I thought the Diner was doing pretty well.  Of course, I had no reason to think that, except I had been there many times and liked it, I had seen firefighters and police officers eating there, and every time I drove by, there were always cars parked there .

I was told that it was due to management differences.  It’s too bad they couldn’t work things out.

What I’m worried about is, and I really hope this isn’t true, but you know how some locations just never make it, no matter what restaurant is opened there?  Unfortunately, this location is 0 for 2.

Maybe it will do better in 2010.

Since 1990, over 10,000 acres in Bexar County that very likely contained endangered species habitat have been lost. Very little land has been set aside by developers.

Bexar County officials recently hosted a meeting to begin discussing a new approach to regional development and environmental protection that will be known as the Southern Edwards Plateau Habitat Conservation Plan.  The new approach is seen as a way to provide endangered species habitat protection while also providing developers with a streamlined approval process for their projects.

Although leaders and citizens in San Antonio have demonstrated a strong commitment to protection of the Edwards Aquifer and endangered species, cities like Helotes could present a major difficulty in developing a successful plan.

The idea of a Regional Habitat Conservation Plan (RHCP) was first offered by officials in the summer of 2008, in response to concerns about rampant development around Camp Bullis.  The plan would involve preparing detailed maps of potential habitats for 31 endangered plants and animals in eight counties.  By extension, protecting these habitats would also help protect the Edwards Aquifer and Camp Bullis.  Using regional habitat assessment maps, developers could easily determine the likelihood that a proposed project would destroy habitat, and they could contribute funds or purchase mitigation lands from a bank established for that purpose.  The process could take as little as several weeks, instead of the several years it takes to receive permits when developers pursue them on their own.  Such a plan would mitigate reductions in endangered species habitats while providing developers with a clear roadmap to legally advance their projects.

Currently, almost no land is set aside as required by the Endangered Species Act when developers encounter endangered species habitats.  When habitats are encountered, developers have several choices:

1.  Be a midnight-bulldozing nose-thumbing Endangered Species Act violator and risk fines and imprisonment.  This choice has been surprisingly popular.  The Greater Edwards Aquifer Alliance (GEAA) estimates that since 1990, over 10,000 acres that very likely contained endangered species habitats have been lost in Bexar County.  Very little land has been set aside by developers.  Prosecution under the Endangered Species Act is mainly a hollow threat.  There have been no successful prosecutions at all, so developers have no reason to believe the risk of fines and imprisonment is real.  They simply bring in the bulldozers.  Once habitats are destroyed, it is impossible for U.S. Fish and Wildlife officials to prove they ever existed, so no lawsuit can be pursued.

2.  Hire an environmental assessment firm that will give you the answer you want, and present regulators with a professional looking document that attests no habitat exists.  This choice has also been very popular.  It’s slightly better than midnight-bulldozing, but almost no one believes that vast areas of Bexar County did not previously contain large areas of golden-cheeked warbler habitat.

3.  Developers that choose a legal and ethical route may apply for and obtain a Section 10A permit from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife to “take” endangered species habitat.  This process takes a minimum of 3 to 4 years and usually requires mitigation whereby other lands containing habitat are purchased and protected by the developer, in exchange for destroying habitats on the proposed project site.  Or,

4.  Developers may obtain permission to “take” habitat under a Section 10A umbrella through participation in a Regional Habitat Conservation Plan if one has been developed and approved for the project area.

Under Option 4, one or several counties and other jurisdictions that want to participate develop a Conservation Plan that outlines exactly what developers are allowed to do and what sort of mitigation is required.  Essentially, developers use a pre-approved Section 10A permit, and they pay into a mitigation bank which provides funds for the purchase of good quality, occupied habitat.  if this process is available, developers often prefer it because they can obtain permission to legally take habitat much quicker than when dealing directly with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife.

When a similar RHCP was developed in Travis County near Austin, it took almost a decade.  In Bexar County, officials are hoping it can be achieved in 2 years.  For a plan to be effective, participation by many jurisdictions will be needed, and cities and counties must make a commitment to be a partner in the plan before it is submitted for approval.

