* This transcript was created by voice-to-text technology. The transcript has not been edited for errors or omissions, it is for reference only and is not the official minutes of the meeting. [00:00:01] ALL RIGHT. IF EVERYONE CAN TAKE THEIR SEATS PLEASE. IT'S 1232. WE'RE GONNA GO AHEAD AND GET STARTED. CAN WE GO AHEAD AND GET STARTED WITH THE ROLL CALL, PLEASE? IT'S 1233. WE'RE GOING TO GET STARTED WITH THE, UH, PLANNING COMMISSION TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE FOR MONDAY, APRIL 11TH. CAN STAFF DO A ROLL CALL, PLEASE? YES, MA'AM. SHE WAS HELPING, UH, SOMEONE WHO HAD JUST WALKED IN. THANK YOU. SHE'S GONNA DO THAT RIGHT NOW. THANK YOU. MR. MOORE. MR. NICKS? MS. MALDONADO? HERE. MS. REED? HERE. MR. MANNA? HERE. MR. ESTRADA. WAIT, I'M NOT PRESENT COMMITTEE. I'M NOT SUPPOSED TO SIGN, SIGN IN APPLICANT. NO, YOU DON'T. PARDON? I'M SORRY. I DIDN'T HEAR. YOU'S GONNA HELP. YOU'S GONNA HELP YOU. MR. TAPIA PRESENT. THIS IS MR. DOMINGUEZ. PRESENT. MR. HANLEY? HERE. GOTTA HOLD IT THEN. MR. BROWN. MS. GANS? HERE. MR. LEEMAN? HERE. MS. TACKETT? PRESENT. MS. FAIRMAN? MS. WRIGHT? HERE. MS. COHEN? HERE. MR. THIEL? PRESENT? MR. SIPES? HERE. MR. ZUKI, VICE CHAIR? CARRIO HAYNES. PRESENT? ACCORDING MS. PRESENT. THANK YOU. I'M GONNA PULL THE MINUTES UP TO THE BEGINNING OF THE MEETING. CAN WE GO AHEAD AND GET A MOTION FOR THE MINUTES? I MOVE FOR APPROVAL. BIANCA, OR MOTION FROM, UH, BIANCA. SECOND FROM SUSAN. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR PLEASE SAY AYE. AYE. AYE. OKAY. UM, [Public Comment  ] I BELIEVE WE HAVE VOICEMAILS TO PLAY. WE DO. UH, SO WE'LL GO AHEAD AND PLAY THOSE AT THE START OF THE MEETING. WE HAVE, UH, 42 VOICEMAILS TO PLAY. UH, SO WE'LL GO AHEAD AND, UH, GET STARTED ON THOSE. YES. HI, MY NAME IS NATALIE GUERRERO WITH THE, THE HISTORIC WEST SIDE RESIDENCE ASSOCIATION. MY PHONE NUMBER IS (210) 643-5864. MY ADDRESS IS 1226 7 8 2 0 7 AND I AM CALLING IN SUPPORT OF THE AMENDMENT SIX 16 THROUGH ONE. THANKS, FIVE. BYE. HELLO, MY NAME IS AMELIA VALEZ AND I'M WITH THE HISTORIC WEST SIDE RESIDENT ASSOCIATION. MY ADDRESS IS 1635 PORT C UH, 2 1 0 8 6 5 0 8 1 9, AND I'M IN SUPPORT OF AMENDMENT NUMBER 16 THROUGH ONE. UH, AGENDA NUMBER ONE, UH, WE WOULD LIKE TO CONTINUE TO WORK WITH THE WEST SIDE COMMUNITY PLAN TO BE ABLE TO KEEP, UH, THE SAME CHARACTER OF OUR, UH, NEIGHBORHOODS. SO AGAIN, I'M IN SUPPORT OF AMENDMENT 16 THROUGH ONE. ELIA VALEZ, HISTORIC WEST SIDE RESIDENT ASSOCIATION ADDRESS 1635, PORT C 2 1 0 8 6 5 0 8 1 9. THANK YOU. HELLO, MY NAME IS ARLENE NOSKER. I'M CALLING IN REGARDING AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 12. AND I WOULD LIKE TO SAY THAT I AM, UM, AGAINST HAVING A GAS STATION BUILT NEXT TO, UM, MY HOME OR, OR MY NEIGHBOR'S HOMES IN THIS URBAN, UH, CORE AREA THAT I LIVE IN NEAR THE PEARL. UM, WE MOVED OUT OF THE VERBS AND, UM, WANTED TO MOVE DOWN TO THIS URBAN AREA AND I FEEL THAT IT WOULD, UM, COMPROMISE THE VALUE OF OUR HOME AND OUR NEIGHBOR'S HOMES IF A GAS STATION WAS TO POP UP IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD. SO THIS IS ITEM NUMBER 12 FROM THE AGENDA, AND MY NAME IS ARLENE NOSKER. MY ADDRESS IS 8 0 4 EAST MYRTLE [00:05:01] STREET, SEVEN EIGHT TWO ONE TWO. AND MY PHONE NUMBER IS AREA CODE (210) 557-3459. AND UH, YEAH, WE'VE INVESTED IN THIS AREA AND WE LIKE TO RIDE OUR BIKES AND WALK AND, UH, WE FEEL LIKE OUR LIFESTYLE WOULD BE COMPROMISED BY A GAS STATION POPPING UP WITHIN A FEW FEET OF OUR HOME. THANK YOU. MY NAME IS BARBARA WHITT HOWELL, 1 0 5 MAGNOLIA DRIVE, SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS 7 3 3 0 5 5 0 AREA CODE 2 1 0. I WANT TO SUPPORT THE INCREDIBLY IMPORTANT AMENDMENTS FOR, UH, PROPOSED PTAC. 16.1 2 6 7 8 9, 10, 11, AND 12. TIER ONE WAS FORMED BECAUSE OF A LACK OF PUBLIC PARTICIPATION BY NEIGHBORHOODS. THERE WERE ABSOLUTELY NO NEIGHBORHOODS REPRESENTED WHEN THE SA TOMORROW PLAN WAS DEVELOPED. ON TOP OF THAT, THERE WAS A, IN THE DRAFT IT SAID ALL NEIGHBORHOOD PLANS WILL BE ELIMINATED. WE NEED PUBLIC PARTICIPATION BY THE VERY PEOPLE IN NEIGHBORHOODS WHO FIGHT HARD FOR THE CITY TO HAVE THESE VIABLE NEIGHBORHOODS WHERE PEOPLE WANT TO LIVE. THIS IS AN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT IMPORTANT ISSUE. PLEASE, I RESPECTFULLY ASK THAT PTAC SUPPORT THESE AMENDMENT ITEMS THAT HAVE REPRESENTED BY TIER ONE NEIGHBORHOOD COALITION ON BEHALF OF RIVER ROAD NEIGHBORHOOD, RIVER ROAD NEIGHBORHOOD COALITION AND RIVER HOOD NEIGHBORHOOD, UH, HISTORIC DISTRICT. THANK YOU. THIS MESSAGE IS FOR THE MEMBERS OF THE P C T A C MEETING ON MONDAY, APRIL THE 11TH. MY NAME IS BEATRICE MORENO. MY HOME ADDRESS IS 4 22 EAST MISS SOSO AVENUE. I HAVE LIVED HERE FOR OVER 40 YEARS. MY HOMESTEAD IS LOCATED WITHIN THE TOBIN HILL NEIGHBORHOOD IN DISTRICT ONE. I AM A MEMBER OF T ONE NC. PLEASE SUPPORT THE FOLLOWING U D C AMENDMENT ITEMS BEING PRESENTED DURING YOUR MEETING. 16 DASH ONE 16 DASH TWO 16 DASH SIX 16 DASH SEVEN 16 DASH EIGHT 16 DASH NINE 16 DASH 10 16 DASH 1116 DASH 12 THAT ARE A RESULT OF NEIGHBORHOOD INPUT REQUESTING RELIEF FROM ISSUES SUCH AS THE FOLLOWING, LACK OF PUBLIC PARTICIPATION PROCESS IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF OUR NEIGHBORHOOD, ISSUES OF OF SHORT-TERM RENTALS, TYPE TWO GAS STATIONS IN RESIDENTIAL AREAS, AND INCOMPATIBLE DEVELOPMENT IN NEIGHBORHOODS ACROSS SAN ANTONIO. THESE AMENDMENTS ARE, THESE AMENDMENTS ARE NECESSARY TO STABILIZE AND PROTECT THE CHARACTER OF OUR RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOODS AND STRENGTHEN THE PARTNERSHIP BETWEEN THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO AND ITS NEIGHBORHOODS BY IMPROVING THE PUBLIC PARTICIPATION PRINCIPLES. WE RESPECTFULLY REQUEST THE P C T A C SUPPORT THESE AMENDMENT ITEMS THAT HAVE BEEN PRESENTED BY THE TIER ONE NEIGHBORHOOD COALITION ON BEHALF OF ITS COALITION NEIGHBORHOOD MEMBERS, MUCH TIME THOUGHT, INPUT, AND EFFORT HAS BEEN SPENT ON FORMULATING THESE AMENDMENTS. THANK YOU FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION. COLLEEN WABA 1603 TARTAN LANE COMMITTEE MEMBERS, I'M SPEAKING TODAY ON BEHALF OF NORTHSIDE NEIGHBORHOODS FOR ORGANIZED DEVELOPMENT, ALSO KNOWN AS NOD. WE REQUEST THAT YOU SUPPORT THE SERIES 16 U D C AMENDMENTS IN TOTAL OR INDIVIDUALLY AS PUT FORTH BY THE TIER ONE NEIGHBORHOOD COALITION. THESE PROPOSED AMENDMENTS HAVE BEEN CRAFTED TO ADDRESS INCOMPATIBLE DEVELOPMENTS IN NEIGHBORHOODS THROUGHOUT SAN ANTONIO AND THE LACK OF ADEQUATE PUBLIC PARTICIPATION PROCESSES IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF OUR NEIGHBORHOODS. SINCE THIS INCEPTION NOT HAS SUPPORTED EFFORTS TO MAINTAIN THE STABILITY OF NEIGHBORHOODS AS WELL AS WORKING WITH THE CITY TO PROVIDE OPPORTUNITIES FOR CITIZENS TO PARTICIPATE BY PROVIDING INPUT AND DEVELOPMENT AFFECTING THEIR NEIGHBORHOODS. WE BELIEVE THAT THE AMENDMENTS PUT FORTH BY THE TIER ONE NEIGHBORHOOD CO COALITION ARE IMPORTANT TO INCREASING PUBLIC INPUT AND MAINTAINING THE INTEGRITY OF NEIGHBORHOODS. WITHOUT PUTTING UNDUE RESTRAINTS ON THE DEVELOPMENT COMMUNITY, WE WOULD RESPECTFULLY ASK FOR THE PTAC SUPPORT FOR THESE AMENDMENTS. THANK YOU. THIS IS DANIEL HULING, PRESIDENT OF THE BEACON HILL AREA NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION, OR RESIDE AT TEN TWENTY FIVE WEST ATCH. MY PHONE NUMBER IS (210) 287-9025. I ASK THAT YOU PLEASE SUPPORT THE U D C AMENDMENT ITEMS HEARD TODAY. 16 DASH ONE 16 [00:10:01] DASH TWO 16 DASH SIX 16 DASH SEVEN 16 DASH EIGHT 16 DASH NINE 16 DASH 10, 16 DASH 11, AND 16 DASH 12 THAT ARE A RESULT OF NEIGHBORHOOD INPUT REQUESTING RELIEF FROM ISSUES SUCH AS THE LACK OF PUBLIC PARTICIPATION PROCESS IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF OUR NEIGHBORHOOD, ISSUES OF SHORT-TERM RENTALS, TYPE TWO GAS STATIONS AND RESIDENTIAL AREAS, AND INCOMPATIBLE DEVELOPMENT IN NEIGHBORHOODS ACROSS SAN ANTONIO. IN BEACON HILL. WE HAVE EXPERIENCED ISSUES THAT THESE AMENDMENTS WILL HELP TO ALLEVIATE. THESE AMENDMENTS ARE NECESSARY TO STABILIZE AND PROTECT THE CHARACTER OF OUR RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOODS AND STRENGTHEN THE PARTNERSHIP BETWEEN THE CITY AND ITS NEIGHBORHOODS BY IMPROVING THE PUBLIC PARTICIPATION PRINCIPLES. WE RESPECTFULLY REQUEST THE PTAC SUPPORT THESE AMENDMENT ITEMS THAT HAVE BEEN PRESENTED BY THE TIER ONE NEIGHBORHOOD COALITION ON BEHALF OF ITS COALITION NEIGHBORHOOD MEMBERS. THANK YOU. MY NAME IS DORA BEES 7 25 SAND MEYERS. UM, 2 1 8 6 3 6 6 3 2. AGENDA NUMBER, 12 AMENDMENT 26 DASH ONE. HELLO, COMMISSIONERS. I'M CALLING TO SAY I SUPPORT THE GAS STATION AMENDMENT 26 DASH ONE TO HAVE A WIDER BOUNDARY BETWEEN GAS STATIONS AND MULTI-GENERATIONAL SAN ANTONIONS IN URBAN NEIGHBORHOODS ALL OVER THE CITY. OUR OLDER NEIGHBORHOODS ARE AT RISK AND NEED OF ASSURANCE OF SOME SORT OF SPACE REQUIREMENT THAT MEGA GAS STATIONS CAN'T JUST SQUEEZE IN A BIG GAS STATION RIGHT NEXT TO OUR HOMES AND LOCAL ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS. HOW CAN WE WHO ARE UNDERSERVED IN THE PAST, TRUST THE CITY WILL DO WHAT IS BEST FOR US. HOW WILL WE BELIEVE THE PROCESS WORKS FOR US? WHEN THE ZONING COMMISSION SAYS IT IS NOT THEIR JOB TO WORRY ABOUT BENZENE FUMES THAT CAUSE CHILDHOOD LEUKEMIA, HOW WILL ME AND MY NEIGHBORS FEEL WHEN OUR, OUR NEIGHBORHOOD LOSES AFFORDABLE HOUSES BECAUSE THE DEVELOPER FOUND CHEAPER RESIDENTIAL LAND AND MOVED QUICKLY BEFORE ANYONE COULD REALIZE WHAT WAS GOING ON TO GET TO GET IT REZONED FOR THE MEGA GAS STATION. HOW WILL MARGINALIZED NEIGHBORS GET LASTING PROTECTION AGAINST A GAS STATION NEXT DOOR TO THEIR HOMES? THE ANSWER IS WE WON'T UNLESS WE GET THIS KIND OF AMENDMENT IN THE C D C, I'M SORRY. THE U D C THAT PROTECTS US, OUR HOMES, OUR NEIGHBORS, OUR SCHOOLS FROM GAS STATIONS BEING BUILT RIGHT NEXT TO US. GAS STATIONS ARE NOW BIG BOX STORES THAT PUT THE LITTLE GUYS OUT OF BUSINESS. SO WE WILL LOSE OUR, OUR SMALL FOUR OR SIX PUMP GAS STATIONS THAT WAS ON THE CORNER BECAUSE THE NEW GAS STATION WILL HAVE GAS MUCH, MUCH CHEAPER. WE WILL PROBABLY LOSE ONE OF ILLA BECAUSE OMEGA GAS STATION WILL HAVE A KITCHEN IN THEIR STORE WITH BREAKFAST TACOS. IN EXCHANGE, WE WILL HAVE MORE TRAFFIC ON OUR STREETS AND UNHEALTHY FUMES IN OUR YARDS WHERE OUR KIDS PLAY. NOW, PLEASE SPONSOR THIS AMENDMENT. HELLO, MY NAME IS IMA HOFFMAN AND I AM CALLING TO SUPPORT U D C AMENDMENT 16 DASH ONE. I BELIEVE IT'S ITEM NUMBER ONE ON THE AGENDA. UH, WE NEED TO PROTECT OUR HISTORIC NEIGHBORHOODS AND SEEK TO PROVIDE FOR MORE COMPATIBLE DEVELOPMENT AND CHARACTER TO OUR PRESENT NEIGHBORHOODS. SO PLEASE CONSIDER THIS THIS AMENDMENT THAT REALLY AFFECTS THE HISTORIC QUALITY AND CHARACTER OF OUR NEIGHBORHOODS. THANK YOU SO MUCH. BYE-BYE. HELLO, MY NAME IS GEMMA KENNEDY, 5 0 9 RIVER ROAD. I'M A TIER ONE STEERING COMMITTEE MEMBER. I AM CALLING TODAY TO SUPPORT THE FOLLOWING U D C AMENDMENT ITEMS 16 1 16 2 16, 6 16, 7 16, 8 16, 9 16, 10 16, 11 AND 1612. I HAVE CLOSELY FOLLOWED THE DISCUSSIONS AND DEVELOPMENT OF THESE AMENDMENTS BY THE TIER ONE COALITION ON BEHALF OF THE COALITION NEIGHBORHOODS AND SPONSORED TO GO FORWARD BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION. THESE ITEMS STRENGTHEN PUBLIC PARTICIPATION BETWEEN NEIGHBORHOODS AND THE CITY. THEY DEFINITELY SUPPORT COMPATIBLE NEIGHBORHOOD DEVELOPMENT AND MOST IMPORTANTLY, THEY MAINTAIN NEIGHBORHOOD PLANS IN THE ESSAY TOMORROW. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. THANK YOU FOR SUPPORTING THESE AMENDMENT ITEMS. [00:15:02] GOOD EVENING. MY NAME IS GLORIA REYES AND I RESIDE AT 10 11 SAN CARLOS IN DISTRICT FIVE. MY PHONE NUMBER IS AREA CODE TWO TEN FOUR THREE TWO EIGHT NINE TWO SIX. I AM CALLING IN SUPPORT OF ITEM ONE, AN AMENDMENT TO AMENDMENT 16.1, WHICH IS TO AMEND SECTION 35 DASH 3 1 0 0.01 OF THE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE. THE AMENDMENT TO MODIFY AND PROVIDE A ONE HALF STORY, 25 FEET HIGH LIMIT FOR OR ONE WILL PROVIDE COMPATIBILITY TO EXISTING HOMES IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD. I ALSO BELIEVE THAT THIS AMENDMENT TO AMENDMENT 16.1 WILL MAKE IT MORE AFFORDABLE TO MAINTAIN A HOME WHEN IT COMES TO PAYING UTILITY BILLS, PROPERTY TAXES AND HOME INSURANCE. UH, MOST OF OUR NEIGHBORHOOD RESIDENTS ARE ELDERLY AND HAVE LIVED IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD FOR MANY YEARS AND WANT TO REMAIN IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD. THIS IS ANOTHER REASON FOR HOMES TO BE ONE STORY BECAUSE ELDERLY AND DISABLED PERSONS ARE UNABLE TO WALK UP AND DOWN STAIRS IN A TWO STORY HOME. I I THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME AND CONSIDERATION. GOODNIGHT. HI, MY NAME IS GRACIA SANCHEZ. I LIVE AT 27 18 MONTEREY IN DISTRICT FIVE, AND UH, I AM A MEMBER OF THE HISTORIC WEST SIDE RESIDENCE ASSOCIATION, THE WEST SIDE PRESERVATION ALLIANCE, AND I AM THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF THE ESPERANZA PEACE AND JUSTICE CENTER. I'M CALLING TO SPEAK TO THE U D C AMENDMENT ITEMS BEING HEARD TODAY, UH, INCLUDING 16 DASH ONE 16 DASH TWO 16 DASH 16 DASH SEVEN 16 DASH EIGHT 16 DASH NINE, 16 DASH 10, 16 DASH 11, AND 16 DASH 12. THESE ARE AMENDMENTS THAT, UH, THE NEIGHBORHOOD COMMUNITY MEMBERS HAVE PULLED TOGETHER AND WE ARE REQUESTING P T E SUPPORT. UM, I'M IN PARTICULARLY WANTING TO, UH, SPEAK ABOUT 16 DASH ONE BECAUSE OUR ORGANIZATIONS, OUR NEIGHBORHOODS HAVE BEEN TOTALLY AFFECTED, UM, UH, BECAUSE OF THE GROWTH, THE INCOMPATIBLE, UH, BUILDINGS THAT DON'T FIT THE CHARACTER OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD. I WAS PART OF THE 2007 NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN AND I'M CURRENTLY ON THE 2017 TO 2022 NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN AND, UH, THE CURRENT U D C UM, UH, RULES, YOU KNOW, REALLY HURT US. UH, THERE'S, UH, THREE AND FOUR STORY APARTMENTS. THE COMMUNITY SAID NO, THE PLAN IN OUR COMMUNITY, OUR COMMUNITY PLAN SAID NO, BUT ULTIMATELY THE APARTMENTS WENT UP. NOW WE'RE LIVING WITH THE CONSEQUENCES OF HIGH DENSITY IN INNER CITY NEIGHBORHOODS. THE KIDS AND THEIR PARENTS WHO ARE WALKING TO SCHOOL TO JT BRACKENRIDGE TO SE FOIA ARE SCARED BECAUSE THERE'S JUST TOO MUCH TRAFFIC. THERE'S MORE TRAFFIC THAT'S COMING BECAUSE OF THE NEW PEOPLE LIVING HERE, BUT WE ALSO HAVE 18 WHEELERS THAT ARE DRIVING DOWN. HI, MY NAME IS GREG SMITH. I LIVE AT NINE 18 WEST MULBERRY AVENUE AND I OWN SEVERAL RENTAL PROPERTIES IN MY BEACON HILL NEIGHBORHOOD. MY TELEPHONE NUMBER IS (210) 602-0597. I FULLY SUPPORT AGENDA 12. I DON'T WANT MASSIVE GAS STATIONS POPPING UP NEXT DOOR TO MY HOMES AND RUINING MY PROPERTY VALUES. AMERICANS WON'T GIVE UP THEIR SUVS, BUT THEY WILL GIVE UP THEIR INTERNAL COMBUSTION ENGINES FOR ELECTRIC MOTORS WHEN EVERY CAR COMPANY IS SELLING THEM IN A DECADE. SA TOMORROW WILL NOT BE A CITY THAT RUNS ON GAS, GAS, GASOLINE. WE NEED TO DEVELOP THE CITY FOR THE FUTURE AND START CONTROLLING BETTER WHERE GASOLINE STA GASOLINE STATIONS GO. IF THE CO UP THE STREET IS A GOOD PLACE FOR A GAS STATION, THEN IT'S A GOOD PLACE TO DESIGN ONE THAT FITS THERE AND FITS THE NEIGHBORHOOD. LET'S PLAN BEFORE TOMORROW COMES. PLEASE SPONSOR THIS GAS STATION AMENDMENT ITEM 12. THANK YOU. MY NAME [00:20:01] IS JUAN AGUIRRE, ADDRESS, THREE 19 COLEMAN STREET, SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS SEVEN EIGHT TWO OH EIGHT. MY PHONE NUMBER IS TWO TEN TWO NINE FOUR TEN FIFTY NINE. I SUPPORT ITEM 12. I DO NOT WANT GAS STATIONS BUILT NEXT TO OUR CHILDREN'S SCHOOL AND NEIGHBOR'S HOMES BECAUSE OF FUMES, LIGHTS, AND 24 HOUR TRAFFIC. THANK YOU SO MUCH. UH, GOOD EVENING. MY NAME IS KIM PETIT. MY ADDRESS IS 2 0 3 4 OAK MIST, SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS 7 8 2 3 2. BEST NUMBER TO REACH ME IS 2 1 0 7 7 1 0 0 3 0. I AM CALLING IN REFERENCE TO THE PROPOSED, UH, AMENDMENTS TO THE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE AND AS PRESIDENT OF UH, NORTH CENTRAL THOUSAND OAKS NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION. THAT'S ALSO REFERRED TO AS NICK TO, UH, WE SUPPORT EVERY ONE OF THEM. WE ESPECIALLY SUPPORT AMENDMENT 16 TWO AND 16 DASH THREE REGARDING THE REASONABLE RESTRICTIONS ON THE SHORT TERM RENTALS IN ORDER TO PRESERVE THE CHARACTER OF OF OUR NEIGHBORHOOD. UH, LIKEWISE, WE, UH, OPENLY, UH, SUPPORT, UH, THE TIMELY COMMUNICATIONS WITH THE GOVERNMENTAL AUTHORITIES AND DEVELOPERS REGARDING POSSIBLE CHANGES TO THE NEIGHBORHOODS AND SUPPORT THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT 16 6 16, 8 16 10 AND 1611. IT'S IMPORTANT THAT THE NEIGHBORS AND THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION TO BE MADE AWARE AHEAD OF TIME OF POSSIBLE ZONING AND OTHER CHANGES BEFORE THEY HAPPEN. AND WE ALSO SUPPORT AMENDMENT 16 1 16, 5 16 9 AND 1612 THAT HELP CREATE THE COMPATIBLE DEVELOPMENTS IN THE RESIDENTIAL AREAS. WE, UH, CERTAINLY APPRECIATE YOUR WORK ON THIS MATTER AND VOTE, UH, YOU KNOW, SUGGEST THAT YOU VOTE, UH, TO SUPPORT ALL OF THOSE AMENDMENTS. THANK YOU. HELLO, I'M CALLING FOR AGENDA ITEM 12. MY NAME IS ALEJANDRO LARA. UH, I LIVE ON 3 1 5 B STREET, SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS 7 8 2 0 8 AND I'M AGAINST HAVING GAS STATIONS AROUND MY NEIGHBORHOOD, UH, ESPECIALLY IF WHERE THERE'S OLDER PEOPLE AND, AND IT'S AN OLD COMMUNITY. PLEASE GO SOMEWHERE ELSE LIKE ON A, I DON'T KNOW WHERE A NEW AREA, BUT THIS HAS BEEN HERE FOREVER AND I JUST DON'T LIKE THAT AROUND MY NEIGHBORHOOD. THIS IS MY OPINION AND, AND THAT'S ALL I HAVE TO SAY. THANK YOU. HI, MY NAME IS LETICIA SANCHEZ. MY ADDRESS IS 1710 CRU SIX CODE SEVEN EIGHT TWO OH SEVEN AND MY PHONE NUMBER IS (210) 363-5895. I'M COMMENTING ON AGENDA ITEM NUMBER ONE U D C AMENDMENT 16 DASH ONE. I'M THE CO-CHAIR PERSON OF THE HISTORIC WEST SIDE RESIDENCE ASSOCIATION, WHICH REPRESENTS RESIDENCE IN THE NEAR WEST SIDE. OUR ASSOCIATION SUPPORTS THIS AMENDMENT TO MODIFY AND PROVIDE A 25 FOOT ONE AND A HALF STORY HEIGHT LIMIT FOR R ONE, R TWO AND R THREE STRUCTURES. OUR COMMUNITY PLAN. THE GUADALUPE WEST SIDE COMMUNITY PLAN, WHICH WAS DEVELOPED IN 2007 WITH THE INPUT OF MANY RESIDENTS SPECIFICALLY STATES THAT STRUCTURES WITHIN OUR RESIDENTIAL AREAS SHOULD BE LIMITED TO TWO STORIES. UNFORTUNATELY, A RECENT DEVELOPMENT IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD ALLOWED FOR THREE AND FOUR STORY APARTMENT BUILDING TO BE BUILT WITHIN A RESIDENTIAL AREA, COMPLETELY CHANGING THE LOOK OF OUR COMMUNITY, BUT MORE IMPORTANTLY CREATING A DANGEROUS TRAFFIC SITUATION ALONG THE WALKING ROUTE TO AN ELEMENTARY SCHOOL JUST A FEW FEET AWAY FROM THIS STRUCTURE. BECAUSE THE GUADALUPE COMMUNITY PLAN WAS DISREGARDED WHEN THE ZONING FOR THIS DEVELOPMENT WAS SUBMITTED. THIS THREE AND FOUR STORY STRUCTURE WAS ALLOWED TO BE BUILT IN A RESIDENTIAL AREA THAT SHOULD NEVER HAVE BEEN BUILT. RESIDENTS TRUST THAT THE CITY PLANNING DEPARTMENT AND PLANNING COMMISSION HAVE THE FORESIGHT TO SEE HOW NEW BUILDINGS WILL IMPACT THE FLOW OF TRAFFIC AND ULTIMATELY THE SAFETY OF RESIDENTS U D C AMENDMENT 16 DASH ONE WILL HELP TO ENSURE THAT THE, THAT RESIDENTIAL AREAS ARE DEVELOPED IN WAYS THAT KEEP RESIDENTS SAFE AND KEEP NEIGHBORHOODS FROM LOSING THEIR UNIQUE LOOK AND FEEL. THEREFORE, OUR ASSOCIATION ASKS THAT YOU SUPPORT U D C AMENDMENT 16 DASH ONE. HI, MY NAME IS LETICIA SANCHEZ. MY ADDRESS IS 1710 CRUZ ZIP CODE SEVEN EIGHT TWO OH SEVEN AND MY PHONE NUMBER IS (210) 363-5895. I'M COMMENTING ON AGENDA ITEMS NUMBER 2 8 9 10 13 17, 18, 20 AND 24. I'M THE CO-CHAIR PERSON OF THE HISTORIC WEST SIDE RESIDENCE ASSOCIATION, WHICH IS ALSO A MEMBER OF THE TIER ONE NEIGHBORHOOD [00:25:02] COALITION. OUR ASSOCIATION SUPPORTS U D C AMENDMENTS 16 DASH TWO AND 16 DASH SIX THROUGH 16 DASH 12. THE TIER ONE COALITION IS COMPRISED OF CONCERNED RESIDENTS THROUGHOUT THE CITY WHO VOLUNTEER MANY HOURS TO WORK ON ISSUES THAT IMPACT OUR NEIGHBORHOODS. BECAUSE UDC CS ARE POLICIES THAT AFFECT DEVELOPMENT IN