Land Use


		BAYPORT LAND USE ISSUES

Peter H. Brown, AIA, AICP

September 15, 1999

This is the first report of a Bayport Land Use Study commissioned by Galveston Bay Conservation and Preservation Association that is to examine the impacts that the proposed Bayport Container Terminal will have on the Clear Lake area and surrounding communities. GBCPA is continuing to raise money for this study.

Land Use Issues
The proposed Bayport terminal site lies at the center of the Clear Lake - Galveston Bay sub-region, with the primary impact area extending on the east side of Highway 146 from Morgan’s Point to Bacliff. The sub-region is a major residential-recreational suburban sector of the Houston Standard Metropolitan Statistical Area (SMSA), with a strong economic base, primarily space technology, related office and light industry, recreation and tourism.

Community Character
The character of this sub-region is clearly established, distinguished by the water-oriented recreation, entertainment and the various activities of Clear Lake and Galveston Bay. In the immediate area there are numerous older water-oriented subdivisions, and west of Highway 146, larger planned communities, including "South Shore Harbor", "Clear Lake City", as well as major residential developments in Webster, Kemah, Taylor Lake Village and Nassau Bay. In addition, attractive shorelines and preserved natural areas, primarily coastal/estuary wetlands, enhance the specific character of this area. Important recreational activities include numerous golf courses (6 in the Greater Clear Lake Area) and the various facilities of private clubs such as the Houston Yacht Club. These amenities combined with the employment base of NASA/Johnson Space Center, and an exemplary school system (Clear Creek ISD, thirtieth largest district in Texas and La Porte ISD) make this sub-region perhaps the most attractive suburb for residential living in the entire SMSA. It is home to many of our nation’s astronauts.

These two school districts, Clear Creek ISD (28 schools with 28,500 students) and La Porte ISD (11 schools with 7,344 students), represent a major public investment in the cultural/educational infrastructure serving the residential population of the sub-region.

The Nature of Industrial Uses
Industrial uses are generally classified in municipal land use regulations based on two categories: light industry and heavy industry. Light industry includes warehousing, and manufacturing involving the assemblage of pre-manufactured parts, such as computers or small machines and products. Heavy industry includes manufacturing involving chemical processes and significant noise, airborne particulate matter and glare. Transportation terminals, railroads, ports, airports, electric generating stations, substations, utility plants, breweries, smelters and chemical plants are classified as heavy industry.

Industrial uses generally account for 3%-5% gross (or 6%-8% net) of the land use of a city or sub-region, and tend to be concentrated in large agglomerations, close to major transportation arteries (highways, freeways, inter-coastal waterways, ports and railroads). There are three reasons for the concentration of heavy industrial uses.

Heavy industrial uses, considered in terms of commonly accepted planning and land use standards, are incompatible with most other land uses, particularly residential, institutional (schools), and park, recreational and open space uses. In most municipalities, substantial buffers are required between even light industrial and residential uses, and heavy industry is not allowed in any reasonable proximity to residential uses. This is a national standard, promulgated by the American Planning Association and established in land use regulations and comprehensive plans throughout the nation. Therefore, heavy industry tends to be grouped in one area of a city or suburb, to minimize adjacency with other uses.
Industrial areas attract other industrial uses in close proximity. For example, a port facility will attract large-scale warehousing and distribution centers, major trucking terminals, and heavy industries such as chemical plants and industrial processing facilities in close proximity. These often noxious uses tend to eliminate residential and related development from the immediate area. For example, the Baytown Comprehensive Plan suggests significant physical separation between emission points and residential structures, recognizing the adverse impacts of heavy industrial uses, not only on residential property values and neighborhood life, but also on the community’s overall "image and general physical appearance."
Industrial uses adversely affect property values of other uses, most notably residential, retail, and office uses. Therefore, industrial uses, particularly heavy industry, tend to be isolated in areas which are not considered suitable for residential use.

Potential Land Use Impacts of the Proposed Bayport Facility
The proposed Bayport heavy industrial facility, in terms of commonly accepted national planning standards, published by the American Planning Association, the American Institute of Architects, and the American Institute of Landscape Architects, is a highly incompatible land use in a predominately residential/recreational area.

The anticipated adverse impacts are in three areas:

The Core Impact Area.
In the "Core" impact area, are those established residential neighborhoods (El Jardin del Mar, Seabrook, Shoreacres, and the southern part of La Porte) directly affected by the presence of a large industrial facility, particularly those neighborhoods in direct contact with noise, glare, traffic (primarily truck) congestion and shipping traffic. The likely impacts include declining property values, environmental nuisances (air pollution, smoke, glare, noise) and traffic congestion.

