CONTACT:

Natalie O'Neill 281-326-1933,

Katie Chimenti 281-286-9750

Harvill E. Weller 281-286-4900

 September 22, 2000

Far from being at odds with each other, industry and bay area residents could wind up standing shoulder to shoulder against the proposed container port development at Bayport.

"The Port of Houston Authority violates the purpose of the deed restrictions for the area with its new port proposal," said Jim Blackburn of the Galveston Bay Conservation and Preservation Association (GBCPA). "We are asking the assistance of the Association of Bayport Companies in enforcing the deed restrictions."

His comments come in the wake of a recent roundtable session between the executive committee of the ABC companies and GBCPA representatives Jim Blackburn, Dick Morrison and Harvill Weller. Deed restrictions establishing high environmental standards for companies in the Bayport Industrial Complex took effect in 1965. They come up for renewal in 2003.

During research into land uses around Bayport, GBCPA has examined some 50,000 Port of Houston Authority documents under the open records law. The history of land transactions has revealed that there is no place for a megaport at Bayport.

As promoted by Humble Oil in the mid-1960s, and later Exxon and its subsidiary the Friendswood Development Company, the Bayport industrial development was to be a superior industrial zone, a combination of space-related companies, dry goods manufacturers, and petrochemical industries.

"With its own waste disposal facility and stringent environmental standards, it was intended as a desirable neighbor for NASA and the companion development of Clear Lake City," said Harvill Weller, an attorney and GBCPA board member who has done much of the research for GBCPA on the deed restrictions.

The environmental standards clauses involve smoke, dust, and other particulates; odorous and toxic matter; radioactive and explosive or flammable materials; noise, glare, and waste. The deed restrictions state that "Bayport has developed such standards to insure proper use and appropriate development and improvement of the area and to protect surrounding landowners in residential and commercial areas from property depreciation and health impairment."

In 1993 the Port of Houston Authority purchased more than 600 acres near Bayport, not for a container terminal but for a dredge spoil disposal site. The Port then requested and received deed restriction waivers on this land from Friendswood Development Company, and now has plans for a container port there. Port lawyers have said the waivers, however, may very well require approval by all Bayport companies.

"These concerted actions by Friendswood and the Port run directly counter to the original plans for avoiding a negative impact on Clear Lake and the pre-existing communities of Seabrook, El Jardin, Shoreacres, and LaPorte," said Weller. A year ago, ABC representatives began expressing concern about how the proposed port might affect them as regards transportation and air quality problems.

"From the perspective of residents, local cities, and also Bayport industry, these actions can be viewed as the first set of promises broken by the Port," said Blackburn. "The Bayport industries, like all industry, have been saying they want to be good neighbors. In this case there is a pact with the community that they have a chance to support. The Port threatens to break that promise and damage the goodwill built up by ABC for three decades. Enforcement and renewal of these deed restrictions offers all Bayport companies an opportunity to affirm this promise," said Blackburn.