This need for widespread participation may prove to be a stumbling block, because many jurisdictions are reluctant to do anything that could be remotely construed as a limit or roadblock to developers.  Many developers are pretty happy with the way things are right now, and many local government officials interpret their public service responsibility as mainly being of service to developers, not participating in regional environmental protection initiatives.

For example, in the City of Helotes, which sits on an important recharge stream, the current political climate is antithetic to regional environmental protection and conservation goals.  Most of the progress made by previous “green” City councils under Mayor Jon Allan has been systematically reversed in favor of environmentally insensitive development schemes.  Residents and citizens that worked toward aquifer protection by establishment of parks and open spaces were openly villified by Helotes Mayor Tom Schoolcraft and the City Council and summarily dismissed from City committees.  Grants intended for parks and open spaces were declined.  Comments provided by expert scientists and hydrogeologists, including an Edwards Aquifer Authority (EAA) Board member, were publicly ridiculed and systematically ignored.  In 2007, Council member Rich Whitehead publicly argued in favor of 100 percent impervious cover over the Edwards recharge zone.  Committees that used to provide public input regarding development have been dissolved.  Most of the remaining committees have not been meeting on a regular basis.  Important development decisions are relegated to the consent agenda and rubber-stamped in lightning-fast meetings without public discussion.  When public discussion is allowed, Mayor Schoolcraft hand-picks who may speak.  Rezoning of sensitive land to allow intensive development is the norm.

As it turns out, Helotes might be particularly important to the plan’s success.  For habitat protections to be effective, large contiguous areas are much preferred over small, fragmented ones, and the area around Helotes offers a prime opportunity.  Helotes has Camp Bullis on one side, Government Canyon on the other, and there are numerous large tracts in between that were purchased with funds approved by San Antonio voters for Edwards Aquifer protection.  The logical strategy to develop a large contiguous area of protected habitat is to “connect the dots” between the already protected lands.  In other words, the area around Helotes may be the epicenter of future mitigation purchases, especially if other counties decide not to participate.

Will Helotes take advantage of an opportunity to help lead the nation in demonstrating forward-thinking environmental protection initiatives?  With the current crop of leaders at City Hall, it doesn’t seem likely.

New restaurant coming or Colonna's - Take 2?

UPDATE 10/7/09:  Apparently, the Hwy. 16 Diner is not owned by the Colonnas as previously reported.  The building ownership did not change, but the Colonnas did not own the building, just the restaurant.

I have eaten at the Hwy. 16 Diner and found the service to be quite good.  I was curious when my charge there showed up on my credit card bill as “Colonna’s”  instead of “Hwy. 16 Diner,”  but the management of the Hwy. 16 Diner assures me that there is no connection between them and the old Colonna’s Grill.  They are still using the Colonna’s credit card machine (??).

__________________________________

PREVIOUSLY REPORTED ON 8/11/09:

On July 30, we reported that Colonna’s Grill had closed (see post entitled “Another One Bites the Dust”).  Today I was driving by and noticed there was a temporary sign on the building announcing that the Hwy 16 Diner is coming soon.

A quick check with City Hall revealed that this is not a change in ownership, just a change in name.  Apparently, the Colonna’s Grill owners are going to give it another try under a new name.

No word yet on what the new menu will contain.  Hopefully, they will be nicer to their customers this time around, that is, assuming you’re even willing to give them another chance.

Time will tell.

Has commercial development in Helotes ground to a halt?  No one has applied for a permit for new signs or lighting?  No ordinances to rewrite?  No zoning variances requested?

Citizen involvement has been seriously diminished by Mayor Schoolcraft.  After all, he has completely shut down several committees. 

There is no Architectural Review Board anymore.  P&Z now makes the decisions they used to make, well, when they’re allowed to meet.  The 10 citizens on the P&Z Commission are really the only citizens left that review the plans, plats, zoning, and permit requests of builders and developers, as well as insuring that signage, lighting, and landscaping complies with the City’s ordinances.

Who knows who takes care of the duties that were assigned to the Tree Preservation Committee?  I’d guess the City Arborist, but those issues never get discussed in public anymore, so who knows what’s being done about saving our trees and insuring compliance with that ordinance.

