Blog Archives - ROWLETT RAMBLINGS

Oh, gosh.

10/30/2015

. Gee whiz. I seem to be picking on our elected leaders. Or, at least that's how a couple of readers feel. On the other hand, some readers don't. In fact, more readers don't than do. I like that.

Look, I've written this before, a couple of times. I do not think Rowlett "officialdom" is stupid. I never said they were. What I have said is that they are inexperienced in real estate development. In other words, incompetent in real estate matters. Now, this includes the "business" of real estate. You can be an expert in building design, but still design a unit that is not marketable because of high cost, or missing the market and designing the wrong product. The best building design in the world is a failure if it costs too much and won't sell or rent because the rents are too high. That's part of what happened at The Harbor. But, they had some design flaws, also. Say, parking.

I think our people try, but they just aren't good at it. It takes more than reading books or attending seminars. As I have said many times before, a doctor is smart, but he can't fly a Boeing 747. It's experience and training, people. Desire ain't good enough. Everybody knows a camel is a thoroughbred designed by committee. Ours is designed by a cast of thousands.......or maybe dozens that talk, grin and write gobblygook like thousands.

The Gang That Couldn't Shoot Straight comes to mind. (There, I did it again. Sorry, Mr. Todd.)

Nobody loves me.

10/30/2015

Last Saturday, I sent out an email saying how well I liked the idea of establishing a chain of "pocket parks" around the Rowlett shoreline of Lake Ray Hubbard.   These parks would establish a "trail" that kayakers, canoers, and other shallow draft boats could follow to enjoy themselves on the water.

This idea wasn't to benefit only the boaters. It would be intended to benefit ALL of Rowlett. Can you think of an outdoor activity that could charm visitors to the city and residents at the same time? It would be a charming, visually appealing, addition to the city.

To my email, I attached copies of my two most recent blog posts; one written by me and another written by a kayak owner. These parks need not be expensive. They only need small amounts of dedicated land and periodically mowing. The mowers could access the parks via a used pontoon boat, appropriately named, "Rowlett Navy."

I sent the email to Jermel Stevens, Director of Parks, and I copied the Mayor, Todd Gottel, the City Manager, Brian Funderbunk, and the Chairman of the Parks Committee, Wayne Baxter.

I sent the email last Saturday. It has now been nearly a week and I have not heard a peep. Nada. Not even a whine.

Now I know I jab the Mayor every once in a while. That's what writers do. However, it is not too bad and it comes with the territory of being Mayor. Public life isn't a Roman feast. A politician can't be too thin skinned. But......ours are.  A citizen can not have a good idea unless they have permission, and it looks like the good idea originated in City Council.

Yesterday I posted a long article about "officialdom's" behavior of administering the Homestead of Liberty Grove development. Today, I'm writing about "officialdom" ignoring a perfectly innocent inquiry about a series of "pocket parks."   The Mayor and his minions are upset with me. They think that when I proposed erecting a 62 foot high statue of the Mayor on I-30 was sarcasm. It was.

Folks, our "leaders" are acting like a bunch of spoiled brats.

Homestead at Liberty Grove

10/29/2015

The Homestead project is now going into Rowlett Planning and Zoning for a Major Warrant to change the set-back lines, or in the language of Rowlett Planning, "Build-to lines."

Staff is requesting that the P&Z Commission approve changing the set back lines from 15 feet to 10 feet on the "Village type" lots. This would create a 10 foot front yard instead of a 15 foot front yard. This is not too bad when used with patio homes or zero lot line homes.  Since these lots have alleys, all the garages are at the rear and attractive front elevations can be designed without the street looking like an alley. This change also allows for a slightly larger house.

Altho the proposed change doesn't have that much effect on the proposed production homes, the language of the Staff Report seems to support fears I already had.

I have long reported that two well known, very experienced and well respected developers were "turned out" by Rowlett officialdom in favor of this development. These two subdivisions would now be producing $600K per week for our tax base. This production would have started approximately one year ago for a total of about $31 million to date. Instead of the $31 million, we have Homestead at Liberty Grove which seems to be floundering about.

I am in the land development business. I review development progress and determine the amount to be funded out of bank loans to pay for that progress. This funding comes from development loans made by a number of banks that I have as clients. I know how it all works and all the steps from financing, to physical development of the land, and the marketing strategies that provide lot sales and revenue to pay off the development loans. In other words, I could do the work myself.

I have had uncomfortable feelings with this project for some time. First of all, "officialdom" seems to feel that because the development is controlled by Form Base Codes, that all the ills of modern society will be eliminated. That is hogwash, but our "officialdom" believes it. FBC works better in urban areas rather than cow pastures. This type of development is good for some homeowners, but not all. Maybe not even a majority. This is an unproven market in Rowlett. However, the developer got lucky with his timing. You could sell a Montgomery Ward pup tent in this market. However, the product must be upscale to protect the future values of the units.

Next, I was concerned about the development progress. This project started in late June, 2014. I attended the ground breaking ceremony and they were just moving the dirt moving equipment onto the site.

Now, everybody knows how much rain we had this Spring. I certainly know because I was trying to get a restaurant started in Wylie some six months, or so, behind Homestead. Although Homestead had a six month head start on us, they had a lot more dirt to move than we did. We were both trying to work in the mud. Very hard to do. I know how many rain days I had to include in my schedule, therefore I applied the same number of rain days to the Homestead production schedule.  I also have in my files several dozen land development projects in which I tracked job progress on many subdivisions. In older files, I probably have a couple of hundred. I know how long it takes to develop land.   During the same time that Homestead has been developing, I have watched the completion of development of six subdivisions, four in McKinney, one in North Dallas, and one in Ft. Worth. All started after Homestead.

I allowed four months of rain caused production delays to a typical production schedule for this project. A project of this size should be completed in about 8 months. In seven months, builders should have started building their models while awaiting final acceptance of the subdivision by the city. Then, permits could have been issued for the production units.

If I add four months to an eight month development schedule, Homestead should have been completed by last June 30. They didn't even have the streets poured. At the time, our mayor wasn't mad at me and was still talking to me. I called him and said Homestead was running well behind a normal schedule. He apparently called the developer. He called me back a few days later and said the rain caused the delay. I said I allowed for that. He then said the developer told him that because of the rain the subcontractors were going to other projects and it was hard to get them back to Homestead.

Now folks, I want you to think about that answer. This Spring, can you think of any other projects in North Central Texas that were dry? If anything, Rowlett got less rain than surrounding communities. Either the developer lied to Todd, and Todd bought it hook, line, and sinker, or Todd dreamed up the story to satisfy me. That story made no sense.

Okay, I'm a big boy. I didn't say anything in rebutal and went on. But, I made a mark by Bill Getima (developer) and Todd's (mayor) names. I knew one of those two weren't telling a straight story.

Soon after, a concrete batch plant was erected on the site, and they started pouring concrete streets and alleys. It's about this time that promotional signs should be erected by builders announcing "What's coming here." After the streets and alleys are poured in the model home area, models should begin to be constructed. The models still haven't been started. We have long been told that David Weekley and Cambridge Homes had bought all the lots and would be building homes. Nothing's happened. There's no evidence of Weekley or Cambridge being anywhere around.

A couple of months ago, I began to suspect that the developer had lost the two contracts from Weekley and Cambridge, or they weren't solid contracts at all. Why did I suspect that? That is because all really good, high quality builders think about their lot needs a whole year in advance. They know when their current inventory of lots will "run out." Therefore, when they go to contract to buy additional lots, they have a default date whereby if the lots are not ready when needed, the contract becomes null and void; then they buy lots somewhere else. Weekley and Cambridge are very sophisticated builders. They know well in advance if the lots they want to buy will be ready in time to fit into their marketing program.

I think the lots were not ready and I strongly suspect that Weekley and Cambridge walked their contracts, or solid, binding contracts never did exist.  I think that is why there are no signs advertising their product, no construction shacks, and no model home starts. I don't think the lots were ever sold under a "hard" contract. But that certainly was the story being told by "officialdom."     Let's see now........who is the mayor, Todd Gottel, always accusing of telling half truths or spreading misinformation? Oh, yeah.   Larry Beckham and myself.

When I was on Council, the developer stated that he would come to Rowlett and bring his five builders with him. Right away, I knew that was a fib. I knew one of his builders had already filed for bankruptcy. I used to inspect their product for Guaranty Federal Bank. So, I knew the developer was capable of not quite telling an accurate story. Then, all I heard was "some builders" were going to build. That fell thru. Then, I heard that D.R. Horton was going to build. That fell thru. Then, I heard that Weekley and Cambridge "bought" all the lots. As set out above, its my opinion that this deal was a long way from being "firm."

Now, I want to draw your attention to some language that appears in the Staff Report to the Planning and Zoning Commission.

Under the paragraph SUMMARY, the words, "Due to unique circumstances the developer is requesting a Major Warrant in order to secure the highest quality builder......."   Does this sound like a builder(s) has already purchased the lots?

Let me tell you what's really scary. Under the following heading, the Staff Report states:

"BACKGROUND INFORMATION

................The Planning and Zoning Commission approved the Preliminary Plat on January 14, 2014, and the Final Plat on August 11, 2015."    (Question? How could two sophisticated builders go "hard" on a contract when it was not even determined that their houses would even fit on the l0ts?)   If that's true......these lots were never "sold."

Also, under the same heading, the following comments were written:

"Over the last several months the developer has been working with high quality builders on the various residential product types........ It became apparent that the desired product types offered by the builders for the Village type lots would not accommodate their housing sizes without adjusting the Build-To Line. The Preliminary Plat established the lot and block size prior the selected builders’ involvement. The subdivision was designed and the construction of streets and infrastructure were based on the Preliminary Plat prior to finding and securing the subject builders. As a result, the developer was not able to anticipate the need for a slightly deeper lot (which then would have accommodated the required setbacks).

This means the builders did not even know whether their units would even fit on the lots.

Now, one more paragraph from the Staff Report:

DISCUSSION

This paragraph is mostly gobblygook, but the salient points are: "............The changes in builders and market conditions after the final design and construction of the streets and infrastructure has resulted in a unique circumstance. Clearly, the Staff Report refers to "changes" in builders. It also refers to changes in markets since "acceptance of the final plat on August 15, 2015." People, the markets haven't changed. The residential market is quite good and has been for a couple of years. It hasn't changed in style or substance in three years.

Now, I'm ready to conclude.

First, if a lender loaned money to develop a "spec" (speculative--no lots sold) subdivision, they are incredibly courageous. incredibly stupid, or the developer has $5 million of CD's in the bank and pledged as additional collateral.

Second, if a builder buys lots before he knows whether his houses fits on the lots, he is incredibly stupid, incredibly courageous, and therefore has no money in the bank.

I don't think any of the above even occurred to our "officialdom." Can you imagine what an albatross a subdivision that won't sell because it is an "unproven" product would become to a city like ours? We'd be the laughing stock of all the towns around.

Why did "officialdom" keep telling us that the lots were sold, when they weren't? Lots are sold when a contract is drawn up, prices determined, delivery dates committed, and take down schedules worked out. It would appear that none of this was done. "Officialdom" let us believe, and furthered the thought, that the lot sales were a done deal. People.......that is called manipulation and misleading. Once again, "officialdom" is worming their way into Larry Beckham and my world. We got there first.

So........now they've changed the set back lines so the houses will fit. That's nice. The builders will like that. Now, what else do they have to do to get the lots sold?

Well, one thing is finishing the subdivision. I drove thru it on the 27th. It still has 2-3 months before it is finished. That is unbelievable. By the time the models are finished, it will have been nearly two years since it started. That is an awful production schedule.

Now.......using the above as a guideline, how well do you trust our "officialdom" to wisely administer to our tax base? They're probably okay on a free standing building on Lakeview Parkway, but I think the more sophisticated development probably needs more help than we have.

Now, you want a real scare on this Halloween season? Think about our "officialdom" administering to the development of Bayview. That scares the bejesus out of me.

From the people.

