What Project Will Neil Emmons Ruin Next?
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. Take a look at the letters attached here. The Mansion Residences, Texas de Brazil, and the The Gables support the project.
Texas de Brazil letter
Mansion Residence letter
Gables letter
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 …
43 Comments to “What Project Will Neil Emmons Ruin Next?”
Leave a Reply
All material copyright © 2008 D Magazine. All rights reserved.
How does someone like Emmons get removed from the city plan commission? He sure seems to need to be removed. Who appointed him? Can Angela Hunt remove him?
Mark Schekter is absolutely dead-on right. Emmons uses his position to punish those in the neighborhood that he doesn’t like and reward those he considers his buddies. It’s not about responsible development. It’s about Neil. And only about Neil.
A plan commissioner cannot be removed by anyone but the council person who appointed him.
In Emmons case, he was appointed by Veletta Lill and then re-appointed by Ms Hunt.
With all due respect to Ms Hunt, Emmons is a ******* who has no problem not only killing good projects in his district, but stepping over the line when a project is in the district next door (reference - the boundary between District 2 and District 14 runs down the middle of Greenville Avenue between Belmont and Ross, right in the middle of the war zone).
To wit, I give you CityVille Lower Greenville, the proposed Arcadia mixed-use development (now dead) and the proposed Carnival redevelopment into mixed-use.
He follows the commands of people like Maxine Aaronson, who uses Lower Greenville NA like her own fiefdom, and reps other associations like Lower Greenville West NA.
They all follow the Star Trek Rule of Non-Interference - One neighborhood association will not support (or oppose) a development another neighborhood association opposes (or supports).
That is why the could not allow the BelmontNA to join the Dallas Homeowners League. We were on record as telling them we would support anything on Lower Greenville no matter what the other groups support or don’t support.
We need another look at the control of fiefdoms by council members. And while we are at it, we need another look at council district boundaries, which will happen after the 2010 census.
There is no reason for parts of D14 to include not only Lower Greenville but also Love Field. And there is no reason for D2 to include Grauwyler Park and Lakewood Library.
(Not that Ms. Medrano could find her way to Lower Greenville in the daylight let alone evening).
If Lower Greenville were one district, we might see something better here as opposed to what we have now - one rep fighting to save her side of the street while the other totally ignores the other side. What’s a code enforcement officer to do???
The Oak Lawn Committee has met with the representatives of the St. Regis Hotel development project on several occasions since January. We established a subcommittee consisting of some of our more knowledgeable experts, including two architects, two homeowners who live nearby, and two business people. The subcommittee worked with the FOCH people to address our concerns for the neighborhood and the impact on the Katy Trail. The FOCH people were very cooperative and made the appropriate compromises. The OLC notified Mr. Emmons and Ms. Hunt of our support for the St. Regis Hotel application and is looking forward to a great addition to the Oak Lawn/Uptown neighborhood.
Unfortunately, there are people at the City who have supported the ideas of the recent ForwardDALLAS project in words only and are swayed by influencial people who hold to a “not in my backyard” mentality.
This is another example of why my property taxes and sales taxes will follow me from Deep Ellum to our new home in Arlington next weekend. I just can’t justify giving that money to a city run like this. It was honestly a deciding factor in our decision to buy elsewhere.
(And, no, I don’t mind anything having to do with the new Cowboys Stadium. So there.)
Hey Trey, you don’t know what you’re talking about. Shekter is a DEVELOPER, so sure he’s going to be upset with a plan commissioner that represents RESIDENTS wishes over those of developers.
As far as the Oak Lawn Committee, they’re increasingly dominated by business interests and developers. And Texas de Brazil, the Mansion Residence, and Gables? Thankfully, their owners have no more say than the residents who live in the area.
Schutze is right. We don’t need more density crammed down our throats by outsiders that we cannot remove from office (i.e. other council members). The “fiefdoms” that you loathe so much protect me from arrogant politicians who want to pave over the entire world, including neighborhoods outside their districts (like Natinsky).