The Parks and Open Space Committee was shut down.  Now we have a Parks and Recreation Committee whose main duty seems to be facilitating entertainment.  Don’t get me wrong.  I think Christmas parades, Easter egg hunts, and movie nights are good things, and they’re enjoyed by many in our community.  My point is just that the current Parks Committee is nothing like the Parks Committee the Mayor did away with.

We do still have an Ethics Commission, operating, as far as I know, under the same ordinance as they always did, but I don’t even remember the last time they met.

It’s the same with the Board of Adjustment, except it is my understanding that this Board is established by state law, so Schoolcraft couldn’t dissolve it if he wanted to.

While it is true that citizen review can complicate or slow down the development process, it is a necessary complication.  Citizens are, I guess you could call them, stakeholders in that process.  They have a real interest in keeping Helotes a nice place to live.  Their property values depend on it.  So citizen involvement is a necessary thing, a good thing, that, in my opinion, has been dealt a serious blow under Tom Schoolcraft.

If we just sit back and let the current administration do whatever they want, let them develop Helotes any way they want, we’ll get what we deserve.

Maybe we just don’t care anymore.

Let us know what you think.

Jon Allan and his beloved Millie

Jon Allan died at his home Sunday night, September 27, 2009, after battling brain cancer for a little over a year.  I’m told he went peacefully, attended by a few close friends and hospice.

I have not been able to discern yet, in my many years of life, any rhyme or reason why some people live long lives and some people die way too young.  One thing I know for sure is that living a long time has nothing to do with living a good life or being a good person, because if it did Jon Allan would have lived forever.

Jon was the Mayor of Helotes from 2005 to 2007.  He had a vision of Helotes shared by many of us, one filled with trees and great natural beauty, one with appropriate, environmentally friendly development.

The current administration in Helotes has spent a great deal of time over the last 2 and a half years trying to destroy Jon’s efforts, but as long as any of us who knew him are still alive, his legacy will live on.

Jon was one of the most kind and gentle people I have ever known.  I will never forget him.

Please add your comments below if you’d like to share any of your thoughts and memories of Jon.  If you have not already done so, you will need to register on this site to be able to leave your comments.

Generally, I have enjoyed these sessions.  They’re educational; I always learn something.  I like watching the interaction between the Council members.  I like hearing the discussions and knowing why certain decisions were made and why Council chose to go one way and not another.

There are many, many things the Council members have to take into consideration, many issues they have to look at, that all contribute to the decisions they make that result in the final budget.  Many things determine how the City’s money will be spent.

This year, however, there will be no special budget workshops.  Apparently, Mayor Schoolcraft has decided that all the discussion and consideration necessary can be done at the regularly scheduled Council meetings in August and September.

According to the schedule, the proposed FY 2010 budget will be presented to City Council at the August 13 Council meeting.  At this meeting Council will also vote to place a proposal to adopt a tax rate on a future Council agenda and set a date and time for a public hearing on the proposed tax rate.

At the August 28 Council meeting, there will be public hearings on the proposed FY 2010 budget and on the proposed tax rate.

At the September 10 Council meeting, there will be public hearings on the proposed FY 2010 budget, to include the approved EDC budget, and, again, on the proposed tax rate.

At the September 24 Council meeting, public hearings on these subjects will be held once again.  Also at this meeting, Council will adopt the City’s FY 2010 budgets and set the tax rate.

In my opinion, this doesn’t give Council enough time to work on the budget.  Workshops were more informal.  Robert’s Rules were suspended.  Interaction and discussion among the Council members were easier and more relaxed.

Once the proposed budget is provided to Council members (hopefully prior to the August 13 meeting) they can review it, but they can’t discuss it with each other because to do so would be in violation of the Open Meetings Act.  All of their interaction will have to take place at the public Council meeting.

I’m disappointed, but I’m probably the only one.  I’m sure Council and City staff are glad they won’t have to spend all the extra hours at City Hall that the workshops would have required.  I just hope the budget process doesn’t suffer in the meantime.

