Lurching towards Houtopia: Montrose Edition

Safely tucked behind the Houston Chronicle's pay wall is a pretty interesting story about changes that are coming to the Montrose area and why some people will never get what they want out of the whole urbanization movement.

Montrose tries to keep its vibe. Erin Mulvaney, HoustonChronicle.com ($$$)

Interestingly, the address seems to suggest that the original idea for the headline was as follows:

"Montrose at critical junction for retail."

One small part of the article intrigued me and lays out the issues that Houston is going to have in its efforts to move everyone inside Loop 610:

Scott McClelland is very familiar with the balancing act required to succeed in Montrose. McClelland, Houston president for H-E-B, set out to develop a store at Alabama and Dunlavy in 2011 on what at the time was the largest undeveloped tract in the neighborhood. News of the project initially disappointed many in the community, who hoped to see a park instead.

To my way of thinking, this is the problem with many of a new-urbanist lean. They want to have their cake and eat it as well.  In this case the relatively affluent, predominantly white, crowd that's moving into the neighborhood are just fine getting in their cars and driving over to Central Market to do their shopping. To preserve that they'd rather have a park where they can lounge, check their iPhones and generally while away the hours.

Unfortunately, for them, the Parker administration has identified so-called "food deserts" as a problem. A problem that a centrally located H.E.B is primed to address.  As more and more people move into the area having a grocery store nearby will be a great plus. The developers will want it because it falls into the myth their building of a car-less Houston and the newer residents want it because they're buying the developers story.

You are starting to see more and more of this as the traditional "quirky" restaurants, bars and retail shops make way for things new-urbanists like including Chipotle and (at the moment) high-end beer taverns and restaurants whose seasonal menus come, at least in part, from the back of a Sysco truck.

Ironically, the result of this change is leading to the suburbanization of Houston's urban core. There's a homogenizing effect on retail (think Urban Outfitters instead of High Times), restaurants (many of the so-called quirky, independent establishments are actually well thought-out concepts controlled by increasingly large investor groups) and entertainment. (Is there really much difference between any of Houston's hip, trendy bars other than name and theme?)

What's being driven from the currently hot areas of Houston's urban core is what made them quirky in the first place. Namely, ethnic eateries, shopping and entertainment. Those truly, independent and quirky businesses are moving out to the suburbs, where rent is much, much cheaper and they can make a go of it selling to people with whom they share a cultural heritage.

The funniest part of all of this is the following:

The challenge moving forward, especially as the area becomes more packed with townhomes, condos and other multifamily projects, is to upgrade the infrastructure while preserving the vibe that draws people there, business and economic developers agreed in a discussion on Wednesday at the posh La Colombe d'Or.

Emphasis mine.

The people who are doing the most hand-wringing over this are those who are the least equipped to understand the problem and those who have done the most to cause it. Truly, in Houston, the foxes of economic development councils are guarding the hen-house of traditional neighborhoods.

While the people suggest that they want parks, what they really want is the ability to go to Panera Bread to grab some breakfast and surf social media.  The 'leaders' who are fretting about this seem happy to quaff Champagne and dine on lightly roasted peacock while trying to figure out how to provide the illusion of quirky without affecting the bottom line.

I'm not suggesting these groups shouldn't try to make money, I'm simply suggesting that they drop the pretense of preserving neighborhoods and admit that what's best for Houston (and their bottom line) is a remaking of the same.

The Law of Unintended Consequences: Quriky Houston Bar Edition.

One of the things that has always made Houston so appealing to those of an entrepreneurial bent were relatively loose land restrictions that allowed for low property values which made it affordable to start and run a business.

Enter the new-urbanist types who demanded that Houston be laid-out under a plan, using seemingly benign terms like "form-based codes" and "smart-growth" which were really just keywords for "mechanisms to keep property values inflated to keep out the riff-raff.

The problem with this idea is that it also makes it more and more difficult for those uber-quirky, hotly desired Mom and Pop shops that the new-urbanists love so much to make a go of it.

Case in point.....

Boneyard Drinkery to close after November 30, 2014. Syd Kearney, Chron.com

The reason? The property that the bar has been renting has been sold. Relocating is off the table because of the 'outrageous increase of property value'  the last couple of years, according to its Facebook page.