RESIDENTIAL AREAS, OUR MEMBERS UNDERSTAND HOW CRI CRITICAL IT IS TO PARTICIPATE IN THE AMENDMENT PROCESS. AND AFTER YEAR LONG DISCUSSIONS AND MEETINGS HAVE DEVELOPED AND SUBMITTED THESE U D C AMENDMENT ITEMS. THE MA MAJOR ISSUES BROUGHT UP BY RESIDENTS WHICH CULMINATED INTO THESE AMENDMENTS INCLUDE PROTECTING NEIGHBORHOOD PLANS, PROTECTING NEIGHBORHOODS FROM INCOMPATIBLE DEVELOPMENT, ENSURING PUBLIC PARTICIPATION, ADDRESSING AND PROTECTING RESIDENTIAL AREAS FROM THE INCREASE OF SHORT-TERM RENTAL AND KEEP KEEPING GAS STATIONS OUT OF RESIDENTIAL AREAS. THESE AMENDMENTS ARE BASED ON DEVELOPMENT ISSUES THAT OUR RESIDENTS AND NEIGHBORHOODS HAVE EXPERIENCED. THE OBJECTIVE OF THESE AMENDMENTS IS ULTIMATELY TO PROTECT THE FABRIC OF OUR NEIGHBORHOODS. JUST AS EACH OF YOU VOLUNTEERS MANY HOURS TO WORK ON THIS COMMITTEE, OUR RESIDENTS AND NEIGHBORHOODS ASSOCIATION AND COALITION MEMBERS VOLUNTEER MANY HOURS, BUT UNLIKE LOBBYISTS WHO REPRESENT SPECIAL INTEREST ORGANIZATIONS, THERE'S NO FINANCIAL GAIN FOR ANY OF US FOR THIS WORK THAT WE DO. WE DO THIS WORK BECAUSE WE LOVE THE UNIQUENESS OF OUR NEIGHBORHOODS AND OUR CITIES. U U D CS SHOULD HELP TO PROTECT WHAT MAKES OUR NEIGHBORHOODS AND CITY. YES, MY NAME IS LINDA O'BRIEN. I'M CALLING FOR AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 12 AND I WANNA, YES, UM, I'M SUPPORT OF NOT HAVING GAS STATIONS NEAR HOLDING. UM, I MOVED FROM ALAMO HEIGHTS INTO THE URBAN CORE AND INVESTED IN NEW CONSTRUCTION AND ENJOY THE WALKING AND BIKING, BUT I WOULD HATE THAT MY FACT THAT MY INVESTMENT AND MY LIFESTYLE COULD BE COMPROMISED BY A GAS STATION BEING IN MY NEIGHBORHOOD NEXT TO MY HOUSE OR IN MY OTHER HOMES IN MY COMMUNITY. SO PLEASE KEEP THEM TO AREAS THAT ARE NOT NEIGHBORHOODY AND THANK YOU FOR YOUR SUPPORT OF THIS EFFORT. UM, AGAIN, LINDA O'BRIEN, 8 0 6 EAST MYRTLE STREET. WE'RE HAVING SOME TECHNICAL DIFFICULTIES. LAUREN, IS IT JUST FROZEN AS IT'S TRYING TO LOAD THE NEXT ONE? IF, IF, IF WE'D, IF WE'D LIKE WHILE THE COMPUTER UNFREEZES ITSELF, WE CAN CALL UP OUR FIRST LIVE SPEAKER. THAT WAY WE'RE NOT LOSING TIME. SOUNDS GREAT. VERONICA, CAN YOU CALL THE THANK YOU CYNTHIA S SPILLMAN. I'M SORRY I CAN'T DO TWO THINGS AT ONCE. UM, I AM READING THIS, UM, ON BEHALF OF SIMA COLVIN WHO LIVES IN BEACON HILL NEIGHBORHOOD 8 1 7 WEST MAGNOLIA. DEAR P PTECH MEMBERS, WHEN COMPARED WITH OTHER TYPES OF USES AND ZONING CATEGORIES, GAS STATIONS IN AND OF THEMSELVES SHOULD BE CONSIDERED AN INDUSTRIAL USE. HOWEVER, BECAUSE THEY SELL THE PRODUCT DIRECTLY TO THE PUBLIC, A COMMERCIAL ZONING IS APPROPRIATE, BUT CHANGES OVER TIME ON THE SIZE AND NATURE OF GAS STATIONS HAS LED TO THE GAS STATION NO LONGER BEING IN NEIGHBORHOOD CONVENIENCE, BUT A HUB FOR COMMUTERS AND TRAVELERS. OF COURSE, THEY ALSO SERVE LOCALS BUT NOT IN THE WAY THEY USED TO. THE SIZE OF TODAY'S GAS STATION CONVENIENCE STORE MODEL IS REALLY ONLY APPROPRIATE IN A C THREE ZONING OR ABOVE. IN ADDITION, THE INCLUSION OF A GAS STATION AS A PERMITTED USE IN C TWO ZONING, WHICH IS A ZONING USED BROADLY AND GENEROUSLY IN OUR DOWNTOWN NEIGHBORHOODS AND THROUGHOUT THE CITY AS A WHOLE, HAS BECOME A PROBLEM FOR NEIGHBORHOODS D S D STAFF AND THE ZONING COMMISSION AND CITY COUNCIL. BY ALL ACCOUNTS, GAS STATIONS SHOULD BE A DYING BREED. IT IS COUNTERINTUITIVE THAT WE WOULD ENCOURAGE THE CONSTRUCTION OF MORE OF THEM AT ALL, BUT AS LONG AS WE INSIST ON HOLDING ON TO THE WAYS OF THE PAST, WE SHOULD AT LEAST RECOGNIZE THE EVOLUTION OF THE GAS STATION AND, AND ACKNOWLEDGE THAT NEW GAS STATIONS ARE NOT APPROPRIATE FOR NEIGHBORHOOD INFILL. A BETTER UNDERSTANDING OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL AND HEALTH IMPACTS CAUSED BY GAS STATION NEEDS TO BE TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT PROTECTION, SHOULD BE ADDED TO CURRENT CODES TO ALIGN DEVELOPMENT WITH THE SA TOMORROW PLANS COMMITMENT TO NEIGHBORHOODS. THE EXPANSION OF THE DISTANT REQUIREMENTS IS ONE SIMPLE WAY TO ACHIEVE [00:30:01] THAT. I ASK YOU THAT YOU SUPPORT THESE TWO AMENDMENTS SO THEY MAY CONTINUE TO MOVE FORWARD THROUGH THE REVIEW PROCESS. THANK YOU. SIMA COLVIN, CITIZEN. HI, THIS IS ENA CINTA AT 1 1 3 EAST NORWOOD COURT IN SAN ANTONIO AND I AM, UH, CALLING ABOUT THE MEETING THAT IS GOING TO HELP HOPEFULLY HELP MY NEIGHBORHOOD, ME MY NEIGHBORHOOD AND TIER ONE SUPPORT THE PROPOSED U D C AMENDMENT THAT HAVE BEEN SUBMITTED. UH, THAT'S LIKE ITEM 16 DASH ONE 16 DASH TWO 16 DASH THREE 16 DASH SIX 16 DASH SEVEN 16 DASH 8 16 9 16 10 16 11 16 12. UM, THE TICKLY, UH, I AM WORRIED ABOUT THE 16 ONE. I'M WORRIED ABOUT ALL OF 'EM, BUT 16 ONE, UH, 16 SEVEN AND 16 TWO REGARDING 16. TWO, THAT IS A REALLY BIG PROBLEM ON OUR STREET AND REGARDING SOME OF THE OTHER ONES, UH, WE REALLY NEED TO TRY TO SAVE OUR NEIGHBORHOODS AND MAKE THEM LOOK AND RESPECT THE CHARACTER OF THE PEOPLE THAT LIVE HERE. AND I APPRECIATE YOUR TIME AND PLEASE VOTE TO SUPPORT THOSE IN, UM, TIER ONE AMENDMENTS. THANK YOU. UH, MY, THIS IS MARGARET LEAD. I RESIDE AT THREE ZERO EIGHT KING WILLIAM. MY PHONE NUMBER IS TWO TEN THREE NINE THREE FIVE TWO THREE. I'M CALLING TO OFFER SUPPORT FOR ALL TIER ONE NEIGHBORHOOD COALITION AMENDMENTS 16 DASH ONE 16 DASH TWO 16 DASH SIX 16 DASH SEVEN 16 DASH EIGHT 16 DASH NINE 16 DASH 10 16 DASH 1116 DASH 12. I URGED SPECIFICALLY THE PASSAGE OF AMENDMENT 16 TWO SECTION 35 DASH 3 74 0 1 FOR SHORT TERM RENTALS. NEIGHBORHOODS SURROUNDING THE DOWNTOWN AREA ARE BEING INUNDATED WITH SHORT-TERM RENTALS TYPE TWO. PLEASE HELP US TO PRESERVE THE RESIDENTIAL NATURE OF THESE AREAS BY LIMITING THE DENSITY OF TYPE TWO FPR TO 12.5% PER BLOCK FACE ALLOWED IN THE CURRENT ORDINANCE WITH NO ROUNDING UP. THE 300 BLOCK IN KING WILLIAMS HAS THREE TYPE TWOS IN A ROW AND ANOTHER TYPE TWO ACROSS THE STREET. TYPE TWO SDRS NOT ONLY REMOVE A NEIGHBOR FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD, THEY INJECT THE COMMERCIAL ESTABLISHMENT INTO THE MIDST OF PRIVATE RESIDENCES. I ENJOY VISITING WITH TOURISTS WHO WALK IN FRONT OF MY HOME, BUT I WANT NEIGHBORS LIVING NEXT DOOR TO ME. THANK YOU. MY NAME IS FREDERICA KUSHNER. MY ADDRESS IS 4 0 5 EAST MYRTLE STREET SEVEN EIGHT TWO ONE TWO. MY PHONE NUMBER IS TWO TWO THREE TWO EIGHT FOURTEEN. PLEASE SUPPORT UT C AMENDMENTS 16 TWO AND 16 DASH 6 7 8 9 10, 11 AND 12. THESE ARE CONCERNS OF MANY NEIGHBORHOODS IN SAN ANTONIO AND ARE NECESSARY TO A STABILIZE AND PROTECT OUR RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOODS. THANK YOU. YES, THIS IS MARY JOHNSON AND I AM, I LIVE AT 1 25 WEST RIDGEWOOD COURT. UH, I'M CALLING TO ASK THAT THE ADVISORY COMMISSION PLEASE SUPPORT U D C AMENDMENT ITEMS HEARD TODAY. 16 1 16 2 16 6 16, 7 16, 8 16, 9 16, 10 16, 11 AND 1612. THESE AMENDMENTS ARE THE RESULT OF NEIGHBORHOOD INPUT ON ISSUES OF SHORT TERM TYPE TWO RENTALS, GAS STATIONS IN RESIDENTIAL AREAS IN YOUR SCHOOLS, AND INCOMPATIBLE DEVELOPMENT THAT INCREASES IMPERMEABLE COVER AND ERO ERODES THE COMMUNITY FABRIC IN OUR NEIGHBORHOODS ACROSS SAN ANTONIO. THESE AMENDMENTS ARE NECESSARY [00:35:01] TO STABILIZE AND PROTECT THE CHARACTER OF OUR RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOODS AND STRENGTHEN THE PARTNERSHIP AND TRUST BETWEEN THE CITY AND ITS NEIGHBORHOODS BY IMPROVING PUBLIC PARTICIPATION. UM, I RESPECTFULLY REQUEST THAT P A C SUPPORT THESE AMENDMENT ITEMS THAT HAVE BEEN PRESENTED BY THE TIER ONE NEIGHBORHOOD COALITION ON BEHALF OF ITS COALITION OF NEIGHBORHOOD MEMBERS. THANK YOU. HI, THIS IS PAMELA ON ARNOLD BLATHER. THE ADDRESS IS 2 1 5 WEST ELLWOOD AVENUE, SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS 7 8 2 1 2 IN THE MONTE VISTA HISTORIC NEIGHBORHOOD. UH, I JUST WANTED TO COMMENT ABOUT WE SUPPORT THE SPECIFIC AMENDMENT NUMBER 16 DASH ONE 16 DASH TWO 16 DASH SIX 16 DASH SEVEN 16 DASH 6 8 16 DASH NINE 16 DASH 10 16 DASH 11 AND 16 DASH 12. UM, I THINK THAT'S ALL YOU NEED, JUST LETTING YOU KNOW THAT WE ARE IN SUPPORT OF THOSE SO IF WE CAN BE SURE THAT THAT GETS HEARD AND NOTED, WE'D APPRECIATE IT. MY NUMBER IS 2 1 0 3 9 2 7 1 9 4. AGAIN, THIS IS PAMELA AND ARNOLD SLATHER. THANK YOU. GOODBYE. GOOD AFTERNOON. MY NAME IS PATRICIA PRT. I LIVE AT 7 33 EAST WOODLAWN AVENUE, TWO TEN NINE ONE TWO FOURTEEN FORTY NINE. I'M A RESIDENT OF THE RIVER ROAD NEIGHBORHOOD AND OUR NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION IS A MEMBER OF THE TIER ONE NEIGHBORHOOD COALITION. I'M CALLING YOU TODAY TO ADDRESS THE U D C AMENDMENTS RELATED TO NEIGHBORHOODS. UM, A GROUP OF VERY DEVOTED NEIGHBORS HAVE WORKED ON DEVELOPING EITHER RIGHTS OR THE NEEDED U D C AMENDMENTS, UH, RELATED TO NEIGHBORHOODS AND THAT'S WHAT I WOULD LIKE TO ADDRESS TODAY. THE ONES THAT YOU'RE GOING TO HEAR, UH, THEY'RE THE RESULT OF, UM, INPUT, REQUESTING RELIEF FROM ISSUES THAT AFFECT OUR NEIGHBORHOODS AND I'LL TALK ABOUT THOSE MORE IN JUST A MINUTE. THESE AMENDMENTS ARE NECESSARY TO STABILIZE AND PROTECT THE CHARACTER OF OUR RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOODS AND STRENGTHEN THE PARTNERSHIP BETWEEN THE CITY AND ITS NEIGHBORHOODS BY IMPROVING THE PUBLIC PARTICIPATION PROCESS. WE RESPECTFULLY REQUEST THAT THE P T A SUPPORT THESE AMENDMENTS, UM, THAT HAVE BEEN PRESENTED BY TIER ONE NEIGHBORHOOD COALITION. SPECIFICALLY THEY ARE, UH, WITH REGARD TO PUBLIC PARTICIPATION IN THE DEVELOPMENT PROCESS IN NEIGHBORHOODS 16 DASH SIX 16 DASH EIGHT 16 DASH 11 AND THEN AMENDMENTS TO MAKE DEVELOPMENT IN OUR NEIGHBORHOODS MORE COMPATIBLE. THEY ARE 16 DASH ONE 16 DASH NINE, 16 DASH 10 16 DASH 12 AND THEN ANOTHER UM, SET OF AMENDMENTS WITH REGARD TO SHORT TERM RENTALS. TYPE TWO 16 DASH TWO. HELLO, THIS IS JUDY WARREN. MY ADDRESS IS 2 1 8 WESTWOOD SAN ANTONIO 7 8 2 1 2 AND I'M CALLING SPECIFICALLY ABOUT THE U D C AMENDMENT ITEMS THAT YOU WILL BE HEARING. ITEM 16, 1 16, 2 16, 6 16, 7 16, 8 16, 9 16, 10 16, 11 AND 1612. THESE ARE VERY IMPORTANT AMENDMENTS THAT HAVE HAD A LOT OF INPUT FROM NEIGHBORHOODS AND WE REALLY APPRECIATE YOUR GOING FORWARD AND PASSING THESE AMENDMENTS TO HELP OUR NEIGHBORHOODS, WE NEED TO KEEP, UH, STRONG HISTORIC NEIGHBORHOOD SUPPORT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. MY PHONE NUMBER IS (979) 324-1184 AND THIS WOULD BE, UM, ON THE U D C AMENDMENT ITEMS THAT YOU'LL BE HEARING MONDAY. VERONICA, CAN YOU CALL THE NEXT LIVE SPEAKER? HELLO, THIS IS JUDY WARREN. MY ADDRESS IS 2 1 8 WEST ELLWOOD SAN ANTONIO 7 8 2 1 2 AND I'M CALLING SPECIFICALLY ABOUT THE U D C AMENDMENT ITEMS THAT YOU WILL BE HEARING. ITEM 16 1 16 2 16 6 16. [00:40:01] HELLO, MY NAME IS ROSS LAWHEAD. I RESIDE AT 59 75 BLOCK HILL ROAD, SAN ANTONIO, 7 8 2 4 0 IN THE OAKLAND STATE NEIGHBORHOOD. MY TELEPHONE NUMBER IS (210) 859-2202. UH, I CALL AND LEAVE THIS MESSAGE WITH REFERENCE TO THE PTAG CONSIDERATION ON APRIL 11TH. UH, I CALL IN SUPPORT OF ALL OF THE AMENDMENTS PROFFERED BY THE TIER ONE NEIGHBORHOOD COALITION, THOSE BEING SERIES 16 AMENDMENTS, SPECIFICALLY 16 1 16 2 16, 6 16, 7 16, 8 16, 9 16, 10 16, 11, AND 1612. THESE AMENDMENTS ARE NECESSARY TO STABILIZE AND PROMOTE THE CHARACTER OF OUR RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOODS AND TO STRENGTHEN THE PARTNERSHIP BETWEEN THE CITY AND ITS NEIGHBORHOODS BY IMPROVING PUBLIC PARTICIPATION PRINCIPLES. WE RESPECTFULLY REQUEST PTAC SUPPORT OF THESE AMENDMENTS THAT DIDN'T PRESENT BY THE TIER ONE NEIGHBORHOOD COALITION ON BEHALF OF ITS COALITION NEIGHBORHOOD MEMBERS. I WOULD ALSO NOTE THAT, UH, TIER ONE HAS WORKED WITH THE DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT TO REFINE THESE PROPOSED AMENDMENTS CONSISTENT WITH, UH, THERE BEING LARGELY SUPPORTED BY DEVELOPMENT SERVICES OR AT MOST IN A FEW CASES, NOT OPPOSED. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. I URGE YOUR, UH, SUPPORT OF THESE AMENDMENTS. GOOD MORNING. MY NAME IS SEAN CAMPBELL. I LIVE AT 5 24 KING WILLIAMS AND I'M THE CURRENT BOARD PRESIDENT OF THE KING WILLIAM ASSOCIATION. ONCE A THRIVING NEIGHBORHOOD OF WORKING CLASS GERMAN IMMIGRANTS KNOWN AS SAUERKRAUT BEND, THE HOMES OF KING WILLIAMS DECLINED IN THE 1930S AND FORTIES WHEN THEY WERE CHOPPED UP INTO APARTMENTS IN THE LATE 1950S. PRESERVATIONISTS BEGAN THE PROCESS OF PRESERVING THE GREEK REVIVAL, VICTORIAN AND ITALIANS HOMES. CURRENT T TWO GUIDELINES THREATEN THE UNIQUE NATURE OF THIS HISTORIC AREA. THE KING WILLIAMS ASSOCIATION BOARD HAS VOTED TO FULLY SUPPORT THE U D C AMENDMENT 16 DASH TWO REGARDING T TWOS. PLEASE SUPPORT 16 DASH TWO AND HELP PRESERVE THE HOMEOWNER QUALITY OF THE KING WILLIAM HISTORIC NEIGHBORHOOD. THANK YOU. HELLO, MY NAME IS STACY SWANS AND I LIVE AT 2 0 3 RADIANCE AND I'M CALLING IN SUPPORT OF AGENDA ITEM 12. MY PHONE NUMBER'S (512) 332-6779. I MOVED TO SAN ANTONIO SIX YEARS AGO BECAUSE IT WAS LIKE A BIG SMALL TOWN, AN EASY PLACE TO LIVE WITH AFFORDABLE HOUSES IN OLDER NEIGHBORHOODS INSIDE FOUR 10. WHAT I NEED IN MY NEIGHBORHOOD IS ONLY A SMALL CONVENIENCE STORE BUT JUST A COUPLE PUMPS TO REPLACE THE ONE THAT WENT OUT OF BUSINESS. I DO NOT NEED A GIANT GAS STATION THAT'S TOO DANGEROUS TO WALK TO BECAUSE OF ALL THE TRAFFIC THERE. 24 7. PLEASE KEEP THE GOOD PARTS OF SAN ANTONIO AND DON'T LET IT LOOK LIKE HOUSTON OR DALLAS. I ASK YOU TO PLEASE MAINTAIN THE CHARM AND PROTECT MY NEIGHBORHOOD AND OTHER OLDER URBAN NEIGHBORHOODS BY SPONSORING THIS AMENDMENT TO LIMIT THE LOCATION OF GAS STATIONS ACCORDING TO THEIR SIZE. THANK YOU FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION IN SPONSORING THIS REALLY IMPORTANT AMENDMENT. HI, STEVEN SCALES, 7 3 7 EAST WOODLAWN TWO TEN THREE EIGHT SIX FOUR SIX FIVE ONE. UH, PLEASE SUPPORT THE U D C AMENDMENT ITEMS HEARD TODAY. 16 DASH ONE 16 DASH TWO 16 DASH SIX 16 DASH SEVEN 16 DASH EIGHT 16 DASH 9 16 10 16 11 16 12. THESE ARE A RESULT OF NEIGHBORHOOD INPUT REQUESTING RELIEF FROM ISSUES SUCH AS LACK OF PUBLIC PARTICIPATION PROCESS IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD, ISSUES OF SHORT TERM RENTALS, GAS STATIONS IN RESIDENTIAL AREAS, AND INCOMPATIBLE DEVELOPMENT IN NEIGHBORHOODS ACROSS SAN ANTONIO'S. THESE AMENDMENTS ARE NECESSARY TO STABILIZE AND PROTECT THE CHARACTER OF OUR RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOODS AND STRENGTHEN THE PARTNERSHIP BETWEEN THE CITY AND NEIGHBORHOODS BY IMPROVING THE PUBLIC PARTICIPATION PRINCIPLES. WE RESPECTFULLY REQUEST THAT P T A C SUPPORT THESE AMENDMENT ITEMS THAT HAVE BEEN PRESENTED BY THE TIER ONE NEIGHBORHOOD COALITION ON BEHALF OF ITS COALITION NEIGHBORHOOD MEMBERS. THANK YOU. HELLO, THIS IS SCOTT ALBERT, 92 2 NORTH PINE STREET, 8 1 5 4 0 1 3 6 8 1. I'M CALLING TO ENCOURAGE YOU TO INCLUDE CLARIFICATION FOR STORMWATER MANAGEMENT AND I DZ RULE SEVEN 14 DASH EIGHT. [00:45:01] THANK YOU. HELLO, THIS IS SCOTT ALBERT, 9 2 2 NORTH PINE STREET. I'M CALLING TO ASK THAT YOU PLEASE SUPPORT THE U D C AMENDMENT ITEMS FOR TODAY. 16 1 16 2 16 6 16, 7 16, 8 16, 9 16, 10 16, 11 AND 1612. THESE ARE THE RESULT OF NEIGHBORHOOD INPUT, REQUEST AND RELIEF FROM ISSUES SUCH AS THE LACK OF PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION PROCESS AND THE DEVELOPMENT OF OUR NEIGHBORHOOD. ISSUES OF SHORT TERM RENTALS, TYPE TWO GAS STATIONS IN RESIDENTIAL AREAS AND INCOMPATIBLE DEVELOPMENT IN NEIGHBORHOODS ACROSS SAN ANTONIO. THESE AMENDMENTS ARE NECESSARY TO STABILIZE AND PROTECT THE CHARACTER OF OUR RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOODS AND STRENGTHEN THE PARTNERSHIP BETWEEN THE CITY AND ITS NEIGHBORHOODS BY IMPROVING THE PUBLIC PARTICIPATION PRINCIPLES. WE RESPECTFULLY REQUEST THE PTECH SUPPORT THESE AMENDMENTS ITEMS THAT HAVE BEEN PRESENTED BY THE TIER ONE COALITION ON BEHALF OF ITS COALITION NEIGHBORHOOD MEMBERS. THANK YOU. MY NAME IS SUE SCHNEIDER AND I RESIDE AT FIVE SIX FIVE FIVE LOCK HILL ROAD. MY PHONE NUMBER IS (210) 316-1348. UH, I AM THE PRESIDENT OF THE OAKLAND ESTATES NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION AND I WOULD HOPE THAT YOU WOULD SUPPORT AMENDMENT 16 ONE AND TWO AND 16 DASH SIX THROUGH 16 DASH 12. THESE AMENDMENTS HELP SUPPORT THE NEIGHBORHOODS AND WITH THE UH, NEW U D C AMENDMENTS BEING PASSED, WE DO HOPE FOR THE SUPPORT OF THESE AMENDMENTS. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. HELLO, MY NAME IS SUSAN RICHARDSON AND I RESIDE AT ONE 18 CAROLINA STREET IN DISTRICT ONE. UM, MY PHONE NUMBER IS (210) 274-7980 AND I'M CALLING TO URGE YOUR SUPPORT FOR THE AMENDMENT ITEMS THAT YOU'RE HEARING TODAY. 16 1 16 2 16, 6 16, 7 16, 8 16, 9 16, 10 16, 11 AND 1612. THESE ARE ALL RESULTS OF, OF NEIGHBORHOODS THAT HAVE GOTTEN TOGETHER AND, UM, PROVIDED INPUT, UM, REQUESTING RELIEF FROM SOME OF THE ISSUES THAT WE ENCOUNTER, UM, AND HAVE HAD TO DEAL WITH RECENTLY. I FEEL LIKE THEY'RE NECESSARY TO PROTECT THE CHARACTER OF OUR RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOODS AND, UM, KIND OF, UH, REINFORCE THE TRUST AND PARTNERSHIP, UH, BETWEEN THE CITY AND THE NEIGHBORHOODS BY, UM, ADHERING TO THE PUBLIC PARTICIPATION PRINCIPLES. UM, I REQUEST THAT YOU SUPPORT THOSE AMENDMENT ITEMS THAT ARE PRESENTED BY TIER ONE AND I THANK YOU FOR EVERYTHING YOU DO AND HAVE A GREAT DAY. BYE-BYE. THIS STATEMENT IS FOR PTAC. AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 21. MY NAME IS TONY GARCIA. I LIVE AT 2 43 E SATCH AVENUE, SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS 7 8 2 1 2. THIS STATEMENT IS ON BEHALF OF THE TIER ONE NEIGHBORHOOD COALITION STEERING COMMITTEE. THE TIER ONE NEIGHBORHOOD COALITION STEERING COMMITTEE DOES NOT SUPPORT U D C AMENDMENT 22 DASH 18. THIS AMENDMENT STRIKES OUT THE EXISTENCE OF NEIGHBORHOOD PLANS AND COMMUNITY PLANS AND IS CONTRARY TO THE GUIDING PRINCIPLES OF THE ESSAY TOMORROW. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. IN ADDITION, THERE IS NO PUBLIC INPUT. THIS IS A MAJOR CONCERN FOR NEIGHBORHOODS AND THEREFORE THIS AMENDMENT IS NOT SUPPORTED BY THE TIER ONE THROUGH HOOD CO STEERING COMMITTEE. WE THANK YOU FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION. THIS STATEMENT IS FOR PTAC AGENDA ITEM 22. MY NAME IS TONY GARCIA. I LIVE AT 2 43 EAST WEST EDGE AVENUE, SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS 7 8 2 1 2. THIS STATEMENT IS ON BEHALF OF THE TIER ONE NEIGHBORHOOD COALITION STEERING COMMITTEE. THE TIER ONE NEIGHBORHOOD COALITION STEERING COMMITTEE HAS A CONCERN FOR AMENDMENT 23 DASH TWO. THIS AMENDMENT DOES NOT CONFIRM WHICH CITY DEPARTMENT MAINTAINS THE NEIGHBORHOOD REGISTRY. WE ALSO BELIEVE THE LAST PARAGRAPH REGARDING WHO TO CONTACT CONTRADICTS SECTION B OF THE AMENDMENT CONFUSING TO SAY THE LEAST TIER ONE STEERING COMMITTEE DOES NOT SUPPORT THIS AMENDMENT. 