[nndl] Variance for TALL building is very possible--drop me an email!




Jody, thank you for spelling
out for all of us a few details about the hearings, the properties involved,
and what granting the variance means for the neighborhood.

 

Personally, I would be a
poor public speaker (probably some others feel the same?) But, I do know that
it is important to support jody's presentation at the future hearing, and if a
large group of us goes with him, it will make a visual statement to the Board. 
There is no need for each of us to speak, if we feel like we cannot do a good
job.  Jody is preparing some points, and he will do a great job of expressing
them. 

 

Although I recognize the
importance of showing up for the hearing, I already know that I and probably
many others on this list will not be able to attend.  This is why I am
encouraging you to send your name to me.

 

Just drop a short email to [at] ,
with your name, last name, and address.  Even if you will not attend the
meeting on Jan 14 (and the date might change again at the last minute), there
will be at least a token of your “virtual presence”.  I am
intending on bringing the list of names of the neighbors who are opposed to the
variance.  Then, if you can make it, it will be even better.

 

laura

[at]

PS.  How
to word this email?

Something
like: 

I, NAME
LASTNAME, oppose the variance request for the parker/howard’s properties  that
is discussed at this BOA meeting. 

Your name,
lastname, and address.

laura

From: Laura Mondino
[mailto: [at] ]

Sent: Tuesday, December 11, 2007
10:49 AM

To: 'Monty'; 'jody horton'; 'Mary Patrick'

Cc: 'Nndl@14gram.
Com'; 'NNA'

Subject: RE: [NNADL] [nndl] Re:
BOA HEARING POSTPONED TO JAN 14

 

Monty:

The variance is for the Parker AND Howard
combined. 

If the BOA approves, both properties will
have clearance to have tall buildings on them.

So, yes, we are at square one, with the
variance still possible.

 

The change is small:  Endeavor and
the howards’ representation for the COMBINED properties.  While it
is true that Endeavor no longer claims for the ex-nursery tract, it is true
that endeavor still is vying for the parkers tract (which as for now is
“glued” to the ex-nursery tract).

 

Because the request for variance is ONE
for two adjoining tracts of land,  the howard’s legal representative
is (well excuse the unintentional pun) representing the howard’s portion,
while endeavor is representing the Parker portion.

Confused yet?  That is why we need to
stay on top of this issue.  Once the variance is granted, there will be no
more say on our side (as a neighborhood) on what the traffic impact will
be.  Thanks jody for keeping then neighborhood informed.

laura

 

 

 

--

Laura Mondino

Sr. Career Advisor

UT Natural Sciences Career Services

[at]

512-471-6700

From:
[at] [mailto: [at] ] On Behalf Of Monty

Sent: Tuesday, December 11, 2007
10:35 AM

To: jody horton; Mary Patrick

Cc: 'Nndl@14gram.
Com'; 'NNA'

Subject: Re: [NNADL] [nndl] Re:
BOA HEARING POSTPONED TO JAN 14

 

Well - here is what it boils down to me.

Is this docket TWO separate variance requests?   Will passage
of the Parker variance - include the Howard?   Also - when we voted
against supporting this variance - we voted against the whole thing - not just
the Howard Tract, but the Parker tract as well.   It seems that this
discussion has focused so much on the Howard tract - that we are overlooking
that Endeavor is plainly violating their verbal agreement to NOT persue this
variance if the neighborhood did not support it.  In the letter from Jamil
to Susan Walker - he requests that they be removed as agent, and then
request postponment of the variance request on the Parker tract.

 

They are clearly seeking a variance for the Parker
tract.   Would this include the Howard tract?   Could this be
happening??  I am starting to feel like those cartoon
characters that turn into a big sucker and they play that waa waa trombone
music in the back.

 

At the very least - it would make it much easier for that next domino
to fall - granting Howard tract the variance, if the adjacent commercial
property already obtained one.

Monty jody horton
< [at] > wrote:

You are right Mary. The Howards do not want to build anything there. But Endeavor does. Just as they always have. The Howards are acting with instructions from Endeavor. Both Endeavor

and the Howards' lawyer

are essentially working as co-council for a single entity (the two

lots considered as a whole). The argument/hardship for the variance is as it always was- for a VMU

project that

spans both properties: These properties are: 1. The old Parkers lot (which Endeavor now owns)

2. The Howards lot (which Endeavor would like to own) Endeavor does not want to pay the Howards w/o knowing that the land

has a variance applied to it. Otherwise its not worth the asking price to them (Endeavor). This is why we see the Howards seeking a variance (through their

lawyer) despite the fact that they themselves

(the Howards) have no wish to build anything on their lot. But again, the Howards are not seeking this independently. "Their" variance request and Endeavor's are one and the same. Jody On Dec 10, 2007, at 5:24 PM, Mary Patrick wrote: > -

> To respond privately, use the "Reply" command.

> To post to the list "Forward" to [at]

> -

>

> Dear All

>

> Unless something really, really unusual has happened since I last

> talked to the

> Howard family - the Howard family never had and still does not

> have ANY

> intention, or desire, or interest in building anything on that

> site. The

> Howard family wants to sell it- period.

>

> If someone has heard from the Howard family directly otherwise,

> please inform

> us.

>

> Thanks,

>

> Mary

>

>

> Quoting Chris Duel :

>

>> By postponing the variance hearing it just proves that they are still

>> seeking to build a building of comparable specs, and that is

>> regardless

>> of Endeavor’s involvement, intentions or promises.

>>

>> We now know for sure that the Howards and or other parties still

>> intend

>> to build a mixed use building of predetermined height in this

>> location

>> and that this fight is just beginning.

>>

>> We’ll have to stay vigilant and be ready to attend this meeting

>> whenever

>> it finally comes up. They’re just waiting for the right moment
when

>> very few or none of us will be able to attend and that’s when
they’ll

>> push it through.

>>

>> I definitely want to say thanks to Jody, Kelly, Monte and others who

>> have stayed on top of this to keep us all informed.

>>

>> Chris

>> 55th ½

>>

>>

>> -----Original Message-----

>> From: [at]

>> [mailto: [at] ] On Behalf Of jody horton

>> Sent: Monday, December 10, 2007 3:51 PM

>> To: NNA; Nndl@14gram. Com

>> Subject: [NNADL] BOA HEARING POSTPONED TO JAN 14

>>

>>

>> Hi All,

>>

>> At 3:21pm I received a call from the case worker at the BOA that is

>> handling the Howards/Parker variance.

>> She had also sent the message (below) a few minutes earlier.

>>

>> I heard a few conflicting reports throughout the day, so had to

>> wait to

>> post this until getting something definitive.

>>

>> According to Walker,
she is 100% sure the variance request will be

>> postponed until Monday. Jan. 14

>>

>> Sorry to those of you who were planning to go to the BOA meeting

>> tonight.

>>

>>

>>

>> Again, the meeting is postponed, not canceled.

>>

>>

>>

>> A few clarifications on the case:

>>

>> Mrs. Walker confirmed to me that the e-mail (said to have been

>> sent by

>> Jamil on Monday the 3rd) was not received

>> by her until Thursday December 6th, in the late afternoon. But it was

>> dated Dec. 3.

>>

>> Mrs. Walker also confirmed that this variance request is ONE request,

>> not two. So while Alam's letters suggest that the

>> variance has been "split" and is now represented by two
parties, this

>> technically cannot be done.

>>

>> So, should Endeavor choose to keep their word and cancel the

>> request, it

>> will be cancelled. The Howards would then

>> be forced to apply for a separate variance request (should they

>> choose

>> to move forward).

>>

>> Please take the time and spread the word to anyone you think may be

>> planning to attend.