Now, new urbanists such as Houston Tomorrow and Peter "plan" Brown would argue that these property values are not being driven by their plans to bring about Houtopia, but by a city that is beholden to developers and allows for land speculation.

There is a little bit of truth to this but it's the planning and attempts to create "most favored" status on certain areas that has led to these big increases in the first place. Instead of growing organically, and where the market might suggest it's needed, Houston's business climate is now being encouraged to move into certain corridors which allow for speculators to run amok.

The more quirky and independent we try and force Houston to be, the more we lose the quirky and independent soul that drew us all here in the first place.  What we're going to end up with is a very segregated inner-loop where everything looks pretty much the same. Yes, in legal terms the businesses in question might be 'independent' but in reality they're just going to be carbon-copies of one another.

We've seen this before in the mirror-image wine bars that sprung up (and then petered out) around the city and we're seeing it again in bars restaurants and craft-beer establishments.  Unsurprisingly then, we're also seeing them fade away.

This cycle will continue as long as Houston is being planned by people with homogenous tastes and food-borg like sensibilities.  That should make you sad.

Required Blogging: Election Day.

It's finally here.

After months of being subjected to political ads featuring half-truths and dodgy claims, Texas Lock-Step Political Media reporting of questionable accuracy and some truly horrible claims from politicians that they will "fight" for one thing or another, our long national nightmare winds down (temporarily) today.

While around 10% of the Nation will spend the evening hanging on the trickling in returns to see how the Republicans and Democrats fare across the Country, the balance of power in the Senate will be largely ignored by 90% of you who have better things to do.

In Texas, the questions are less about who is going to win or lose than just how bad the beating will be. In order to drive at least some interest, the TLSPM is mining the fields of presumed electoral ash to find a sprinkling of diamonds for Texas Democrats to cling to.

Yes, it's cute that Wendy! Davis is saying that all of the polls are off and she will somehow pull off the upset of the season but, odds are, this is not going to be the case. The better question is just how far behind she as fallen.  For most, the benchmark is 42% which, assuming 56-57% of the remaining vote goes to Abbott would put her at 14-15% behind.

In terms of the effort put forth by Wendy! and Battleground Texas, this would spell disaster because it would mean that, despite their work, they gained exactly zero ground from 4 years prior. I believe that this will be the likely scenario with Wendy! taking in somewhere around 40-42% and Abbott cleaning house. 

If I had to guess, I see things falling like this:

Governor
Wendy!  41%
Abbott    58%

Lt. Governor
Van de Putte 44%
Patrick 55%

Attorney General
Paxton  53%
Houston 46%

Comptroller
Hegar 58%
Collier 41%

Ag Commish
Miller 57%
Hogan 42%

Land Commish
Bush 60%
Cook 39%

Railroad Commish
Sitton 59%
Brown 40%

Prop 1
Yes 65%
No  35%

I think there is something to the "no to Dan Patrick" vote and I think Sam Houston does the best of all the Democratic Statewide candidates on name alone.  George P. Bush should win by the largest margin due to his name ID and I don't see Prop 1 having any trouble due to the absence of any organized opposition.

All that being said, I think tonight is going to be a disaster for Wendy!, Matt Angle and the folks over at Battleground. In a sane political party this would lead to a re-examination of message, platform, leadership and infrastructure but, this being Texas Democrats, I've a feeling not much is going to change. It would be good news for Texas Republicans if the Dems continue to back Angle as a key player in their state party because he has shown himself to be fairly incompetent in the areas of running good campaigns, identifying quality candidates and structuring a winning message for them.

I do think that the lack of impact shown by the folks over at Battleground is going to be hotly debated within the TLSPM for months to come. I wouldn't be surprised to see the National Democratic Party pull their bigger names from the group and leave in place what is basically a shell organization, possibly headed up by Angle, which would be a dream come true for Texas Republicans.

One important thing to watch that's only receiving minimal play from the TLSPM is how all of the candidates fare among Hispanic voters, and in the Rio Grande Valley.  If Abbott, Bush, Sitton, Miller, Hegar and, to a lesser extent, Patrick can contend, and possibly even win in that area it could punch a huge hole in the "demographics are destiny" electoral weather balloon, possibly damaging the hopes of Texas Democrats for years to come.

