Houston to restrict Land Use near Airports

[rps324]

Link to story

[musicman]

This has been quietly happening around Hobby for several years now. There's a large parcel east of telephone/south of braniff where a developer wanted to go in and put in a new hood. After talking with a councilmember, it was decided that it was in the City's best interest to ultimately deny the permit. The city then bought some of the parcel and expanded the HFD training academy.

[TheNiche]

This has been quietly happening around Hobby for several years now. There's a large parcel east of telephone/south of braniff where a developer wanted to go in and put in a new hood. After talking with a councilmember, it was decided that it was in the City's best interest to ultimately deny the permit. The city then bought some of the parcel and expanded the HFD training academy.

Yep, up until now, the City's approach to this has been to buy land. I'm not clear exactly why the parcel you were talking about was so important, though, considering that flight paths would be around it rather than over it.

[BryanS]

I guess that pretty much nixes any plans a developer had to put in a new high-dollar, Bay Oaks-like, subdivision at the end of El Camino Real at Clear Lake City Blvd (there was an article in the Chronicle about this proposed new development, but I can't find it). Also, pretty much permanently chokes off all new development down here. Ellington has no where near the traffic as HOU or IAH. And, over the next few years, the noisy F-16's will be replaced with very quiet Predator drones. That alone, will help the situation.

I am not sure

[Jeebus]

The parcel the city bought is behind (due south), and not to the west of the fire department's training facility. The parcel requested to build a new neighborhood is due south of one of Hobby's run ways, which Hobby and the city developed plans for extending south half way the distance to Almeda Genoa, and rerouting Braniff around it, just as it is on the southeast corner of the airport.

Of course, this was four years ago when I saw this plan. So no clue what the situation is now.

[musicman]

The parcel the city bought is behind (due south), and not to the west of the fire department's training facility. The parcel requested to build a new neighborhood is due south of one of Hobby's run ways, which Hobby and the city developed plans for extending south half way the distance to Almeda Genoa, and rerouting Braniff around it, just as it is on the southeast corner of the airport.

Of course, this was four years ago when I saw this plan. So no clue what the situation is now.

The proposal I saw extended from telephone to ballantine but that was squelched. They are also acquiring some on almeda genoa between telephone and ballantine so most of that area is a target.

Edited May 4, 2008 by musicman

[musicman]

just got back from a meeting concerning this. a few neighborhoods have portions included in the so called "tier 1" areas. this doesn't restrict someone from building a single family home, but does restrict them from adding a garage apartment if it doesn't exist now, it doesn't allow them to subdivide a lot, no nursing homes and no day care centers.

portions of the following neighborhoods (that i remember) were affected...garden villas, bayou oaks, gulf freeway oaks and i believe glenbrook valley(to the east of the drainage ditch)

unfortunately their website crashed earlier today so the information isn't out there electronically. i will look tomorrow to see if the detailed map is added.

also per faa regulations, a 3x5 mile swath with the runway at center, COULD conceivably be restricted by the city. their proposal area is much smaller but will affect several hoods.

[editor]

Sounds like the ultimate goal is to reduce density in the area. Do you get a sense that it's to minimize the casualties in a crash, or to make airport expansion easier?

[JLWM8609]

Crashes can happen anywhere. I suspect it's to make expansion easier. I saw the master plan for Hobby and it calls for extending some runways, 17/35 and 12L/30R, and constructing a runway parallel to 4/22.

[musicman]

Sounds like the ultimate goal is to reduce density in the area. Do you get a sense that it's to minimize the casualties in a crash, or to make airport expansion easier?

the faa sent the city a letter 2 yrs ago on protecting THEIR airport investment. the faa has spent 650 million at houston airports over 2 decades and they want to ensure that the city is doing everything they can to protect that investment. the kicker was that if the faa didn't think the city was doing enough, they could ask the city to repay the 650 million which is why the city responded.

an interesting sidenote, marlene gafrick who is head of planning specifically said we don't want high rises in neighborhoods. and i thought ashby immediately.

as for reducing density, no but this IS a form of zoning. each new structure build will have to be built in such a way to mitigate sound. the city is still figuring out what exactly does that mean. plus certain types of structures won't be allowed. But a property owner will be allowed to build a single family residence in a hood. if they want to split the lot and build 2, forget it. maybe minimizing density is a better term.

[editor]

each new structure build will have to be built in such a way to mitigate sound. the city is still figuring out what exactly does that mean.

Just be happy it's only the NEW structures. In the area around Midway Airport in Chicago the city has spent the last 20 years replacing the doors and windows on tens of thousands of homes with sound-reducing windows and doors -- for free.

And by "free" I mean that people who didn't choose to live next to an airport had to pay for it with their tax dollars.

[TheNiche]

Sounds like the ultimate goal is to reduce density in the area. Do you get a sense that it's to minimize the casualties in a crash, or to make airport expansion easier?

I kind of suspect that it may be a way to limit long term liability to lawsuits by the kind of people who knowingly move near a nuisance and then complain about them. Or something along those lines. There has to be some obscure CYA line of thought going on, here.

The affected areas are just too ridiculously huge for it just to be only about expansion.

[houstonmacbro]

Sounds like the ultimate goal is to reduce density in the area. Do you get a sense that it's to minimize the casualties in a crash, or to make airport expansion easier?

I've heard it's to make sure certain developments don't expand, and yes, for easier expansion of the airports in the future.