23 DASH TWO WE THANK YOU FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION. THIS STATEMENT IS FOR P-TECH AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 12. MY NAME IS TONY GARCIA. I LIVE AT 2 43 EAST ATCH AVENUE, SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS 7 8 2 1 2. THIS STATEMENT IS ON BEHALF OF THE TIER ONE NEIGHBORHOOD COALITION STEERING COMMITTEE. THE TIER ONE NEIGHBORHOOD COALITION STEERING COMMITTEE SUPPORTS U D C AMENDMENT 26 DASH ONE WHICH HAS RECEIVED THE GREATEST COMMUNITY RESPONSE U D C AMENDMENTS [00:50:01] THAT PROTECT PHYSICAL PHYSICAL WELLBEING OF SAN ANTONIO RESIDENTS SHOULD HAVE THE HIGHEST CONSIDERATION FOR SUPPORT. WE RESPECTFULLY REQUEST P T A C TO SUPPORT AMENDMENT 26 DASH ONE. WE THANK YOU FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION. THIS STATEMENT IS FOR PTECH AGENDA ITEM 23. MY NAME IS TONY GARCIA. I LIVE AT 2 43 EAST WEST EDGE, SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS 7 8 2 1 2. THIS STATEMENT IS ON BEHALF OF THE TIER ONE NEIGHBORHOOD COALITION STEERING COMMITTEE. THE TIER ONE NEIGHBORHOOD COALITION STEERING COMMITTEE DOES NOT SUPPORT AMENDMENT ITEM 29 DASH ONE. WE BELIEVE AMENDMENT 16 DASH EIGHT AND 16 DASH 10 BETTER ADDRESS THE COMMUNICATION NEEDS OF COMMUNITY ORGANIZATIONS AND NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS. THEREFORE TIER ONE STEERING COMMITTEE DOES NOT SUPPORT AMENDMENT ITEM 29 DASH ONE. THANK YOU FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION PTAC. AGENDA ITEM NUMBER SIX, MY NAME IS TONY GARCIA. I LIVE AT 2 43 EAST ATCH AVENUE, SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS 7 8 2 1 2. THIS IS A STATEMENT ON BEHALF OF THE TIER ONE NEIGHBORHOOD COALITION STEERING COMMITTEE. THE TIER ONE A NEIGHBORHOOD COALITION STEERING COMMITTEE SUPPORTS U D C AMENDMENT 13 DASH ONE. THIS AMENDMENT OFFERS FURTHER PROTECTION FOR OUR CITY'S MOST PRECIOUS ASSETS, THE MISSION DISTRICTS. WE RESPECTFULLY REQUEST P T A TO SUPPORT THIS AMENDMENT. WE THANK YOU FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION. HI, THIS IS TONY VAN BUREN AND I'M PRESIDENT OF THE MONTE VISTA HISTORICAL ASSOCIATION. UM, OUR ADDRESS IS PO BOX 1 2 3 8 6 7 8 2 1 2. OUR OFFICES ARE LOCATED AT THE LANDON LIBRARY. I'M CALLING, UM, IN SUPPORT OF THE U D C AMENDMENT ITEMS 16 1 16 2 16, 6 16, 7 16, 8 16, 9 16, 10 16 11 AND 1612. UM, ON BEHALF OF THE MONTE VISTA HISTORICAL ASSOCIATION, MY PHONE NUMBER IS (210) 834-1321. AGAIN, WE ARE IN SUPPORT OF THESE AMENDMENTS. THANK YOU. HI, THIS IS MONICA SABINO. I LIVE AT 1120 EAST CROCKETT STREET IN DISTRICT TWO. I APPRECIATE THE OPPORTUNITY TO PROVIDE MY SUPPORT TO SOME OF TODAY'S P PCT AGENDA ITEMS. THERE'S SEVERAL THAT I MY HOUSEHOLD SUPPORT. SO IN THE INTEREST OF TIME I'M GOING TO LIST THE AGENDA AND THE AMENDMENT NUMBERS THAT I SUPPORT ALONG WITH THE GENERAL COMMENT. ALSO, WHEN I RUN THE CLOCK OUT, UH, I'M GONNA CALL BACK AGAIN TO FINISH. UM, FIRST ONE, ITEM NUMBER ONE, AGENDA 1 16 1. BUILDING HEIGHTS AND STORIES IN RESIDENTIAL ZONING DESIGNATIONS IS INCREDIBLY IMPORTANT TO NEIGHBORHOOD CHARACTER PROTECTION AND PROVIDES THE BENEFIT OF ENSURING DIVERSITY OF HOUSING TYPES AND OPTIONS IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD. THEREFORE, I SUPPORT I AGENDA NUMBER, ITEM NUMBER ONE, NUMBER 2, 16 12. I ALSO SUPPORT LOT BUILDING DIMENSIONS. UH, AGENDA ITEM NUMBER FIVE FOR AMENDMENT 25 1, I SUPPORT MILITARY LIGHTING OVERLAY DISTRICT PROPOSED CHANGES AND THIS IS IMPERATIVE FOR BOTH HUMAN HEALTH AND WILDLIFE SURVIVAL. AGENDA 7 14 8 CLARIFICATION FOR STORM WATER MANAGEMENT AND I D Z. OUR BUILT TRACK RECORD OF I D Z PROJECTS PROVIDES MANY CASE STUDIES OF EXACERBATED RUNOFF ISSUES RELATED TO BUILDING AN IMPERVIOUS COVER. THIS AMENDMENT WITH CLARIFICATION AND UH, ADDITIONAL INFORMATION IS IMPORTANT IF WE WISH TO CONTINUE I D V WITH GOOD SUCCESS AMENDMENT. UH, AGENDA NUMBER EIGHT, AMENDMENT 16 NINE AND SUPPORTS THE ATTACHED DWELLING PROPOSAL. AGENDA NUMBER 9 16 2. CLARIFICATION OF SHORT TERM RENTAL TAX. THE ORIGINAL 2018 ORDINANCE IS REALLY GOOD, BUT IT NEEDS TO BE AMENDED BASED ON ACTUAL S P R ACTIVITY THAT WE SEE NOWADAYS IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD. AGENDA NUMBER 10, UM, 16 SEVEN GAS STATION LOCATION AS WELL AS AGENDA. UH, THOSE ARE ALL THE VOICEMAILS WE HAVE FOR TODAY. OKAY, VERONICA, CAN WE PETER LUND. WELL THAT'S A TOUGH ACT TO FOLLOW. UM, MY NAME'S PETER LUND. I OWN A TYPE TWO SHORT-TERM [00:55:01] RENTAL PROPERTY LOCATED ON MARQUE LANE. UM, I'D LIKE TO ADD A LITTLE PERSPECTIVE FOR YOU TO CONSIDER, UH, PARTICULARLY REGARDING AMENDMENT 16, TWO AND 16 THREE. NOW, I PURCHASED THIS PROPERTY ABOUT FOUR YEARS AGO TO PROVIDE SUPPLEMENTAL INCOME DURING MY RETIREMENT. AND TO DATE I'VE INVESTED OVER $60,000 INTO RENOVATING A SEVERELY DILAPIDATED PROPERTY, WHICH BECOME AN EYESORE IN MY NEIGHBORHOOD. ITS PRIOR OWNER LIVED IN DALLAS, VISITED THE PROPERTY ONLY EVERY FEW YEARS, RENTED IT OUT WITH LITTLE REGARD FOR ITS TENANTS OR IT'S UPKEEP. NEIGHBORS TELL ME, SOME TENANTS DEALT DRUGS FROM THE ALLEYWAY AND THE POLICE WERE FREQUENTLY CALLED TO THE PROPERTY. THIS NEGLECT, UH, FESTERED FOR YEARS BECAUSE UNLIKE THOSE OF US WHO OFFER PROPERTIES ON AIRBNB, OWNERS OF LONG-TERM RENTAL PROPERTIES HAVE NO CONSTANT INCENTIVE TO SPEND MONEY ON THEIR OCCUPIED UNITS. CONVERSELY, I VISIT MY HOME DAILY. I KNOW MY NEIGHBORS, I TALK TO 'EM ALL THE TIME. I'M THERE TO CHANGE THE SHEETS, MOW THE LAWN, PERFORM REPAIRS BECAUSE MY GUESTS, MY TENANTS LEAVE ME A STEADY STREAM OF FEEDBACK RATINGS WHICH DICTATE JUST HOW MUCH, UH, BUSINESS I CAN EXPECT IN THE FUTURE. MY NEIGHBORS ARE THRILLED THAT I'VE UPGRADED MY PROPERTY DESPITE THE SCARE TACTICS THEY READ IN NEWSPAPERS, WHICH ARE OFTEN WRITTEN BY PUBLICISTS FOR THE HOTEL INDUSTRY. I ENCOURAGE THE COMMITTEE TO RECOGNIZE THE LOBBYISTS FOR THE HOTEL INDUSTRY ISSUE PROP PROPAGANDA ABOUT SHORT-TERM RENTAL PROPERTIES BECAUSE THEY DON'T WANT COMPETITION FROM SMALL BUSINESS OWNERS LIKE MYSELF. THEY SCARE THE PUBLIC AND CITY OFFICIALS WITH EXAGGERATED STORIES OF NOISY PARTY HOUSES, WHICH CAUSE NEIGHBORS TO ERRONEOUSLY ASSUME THAT SHORT-TERM RENTALS WILL MAKE FAR WORSE NEIGHBORS THAN LONG-TERM RENTALS. THAT CERTAINLY WASN'T TRUE WITH MY PROPERTY. MEANWHILE, MANY OF THESE SAME CORPORATIONS BUILD THEIR HOTELS ON LAND. THEY LOBBIED TO REZONE FROM RESIDENTIAL TO COMMERCIAL AND THEREBY REMOVING RENTAL HOUSING STOCK FROM THE CITY AS WELL. KEEP IN MIND THAT WHILE I MAY ONE DAY CONVERT MY SHORT-TERM RENTAL BACK INTO A LONG-TERM RENTAL REZONING FOR A HOTEL OR ANY TYPE OF COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT IS PERMANENT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. DAVID LITTLEFIELD FIELD. THERE IS A LITTLEFIELD SIR, TO BE CLEAR, DID YOU WANNA SPEAK ON AN ITEM ON THE AGENDA OR WERE YOU JUST HERE FOR YOUR OWN, UM, UH, SUBMITTAL? UH, JUST FROM THE 35 1 3 9 SUBMITTAL. OKAY, THEN WE'LL GO AHEAD AND CALL YOU UP WHEN WE GET TO THAT ITEM. SAN PLIN PINI. OKAY, SAME THING. THANK YOU MELISSA BRYANT, SAME. SAME THING. SAME THE FOR ME, MIRA. OKAY. THAT, THAT'S ALL. OKAY, THANK YOU. UM, REAL QUICK, MONIQUE, CAN YOU READ A SUMMARY OF THE WRITTEN COMMENT RECEIVED FOR AMENDMENT NUMBER 25 DASH ONE? WE RECEIVED 50 WRITTEN PUBLIC COMMENTS IN SUPPORT FOR 13 DASH ONE ONE IN OPPOSITION, 16 DASH ONE FOUR IN SUPPORT, TWO FIVE IN SUPPORT, AND 18 IN OPPOSITION FOR 16 DASH THREE THREE IN SUPPORT AND 18 IN OPPOSITION FOR 16 DASH SIX FOUR IN SUPPORT FOR 16 DASH SEVEN NINE IN SUPPORT FOR 16 DASH EIGHT THROUGH 16 DASH 12 FOUR IN SUPPORT FOR 26 DASH ONE FIVE IN SUPPORT AND FOR 29 DASH ONE ONE IN SUPPORT. AND ALL OF THESE WRITTEN PUBLIC COMMENTS WERE EMAILED TO P TAC THIS MORNING AND THAT CONCLUDES THE PUBLIC WRITTEN COMMENTS. OKAY. UM, WE WILL GO AHEAD AND GET STARTED WITH ITEM NUMBER ONE [New Business  ] AMENDMENT 16 DASH ONE. UH, CHAIRMAN, UH, IF YOU DON'T MIND INDULGING ME, I'D LIKE STAFF TO RE RESPOND OR ILLEGAL IF JOSEPH IS HERE. WHAT PROTECTS THE NEIGHBORHOOD'S PROPERTY? MY UNDERSTANDING IS LAND USE IS USE ZONING AND AN OVERLAY LIKE A HISTORICAL NEIGHBORHOOD. 'CAUSE SOME OF THESE THINGS THAT ARE BEING MENTIONED BY THE PEOPLE ON THE PHONE LIVE IN HISTORICAL NEIGHBORHOODS AND I JUST NEED TO HAVE A BETTER UNDERSTANDING WHAT PROTECTS THE NEIGHBORHOOD. SO I I I THINK THAT THERE'S A NUMBER OF THINGS THAT PROTECT THE NEIGHBORHOOD. UH, CERTAINLY INCLUDING SOME OF THE ITEMS YOU MENTIONED LIKE ZONING. ZONING IS GOING TO DICTATE USES. IT'S ALSO GOING TO DICTATE CERTAIN DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS LIKE SETBACKS, BUILDING HEIGHT, UH, ET CETERA. AND I, I THINK AS WE GET INTO THESE AMENDMENTS, YOU'LL FIND THAT MANY OF THEM PROPOSE [01:00:01] CHANGES TO CERTAIN ZONING DISTRICTS, UH, AS IT PERTAINS TO THOSE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS LIKE HEIGHT, UH, ET CETERA. UM, SO IT'S CERTAINLY LAND USE RESTRICTIONS, UH, ZONING, ALL OF THOSE, UH, PROTECT THE NEIGHBORHOOD IN ONE WAY OR ANOTHER. THEY PROVIDE FOR CERTAIN PREDICTABLE USES. UM, BUT AGAIN, THE AMENDMENTS BEFORE YOU TODAY ARE GOING TO SEEK, UH, IN SOME CASES TO MODIFY SOME OF THOSE STANDARDS. LOGAN, THANK YOU. BUT LET ME ASK YOU A FOLLOW-UP QUESTION ON THAT. UH, IS THERE ANYBODY HERE FROM THE CITY PLANNING DEPARTMENT, I HEARD MORE THAN ONE SPEAKER TALK ABOUT THE LACK OF OPPORTUNITY TO HAVE ANY INPUT IN THE CITY PROCESS, ESPECIALLY THE SA TOMORROW PLAN? YES, WE HAVE MICAH DIAZ FROM THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT IS HERE. MICAH, PLEASE, BECAUSE I WAS ON THE SA TOMORROW PLAN ON THE TRANSPORTATION MULTIMODAL AND SAT IN THIS ROOM WHEN IT WAS PRESENTED TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION. COULD YOU PLEASE JUST REFRESH MY MEMORY ABOUT WHAT THE OPPORTUNITIES FOR THE NEIGHBORHOODS TO INPUT THE SA TOMORROW PLAN WAS? ARE YOU ASKING SPECIFICALLY ABOUT THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN OR THE SUB AREA PLANS THAT ARE UNDERWAY RIGHT NOW? COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. 'CAUSE WE HAD NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS ON THE COMMITTEE THAT I WAS PART OF. AND SO WOULD YOU EXPLAIN WHAT THE OPPORTUNITY WAS PRESENTED TO THE VARIOUS NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS? YEAH. CAN WE USE THE MICROPHONE? APOLOGIZE, MAYOR COOPER. UH, WOULD YOU PLEASE, UH, WHAT THE OPPORTUNITIES WERE DURING THE SAN ANTONIO COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FOR NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS AND NEIGHBORS TO PARTICIPATE IN THE PROCESS? BECAUSE ON, THERE WERE THREE MAJOR COMMITTEES AND I WAS ON THE TRANSPORTATION MULTIMODAL AND WE HAD THREE DIFFERENT NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS. I JUST WANT TO, FOR THE MEMBERS OF THE P PC T TO UNDERSTAND THAT PROCESS BECAUSE THERE WAS A LOT OF PEOPLE SAYING THEY HAD NO INPUT. UM, SO I WAS PART OF THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT WHEN THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN WAS BEING DEVELOPED. UM, I WAS NOT IN A LEADERSHIP ROLE, BUT I WILL SPEAK TO THE BEST OF MY MEMORY. UH, THERE WERE A NUMBER OF NEIGHBORHOOD REPRESENTATIVES THAT PARTICIPATED IN THE PLAN ELEMENT WORKING GROUPS. THEY WERE NOT ALWAYS THERE NECESSARILY AS A REPRESENTATIVE FOR THEIR NEIGHBORHOOD. UM, THEY WERE THERE TO SERVE ON THE DIFFERENT PLAN ELEMENT WORKING GROUPS SUCH AS TRANSPORTATION. UM, THERE WAS A HISTORIC PRESERVATION ONE, THERE WAS A CITY FORUM. I THINK THERE WERE NINE PLAN ELEMENTS. SO THERE WERE MANY CITY RESIDENTS THAT PARTICIPATED. UM, YOU KNOW, THE, THEY SAY NOW THAT THEY WERE NOT THERE TO REPRESENT OR AS REPRESENTATIVES FOR THEIR NEIGHBORHOODS. I, I CAN'T REALLY SPEAK TO THAT. WE DID NOT HAVE A SPECIFIC NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN ELEMENT WORKING GROUP. I CAN'T SAY THAT. OKAY. THANK YOU. UH, UH, BECAUSE IN MY EXPERIENCE IN THE PROCESS WAS DURING THE INTRODUCTION OF WHO THE PEOPLE WERE AND WHAT STAKEHOLDER GROUPS THEY WERE ON MY COMMITTEE, THEY WERE IDENTIFIED AS PART OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN. OKAY. THAT'S US LOGAN, I HAVE ONE MORE FOLLOW UP QUESTION AND I'LL RE RELINQUISH CHAIR. I APOLOGIZE. WHEN WE MAKE ANY OF THESE U D C AMENDMENTS, THEY DON'T JUST IMPACT KING WILLIAM OR BEACON HILL OR TOBIN HILL, IT'S THE WHOLE CITY, CORRECT? THAT IS CORRECT. CHAIR, I HAD A FOLLOW UP JUST AS SOMEONE WHO SERVED ON A PLAN ELEMENT WORKING GROUP WHO REPRESENTED MY NEIGHBORHOOD FOR HISTORIC PRESERVATION. THERE WERE ONLY FOUR PEOPLE ON ALL THE 250 MEMBERS THAT SERVED ON THOSE PLAN ELEMENT WORKING GROUPS WHO REPRESENTED THEIR NEIGHBORHOOD IN AN OFFICIAL CAPACITY. AND WHEN THAT ESSAY, TOMORROW PLAN WENT TO CITY COUNCIL, IT WAS FROM THE DAAS THAT THERE WERE SEVERAL AMENDMENTS MADE TO PROTECT NEIGHBORHOOD PLANS BECAUSE THE INITIAL DRAFT THAT CAME OUT FOR THE ESSAY TOMORROW 2020 PLAN WAS TO ELIMINATE ALL THOSE NEIGHBORHOOD PLANS. SO THE COMMENTS THAT YOU HEARD FROM THE CITIZENS TODAY, THOSE ARE HONEST, TRUE EXAMPLES OF PROBLEMS THAT THEY WENT THROUGH IN 2016 WHEN THEY WERE NOT INCLUDED IN THE PROCESS. BECAUSE TO YOUR POINT, SEVERAL MEMBERS STEPPED UP AND SERVED TO SERVE ON THOSE PLANNING ELEMENT WORK GROUPS, BUT THEY WERE THERE IN A DIFFERENT CAPACITY. AND WE WERE TOLD, OH, WELL THEY LIVE IN NEIGHBORHOODS. THEY COULD SPEAK UP FOR NEIGHBORHOOD ISSUES, BUT THEY WERE NOT THERE PRIMARILY TO REPRESENT NEIGHBORHOODS. SO THERE WERE A LOT OF AMENDMENTS THAT WERE DONE AND IT'S VERY PUBLIC KNOWLEDGE FROM WHEN THE DRAFT CAME OUT IN MAY OF 2016 AND WHEN IT WAS ADOPTED IN COUNCIL IN JULY OF 2016 TO ADD LANGUAGE IN SPECIFICALLY TO PROTECT NEIGHBORHOODS. AND THAT'S WHY YOU HEAR THOSE COMMENTS TODAY. AND SO THERE IS OF COURSE A CONCERN THAT THEY WANT TO BE ENGAGED AND INFORMED ON THINGS THAT HAPPEN. AND TO YOUR POINT, YES, MANY OF THE AMENDMENTS THAT WE PASS TODAY AFFECT EVERYBODY ACROSS THE CITY, BUT CERTAIN AREAS OF THE CITY TO ALSO [01:05:01] YOUR POINT, HAVE ADDITIONAL PROTECTIONS THAT OTHER AREAS DO NOT. SO SOME OF OUR DECISIONS MAY ADVERSELY IMPACT OTHERS MORE THAN CERTAIN AREAS OF THE CITY. SO I THINK THAT'S ALSO COGNIZANT TO KEEP IN MIND CERTAIN AREAS ARE NOT IN H O A LANDS AND, AND MASS MASTER PLAN DEVELOPMENT COMMUNITIES THAT DON'T HAVE THOSE PROTECTIONS. AND SO I THINK IT'S VERY IMPORTANT THAT WE, WE LISTEN TO THE COMMENTS THAT WE HEAR TODAY, THAT WE UNDERSTAND THEY'RE COMING FORWARD BECAUSE THEY'VE SEEN PRESSURES, THEY'VE SEEN THINGS THAT HAVE HAPPENED IN THEIR, IN THEIR COMMUNITY. SO STEP IN THAT'S, THANK YOU. I JUST WANTED TO, UM, RESERVE THOSE KIND OF CONVERSATIONS FOR WHEN THAT TOPIC ARISES. I'M SURE WE'RE GONNA HAVE A LENGTHY MEETING AND I'D LIKE TO MOVE US ALONG AND IN FACT BEFORE WE GET STARTED ON 16 DASH ONE STAFF, ARE THERE ANY ITEMS THAT HAVE BEEN WITHDRAWN OR POSTPONED THAT WE CAN MOVE TO THE FRONT OF THE AGENDA IN CASE THERE ARE PEOPLE IN THE AUDIENCE WAITING FOR THOSE ITEMS? SURE. UH, YEAH. SO A COUPLE QUICK THINGS. AGENDA ITEM NUMBER FIVE, THIS IS AMENDMENT 25 DASH ONE. UH, WE RECEIVED THAT FROM THE HILL COUNTRY ALLIANCE. THEY'RE REQUESTING A CONTINUANCE, UH, TO MAY 9TH IF AT ALL POSSIBLE. SO IF, IF, UH, THAT WORKS FOR Y'ALL, WE CAN START WITH THAT ITEM. GREAT. CAN I GET A, UH, MOTION TO UH, MOVE AGENDA ITEM NUMBER FIVE FOR AMENDMENT 25 DASH ONE TO MAY 9TH, SO MOVED. SECOND. SECOND BY BIANCA OR, OKAY. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR PLEASE SAY AYE. AYE. UH, AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 26, UH, ON AMENDMENT 13 DASH TWO, UH, WE HAVE THE APPLICANT HERE TODAY. THEY SUBMITTED AN AMENDMENT THAT IS, UH, PRETTY SIMILAR TO ANOTHER ONE ON THE AGENDA AND WE DO HAVE CONFIRMATION THAT THEY ARE WITHDRAWING THAT ITEM. UH, THEY WILL BE HERE TO SUPPORT THE SIMILAR AMENDMENT FROM THE TIER ONE NEIGHBORHOOD, UH, COALITION. OKAY. CAN I GET A MOTION, UM, TO WITHDRAW ITEM NUMBER 20? THAT ONE DOESN'T REQUIRE A MOTION. IT'S WITHDRAWN BY THE APPLICANT. OKAY. ANY OTHER ITEMS THAT WE CAN MOVE TO THE FRONT? THAT'S IT FOR MOVING TO THE FRONT. I DO WANT TO, UH, REAL QUICK JUST MENTION THAT THERE ARE 10 ITEMS ON TODAY'S AGENDA THAT WERE SUBMITTED FROM THE TIER ONE NEIGHBORHOOD COALITION. UH, THOSE ARE ALL THE ONES STARTING WITH 1616 DASH ONE, ET CETERA. UH, AND I DO WANNA SAY THAT WE HAD AN OPPORTUNITY AT D S D TO SIT DOWN WITH THE APPLICANTS FROM, UH, THE TIER ONE COALITION, UH, LOOK AT THOSE AMENDMENTS, WHAT THEY WERE SEEKING, UH, TO AFFECT, UH, THROUGH THOSE AMENDMENTS. AND WE HAD AN OPPORTUNITY TO WORK OUT IN, UH, COMPROMISES ON ALMOST ALL OF THEM. UH, I THINK ON, ON ONE OR TWO, WE HAD NO CONCERNS RIGHT OFF THE BAT. SO WE ARE GONNA PULL UP THE INITIAL LANGUAGE THAT WE HAVE HAD POSTED ONLINE, BUT WE'RE ALSO GONNA PULL UP, UH, THE AMENDMENTS, UH, THAT WE HAD AN OPPORTUNITY TO SIT DOWN AND WORK OUT WITH THAT GROUP. SO JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY THAT FOR 10 ITEMS ON THE AGENDA TODAY. UH, WE'RE GONNA HAVE SOME UPDATED LANGUAGE AS WELL. MADAM CHAIR, THIS ROBERT HANLEY, UH, UH, LOGAN, ARE THESE REPRESENTED IN THE PACKET THAT WE WERE, UH, EMAILED AND ON THE SPREADSHEET, THESE AMENDMENTS? SO THE, THE SPREADSHEET DIDN'T CHANGE 'CAUSE IT'S, THE INTENT OF THEIR AMENDMENT DID NOT CHANGE, BUT WHAT WAS INCLUDED INITIALLY IN THE PACKET IS NOT GOING TO REFLECT WHAT WE AGREED UPON LATE LAST WEEK. UH, SO WE'LL HAVE THAT LANGUAGE PULLED UP ON THE SCREEN FOR A DISCUSSION TODAY. WE'LL BE ABLE TO COMPARE THOSE TWO. MR. HENLEY. THANK YOU. KARA, DID YOU ALSO HAVE A QUESTION? OH, MADAM CHAIR. I WAS JUST GONNA SAY WOULD, DO WE WANT TO DO ALL OF THOSE TOWARDS THE END SINCE THERE ARE OTHER ITEMS WE'VE ALL HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO REVIEW AND MAYBE CAN GET THROUGH SMOOTHER? I, I'M OKAY WITH THAT. JUMPING INTO ALL THOSE REVISIONS. SO ITEMS, ALL OF TIER ONE SIXTEENS, 1, 2, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12 WILL BE OUR LAST ITEMS. IS THERE ANY OPPOSITION FROM THE COMMITTEE? OKAY, WE'LL MOVE THOSE TO, UH, THE END OF THE MEETING. WE WILL START WITH ITEM NUMBER THREE. IT'S A GO AHEAD KEN. AND CLARIFYING, CAN WE JUST GET RID OF THOSE FIVE ITEMS? THEY'RE SUPPOSEDLY NOT SUBSTANTIVE. WHICH ONES ARE YOU REFERRING TO? ONE. WHICH ONES WHAT? AGENDA ITEM 16. UH, I'M COLORBLIND, BUT I THINK THEY'RE BROWN. 21, 22 AND 25 GREEN. OH, I HAVE CONCERNS. SO THE GREEN ONES, THE GRIEVANCE IS WHAT YOU'RE CALLING OUT? YES. I MEAN I WAS GONNA RECOMMEND A DIFFERENT ACTION ON ITEM 16. SO I DON'T KNOW IF YOU WANT TO LOOK. ALRIGHT, NEVERMIND. I'M OKAY WITH MOVING THE OTHERS. 