AK123

The TDHCA sign is back up on the property. When they tried to say it was taken down because the application was no longer moving forward, that was a lie.

Since this thread is revived, I'll go ahead and post updates.

The downtown hearing in April had a huge showing. Thanks Sugar Land!

There is now a new community organization created in opposition of the proposed Goldshire Townhomes. Big thanks to all the area HOA leaders who have worked hard on this

http://www.united77498.org

As well as a twitter page

http://twitter.com/United77498

And a facebook page

http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=93063828560

Everyone in Sugar Land has until June 15th to contact TDHCA with their complaints if they haven't yet already. Details on how to do that can be found on the above pages. The decision by TDHCA will be made the following month.

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/front/6411804.html

I agree with most points made. Makes sense Dallas would be on the list... but Austin? Sorry, but that's the one that should be taken off (and I can speak as a former resident). Besides, they already San Antonio on there.

And where you can vote Houston back into the running (you can just vote for Houston... doesn't have to be 5) :

http://www.travelandleisure.com/afc/2009/newcitiesvote

Thank you for the wonderful post!!

It is not leased because people IN THAT AREA cannot afford to spend anymore. The Goodwill Donation Center and the Texas workforce commission opened because people are now buying second hand clothes and are applying with the state for jobs. IN THAT AREA!!!

THIS IS THE EXACT REASON WE NEED AFFORDABLE HOUSING IN THE AREA. YOU JUST ANSWERED YOUR OWN QUESTION!!!!

That reasoning is all just assumptions.

A Goodwill opened on Hwy 6 near Dulles in First Colony too. Does that mean that area is also having problems?

And there is plenty of affordable housing in that area. 77083. More vacancies available right now in that zip than the 150 units the developer wants to build new just south of it.

And why do you keep skirting my other question about your involvement in this development?

One more point:

This is a TDHCA TAX CREDIT development.

This is NOT a subsidized housing program or Section 8 housing. All residents are responsible for the full amount of rent each month, ther are no vouchers.

The developer of the project wants $2mil in tax funds to help build it.

And yes the rents would be very low in comparison to other area apts. Spin it any way you want, but it is still technically low-income housing.

So are you the one hired to do PR for the development? Or are you in real estate development for this complex?

You've yet to answer that.

I think VicMan is stuck with some land he cant unload and hopes Sobti will read this and buy his land.

Good job bringing in the research AK123, however I am sure TDHCA has heard them all, especially from 1998 They still allocate more money to the program year after year. Tax Credit Housing has to be built. It is a federal mandate.

Or perhaps VicMan is actually looking at this smart.

There is lots of competition this year for developments wanting the government subsidy. There's only so much money to go around. And the Goldshire development has caused a lot of public outcry compared to the others. I hear it even made front page of one of the local Fort Bend newspapers (and not in a good way).

You still have yet to answer why you are so interested in convincing the rest of us that this development is a good thing for the area, when all evidence and most other opinions tell otherwise. I'd have to hypothesize that you're working PR for the developer or have a financial stake in the project.

They want more people to move there, so I dont understand the argument that no more people can move to Fort bend because it seems like schools are crowded. As traffic increases, they will build roads and schools to accomodate.

Also, the TDHCA site says that the state has to approve who applies to live in these developments. A criminal and background check is also done. I dont know about you guys, but I would rather have the state overseeing the apartment leasing than a private landlord looking to lease up quickly.

The schools don't seem crowded, they are crowded. Some subdivisions along 1464 have been rezoned to 3 different elementary schools in almost as many years because of the crowding issue. And there are still no plans to build another.

You really don't seem to know much about this area unless it's something you think will build your case.

Multiple studies have show that this kind of housing exerts negative effects on the surrounding area.

Federally assisted housing programs, particularly public housing developments, have been associated with negative neighborhood impacts by a number of investigators (Carter, Schill, and Wachter 1998; Newman and Schnare 1997; Schill and Wachter 1995). (3 separate studies)

The point is that Sugar Land is on its way to becoming a major city. The population is exploding and companies are relocating there.

As with any major city, there needs to be affodable housing put in to help balance all levels of society. This is what comes along with living in a rural city.

So I have a better idea. If you do not want to live in a healthy, vibrant, and growing area like fort bend then move to the "rural" areas that VicMan is referring to. If you want to live in Fort Bend, then you must deal with the wide range of people that are living and working in the area....

And as far as your property values, I would be more concerned about whats happening with mortgage rates and the national economy. Your property values are falling right now.