Emmons represents us well, and when WE decide he’s not doing a good job for US, we’ll let our council rep know. As far as my neighborhood is concerned, you — and Park Cities Wick — can go suck an egg. But that’s the real issue here, isn’t it? You think you know what’s best for me, but Emmons listens to me (a resident) and not you (a D Magazine blowhard). How frustrating for you.
This is a goofy article. What would it gain Emmons to stifle appropriate development? Are you saying he is on the take because he refuses a multimillion dollar project? That makes no sense.
More than likely, Emmons only problem is that he is in the way of some big money developers and they want him gone.
wow, avi calling someone an *******? Irony, anyone? Pot? Kettle? Bueller?
Mr. Morris
Thank you for the additional title of Developer.
If you consider a person that developed one great project in the 80’s, “THE DOWNS ON HILLCREST” a 56 acre RESIDENTIAL development,
then I guess I am. I have worked with developers and homeowners for many years, and I guarantee you that I never sided with a person just because they were a developer. I have many homeowners that can attest to that.
Obviously, Will Morris and Ran know nothing about what Neil Emmons is up to as a Plan Commissioner. He lies to people. It’s not because he’s on the take, it’s becaue he gets a kick out of playing power games.
Neil Emmons would rather climb a tree to tell a lie than stand flat footed and tell the truth. Two days before the P&Z hearing, lying Emmons told the St Regis people he would support their project because they had made 16-17 concessions requested by nearby property owners and residential groups. FOCH did not know until the day of the P&Z hearing that he had lied to them.
Now, lying Emmons and Cay Kolb have pulled Lordi Palmer into the matter. Who’s paying her to kill this hotel project? Palmer doesn’t even live in Dallas County, much less Dallas. She gets paid to interfer with Dallas matters.
St. Regis will build the hotel with or without the zoning changes they are requesting. Rather than a tall, thin building with lots of greenspace and sensitive to the Katy Trail, they will build a fortress looking, squat structure with the trash and deliveries backing up to the Katy Trail.
Thanks to lying Neil Emmons.
Trey, you have a good synopsis of what Neil is doing to this city. All of it is out of meanness and to curry political favor. The ***** thinks he’s going to be the next District 14 council member after Angela.
Hopefully, Angela will back away from the liar before he taints her legacy and reputation.
I think it is a good idea that the council member of a district has more input on developments in his or her district than other council members. But, when they appoint people like Emmons who kill one good development after another, and he can only be removed by the council member, then it is time for that council member to be voted out. It seems to me that Emmons is doing great harm to the areas he represents. I agree with Ms. Boyd. I hope Angela Hunt removes Emmons before he takes her down with him.
This article is deeply flawed.
First, there is actually no such thing as a denial with prejudice. There is either a denial, or a denial WITHOUT prejudice. So, perhaps the author should know just a little about what he’s talking about before launching into a baseless tirade. It is standard practice to issue a straight denial unless there is an overwhelming reason to deny without prejudice. In this case, the applicant showed no willingness to give up height, and height is a critical issue to people in this district. It is also a critical issue given the geographic location of the site.
Sorry to inform the esteemed member of the Oak Lawn committee, but ALL zoning is subject to “not in my back yard.” Zoning is precisely FOR the protection of people’s back yards, which is something that we should all understand. If a piece of zoning doesn’t directly affect a person, then that person doesn’t really have a dog in the fight.
Here is what you fail to see: A straight denial is not a death sentence. It is actually most often used to walk the applicant to the edge of the abyss, face him squarely into it, and get him to produce his best deal.
Almost all huge zoning deals are struck between a straight denial at CPC, and a Herculean effort to overcome the 3/4 supermajority required at Council to overcome it.
So, instead of blowing off half-cocked (and politically naive), perhaps all of you armchair critics could take one tiny step back and realize it should be HARD…almost impossible…to achieve a zoning change. This is good. This is what forces the best development. If you think about it for just a moment, it’s what you want.