And I have to ask myself – why is the Mayor changing this budget process that has been followed for so many years by so many different Helotes City Councils?

Colonna's - even the sign is gone!

Closed last year

Another restaurant in Helotes closed this week.  I don’t know how long Colonna’s Grill was open, but I’d guess less than a year.  Last year the Old Town Grill & Bistro in Old Town Helotes closed.  It was open maybe a year?

I really wanted these restaurants to make it.  I was excited about both of them when they opened.  They were both unique, and by that I mean they were not part of a chain of restaurants.  I would really love for Helotes to get some really good, unique restaurants, or I guess I should say some more good, unique restaurants.  We do have El Chapparal, even though it is no longer unique; there are several of them around now.  And, of course, we have Bobby J’s, Tejas Barbacoa, the Bandera Road Cafe, and Mekong Garden.  OK, maybe I’m just being greedy, but I want more!

In my opinion, both the Old Town Grill and Colonna’s had great potential, and I think that there are plenty of Helotians who would support a good restaurant.  Lots of us eat out on a regular basis, but emphasis should be put on the word ‘good.’  Neither of these restaurants were good (remember this is just my opinion).

The Old Town Grill had an interesting concept.  I liked the way the restaurant looked.  Having wine was a good idea.  The idea of serving fresh breads and muffins was also a good one.  However, the service was horrible (we waited one time for 45 minutes just to get a glass of tea).  Some of the food was really good; some of it not so good.  The breads and muffins were dry and not real tasty.  We went numerous times hoping it would improve, but it never happened.

To Colonna’s, we only went twice.  The first time the only thing on the menu that they actually had was pizza.  They were not organized.  They were slow.  My husband never did get the dressing for his salad.  A table of 10 next to us got up and left after 45 minutes when all they had gotten was their tea.

Not a fun experience, but they were new so we thought we’d give them a second chance.  When we went a second time, we were with friends who wanted to buy a bottle of wine.  They were out of wine.  Another friend of mine went once, and they were out of salad.  They were not accommodating.  They were rude to customers.  They were not organized.  However, the cook (Mr. Colonna) did inform us that he had had restaurants for years, he had a loyal following, we didn’t know anything about the restaurant business, and he knew what he was doing.

I hoped that our experiences were unique, but I heard many people complain about Colonna’s saying they would not go back.  Now they’re closed.

I hope this will not become a pattern here in Helotes.  We deserve some more good restaurants, some unique restaurants, ones that will draw people to Helotes to eat, enjoy themselves, and spend lots of money.

Hey, it’s just my opinion!!   What’s yours?

This past week the office of the current fire station was demolished.  The empty space to the left of the remaining bays is where the driveway will be, serving as both the entrance to and the exit from the new fire station.

If you will notice, there is a large old oak tree in the pathway of the proposed new driveway.  A call to the fire station revealed that no decision has yet been made as to whether or not that tree will be saved.

There was a division on Council with half of Council wanting the entire station demolished (bays and all) and half wanting the bays left standing.  The Mayor wanted the bays left because he wants to use them to store public works equipment in (tractors, bobcat, etc.), so he broke the tie dismissing the public safety issues that were raised by Council members Massey and Whitehead (who is a firefighter for San Antonio), and the bays will remain standing.

The Fire Chief wanted a 24-foot wide driveway for the safety of all concerned.  It is obvious that since the bays were left standing this will not be possible, and that was one of the concerns expressed by the Council members.  They felt that this area was not sufficiently wide to provide the visibility necessary for the safety of the firefighters or the driving public.

What do you think?  Will this space be adequate?  Should the Mayor and the Council listen to what the Fire Chief wants?

(For more information on this issue, read “Red Flag Raised in Fire Station Construction Plans” on this website under the heading of “City Hall.”)

I will admit upfront that I don’t understand what all the changes mean, and I still have some questions on these amendments and their intended purposes.  However, in an effort to inform our readers and as food for thought, I will list some of these changes, which, I believe, are being made to cut the bottom-line cost of the contract.

