Interesting that the Chronicle is not running this little revelation.

It just points out the hypocrisy of some of the opponents. They are pro-development on the one hand and "NIMBY" on the other.

Contrary to claims by a neighborhood paper, the Southampton Civic Club fully disclosed--two years ago, in the September 2005 Southampton Newsletter--the threat of possible high rise development of the Maryland Manor site. The Oct. 10 edition of the West U Examiner quoted leaked "emails to members of the Civic Club legal committee -- dating back as far as Sept. 7, 2005" as the source of its inside "scoop." In fact, the supposed covert information trumpeted in the story's lead paragraphs was fully discussed in the newsletter, which goes to all residents. The same message was published in the Boulevard Oaks September 2005 Newsletter. (The full text of the September 2005 newsletter item is reproduced below).

All Southampton residents, not just "ranking members" of the Civic Club, were provided this information. The insinuation that the information was hidden in emails to insiders is simply false. The Examiner's reporter could easily have learned this had he asked, but he didn't bother. Apparently the reporter's eagerness to deliver a "Lesson in Civics" led him into this gross journalistic blunder.

The facts are that, following the September report, investigation yielded nothing, nor were the Dallas owners forthcoming with information. Meanwhile, similar residential properties in the area were being developed as low- to mid-rise. The issue did not surface again until early March of 2007 when another survey crew was observed at the site, although it is unclear if their presence was related to the Maryland Manor site or another neighboring property.

In March 2007, renewed activity near the site led Southampton to investigate whether any development plans were afoot. We eventually learned that Maryland Manor had been acquired by developers Matthew Morgan and Kevin Kirton. Morgan, who grew up in the Southampton area, has been active in local civic organizations, and was well known to many Southampton and BOCA residents.

Morgan assured the Southampton Civic Club Executive Director that he had no current plans to redevelop the site, merely that he was looking at options due to a collapsed sewer line that was causing foundation problems with one of the existing structures on the site. He also stated that he was considering town homes and possibly a mid-rise. In the same time frame, the developers' representative informed Council Member Anne Clutterbuck that a townhouse development was planned.

Morgan and Kirton did not disclose their true intentions until late August of this year, when they approached Council Member Clutterbuck, who immediately notified the neighborhoods of the imminent threat of a high-rise.

Here is the full text of the article printed in the September 2005 Southampton Newsletter:

"Will there be a high-rise at Bissonnet and Ashby?

A Southampton resident reported that she had seen survey crews working at the corner of Bissonnet and Ashby for several days in a row. When she asked what they were doing a crewmember told her that the Maryland Manor apartments were going to be torn down and replaced with a four to twelve story residential high-rise, and that the crew had been hired by the prospective buyer.

Our area has been faced with the prospect of a high-rise since the mid 80s. In conjunction with other University Place neighborhoods, we have been able to convince developers to look elsewhere, but larger tracts of close-in land are becoming scare, and we may be faced with this prospect again soon, and possibly on the edge of our neighborhood.

There are no existing City of Houston development rules explicitly restricting high-rise structures on the edge of residential areas such as Southampton. Southgate acquired its first high-rise neighbors years ago, while River Oaks and Tanglewood have both acquired many tall structures directly adjacent to their deed-restricted boundaries. A very injurious 28 story high rise adjoining the Morningside neighborhood south of Rice Village was recently abandoned by its proposed developers after assessing aggressive opposition led by the Morningside Place Civic Assn. and the Southampton Civic Club, represented by Hugh Rice Kelly. They were successful in obtaining the support of University Place and enlisted strong personal intervention by Mayor Bill White and members of his administration. Although the location was immediately outside its boundaries, the City of West University Place also weighed in, as did a number of area legislators.

We are working in conjunction with Boulevard Oaks and University Place Super Neighborhood to verify this information with the owners and to plan a response. We have also made preliminary contact with the City. We will keep you posted."

The question has to be asked why no one attempted to address the problem two years ago - did it have to do with Sonoma?

The arguments made about 1717 Bisonnet were also made about Sonoma. The difference is our elected officials did little to stop Sonoma. And yet they seem intent on stopping 1717 Bissonnet. If that is not indicative of the hypocrisy involved I don't know what would be. Quite a few residents still object to Sonoma. Simply because with regard to promises from developers, they have already "been there, done that" with Weingarten and the Village Arcade.

To claim as so many do that they are concerned about traffic indicates that they rarely if ever venture into the Village or believe that indeed there is a sucker born every minute.

You have to wonder if some were silent about 1717 Bissonnet out of fear of blocking Sonoma as well?

It does seem, again, to be the ultimate hypocrisy to allow unchecked development on one side of Southampton but not another.

In any case, no one involved in the opposition to 1717 Bissonnet disclosed they knew about it two years ago and instead chose to mislead everyone into thinking that all of this was some sort of kamikaze attack by two greedy developers. The kamikaze attack seems to have been made by the attorneys who seem to be the primary force behind the opposition and who used their muscle, and no doubt their campaign contributions, to get elected officials to threaten to do whatever it took, legal or illegal, to stop it.

And as always, the attorneys are talking out of both sides of their mouths.

The homeowners in the Village area seem to be helpless to do anything but become pawns in political games and all of this is nothing more than a political game. And a fixed game at that. Political insiders get their developments approved. Political outsiders don't if a couple of the political insiders object. As a couple have with regard to 1717 Bissonnet.

Stinks to high heaven.