19, 21, 22 AND 25. UNLESS THERE'S ANY OPPOSITION. I'LL MAKE THE MOTION SECOND. THE MOTION BY KEN. SECOND. BY WHO? I'M SORRY. ALLISON. ALLISON. HOLD ON. I HAVE A PROBLEM WITH ITEM NUMBER 2122. [01:10:01] NEVERMIND. SORRY. MOTION HAS WITHDRAWN. ALL RIGHT. WE PUBLIC COMMENTS ON 'EM TOO. MOVING ON TO ITEM NUMBER THREE, AMENDMENT 30 DASH ONE. WE HAVE ONE PERSON THAT JUST SIGNED UP TO SPEAK. MR. JOHN BUSANTE. UH, GOOD AFTERNOON LADIES AND GENTLEMEN OF THIS COMMISSION. UH, MY NAME IS JOHN BUSANTE. MY ADDRESS IS 1 0 6 CASTILLO AVENUE, UH, SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS 7 8 2 1 0. I SERVE AS A MEMBER OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND A CHAIR OF THE ZONING COMMISSION. BUT I'M HERE TODAY TO SPEAK AS AN INDIVIDUAL CITIZEN. UH, AS WE HAVE DEALT WITH CERTAIN ZONING ISSUES RELATING TO HUMAN SERVICES CAMPUSES. WE HAVE SEEN AT THE ZONING COMMISSION, AND AGAIN, I'M ONLY SPEAKING FOR MYSELF, UM, THAT WE NEED A WIDER VARIETY OF TOOLS TO ADDRESS THE VARIETY OF NEEDS WE HAVE IN OUR COMMUNITY. AND CURRENTLY, THE HUMAN SERVICES CAMPUS DESIGNATION THAT WE HAVE IN THE U D C IS OF TWO GREAT INTENSITY FOR MANY OF THE NEEDS. IT GOES FROM ZERO TO 100 WITH NOTHING IN BETWEEN. UH, AS A RESULT, CITIZENS IN OUR COMMUNITY, RESIDENTS OF OUR COMMUNITY BELIEVE THAT EVERY SINGLE HUMAN SERVICES CAMPUS IS GOING TO BE A HAVEN FOR HOPE. FULL SERVICE CAMPUS. WE NEED SOMETHING LESSER. WE HAVE SO MANY NEEDS. UH, SPECIFICALLY RECENTLY WE TALKED ABOUT THE Y W C A AND HOW IT WAS SIMPLY A HOUSING AND EDUCATIONAL CAMPUS FOR YOUNG WOMEN AGING OUT OF FOSTER CARE, YOUNG WOMEN NEEDING A PLACE TO STAY, TO DEVELOP EQUITY IN HOME AND GET A STAKE IN OUR COMMUNITY. AND WE HAD A GREAT DEAL OF PROBLEMS PASSING IT BECAUSE PEOPLE BELIEVED IT WAS HAVEN FOR HOPE. SO I HOPE THIS COMMISSION WILL SUPPORT THIS AMENDMENT TO THE U D C. UH, PLEASE DO SO. PLEASE KEEP IT ALONG IN THE PROCESS SO THAT WE CAN, YOU KNOW, POSSIBLY IMPROVE IT, BUT IT NEEDS TO BE THERE SO WE HAVE A BASE UPON WHICH TO WORK. THANK YOU SO MUCH AND THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME AND SERVICE. THANK YOU. MR. FUSO MONTE, IS THE APPLICANT PRESENT? YES. THE APPLICANT IS PRESENT. GOOD AFTERNOON, JAMES MCKNIGHT, 1 1 2 EAST PECAN. UM, I, SO, UH, COMMISSIONER BUSANTE WAS REFERRING TO THE Y W C A CASE. THAT'S ACTUALLY WAS THE IMPETUS FOR WHY OUR FIRM, UH, BROWN ORTIZ WAS REPRESENTING, UH, THE Y W C A AND THE PROBLEMS THAT WE ENCOUNTERED ALONG THE WAY. AND IT'S NOT THE FIRST TIME WE'VE ENCOUNTERED IT WITH THIS HUMAN SERVICES CAMPUS USE. SO, UM, THE, THE REASON FOR MY AMENDMENT, SO COMMISSIONER BUSANTE REFERRED TO THE FACT THAT HUMAN SERVICES CAMPUS REFERS TO THIS LARGE RANGE OF USES. THERE'S NINE DIFFERENT SORT OF SPECIFIC USES THAT ARE MENTIONED IN THE DEFINITION OF A HUMAN SERVICES CAMPUSES, UH, EMERGENCY FOOD, MEDICAL AND SHELTER SERVICES, ANIMAL CARE FACILITIES, SCHOOLS, COMMUNITY HEALTHCARE CLINICS, ALCOHOL AND DRUG ABUSE SERVICES, MULTIFAMILY HOUSING. THERE'S A LOT. SO IN TRYING TO DESCRIBE TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD WHAT IT WAS THAT WE WERE GOING TO PUT THERE FOR THE Y W C A, WE, WE HAD A SITE PLAN THAT SHOWED THEM EXACTLY WHAT WE WERE GONNA DO, BUT AT THE END OF THE DAY, THE ZONING IS STILL HUMAN SERVICES CAMPUS. THERE'S THE, THE SITE PLAN THAT WE SHOWED THEM, AND WE TRIED TO LIST ON THERE EXACTLY WHAT IT WAS WE WERE GONNA DO. WE WERE SAYING IT HAS SOME OF THE MULTIFAMILY HOUSING, IT HAS SOME EDUCATIONAL SERVICES, SOME DAYCARE SERVICES, BUT NO MATTER THE ZONING STILL HAD HUMAN SERVICES CAMPUS. SO IT COULD HAVE BEEN A HOMELESS SHELTER, A HAVEN FOR HOPE HAD THIS NOT SHOWED UP. SO WE WERE TRYING TO THINK OF A SOLUTION TO MAKE IT MORE SPECIFIC. HOW CAN WE SAY OR FIND THAT MIDDLE USE? HOW DO, HOW DO WE TELL THAT IT'S NOT GOING TO BE A, A HOMELESS SHELTER? SO WHAT I PROPOSED, OR WHAT WE PROPOSED WAS TRYING TO LIMIT THE, THE USES BY THE SITE PLAN ITSELF. JUST ADDING, THIS IS THE AMENDMENT HERE, ADDING A SECTION TO THE HUMAN SERVICES CAMPUS USE IN, UH, TO SAY THE SITE PLAN ITSELF HAD TO LIST WHAT THE USES WOULD BE. THE PROBLEM AS WE ENCOUNTERED THIS WAS JUST, UH, OUR SUBMITTAL AS OUR FIRST ATTEMPT AT MAKING IT WORK. UM, SINCE THEN WE'VE BEEN WORKING WITH CITY STAFF ON WHAT COULD WORK BETTER THAN THIS. FROM THEIR POINT OF VIEW, THIS DOESN'T EXACTLY WORK BECAUSE THE USE, UH, UH, IN CAPITAL U IS STILL HUMAN SERVICES CAMPUS. SO MATTER WHAT WE PUT ON THE SITE PLAN. IT DOESN'T CHANGE THE FACT THAT YOU COULD STILL DO A HOMELESS SHELTER OR HAVEN FOR HOPE. [01:15:01] SO, UM, WE'VE, WITH STAFF WORKED ON COMING UP WITH AN ALTERNATIVE TO THE AMENDMENT THAT YOU SEE THERE. AND I DON'T KNOW IF YOU HAVE THAT ONE PULLED UP, BUT IT'S ESSENTIALLY TRYING TO CREATE A MIDDLE USE THIS HUMAN SERVICES CAMPUS HAS. UM, CAN, IS THAT, SORRY, IS IT UP THE AMENDMENT? YEAH. IS THE AMENDMENT UP THERE? THAT'S YOUR POWERPOINT. SORRY. YEAH. THIS, THIS POWERPOINT WAS JUST SHOWING EXAMPLES THAT WE HAD IN DIFFERENT NEIGHBORHOODS AND HOW THEY WERE, UH, SOME OF THOSE USES WERE DIRECTLY ADJACENT TO THESE NEIGHBORHOODS AND PROBLEMS THAT THEY, THAT IT CAUSED. UM, THAT'S OKAY. I WILL READ IN AS A, AN ALTERNATIVE, WHAT WE'RE LOOKING AT IS A MIDDLE USE CALLED SUPPORTIVE HOUSING CAMPUS. SO THE HUMAN SERVICES CAMPUS WOULD REMAIN, AND IT WOULD, AND IT'S STILL A, UH, SPECIFIC USE IN C THREE AND THE D DISTRICTS. BUT WHAT WE'RE PROPOSING IS THE SUPPORTIVE HOUSING CAMPUS USE, WHICH WOULD JUST ALLOW MEDICAL SERVICES, SCHOOLS, MULTIFAMILY AND DAYCARE, SO MUCH LESS INTENSIVE. IT WOULDN'T HAVE EMERGENCY SERVICES, MEDI, UH, SHELTER SERVICES. IT WOULDN'T HAVE, UM, ALCOHOL OR DRUG ABUSE SERVICES. WE'RE PULLING THAT ONE UP RIGHT NOW. OKAY. THANK YOU. IT'S EASIER TO TALK ABOUT WHEN YOU CAN SEE IT. THERE YOU GO. SO THIS IS A, AN AMENDMENT TO MY AMENDMENT SUPPORTIVE HOUSING CAMPUS, A USE IN WHICH MULTIPLE STRUCTURES AND RELATED GROUNDS OR PORTIONS THERE EVER USED TO PROVIDE A MULTIPLE MULTITUDE OF SERVICES, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO THE FOLLOWING MEDICAL SERVICES SCHOOLS, INCLUDING EDUCATIONAL, BUSINESS AND VOCATIONAL, MULTI-FAMILY HOUSING AND DAYCARE. DAYCARE SERVICES FOR CHILDREN, SPECIFICALLY A SUPPORTIVE HOUSING CAMPUS SHALL NOT BE CONSIDERED A HUMAN SERVICES CAMPUS. AND IF YOU SCROLL DOWN, YOU'LL SEE THAT THE SUPPORTIVE HOUSING WOULD BE PERMITTED BY RIGHT. UM, SORRY, KEEP SCROLLING INTO THE MS. LAUREN, CAN YOU ZOOM IN A LITTLE BIT MORE PLEASE? THANK YOU. THANK YOU. ONE MAJOR DIFFERENCE YOU CAN SEE IS THAT IT'S, IT'S PERMITTED BY RIGHT IN C THREE AS OPPOSED TO REQUIRING AN S. UM, I WOULD ALSO SUGGEST THIS SHOWS A, AN SS U P IN C TWO AS WELL, ALTHOUGH I WOULD ACTUALLY PROPOSE MAKING THAT BY RIGHT IN C TWO, CONSIDERING THE USES THAT ARE, ARE ALLOWED AS PART OF A SUPPORTIVE HOUSING CAMPUS. SO ESSENTIALLY WHAT THAT DOES IS IT JUST PROVIDE A MIDDLE USE SO THAT YOU COULD STILL GET SOME OF THE SERVICES THAT WE SAW IN THE Y W C A WITHOUT NEIGHBORHOODS, UH, OR THOSE IN RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS WORRYING THAT THERE WOULD BE A HAVEN FOR HOPE. THIS WOULD TAKE CARE OF THAT BY CREATING A NEW USE QUESTION. GO AHEAD, DEBBIE. CAN YOU EXPLAIN IF, UM, THIS ELIMINATES LIKE OVERNIGHT HOUSING? IT WOULD NOT, NO, IT WOULD NOT ELIMINATE ANY USE THAT WE HAVE AS IT IS. UM, IT WOULD BE UP TO STAFF, I BELIEVE WHEN YOU SUBMIT FOR A ZONING CHANGE OR A USE FOR A, A CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY, WHETHER OR NOT IT WOULD CLASSIFY AS A SUPPORTIVE HOUSING CAMPUS OR A HUMAN SERVICES CAMPUS, BUT WE'RE NOT ELIMINATING ANY USES IN YOUR NEW SUPPORTIVE HOUSING CAMPUS, THEN THAT WOULD BE HOUSING AND OVERNIGHT STAYS. YES, MA'AM. THAT WOULD BE OVERNIGHT STAYS. AND THERE'S, ARE THERE POPULATIONS THAT ARE IDENTIFIED IN THIS OR NO, NOT RIGHT NOW. NO. MANNA. SO, UM, SO I WAS THERE FOR YOUR PRESENTATION. AND SO, UM, ONE OF OUR COMMUNITY PARTNERS, AS WAS PART OF YOUR PRESENTATION AS WELL, WHICH IS THE PRESBYTERIAN CHILDREN'S HOME. AND SO, SO I'M ASSUMING THAT, UM, ALL OF ALL OF THAT SETTING THERE WOULD ALSO QUALIFY WITH REGARDS TO WHAT IS IT YOU'RE, YOU'RE ADDRESSING HERE. AND SO THEY WOULD BE INCLUDED. SO THAT WOULD BE AN EXAMPLE, UH, OF, OF ONE OF THE GROUPS THAT YOU BE ACCEPTING, RIGHT? THAT'S CORRECT. THAT WOULD BE ONE OF THOSE EXAMPLES. AND WE HAD ANOTHER EXAMPLE THAT WAS MORE ON THE, THE MORE EXTREME END THAT WAS A, A MORE INTENSIVE USE. SO WE'VE, WE'VE, WE'VE SEEN BOTH EXAMPLES, BUT THAT'S, THAT IS A LOWER INTENSIVE EXAMPLE. YES. GREAT. THANK YOU ASH CHAIR, IF I MAY, IF CHIME IN ON, UH, DEBBIE'S QUESTION. SO LAUREN, IF YOU COULD, UH, SCROLL UP TO THE TOP OF THE DEFINITION. SO THE INTENT OF THIS IS TO, IS TO CAPTURE, UM, PERMANENT SUPPORTIVE HOUSING, NOT THE EMERGENCY SHELTER TYPE SITUATIONS THAT WOULD COME UNDER A HUMAN SERVICE CAMPUS. IS THIS PERMANENT HOUSING FOR ANY POPULATION THAT IS GOING TO BE HOUSED THERE? PERMANENT? I MEAN, WHEN I SAY PERMANENTLY UPON A LEASE AGREEMENT, IF YOU WILL, AS WELL AS THESE SERVICES, WHICH ARE NOT AS INTENSE AS WHAT WOULD BE PERMITTED BY RIGHT. IN A HUMAN SERVICE CAMPUS. SO I WANTED TO BE SURE TO CLARIFY THAT YOUR QUESTION ON OVERNIGHT STAYS WOULD BE CLASSIFIED AS A HUMAN SERVICE CAMPUS. 'CAUSE I I BELIEVE YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT HOW, YOU KNOW, HOMELESS POPULATION OR EMERGENCY, UH, SHELTER SITUATIONS. YES, YOU'VE [01:20:01] HELPED A LOT. THANK YOU. OKAY, ASHLEY. THANK YOU. UM, JAMES, QUICK QUESTION BECAUSE I'M FULLY SUPPORTIVE OF THIS 'CAUSE I THINK THERE'S A, A BIG GAP. AGREED. YEAH. YOU KNOW, HUMAN SERVICES CAMPUS IS KIND OF A CATCHALL BETWEEN APARTMENTS AND HOSPITALS AND WHAT DO YOU HAVE LEFT, UM, MEDICAL SERVICES. DOES THAT ALSO INCLUDE MENTAL HEALTH? SO THE WAY THIS IS DRAWN IS TO ELIMINATE THE MENTAL HEALTH CARE. UM, I DON'T, BUT THAT IS UP TO, UM, THIS COMMITTEE, WHETHER OR NOT THAT'S SOMETHING THAT SHOULD BE INCLUDED IN PERMITTED BY RIGHT IN C THREE OR WHATEVER CATEGORY YOU AGREE ON. BIANCA YOKA, I WAS GONNA GET INTO THE DEFINITIONS. YOU KNOW, YOU KNOW, YOU DEFINE MEDICAL SERVICES. WHAT DOES THAT ENCOMPASS AS FAR AS, YOU KNOW, IS THAT DENTIST, IS THAT, UH, YOU KNOW, MD YOU KNOW, OR IS THAT SURGICAL PROCEDURES? I'M JUST ASKING WHAT THAT INCLUDES. AND THEN ALSO YOUR SUPPORTIVE HOUSING. IS THAT DEFINED IN THE U D C? I GUESS I COULD GOOGLE IT IN THE APPENDIX, RIGHT? SO THE, OR IS IT SEEKING TO DEFINE WHAT THAT WOULD BE? NOT, NO, IT'S NOT. AND THAT'S, YOU KNOW, PART OF WHAT THE U D C ALREADY SHOWS AS PART OF THE HUMAN SERVICES CAMPUS IS THAT BROAD DEFINITION ALREADY. IT SAYS EMERGENCY FOOD, MEDICAL, OR SHELTER SERVICES. SO U D C CARRIES A LOT OF THESE DEFINITIONS THAT ARE STILL PURPOSEFULLY BROAD, THAT HAVE TO BE DEFINED AS USERS COME IN. AND THAT THIS IS LEFT TO BE PURPOSEFULLY BROAD IN THAT WAY. JUST HAD A FOLLOW UP. I MEAN, I REALLY APPRECIATE YOUR AMENDMENT BECAUSE IT DOES ADDRESS A HUGE CONCERN WHEN YOU COME TO A COMMUNITY AND THERE IS A, YOU KNOW, A ZONING CATEGORY THAT EXISTS FOR THE USE THAT YOU'RE, YOU'RE INTENDING. BUT IT'S, IT'S SIGNIFICANTLY BROAD AND IT'S VERY, UH, CONCERNING TO A COMMUNITY BECAUSE YOU HOPE THAT THE APPLICANT WHO COMES TO YOU WITH THEIR PRESENTATION IS ABLE TO EXECUTE THEIR PLAN. MM-HMM. , HOWEVER, IF THEY DON'T, THE ZONING STILL CONVEYS WITH THE LAND AND THERE'S NOTHING, NOTHING THAT PROTECTS A NEIGHBORHOOD AND IT FORCES THEM IN AN UNFORTUNATE SITUATION WHERE THEY HAVE TO ENTER INTO RESTRICTIVE COVENANTS. EXACTLY. AND YOU SHOULDN'T HAVE TO BE FORCED INTO THAT SITUATION TO PROTECT THE INTEGRITY OF YOUR NEIGHBORHOOD. AND SO ANYTHING THAT CAN BE DONE TO ENSURE THAT THOSE ADDITIONAL PROTECTIONS TO STEP IN SO THAT THERE'S NOT SUCH A BROAD CATEGORY. WE'VE HEARD ABOUT IT IN OTHER AMENDMENTS WE'LL HEAR LATER TODAY, BUT I THINK THE INTENT HERE, UH, IS, IS RIGHT ON POINT AND IT'S SOMETHING I HOPE WE CAN ADDRESS. UM, MY OTHER CONCERN IS THAT YOU SAID THIS IS FOR SPECIFIC USE, CORRECT. FOR SEVERAL CATEGORIES. SO C ONE, C TWO AND D IS STILL A SPECIFIC USE. SO I KNOW SOMETIMES WHEN THINGS CHANGE, WHAT WOULD TRIGGER IT TO COME BACK FOR A PUBLIC PROCESS IN THE EVENT THAT YOU'RE NOT ABLE TO EXECUTE EVERYTHING THAT YOU'RE ASKING TO DO. DOES THAT MAKE SENSE? SO YOU COME IN WITH A PLAN AND WHAT IF THAT CHANGES? RIGHT? WHAT WOULD TRIGGER IT TO COME BACK TO THE ZONE HEARING? SO IF YOU LOOK AT THE, SORT OF THE DIFFERENCES BETWEEN HUMAN SERVICES CAMPUS AND THIS SUPPORTIVE HOUSING CAMPUS, SOME OF THE, THE, THE MAIN ONES THAT YOU'LL SEE IS THE EMERGENCY SHELTER SERVICES AND THE, UH, DRUG ABUSE AND ALCOHOL SERVICES. THOSE, IF EITHER ONE OF THOSE USES WERE TO SHOW UP AS PART OF THAT CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY, THAT WOULD TRIGGER IT. SO SOMETHING MORE INTENSE THAN WHAT'S ALREADY THERE. ALSO, BECAUSE THIS WOULD BE AN S IT WOULD REQUIRE A SITE PLAN. SO IF THERE'S A MAJOR AMENDMENT, UH, THAT IS GOING TO BE REQUESTED THROUGH THE DEVELOPMENT PROCESS AND IT WOULD TRIGGER A REZONING. THANK YOU FOR THAT CLARIFICATION, DEBBIE REED. ONE MORE QUESTION, DEBBIE. THANK YOU. UM, JUST TO, SO THIS WOULD BE BY RIGHT IN ALL OF THOSE ZONING AREAS AND THERE WOULDN'T BE ANY PROTECTION FOR ACCUMULATION OF THESE TYPES OF BEING, UM, STAGED IN CERTAIN NEIGHBORHOODS THAT WHERE THERE BE IT, IT COULD BE A LITTLE BIT OVERWHELMING TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD. SO JUST BE BY RIGHT, CORRECT. ONE JUST IN C THREE. YEAH. THE ONLY PLACE IT'S PERMITTED BY WRIGHT IS IN C THREE. EVERYWHERE WHERE YOU SEE AN SS IT'S A REZONING PROCESS THAT'S INTERESTING TO ZONE FOR A SPECIFIC USE AUTHORIZATION. IT'S THE, IT'S THE SAME EXACT PROCESS AS IF YOU WOULD REZONE FROM COMMERCIAL TO MULTI-FAMILY. I THINK IT'S GOTTA GO THROUGH THE SAME PROCESS. JUST HAVE A LITTLE BIT OF CONCERN OF THESE BEING CLUSTERED IN EXISTING LOW INCOME NEIGHBORHOODS WHERE IT COULD ELIMINATE SOME OF THE THINGS OR BUSINESSES THAT WOULD ACTUALLY CREATE COMMUNITY. YEAH, GO AHEAD. SO WHAT THIS IS PROPOSING, THIS WOULDN'T AUTOMATICALLY REZONE PROPERTIES, UM, IF, IF APPROVED BY CITY COUNCIL AND INTRODUCING THIS INTO THE CODE. UH, WHAT [01:25:01] THIS IS PROPOSING THAT FOR THE RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS IS THAT IT WOULD TRIGGER A SPECIFIC USE AUTHORIZATION, A REZONING REQUEST. SO IT WOULD HAVE TO GO THROUGH A PUBLIC PROCESS IN ORDER FOR THE USE TO BE INTRODUCED ON A PIECE OF PROPERTY. SO IT'S NOT BY RIGHT, IT'S NOT GOING TO HAPPEN AUTOMATICALLY. IT HAS TO GO THROUGH THAT PUBLIC HEARING PROCESS. SO, UM, THE COMMUNITIES THAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT WOULD HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO PRO PROVIDE INPUT INTO WHETHER OR NOT, UH, THEY ARE GOOD WITH THAT USE ON THAT PIECE OF PROPERTY. THE ONLY DISTRICT THAT, UH, THEY'RE THIS AMENDMENT IS PROPOSING BY RIGHT, IS C THREE. AND THAT'S BECAUSE YOU'RE NOT GONNA SEE A LOT OF C THREE OF THE SIZE THAT IT'S NEEDED FOR THIS USE ADJACENT OR DIRECTLY ABUTTING NEIGHBORHOODS. YOU'RE GONNA SEE THOSE ON MAJOR ARTERIALS. YOU'RE GONNA SEE THOSE ON ROADS LARGER THAN COLLECTORS. UH, SO THAT'S WHY ONE OF THE DISTRICTS WOULD BE PROPOSED. I KNOW HE MENTIONED JUST EARLIER C TWO AS A DISTRICT FOR PERMITTED BY RIGHTS, BUT, UM, THAT WOULD BE UP TO, UH, THE COMMISSION OR THE COMMITTEE TO, UH, ENTERTAIN QUESTION, UM, IN ITEM A, UH, THE PURPOSE OF, UH, THE AMENDMENT IS, UH, TO IDENTIFY THE INTENSITY OF THE USES ALLOWED ON THE PROPERTY. AND YOU LAY DOWN, UH, NINE OPTIONS IN PART B. SHOULD YOU HAVE ATTACHED WITH THAT, WHAT KIND OF INTENSITY WE'RE LOOKING FOR IN SOME OF THOSE NINE CHOICES? I I THINK THAT YOU'RE PROBABLY LOOKING AT THE ORIGINAL SUBMITTAL, NOT THE AMENDED LANGUAGE THAT'S ON THE SCREEN AT THE 30 MINUS ONE THAT HAS THE RIGHT AMENDMENT. HE CHANGED IT. SO HE'S, UH, THE APPLICANT IS AMENDING AT THE PODIUM AND THE, UM, PROPOSED NEW TEXT IS ON THE SCREEN. IS THE AMENDMENT YOU'RE REFERRING TO THE ORIGINAL AMENDMENT WOULDN'T ACTUALLY WORK IN, IN OTHER WORDS, BECAUSE IT WOULD STILL ALLOW A HUMAN SERVICES CAMPUS REGARDLESS OF WHAT YOU, THOSE, THOSE INTENSITIES THAT YOU PUT ON THE STATE PLAN? YEAH, I'M, I'M REFERRING TO 30 MINUS ONE HERE THAT, SO THIS IS DIFFERENT. THAT'S GONE. IT WAS AMENDED. COMMISSIONER ZUKI, HE, THE APPLICANT AMENDED HIS OWN. SO WHAT WE, HE AMENDED HIS OWN. YES. ARE THERE ANY ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS? DO WE HAVE A MOTION? I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE SECOND AND SECOND BY MR. MANNA. ALL THOSE IN O I HAVE A QUESTION, JUST A CLARIFICATION. THIS IS C TWO WITH AN SS, CORRECT? CORRECT. 'CAUSE HE WAS TALKING BOTH SIDES OF THAT'S CORRECT. THAT'S RIGHT. OKAY, THANK YOU. OKAY. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR PLEASE SAY AYE. AYE. AYE. ANY OPPOSED? RIGHT. MOTION PASSES. ITEM NUMBER FOUR AMENDMENT 17 DASH ONE AMENDMENT 17 DASH ONE IS SUBMITTED FROM JOINT BASE SAN ANTONIO. I DON'T SEE ANYONE HERE. UM, MADAM CHAIR. SO IF YOU WANT, IF WE CAN GO TO THE NEXT ITEM ON THE AGENDA, LET ME TEXT THEM. 'CAUSE WE'VE HAD SEVERAL CONVERSATIONS WITH THEM THAT THEY SAID THEY WOULD BE IN ATTENDANCE. OKAY. UM, MOVING ON TO ITEM NUMBER SIX, THEN. ITEM AMENDMENT 13 DASH ONE. IS ANYONE HERE IN THE AUDIENCE FROM JOINT BASED SAN ANTONIO? OH, I APOLOGIZE SIR. YOU'LL NEED TO COME TO THE PODIUM TO SPEAK ON THE, UH, AMENDMENT. SORRY MADAM CHAIR. THAT'S OKAY. SO WE'RE BACK ON NUMBER ITEM NUMBER FOUR. ITEM AMENDMENT ITEM 17 DASH ONE. HI, MY NAME IS SALIA. I'M A COMMUNITY PLANNER WITH THE J B S A LACKLAND BASE. UH, HERE WE ARE PROPOSING A NEW, UH, UN UPDATED, UH, LAND USE FOR THE AQS, UH, FOR THE ACRES, UH, LAND USE. SO ACTUALLY I GOT A SHORT NOTICE FOR THIS MEETING. UH, I I I THOUGHT THERE WAS, UH, UH, SOMEONE FROM PUBLIC, UH, FROM THE PUBLIC GONNA BE, UH, FIGHT AGAINST THE NEW UPDATE. SO THIS [01:30:01] IS, AS THE APPLICANT YOU HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO INTRODUCE THE AMENDMENT, THE INTENT OF THE AMENDMENT, AND KIND OF DEFEND WHY YOU THINK IT'S NECESSARY, UH, TO CHANGE THE MILITARY, UH, AIRPORT OVERLAY ZONE BEFORE THE COMMITTEE. OKAY. SORRY. SO I'M NOT PREPARED TO, TO DO THAT NOW. CAN WE, UM, POSTPONE THIS ITEM TO, TO ANOTHER MEETING? OR LATER TO THIS MEETING? WHAT WOULD YOU WE CAN PUSH IT TO ANOTHER MEETING AND I WILL CALL, UH, MR. ANDERSON. OKAY. SO WE WILL MOVE NOW THEN. DO WE NEED A MOTION TO POSTPONE IT? YEAH, LET'S, WE CAN DO A MOTION TO CONTINUE TO MAY 9TH. MOTION TO CONTINUE. SO MOVED. ROBERT HANLEY. SECOND. I'LL BE RE . ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF, UH, MOVING ITEM NUMBER FOUR TO MAY 9TH. PLEASE SAY AYE. AYE. ANY OPPOSED? OKAY. MOTION PASSES. MOVING ON TO ITEM NUMBER SIX AMENDMENT 13 DASH ONE. GOOD AFTERNOON. UM, MY NAME IS TERESA IVANEZ. I'M PRESIDENT OF MISSION SAN JOSE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION. UM, I'M GOING TO SHARE A LITTLE BIT OF, OF BACKGROUND INFORMATION OF A GOOD CODE, BUT IT CAN BE BETTER. IT CAN BE BETTER FOR ONE REASON THAT IT'S GONNA PROTECT OUR MISSIONS. UM, I WAS, I'M SHARING, UM, THE MISSION PROTECTION OVERLAY DISTRICT'S, UH, POWERPOINT ON THE MPO. IF WE COULD GO TO THE MAPS THAT SHOW. AND, UM, SO IT, IT EXPLAINS, IT'S A REALLY GOOD CODE. IT, THE EXPLANATIONS IN IT ARE, ARE REALLY SOLID. UM, BUT WE WERE ARE ASKING THAT THAT CIRCUMFERENCE THAT IS 1,500 FEET THAT WE ADD ANOTHER THOUSAND FEET. AND I'M GONNA SHOW YOU WHY IN A LITTLE BIT WHY I WANT, WHY OUR NEIGHBORS, THE FOUR NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS WITHIN THE MISSION OVERLAY DISTRICTS AREA ARE REQUESTING THIS. COULD YOU GO TO THE NEXT MAP? RIGHT THERE. SO THAT'S THE MAP OF MISSION ION AND UM, THE MISSION IS KIND OF THAT WEIRD LITTLE PARALLELOGRAM IN THE CENTER. AND, UH, FROM THAT MAP YOU CAN SEE SOME OF THE RESIDENTIAL HOUSING. YOU CAN SEE THE PARK THAT'S TO THE WEST ACROSS, UH, MISSION ION. AND THEN, UH, TO THE NORTH THERE IS, UH, COMMERCIAL PROPERTY THAT'S USED BY C P S AND SAWS, UH, FOR PARKING THEIR VEHICLES. IT'S A VERY BIG AREA OF LAND, BUT WHAT WE'RE CONCERNED ABOUT IS RIGHT OUTSIDE THAT RED CIRCLE. OKAY, CAN WE GO TO THE NEXT MAP? THIS IS MY MISSION. I JUST LIVE RIGHT BEHIND THAT MISSION. UM, AND AGAIN, YOU CAN SEE A LOT OF THE PARK AREA RESIDENTIAL AREA AND UH, THERE'S SOME COMMERCIAL AREA 'CAUSE WE'RE RIGHT ON THE ROOSEVELT CORRIDOR. UM, BUT WE'RE, UH, CONCERNED ABOUT THAT. THE PROPERTIES THAT ARE RIGHT OUTSIDE THAT RED LINE. CAN YOU GO TO THE NEXT MAP? THIS IS SAN JUAN. AND SAN JUAN IS BLESSED BECAUSE THEY HAVE A LOT OF BUFFER ZONE PROTECTION OUTSIDE OF THAT 1,500 FEET RADIUS, UH, BECAUSE IT'S NATIONAL PARK PROPERTY AND SAN ANTONIO RIVER AUTHORITY PROPERTY. SO THEY HAVE A NICE LITTLE SECTION, UH, A BIG AREA OF LAND OUTSIDE OF THAT CIRCUMFERENCE THAT PROTECTS, UH, THEIR VIEW. SHED. UH, CAN YOU GO TO THE LAST ONE? AND THIS IS MISSION ISDA. NOW, MISSION ISPA OF ALL FOUR MISSIONS IS PROBABLY THE ONE THAT IS THE MOST RURAL, HAS A LOT OF OLD FARMLAND, BEAUTIFUL LAND THERE. AND, AND, UH, A LOT OF IT IS PROTECTED WITHIN THAT 1,500 FEET. BUT WE'RE REALLY CONCERNED ABOUT THAT OTHER FARMLAND THAT'S RIGHT OUTSIDE THAT RED LINE. SO, UH, AGAIN, UH, WANTING TO PROTECT THE MISSIONS EVEN MORE. COULD YOU GO TO MY, MY POWERPOINT NOW? SO ONE OF THE REASONS WE WANT TO, UH, ADD THIS EXTRA THOUSAND FEET IS TO JUST ENSURE THAT THE HEIGHT OF THE BUILDINGS, THAT ANY DEVELOPMENT THAT OCCURS IN THE FUTURE DOES NOT EXCEED A CERTAIN HEIGHT. [01:35:01] SO THAT, THAT, THAT THE VIEW OF, AND THE FEELING OF THE AREA AROUND THE MISSIONS IS PROTECTED EVEN MORE. SO CAN YOU GO TO THE NEXT, UM, AND THE REASON WE'RE WANTING TO DO THIS IS IT WE'RE NOT WANTING THOSE TALL, TALL BUILDINGS, UH, OVER SIX STORIES, SEVEN STORIES, EIGHT STORIES, WHICH IN ONE OF THE PROPERTIES BY MISSION ION IT'S, UH, ON STEVE'S AVENUE. AND I'LL SHOW YOU THE PROPERTY IN A MINUTE. UM, IT'S A POSSIBILITY BECAUSE IT'S OUTSIDE OF THAT 1,500 FOOT BY MAYBE 500 FEET OR LESS, THAT YOU COULD HAVE A VERY TALL BUILDING. YOU COULD HAVE A 10 STORY APARTMENT BUILDING OR A 10 STORY OFFICE BUILDING THERE. AND SO WHAT WE'RE WANTING TO, TO DO IS JUST TO LIMIT THE HEIGHT OF THOSE BUILDINGS SO THAT THE FEELING AROUND MISSION SAN JOSE IS HONORED AND THAT THAT VIEW SHED, WHICH EVEN ON HIGHWAY 90, IF YOU'RE GOING EAST ON HIGHWAY 90 AND YOU LOOK SOUTH, YOU CAN STILL SEE MISSION GLITZ. UM, CAN YOU GO TO MY NEXT, UH, SKIP THAT ONE. OKAY, SO THIS IS A PROPERTY, AND PARDON MY PHOTOGRAPHS, I'M AN ARTIST, BUT I AM A HORRIBLE PHOTOGRAPHER. I TRIED TO GET MY HUSBAND TO GO TAKE PICTURES FOR ME, BUT HE WAS RIDING HIS BIKE ON MISSION REACH, SO HE DIDN'T GO WITH ME. UM, THIS IS THE FARMLAND ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF MISSION ESPADA. AND THE RADIUS WHERE IT'S CURRENTLY ENDING IS PROBABLY RIGHT ON THAT HORIZON LINE THAT YOU SEE IN THE PHOTOGRAPH. OKAY. CAN YOU GO TO THE NEXT PHOTO? THESE ARE IN THE SOUTH WEST PART OF DIRECTION FROM MISSION IS PAHA AND THE FARMLAND THERE IS JUST BEAUTIFUL, BUT IT'S ALL PRIVATE LAND THAT IS NOT OWNED BY THE PARKS. SO, YOU KNOW, FAMILIES MAY START DIVIDING IT UP, SELLING IT. THEY MAY DECIDE, YOU KNOW WHAT, A DEVELOPER CAME AND OFFERED ME A MILLION DOLLARS AND WE WANNA DO A 10 STORY APARTMENT BUILDING RIGHT THERE. AND FOR US, IT JUST SEEMS DOESN'T WORK FOR US BECAUSE WE THINK THAT THE MISSION SHOULD BE PROTECTED A LITTLE BIT BETTER AS FOREST AS DEVELOPMENT AROUND IT. CAN YOU GO TO THE NEXT ONE? UM, AS I SAID, MISSIONS SAN JUAN IS PROTECTED BY, UH, A LOT OF NATIONAL PARK PROPERTY AND SAN ANTONIO RIVER AUTHORITY PROPERTY. BUT IF YOU ARE LOOKING OUT FROM MISSION SAN JUAN'S GROUNDS AND YOU LOOK DOWN GRAFT ROAD, YOU'RE GONNA LOOK ACROSS SOUTH PRESA. AND CURRENTLY ISDA MEXICAN RESTAURANT IS RIGHT THERE. BUT WHO'S TO SAY THE OWNERS OF THAT RESTAURANTS SELL THEIR PROPERTY AND SOMEBODY WANTS TO BUILD? AND THAT'S RIGHT OUTSIDE THE 1,500 FEET. OKAY, SO WE'RE NOT SAYING DON'T DEVELOP, JUST DEVELOP WITH LESS HEIGHT. OKAY? AND, AND IT'LL PROTECT IT. AND, AND ONE OF THE THINGS THAT I LOVED ABOUT, UH, WHEN, WHEN I SAW, UH, SA TOMORROW'S PLAN FOR HISTORIC NEIGHBORHOODS AND ESPECIALLY OUR NEIGHBORHOOD FOR THE MISSIONS, IS ONE OF THE THINGS THAT THEY STATED WAS TO DO THIS TIERED DEVELOPMENT. SO THE CLOSER YOU YOU'RE TO, TO THE MISSIONS ONE STORY AND, AND THAT'S WHAT THEY SHOW IN THE CURRENT CODE. OKAY, ONE STORY, TWO STORY, THREE STORY. WE'RE SAYING, LET'S CONTINUE IT RIGHT OUTSIDE FOR ANOTHER THOUSAND FEET JUST TO GUARANTEE THAT THE MISSIONS ARE PROTECTED. CAN YOU GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE PLEASE? THESE ARE PROPERTIES OF ALL THE MISSIONS, PROBABLY MISSION SAN JOSE HAS THE MOST VACANT PROPERTIES OF THAT ARE PRIVATE PROPERTIES. UH, WE HAVE ALTOGETHER ON THE ROOSEVELT CORRIDOR AND RIGHT OFF THE ROOSEVELT CORRIDOR. UH, CURRENTLY WE HAVE 14 VACANT PROPERTIES. TWO OF THEM ARE GOING TO HAVE, UH, A NEW RESTAURANT, NIETZSCHE'S RESTAURANT. AND IT'S, UM, RIGHT AT THE EDGE. AND I'M GLAD THAT THEY MOVED THEIR BUILDING BACK A LITTLE BIT FROM THE CORNER. 