It won't be "healthy and vibrant" much longer if low-income multi-family housing is allowed to move in. That's what killed formerly good areas such as Alief, Sharpstown, and Bammel.

So the economy is pushing down property values... why in the world would we want to push them down even more by building low-income apartments in an area surrounded by single family homes?

You sure do seem to be going to a lot of trouble to sugar-coat this and convince others it's good for the area, when it's not. Do you happen to work in real estate development by chance?

I'm told by the experts that developments built using public tax money must have the area's public support in order to happen. From all I've seen and heard from surrounding neighborhoods on this one, it's obvious this one does not have support, and in fact is causing quite the opposite reaction.

Old Richmond Rd is scheduled to be widened and aligned later this year.

^ Taking bets now on how much developer is paying him to post up here!

No kidding.

And he got an entire thread temporarily closed down by his hate speech in another forum. A reverse racist post that was later deleted by the moderator. Not good...

I disagree. When white folks move away as soon as one or two slightly darker people move in...

One or two people? I don't think so. In that case, the entire white population of Houston would be trying to move to the middle of wherever it is all white these days (I don't know of any places like that). How would you explain places like 77079 (west Memorial) still gaining in value? And what about 77479 in Sugar Land, in which the Asian population is as large (in some areas larger) than the white population? Again, another area still gaining in value even in this economic climate (you can look this all up on HAR.com)

I don't hear of areas going into decline until there is an overbuild of apartments and low-income housing, and I don't hear of the white population really moving out until the minority population is more like 40%+. And even in that case, if the schools still rank well they may not move out in droves.

I would also imagine that most Park Pointe residents are aware that they are zoned to Austin High School, not Kempner.

I also find it odd that "sugarlandcitizen" has knowledge of what it would cost to rent a 3-bedroom unit in Goldshire Townhomes ...

Yes.

Something is not right.

I would bet "sugarlandcitizen" does not actually live in the above mentioned subdivision.

So honestly, can someone tell me why Sharpstown & Fondren SW is the complete ghetto area it is today? What exactly happened? Is it because of Houston having no zoning, or another reason?

So many things. Zoning. Cheap apartments. Fiesta Food market. Poor immigration enforcement. Age. Slum lords. You name it.

Let's not forget how shady "renters" are.

I'm finding it strange, and quite frankly, offensive that others from totally different parts of town feel they must come into this thread and inject their views on the way they think we need to live in our area.

Can't you respect that there may be specific reasons that the residents choose to live in Sugar Land rather than another area? Such as good schools and a safe community for our children? Do we not have the right to do that without other people from other areas trying to come in and change things at our expense and for their gain?

... That is higher than the $90,000 I paid for my Park Pointe house across the street. Am I not worthy to live in Sugar Land and have my kids attend Kempner High School??

Sugarlandcitizen / Equalityofman,

I'm confused. You say you have a house in Park Pointe, but ask if you are not worthy to live in Sugar Land?

So do you, or do you not live in Sugar Land?

And do you have a special interest in this development? Are you in on it for profit? I'm just finding it very strange that you should be a new user in two different forums with your first and only posts on this specific development.

www.glenshire.org/Newsletters/2007-05.pdf

Wow, imagine that no one else would want this built in their area either.

Yet the Sugar Land residents are in the wrong?

I implied no such thing.

Then what exactly are you implying?

Sounds like you're just chasing rabbits at this point.

What do you know about my neighborhood? I've got a lot of low income families living next to me. What makes you so special?

Westbury? I know enough about it. It was actually an area I briefly considered being that I worked in the Medical Center.

I nixed it because my #1 priority was great schools for my kids, and I was not ready to make the move to a more transitional area. The low income areas were already there in Westbury. People know that moving there, and housing prices reflect that.

This is a completely different situation. I moved to the neighborhood for the great schools and for not being a transitional area. The price I paid for my home reflects that. What I pay in property taxes reflects that. Nothing "special" about it.

Again... missing the whole point.

It is time we started treating all human the same, no matter race or income.

Oh really?

In that case, I'd tend to agree with you.

I should get a bailout too, if others are. I should get the government to pay for part of my housing, like others do. My children should get preferential treatment and money to get into college because of the way they look, or what income their parents make.

But guess what - because of my income and the way I look, I don't get any of that.

I'm not wealthy by any means - else I could just send my kids to private school or move to the middle of Sweetwater and not have to worry about any of this, don't you think?

Yes, all humans should be treated the same. The problem is they aren't; in this country, it seems more and more that the middle class has to work and pay for everyone else (poor and rich).