Over the last weekend, on vacation in Boston, I saw a few ads for Republican senate candidates who did their level best to tie Democratic senators to President Obama. I commented to my wife that most voters in Massachusetts and New Hampshire (the two states for which the races were contested) would probably view this as a feature not a bug.  I think the same thing applies to Texas Dems but in reverse.

I realize that it's political blasphemy these days to suggest anything other than ideological purity but would everything be better if we returned (at least regionally) to the days where liberal Republican and conservative Democrat were more than just museum pieces?  I know that I, for one, would enjoy having two quality candidates from whom to select in the general election, in addition to the primary. It'd make all of this seem just a little more worth it.

Instead of obsessing over ground-games and GOTV and just how bad the whipping is going to be there might be a reason to stay up and watch the returns.  Of course, the person rooting hardest against this is Stan Stanart, the Harris County Clerk who's issues with releasing voting numbers is now legend.

Go get informed and vote. 

Houston Leadership Vacuum: Ready! Fire! Aim! (Lies, Damn lies, and statistics version)

I'm sure at least some of my reader's saw yesterday's story on the horror of increased traffic collisions since the pulling of red-light cameras.

Crashes double at Houston intersections after red-light cameras pulled. James Pinkerton, Chron.com

HPD statistics show an increase of 117 percent over the last four years. While the cameras were in operation from 2006-2010, HPD reported 4,100 crashes at those intersections followed by almost 9,000 crashes during the next four years without camera, including a 30 percent increase in fatal collisions.

However, HPD's data did not show traffic counts over time at the monitored intersections.

(Emphasis mine)

This is a case of selectively presenting statistics with the desire of attending a desired result. In this case, HPD would REALLY like to have back that $10MM per year.

The problem is that without these traffic count numbers this particular set of statistics is bunk.  Since 2010 there have been major road-works projects on area feeder roads (driven on 59 by Greenway Plaza lately?) that have impacted traffic counts and Houston's population has grown mightily since the lights were removed.

That's not to suggest that collisions, including fatal collisions, haven't increased, but a correlation does not equal causation.

One of the biggest problems that journalists have when presenting statistics is that, in many cases, they don't have the mathematical and analytical education to understand what they mean or to apply context. In this case, it appears that Mr. Pinkerton did understand the holes in the data but, either through editing or omission, did no continue the line of thinking to its logical end.

I wish he would have. It wouldn't have meant that the HPD numbers were bogus, but it might have provided a platform to start the City down the road of trying to figure out exactly WHY these collisions are happening rather than just firing a revenue cannon at the problem and hoping it goes away.

It's just another case where Houston's elected non-leadership overreacted to a problem without having a full understanding of what that problem was. As Pinkerton pointed out in the story, the unintended consequences of not taking the time to properly aim resulted in the City spending $4.8MM in settlement money that could have been used to fix some pot-holes. Too many times in Houston the government does this while the Chronicle, and other media, drop the ball in their watchdog role.

From a good governance perspective (as the InterLeft continually reminds us "we all want") this should be priority one for everyone. Sadly, it's not.

How will they govern? The Republican Majority as a whole.

The current Texas election, much the same as recent elections, is expected to be a Republican rout. The brand of the Texas Democrats is so weakened state-wide, their base of support so concentrated, that it will be a major upset should all of the state-wide races and a large majority of the State House and Senate races not tilt the Republicans way.

Amazingly, after 20-plus years of Republican rule, the question "Can the Republicans Govern?"  is still being asked by some members of Texas' Lock-Step Political Media.

Political Monsters. The New Mrs. White, Chron.com

Don't want to vote? So don't. It's the Texan way. Lisa Falkenberg, HoustonChronicle.com ($$$)

Abbott says that, as Governor he would 'be like Greg Abbott'. Peggy Fikac, HoustonChronicle.com ($$$)

Elkins' conflict. The New Mrs. White, Chron.com

UT/TT Poll: Transportation Amendment on cruise control. Ross Ramsey, Texas Tribune.