And if you think about it for more than a moment, you’ll come to the realization that none of you really know what conversations exist between Mr. Emmons and Ms. Hunt, or how they choose to make this work between them. Are any of you really so naive as to believe that there is not a strategy when a district rep is faced with this type of upzoning? Are you THAT politically green to fail to understand this?
Trey, I love ya, but I had to weigh in…
http://tinyurl.com/5wc6qf
Back at ya, Sam.
Tim W - what are you going to do in Arlington between yawns?
Watch out East Dallas is about to morph…
Trey, I respect you as a journalist and nine times out of ten, I agree with your perspective. But you’re post on Neil Emmons is off the mark.
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.
wow, someone just got spanked.
I have worked closely on with the neighbors on the St. Regis project, and character-attacking bloggers should be personally ashamed for their lack of respect for our District 14 Plan Commissioner - who has faithfully served this community for many years. Mr. Emmons has served this District with high standards and honor, and represents the constituents of this District well, in addition to evaluating all the development issues involved in each case. The zoning height for the St. Regis is currently limited to 240′ and these developers knew that before purchasing. They should not expect otherwise. Neighbors want zoning PROTECTED and ENFORCED, otherwise, there is NO NEED TO HAVE ZONING AT ALL. I commend Mr. Emmons for his impartialness in this matter and careful consideration of this case. The City of Dallas does well to have a Plan Commission of the high calibre of individual as Mr. Emmons. All respect is due Councilwoman Hunt. These are our honored elected officials, whether you agree - or disagree.
Sam Merten quotes Emmons as follows: “’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.” One question that Sam didn’t explore and Emmons, Angela Hunt, and their supporters haven’t addressed is if, in fact, Emmons told the St. Regis people that he would support their proposal and then reneged, as the St. Regis people have alleged. I think that is worth further investigation.
Leslie Brosi said: “Neighbors want zoning PROTECTED and ENFORCED, otherwise, there is NO NEED TO HAVE ZONING AT ALL.” Generally speaking, this is a true statement, but in the case of this particular neighborhood, which neighbors do you mean? The renters in the apartment complexes in that surround the development site, who (as temporary residents) should have no say in the city’s final decision? The nearby young townhouse and condo owners who want just the kind of urban environment that the St. Regis would provide? Regardless of Mr. Emmons’ purported impartialness, I don’t think the opinions of a few old farts living the Claridge or Mansion Residences should be given the weight they appear to carry. (No offense intended to Mrs. Marcus or Ms. Cullum). And if these voices are coming from west of Turtle Creek Boulevard, then they are too far away to be listened to at all.
Neal whateveryourlastnameis, I don’t know which sources you are using, but Mr. Emmons NEVER promised the St. Regis folks ANYTHING. Your sources are badly mistaken about any imagined assurances - in fact, no assurances were were mentioned in the last neighborhood meeting with the developer because I and many other neighbors from both sides of Turtle Creek Boulevard were represented. …. On a separate note, I am particularly concerned by bloggers such as yourself who use dubious sources hiding behind anonymity, particularly those who don’t live in this community or district, trying to change public policy. Somehow I didn’t expect this sort of trash in Frontburner. However, citizens of Dallas are smart enough to recognize a slander campaign when they see it, especially when it is organized by professional bloggers and anonymous bloggers who deliberately conceal their identities.
Leslie, congratulations, you’ve just embarrassed yourself. Maybe you should have considered posting anonymously after all. If you go back and read my post, you will see that I didn’t level accusations against Neil Emmons or anyone else. I was merely referring to Trey’s statement in his original post that after “whispering sweet nothings in FOCH’s ears, Emmons used the fiefdom tradition on April 3 to have the case ‘declined with prejudice,’” and to Sharon Boyd’s more explicit accusation in her post above and in her comment to the Sam Merten piece on Unfair Park linked above. Furthermore, neither I nor anyone else alleged that Neil Emmons gave such assurances to the developers in the “last neighborhood meeting” you mentioned above. It is entirely possible (and under the circumstances, more likely) that those assurances were given outside the environment of a public meeting (but good try with that little piece of misdirection - better luck next time). Of course, it is entirely possible that no such assurances were given at all and the St. Regis people are lying and Trey’s reporting is incorrect. But to my knowledge, neither Neil Emmons nor anyone else has denied these allegations. Not that they need to, of course, but I do think it’s noteworthy that nowhere in the ferocious pushback coming from you and other commenters has this question been addressed.