The Primary Impact Area
The primary impact area includes the portion east of Highway 146 from Morgan’s Point to Bacliff and the communities that are immediately adjacent on the west side of 146: Taylor Lake Village, El Lago and parts of Seabrook. The primary impact area will experience effects similar to the core impact area, particularly traffic congestion along Highway 146, tie-ups at at-grade rail crossings, declining property values and a negative community image.
The Secondary Impact Area
Effects will be significant in the secondary impact area, essentially a 5-7 mile radius inland, which includes the NASA area, portions of Clear Lake City, Webster, League City, and La Porte. In this area, traffic congestion will likely be the primary problem, property values will be affected, accompanied by a change in the overall image and appearance of the sub-region.

The existing light and heavy industries adjacent to Bayport are across Highway 146 from a large light and heavy industrial area on either side of Port Road, extending north from Bay Area Boulevard, which also contains considerable undeveloped vacant land. These areas are unfortunately adjacent to the Armand Bayou Nature Center and other estuarine tributaries of Clear Lake and border several residential subdivisions to the north. This is a good example of the spreading growth patterns of heavy industrial uses (primarily manufacturing, trucking and warehousing), infringing on pristine natural areas and effecting nearby residential neighborhoods. Similar patterns of land use occur adjacent to the Barbour’s Cut Terminal. Such a pattern is incompatible with the established residential character of the area.

It is not likely that the neighborhoods in the core impact area will survive the adverse effects of Bayport. NO AMOUNT OF BUFFERING OR REMEDIAL MEASURES can alleviate the effects of such a large facility in the core impact area.

The result of the proposed Bayport facility, in the core impact area will likely be an immediate and significant loss of property values (affecting 3,000-3,500 homes, mostly owner occupied) and an exodus of the long-term resident population. This is typically followed by an influx of less affluent renters and buyers and haphazard changes from residential to marginal commercial and industrial uses, where the land is not regulated by zoning. In planning terms, this is the beginning of a downward spiral of neighborhood decline, resulting in future blight and physical deterioration of the built environment

The nature of change in the primary impact area will be similar as those in the core area, particularly increased traffic congestion. The essential established character of the community will be irreversibly altered. Probable adverse impacts include:

A significant loss of property values and ad valorem taxes and a consequent reduction in the quality of municipal services and level of educational facilities.
Declining commercial values, which historically served the generally broad spectrum of residential population. There will be a possible surplus of commercial retail and office uses, as spending power decreases, and new commercial retail office growth will be diminished.
Reductions in water-oriented tourism and leisure activities, particularly, sailing and eco-tourism.
Decline in the rate of new development of vacant land for residential and supporting commercial uses.
Gradual increases in the amount of land devoted to heavy and light industrial and warehouse/manufacturing uses, which are attracted by a large container port operation and its spin-off operations, particularly in areas where there are no zoning regulations.

The current predominant land use in the primary impact area as a percentage of developed land is residential 80% and commercial 13%. Industry accounts for only 7%. This figure will possibly be doubled by the construction of Bayport and spin-off industries. This would be an unusually high percentage of industrial land, particularly in predominantly residential sub-region.

Probable effects in the secondary impact area (5-7 mile radius west of Highway 146), will include:

Added traffic congestion will be a critical factor, because most of the local residents are auto-dependent commuters.
A lessening of desirability of residential areas and planned communities, such as "South Shore Harbor", which depend on an unspoiled recreational and leisure environment for their competitive appeal with other SMSA sub-regions.
A general decline in its image and community appearance.

The slowing of residential growth and decline in property values and tax revenues brought about by the increase in industrial uses, particularly heavy industry, will have a significant impact on local school districts, especially Clear Creek ISD which is planning for significant increases in school-age population. These negative impacts must be quantified and included in any cost/benefit analysis of port and industrial expansion.

Eventually, the employment base of NASA will be affected, since there is fierce national and international competition for recruiting top engineering graduates to work at NASA. No one moving to Houston wants to live near in the vicinity of a large heavy industrial complex. Quality of life is a key factor in attracting these new employees. Any significant decline in the quality of life (particularly congestion, the loss of recreational and leisure amenities, and the "industrial" stigma) eventually will have a negative effect on the growth of the important space technology sector of the economy.