Will the changes compromise the quality of the project?  Will they cost us taxpayers more over the coming years?  Will they jeopardize public safety or the safety of our police officers or our firefighters?  I can’t say, because I don’t know enough about the requirements of, for example, driveways.  How thick should they be to support the heavy fire trucks and other emergency vehicles?

I have listed some of the changes below.  This list will not be a complete list of the changes, just the ones I thought were most pertinent.  To see a complete list of the amendments, go to the City’s website (www.helotes-tx.gov) and look at the agenda for Thursday’s meeting.  Under agenda item number 10, you can click on the word “Contract” in the third line and that will bring up a copy of these amendments.

Bid alternate #1 -  install fiber board duct in lieu of metal duct at both stations (saves $27,900); 5 inch thick concrete paving in lieu of 7 inch thick concrete paving (-$12,500); change heavy duty asphalt paving to light duty (-$6,664); install double lock standing seam roof to match existing City structures in lieu of CeeLock metal roof (-$17,600); some electrical/generator changes that I really don’t understand, but they must be substantial changes because they save $172,030; change overhead sectional doors (-$15,427); delete non-essential curbs (-$6,627); and reduce stucco thickness from 1 inch to 5/8 inch (-$2,400).  All of the changes in Bid Alternate #1 (not all listed here) resulted in a deduction of $286,211.

Bid Alternate #2 – reduce concrete driveway width at rear entrance to apparatus bay (-$2,740); residential grade windows in lieu of storefront type (-$9,138); roof decking 7/16 inch OSB in lieu of 3/4 inch plywood (-$5,072); omit emergency eye wash station and associated water service plumbing at Sally Port (City to provide and install self contained unit) (-$1,700); polished concrete instead of carpet (-$9,360); omit grease trap at fire station (-$10,000); 80Kw NG generator in lieu of 250Kw diesel generator at police station (-$36,300).  Because of these changes there were architectural, MEP engineer, and civil engineer redesign fees in excess of $12,000.  All of the changes in Bid Alternate #2 (not all listed here) resulted in a deduction of $55,020.

Bid Alternate #3 – delete Apparatus bay trench drains and oil interceptor (-$22,900); add architectural and engineering redesign fee (+$2,830); rough in water supply for future eye wash at Sally Port (+$700). All of the changes in Bid Alternate #3 (not all listed here) resulted in a deduction of $19,370.

Bid Alternate #4 – delete CU-7/AC-1 at bunker gear storage (whatever that is) (-$4,485 which was the total deduction for Bid Alternate #4).

Bid Alternate #5 – delete Kohler 80 KW NG Generator (-$56,500) (City will purchase and install generator); delete boring under FM  1560 for public sewer (-$20,000); delete fencing at two dumpster/generator enclosures (-$5,280) (fencing and painting will be done by City).  All of the changes in Bid Alternate #4 resulted in a deduction of $81,780.

The total reduction in the cost of construction because of all the changes was $439,466. bringing the total of the contract to $4,497,990.

On the surface, a reduction of over $400,000 in the cost of construction would appear to be a good thing, but will it cost us taxpayers more over the coming years??  For instance, the original architects (whose work was scrapped by the Mayor when Council decided to go with a design/build construction firm changing the original buildings to metal buildings, among many other changes) told the Mayor that a stucco finish would not last but 8 or 10 years before needing repair (if my memory is correct), and now they are reducing the thickness of the stucco which would, in turn, seem to decrease that durability even more.

I guess only time will tell.

Comments??

As much as I hate to admit it, I’m one of those people, and I do appreciate the Echo’s efforts to make me happy!

In the Echo dated July 8, 2009, I read that a traffic light had been installed at Parrigan and FM 1560 and was working well.  I was excited to hear that, so I jumped into my car to go see the new light.  Unfortunately, there was no traffic light at Parrigin and FM 1560.

I’m guessing they were talking about the fairly new traffic light at Antonio and FM 1560.

I find errors in the Echo all the time, so I think I’m going to make this a continuing commentary.  Check back every week to read about the errors I’ve found in the Echo.

If you find errors in the Helotes Herald, let the Editor know.  I have to admit that won’t make me as happy as finding errors in The Echo, but we do need to know about them.