Locally unwanted land use
I had a tough decision to make this evening: should I watch NCIS or the premiere of V (starring Morena Baccarin of Firefly fame)?
Well, instead of making the tough decision, I went to Dr. Richard Showers’ Huntsville City Council District One Town Meeting. The main topic of the meeting was the City’s proposed “Correctional Center Zoning”, which will be voted on this Thursday night at the City Council meeting. This issue doesn’t seem to have a good solution, so unfortunately the City Council must vote on the least bad solution – a real-life tough decision that weighs heavily on our elected officials.
Some background: in February 2009 the City received a letter from a Federal Bureau of Prisons contractor (described by Mayor Tommy Battle as a “litigious group”) asking for guidance on locating a “residential re-entry center” or “correctional transitional housing” in Huntsville. As of that date the clock stopped in a way (and started in another way). According to City Attorneys, the City is required to allow public or private (contracted) correctional facilities and can only deal with zoning that was in place as of February 2009 (clock stop). The City asked for and received two moratoriums in order to develop zoning ordinances for correctional facilities – but the deadline is December 23, 2009 (clock running). Notable quotes: City Planner Marie Bostick – “we didn’t go looking for this”; City Administrator Rex Reynolds – “we need a managed response”; Mayor Battle – “let’s control it”.
The City Council votes Thursday to approve or disapprove the Zoning Ordinance proposed by the Planning Department and approved by the Planning Commission. The Ordinance allows for development in large areas around the airport, close to the Toyota plant, and close to A&M in Chase (among other areas – see the maps at the link above). No one wants a correctional facility 500 feet from their backyard (NIMBY – or as the hip kids call it, “locally unwanted land use”). Councilman Will Culver announced tonight that he and Dr. Showers will both vote ‘No’ on the Ordinance.
If the Ordinance fails, it will take months to develop and approve another plan, during which time a correctional facility could be constructed pretty much anywhere in Huntsville. Keep in mind that the proposed plan has been in the works since February – and that the City tried very hard to minimize the impact on residents – and that the City must develop broad guidelines that can withstand a legal challenge.
So these are the bad choices: vote Yes to zoning rules that will restrict the unwanted development to limited industrial areas, knowing that some people in the community will be harmed financially (and that their safety will be at risk) - or vote No and potentially expose the City to an unplanned facility (basically hoping that the City can come up with a better plan before the Bureau of Prisons acts).
It’s a tough decision – but that’s why our Mayor and City Council make the big bucks… It’s also why elections matter.
***
Now let’s get into some meeting details and notes. There were more than a dozen City officials in attendance: Mayor Battle, Councilmen Showers and Culver, City Administrator Reynolds, Police Chief Henry Reyes, Fire Chief Mike Sublett, Public Works Director Terry Hatfield, Community Development Director Michelle Jordan, and Assistant Planning Director Marie Bostick.
There were about 80 people or so in the crowd, including about 20 students from A&M’s Department of Urban Planning. Stephanie Beecken of WAAY 31 reported on the meeting.
Public Works Director Hatfield said that he’s hired about 30 temps to help with curbside leaf pickup (it’s easier and better to mulch or compost your leaves). Chief Sublett said that the Fire Department has 16 stations and is building a new station in Greenbrier (and could use about five more). Chief Reyes said that 33 new cadets started at the Police Academy. Community Development Director Jordan said that there will be a public hearing on the HUD Five Year Consolidated Plan Update (I missed the time – be on the lookout).
Councilman Showers said that he has “concern” for those who “worked real hard and saved their money to buy in that area” and that people “didn’t move to Carter Gin to be impacted by this type of situation”.
Councilman Culver made a point of saying that the zoning was “not racially motivated” and that he would like to see the zoning “proportionally distributed” around the City. He noted that most of the available land was in his district near the airport, and that most of the residents in that area were white (he didn’t say white, but that’s what he said).
There were about 25 questions from the audience during the Q&A – bottom line – people don’t want it – other bottom line – “we can’t prohibit them” (Planner Lisa Aleddo). Another bottom line is that if you live in Madison County (or maybe even Madison) you don’t have the zoning protections – this only covers the City of Huntsville.