UT/TT Poll: Abbott holds a commanding lead over Davis. Ross Ramsey, Texas Tribune

Why Entitlement Reform isn't on the GOP Agenda. Jim Manley, WSJ

Davis ad focused on Abbott's wheelchair raises legitimate questions. Wayne Slater, Dallas Morning News

In the Valley, Van de Putte blasts Patrick, urges students to vote. Christopher Hooks, The Texas Observer


With one exception (the WSJ story) all of the articles that I've chosen carry a common theme: The questions still being raised by the TLSPM as to whether or not Texas Republicans can govern.  It was a question first clumsily asked by a then-relevant Paul Burka in 2003 and it's been repeated as accepted dogma by the TLSPM since that time*.

In 2003, that question made some sense.  Having taken over the entirety of the Texas political process for the first time there were legitimate questions whether or not this group of fresh-faced, politically inexperienced lawmakers could come together, back away from the scary rhetoric and actually create a budget, address the state's issues, and do something besides cut taxes and then wait for the furor to subside.

The good news, if you're a citizen of Texas and not a hard-core partisan, is that they did. The sky did not fall and things pretty much went on as they had for generations.  Yes there were tax cuts, tort-reform and a whole bunch of other things that made Democrats cringe, but the basic functions of government never ground to a halt. (Except for when the Democrats decided to take a vacation in Ardmore, OK)

A much bigger issue is that the Republicans, either through ignorance or indifference, have not done a very good job outlining exactly what they think good government looks like. While "cut taxes" is a mantra that's resonating at the ballot box there's not been an overriding narrative of what cutting taxes looks like in relation to things that citizens expect from their government. When you look at the current iteration of the top of the Republican ballot there's very little to indicate this is going to change.

Abbott, despite his ads speaking about infrastructure and education, has an issues page filled with National red meat for the base Dan Patrick is being Dan Patrick and while he's promoting his vouchers plan for education alongside property tax reductions, he's been off and on that bandwagon for years now and, seemingly, if it does get fixed he's out of campaign material. Glenn Hegar is saying a lot without actually saying anything. And Ken Paxton and George P. Bush are clearly already thinking about a higher office.

Before you shut this down and think that I'm suggesting you should vote against the Republican slate you're mistaken. As a fiscal conservative I think that all of these candidates deserve your vote. The narrative of the TLSPM has been that, especially in the races for Comptroller and Attorney General, the Democrats offer a slate of pragmatic, business friendly candidates who are going to govern against progressive type and not try to bury the state's economy under an avalanche of new business taxes and soak-the-rich policies to make everyone pay their 'fair share'.  This is a happy fantasy, but one that I don't share based on the candidates own statements and legislative histories.

Which brings us back to the narrative. If you only read the TLSPM and nothing else then it's amazing that Texas Republicans can fog a mirror electorally speaking. Part of this is because Republicans such as Perry and Patrick have shown that you don't need the media to win in Texas and part of it is because the TLSPM likes and agrees with the Texas Democrats more often then they like and agree with Texas Republicans. In many ways, those narratives are never going to go away no matter what Republicans do, short of turning to Democratic policies.

Even IF Texas Republicans decided to pivot and support the DREAM Act, fund education beyond the dreams of Avarice, move to change the voting laws to allow for same-day registration and do pretty much everything the TLSPM desires, they would still push for Democrats to be elected because they would still think more would be done if only the right people were in charge.

Clearly the Republican way-forward is with principle. But it also lies in defining exactly what those principles are. What ARE the things that Texas Republicans feel to be 'core government services?' In the linked editorial addressing Rep. Elkin's recent troubles it's a given that the state has the obligation to regulate and eliminate pay-day and auto-title loans.  Do they?  Is it the obligation of the State to clothe, house and properly educate every child regardless of their desire? Does the State have an obligation to provide grants and tax breaks to bring business (and, by extension, jobs) to Texas?

Unlike Lisa Falkenberg, I'm not going to attempt to sit behind my keyboard on a Sunday evening and tell you what you need to think. Nor am I going to belittle you if you think differently than I.  There are, I admit, sound arguments behind both the yes and the no's on all of these positions. Choosing to think yes or no where I think differently is not a sign of mental weakness (as Falkenberg (wrongly) suggests) it's a sign of mental strength.