Now to address your other points: If I ever go out and do my own reporting on this issue rather than just commenting from the peanut gallery, then rest assured I will post my information under my full name. Second, I doubt that I would spend this much time or brainpower commenting on a nice Saturday afternoon if I didn’t live (and own property) in the district. In fact, I have lived in the central Dallas area all my life so not only do I have a personal interest in seeing further constructive development in Uptown, but I also have (over the 38 years of my life) gained a full awareness of the dysfunction and political lunacy (if not outright corruption) happening in our city government, so pardon my somewhat cynical response to your demand for “respect” and “honor” for our city officials, particularly the unelected ones.
Unfortunately, there has been some incorrect reporting on this case, and I hope that has now been clarified. Neal….As to your personal issue, those who post comments under a partial or anonymous names (whether you live in the neighborhood or not) do so from “the peanut gallery”, as you called it, and cannot be considered credible by the general public. That is why there has been legislation recently before Congress to change anonymous postings on the internet. I hope you will have the courage to come forth in light of day and let the Citizens of Dallas get to know who you profess to be - unless you prefer to meet in dark, private corners for unknown reasons. The neighbors would invite you to participate if we knew who you were, as we believe a variety of viewpoints is essential to a building a strong community. We would hope that you would join us, rather than operate in the shadows.
If Trey got spanked by Angela then he probably enjoyed it because all she offered up was blind support for Neil and status quo rhetoric that at its best exposes her for her lack of knowledge of the subject project and at its worst is just a lack of vision for a better city and neighborhood. As for Leslie Brosi who claims to have been at the negotiating table…her credibility is shot because she does not even understand the current zoned height… Which is 196′…I repeat 196′…not 240′. Maybe Ms. Hunt will take the time to understand the issue so that in the end she comes around and agrees with Trey 10 out of 10 times instead of 9 out of 10 times. Anyone who has the time and energy to play around in the blog world should understand these facts: The developer spent six months plus listening to Neil, making the project better for all stakeholders such as a great respect for the view corridor of the nearest highrise residents, a better less impactful shadow footprint on the Park Bridge Court neighbors, amazing sensitivity to the Katy Trail by building 55′ tall townhomes adjacent and moving the tower 157′ off the trail and a commitment to underground parking giving the building a life at the street. These are just some of the items put into the proposed amended PD 184…that’s right, the site is not even part of the revered Oak Lawn PD 193… If it were, it would have an allowable height of 240′ and 4 to 1 FAR. In the end, the developer negotiated against himself cause Neil shot it down…and here is the real kicker, in doing so he squashed the efforts of a diligent and professional City staff who recommended 240′ and a 4.2 to 1 FAR (4.5 to 1 would be allowed in PD 193 because of the residential component). It is sad and shocking at the same time. I for one hope the Mayor and City Council, which of course includes Ms. Hunt, will pay close attention to the message this mess has sent. Mrs. Marcus said time and again “this isn’t fair”. I now understand she meant it isn’t fair to work so hard, listen so closely, truly play nice…only to have someone like Neil not play nice and make a power play that no one benefits from.
Leslie, this is going to be my final word. First, I appreciate your willingness to include others in your discussions. Second, you and everyone else are perfectly entitled to disregard this and any other anonymous blog posting or comment as you see fit. However, it is extremely disturbing (and somewhat revealing) to me that you apparently support an act of Congress outlawing anonymous blog posts and comments. The right to publish anonymously is a basic component of our First Amendment rights, subject to limitations relating to libel, incitement, copyright, disclosure of confidential or secret information etc. If none of those limitations apply (and none of them do in relation to any of the posts on this thread), then the reader can decide whether to give any weight to the anonymous statement taking into account both the substance of the statement as well as the anonymity of the writer. It’s called the “marketplace of ideas” and it’s simply how the First Amendment works.
You might ask yourself why Congress would even consider such a law. Has it occurred to you that it is the members of Congress themselves as well as the various interest groups and other elites that own them that want to curtail our rights, just so it’s easier for them to intimidate, take retribution on and silence their critics? On the other hand, your demand that we all use our real names, your strident support for Neil Emmons and your insistence that we all give Emmons, Angela Hunt and our other city officials the “honor” and “respect” you say they deserve all suggest to me that you’re on the government’s side on this one. Be careful what you wish for.
I served with Emmons on the P&Z.I sat there week after week and saw what Emmons was doing. I visited with Hunt and told her two years ago about him. What is coming out now has been going on for years. If anyone thinks it’s not true go to City Hall any Thursday and witness what Emmons is doing. Attend any meeting on a topic, tape it, attend another meeting same topic tape it and compare. Attend meeting with applicant tape it, then you will not need to wonder what the truth is. Emmons also has his favorite developers, who do get their zoning, with neighborhood opposition.
Roodog, thank you for reminding me that the current maximum height restriction for the St. Regis property is 196 feet not 240 feet. St. Regis requested a total height of 271 feet and an additional density of 85,000 square feet than current zoning allows. The Dallas Plan Commission was tasked with evaluating the various aspects of this project, too numerous to mention in this blog. Quite a daunting task! The Plan Commission is more than one person. Our City government is a Process. Let’s keep a positive outlook , with mutual respect, and continue working to make Dallas the best City in the country!
Ms. Culbreath, to be diplomatic, I have witnessed some of your meetings, possess tapes of some of them and believe that “those who live in glass houses should not throw stones.”
Neal, I’m sorry this topic upsets you. If you have nothing to hide, there is nothing to worry about.
Sorry to inform the esteemed AGA (whoever that is), I am fully aware that ALL zoning is subject to “not in my back yard.” (I dislike being taken out of context. Fortunately in a blog, you can go back to actually read what I wrote and hopefully comprehend it.
I said: “Unfortunately, there are people at the City who have supported the ideas of the recent ForwardDALLAS project in words only and are swayed by influencial people who hold to a “not in my backyard” mentality.” In other words, there are some people at the City who should have a wider vision for the neighborhood and its place in the overall future of the City of Dallas, but they are swayed by people who talk big and future-thinking on development UNTIL it comes to the view from their front window.
Ms. Brosi:
You know nothing about City Hall if you think the P&Z is more than 1 person. Years ago when I served on the P&Z and Betty Culbreath was chair, we were under 8-3-1 and there was no fiefdom. All cases were considered by the entire commission. Today, the district rep (i.e., lying Emmons)is the sole determiner of life or death for a zoning case in his district. The rest of the commissioners follow along, just like at council.
In her second term as chair (Miller appointment), Betty got through a rule to require the 2 adjacent district reps included in any impact cases, like St Regis. She also got through a rule that 1 meeting a month would be in the evening for the convenience of citzens. As soon as she resigned, lying Emmons pushed through resolutions to get both rules repealed.
Betty and I frequently cancelled each other’s vote when we served together, but she was a good chair and fair. We became friends, and I consider her one of my closest friends today.
So, don’t try to justify lying Emmons’ bad behavior by alleging false claims against Betty Culbreath. Is it because she stood up to lying Emmons’ baiting and abuse that you make these claims? In every case where he challenged her, the City Atty supported her interpretation of the rules. Look it up!
By the way, I talked with the FOCH rep myself who took me through his entire experience with lying Emmons, who told him on Tuesday b/4 the P&Z meeting he was supporting the St Regis zoning case in its evolved status. They were completely blind sided by what Emmons did at the hearing.
I’ve known lying Emmons longer than you. He’s a bad guy who lies to people for the fun of it.
Your friendship with Ms. Culbreath is a nice thing, but not relevant to our discussions.