The meeting wrapped up about 9PM and the City Planners stayed to answer all questions (including mine). On the way out, I had the pleasure of speaking with Will Culver. He took the time to explain to me his decision to vote against the Ordinance and details of the issue, which I truly appreciate. From what I’ve seen, Culver is doing a great job as Councilman.
Sounds messy, though not surprized to read no one spoke in favor. Which group is planning to build this facility?
Let’s be fair – SE HSV gets HHA housing so Madison (Airport) and A&M area get correctional transitional housing.
waltm – the City did not identify the contractor, and but the City said that the contractor’s letter was a response to a Request For Proposals from the Bureau of Prisons.
BOP residential re-entry center contractors include the Salvation Army and bunches of small companies and non-profits. I thought it might be the Corrections Corporation of America (CCA) but they seem to prefer running larger facilities.
The City said that the closest correctional transitional housing facility is in Birmingham, and that the Bureau of Prisons is looking to build facilities to serve North Alabama. I don’t know how many facilities are planned or which Cities are going to be impacted (Florence? Decatur?).
It is ridiculous that these facilities can be built and what the locals think is irrellevant. Once again, the federal government rams stuff down our throats and we have very little say-so in the matter.
Good report on the issue, Reactionary.
Oh, and by the way, Reactionary — I’m not sure why you keep praising Will Culver so much. The guy has been a moralizing clown. He doesn’t think about issues so much as he emotes on them, and “feelings” trump all.
Familiar with the Salvation Army and Volunteers of America halfway houses which do fairly well. Inmates know there are much worse place they can be but there’s always someone won’t listen.
Guess they feared naming the suit happy outfit would lead to a suit too. Just adds to the mystery.
Thanks Brian.
Ben – well, I like Culver – he’s a natural politician (friendly, great personality) and I enjoy talking politics with him, plus he likes HSV as much as I do. I’ve harshed on him when I thought that was appropriate (noting in my first post about him that he needed to get used to free speech and differing opinions). I appreciate that he holds monthly town halls in his district and that he’s accessible. Your statement that he votes his ‘feelings’ on issues may have merit.
I admire that he speaks up even when his opinion may not be popular. For example, last night’s meeting was ~90% black and some people started to say that the City was dumping on North HSV because of race. Culver stood up and presented dissenting facts – he didn’t go along with that narrative even though he could have. BTW Showers didn’t stand up.
Someone — Bill Kristol, maybe — once said that given the choice between a program that works but sounds “mean,” and one that’s an utter failure but sounds “nice,” liberals will choose the latter every time. That’s Culver in a nutshell.
Racially motivated? Not in a literal sense. But. . . the demographics of the particular industrialized zoned areas are either lower income households or minorities. . . The thing is, implementing plans in areas where people have less money and education makes the process easier to go through. I firmly believe this could have been mapped out in a much better way. I will leave this as concise as possible, because I can get long winded. However, the industrial zones are not spread out they are hitting similar demographic terrains. Why can’t one be in the Grissom area? Lee area? and perhaps Huntsville High area? I just say this to show the lack of equal consistency. No one wants a facility of this nature near their home, place of worship, or childs school. . . so why is there no at least an equal disruption or discomfort. Lastly, as a tax paying citizen, I would personally rather spend my money to building a correctional facility (on the basis they’re going to be required) . . . and put this facility in a desolate area . . . than save a few bucks to renovate an older building in an area near family life. I could write several rebuttals. . . in my opinion. . . on the whole situation. . . but then again this is your blog! ha, not mine! I enjoyed stumbling across this, as I was looking for more news feed on the content.
Sincerely.
The zoning classification which would allow a halfway house or the like shouldn’t be “’proportionally distributed’” around the City,” as some areas have a higher concentration of homes than others, and are primarily residential areas. No one involved seems to want these near neighborhoods, schools, or churches, so why would Will Culver think spreading them out evenly across the city would be a good idea?
Given the desires of residents throughout the city, it sounds like they should go in the parts of town that currently have the lowest percentage of homes, schools and churches; have vacant commercial-zoned land that is the farthest away from homes, schools, and churches; and have the lowest percentage of residential-zoned land. Doing something like that would be somewhat unfair in that it may allow them to be near some homes, but it would accomplish a goal of limiting halfway houses and transitional facilities to the lowest number possible in the city as a whole.