'CAUSE IT WAS ALMOST RIGHT AT THE EDGE OF THAT 15, UM, HUNDRED FEET. AND IT'S A TWO STORY BUILDING AND IT'S APPROPRIATE, IT'S BEAUTIFUL CONSTRUCTION. BUT LET'S SAY SOMEBODY DECIDES LIKE THE [01:40:01] PROPERTY NEXT TO IT, WHICH IS WHAT YOU'RE SEEING HERE, UH, OR ACROSS THE STREET IS ON HUIZAR STREET AND THEY DECIDE, AND IT'S RIGHT OUT OF THE 1,500 FEET FROM THE FRONT DOOR OF MISSION SAN JOSE OUT IN AN ANGLE. OKAY? AND LET'S SAY THE DEVELOPER SAYS, UH, THIS BEAUTIFUL, I'M GONNA DO A 10 STORY BUILDING. I'M RIGHT OUT, I'M RIGHT OUT OVER HERE. I I DON'T NEED TO FOLLOW THIS. AND, OR I'M GONNA DO, IT'S A C THREE RIGHT NOW THAT, AND IT'S I D Z, UM, I'M GONNA DO AN OFFICE BUILDING AND HE CAN GO 10 STORIES. BUT IS THAT THE RIGHT FEELING, THE RIGHT TYPE OF DEVELOPMENT, THAT HEIGHT FOR THAT AREA AROUND THE QUEEN OF THE MISSIONS FOR OUR NEIGHBORHOODS, WE SAY, NO, IT ISN'T. UH, CAN HE BUILD A THREE STORY, FOUR STORY THERE? POSSIBLY, YEAH, BUT NOT ANY HIGHER, RIGHT? AND RIGHT NOW THE CODE COULD, IF WE EXTENDED IT OUT, IT COULD HELP WITH THAT IN, IN KEEPING THAT BUILDING BELOW A VERY TALL BUILDING. CAN YOU GO TO THE NEXT ONE? THESE ARE BOTH PROPERTIES, VACANT PROPERTIES. UM, THEY, THEY ARE PRIVATELY OWNED, BUT THEY'RE VACANT, UM, ON THE ROOSEVELT CORRIDOR RIGHT OUTSIDE. THEY'RE SOUTHWEST OF MISSION SAN JOSE, RIGHT OUTSIDE THE 1,500 FOOT RADIUS. CAN YOU GO TO THE NEXT ONE? UM, THIS IS A PROPERTY TO THE SOUTHEAST BEHIND WHERE I LIVE. UM, AND, UH, IT'S AGAIN, RIGHT OUTSIDE THAT RADIUS. CAN YOU SHOW SHOW THE NEXT PROPERTIES? UM, SO THESE ARE BY MISSION QUIN. UH, THE SAWS AND C P S BUILDING ON MISSION ROAD IS ON THE LEFT. UH, THE PROPERTY THAT YOU SEE ON THE RIGHT IS ON STEVE'S. NOW THE, THE SAWS AND C P SS PROPERTY, HALF OF, WELL I SAY THREE QUARTERS OF IT IS WITHIN THE RADIUS CURRENT RADIUS OF 1,500 FEET. AND THEN THE REST OF THE PROPERTY IS OUTSIDE OF THAT. UH, THAT PROPERTY ON THE RIGHT IS OUTSIDE OF THAT 1,500 FEET. IT IS PARALLEL TO, UM, HIGHWAY 90. AND IF YOU CROSS THE STREET AND YOU LOOK SOUTH, YOU CAN SEE MISSION. OKAY. THE NEXT ONE, UH, AND THIS IS A PROPERTY ON MITCHELL ROAD. SOME OF IT, UH, IT IS PART OF THE DETE JUVENILE DETENTION CENTER. HALF OF THAT PROPERTY IS WITHIN THE RADIUS AND THE OTHER HALF IS ON THE OTHER SIDE. AND THE REASON I'M SHOWING YOU THE C P S AND THE JUVENILE DETENTION CENTER IS THE PROPERTY AROUND THE MISSIONS. PEOPLE WANNA LIVE THERE. SO WHY SHOULD I BE CONCERNED WITH A DETENTION CENTER? WHY SHOULD WE CARE? THEY'RE THERE BECAUSE IT MIGHT HAPPEN IN THE FUTURE THAT THEY DECIDE WE'RE GONNA MOVE IT, IT'S NO LONGER APPROPRIATE NEXT TO ST. JOHN'S SEMINARY APARTMENTS. WE'RE GONNA SELL IT AND WE'RE GONNA MOVE IT. AND THEY BUILD APARTMENTS THERE. OKAY. OR OFFICE, SOME MIXED USE, UH, BUILDING. SO THAT'S WHY I AM SHOWING IT TO YOU BECAUSE JUST IN CASE IN THE FUTURE WE'RE NO LONGER AROUND, THERE'S SOME CODE THAT'S STILL GONNA PROTECT THOSE MISSIONS AND HONOR THEM THE WAY THEY ARE SUPPOSED TO BE HONORED WITH SMART DEVELOPMENT. OKAY. ANY QUESTIONS? THANK YOU MS. IVANEZ. GO AHEAD, KEN. UM, I HAVE A QUESTION FOR STAFF. SO IN THIS ZONE, IS HEIGHT THE ONLY DEVELOPMENT? STANDARD HEIGHT IS THE ONLY RESTRICTION. OKAY. MOTION TO APPROVE. SECOND, DEBBIE, READ SECOND. COREY. COREY IS HERE IN THE AUDIENCE FROM OFFICE OF HISTORIC PRESERVATION. SO I DON'T KNOW IF WE NEED ANY RESPONSE FROM COREY OR COREY, DID YOU HAVE ANYTHING THAT YOU WANTED TO ADD? I'M WAY OVER HERE. NO, YOUR ANSWER WAS CORRECT. IT'S JUST THE HEIGHT. THANK YOU. COREY. GO AHEAD. ASHLEY, I HAVE A QUESTION. UH, COREY, JUST SO I UNDERSTAND, YOU MEASURE FROM THE DISC AT THE MISSIONS AND THEN IT GOES UP, CORRECT? YEAH. IF WE CAN PUT ACTUALLY THAT POWERPOINT. YEAH. UM, YEAH, RIGHT THERE. ONE OF THOSE IMAGES IS GOOD. UM, SO AT EACH OF THE MISSIONS THERE IS A SURVEYOR'S DISC, UH, LOCATED, UH, IN FRONT OF THE FRONT FACADE OF EACH MISSION. AND SO THAT IS THE POINT OF ORIGIN FOR EACH OF THE OVERLAYS. UM, AND [01:45:01] AS YOU CAN SEE IN THIS DIAGRAM, AS YOU EXTEND OUTWARD, THE HIGHER YOU CAN BUILD. UM, SO WE DID A LITTLE BIT OF CALCULATION BASED ON WHAT'S PROPOSED HERE, EX EXTENDING THE, UM, RADIUS TO 25, 2500 FEET. UM, AND SO IT WOULD CONTINUE TO GO UP AND AT ABOUT THAT OUTERMOST EDGE OF THE PROPOSED NEW BOUNDARIES, UM, WE THINK WOULD BE A SIX OR SEVEN STORY BUILDING THAT WOULD BE ALLOWABLE. UM, WHICH IS BEYOND THE ALLOWABLE HEIGHT AND MOST OF THE EXISTING, UH, ZONING DISTRICTS THAT ARE IN PLACE NOW. SO I I, I DON'T THINK IT'S GOING TO RESTRICT A WHOLE LOT AT THIS TIME. COREY, WHAT'S THE HEIGHT AT THE CURRENT 1500 FEET? IT'S ABOUT A THREE STORY BUILDING. YEAH. AND YOU'RE IN THAT THOUSAND FEET RESTRICTING BETWEEN A THREE AND SIX STORY BUILDING? CORRECT. AND, UM, AN EXAMPLE, IF YOU GO TO THE MAP OF MISSION CONCEPCION, I THINK BELOW THIS. YEAH, ONE MORE. UM, SO THERE IS A, A TWO AND THREE STORY APARTMENT COMPLEX THAT IS CONSTRUCTED BEHIND MISSION CONCEPTION. IT'S THE ST. JOHN'S APARTMENTS PROJECT. AND SO THAT WAS REVIEWED UNDER THIS, UH, REGULATION AND APPROVED AND PERMITTED. UM, SO IT IS POSSIBLE TO, TO DEVELOP AND, AND MEET THE OTHER REQUIREMENTS. IT'S JUST GONNA BE A, A CLOSE LOOK AT HEIGHT WHEN THOSE COME THROUGH. MM-HMM. . AND JUST TO CHIME IN, UM, AGAIN, THE BASE DISTRICT IS WHAT'S GOING TO DICTATE WHAT THAT HEIGHT IS, AND THEN, UH, THE HISTORIC REVIEW CAN FURTHER RESTRICT IT. SO FOR EXAMPLE, C THREE, THE MAX HEIGHT IS 35 FEET, C TWO IS 25 FEET. UM, SO THE ONLY ONE THAT RIGHT NOW HAS 10 STORY WOULD BE AN O TWO PROPERTY. BUT WE'RE NOT GONNA, I DON'T BELIEVE THERE'S ANY O TWO PROPERTIES DOWN HERE THAT WERE CONVERTED FROM OH ONE. ARE THERE ANY, UH, CURRENT PROPERTIES THAT WOULD, WOULD BE OUT OF COMPLIANCE? SO AGAIN, IT'S NOT THE PROPERTY, IT'S THE, THE STRUCTURES OR BUILDINGS ON THE PROPERTY THAT WE LOOK AT. SO, UM, I, I DON'T THINK SO. I CAN'T SAY WITH CERTAINTY. UM, I, I DO KNOW ONE EXAMPLE, UM, IF YOU ARE FAMILIAR WITH, UH, MISSION, UH, SAN JOSE, THERE'S, THERE USED TO BE THE PIZZA HUTT SIGN THAT YOU COULD SEE NOT FAR FROM THERE. WE LOWER, BUT THAT, BUT THAT'S BEEN REMOVED AND REDUCED IN HEIGHT. SO THERE'S A FEW KIND OF OUTLIERS LIKE THAT, BUT BUILDINGS NOT SO MUCH. AND, AND IF I MAY INTERJECT, UH, THE MISSION, UM, DESIGN MANUAL, THAT OFFICE OF HISTORIC PRESERVATION, UH, HAD CREATED ABOUT TWO YEARS, THREE YEARS AGO, UH, HAS RECOMMENDATIONS FOR DESIGNS OF BUILDINGS AND MATERIALS. UM, THE HEIGHT OF THE RECOMMEND, THE HEIGHT AND RECOMMENDATIONS ARE, ARE WONDERFUL EXCEPT THAT, UM, THAT FOR AROUND THE MISSIONS WE JUST FELT THAT THAT HEIGHT SHOULD BE REALLY CONSIDERED, UH, JUST A ANOTHER THOUSAND FEET OUT, UH, JUST TO LIMIT FROM VERY, VERY TALL BUILDINGS BEING BUILT FURTHER OUT. SUSAN, DID YOU HAVE A QUESTION? SUSAN, DID YOU HAVE A COMMENT OR A QUESTION? I GUESS I'M A LITTLE CONFUSED AS TO THE, I'M NOT NECESSARILY OPPOSED TO THIS, BUT THE PROCESS SEEMS ODD TO ME BECAUSE I CONSIDER OVERLAY ZONES, UH, OVERLAY DISTRICTS TO HAVE A ZONING CASE. AND IN THIS CASE, YOU KNOW, IT SEEMS WEIRD TO ME THAT WE ARE CHANGING THE U D C BEFORE WE'RE AND NOT HAVING A ZONING CASE ON THIS. AND I'M JUST CONFUSED BY THAT. SO IF YOU COULD JUST WALK ME THROUGH IT. I'M, YOU KNOW, I'M RUSTY FROM MY ZONING DAYS, BUT BACKWARDS, THIS WOULD'VE HAVE TO GO THROUGH, THIS WOULD ALSO HAVE TO HAVE COUNCIL DO A REQUEST FOR REZONING. YEAH. SO AND SO THEY WOULD HAVE TO E EXACTLY WHAT THEY DID WITH THIS. AND IT DOESN'T CHANGE THE ZONING OF THE PROPERTIES. IT JUST CHANGES WHAT THAT LOOKS LIKE. TERRY, GO AHEAD. LOGAN. GO AHEAD STEPH, PLEASE. THIS WOULD VERY MUCH SO BE A TWO-PART PROCESS SHOULD THE CITY COUNCIL ULTIMATELY APPROVE THIS AMENDMENT. SO IF THEY APPROVE AN AMENDMENT TO THE U D C THAT EXPANDS THAT TO 2,500 FEET FROM 1500, WE WOULD HAVE TO GO THROUGH A LARGE AREA REZONING TO OFFICIALLY ASSIGN THAT OVERLAY ZONING TO THESE PROPERTIES. U D C AMENDMENTS DO NOT ZONE PROPERTY COUNCIL ACTION ZONES, PROPERTY MANNA SO MUCH THERE. WHY WE'RE REVIEW WHAT OUR POSITION MATTERS ON THIS, WHAT PART OF THE CODE, GIMME SPECIFICALLY WHAT WE ARE TRYING, WHAT WE ARE BEING ASKED TO DO, THAT WOULD NOT BE A COUNCIL ACTION. SO IT'S CREATE AN OPPORTUNITY TO EXPAND IT. IT'S THE ENABLING. YES. SO EFFECTIVELY IT'S, IT'S THE ENABLING, RIGHT? WHAT WE WOULD ANTICIPATE DOING IS, UM, MAKING SURE WE'RE HAVING THE CONVERSATIONS WITH THE IMPACTED [01:50:01] COUNCIL DISTRICTS TO ENSURE THEY AGREE. UM, ASSUMING THEY DO, WE COULD POTENTIALLY WRITE LANGUAGE IN THE ORDINANCE TO CREATE THAT RESOLUTION IN THIS ACTION OF APPROVAL BY CITY COUNCIL. AND THEN THE NEXT STEP WOULD BE LIKE LOGAN MENTIONED THE LARGER REZONING. BUT THOSE ARE DISCUSSIONS THAT STILL NEED TO BE HAD. GO AHEAD, MR. MAYOR. SO THE ONE QUESTION I HAD WAS, UM, YOU, IT TALKS ABOUT THE DISC AND I THOUGHT I, I SAW SOMETHING, TALKED ABOUT A 2%, UH, VIEW SHED. AND SO ARE WE STILL EXTENDING THAT 2% ALL THE WAY TO THE END LINE? OR ARE WE GOING TO REDUCE THE HEIGHT AT THE, AT THE, UH, 2,500 FOOT TO BE WHATEVER THAT'S, THAT NEW MEASUREMENT IS? SO THAT'S TRULY OUR HEIGHT MAXIMUM THAT WE REALLY WANT IN THAT VIEW SHED. SO, YOU KNOW, SO, SO IN OTHER WORDS, DO WE CONTINUE GOING UP OR DO WE SET, SET THE BAR SO THAT THAT VIEW STILL REMAINS AT A FURTHER DISTANCE? OR ORIGINALLY, UH, THE PRESIDENT'S HEAD DID, DID WANT TO, FROM THE FOUR NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS WHEN WE MET, UM, THEY, WE DID WANT TO CHANGE THE ANGLE. 'CAUSE RIGHT NOW IT'S, IT'S A LITTLE HIGHER AT THAT PEG. OKAY. WHICH INCREASES, RIGHT. SO WE THOUGHT ABOUT CHANGING THE ANGLE AND, UM, AND WE DIDN'T THINK THAT IT WOULD BE PASSED BECAUSE IT WOULD AFFECT THE CURRENT HEIGHTS THAT ARE BEING ALLOWED NOW. UM, SO, UH, WITHIN THAT 1,500 FOOT RADIUS. SO, UM, WE COMPROMISED AS FAR AS THE PRESIDENTS DID. I SAID WHEN WE WERE DISCUSSING WHAT SHOULD BE CHALLENGED FOR CHANGE IN, IN THIS AND HOW, HOW EFFECTIVE COULD IT BE KNOWING THAT DEVELOPMENT IS, IS THERE AROUND THE MISSIONS, YOU KNOW, AND WHAT COULD BE MO MOST EFFECTIVE TO, FOR OUR NEIGHBORHOODS TO STILL INVITE THE INVESTMENT, UH, FOR OUR NEIGHBORHOODS WITH CONSTRUCTION, WITH DEVELOPMENT OF APARTMENTS OR OFFICE BUILDINGS OR MIXED USE. ASHLEY, DID YOU HAVE A QUESTION? NO, I'M OKAY. AND I BELIEVE WE HAVE A, A MOTION AND A SECOND ON THE TABLE. KEN, WHO IS A SECOND FROM AGAIN, BIANCA. OKAY. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, PLEASE SAY AYE. AYE. THANK YOU. MOTION PASSES. ALL RIGHT. MOVING ON TO ITEM NUMBER SEVEN 14 DASH EIGHT. DEBBIE, YOU COULD HAVE DONE THAT FROM YOUR CHAIR. , SAVE YOU SOME STEPS AND TIME. MY STEPS IS WE HAVE A LOT OF, UH, ITEMS TODAY, A LOT OF DISCUSSION QUESTION. SO OUR OFFICE, OUR OFFICE HAS RECEIVED A LOT OF CALLS ON INFILL DEVELOPMENT AND EXTRA, UH, STORM WATER RUNNING OFF TO THEIR BUDDING ADJACENT PROPERTIES OR INCREASED ELEVATION OF STORM WATER IN THEIR STREETS ABOVE THE SIX INCHES THAT'S ALLOWED. AND THIS WAS A VERY MINOR TYPE OF AMENDMENT TO ALLOW FOR A LITTLE BIT MORE CONTROL FROM THE PUBLIC WORKS PERSPECTIVE OF A STORM WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN REPORT BEING REQUIRED AND ALSO FOCUSING ON THE INCREASE OR NOT INCREASE OF IMPERVIOUS AREA. IS THAT IT DEBBIE? SORRY? DID YOU HAVE A PRESENTATION? RIGHT. DO YOU WANT ME TO READ THESE OUT? NO, NO. YOU DON'T HAVE I DIDN'T, YES. COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS? SABRINA? I MEAN, I KNOW IN INFILL AND, YOU KNOW, SCHOOLS ARE EXEMPT AND OTHERS, THERE'S SOME ISSUES. DON'T WE ALREADY SOMEWHERE IN THE CODE HAVE A IMPERVIOUS COVER THRESHOLD THAT IF YOU'RE ABOVE, YOU HAVE TO, IF YOU'RE BELOW, I MEAN, I DON'T HAVE AN ISSUE WITH THE CONCEPTS, I JUST DON'T WANNA SAY WHERE THERE'S ZERO INCREASE IN IMPERVIOUS COVER AND SOMEWHERE ELSE. I THOUGHT WE HAD ANOTHER THRESHOLD. RIGHT. SO, UM, THE, THE OLD FILE ORDINANCE HAD THE DESCRIPTION OF THE, THE 4,300 SQUARE FEET. UM, WE KIND OF SCRAPPED THAT WITH THE NEW ORDINANCE. SO THE IMPERVIOUS COVER LIMITS WERE SCRAPPED OTHER THAN, YOU KNOW, THE SETTING A MINIMUM FOR COLLECTING FEE IN LIEU OF, UM, I THINK FROM, UM, A PUBLIC WORK STANDPOINT, WE, WE, WE SUPPORT THIS AMENDMENT. UM, WE DON'T HAVE ANY OBJECTION TO THIS LANGUAGE, BUT I JUST HAVE ONE QUESTION. I [01:55:01] I ALSO AGREE WITH THE CONCEPT. I JUST, HOW DO YOU ENSURE THAT RUNOFF FROM DEVELOPMENT DOES NOT ENTER ONTO A BUDDING PROPERTIES WITHOUT DOING A PLAN? WE'VE ASKED DEVELOPMENT SERVICES TO ENSURE THAT'S A PART OF THE, UH, C OF O CER CERTIFICATE. SABRINA AND WHO DID YOU TALK TO? DEBBIE. THAT WOULD BE MICHAEL AND JACOB BEFORE HE LEFT, HE WAS NOT DEVELOPMENT SERVICES. MICHAEL SHANNON. MICHAEL SHANNON. MICHAEL SHANNON. AND THAT GUY. ISN'T THERE A BUILDING PERMIT? ALL RIGHT, I'M GONNA, I'M GONNA CHIME IN HERE. DEBBIE, CAN YOU REMIND ME WHAT I SAID TO YOU? , THERE YOU GO. I THINK THIS WAS A MISSILE TOE ISSUE WHERE, UH, SIX CONDOS WENT IN AS AN INFIELD DEVELOPMENT UP AGAINST, UH, EXISTING RESIDENTIAL. AND WE DON'T KNOW IF IT'S EXACTLY THE WAY THE, THE PROPERTY WAS SLOPED BEFORE IT WAS LANDSCAPE, BUT THE FINAL GRADE ACTUALLY WAS SLOPED TO THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES AND IT WAS GOING UNDERNEATH THEIR PIER AND BEAM HOUSING. AND YOU AND JACOB AND SEVERAL NEIGHBORHOOD FOLKS STOOD OUT IN THE STREET AND TALKED ABOUT ENSURING THAT, UH, AT THE FINAL INSPECTION. BUT IF YOU HAVE OTHER SUGGESTIONS, SO THAT'S THE ONE I'M MOST THAT INSURING RUNOFF, YOU KNOW, I MEAN THERE'S ALL THE F H A GRADING CRITERIA SPECIFICALLY SAY YOU ARE ALLOWED. AND IN FACT, YOU KNOW, TO FLOW ACROSS CERTAIN NUMBER OF LOTS FROM AN ADJACENT LOT. AND SO THAT'S KIND OF IN CONFLICT WITH A NUMBER OF DIFFERENT THINGS. I AGREE WITH THE CONCEPT OF YOU DON'T WANNA DUMP ON SOMEONE ELSE AND LOOKING AT IT, BUT THAT'S INDIRECT CONFLICT WITH OTHER CODE AND BUILDING CODE REQUIREMENTS. I, I THINK THAT'S THE, THE REQUIREMENT FOR HAVING THE, THE STORM WATER PLAN BEING REVIEWED AND SEEING IF THERE IS FLOW FROM OTHER PROPERTIES. BUT IF YOU'RE DOING AN INFILL AND THERE WAS NO FLOW COMING INTO YOUR PROPERTY BEFORE THE DEVELOPMENT, THEN THAT'S PER PRETTY MUCH THE ISSUE WE'D LIKE TO ADDRESS. AND I WOULD ANTICIPATE IF, IF THIS IS SOMETHING THAT IS GONNA BE SUBMITTED AS PER EACH APPLICATION, WE WOULD HAVE TO CREATE SOME SORT OF, UH, DOCUMENTATION REQUESTING INFORMATION TO BE EVALUATED. JUST BECAUSE WE'RE PUTTING IN THE CODE DOESN'T MEAN WE HAVE SOMETHING TO EVALUATE. SABRINA, WERE YOU GONNA ADD SOMETHING? NO, NO MA'AM. OKAY. YEAH, BECAUSE THE WHOLE WHOLE POINT OF THIS SECTION IS TO SAY IF YOU MEET THESE TWO ITEMS, THEN YOU DON'T HAVE TO TURN IN A STORM WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN. HOW ARE YOU GOING TO VERIFY MM-HMM. NUMBER TWO, NUMBER ONE IS EASY. IT'S A BUILDING PERMIT, BUT HOW ARE YOU GOING TO VERIFY NUMBER ONE? AND IF THERE WAS RUNOFF GOING THERE IN THE FIRST PLACE, YOU'RE LEGALLY ALLOWED TO CONTINUE TO HAVE RUNOFF THERE. CORRECT. BY STATE LAW, YOU, YOU CANNOT DIVERT. AND BY THE DRAINING ORDINANCE, YOU CANNOT DIVERT WATER FROM ITS NATURAL WATERCOURSE. OKAY. MR. LEEMAN, DID YOU HAVE A COMMENT? YEAH, I'M KIND OF GOING RIGHT ALONG WITH THAT MICRO UP ANYWAY. I THINK WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO SAY IS YOU SHOULDN'T PUT, UH, LET WATER ENTER BUDDING PROPERTIES WHERE WATER NEVER ENTERED BUDDING PROPERTIES BEFORE. THAT'S WHAT SHE'S TRYING TO SAY. BUT YOU CAN'T MAKE THAT STATEMENT THAT IT CAN'T ENTER IN BUDDING PROPERTIES 'CAUSE IT DOES ALL THE TIME. GOOD POINT. SO DEBBIE, WOULD YOU BE OPEN TO AMENDING THAT TO KEEP THE INCREASE IN IMPERVIOUS COVER WITH THE REUSE OF EXISTING BUILDING, BUT TAKE OUT THE INSURING THE RUNOFF PART? I, I JUST DUNNO HOW TO, WHERE IT'S EXISTING NOW, IT WOULDN'T BE ALLOWED OR HOW TO CHECK IT. YES. SO I MOVE, WE APPROVE WITH THE AMENDMENT THAT DEBBIE JUST AS REFLECTED ON THE SCREEN AS REFLECTED ON THE SCREEN. SECOND, IT'S BEYOND, WELL THE ONLY OTHER THING IS STORMWATER REPORT SUBMITTED AT THE PLATTING STAGE. YOU MAY NOT NEED A PLATT IF IT'S AN ALREADY PLATTED LOT. SO IT MAY BE OR BUILDING PERMIT. I MEAN THAT'S GONNA VARY DE DEPENDING ON THE LOT. YES. AS AMENDED WITH, UM, PLATING OR PERMIT. THIS IS BEYOND . SO STAFF IS THAT SENTENCE NECESSARY THAT SAYS WHEN THEY HAVE TO TURN IT IN, BECAUSE THE FIRST ONE SAYS YOU HAVE TO TURN IT IN IF YOU DON'T COMPLY WITH THE FIRST TWO. SO WOULD IT BE [02:00:01] THE LAST ONE REGARDING PLATTING? WOULD IT BE AS APPLICABLE? 'CAUSE IF IT'S ALREADY PLATTED, THEN THEY DON'T HAVE TO PLAT. BUT IF IT'S, IF IT'S A INNER CITY LOT AND THEY NEED TO PLAT, THEN THIS WOULD APPLY. COULD WE AMEND IT TO SAY THE STORMWATER MANAGEMENT STANDARDS AND REPORT SHALL APPLY TO ALL IN, IN FILL, NOT LISTED ABOVE, OR JUST TAKE OUT THAT WHOLE LAST SENTENCE AND ADD IN THE EXISTING ONE WHERE IT SAYS STORMWATER MANAGEMENT STANDARDS SHALL APPLY, SAY STORMWATER MANAGEMENT STANDARDS AND REPORT AND ENGINEERS REPORT. DOES THE WORD STANDARDS ALREADY COVER THE REPORT BECAUSE SOMEBODY IS DOING THE CALCULATIONS. IT SHOULD, IT SHOULD BE WITHIN THE STANDARDS. WHETHER YOU SUBMIT THE REPORT OR NOT, IT SHOULD BE WITHIN THAT STANDARDS ANYWAY. I'M JUST TRYING TO BE VERY CLEAR THE WORD SHE WAS AT. DEBBIE, ARE YOU OKAY WITH THE AMENDMENTS AS PROPOSED? YES, EXCEPT THE PROPOSED AMENDMENTS. OKAY. SO WE HAVE A MOTION FROM KARA AND A SECOND FROM KEN. KEN IS YOUR SECOND STILL? YES. OKAY. I'LL BE THE SECOND IF YOU NEED ONE. OKAY. BIANCA IS HER SECOND. UM, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? ANY OTHER COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS? I DO. BIANCA, JUST FOR THE RECORD, THE, UH, CASE THAT YOU WERE REFERENCING ON MISSILE TOE, IT WAS RECORDED BY NOWCAST IN 2019, MR. SHANNON. SO I KNOW THAT THAT WAS A RECORDED CONVERSATION OF WHAT HAPPENED IN THE FLOODING IN THAT PARTICULAR INSTANCE FOR INFIELD DEVELOPMENT. THANK YOU. OKAY. THANK YOU FOR THAT CLARIFICATION. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, PLEASE SAY AYE. AYE. ANY OPPOSED? MOTION PASSES. MOVING ON TO ITEM NUMBER 11, UM, AMENDMENT ONE DASH ONE. WE HAVE THE APPLICANT COMING TO THE PODIUM. THIS ONE RIGHT HERE, SIR. 5 3 90. IF YOU, SIR, EXCUSE ME, CAN YOU TURN ON THE MICROPHONE? THERE'S A BUTTON RIGHT THERE UNDERNEATH A LITTLE THERE. YEAH. 35 3 90 HAS TO DO WITH TRANSITIONAL HOUSING IN SAN ANTONIO. UH, JUST A LITTLE, A LITTLE BACKGROUND. I'M SORRY. WHICH DOCUMENT? WELL, IT'S GONNA BE, YEAH, WE'LL TRY THAT ONE. YEAH. A LITTLE BACKGROUND BACK. PRE COVID, THERE WAS A VERY ACTIVE, UH, COUNCIL OUT OF THE BAYER COUNTY REENTRY CENTER WITH THE REENTRY STAFF AND, UH, VARIOUS COMMUNITY VOLUNTEER ORGANIZATIONS. AND I CAN REMEMBER THE COMMENTS BACK THERE. EVERYBODY WAS PRETTY MUCH IN AGREEMENT THAT THE AVAILABILITY OF TRANSITIONAL HOUSING IN SAN ANTONIO WAS, UH, WAS LACKING JUST, UH, TRANSITIONAL HOUSING. WHEN A PROLIA IS RELEASED INTO BEXAR COUNTY, THERE'S THREE OPTIONS ON WHERE THEY CAN GO. THEY HAVE WHAT THE STATE REFERS TO A HALFWAY HOUSE, WHICH IS THESE, UH, UH, INSTITUTIONAL FACILITIES SUCH AS CORE CIVIC. THERE'S ONE IN AUSTIN, I THINK THERE'S PROBABLY SIX OR EIGHT THROUGHOUT THE STATE NOW THEY HAVE ANOTHER, UH, PLAN. IT'S CALLED A RESIDENTIAL PLAN, WHERE THE PAROLE LEAGUE CAN BE PLACED BACK WITH FAMILY OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT. IF, UH, YOU KNOW, IF THE PAROLE ORGANIZATION FEELS LIKE THAT'S A, THAT'S A GOOD OPTION. THERE'S A THIRD, THIRD OPTION, AND THAT'S THIS TRANSITIONAL HOUSING. TRANSITIONAL HOUSING IS, UH, A SMALL COMMUNITY HOUSE, SAY SIX OR EIGHT PEOPLE THAT'S TYPICALLY SUPPORTED BY A FAITH-BASED GROUP OR, YOU KNOW, PRIVATE, PRIVATE INDIVIDUALS THAT, UH, THAT HAVE PUT THESE IN PLACE. SO, BACK IN 19, UH, 2019, UH, WE WERE TALKING ABOUT THIS. WE DECIDED, WE TRY TO START COLLECTING SOME DATA ON THIS AND SEE IF IT REALLY, IF THE DATA REALLY SUPPORTED THAT THERE WAS A NEED, UH, FOR THIS KIND OF, UH, THESE KIND OF FACILITIES IN SAN ANTONIO. SO FIRST OFF, IF YOU JUST LOOK AT WHAT'S AVAILABLE CURRENTLY IN SAN ANTONIO. UH, BACK UP TO THE TOP PLEASE. UH, THERE'S ANOTHER ORGANIZATION CALLED AN OXFORD HOUSE. I GUESS AN OXFORD HOUSE WOULD PROBABLY FALL IN THE CATEGORY OF, UH, OF A RESIDENTIAL PLAN. AN OXFORD HOUSE, [02:05:01] IF YOU'RE NOT FAMILIAR, IS A, UH, OXFORD IS A NATIONWIDE, UH, ORGANIZATION THAT WORKS TO DEVELOP THESE FACILITIES IN, UH, YOU KNOW, COMMUNITIES ALL OVER THE NATION. IT'S A, UH, IT'S A ADDICTION RECOVERY HOUSE WHERE IT'S COMPLETELY SUPPORTED BY THE, BY THE OCCUPANTS. THERE'S LOTS OF RULES AND REGULATIONS. YOU KNOW, ONE STRIKE AND YOU'RE OUT KIND OF THING. CURRENTLY THERE'S 44 OXFORD HOUSES IN SAN ANTONIO. UH, THERE'S SOME DETAILS ON HOW YOU GET IN. YOU HAVE, YOU'RE ADMITTED WITH 80% OF THE VOTE OF THE HOUSE MEMBERS. UH, YOU HAVE TO IDENTIFY AS A SUBSTANCE ABUSER. SO, WHICH DOESN'T DISQUALIFY A PAROLEE EVEN THOUGH, YOU KNOW, FOR THE LAST, UH, MONTHS OR YEARS YOU HAVEN'T REALLY, REALLY BEEN ABUSING SUBSTANCES. IF YOU STILL IDENTIFY YOURSELF AS A SUBSTANCE ABUSER, SAY PRIOR TO INCARCERATION, UH, YOU WOULD QUALIFY FOR, UH, UH, TO LIVE IN AN OXFORD HOUSE. UH, CURRENTLY THERE ARE 15 PAROLEES RESIDING IN, UH, BEXAR COUNTY, OXFORD HOUSES, UH, FIVE IN GUADALUPE COUNTY. UH, THE WAY THAT THEY'RE ORGANIZ ORGANIZED, UH, THE, AN OXFORD HOUSE HAS TWO CATEGORIES. THE FIRST CATEGORY IS IF YOU'RE, IF THE, UH, FACILITY IS CONSIDERED TO BE NOT PAROLEE APPROVED, IF THE FACILITY IS NOT PAROLEE APPROVED, THAT MEANS THAT ONE PAROLEE CAN LIVE THERE. IF THEY ARE PAROLEE APPROVED, THEN IT'S UNLIMITED. YOU COULD HAVE, THE WHOLE HOUSE COULD BE FULL OF PAROLEES IF THAT'S THE WAY IT SHOOK OUT. UH, THERE'S VERY LITTLE EFFORT BEING MADE CURRENTLY ACCORDING TO THE OXFORD HOUSE PEOPLE IN, YOU KNOW, ENCOURAGING HOUSES TO GET PROLE APPROVED BECAUSE IT'S, UH, UH, PROOF TO BE VERY TORTUROUS. THERE'S ADDITIONAL PERMITTING PLAN, UH, REQUIRED AND THEY JUST DON'T SEE A, A NEED FOR IT CURRENTLY. SO THAT'S, THAT'S THE AVAILABILITY IN THE OXFORD HOUSE ORGANIZATION CURRENTLY IN, UH, IN SAN ANTONIO. UH, IF YOU SCROLL DOWN A LITTLE BIT, SO HERE'S THE SECOND CATEGORY. UH, THIS WOULD BE THE SAN ANTONIO TRANSITIONAL HOUSING. THE, THE STATE REFERS TO THAT AS ALTERNATIVE HOUSING, BUT SAME THING. SO WHAT WE HAVE NOW IN, UH, BEAR AND GUADALUPE COUNTY, THERE'S A TOTAL OF EIGHT TRANSITIONAL HOUSES. YOU CAN SEE WHAT THEY ARE THERE. THERE'S ONE, UH, TEEN AND ADULT CHALLENGE. THIS IS KIND OF A FOR-PROFIT THING THAT WERE PRIORS ARE PRETTY HEFTY INDUCTION FEE. UH, GRACE HOUSE, THERE'S, UH, THE GRACE HOUSE IS ON THE BAPTIST CAMPUS OVER BY LACKLAND AIR FORCE BASE. THIS IS A WOMAN'S FACILITY. UH, THERE'S TWO SECOND CHANCE HOUSES. DIDN'T, THEY DIDN'T, THEY DIDN'T CARE TO COMMENT ON MUCH ON WHAT THEY HAD GOING ON OR, UH, AVAILABILITY OF BEDS. UH, SAME THING FOR THE OTHER ONES. THE NEXT TO TRANSFORMING LIVES THROUGH HOPE OUTCRY IN THE BURIAL. UH, THERE'S A HOUSE THAT'S CURRENTLY UNDER, UH, RECONSTRUCTION IN, UH, OUT IN MARION. UH, THE MAN OUT THERE HAS BEEN RUNNING THIS FOR SEVERAL YEARS. IT WAS PUTTING IN MARION BECAUSE AT THE TIME IT WAS HARD TO GET IT PUT IN SAN ANTONIO. SO HE, HE LOCATED IT OUT THERE. HE, IN THE PAST, HE'S HAD EIGHT MEN LIVING THERE, AND, UH, HE'S BEEN SUCCESSFUL. SO HE, HE'S CURRENTLY BUILDING A 10, 10 BED FACILITY. SO HERE'S, HERE'S THE, UH, OPPORTUNITIES FOR, UH, FOR HOUSING FOR FOLKS RIGHT NOW. PRECO, I, I PUT 2019 UP THERE, THAT'S PRE COVID DURING COVID, AND THE NUMBERS ARE GOT ALL JUMBLED UP AND THEY, UH, THEY'RE NOT REALLY THAT, THAT MEANINGFUL. SO IN 2019, THIS IS IN, UH, IN BEXAR COUNTY. THERE WAS TWENTY TWENTY ONE HUNDRED AND TWENTY SEVEN PRO RELEASED IN BEXAR COUNTY, 261 A MONTH. UH, NOT THAT DIFFERENT IN 2020, IT'S JUST THE RECEIVES FROM INTO THE PRISON WAS GONE DOWN. THEY WERE, UH, THEY WERE ENCOURAGING, YOU KNOW, NOT TO INCARCERATE PEOPLE SO MUCH AS, UH, MORE RELEASES GOING ON. SO THAT'S, UH, YOU KNOW, NINE PEOPLE A DAY SAY, OR, UH, ACCORDING TO 2019, THERE'S AN OPPORTUNITY TO TRY TO HOUSE ABOUT NINE PEOPLE A DAY. SO IF YOU SLIDE DOWN ONE MORE. SO IT'S, IT'S NOT CLEAR WHAT THE DISPOSITION REALLY OF THOSE NINE PEOPLE IS, IS THERE A NEED OR IN THERE A NEED? SO I ASK THE, UH, THE T D C J HAS A PUBLIC INFORMATION OFFICE WHERE YOU CAN MAKE A REQUEST, UH, FOR PUBLIC INFORMATION. SO I PICKED A, A MONTH IN, UH, 2019 FEBRUARY. JUST HAD TO HAVE THE MOST HAPPENED TO HAVE THE MOST RELEASES IN 2019. SO I PICKED THAT AND ASKED THEM TO PROVIDE DATA ON THE, UH, DISPOSITION OF THOSE PAROLEES RELEASED INTO BEXAR COUNTY IN FEBRUARY OF 2019. UH, SEVEN OF THEM WENT TO A RESIDENTIAL REENTRY CENTER, A HALFWAY HOUSE THAT'S LIKE THE CORE CIVIC, UH, INSTITUTIONAL FACILITIES. [02:10:01] ZERO, INTERESTINGLY ENOUGH, WENT TO ALTERNATIVE HOUSING. UH, 135 OF THE TOTAL OF 155, UH, WENT INTO A RESIDENTIAL PLAN. UH, THE OTHER CRIMINAL JUSTICE AGENCY, UH, COULD FRANCE, UH, FOR EXAMPLE, BE A SAFE P TYPE HOUSE. UH, I'M NOT SURE EXACTLY WHAT THE OTHER T D C J DIVISION IS, BUT ACCORDING TO THIS ONE MONTH IN HISTORY, 135 OF 155 PAROLEES RELEASED IN BEXAR COUNTY WENT INTO A RESIDENTIAL PLAN. SO THAT IS, TO ME, THAT SAYS THAT THEY'RE A GOOD POTENTIAL. THEY'RE GOING RIGHT BACK INTO THE SAME COMMUNITY WHERE THEY LIVED PRIOR TO INCARCERATION. UH, AGAIN, IT'S, IT'S HARD FOR ME TO INTERPRET THIS, PARTICULARLY THE, THE ZERO TO ALTERNATIVE HOUSING WHEN MAYBE THAT WAS JUST PARTICULAR TO THAT MONTH, UH, MADE A SECOND REQUEST TO THEM TO GIVE, PROVIDE SOME DATA FOR TARRANT COUNTY FORT WORTH. UH, FORT WORTH HAS ABOUT THE SAME NUMBER OF, UH, PAROLEES RELEASED, BUT THEY HAVE 43 ALTERNATIVE HOUSES. UH, SO MAYBE THAT'LL LEAD TO SOME BETTER UNDERSTANDING ON THIS. NOW, IF YOU WANNA, CAN YOU JUST OPEN THE, UH, OPEN THAT FILE ON THERE AND JUST SEE WHAT'S IN THE, IN THE FILE? YEAH. CAN YOU, I GUESS YOU CAN'T DISPLAY THAT. YEAH, I DON'T IF YOU WANT TO LOOK AT ANY OF THIS OTHER, OTHER DATA HERE IS, UH, HERE'S ALL THE DOCUMENTS THAT I USE TO, UH, ACQUIRE THIS DATA. THERE'S LOTS AND LOTS OF STUFF AVAILABLE. THIS IS JUST, JUST A REALLY SHORT LIST OF WHAT WE LOOKED AT. UH, THERE'S A DOCUMENT ON THERE THAT SHOWS ALL THE AL ALTERNATIVE HOUSING FACILITIES CURRENTLY IN PLACE IN EVERY COUNTY IN TEXAS. UH, IT'S PRETTY INTERESTED TO LOOK AT BEAR COUNTY VERSUS, UH, YOU KNOW, FORT WORTH, DALLAS, HOUSTON, AUSTIN, EVEN. IT'S, UH, BEAR COUNTY COUNTY FALLS VERY, VERY SHORT AND THEY'RE PULLING THAT UP. I'M GONNA GO AHEAD AND SEE IF WE HAVE ANY, UM, COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS FROM THE COMMITTEE. SURE, ABSOLUTELY. LAUREN, CAN YOU PULL UP THE CODE THAT THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT, THE 35 GO AHEAD. GO AHEAD, ASHLEY. SORRY, I APOLOGIZE IF I'M CONFUSED. UM, MR. LITTLEFIELD, BUT CAN YOU HELP ME UNDERSTAND, IS THE GOAL HERE TO ALLOW FOR MORE TRANSITIONAL HOUSING IN MORE TRADITIONAL RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOODS, BUT ON A SMALLER SCALE? I THINK THAT'S THE BIGGEST, THAT'S THE BIGGEST THING. WHAT, WHAT MY APPROACH WAS IS TO TRY TO, UH, DEVELOP THIS KIND OF A SUB-CATEGORY TO THE CURRENT TRANSITIONAL HOUSING I CALL QUALIFIED TRANSITIONAL HOUSING THAT HAS ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS AND IS, UH, HOPEFULLY BETTER STRUCTURE AND IT WOULD BE ACCOMP ACCOMPANIED BY A, UH, MODIFICATION TO THE ZONING MATRIX. SO BASICALLY WOULD ALLOW THESE TO BE DEVELOPED IN RESIDENTIAL HOUSING AREAS. SO WITH THE SPECIAL, WELL, I'M NOT SURE IF I UNDERSTAND SPECIAL. TO ME, THE SPECIAL JUST KIND OF MEANT LIKE IT GETS EXTRA SCRUTINY. I'M NOT SURE IF THAT'S REALLY WHAT IT MEANS OR NOT. SO, SO TWO THINGS. THE S THE S WOULD REQUIRE THAT IT GO THROUGH A REZONING PROCESS TO HAVE CITY COUNCIL GRANTED THAT SPECIFIC USE AUTHORIZATION. MY, MY SECOND QUESTION THAT I WANTED TO CLARIFY IS, FOR THESE QUALIFIED TRANSITIONAL HOMES, IS IT YOUR INTENT TO HAVE EVERYTHING LISTED HERE IN BLUE IN ADDITION TO ALL OF THE REGULATIONS CURRENTLY IMPOSED UPON TRADITIONAL TRANSITIONAL HOUSING? YEAH. YEAH. IT'LL BE, OR IS THIS SUBSET? OKAY, SO IT'LL THE SAME RE LIKE CAN'T BE WITHIN A THOUSAND FEET OF CHURCHES AND SCHOOLS AND PARKS AND, UH, THE REQUIREMENT FOR SUPERVISION AND, AND ALL THE REQUIREMENTS THAT ARE CURRENTLY IN 35 90, THIS IS JUST A SUBCATEGORY. OKAY. THEN I, I WOULD, IF THAT'S THE INTENT, I WOULD RECOMMEND THAT WE START SUBSECTION K WITH, IN ADDITION TO ALL REGULATIONS CODIFIED ABOVE. YEAH. AND THEN CARRY ON WITH THE REST. YEP. THIS IS BIANCA TO COMMENT. GO AHEAD, BIANCA. SO IN THIS PARTICULAR INSTANCE, WHEN YOU WANNA BRING THIS INTO AN ESTABLISHED NEIGHBORHOOD, THE NEIGHBORHOOD WOULD RECEIVE A ZONING APPLICATION AND IF THEY HAD CONCERN ABOUT IT, THEY WOULD HAVE TO COME AND RAISE THEIR CONCERN. IN ADDITION TO THIS, USE WHAT IS ALREADY PERMITTED BY RIGHT. WITHOUT GETTING A SPECIFIC USE, WITHOUT A ZONING THAT COMES INTO A NEIGHBORHOOD TODAY ARE SOBER HOMES AND ADULT LIVING SITUATIONS. AS SOMEONE WHO LIVES THREE DOORS DOWN FROM TWO SOBER HOMES, TWO OF THEM ADJACENT TO EACH OTHER. AND THE PROBLEMS THAT WE HAVE HAD, AND THESE ARE NOT ZONING CASES WHERE RESIDENTS CAN COME AND VOICE THEIR OPPOSITION. WE HAVE TO LIVE WITH THIS. THE SAME WITH THE ADULT LIVING HOMES THAT ARE ALLOWED UP TO SIX OCCUPANTS PER RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURE. THIS PUTTING THIS BURDEN ON NEIGHBORHOODS SAYING [02:15:01] THAT IT IS APPROPRIATE, IN MY OPINION, I ENTER THE MOST STRONGEST OBJECTION TO THIS REQUEST BECAUSE OF WHAT ALREADY EXISTS BY RIGHT. THAT COMES INTO NEIGHBORHOODS TODAY. I, AND, AND MY DECISION, AND MY OPINION ON THIS COMES FROM EXPERIENCE, COMES FROM LIVING WITH THE U D C AS IT'S WRITTEN TODAY AND HOW IT'S IMPACTING NEIGHBORHOODS. YOU'RE GONNA PUT A BURDEN ON A NEIGHBORHOOD TO COME OUT AND CHALLENGE THIS EVERY TIME AT CITY COUNCIL. AND ITS ZONING COMMISSIONS. WE KNOW HOW THE PRESSURES THEY ALREADY FEEL WITH INFILL DEVELOPMENT. THIS IS JUST TAKING A STANDARD HOME AND CHANGING THE USE. AND WHAT'S MOST IMPORTANT IS THAT WHEN YOU TALK ABOUT A HOME THAT HAS RESTRICTIONS, I'LL TELL YOU THE TWO SOBER HOMES DOWN FOR ME AT ALL TIMES, YOU CAN SEE SOMEBODY CHAIN SMOKING OUT ON THE PORCH. YOU CAN SEE THEM PACING OUR ALLEYS. YOU CAN SEE THEM VIOLATING THE RULES. IT IS HAS BECOME INCUMBENT ON THE COMMUNITY TO HOLD THESE PEOPLE ACCOUNTABLE TO THEIR OPERATIONS. AND THESE ARE THINGS THAT ARE BY, RIGHT? THESE ARE NOT THINGS THAT THEY HAVE TO COME AND TALK ABOUT WITH EACH ZONING INFILL APPLICATION. FOR THAT REASON, I MOTION FOR DENIAL ON THIS BECAUSE IT IS, IT IS DEGRADING A NEIGHBORHOOD. SECOND. WELL, LEMME JUST MAKE ONE COMMENT. UH, THE OXFORD HOUSES AND TRANSITIONAL HOUSES ARE, ARE, UH, ARE TWO DIFFERENT CATEGORIES. I'M SURE YOU'RE VERY WELL AWARE THE OXFORD HOUSES ARE PROTECTED BY, UH, FREE HOUSING REGULATIONS. UH, AND THESE, THESE ARE NOT. SO THERE'S REALLY ADDITIONAL RESTRICTIONS THAT WOULD BE BE REQUIRED FOR THESE, UH, TRANSITIONAL HOUSES. AND I'M NOT SAYING I HEAR EXACTLY WHERE YOU'RE COMING FROM IN THE, IF YOU'VE BEEN AROUND THESE KIND OF THINGS. YOU'VE HEARD THE TERM NIMBY NOT IN MY BACKYARD. NOBODY WANTS TO LIVE NEXT DOOR TO A HOUSE FULL OF FELONS. I MEAN, THEY DON'T, BUT YOU HAVE TO WEIGH THAT TO THE, UH, ADVANTAGE TO THE COMMUNITY. I MEAN, WHAT ARE THESE GUYS? THE OVERALL, THE, THE GOAL IS TO REDUCE RECIDIVISM AND, UH, PROVIDING ADEQUATE HOUSING. THERE'S, THERE'S LOTS OF REPORTS OUT THERE THAT CAN SHOW YOU THE, THE, UH, IMPORTANCE OF HOUSING AND, AND SO FORTH ON, UH, REDUCING RECIDIVISM. NO, APPRECIATE YOUR COMMENTS. MY BIGGEST CONCERN IS IN THE MIDDLE OF A RESIDENTIAL BLOCK, WHICH IS WHERE THESE COULD COME. YEAH. AND THIS IS WHERE THEY COULD APPLY FOR THEM. AND SO FOR THAT REASON, THAT'S WHY I MADE MY MOTION AND THANK YOU FOR, I MEAN, I, I AGREE WITH YOU, BUT MM-HMM. IN THE MIDDLE OF A NEIGHBORHOOD. NO, THANK YOU. THAT I GUESS MY WHOLE, AGAIN, MY COMMENT WOULD BE, I, I DON'T THINK THAT SOME OF THESE, I THINK THIS IS, I DON'T WANNA SAY IT'S FEAR-BASED, BUT IT, IT KIND OF IS. AND IT'S, IT'S NOT REALLY DATA BASED, THESE KIND OF FEARS. SO GOING FORWARD, I WOULD SAY, UH, I THINK THERE'S AN OPPORTUNITY TO GATHER MORE DATA ON THIS. GO ASK SOME OF THESE COMMUNITIES THAT HAVE A LOT OF THESE IN PLACE. WHAT KIND OF PROBLEM YOU GUYS HAVING PROBLEMS WITH THESE HOUSES AND CHAIR, IF I MAY JUST KIND OF WANNA CLARIFY, WHAT OUR CODE ALLOWS FOR TODAY IS WE CURRENTLY HAVE A, HAVE A CLASSIFICATION OF TRANSITIONAL HOME, RIGHT? UH, WE ALSO HAVE THOSE USES THAT ARE, UH, YOU HAVE TO GO THROUGH A SPECIFIC USE AUTHORIZATION, A REZONING PROCESS IN ORDER TO REZONE PROPERTY THAT'S ZONED RMS OR MFS, AS WELL AS SOME COMMERCIAL DISTRICTS. YOU STILL HAVE TO GO THROUGH A REZONING. YOU COULD CONDITION IT DOWN INTO SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS AS WELL. SO YOU CAN REZONE ANY PROPERTY THAT'S ZONED RESIDENTIAL, UH, FOR A TRANSITIONAL HOME. WE HAVE A BASIC, UH, GENERAL DEFINITION OF TRANSITIONAL HOME IN OUR CODE. UH, BASICALLY IT'S, IT'S, IT'S LIKE A HALFWAY HOUSE OR IT, IT'S A PAROLE HOUSE. UM, AND WE DO HAVE SUPPLEMENTAL USE REGULATIONS THAT CURRENTLY EXIST TODAY. SO THERE WE DO HAVE A USE. UM, IT'S A GENERAL USE AND IT HAS TO GO THROUGH A REZONING PROCESS. SO IT'S NOT THAT THESE USES DON'T EXIST IN OUR CODE THEY DO TODAY. UM, IT, IT'S JUST THAT YOU HAVE TO GO THROUGH A REZONING PROCESS. SO I WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT THAT WAS CLEAR FOR YOU, SIR, AS WELL AS THE AS, AS WELL AS THE COMMITTEE. I DON'T KNOW THE NUMBERS AND MAYBE YOU GUYS DO OF WHAT, UH, AMOUNT OF THE, YOU KNOW, PROPERTY IN BEXAR COUNTY IS ZONED RESIDENTIAL VERSUS SOME OF THESE OTHER ONES. I TRIED TO GET A BIG MAP AND START DRAWING IT OUT AND IT LOOKED TO ME LIKE THE, I MEAN, VAST MAJORITY OF ALL THE, UH, EVERYTHING IS ZONED RESIDENTIAL. SO WITH, YOU KNOW, ELIMINATING THAT AND THEN YOU START DRAWING THOUSAND FOOT CIRCLES AROUND EVERY PARK AND EVERY SCHOOL. I MEAN, THERE'S JUST NOT MADAM CHAIR YOU MISSED. I BELIEVE WE HAVE A MOTION ON THE TABLE. THANK YOU, MELISSA. WE HAVE A MOTION FOR DENIAL FROM BIANCA AND A SECOND FROM KEN. UM, ANY ADDITIONAL COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS FROM THE COMMITTEE? I HAVE A COMMENT. YES, GO AHEAD. UH, COULD WE SEE THE TABLE? I THINK TO YOUR POINT, LOOKING AT DIFFERENT CASE STUDIES IN THE DIFFERENT PARTS OF THE WORLD AND OF THE NATION AND WHERE YOU SAW THAT THESE PROJECTS ARE AC ACT ACTUALLY BEING IMPLEMENTED WOULD BE A GOOD START. AND THEN SEEING THERE'S A SLEW OF DIFFERENT, UM, CRITERIA YOU HAVE HERE, MF 18, [02:20:01] MF 25, AND I'M JUST CURIOUS WHICH ONES WOULD BE MOST EFFECTIVE THAT ARE HAPPENING IN TEXAS AND ALL OVER THE NATION. SO, UH, I'M OPPOSED TO THIS JUST AS BIANCA IS, BUT UM, IN THE FUTURE I SEE THE NEED FOR THIS TYPE OF, UH, CONCEPT. JUST HOW CAN WE CREATE STRONGER EVIDENCE FOR WHAT WILL WORK, WHAT OUTCOMES ARE BEING DRIVEN, UM, WHERE ARE THEY MOST APPLICABLE AT, IN, IN THEIR LOCATION? IS THAT GONNA BE IN R FOUR MF 50? A LITTLE BIT MORE INSIGHT, JUST LIKE YOU SAID. OKAY, THANK YOU. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, PLEASE SAY AYE. AYE. AYE. ANY OPPOSED? ALRIGHT, MOTION FOR DENIAL PASSES. UM, I'M MOVING ON TO ITEM NUMBER 12 AMENDMENT 26 DASH ONE. AND DID Y'ALL HAVE THAT FIRST REVISION SLIDE? OKAY. OKAY. ALRIGHT. HELLO, COMMITTEE MEMBERS. MY NAME IS DT COLE. I LIVE AT 1 0 5 RENO IN THE BACK PART OF GOVERNMENT HILL BY THE WALTER STREET ENTRANCE. I'M A PROUD D TWO RESIDENT AND A PROUD D 10 SMALL BUSINESS OWNER. I'M HERE TODAY TO SPEAK, IS THE APPLICANT FOR AMENDMENT NUMBER 26 DASH ONE. I LEARNED THROUGH A FIGHT TO SAVE OUR CORNER OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD THAT ANY GAS STATION CAN BE BUILT RIGHT ACROSS THE STREET OR NEXT DOOR WITH NO DISTANCE REQUIREMENT, BE IT FOUR PUMPS, 16 PUMPS, OR 32 PUMPS. I SAW FIRSTHAND HOW CLOSE YOU CAN COME TO HARMFUL DEVELOPMENT ON YOUR SLEEPY DEAD END RESIDENTIAL STREET, HOW A MEGA GAS STATION DEVELOPMENT MIGHT DEVALUE THE HOME YOU THOUGHT YOU WOULD LIVE IN THE REST OF YOUR LIFE. HOW NEGATIVE THE IMPACT OF A GAS STATION. THAT'S TOO INTENSE. ABUTTING HOMES, FRONT YARDS, BACKYARDS, PLAYGROUNDS, BASKETBALL COURTS CAN DESTROY QUALITY OF LIFE AND CAUSE NEIGHBORS TO FEEL UNSAFE, UNHEALTHY, AND WORRY ABOUT THEIR HOMESTEADS. THERE ARE HUNDREDS OF OLDER MULTI-GENERATIONAL WORKING CLASS NEIGHBORHOODS ALL OVER THE CITY WITH SMALL HOUSES ON SMALL STREETS JUST LIKE MINE. GAS STATIONS WERE ONCE FAR LESS INTENSE USES TODAY THEY OPERATE 24 HOURS, TEND TO LOCATE ON LARGER SITES, CONTAINING AN INCREASED NUMBER OF GAS PUMPS, CONVENIENCE STORES, CAR WASHES, RETAIL UNITS, AND DRIVE-THROUGH SERVICES, WHICH RESULT IN GETTING MORE VEHICLES IN AND OUT. THERE'S NO WAY TO JUSTIFY THESE HIGH INTENSITY MEGA GAS STATIONS THAT DRAW SCORES OF CARS PER HOUR AS NEIGHBORHOOD FRIENDLY TO RESIDENCES. THAT'S MY SECOND SLIDE. YEP. THIS IS AN INFO ON, UH, MEGA GAS STATIONS. THIS EXAMPLE FEATURES 32 PUMPS OR FUELING POSITIONS AT ANY GIVEN TIME, AND IT CAN ACCOMMODATE THE FUELING OF 32 VEHICLES. FOR A STATION THIS SIZE, THERE WOULD BE THREE UNDERGROUND STORAGE TANKS HOLDING APPROXIMATELY 40,000 GALLONS OF LIQUID FUEL EACH FOR A TOTAL OF A HUNDRED AND TWENTY THREE TWENTY GALLONS OF GAS TO EQUALIZE PRESSURES. FUEL TANKS MUST VENT ROUTINE FUEL VAPOR RELEASES OCCUR 24 7 FROM THESE VENT PIPE VENT PIPES, WHICH ARE OFTEN CONCEALED IN THE VERTICAL SUPPORTS OF THE OVERHEAD CANOPY. EXPOSURE TO ELEVATED BENZENE LEVELS OF LIVING NEAR A GAS STATION IS A HEALTH AND SAFETY RISK. AS WE LEARNED WITH C O V I D, IT IS THE MOST VULNERABLE THAT NEED TO BE PROTECTED. URBAN NEIGHBORS ARE VULNERABLE. URBAN NEIGHBORS GENERALLY DO NOT LIVE IN GATED COMMUNITIES. URBAN NEIGHBORS GENERALLY ARE NOT PROTECTED BY H O A RESTRICTIVE COVENANTS. THEIR NEIGHBORHOODS AT RISK OF LOWER COST VACANT PROPERTY BEING CONVERTED FOR COMMERCIAL USE. URBAN NEIGHBORHOODS ARE OFTEN IN DENSER CLUSTERS WITH CLOSE LOT LINES. IN 80 PLUS YEAR OLD HOMES, OFTEN LACKING ADEQUATE INSULATION. OLDER LEGACY NEIGHBORHOODS ARE OFTEN THE LEAST CAPABLE OF OPPOSING THIS TYPE OF DEVELOPMENT DUE TO, DUE TO A SOPHISTICATED CITY SYSTEM THAT DOES NOT FAVOR THEIR INVOLVEMENT. AND WHILE THIS STARTED AS A WAY TO OFFER APPROPRIATE PROTECTIONS FOR OLDER, MARGINALIZED NEIGHBORHOODS WHOSE LAND VALUES WOULD APPEAR AS A GOOD DEAL TO GAS STATION DEVELOPERS, BECAUSE THE SCALE AND MONETIZATION OF THESE PROJECTS IS SO GREAT, I SINCE LEARNED FROM OTHERS THAT OUR ENTIRE URBAN CORE AND BEYOND IS UNDER THREAT OF MEGA GAS STATIONS ABUTTING THEIR PROPERTY AND NEIGHBORHOODS. SO WHETHER YOU'RE A LIFELONG HOMEOWNER OVER IN THE DEL CREST NEIGHBORHOOD OFF OF RIGSBY, YOU DID REDID A VICTORIAN HOME IN LAVACCA, OR FOUND YOUR FOREVER HOME ON A SMALL DEAD END STREET, YOU HAVE THE PEACE OF MIND KNOWING THAT YOUR FAMILY, YOUR FAMILY'S WELLBEING, YOUR INVESTMENT, YOUR LIFESTYLE, YOUR NEIGHBORS AND YOUR NEIGHBORHOOD HAS A HEALTHY CUSHION OF SPACE FROM THE INTENSITY OF A GAS STATION IN YOUR NEIGHBORHOOD. NEIGHBORHOODS AND RESIDENTIAL [02:25:01] HOMES NEED TO BE SEPARATED FROM GAS STATIONS. ZONING MIGHT ALREADY BE THERE OR MIGHT BE NEW, IT DOESN'T MATTER. THE GASOLINE FILLING STATIONS NEED TO BE AWAY FROM SCHOOLS AND HOMES WHEN THE CITY PERMITS A NEW GAS STATION. DURING OUR FIGHT, I LEARNED ABOUT THE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE. IT WAS SUGGESTED BY A COMMISSIONER AND A COUNCIL OFFICE THAT THE U D C CODE COMES UP FOR AMENDMENTS. AND I WAS ENCOURAGED TO PURSUE CHANGES REGARDING NEW GAS STATIONS AND THEIR PROXIMITY TO EXISTING HOME SCHOOLS AND NEIGHBORHOODS. I INITIALLY PUT THIS AMENDMENT TOGETHER BY BORROWING FROM OTHER CODES ABOUT ABOVEGROUND STORAGE TANKS AND OTHER SECTIONS OF SAN ANTONIO CODE THAT REQUIRE DISTANCES. I'VE TRIED TO FURTHER SIMPLIFY IT HERE TODAY. DO YOU HAVE MY OTHER, THE, UM, THE REVISED, IT'S ONE BEFORE THAT. SO I'VE TRIED TO SIMPLIFY IT HERE TODAY. THE DISTANCE PROPOSED IS 100 FEET FROM SMALLER GAS STATIONS THAT ARE UNDER 50,000 GALLONS OF UNDERGROUND FUEL TANK STORAGE AND 200 FEET FOR GAS STATIONS OVER 50,000 GALLONS UNDERGROUND FUEL TANK STORAGE IN WHATEVER WAY THAT DISTANCE CAN BE ACCOMPLISHED. IT WILL SERVE THE PURPOSE. IT CAN BE ON THE GAS STATION PROPERTY OR PROPERTY IN BETWEEN. IT DOESN'T MATTER. I'VE REVISED IT BASED ON WHAT I HEARD AT PLANNING COMMISSION AND OTHERS THAT GAVE ME FEEDBACK FROM THE TECHNICAL COMMITTEE. I HOPE TO HEAR HOW I CAN MAKE THIS NEEDED CHANGE WORK AND ACCOMPLISH MY GOAL TO PROTECT THE MANY HOMES AND SCHOOLS NEXT TO COMMERCIAL ZONING THAT ALREADY CAN ALLOW FOR A GAS STATION. FORGIVE ME IF THIS IS NOT AS TECHNICAL AS IT COULD BE. I'M JUST A NORMAL CITIZEN AND HOMEOWNER, AND I LIKE TO THINK A GOOD NEIGHBOR PRESENTING A SIMPLE SOLUTION TO THIS PROBLEM, WANTING THE CITY TO BE A GOOD CUSTODIAN, PROTECTING, ENHANCING THE CHARACTER, QUALITY AND EQUITY OF THE DISTRICTS AND NEIGHBORHOODS ALL OVER THE CITY. I SINCERELY THANK YOU FOR YOUR SERVICE IN YOUR CONSIDERATION. OKAY, SO IT'S THIS ONE. JUST JUST FOR OUR CLARIFICATION, THIS AMENDMENT IS PRETTY SIMILAR TO AMENDMENT 16 DASH SEVEN, UH, WHICH WAS SUBMITTED BY TIER ONE NEIGHBORHOOD COALITION, UH, SPECIFICALLY STEVE VERTE. WE HAD MET, UH, SEVERAL TIMES WITH THAT GROUP, UH, ON SOME AMENDED LANGUAGE. AND WHAT'S ON THE SCREEN NOW IS KIND OF ANOTHER ITERATION OR ANOTHER PROPOSAL. SO I, WERE WERE WE OH YEAH, THIS IS, WE'RE WE'RE BOTH ORGANIZATIONS. YOU AND, AND STEVE MOVING FORWARD WITH BOTH AMENDMENTS AND WE'RE GONNA TRY TO FIGURE OUT WHICH IS BEST HERE AT TAC OR WHAT WAS THE INTENTION? WELL, MY ORGANIZATION OF ONE ME, UH, IS MOVING FORWARD THIS ROBERT HANLEY LOGAN, ARE YOU SAYING WHAT WAS ORIGINALLY SENT IN THE PACKAGE LAST WEEK? WHAT'S ON THE SCREEN IS THE AMENDED AND THIS IS WHAT'S BEING PROPOSED FOR US TO VOTE ON. YEAH, SO AGENDA ITEMS 10 AND 12 HAVE BOTH BEEN AMENDED SINCE THE PACKET WAS FINALIZED. SO WE NEED TO TAKE A LOOK AT BOTH THOSE AMENDMENTS SIDE BY SIDE SO THAT THE ATTACK CAN HOLISTICALLY EXAMINE, UH, WHICH PATH FORWARD IS THE MOST APPROPRIATE. AND LOGAN, IS THE APPLICANT COMFORTABLE WITH WHAT IS ON THE SCREEN CURRENTLY THAT HAS BEEN AMENDED? SO WHAT SHE, SHE HAS AMEND THAT, THAT'S HER PROPOSAL. OKAY, THANK YOU. THAT IS, YES, THE APPLICANT HAS RECOMMENDED THESE CHANGES. CAN, I'M JUST GONNA MAKE A COMMENT. THIS IS, THIS IS DIFFICULT FOR, UM, I DON'T, I'M SPEAKING FOR MYSELF, NOT THE THE COMMISSION OR THE COMMITTEE, BUT WHEN WE SEE THESE CHANGES AT THE D AND UM, IT'S VERY DIFFICULT FOR US TO, I THINK, OPINE ON CHANGES THAT WE HAVEN'T VETTED OR SEEN. AND WE'VE, WHEN WE REVIEWING THESE, UM, AS A PACKET AND WE'RE TRYING TO GET UP TO SPEED ON WHERE THEY ARE IN THE CODE AND LOOK AT ALL THE DEFINITIONS TO HAVE SOMETHING COME TO US ON THE FLY WITH CHANGES, UM, WOULD IT BE POSSIBLE TO GET THESE TWO PUSHED BACK? YOU GUYS CAN WORK TOGETHER, COME TO US WITH A UNIFIED AMENDMENT THAT IS AGREEABLE TO BOTH PARTIES AND SOMETHING THAT'S BEEN WORKED OUT WITH STAFF. SORRY, MADAM CHAIR. BUT AREN'T ALL THE 16 SERIES ONE'S BASICALLY GONNA BE AMENDED HERE? YES. ON THE SCREEN TODAY, AND THEY FINALIZED THEIR LANGUAGE WITH STAFF, BUT THEY STATED THAT THEY HAD TO NOTICE THE ORIGINAL AMENDMENT THAT WAS SUBMITTED, NOT THE AMENDED AMENDED VERSION WHEN THEY NOTICED IT FOR TODAY'S HEARING. SO IT'S KIND OF, IT, IT MAY BE A PROCESS THING THAT WE COULD CLARIFY IN THE FUTURE, BUT THEY WORKED VERY HARD WITH STAFF TO GET TO WHERE THEY'RE AT TODAY. SO. WELL, I MEAN, I THINK JULIA'S JUST SAYING IT'S REALLY HARD. HOW ARE WE SUPPOSED TO, ON AN ITEM THAT WE SEE ON THE SCREEN AND IS ULTIMATELY GONNA BE 10 OR 12 ITEMS LIKE THAT TODAY PROCESS AND DOUBLE CHECK AND SEE WITHOUT NOTICE? MY CONCERN IS NOW TO KICK BACK ALL OF THESE THAT APPLY. WE'RE ADDING A MEETING BECAUSE IT'S TWO 30, THE INCHES DIMINISH WORK. I [02:30:01] I GET THAT THEY WORKED HARD AND I APPRECIATE THAT THEY WORK WITH STAFF TO COME UP WITH THESE, YOU KNOW, AMENDED LANGUAGES. UM, IT'S JUST, IT'S, IT'S DIFFICULT. AND SO WE, WE ARE, I DON'T EVEN THINK HALFWAY THROUGH THE AGENDA AND WE HAVE SO MANY MORE THAT WE'RE GONNA BE REVIEWING FOR THE VERY FIRST TIME TODAY. SO IS THERE SOMETHING THAT STAFF CAN RECOMMEND FOR US FOR THIS I THESE TWO ITEMS AND PERHAPS THE 16 ITEMS? I, I THINK THAT FOR THE MAJORITY OF THOSE ITEMS WITH AMENDED LANGUAGE, I THINK NONE OF THEM CHANGE THE INTENT OF WHAT WAS PROPOSED. IT TWEAKS SOME WORDS, TWEAKS, SOME, YOU KNOW, THE SENTENCE HERE, BUT WE'RE NOT LOOKING AT HOLISTIC REWRITES OF WHAT WAS INITIALLY SUBMITTED. THE, THE CONFUSION WITH THIS PARTICULAR AMENDMENT, AND THE ONE THAT IS ALMOST, I ALMOST IDENTICAL TO IT, IS THAT WE HAVE TWO DIFFERENT PROPOSALS ON HOW TO REGULATE THE SAME THING. SO WHAT I WAS SAYING WAS, IS WE REALLY NEED TO PULL UP BOTH AT THE SAME TIME, UH, SO THAT THE TAC CAN TAKE A LOOK AT BOTH APPROACHES TO DETERMINE WHICH, IF ANY, IS THE MOST APPROPRIATE. AND JUST TO CLARIFY THE AMENDMENT THAT IS BEFORE YOU STAFF HAS NOT EVALUATED THIS AMENDMENT? THAT'S CORRECT. OKAY. BUT STAFF HAS EVALUATED THE OTHER AMENDMENT, CORRECT? THE OTHER, THE OTHERS, YES. THIS IS THE ONLY AMENDMENT BEFORE THE TAC TODAY THAT STAFF HAS NOT HAD AN OPPORTUNITY TO REVIEW. SO AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 12, WHICH IS SIM OR I'M SORRY, AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 10, WHICH IS SIMILAR TO THIS ONE, STAFF HAS EVALUATED. THAT'S CORRECT, YES. AND MS. COLE, DID YOU HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO MEET WITH STAFF ABOUT YOUR AMENDMENT? I DID NOT. AND TO HER DEFENSE, I DON'T, I DON'T KNOW MS. COLE, BUT SHE ALSO HAS NOT HAD AN OPPORTUNITY TO REVIEW MR. VERTI OR MEET WITH HIM ON HIS AMENDMENTS. WE, WE HAD AN OPPORTUNITY TO MEET ON THE OTHERS. WE'VE BEEN MEETING FOR SEVERAL WEEKS, WE RECEIVED THIS AMENDMENT. MR, I UNDERSTAND THAT MS. MS. COLE, I'M SAYING MS. COLE HASN'T, SHE HASN'T BEEN HAD THAT SAME OPPORTUNITY. WELL, AND I JUST WANTED TO, TO, AND I TOTALLY UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU'RE COMING FROM AND I UNDERSTAND THAT WHAT, WHAT'S BEFORE Y'ALL, I REALLY HOPE THAT THIS WOULD SIMPLIFY IT AND REALLY NARROW IT DOWN. SO I WAS REAL, AND I KNOW THAT IF YOU, IF YOU SEE IT, IT'S GOT LIKE LOTS OF RED LINES BECAUSE WE WERE SUPPOSED TO LEAVE WHAT THE ORIGINAL WAS. BUT THE, THE NITTY GRITTY IS THAT IT JUST GOES TO HAVING, YOU KNOW, A HUNDRED FEET AND THEN AS OPPOSED TO 200 FEET. AND THAT'S ALL BASED ON, UM, THE, THE TANK CAPACITY MADAM CHAIR. SO I TRIED TO MAKE IT SIMPLER AND JUST EASIER. YEAH. MADAM CHAIR, I SUGGEST THAT WE PAUSE THIS ONE, PULL UP ITEM 10 BECAUSE ITEM 10 REALLY IS JUST TREATING A GAS STATION EXACTLY LIKE A HEADSHOT HEAD SHOP. AND SO WE MAY BE ABLE TO, IN SEEING IT, DECIDE WHICH ONE WE WANTED TO DISCUSS IN DEPTH. YEAH. AND I PLAN TO PULL UP THAT ONE NEXT. UM, I'M SEEING HER AMENDMENT MICROPHONES ARE REALLY ANNOYING. UM, . UM, SO YEAH, IF WE CAN JUST PULL 'EM BOTH UP THAT WAY WE CAN SEE, UH, 16 DASH SEVEN SIDE BY SIDE. I GUESS. I DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S POSSIBLE ON THE SCREEN. GO AHEAD, GO AHEAD. UM, SINCE THESE ARE SUPPLEMENTAL USE REGULATIONS, THAT DOESN'T CREATE ANY NONCONFORMING USES FOR OTHER EXISTING GAS. IT MIGHT, I MEAN, 'CAUSE WHAT THEY'RE ARE INTRODUCING IS A DISTANCE SEPARATION TO BASE, UH, BASED ON THE TANK CAPACITY, BUT WE'RE NOT CHANGING THE ZONING. SO THESE JUST CAME INTO EFFECT. I'M ASKING YOUR CITY ATTORNEY BECAUSE WE HAD THIS PROBLEM BEFORE AND WE'VE HAD ANOTHER GAS STATION ITEM IN THE FIRST MEETING A LONG, LONG TIME AGO, REMEMBER? MM-HMM. , UM, WELL, I'M ASKING THAT QUESTION. CHANGING SUPPLEMENTAL USE REGULATIONS, DOES IT CREATE A NON-CONFORMING USE FOR THOSE EXISTING GAS STATIONS? YES. YES, IT CAN. EITHER IT DOES OR IT DOES. IT WILL. IF, IF A GAS STATION CURRENTLY TODAY IS IN C TWO WITHOUT AN SS AND IT IS AS IT IS WITHIN, LET'S SAY A COUNCIL ADOPTS A DISTANCE SEPARATION OF 300 FEET, IT DOESN'T HAVE AN SS IT WILL BECOME NON-CONFORMING. OKAY. OKAY. SO WHO CAN WALK US THROUGH? I'M 16 DASH SEVEN STEVE, MR. MERCY HERE. OKAY. AND DID YOU HAVE MY SLIDES? UH, GOOD AFTERNOON TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE. THANK YOU FOR [02:35:01] BEING HERE TODAY TO HEAR THESE AMENDMENTS. MY NAME IS STEVE VERSTEEG, 1 0 5 RENO STREET. I'M A MEMBER OF THE TIER ONE NEIGHBORHOOD COALITION STEERING COMMITTEE AND ON THE T ONE N C U D C COMMITTEE. SO U D C AMENDMENT 16 DASH SEVEN IS A TIER ONE NEIGHBORHOOD COALITION SUBMITTED AMENDMENT PROPOSAL ON DISTANCING GAS STATIONS FROM RESIDENTIAL ZONED PROPERTY, AS WELL AS DIS DISTANCING FROM PUBLIC USES. ALSO FOUND IN RESIDENTIAL ZONING LIKE SCHOOLS AND CHURCHES. SO, UM, THERE HAVE BEEN, UH, MULTIPLE CASES IN THE LAST COUPLE YEARS FOR REZONING TO GASOLINE STATION USES ADJACENT TO SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL. AND I'M TALKING, I'M TALKING ABOUT, THAT'S JUST IN MY DISTRICT. I I'M SURE THERE HAVE BEEN OTHERS IN THE CITY. REZONINGS THOUGH ARE ONLY A PORTION OF THE PROPERTIES WHERE FAMILIES AND NEIGHBORS WILL FIND THAT A GAS STATION CAN BE BUILT NEXT TO THE HOMES AND ADJACENT TO PROPERTY, UM, NEXT TO LAVACCA. AND ALREADY C TWO ZONE PROPERTY WAS PLANNED TO BE A GAS STATION AND FEEDBACK FROM NEIGHBORS STOPPED IT. ALL NEIGHBORHOODS DO NOT HAVE A STRONG ASSOCIATION FULL OF PROFESSIONALS WHO HAVE ACCESS TO AND CONTACT WITH DEVELOPERS. UM, SO THIS WAS THAT FIRST. YEAH, THAT FIRST SLIDE IS JUST THE USES THAT ARE CURRENTLY IN THE TABLE. UM, THERE'S THE SERVICE GASOLINE WITH VARIOUS MODIFICATIONS OF THAT, AND THEN THERE'S OTHER USES WITH GASOLINE. SO THAT'S, THAT'S HOW THOSE APPEAR IN THE TABLE RIGHT NOW. UM, YEAH, I GO TO SLIDE TWO. THANKS. UH, SO, UH, ZONING COMMISSION FOUND IT PRUDENT TO RESTRICT GAS STATION USES TO SPECIFIC USE IN C TWO C TWO IS UBIQUITOUS THROUGHOUT THE CITY. GAS STATIONS ARE MORE INTENSE THAN THEY WERE WHEN THESE DISTRICTS WERE ESTABLISHED. UH, TO, UH, GAS STATIONS ARE OPEN 24 7, 365, SO HOURS, 24 HOURS A DAY OF TRAFFIC. GAS STATIONS, ALMOST MORE THAN ANY OTHER BUSINESSES REQUIRE VEHICULAR, NOT PEDESTRIAN TRAFFIC 24 HOURS A DAY, YOU HAVE BRIGHT LIGHTS ON BIG, LARGE, BIG CANOPIES THAT ALL NEW GAS STATIONS HAVE OVER THEIR PUMPS. 24 HOURS A DAY, YOU HAVE TANKERS DELIVERING FUEL 24 HOURS A DAY, FUMES VENT FROM TANKS AS WELL AS FUMES FROM REFUELING AND FUMES FROM THE TRAFFIC. UM, SLIDE THREE PLEASE. SO ALL THIS TRAFFIC AND BUSINESS IS, IS GREAT FOR THE ECONOMY. HOWEVER, TRAFFIC ATTRACTS UNWANTED ACTIVITIES AS WELL. CRIME AT, AT GAS STATIONS IS DOCUMENTED BY THE GOVERNMENT AS A LOCATION WHERE IT HAPPENED. SO, I MEAN, I, I ASSUME, UM, THAT IT WAS SIMILAR REASONS THAT THIS, UH, 35 DASH 3 77 SECTION ON HEAD SHOPS WAS CREATED IN THE FIRST PLACE. UM, SLIDE FOUR. UM, SO C TWO IS ONLY A PIECE OF THE ISSUE THOUGH. C C THREE AND LIGHT INDUSTRIAL ADJACENT TO RESIDENTIAL IS VERY COMMON IN THIS CITY. UM, SO CAT, UH, I TAKE THE CHALLENGE TO FIND A A C THREE WHERE THEY, THERE'S ROOM TO PUT A, UM, THE, UH, SERVICES THAT YOU MENTIONED EARLIER, BUT, UM, SO, UH, BUT GAS STATIONS CAN BE BUILT THERE AT ANY TIME AND THERE'S NO PROCESS WHATSOEVER FOR NEIGHBORS TO HAVE A SAY. UM, SA 2020 PLANS, UH, BY THE CITY HAVE EVEN WIDER SWATCHES OF COMMERCIAL CORRIDORS CUTTING INTO NEIGHBORHOODS. AND BASED ON THE AMENDMENTS SUBMITTED RECENTLY, THOSE AREAS ARE PLANNED TO BE TO HAVE LIBERAL USE ALLOWANCES. SO THE DIVERSITY ALLOWED, YOU KNOW, UM, IN SAY DOWNTOWN ZONING IS, IS, IS FINE THERE, BUT COMPATIBILITY WITH URBAN NEIGHBORHOODS REQUIRES WELLTH THOUGHT OUT DISTRICTS. AS WITH ANYTHING, UM, IT'S GONNA REQUIRE REGULAR REVIEW AND MODIFICATION TO KEEP THESE USES IS, UM, IN THESE CATEGORIES, UH, PERTINENT TO TODAY. UM, SO SLIDE FIVE, PLEASE. UM, THERE ARE COMPATIBLE COMMERCIAL USES ADJACENT TO RESIDENTIAL GASOLINE IS IS JUST NOT ONE OF THEM ANYMORE. UH, ONE CAN FIND MANY COMPATIBLE USES YOU APPRECIATE HAVING ADJACENT TO A NEIGHBORHOOD LIKE THESE LISTED HERE. UM, FEW AMENDMENTS HAVE GENERATED MORE SUPPORT, UH, AND INTEREST FROM THE TIER ONE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS THAN THIS ISSUE. UM, ENCROACHMENT BY GAS STATION USES IS, UH, IS NOT ALWAYS A SOLUTION, UH, THAT IS NOT ALWAYS PROVIDED A SOLUTION BY ZONING. UM, SO WHEN THE TIER ONE U D C COMMITTEE LOOKED AT DISTANCING USES, THE THOUGHT WAS, WHERE ELSE DID THEY DO THAT? WELL, WE FOUND THIS HEAD SHOP SECTION, UM, HEAD SHOPS OR STORES THAT SELL PAR DRUG FAIR PARAPHERNALIA ARE STILL FOUND READILY AROUND THE CITY. UM, SO THE THOUGHT WAS, WELL, IF THAT'S A WORKING MODEL OF DISTANCING, THEN WE WOULD MODIFY THAT. UM, [02:40:02] AND UN UNFORTUNATELY, AS WE'VE SEEM TO BE HEARING, UH, THE NON-CONFORMING USES MAY NOT HAVE FULLY BEEN ADDRESSED IN THIS METHOD. UM, I DON'T COMPLETELY UNDERSTAND THIS ROADBLOCK. IT, IT WAS SAID RIGHT HERE AT PTAC, THAT ENDING NON-CONFORMING USES IS NOT DICTATED BY THE STATE. THAT IT IS FULLY WITHIN OSA'S RIGHTS TO DETERMINE HOW NON-CONFORMING USES CAN CONTINUE. UM, SECTION 35 7 0 2 SAYS THAT NON-CONFORMING USES CANNOT ENLARGE OR EXTEND, UH, 35 7 0 9 SAYS THAT NON-CONFORMING USES MUST REZONE IF THEY EXPAND. SO THE ARGUMENT HERE TO HERE THAT GAS STATIONS COULD NOT UPDATE THEIR TECHNOLOGY IN TANKS AS A NON-CONFORMING USE DOES NOT SEEM VALID BECAUSE THEY WOULD NOT BE EXPANDING OR EXTENDING. UM, THE 50% OF APPRAISED VALUE EXPENSES IS ONLY MENTIONED IN THE CODE THAT I FOUND UNDER DAMAGE NON-CONFORMING USES. HOWEVER, THAT SEEMS TO BE AN INTERPRETATION THAT'S WIDELY USED IN OTHER SECTIONS. UH, BUT IF THE CITY DEFINED THAT MORE CLEARLY, THAT COULD MITIGATE THIS ROADBLOCK THAT WE SEEM TO HAVE BY TRYING TO UPDATE OUR, IN OUR, YOU KNOW, LISTED USES BASED ON INTENSITY. UM, SO HOW, I MEAN, HOW WILL THE CITY CODE ADAPT GOING FORWARD IF, IF, IF EVERY CHANGE IN ITY AND APPROPRIATE MOVEMENT TO ANOTHER DISTRICT IS BLOCKED BY THIS NON-CONFORMING USE THING? SO AT SOME POINT WE NEED, UH, AT SOME POINT WE'LL NEED TO SAY THAT IF THESE ZONING DISTRICTS ARE GONNA KEEP WORKING, AND THIS IS A TECHNICAL PROBLEM, I MEAN, I THINK A DEEPER VIEW OF THE TERMINATION OF NON-CONFORMING USES WOULD BE VALUABLE FOR ADDRESSING A NEED FOR A CHANGE TO ZONING DISTRICT PERMITTED USES. UM, THIS, THIS WOULD A DEEPER REVIEW AND, AND AN UNDERSTANDING OF HOW THE CITY CAN PROPERLY ADDRESS TERMINATION OF NONCONFORMING USES WOULD REDUCE POTENTIAL DIFFICULTIES IN IMPROVING THE U D C IN MANY WAYS. UM, SLIDE SIX PLEASE. SO ACREAGE WAS DISCUSSED HERE AS A WAY TO SELECTIVELY APPLY THIS EXISTING TO NOT AFFECT EXISTING GAS STATIONS AS MUCH. A METHOD, MORE REPRESENTATIVE OF SIZE AND INTENSITY IS STORAGE TANK CAPACITY. THE UNDERGROUND TANK INFORMATION IS MAINTAINED BY THE STATE AND EASY FOR THE PUBLIC TO GET. LOOKING AT THAT INFORMATION FOR BEXAR COUNTY AND SELECTING 10 GAS STATIONS OF RELATIVELY SMALLER AND LARGER CAPACITIES. UH, TIER ONE THEN FOUND, UH, YOU KNOW, HOW MANY FILLING POSITIONS THOSE HAD. ALMOST EVERY PUMP TODAY HAS TWO SIDES, WHICH IS CALLED A FILLING POSITION ON A VEHICLE. SO WHEN, WHEN YOU TELL THE CASHIER IT'S PUMP THREE, YOU'RE REALLY FILLING POSITION THREE. UM, BUT 30,000 APPEARED, UH, YOU KNOW, SOMEWHERE IN THE MIDDLE THERE, 30,000, WE HEARD 50,000, UM, APPEARS TO BE A GOOD DIVIDING LINE. UH, A THOUSAND FEET WAS NOT REAL RECEIVED. TIER ONE HEARD THAT AND PROPOSED TWO DISTANCES. SO, UH, STOLE THE IDEA OF THE CHART. AND, UH, 300 FEET WAS PROPOSED FOR OVER TH 30,000 GALLONS AND 50 FEET FOR UNDER 30,000 GALLONS. AND THIS IS WHAT STAFF IS SAYING, THEY LOOKED AT, UH, THIS WAS THOUGHT TO BE A WORKABLE DRAFT. UM, MR. , COULD YOU EXPLAIN THE AMENDMENT THAT'S BEF ON THE AGENDA, SO THAT WAY, UM, THE, UH, TAC MEMBERS CAN, UM, START INTO THEIR QUESTIONS. PLEASE. YES. SO, SO YOU'RE GONNA PUT UP THE, UM, YOUR AMENDMENT, YES. RIGHT? YES. SO THIS IS THE AMENDMENT THAT WAS SUBMITTED AND THEN THERE IS A PROPOSED CHANGE TO THAT AMENDMENT CORRECT. AND THAT'S WHAT LAUREN IS PUTTING, COMPARING THAT LANGUAGE. UM, MELISSA, WHAT IS MORE APPROPRIATE? THERE'S TWO GAS STATION AMENDMENTS BEING PROPOSED. ONE GOES TO SECTION 35, 3 77, THE HEAD SHOPS, AND THE OTHER GOES TO 35 3 97, WHICH IS VEHICLE SALES. AND FOR PURPOSES OF THE MUNI CODE, WHERE IS IT APPROPRIATE IF THIS COMMITTEE ACCEPTS A, UH, GASOLINE STATION, UM, UH, ISSUE, UH, WHERE DOES IT NEED TO BE? UH, WHAT I CAN ADDRESS IS, UM, THE AMENDMENT LANGUAGE IN 35 3 77 HAS BEEN EVALUATED BY STAFF. WE DON'T HAVE ANY OPPOSITION TO THAT LANGUAGE. HOWEVER, JUST AS A CAVEAT, THIS IS A POLICY SHIFT FROM WHERE WE, WHAT WE DO TODAY, AND THEREFORE COUNSEL NEED TO BE THE ONE TAKING THAT ACTION. UM, BUT, BUT THERE'S NOTHING TECHNICALLY WRONG WITH THE LANGUAGE. IN OTHER WORDS, WE HAVE REVIEWED IT WITH, UH, TIER [02:45:01] ONE, THE, UM, OTHER AMENDMENT, UM, THAT HAS BEEN SUBMITTED BY, UH, DIT COLE. THAT ONE WE HAVEN'T REVIEWED, UM, WITH HER AND NOR THE AMENDED LANGUAGE THAT HAS BEEN PRESENTED. SO WE DON'T KNOW IF IT'S TECHNICALLY SOUND. OKAY. MELISSA, I, I UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU SAID, BUT IT SEEMS FUNNY TO, TO LINK GAS STATIONS TO HEAD SHOPS, EVEN THOUGH YOU'VE REVIEWED THE LANGUAGE AND YOU TAKE NO EXCEPTIONS TO IT. I'M JUST ASKING FOR PURPOSES OF PROCESS AND PROCEDURE, WHERE IS THE APPROPRIATE GASOLINE ISSUE? SHOULD IT BE LISTED IN