The evening Plan Commission meetings were a failed experiment, obviously not workable, especially since it was such a hardship on the working City staff. Most observers inside and out of City Hall were aware that it was not working, despite Ms. Culbreath’s best intentions to leave a “legacy”.
I saw the Plan Commission run smoothly, saw a greater sense of decorum and respect for guest speakers & attendees, noticed the agenda moved more quickly because there was no time taken for Grand-Standing, and I also recognized that the overall organization performed better as a team AFTER MS. CULBREATH LEFT THE PLAN COMMISSION.
I’m just one of those “old” neighbors. If it was obvious to me, it must have been obvious to nearly EVERYONE.
Please do not pull “The Way we were” material related to Ms. Culbreath. She has served the City and continues to do so and I wish her well in her NEW endeavors.
Ms. Culbreath,
I personally witnessed you trying to quash Mr. Emmons when he attempted to prevent a scam charter school from getting a zoning change, and you did everything in your power to exclude facts from the hearing–up to and including making an attempt to have Mr. Emmons forcibly removed.
The city attorney tried to put you in your place, you wouldn’t hear of it. Then the entire commission voted you down when you tried to bring punitive action to the floor.
You ran a three-ring circus, not a plan commission. It was shameful. I personally witnessed you berating and interrupting citizens during their few given minutes of testimony…grandstanding and generally behaving like a petulant child, wielding power as if it were your own.
Anyone with any sense of fairness and dignity cheered the moment you were off the commission. And Ms. Boyd, if that is the kind of Plan Commission you envision as somehow fair and progressive, then you’ve revealed a more disgusting side of yourself than your empty ad hominems have revealed here.
I too have tapes. Do we want to go there? Because if we do, Neil Emmons comes out clean as a whistle, and the sham you’re trying to put over on people who WERE NOT there will be quite evident.
AGA & Leslie,
I hear Mussollin ran a good railroad, too.
In all of Betty’s battles with Emmons, the City Atty backed her decisions.
Neil’s a slick actor. Just because he cites something, don’t assume it’s true. He once cited a non-existent bylaw to the Oak Lawn Committee when he’s side lost a vote. Because we assumed another adult and the OLC president would not lie to his fellow committee members, we withdrew our resolution. He later laughed that we fell for his trick and said the bylaw he cited didn’t exist.
Don’t know why anyone would hang on to tapes of a P&Z hearing, but I have 20+ people who were at the OLC meeting who can attest to what Emmons did to us.
Orderliness is not always a component of democracy. It seems to be very important to control freaks.
This seems very disconcerting to me, I would expect the city and neighborhood groups to be insisting that a new development provide underground parking, but what I’m reading is they are BLOCKING a new development that is WILLING to provide underground parking and in turn are going to “allow” a parking structure that is going to be visible by every person walking down the Katy Trail or driving down Cedar Springs!! Who is running this show?? Parking lots and parking structures are a blight in downtown cities and even more so in an area like Oak Lawn.
I hope it’s not too late to do anything, but someone at the city needs to grab the reigns and get this back on track quick. We should be so lucky to have a developer come to our city, not ask for a penny and then spend more than necessary to give Dallas a quality development.
If you chopped the head off of every developer in this city today, there would be twice as many of them tomorrow, all wanting half-again as many development rights as they bought.
A point worth mentioning is that this city does not have a “planning department.” There are two full-time planners in the City, and they’re mostly buried in busywork. We have a “Department of Development Services,” which contrary to the ideas floating around in this debate, do no planning whatsoever. They help developers get cases ready for CPC hearings, and they try to blunt-down the most egregious requests.
NO developer shows up at CPC with plans that are good for the surrounding areas…at least none that I have ever seen in my umpteen dozen days of sitting through cases waiting my turn. What I see, over and over, are people trying every way they possibly can to somehow build more than they have a right to build under their zoning.
The developer in question did EXACTLY what the worst of them do–they floated a pretty-perfect drawing of what they’d build if only we’d give them scads of extra height and development rights. Then they show you the hideous, butt-ugly drawing of what they threaten to build if you don’t give them what they want. It’s tantamount to blackmailing the public. And it’s also complete horsefeathers.
