LETTER TO THE EDITOR
Editor:

I feel compelled to write in response to your news article of Thursday, May 24, 2007 entitled WH City Council considers removing P&Z member. As a professional planner, a 13 year resident of Whitehouse and Chairman of the P&Z Commission for the past 9 years, I wish to clarify two misconceptions related to information reported in your article:

1) I chaired the P&Z meeting in the Fall of 2006 in which Mr. Lee Wilson presented his proposed townhouse development. His proposal did not comply with the newly adopted Vision 2020 Master Plan in any way and was unanimously denied by the Commission for the following reasons: incompatible with the Master Plan, which calls for retail/office uses along FM 346; unresolved noise and traffic issues related to its proximity to the Football Stadium; and WISD's ownership of Bain Street right-of-way. As the P&Z is only an advisory board, Mr. Wilson's chose was to continue pursuing approval of his development plan with City Council, which is his right. I was also present for that Council meeting. There were mixed opinions and concerns among the City Council to return to the P&Z and work out a solution and to further clarify the Bain Street rightof way issue with the WISD. Mr. Wilson never contacted the City Staff or made arrangement to represent his development proposal to the P&Z as requested by Council.

I also chaired the meeting in which Mrs. Bellefeuille's singlefamily housing development was presented. In compliance with Texas state law she signed a disclosure statement regarding her financial interest in the project and recused herself from all discussion and voting by leaving her room. Her proposed residential development was 63 percent in compliance with the Vision 2020 Plan and the layout and design of the remaining 37 percent of the subdivision was in harmony with the other existing and adjacent developments within the area. After much discussion P&Z recommended approval of her rezoning, site plan and preliminary plat, and sent on to City Council for their fostering a "conflict of interest" situation. Although Mr. Wilson claims that Mrs. Bellefeuille received preferential treatment, the records clearly show that both developments were completely different and both were considered on their own merits. To suggest otherwise is to assume that one person, Mrs. Bellefeuille, was able to somehow coerce the other six members of the P&Z to deny Mr. Wilson's proposal and approve hers.

2) The City Council unanimously approved a preliminary plat for Mrs. Bellefeuille's development that included no access to the existing Rosebrook Subdivisions. In doing so the City relinquished their ability to backtrack and insist that the singlefamily development include additional access points. As it is currently platted Mrs. Bellefeuille's subdivision is in compliance with city ordinances that require a minimum of two points of entry and exit. The City Manager's efforts to include a connection to Rosebrook, which was discussed at length by P&Z, occurred after the City Council had officially approved the preliminary plat, thus eliminating the City's options to require the developer to provide a third point of access. To publicly declare that Mrs. Bellefeuille's development plan is in violation of the city ordinance regarding connectivity is an inaccurate statement.

As a 25 year professional land use planner, I personally find these accusations of conflict of interest and noncompliance insulting and counterproductive to all of us who volunteer our time, expertise and energy striving to serve our city's best interests. In both cases all the rules and ethical standards were followed. Hidden agendas and personal resentment towards Mrs. Bellefeuille should not be allowed to determine City Council policies and decisions concerning the Whitehouse P&Z.
Mark W. Sweeney, AICP
Chairman
Whitehouse Planning &
Zoning Commission