>>

>> Best,

>>

>> Jody Horton

>>

>>

>>

>>

>>

>>

>>

>>

>>

>>

>>

>>

>>

>> I have received a request for postponement by this applicant. I had

>> originally told the applicant's attorney that he needed to be there

>> because the board may not be fond of another postponement request,

>> but

>> in the meantime, I have had two Boardmembers call in that they

>> will not

>> be able to make the meeting. In light of this...I am sure that the

>> Board will approve their request for postponement.

>>

>> Sorry for any inconvenience this may cause.

>>

>> Susan Walker

>> Senior Planner

>> Watershed Protection & Development Review Department

>> Phone: 512-974-2202

>> Fax: 512-974-6536

>>

>>

>> On Dec 10, 2007, at 11:40 AM, Monty wrote:

>>

>>

>>

>> I just spoke to Jamil. As you can see - they are removing

>> themselves

>> as agents for the Howard property, and they have no intent on seeking

>> the compatiability variance for the Parker property - which they HAVE

>> closed on.

>> but that doesn't mean that the Howard's might not have a rep/agent

>> there

>> tonight.

>>

>> It would take the Howards to actually remove this from the docket.

>>

>> Monty

>>

>>

>> Jamil Alam wrote:

>> Subject: RE: [NNADL] BOA HEARING FOR HOWARDS/PARKER THIS MONDAY

>> Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2007 11:31:32 -0600

>> From: "Jamil Alam"

>> To: "Monty"

>> CC: "Nndl@14gram. Com" ,

>> "Northfield
Discussion List"

>>

>>

>>

>> Sorry for delayed response. Your email got picked up by my spam

>> filter.

>>

>> I sent a letter of postponement to the City on 12/3 and copied

>> Northfield.
I have attached a copy for your review.

>>

>> I can only speak for Endeavor as it relates to the Parker site as we

>> have no involvement w/ the Howard site at this time.

>>

>> Thanks

>>

>> Jamil

>>

>> Jamil Alam

>> Endeavor Real Estate Group

>> 221 West 6th Street,
Suite 1300

>> Austin, Texas 78701

>> (512) 682-5575 / 682-5505 - Fax

>> [at] / www.endeavor-re.com

>>

>>

>> _____

>>

>> From: Monty [mailto: [at] ]

>> Sent: Friday, December 07, 2007 10:18 AM

>> To: jody horton; Jamil Alam

>> Cc: Nndl@14gram. Com; Northfield
Discussion List

>> Subject: Re: [NNADL] BOA HEARING FOR HOWARDS/PARKER THIS MONDAY

>>

>> Jamil - Please let us know. If this variance is cancelled it would

>> save me a trip down Monday. I have no desire to be there - unless

>> it is

>> for the Howard/Parker dev. issue.

>> Monty Newton

>> VP NNA

>>

>>

>>

>>

>> _____

>>

>> Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find

>>

>>
newsearc

>> h/category.php?category=shopping> them fast with Yahoo! Search.

>> _______________________________________________

>> NNADL mailing list

>> [at]

>> http://northfieldna.org/mailman/listinfo/nnadl_northfieldna.org

>>

>>

>

>

>

> ----------------------------------------------------------------------

> --

> Disclaimer: Opinions expressed in messages are solely that of the

> author

> and not of the list administrators nor Druma Inc (sponsor 14gram.com).

> ----------------------------------------------------------------------

> --

> Unsubscribe & "howto" info, send a blank email to nndl-

> [at]

> - _______________________________________________

NNADL mailing list

[at]

http://northfieldna.org/mailman/listinfo/nnadl_northfieldna.org

 

 

Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find
them fast with Yahoo! Search.

‹ Re: [NNADL] [nndl] Re: BOA HEARING POSTPONED TO JAN 14 RE: [NNADL] [nndl] Re: BOA HEARING POSTPONED TO JAN 14 ›

Tags:

 

Post new comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.