10/23/2015

This comment deserves a special post. It comes from the crowd I support.
________________________________________________________

Jared
10/15/2015 17:44:08

I'm an avid kayak angler, and there are a lot of us in the area. The sport of kayak fishing alone is growing like crazy, and it's just a portion of the kayaking population. There are almost 1000 members in the DFW Kayak Fishing Facebook group. While we do go in to the bigger deeper waters (we're a different breed of kayaker), thinner water is where it's at for the most part. It's just inaccessible to so many people. I'll paddle two miles to where the fish are biting, but a lot of people can't or won't. Launch points dotted all over the shoreline would be incredible for kayak anglers, and would make Rowlett a destination for them. Most kayak anglers don't put Ray Hubbard at the top of their list today. I know people who live near Ray Hubbard, but go to Lavon or Tawakoni instead.

I'm baaaaack.

10/23/2015

I just got in last night from a few days at the Texas coast. Spent a few days at Port Aransas. Gee, I like it down there.

On the way, I satisfied one of the things on my bucket list. Of course, nearly everyone has been to the Alamo. However, few have visited Goliad and the grave of Col. Fannin and his men, and the site of the nearby battle site nine miles to the east. It has been on my list to visit for many years. I decided to deviate a little from my course to the coast and visit Goliad.

To Texas enthusiasts, Goliad ranks right up there just behind the Alamo......some say it was just as important as the Alamo when measuring the motivation of Texicans when fighting for independence from Mexico.

I took some photos. I may feature some of them in a future post.

I had a great time. There were great restaurants, but it was time to get back to the salt mines. I have to clear my decks, then I will get caught up with some Rowlett happenings. .

Revisiting a thought

10/15/2015

There have been a few times I have written about Rowlett's image and lifestyle. One of the scenes I conjure up is the vision of visitors to Rowlett that may be driving across the bridge on Lakeview Pky. Of course, they would see the lake and that would be nice. However, how much nicer and what better image of Rowlett would it be if those visitors saw canoes, kayaks, paddleboats, and bass boats. Furthermore, within their site line, let's say they could see a couple of pocket parks with boats parked and people enjoying lakeside picnics.

All boaters like a destination. When my family and friends rent a sailboat in the Caribbean, we want somewhere to go. In our case, other islands fulfill this need. Let's say we had 10-12 pocket parks around the lake within the Rowlett city limits. A kayaker could launch at any park, but have a series of parks to visit. There could be a regular trail around the lake, visiting points of interest on the way to the next park.

When I was on Council, Texas Parks and Wildlife was to design the water trail system for Rowlett. I have no idea what happened to that plan, but it sure would be nice.

Kayaking and canoeing, as a sport, seems to be growing by massive leaps. I see kayaks strapped to a bunch of automobiles while driving around town. Kayaks, canoes, and paddleboats need a place to "do their thing." Deep water ports, like Rockwall, Heath, and other places south of Interstate 30 are not good waters for these types of boats. These are boats that do best in quiet water, without big waves, in bayous, and thin water. It is a very quiet and relaxing style of boating. You can also sneak up on some wildlife and get a real treat.

If you have a series of nice pocket parks, and an abundance of quiet water boaters, what else do you need? One is a lake with the right water. We have that. The other is a city that can visualize how valuable this type of outdoor activity can be to a community. Rowlett would become a destination town for quiet water boaters from many miles around. And, it may certainly influence any merchants or developers looking for a good market. They would be looking for a town with class. The above scene certainly suggests class.

We've got the lake and the market. All we need is a city that can think.

Time for reflection

10/15/2015

In a couple of days, I'm leaving for the Texas coast. I love it down there.   It allows a little time for reflection, while enjoying the sea, and sampling a number of seafood restaurants.

I have a number of emails sent by blog readers that contain information that I need to study. There is an election looming just around the corner. There is a Charter Review Committee that is contemplating changes in Rowlett's Charter.

There are some City Council meetings that I want to review. I want to see what's actually said in the meetings I missed. In about four and a half months, people will want to know who is running for office.   The Charter Review Committee might have an effect on which candidates run. The hot topic on the Review Committee's agenda (at least as far as the citizens are concerned) is the issue of term limits.

I have written before that I really don't have a problem with 9 year limits instead of 6, however I'm not real emotional about it.   What I get emotional about it whether the Committee will recommend to Council a provision whereby sitting Council Members and the mayor will be voting to "feather their own nest." In other words, will recommendations, if approved by City Council, benefit sitting members by extending their term limits beyond their currently ending term.