Appropriate Land Use
The proposed container facility raises the important question, "In terms of commonly accepted planning principles, what is the appropriate land use for this property?" In reaching a conclusion to this question, specific criteria must be considered:

Compatibility with established existing land uses in the immediate area.
Environmental concerns, especially on the Galveston Bay ecosystem, storm water management and air quality.
Traffic considerations, particularly added congestion impacting existing uses.
Impact on the local tax base of the adjacent municipalities.
Market demand for the development of this property and adjacent vacant land in terms of the intensity and type of use.
Existing land uses and activities currently on the subject property.
Social impacts including broader community effects on social well-being (See Hanly v. Kleindist, 409 US990, 1972).
Adequate infrastructure, including the roadway system, rail and water transportation, water, sewer and drainage facilities.

The feasible alternative uses for this large property provided there are significant and adequate buffers from existing heavy industrial, include:

Single and multi-family residential – oriented toward the water areas
Commercial retail and office, along Highway 146
Leisure commercial including a hotel, convention/meeting facilities, restaurants and entertainment venues
Recreational/commercial marinas and related facilities
Cruise ship terminal
Regional parklands, sports and recreational facilities
Light industrial, manufacturing and warehousing
Golf course and country club.

From a planning viewpoint, additional heavy industry is inappropriate for this site. The existing heavy industry on the property suggests limited light industry and commercial on adjacent land. Residential uses are appropriate on those portions of the property not impacted by existing heavy industry. The water areas should be developed as regional amenities, marinas and sailing clubs, including a venue for Olympic water sports. A local or regional park is clearly an appropriate use, as well as a championship golf course. Waterfront entertainment-oriented retail, similar to the Kemah Waterfront, could be developed on the bay front south of the inlets. A cruise ship terminal could possibly be developed in association with waterfront commercial, provided it does not adversely impact sailing and related water sports.

In summary, this is a large and attractive property, with a unique waterfront amenity. It has the unmistakable potential to reinforce the recreational, residential and leisure-oriented commercial character of the Clear Lake – Galveston Bay sub-region. Given the limited infrastructure (existing and planned) and the unique potential of this site and its context, further development as a port facility and related heavy industry, trucking and warehousing is inappropriate.

Summary
Aside from the significant adverse environmental impacts on the sub-region and Galveston Bay, in terms of air and water quality, the proposed Bayport container terminal will have substantial negative impacts on the local livability and the economy; including:

Loss of property values, decreased tax revenues for municipalities and school districts.
Job losses in the public sector, followed by declining job growth in the commercial, recreation and entertainment sectors.
Decrease in growth rates of commercial uses particularly retail and professional offices, resulting from decreased consumer spending power.
Significant decreases in the rate of new residential development, particularly in the primary impact area.
Deterioration and blight of once stable residential neighborhoods in the core impact area.

Of particular significance is the issue of future land use. More than 50% of the land area in the primary and secondary impact areas is yet undeveloped. The future land use, in terms of current zoning and land use suitability, is predominantly residential, accompanied by supporting retail, office, recreational and leisure uses. The most significant impact of Bayport, perhaps, is this effect on the future disposition of vacant land. If Bayport is constructed, expanding presence of heavy industry, much of this land will be developed by spin-off heavy industry and manufacturing, and large areas, highly suitable for residential use will be consumed by industrial uses, remain vacant or developed as marginal non-residential uses with a minimal economic multiplier effect.

Typically industrial uses (both light and heavy) account for approximately 3%-5% (gross) of the land use in an economic sub-region or region. Industrial uses in the primary impact area are already at 3.5%. This would indicate that compared to other stable sub-regions, very little industrial growth, particularly heavy industry, is warranted particularly in the Clear Lake – Galveston Bay sub-region.

Our research shows that without the Bayport facility the undeveloped land will tend to develop according to the prevailing trends, with increased high quality residential, recreational (water-oriented), and high-tech office uses, focused on the space technology and research sectors. These are the appropriate land uses for this unique site.

This raises the important question as to whether the economic benefits of Bayport, primarily in terms of employment, will result in any net economic benefit to the sub-region or SMSA. Decreased tourism and leisure activities, the costs of declining municipal and school revenues and job losses, declining commercial uses, slower development activity in all sectors except industrial may well offset any anticipated economic benefits. The long-term effect of Bayport could well be a significant broad based economic loss for the Houston SMSA. When the costs of new infrastructure construction, traffic congestion mitigation (including accidents and deaths), remedial measures for increased air pollution, and remediation for environmental impacts on Galveston Bay are all taken into account, Bayport (in this location) will likely have a severe negative impact on the region.

In addition, it will inevitably alter the community character of what is perhaps the highest amenity suburb of the Houston SMSA and adversely affect our major space technology-oriented employment sector, increasingly important to the economic base of the entire region in the high-tech, information age global economy.

Submitted by: