesting.
Costa Dallis
President
The Backyard on Northgate
La Bodega Baja Taco Bar
Burger Mojo
Eccell Enterprises LLC
Thank you.
I try to remain pragmatic. Measured and strategic development can be a very good thing. On properties other than that particular parking lot it's not as crucial.
Not all real estate is created equal, and that parking lot is not equal to all the peripheral properties where high rises are going up. It has a direct synergy with the nucleus of Northgate and should be handled with kid gloves.
There is already not enough parking inventory in Northgate at peak times to properly serve the tourism it draws. So, the numbers say not only should we replace parking inventory, but in the redevelopment process we should actually be mindful to increase inventory whilst building something unique to further enhance the tourism aspect.
Northgate is not just students, contrary to what many locals may think. It gets a ton of out-of-town tourists and local loyalists. This process of the small area plan, coupled with a wise approach on the parking lot, is a great opportunity if navigated with the proper stewardship.
I try to remain pragmatic. Measured and strategic development can be a very good thing. On properties other than that particular parking lot it's not as crucial.
Not all real estate is created equal, and that parking lot is not equal to all the peripheral properties where high rises are going up. It has a direct synergy with the nucleus of Northgate and should be handled with kid gloves.
There is already not enough parking inventory in Northgate at peak times to properly serve the tourism it draws. So, the numbers say not only should we replace parking inventory, but in the redevelopment process we should actually be mindful to increase inventory whilst building something unique to further enhance the tourism aspect.
Northgate is not just students, contrary to what many locals may think. It gets a ton of out-of-town tourists and local loyalists. This process of the small area plan, coupled with a wise approach on the parking lot, is a great opportunity if navigated with the proper stewardship.
The more I see on the Macy's situation, the more I want the City out of the equation on this property altogether.
Even going back to the bid responses, the city staff selected Capstone Community over local Oldham Godwin, as the recommended bid. The Oldham Godwin plan was far superior to what Captsone brought forward and OG has more experience with development that isn't just student housing. I will point out one of the people that Capstone brought to speak on their behalf at the board meeting was Natalie Ruiz, who is now in the private sector. We all read her emails in the other thread dealing with the Macy's property. I'd like someone to answer how much her involvement led to the city staff selecting Capstone as the preferred one.
Even going back to the bid responses, the city staff selected Capstone Community over local Oldham Godwin, as the recommended bid. The Oldham Godwin plan was far superior to what Captsone brought forward and OG has more experience with development that isn't just student housing. I will point out one of the people that Capstone brought to speak on their behalf at the board meeting was Natalie Ruiz, who is now in the private sector. We all read her emails in the other thread dealing with the Macy's property. I'd like someone to answer how much her involvement led to the city staff selecting Capstone as the preferred one.
I'm sure we all have suspicions of why her group was selected.