People, it that is done, it is just plain stupid. Look at the precedent it creates. Will 9 years end it? Will they then vote in 12 years? What about 15 years. Of course, defenders of the change in term limits will say that nothing can be approved unless the voters vote it in. That is true. Of course, one must be incredibly naïve if they think that some voters have no trouble when they try to think. Guess who gets led around by the nose by politicians that benefit from extended term limits?

If you want to vote for an increase in term limits that benefit future generations of City Council members and mayors, that's fine. However, if you vote to increase term limits that benefit sitting officials, that is really dumb. Just watch for who is trying to sell you on increasing term limits....and whether or not they become immediately effective. If supporters of term limit increases that immediately benefit sitting officials start making their pitch, and you think it's a good idea, you are beyond any sensible help.

By placing an unwise change of term limits on a ballet, a risk is created that currently doesn't exist. If Peter Pan plays his flute, a certain number of less than mature people will march into the sea.

And.......speaking of the sea, over the next few days, I will have an excellent environment in which to contemplate. Wish you could, too. Maybe your easy chair will have to suffice.

Communications

10/11/2015

Please see the comments attached to the "There they go again" post published on 10/7/15.
These  comments define  the corral that
contains  much of what we've been talking about. Sure, we've been talking about water. We've also been talking about term limits. But.......what else?

We've been talking about Rowlett "officialdom's" communications toward citizens who ask questions regarding "officialdom's" behavior.   If these citizen questions pose a thought contrary to "officialdom's" position on a matter, then it seems the citizen is criticized for not having the facts and is premature in their criticism.

Let's review a couple of things. First, where is the citizen supposed to get the information? Let's presume everyone is smart enough to know that all the information must come from the city.

It's been my position all along that the communications from city hall to the citizens is awful. Elected officials and some of Staff seems to be quite satisfied with themselves when they chastise citizens for not attending City Council meetings, thinking that that attitude has soundly corrected the citizen.   In fact, such behavior only compounds the problem.   The citizen doesn't feel corrected. The citizen feels angry.

Another thing. Any citizen can ask any question, any time, about any issue....no matter how dumb, ill conceived, or off target it may be.   That is their constitutional right. It is the job of elected or appointed officials to answer those questions as accurately as they can....even the dumb ones (questions, not councilpersons).

Rowlett is a small town of 58,000. It's a good night if 30 people attend a City Council meeting. There is another group that watch City Council meetings on live feed, and another group that watch filmed meetings later. It all depends on schedules. I don't know how many total people watch City Council meetings, but I sadly feel that it's not enough. One of the positions on which I agree with "officialdom" is that our citizens do not "engage" with city business. Some are truly quick to criticize without knowing available facts. However, some know available facts and ask excellent questions. It is these citizens I defend.

What perplexes me is that often "officialdom" is quick to criticize with a chastisement toward a citizen when the citizen knows the available facts. The problem often is that the available facts don't answer the question. Some of the criticism I have observed over recent days is aimed at one of the more informed citizens in Rowlett. Folks.....that is very wrong. He should be answered with dignity. His most recent response to an elitist council member cited book and verse the comments made by members of council in a recent meeting he watched on live feed. He was told, in a rather curt manner, to wait for more facts.

Folks........here's the rub. He doesn't have to wait for more facts. He is entitled to ask any question any time he wants. That's the American way. If the council person doesn't have the answer to the question, that council person should tell the citizen that they don't know the answer, yet. They can give the citizen answers to any other salient facts, but if they don't know the answer to the question, just say so.

My problem with our current council is that rather than answer questions accurately, they launch into a long tirade of meaningless rhetoric, presumably thinking that it makes them look smart. It probably works on some people.

No one forced our elected officials to seek elected office. No one made them do it. The winners of elections aren't anointed with some kind of special lotion that empowered them with more smarts than they had before the election. However, they will soon begin to acquire more information than the general public. This comes with the territory.   It is the timely sharing of that information the keeps the citizens informed and reduces the amount of "stupid" questions (as perceived by "officialdom).

Now, citizens don't get a bye on this. They have to exert some effort. Staying informed by visiting the city's website is a good place to start. However, to some of our senior citizens and others, this is not as easy as someone 30 years old.