This developer will sit down and get serious now that it will take 12 votes to overrule the denial. They’ll build the pretty building, and they’ll build it shorter. That’s how this game works.
Ken, zoning is there to protect the land and community. Some developers expect the City to hand over the up-zoning so they can “make their numbers work”. Seriously, this is an argument that I’ve heard numerous times. You would think prospective developers would “run their numbers first” - just like every other tax-payer is expected to do when they buy a car. Wouldn’t it be just peachy if we all got bailed out after we bought a Bentley when we could only afford a Toyota and our argument is “my numbers don’t work”! If the City had better-defined policies in place, i.e. that up-zoning is done in the rarest of circumstances, the City could save a fortune in administration costs, the inner city parks and green spaces would be spared, prospective developers would know what to expect, and tax-payers would have more confidence in City leaders. Developers apply for and EXPECT up-zoning in this area. Up-zoning is not something developers should be led to expect. That should be an exception. I believe we have a problem at City Hall.
AGA (aka Neil Emmons from the tone and very knowledgeable comments of City procedure) - now ya’ll have really confused me! If they’re in their own PD (184 I think someone said) then why do ya’ll keep talkn about PD 193? Cuz if PD 193 is all around them, then their extra height of 30 or even 50 feet is like 10-15 yards. And even I know that is only a first down for our beloved Cowboys! So let’s show these boys some southern charm and give them their few feet…..BUT, smile sweetly and graciously and accept their 16 or 17 gifts!
Kay, haven’t you noticed I’ve been smiling?
I just want to state, as a citizen, i think it’s incredible that we now have a forum and the technology to have this debate, AND have community leaders, council people, columnists, et al., chime in on the process.
It’s pretty riveting, and I think this thread alone notes how powerful and enlightening our new media vehicle has become. On the bittersweet side, it’s also the all-to-obvious indicator of why the paper media is doomed.
I can only hope the other non-interactive council people take note, and start to jump in on these debates as well.
So Angela, what are your thoughts on this project? Will you support it when it comes before the CC?
Ms. Brosi & AGA I do not apologize to any one the way I ran the meeting. I did not allow Emmons to ask question that were not zoning related because, I know where they would end up. In COURT ! The case you are speaking of, Emmons and Angela Marshall were asking what the State grade standing was for the Charter school, however they never ask low performing DISD schools the same question. Asking DHA what kind of people will rent their property ? Deny zoning because they house poor people . The questions had nothing to do with land use. Zoning is Land. Remember Cinemark! Millions of tax dollars spent because zoning denied on bull crap. You need to get your information right when it comes to me. I work by the rule. Do I get up set ? Yes ! When I see someone misusing the system and wasting tax dollars. I serve this City for 41 years, free and work full time. I have done well and could be very happy sitting at home. I do not call anyone and ask to be on any board or commission. Everyone knows how serious I take the job and Fight go with it!If I’m on your side after the meeting you come up and say thank you, the other side storms out of the room hating me so it all goes with the territory. Just as Sharon spoke for me I can tell you all are speaking for Emmons. Have a wonderful day!
Ms. Culbreath, The Dallas Morning News reported an interesting story related to your management of the Plan Commission, entitled “Culbreath apologizes for actions taken at previous meetings, erupts again” (date 4-14-06):
http://www.dallasnews.com/cgi-....._print.cgi
The DMN article is public information about the tumultuous goings-on when you were in the leadership position at the Plan Commission and it verifies eye-witness testimonies.
Your many years of public service, with noble intent, have been duly noted.
Ms. Brosi - I will have to trust the proper authorities whenever they indicate that Neil Emmons works hard. Meanwhile, I’ m ready for my punishment when Congress passes that law. Perhaps it will cure me of my other problem - asking people offline “Do you know who I am?”
If you have any way to get this vital piece of legislation passed please do not delay.
Keep Dallas Positive. Three Strikes. Out.