So you're saying that you're saying kids of a lower income don't deserve the same opportunities that you, as a homeowner, have?

Funny how people make comments like this, as long as the development is not in their own neighborhood.

And it's a little unfair for people to keep bringing up the lower-income thing. It's not that specifically, but the school overcrowding (150 families is larger than some subdivisions), traffic on that little two-lane road, falling property values, and potential crime problems (just read the news... most of the violent crime in Houston happens around apartment complexes, does it not?) So you want the complex citizens to have plenty of rights and privileges, but what about all the surrounding residents?

If what you said were the view of the developer, I'd like to see him build it in his own part of town and school attendance zone. Do you think that would actually ever happen? Highly unlikely.

The developer just wants to make money off the project. It's a business venture and nothing else.

And yes - when it's a government subsidized project and my tax dollars are being used, I think I have a say in it. Especially when we up and moved our family from a perfectly good home six months ago, for the sole reason of getting into a better school zone.

And now this...

That's the same thing Patterson told me when I complained about the apartments near Chelsea Harbor. The county truly is powerless when it comes to development issues ...

Yes but this is a government subsidized development, using public money. So I would think it's a different situation than with the private apts next to Chelsea Harbour (which I hear are expensive).

The public/residents are allowed more input when it's their money being used.

This development would not benefit anyone in the area. And it will bring the area down. All with the use of public money and potential abuse of the Fort Bend "disaster area" status, used for the developer's personal financial gain.

Perhaps there are some local Sugar Land city counsel members we could contact. Even though I don't think the land is in the city limits, it's close enough (and still has a Sugar Land postal address). Not to mention that some of the subdivisions in the same school zone (such as New Territory) are in Sugar Land ETJ and up for possible annexation into city limits. People move to Sugar Land for the impeccable reputation, good schools, and strict land use and zoning controls that are not typically available in many other parts of Houston. This kind of development defeats that whole purpose.

Mr. Sobti, is that you?

That's funny.

I did take notice that it's their first and only post on HAIF. Interesting, huh?

Whoever it is will have to do a lot better than that -- Sugar Land isn't exactly hurting in this economy. Every time I read the local news, some company is relocating HQ here or opening up a new location. And the Fort Bend real estate market is one of the healthiest, with strong home-resale values.

And you've got a point on that "disaster area" thing. What a waste...

I've got the word out to the community leaders of several subdivisions that are zoned to the schools, ranging from Woodbridge Estates to New Territory.

Also, the MUD can refuse to provide service. My experience with this area's MUDs is that they are very involved in the community and will go to great lengths to respect the residents' wishes.

Should be fun...

I think that in this economy we need all the building spending we can get. For 150 units this will probably be close to a 15 million dollar development. That is money spent locally.

You must be joking.

Just as long as it's not in your back yard, right?

Here's some interesting reading. It's Mr. Sobti's complete pre-application, including the closing documents from the sale of the land, and a list of elected officials he was supposed to notify ... amazing what you can find on the Internet!

www.tdhca.state.tx.us/multifamily/htc/docs/2009Preapps/09166.pdf

Interesting.

I wonder if us contacting any of those elected officials about this would be worthwhile.

And there were a few email addresses in there as contacts for "Goldshire Townhomes LP"

nss64@alltel.net (ownership)

ajcarpen@gmail.com (for questions)

Another thing I wonder - this is in an area for possible future ETJ swap from Houston ETJ to Sugar Land ETJ? Thus, possible future annexation by Sugar Land (and subject to city zoning, ordinances etc.) I wonder if this was considered by the developer or anyone else.

I recommend you gather your opposition and demand to see who endorsed, or is behind this project in Sugarland. If enough people object, it may not happen.

According to one of the documents in the first post, the project contact is Navdip S. Sobti. When I googled "Navidip Sobti", I found several other documents suggesting he has been trying to develop these low-income housing projects. I also got a whitepages address in Forum Park (anyone familiar with this area at Beltway & Hwy 59 knows it's really bad).

Another document I found (on page 61) suggests he was trying to develop a project by similar name elsewhere in Fort Bend

http://209.85.173.132/search?q=cache:pqntK...=clnk&gl=us

For those who want to protest, here is another link - though I called the State and was told attending the hearing (as mentioned in the first post) is the best way to try and stop this.

http://www.tdhca.state.tx.us/complaint.htm

Does anyone know what will come of Madden Road once West Bellfort is complete to Harlem/99. I "heard" it may be closed.

I don't know, but I just drove down it today and didn't see any indication of it being closed anytime soon.