What I do know is that Republicans need to start doing a better job outlining what are core functions of government and what are not. And Republican voters had better start doing a better job rewarding candidates who take the issues seriously. The second problem will be how to get this message out to the voters, because the TLSPM is not going to be very keen on putting it out there for them.

Finally, Texas Republicans need a leader who's not only solid on the issues, but able to communicate them effectively.  For all of the noise relating to 'demographics is destiny' and Battleground Texas, the sense of inevitability surrounding the two is overblown. To counter this Texas Republicans are going to have to get better at their ground game, in their communications and in controlling their rhetoric. Because, right now, the left is doing a much better job of this and what's really holding them back is a dearth of quality candidates, a national party that's doing whatever they can to blow it and some curious policy positions that are at odds with the electorate. At some point, this is going to change and Texas Republicans will have a fight on their hands.

Conservative Republicans could take huge steps toward winning this fight by clarifying the conservative position now. To do this it's time for conservatives to stop saying what they're against and start saying what they're FOR. I'm not sure if there's anyone in this crop of state-wide candidates that's able to accomplish this however.  I hope I'm wrong.





































*2003 was the first year that Republicans held all of the State-wide offices along with majorities in the Texas House and Senate. In reality Republicans had a strangle-hold on state-wide races for much longer.

Houston Leadership Vacuum: How to torpedo bullet trains.

There's a lot of news coming out today about the proposed bullet train between Houston and Dallas....

Federal officials green-light Houston-Dallas high speed rail environmental study. Dug Begley, Houston Chronicle.

While the environmental study is a first, necessary step, and all looks rosy, I still think there's a better than average chance Houston's sub-par delegation of political officials and "leaders" are going to mess this up.

There's an important take-away, hidden behind the Chron's pay-wall, regarding the investor group behind the current project.

(I'm just going to quote the pertinent quote here and encourage you to go read the entire article if you can)

Robert Eckels, president of Texas Central Railway, the company proposing the line, said in a statement that the notice begins a process, "which, true to our overall philosophy, will be funded with private dollars."

The emphasis is mine.

I've had the opportunity to speak with a couple of people associated with this project and they have all told me that the private-only funding aspect of this is a must-have for the project to go forward. The reason for this is simple: If you start accepting Federal and State funds then you have to meet Federal and State priorities, most of which are designed for political, not profitable reasons.

In business, this is a deal-killer.  Given that this train is going to have extremely high capitol costs the company is going to want the flexibility to have the most profitable route structure possible.  The feeling is the inclusion of additional stops (to provide service to those who can't drive to the train) and other foibles will take away from the utility of the project itself and kill flexibility.

Already, however, we're seeing that some of Houston's dimmer bulbs are already trying to force their way into the action.

Congresswoman Sheila Jackson-Lee pressing for bullet train between Houston and Dallas. Stewart Powell, Chron.com

Jackson Lee said she had fought hard to secure $15 million in initial funding for Texas’ high-speed rail line from the U.S. Department of Transportation. The potential high-speed rail route between Houston and Dallas will include only one or two stops in between. 

“Japanese and South Korean officials both expressed interest in supporting and providing high-speed rail in the state of Texas,” Jackson Lee’s statement said. 

The lawmaker said she was working to arrange visits to Houston by the foreign officials so they could “see first-hand our needs and plans for an expanded rail transportation system.” 

No offense Ms. Jackson-Lee, but on a $10 Billion dollar project $15 Million is nothing. Furthermore it's a $15 Million dollar grant the company in charge of the project doesn't want. Unless that is Ms. Jackson-Lee is pushing to get a competing project off the ground, one funded with taxpayer dollars and that might run at a loss?  One that's funded by people that she has a relationship with?

It seems fairly apparent that Ms. Jackson-Lee either doesn't understand the current project being proposed, or she's trying to either muscle in, or muscle it out, in favor of another group of investors to which she has previous ties.

A second problem is going to be when politicians start messing with the proposed route.

Routes proposed for Houston-Dallas bullet train revealed. Dug Begley, Chron.com

Again, in conversations with people employed by the train company I've been told that routing and stops will be decided on purely profitable metrics.  If politics enters the fray and say, someone wants to build 10 extra miles of rail to service a neighborhood which makes the line unprofitable the entire thing could go up in smoke.