As much as "officialdom" dislikes it, it is the right of any citizen to ask any question at any time, no matter how dumb it may seem. It is "officialdom's" duty to answer those questions as accurately as possible without disrespect. If that capability is beneath the dignity of any member of "officialdom," that member should resign. There is absolutely no room for some of the flippant, dismissive commentary recently made by certain officials. If its impossible to treat the citizens with respect, then get the hell out.

.

Leading the fight

10/10/2015

Ya know......there's been a lot of discussion about water rates and billings. There's been accusations of poor management by the city. There has been accusations of rising water rates as the cause of substantially increased costs to citizens. The water meters aren't working........etc., etc., etc., ad nauseam.

I am of the opinion that Rowlett's "officialdom" did not purposely do anything wrong. Perhaps the water situation could have been handled better, but I don't think Rowlett "officialdom" is profiting in any way by the situation. However, I do think that NTMWD is most definitely profiting. It doesn't make sense to me that the rates should have gone up the way they did, using the excuses they did........then continue to raise after the excuses were gone. I think the real culprit is the NTMWD.

Just think how much different the political atmosphere would have been if "officialdom" had elected to join the citizens and lead the fight against NTMWD's obnoxious water rates. I think NTMWD has been the main culprit.....as evidenced by their 10% rate increases per year over the past five years. I think it was a pure cash grab. Furthermore, "officialdom" could have brought to task the suppliers of the new meters and demanded proof that the new electronic system was actually working as represented. And, finally, an investigation of our in-house procedures of posting paid bills could be done with a minimum of angst. I don't fault our people for following procedure. I fault the office procedures. It could be fixed, if needed, relatively easy.

Somehow this has blown up way out of proportion to the needed efforts to repair. How much better would it have been if Rowlett "officialdom" had made demands of NTMWD justifying their rates. It may not have done any good, but the citizens could see that their elected officials were trying to lead the fight against the bureaucrats. Then, all major suppliers of equipment should be made to prove up their products are working as represented. This is standard operating procedure in the world of business. Lastly, our city manager is plenty smart enough to tweak dials in-house to expedite paying of water bills and properly posting the accounts.

If these three items were done, and the public made aware of all efforts, don't you think the political environment would be much better? Maybe efforts were made but not publicized. Maybe not.

The really big question remains, "If not...why not?"

Jared's question

10/9/2015

One of our readers posed this honest question.
____________________________
Waste water

"Doesn't Garland process our waste water? I think that's what we are paying Garland for."
____________________________

Jared--
You are correct. Garland does process our waste water. They take our sanitary sewerage. But, at issue is the water billings.

Garland does not sell Rowlett water. We buy our water from North Texas Municipal Water District. (NTMWD).

NTMWD sells Rowlett water, but Rowlett is responsible for metering that water. That is part of what the "huff" is all about. NTMWD keeps raising water prices, but Rowlett purchased new meters that presumably sends accurate electronic signals to a "meter reader" that I understand just drives down the street. Some say these meters aren't operating properly. Others say the billing and posting of payment procedures in the city's Water office is not working properly.

The citizens say the system is all screwed up. Questions are posed on amount water use, meter accuracy, prices, and office procedures. There seems to be enough questions to lend credence to an effort to find the facts of the case, rather than opinions or isolated stories of some individual's story. "Officialdom" seems to be a little casual about water billings........but retirees on fixed income aren't so casual about the situation. Neither is anyone else with half a brain. Even citizens still working have not enjoyed increases in salary even remotely close to the increases in water rates.

Rowlett's "officialdom" says its only because the citizens use too much water and NTMWD keeps raising the rates.

I wouldn't be surprised if some of all the above are the culprits. However, rather than "fussing" with the citizens, it seems to me that somebody owes someone some factual information. I don't think the skirts of suppliers of the systems are completely clean. Did they sell us something without warranties? If so, how did we let them get by with that? All suppliers of equipment should share the cost of proving that their equipment is in good working order. "Officialdom's" answer to the problem seems to be belittling the complaining citizens instead of searching for the facts that either prove or disproves either side of the arguments. I think that is a huge mistake.

It would appear that "officialdom" is satisfied with their answers. I reckon I don't believe the citizens are.