From the Begley article:

Looking at the southern end in the Houston area, the real decision — which could quickly get political — is which of the two preferred routes is the top contender. While the BNSF Railway option grabs a lot of Tomball area and then hooks along Loop 610 before coming south, the utility alignment connects with Cypress and follows the crowded U.S. 290 corridor in. 

If you need proof that the most destructive force in wealth creation today is politics than look no further than here.  I also question the Begley assertion that these trains will be free of lines and security.  So far we've gotten no assurances from the Federal government that the TSA will not be involved in screening. I think that there will.

All that said, as it's currently designed I approve of this project because whether or not to build it will be based on whether or not money can be made. Obviously the investors think that it can be and their willing to take that gamble.  So be it.

When I'll remove my support is if the current crop of inept Houston elected officials, at all levels, start to try and add public funding components to this which I believe would strip the project of all value and leave us with a cash-sucking boondoggle probably named the Queen Sheila express. At least she'll be able to get her seafood meal one guesses but the rest of us will get the bill for a $10 Billion boondoggle.

Houston Leadership Vacuum: A return to Ready! Fire! Aim!

A few years back Anne Linehan and Kevin Whited of BlogHouston spent some time discussing the idiocy of Houston's Ready! Fire! Aim! method of finding solutions for problems that may, or may not exist.  Frequently these solutions were expensive and actually exacerbated other, far worse, problems in an bull-headed attempt to fix something of dodgy provenance.

Fast forward to today:

Officials hope downtown bike lane opens by end of year. Dug Begley, HoustonChronicle.com ($)

The article goes on to focus on the lack of availability of so-called armadillo land dividers and spends much time talking about green epoxy to coat the lanes and how wonderful everything will be once bicyclists have one road lane all to themselves.

It really is a beautiful vision of no-cars with thousands of Houston bicyclists pedaling along, although apparently without the pointy hats reminiscent of 1980's Saigon.

One tiny problem however:

(Just a quick snippet from the HoustonChrnoicle.com news story in respect to their pay-wall. Please go read the entire thing if you can)

It will take some time before officials can judge the lane's effect on cycling, however. Houston's first bicycle master plan is a work in progress ,and Payne said little data is available on Houstonians' bike habits.

"We have not been measuring cycling activity in our city, unfortunately, but we are going to start," he said.

The onus behind this dedicated bicycle lane is to allow riders to safely access and interconnect between bicycle trails on the East and West sides of downtown. The belief being that, again, thousands of cyclists will suddenly fill these lanes, cars will suddenly disappear from downtown and your morning commute will suddenly look more like this:

 

 

Rather than this:

 

 

 

Of course, Peter Brown would tell you that, without a plan, Houston is going to get stuck with this:

 

It seems however that we might end up with this:

Because, and this is typical of Houston, we don't know how much demand there is for bicycle riding in downtown, or any part, of Houston.  The City is not studying it, they aren't tracking it, in reality, they have no idea.

Of course, supporters of bicycling in Houston will wildly point at Critical Mass Houston as proof of case that "thousands" of people are dying to commute to work under pedal power and two wheels.  The flaw in that logic is this: There's a big difference between having some upper-middle class Caucasians joining in on a bit of low-level social protest than there is ditching the car and footing it into work solo on a daily basis.  Critical Mass is popular because it's developed a reputation as being somewhat edgy. The few hard-core bicyclists that made up the core of this ride go on a once-a-month power trip against cars, slam their fists on them, and stick their hands up ordering them to stop as the families, college kids and young professionals slowly meander by taking selfies and getting a tingle up their spine thinking that they're engaging in something that might, just possibly, be a little bit illegal.

I've said before that I take no issue with grade separated bike lanes which allow those who want to to commute throughout the city in spandex and awkward shoes.  I like the addition of bike trails and I think that their construction is a worthy cause.  However, we're talking about cordoning off an entire street lane and making it inaccessible to automobiles, in a city that has a notorious traffic problem and where the Danger train has already made certain areas impassable.

And Houston is doing this without having any idea whatsoever if there's sufficient demand to justify this decision.

Ready!  Fire! Oh....Aim!