THE U D C? AND IT DOESN'T MEAN YOU CAN'T TAKE THAT LANGUAGE, YOU COULD CREATE A NEW SECTION OR YOU COULD PUT IT IN SOMETHING ELSE. THAT'S WHERE I'M TRYING TO GET, I'M JUST TRYING TO UNDERSTAND THAT PROCESS. AND WE'VE BEEN WORKING WITH THE APPLICANT TO ESTABLISH HIS, UM, HIS DISTANCE REQUIREMENTS. THAT'S WHAT HIS GOAL WAS. SO THAT'S WHERE WE WERE FOCUSING ON. AND I THINK KAT HAS MORE TO ADD. SO BOTH OF THESE AMENDMENTS ARE ESSENTIALLY, UM, WITHIN, UH, WHAT WE CALL OUR SUPPLEMENTAL USE REGULATIONS. WE HAVE MANY, UH, USES WITHIN OUR, UH, MATRIX THAT WILL HAVE ADDITIONAL STANDARDS, IF YOU WILL, UH, FOR, UM, DESIGN. LIKE FOR EXAMPLE, WE HAVE ONE THAT REGULATES CAR WASHES. IT HAS TO BE THE, THE VACUUMS HAVE TO BE 50 FEET AWAY FROM, UH, RESIDENTIAL USES. SO BOTH AMENDMENTS ARE PROPOSING TO PUT 'EM INTO THE SAME DIVISION OF ARTICLE THREE UNDER SUPPLEMENTAL USE REGULATIONS. YOUR QUESTION ABOUT WHETHER OR NOT IT'S APPROPRIATE TO TAG IT TO HEAD SHOPS OR TAG IT TO 3 97 FOR AUTO VEHICLE SALES, THAT WOULD BE UP TO, UH, UP FOR DISCUSSION HERE. UM, IF WE WERE, AND THE WAY MY HEAD WORKS IS THAT IF I WERE TO LOOK FOR WHAT MY SUPPLEMENTAL USE REGULATIONS ARE FOR MOTOR VEHICLES THINGS OR THINGS RELATED TO AUTO, I WOULD LOOK IN AUTO RELATED TYPE SUPPLEMENTAL USE REGULATIONS AND NOT IN HEAD SHOPS, JUST TO BE CLEAR. WHAT'S, WHAT, WHAT, WHAT'S ON THE SCREEN AS WELL. IF YOU LOOK, UH, I KNOW IT SAYS 35 3 77 AT THE TOP, BUT UNDERNEATH AMENDMENT LANGUAGE ON THE LEFT SIDE OF THE SCREEN AMENDMENT, UH, IT'S 35 DASH 3 77. SEEK SEEKS TO CHANGE THE NAME TO SPECIFIC USE REQUIREMENTS BY PROXIMITY TO OTHER USES. IT WOULD NOT BE CALLED HEAD SHOPS AND GAS, GAS STATIONS. IT WOULD CHANGE THE NAME TO SOMETHING MORE GENERIC BASED UPON REQUIRING CERTAIN, UH, ADDITIONAL STANDARDS DUE TO PROXIMITY TO OTHER ITEMS. IT ADDRESSES IT UP. AND ALSO TO NOTE, UH, FOR 26 DASH ONE, SHE WOULD BE ADDING A SUBSECTION. SO IT WOULD BE 35 DASH 39 39, 7 0 1, LIKE A SPECIFIC GAS STATION. IT WOULDN'T FALL UNDER THAT AUTO, IT WOULD BE ITS OWN STANDALONE IN HER PROPOSED CODE. CORRECT. IN 26 DASH ONE, I HAVE A QUESTION FOR STAFF. YES. CLARITY TO APPLICANT. WHERE IS AT? I HAVE A QUESTION FOR STAFF. WHERE ARE GAS STATIONS CURRENTLY RESTRICTED IN THE CODE OR WITHIN THE CITY FROM BEING BUILT? SO WE HAVE DIFFERENT USES, IF YOU WANNA PULL UP THE PERMITTED USE TABLE. WE HAVE, UH, GAS STATIONS ARE A COM. WE HAVE A CONVENIENCE STORE WHICH DOES NOT HAVE GAS. WE HAVE GAS STATION. WE HAVE A GAS STATION WITH, UM, UH, CAR WASH, UM, NO, NO GEOGRAPHY. WHERE IN THE CITY ARE THEY NOT ALLOWED? EDWARDS AQUIFER. SORRY. E R Z D. THANK YOU. AND THEN DOWNTOWN, CORRECT? YEAH, THAT'S THE FIRE CODE DOESN'T ALLOW IT DOWNTOWN. CORRECT. THAT, THAT'S MY POINT. I GET ON D REQUIRES AN S THANK YOU. A D REQUIRES AN SS WELL MY, MY WHOLE POINT IS THAT WHEN YOU LOOK AT WHAT'S THE PRESSURE, WHY ARE WE SEEING AMENDMENTS COMING FORWARD FOR GAS STATIONS? WHERE ARE THESE PROPOSED GAS STATIONS SUPPOSEDLY, YOU KNOW, WHERE ARE THE APPLICATIONS THAT HAPPEN? THEY'RE NEAR THE URBAN CORE ON THE PERIPHERALS OF DOWNTOWN WHERE THEY'RE NOT ALLOWED TO BE BUILT BY THE FIRE CODE. SO IT'S LIKE WE HAVE A PROTECTION FOR DOWNTOWN FOR FIRE REASONS, BUT WE DON'T HAVE A PROTECTION FOR OUR URBAN CORE NEIGHBORHOODS THAT ARE ON THESE MAJOR TRANSIT CORRIDORS THAT COME IN AND OUT OF DOWNTOWN WHERE THERE'S NOT A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF BUFFER. SO THAT'S WHERE THE CONCERN IS COMING IN BECAUSE OF THE AMOUNT OF TRAFFIC THAT YOU SEE. AND OF COURSE THE HEALTH CONCERNS TOO. SO THAT WAS MY POINT IN MAKING THAT QUESTION. THANK YOU. AND I'LL ADD ON, WE PROTECT OUR WATER, BUT I DON'T KNOW THAT WE PROTECT OUR RESIDENTS AS MUCH FROM A HEALTH PERSPECTIVE. THAT'S MY PERSONAL OPINION. WE DON'T DO A GOOD JOB PROTECTING OUR WATER. WELL, I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION THAT WE DENY ITEM 10 FOR ME. SECOND, LUMPING THE TWO TOGETHER DOESN'T WORK. WE CAN ADDRESS THE ISSUE IN ONE PLACE, BUT THAT'S NOT THE PLACE FOR ME. SECOND. OKAY. MOTION FOR DENIAL FROM KARA. SECOND FROM KEN. IS THERE ADDITIONAL COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS ON ITEM NUMBER 10? BIANCA? I HAD ADDITIONAL COMMENTS JUST BECAUSE I THINK OUR FAILURE TO ADDRESS THE SITUATION OR TYPICALLY TO ROLL UP OUR SLEEVES AND DO THE [02:50:01] WORK ON THIS ONE, I, I KNOW THAT THERE HAS BEEN A LOT IN THE COMMUNITY THAT HAVE REALLY STEPPED FORWARD TO, TO DO THE WORK AND REALLY TRY TO ADDRESS A VERY LIMITED VERSION. I KNOW IT'S STANDARD STARTED OUT IN THE HEAD SHOP, BUT YOU KNOW, WE, WE PUT DISTANT LIMITS ON HEAD SHOPS. WE PUT DISTANCE LIMITS ON PAWN SHOPS. UM, I THINK THAT WITH US NOT ADDRESSING THIS ISSUE MOVING FORWARD, IT ONLY EXACERBATES IT DOWN THE LINE. I DON'T, LET ME BE CLEAR, I DID NOT SAY NOT ADDRESS THIS ISSUE. I SAID NOT ADDRESS IT IN THIS LOCATION. WE STILL HAVE AN OPEN ITEM WHERE WE CAN TAKE ALL OF THE PROVISIONS THAT WE THINK ARE APPROPRIATE THAT GO THERE, BUT I DON'T THINK IT GOES IN A TABLE WHERE THE ONLY TWO OFFSETS ARE HEAD SHOPS AND GAS STATIONS. OKAY. I LIKE YOUR DIRECTION THEN. THANK YOU . OKAY. CAN WE GET, UM, A VOTE ON ALL THOSE IN FAVOR FOR THE MOTION TO DIAL OF ITEM NUMBER 10? DENIAL. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR PLEASE SAY AYE. AYE. AYE. ANY OPPOSED? OKAY. SO ITEM NUMBER 10, UH, DENIED. AND SO NOW WE'RE GONNA ADDRESS ITEM NUMBER 12 AND COMMENTS AND QUESTIONS ON THAT. LET'S OPEN THAT ONE UP. ARE WE GONNA PULL LANGUAGE FROM 10 INTO 12 OR CARE DID YOU HAVE SOME SPECIFIC SUGGESTIONS? FOR ONE? I THINK, YOU KNOW, IT LOOKS LIKE IN ITEM 12 YOU'VE MADE A FEW ADJUSTMENTS TO THE USES. BUT THEN THE OTHER BIG QUESTION IS, ARE THE DISTANCES THE SAME IN BOTH VERSIONS OR WHICH DO THEY'RE NOT? SO THAT'S THE PART WE PROBABLY NEED TO LOOK AT, RIGHT? CORRECT. AND IT LOOKS LIKE YOU'VE REMOVED THEM FROM HOSPITALS AND COMMUNITY CENTERS. 'CAUSE FRANKLY HOSPITALS WILL HAVE A TANK AND MAY HAVE ACTUALLY HAVE THEIR, I MEAN THEIR GENERATORS HAVE A TANK, THEY'RE REQUIRED BY CODE AND THEY MAY HAVE THEIR OWN FEELING. SO YOU'VE TAKEN A FEW OF THOSE OUT FOR THAT REASON. I THINK ALSO, KARA CAT, CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, BUT ITEM 10 HAD A SPECIFIC USE ADDED IF YOU'RE WITHIN THAT ZONE UP BACK AT THE TOP OF, ALRIGHT. HAS A SPECIAL USE ZONE. YES. SO THE ESSENTIAL DIS DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE TWO IS ITEM 10 TRIGGERED A, A REZONING, A SPECIFIC USE AUTHORIZATION. IF WITHIN THAT, THOSE DISTANCE RE UM, RESTRICTIONS. I DON'T BELIEVE THIS ONE DOES. THIS ONE IS JUST, YOU'RE NOT ALLOWED WITHIN THOSE DISTANCE, UH, RESTRICTIONS AND THEREFORE IT WOULD TRIGGER A BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT PRO PROCESS. YES. THAT'S WHAT WE DO FOR FOOD SIMILAR TO FOOD TRUCK PARKS. SO LIKE FOOD TRUCK PARKS, UM, IF YOU WANNA, IF YOU WANNA ELIMINATE THE DISTANCE SEPARATION OF, I THINK IT'S 300 FEET OR 200 FEET FROM A RESIDENTIAL USE, YOU GO TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT TO MINIMIZE THAT DISTANCE REQUIREMENT. OKAY. WILL YOU SAY THAT AGAIN? FOOD TRUCK PARKS, UH, HAS A DISTANCE REQUIREMENT. I WANNA SAY IT'S ABOUT 200 FEET FROM ANY RESIDENTIAL USE. UM, IF YOU'RE WITHIN 200 FEET, YOU GO TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT FOR DISTANCE, UH, REQUIREMENT, UM, VARIANCE MANNA. SO, SO QUESTION I HAVE HERE IS, UM, SO WE DROPPED SOME THINGS IN 10. UM, AND SO, SO BASICALLY THE LIST OF, OF ALL OF THE THINGS THAT WE WANTED TO PROVIDE A DISTANCE FROM. AND SO I GUESS I WOULD SAY, UM, SHOULD IT BE ALL THOSE BE MOVED OVER, UM, INTO THIS NEW ONE, UM, UH, THAT WE'RE RECONSIDERING? 'CAUSE THE CITY CONSIDERED THE OTHER ONE ALREADY AND I GUESS CAME THAT LANGUAGE. AND SO I WOULD ASSUME THAT THAT LANGUAGE WAS APPROPRIATE WHEN THEY SUGGESTED IT AND THAT THAT WOULD BE MOVED OVER FOR THE THINGS THAT ARE BEING CONSIDERED TO PROVIDE THE DISTANCE FROM. DOES THAT MAKE SENSE WHAT I JUST SAID? YES. SO YOU WANNA MAINTAIN NUMBERS ONE THROUGH SEVEN, CORRECT? IN THE LIST ON, UH, THE ONE WE ARE CONSIDERING. IS THAT YES, THAT'S CORRECT. UM, MS. COLE, CAN YOU SPEAK REAL QUICK TO WHY YOU STRUCK HOSPITALS AND COMMUNITY CENTERS? I WAS REALLY TRYING TO JUST COURT, I MEAN, TO, TO, TO NAIL DOWN THE RESIDENCES, THE NEIGHBORHOODS, THE SCHOOLS, DAYCARE FACILITIES WHICH WOULD HAVE CHILDREN BECAUSE OF THE HEALTH SITUATION OR THE HEALTH. UM, AND THEN ALSO THE ASSISTED LIVING. SO ANYWHERE PEOPLE WOULD BE SPENDING THE NIGHT SLEEPING, UM, OVERNIGHTS AND JUST BE FOR AN EXTENDED PERIOD. I FELT LIKE YOU WERE SAYING HOSPITALS WOULD BE BIGGER CAMPUSES USUALLY MAY HAVE THEIR OWN FUEL SUPPLY. UM, AND THEN COMMUNITY CENTERS WOULD BE MORE, PEOPLE WOULD PROBABLY BE GOING IN DAY, YOU KNOW, NOT QUITE THE SAME, UM, AS THE OTHER. SO I JUST TRIED TO NARROW IT DOWN. I REALLY WAS TRYING TO JUST HONE IN ON THE MEAT OF THE ISSUE AND WITH, UM, I FELT LIKE DOING IT BEFORE I WAS DOING IT TOWARD TANK CAPACITY AND I WAS HAVING MORE, UM, BREAKDOWNS IN THE FEET AND SO I NARROWED DOWN THE FEET AND I KIND OF JUST, YOU KNOW, PUT IT INTO TWO DIFFERENT COMPARTMENTS, LIKE A BIG GAS STATION AND THEN THE SMALLER GAS STATIONS. OKAY. [02:55:01] I REALLY WAS TRYING TO MAKE IT EASY PEASY. SO MR. MANA HEARING WHAT SHE HAS SAID, DO YOU, DO YOU WANT TO, I I STILL WOULD, I STILL WOULD WANNA MOVE THOSE OVER. I I DO. OKAY. SO I THINK I, I DON'T THINK WE NECESSARILY NEED TO BE EASY AND I THINK WHAT YOU'RE TRYING TO DO IS TRY TO MAKE IT AS EASY AS POSSIBLE, BUT I THINK THOSE ARE THINGS THAT REALLY I THINK ARE OF VALUE, YOU KNOW, AND ALSO BEING THAT THE CITY REVIEWED THAT ALREADY AND WE'RE OKAY WITH THAT LANGUAGE BEFORE WE, LET ME CLARIFY. WE REVIEWED IT TO MAKE SURE THAT THE, THAT THE LANGUAGE IS, UM, ENFORCEABLE AND CODIFIED. WE'RE NOT SAYING THAT WE'RE IN SUPPORT OR OPPOSITION OF THAT. UNDERSTOOD. BUT, BUT YOU WERE, YOU ARE OKAY WITH THE LANGUAGE AS IT WAS WITH WHERE IT WAS. AND WITH REGARDS TO THE, THE HEAD SHOP AND THEN THAT WE'RE ORIGINALLY STARTED FROM US, WE ARE SAYING THAT THE LANGUAGE IS WORKABLE IN THE CODE. OKAY, THANK YOU. AND I'M MORE THAN PLEASED TO INCORPORATE THAT INTO MINE. I'M HAPPY TO HEAR THAT TOO. OKAY, SO WE'LL MOVE THAT LIST OVER. WE'LL COPY THAT. UM, SO I WOULD, TO HER POINT ON A COUPLE OF THOSE HOSPITALS, I MEAN THE LANGUAGE OVER HERE IS ABOUT TANK CAPACITY, NOT GAS STATIONS. HOSPITALS REQUIRED TO HAVE AN EMERGENCY GENERATOR BY CODE, WHICH IS ALMOST ALWAYS GASOLINE, AT LEAST TO START IT UP, IS NATURAL GAS. HER LANGUAGE ABOVE SAYS GASOLINE FILLING STATION, NOT GAS STORED IN A GENERATOR. DOWN BELOW IS TOTAL CAPACITY OF TANKS ON PROPERTY NEEDS TO BE CHANGED. 'CAUSE UP ABOVE IT IS WHERE IT SAYS GASOLINE FILLING STATION. SO THERE'S JUST A LITTLE BIT OF A, A DISCONNECT BETWEEN THOSE TWO. AND THEN IT SAYS, OR USE IT ALSO SAYS WE'RE USE WITH GASOLINE. AND SO THE YELLOW PART, YEAH, SO THE YELLOW PART IS WHAT GOT REMO GOT REMOVED. AND SO IT'S NO GAS STATION SHALL BE ESTABLISHED. SO IT IS GAS STATION. IT'S NOT GAS STORAGE FACILITY OR THE LIKE. THEN WE NEED TO CLARIFY. GASOLINE FUELING STATION IS WHAT IS DEFINED IN THE CODE ALREADY. CORRECT. I WOULD ALSO REMOVE THE TEMPORARILY ZONED RESIDENTIAL BECAUSE WHEN YOU ANNEX PROPERTY, YOU BRING IT IN AS TEMPORARILY ZONED RESIDENTIAL. I DON'T, NO, WE DON'T ANYMORE. IT'S A, IT'S A DEVELOPMENT RESERVE. ALL. YEAH. IT'S A DR OR WE BRING IT IN, BUT WE STILL HAVE OLD ONES THAT HAVE NEVER BEEN REZONED THAT ARE STILL TEMP. NO, CONVERTED TO R SIX. EVERYTHING CONVERTED TO R SIX. ALL TEMP R ONES CONVERTED R SIX. ARE WE MOVING NO LONGER THE LANGUAGE REFERENCE IN 16 SEVEN TO 26 DASH ONE? WE ARE MOVING THE LIST. THE ONE THROUGH SEVEN. THAT IS WHAT WAS SUGGESTED. YEAH. THAT THAT WAS, WAS SUGGESTED. AND THEN ALSO I WANTED TO REVIEW THE, UH, THE, THE DISTANCE BETWEEN, JUST TO CLARIFY, YOU KNOW, WHAT, WHAT THE PREVIOUS DISTANCE THAT WAS SUGGESTED TO SEE WHICH WAS MORE APPROPRIATE. I AGREE. OR THAT'S THE EASIEST. YEP. ANY THOUGHTS ON STORAGE CAPACITY? I THINK, AND SO THE, THE PREVIOUS BULLETS I THINK WERE OF VALUE TOO. SO THAT, AND I DON'T THINK WE SHOULD BE REMOVING THOSE. SO I THINK WE'RE ADDING TO THAT. SO I THINK YOU HAD SOME ADDITIONAL BULLETS THERE THAT YOU WERE LOOKING FOR. CORRECT. THE PREVIOUS, WELL BEFORE I MADE THE ADJUSTMENTS TO IT, HE'S, HE'S TALKING TO, UM, STAFF WHO'S MAKING THE, THE AMENDMENTS. LAUREN, I THINK HE WANTS TO KEEP THE PREVIOUS BULLETS THAT WERE SINGLE, SINGLE FAMILY OR MULTIFAMILY IS COVERED BY NUMBER ONE. CHURCHES WASN'T ON THE ORIGINAL LIST. HOSPITALS WAS COMMUNITY CENTERS, WAS MUSEUMS WASN'T ON THE ORIGINAL PARKS. WASN'T, UH, THE ONLY TWO ARE THEN DAYCARE FACILITIES AND ASSISTED LIVING FACILITIES, BOARDING HOMES AND COMMUNITY HOMES. CAN I ASK A QUESTION? YES. JUST WHILE THIS IS GOING OF THE APPLICANT, DO YOU KNOW THE OTHER APPLICANT? I DO. YEAH. WHY COULDN'T YOU TWO HAVE DONE THIS? WHY DID WE HAVE TO DO IT? BECAUSE I HAVE Y'ALL'S PARTICIPATION. I'M, I'M NOT WORKING ON THIS ANYMORE. NUMBER ONE AND NUMBER TWO, WE'RE STILL GONNA GET BACK TO THE NON-CONFORMING USE. IT SEEMS LIKE WE'RE REARRANGING [03:00:01] THE CHAIRS ON THE TITANIC. I MEAN, LAST TIME WE DIDN'T APPROVE THE LAST ONE BECAUSE OF NON-CONFORMING ISSUES. AND I'M AFRAID WE'RE, WE'RE HEADING THERE AND WE'RE DOING THE WORK THAT YOU TWO SHOULD HAVE DONE. SO YEAH, I'M GONNA MOVE TO DENY THE SECOND ONE ALSO SECOND. SO THERE'S A MOTION FOR DENIAL. IS THERE A SECOND? NO. SECOND MOTION FOR DENIALS. SECOND LIE, TAKE THAT BACK FOR DENIAL FROM KEN AND IS SECOND FROM MR. TAPIA FOR DENIAL OF, UM, NUMBER 1226 DASH ONE. I HAVE A COMMENT. I I THINK IT'S P WAIT, GO AHEAD. I THINK IT'S PREMATURE TO DENY SOMETHING WHEN WE'RE STILL WORKING ON THE LANGUAGE. WELL LET'S TALK ABOUT THE NON-CONFORMING ISSUE 'CAUSE THAT'S WHAT KILLED THE LAST ONE. I MEAN, I DON'T WANT TO KEEP GOING THROUGH ALL THIS. IF WE GET TO THAT, IF WE GET TO THAT AT THE END AND, AND DO WHAT WE DID LAST TIME, IF WE GET OVER THAT HUMP, THEN FINE. BUT IF WE'RE NOT GONNA GO OVER THE HUMP, WHY ARE WE DOING THIS? 'CAUSE IT'S IMPORTANT AND IT'S IMPACTING PEOPLE AND SO I I I THINK CAN WE JUST FINISH THE LANGUAGE AT LEAST CAN NOT PERFORMING USES ARE IMPORTANT TOO. MR. MANA, I WOULD NOT HAVE VOTED FOR THE PREVIOUS ONE, UH, FOR THE DIALOGUE. 'CAUSE WE SAID WE WOULD TALK IT UP, BRING IT UP ON THIS DIALOGUE AND, AND COMBINE IT TOO. AND SO, SO ONE THING I WOULD CONSIDER WOULD BE A CONTINUANCE HERE TO MOVE THIS TO THE NEXT MEETING TO LET THEM WORK THROUGH THE LANGUAGE TO DO THIS THROUGH THE SOLUTION VERSUS DENY IT. I, I I WILL NOT SUPPORT, DENY IT. 'CAUSE I THINK IT SHOULD BE MOVED TO A NEXT DISCUSSION WITH A CONSOLIDATED, BUT KEN, YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT OUR VERY FIRST MEETING. WE HAD AN ITEM. IT'S KARA. YEAH. UM, ON OUR FIRST MEETING WE HAD AN ITEM, THAT'S THE ONE YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT WHERE WE HAD THE DISCUSSION ABOUT NON-CONFORMING USES ON GAS. WE HAD THAT THRESHOLD, THAT TWO ACRE THRESHOLD KEPT GOING. MAYBE HALF ACRE, MAYBE A QUARTER AC WAS AC SIZE. THAT'S THE ONE YOU'RE REFERRING TO, NOT THE TWO ITEMS TODAY. RIGHT. WE DO HAVE A MOTION ON THE TABLE FOR A DENIAL AND A SECOND. SO WE DO HAVE TO TAKE A VOTE ON THAT. SO ALL THOSE IN FAVOR FOR DENYING NUMBER 12. UM, OH, SHOULD WE DO ROLL CALL? VOTE. OKAY. STAFF, CAN YOU PLEASE DO A ROLL CALL VOTE. IT SAYS A MOTION FOR DENIAL FOR NUMBER 12. ITEM 26 DASH ONE. MR. BROWN? YES. . THINK ABOUT MR. TAPIA. YES. MR. ZUKI? YES. MR. SIPES? NO. MR. TEAL? NO. NO. MS. COHEN? NO. MS. FAIRMONT? YES. MS. WRIGHT. MS. TACKETT? YES. MR. LEEMAN? YES. MS. PAGANS? YES. MR. HENLEY? YES. MR. DOMINGUEZ ABSTAIN. MR. ESTRADA? NO. MR. MANNA? NO. MS. REED? NO. MS. MALDONADO? NO. AND VICE CHAIR GABRIEL HAYES? NO. SEE IT. MOVE TO CONTINUANCE? YEAH. WELL SHE PASSES. SPLIT RIGHT BY MY COUNT. YES. YES TO. SO THAT MOTION FOR DENIAL FAILS. IS THERE ANOTHER MOTION ON THE TABLE THAT ANYBODY OR ANYBODY WOULD LIKE TO MAKE MOTION FOR? CONTINUANCE TO THE, WHICH AGENDA DID WE SAY MAY I WOULD RECOMMEND THE MAY 9TH AGENDA BECAUSE WE'RE GONNA NEED SOME TIME IF YOU'RE WANTING US TO WORK OUT LANGUAGE, WE'RE GONNA NEED SOME TIME TO SIT DOWN AND HAVE THE DISCUSSION. SECOND. AND I WOULD WELCOME A DISCUSSION IN BEING PART OF THAT DISCUSSION. OH, YOU WILL BE AT THE TABLE. THANK YOU . JENNIFER, MS. MALDONADO. AND A SECOND FOR MR. MANNA. UH, CAN WE GET A RULE CALL VOTE PLEASE? WAIT, POINT OF CLARIFICATION. IS IT MAY 5TH OR WHAT'S THE NEXT DATE? MAY 9TH. NINTH. MAY 9TH. MS. MALDONADO MOTION. OH YES, I MADE A MOTION AND THERE'S A SECOND ON THE FLOOR ALREADY. SHE'S TAKING THE VOTE. YES. OH, SORRY. YES. FAIR CONTINUANCE. I'M SORRY. YES. MR. MANO? YES. [03:05:01] MR. ZUKI? YES. MR. SIPES? YES. MR. TEAL? YES. MS. COHEN? YES. MS. WRIGHT? YES. MS. FAIRMONT? YES. MS. ETT. MR. LEESMAN? YES. MS. PAGANS? YES. MR. BROWN. MR. HANLEY? YES. MR. DOMINGUEZ? YES. MR. TAPIA? YES. MR. ESTRADA? YES. MS. REED? YES. VICE CHAIR. CARILLO. HANES? YES. MOTION PASSES FOR CONTINUANCE. SO WE'LL MOVE THAT TO MAY 9TH. UM, WE ARE GONNA TAKE A COUPLE MINUTE BREAK, FIVE MINUTE RECONVENE AT 4 45. 45 45. 3 45. WE'RE GONNA GET STARTED AGAIN, WE'RE GONNA CONTINUE WITH ITEM NUMBER 1419 DASH ONE. IS THE APPLICANT AVAILABLE? AND MELISSA, WHENEVER YOU'RE READY. YEAH. GOOD AFTERNOON EVERYBODY. MY NAME'S MELISSA BRYANT. I'M THE DIRECTOR OF TECHNICAL SERVICES FOR THE SAN ANTONIO RIVER AUTHORITY. I ALSO HAVE SANDY PAULINI, WHO'S ONE OF OUR ENGINEERS FOR THE SAN ANTONIO RIVER AUTHORITY. AND TODAY WE WANTED TO TALK TO YOU ABOUT THE WEST SIDE CREEK'S WATER QUALITY PROTECTION AREA. CISCO. OH, THERE IT GOES. SO THIS IS, UM, IN THE PROJECT AREA WHERE SAN PEDRO CREEK, APACHE, AMAZON, MARTINEZ, AND ZAMORA CREEKS ARE LOCATED. YOU CAN SEE FROM THE MAP, THE MISSION REACH, THE MUSEUM REACH, AND THEN THE WEST SIDE CREEKS. ONE OF THE REASONS THAT WE WANTED TO PROPOSE THIS AMENDMENT WAS TO PROTECT A FUTURE INVESTMENT THAT WE'RE LOOKING TO MAKE. WE DID RECEIVE FUNDING FROM THE CORPS OF ENGINEERS AND WE HAVE 115 MILLION TOTAL INVESTMENT PROPOSED FOR AN ECOSYSTEM RESTORATION PROJECT IN THE WEST SIDE CREEKS. SO THIS AGAIN WOULD APPLY FOR ALZA, APACHE, MARTINEZ, AND PEDRO AND ZAMORA. THE UH, OVERLAY PROTECTION AREA WOULD REQUIRE TREATMENT OF STORMWATER RUNOFF. IT WOULD PREVENT ANY NEGATIVE IMPACTS AND IT WOULD MAINTAIN THE NATURAL HABITAT AS WELL AS SAFETY AND ACCESS TO THE TRAILS. WE HAVE BEEN COORDINATING WITH THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO AND THE DEVELOPMENT COMMUNITY. UH, WE'VE MET WITH THE REAL ESTATE COUNCIL OF SAN ANTONIO, D S D, UH, PUBLIC WORKS. WE'VE ALSO MET WITH D FIVE COUNCILWOMAN AND D ONE COUNCILWOMAN. I'M, I'M SORRY, COUNCILMAN. SOME OF THE KEY POINTS THAT I WANNA HIGHLIGHT. UH, AGAIN, THIS IS ALL THE WEST SIDE CREEKS. WE, UH, ARE, WE ARE PROPOSING A BOUNDARY OF A HUNDRED FEET FROM THE SAN ANTONIO CHANNEL IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT. THIS IS THE BOUNDARY THAT WAS CREATED WHEN THE CORPS OF ENGINEERS CAME BACK AND DID THEIR INITIAL CHANNELIZATION IN THE WEST SIDE CREEKS. AGAIN, WE WOULD REQUIRE TREATMENT FOR STORMWATER RUNOFF FOR NEWLY DEVELOPED OR REDEVELOPED PROPERTIES. AS PER THE U D C CURRENT DEFINITION, THIS WOULD NOT APPLY TO SINGLE FAMILY HOMES. AND WE DO HAVE SOME PROHIBITED USES LISTED, BUT IT WOULD NOT, UM, IF IT'S A CURRENT USE IN THE AREA, IT WOULD BE GRANDFATHERED IN. WE ALSO HAVE PROVISIONS FOR OFFSITE NEIGHBORHOOD SCALE PROJECTS AND WITH THAT, I'LL ENTERTAIN ANY QUESTIONS. MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE IS ROBERT HANLEY SECOND. OKAY. ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS FOR THE APPLICANT OR WELL, ALL RIGHT, SO WE HAVE A MOTION FROM MS. TACKETT AND A SECOND FOR MR. HANLEY. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, PLEASE SAY AYE. AYE. OPPOSED? ALL RIGHT. MOTION PASSES. THANK THANK YOU. WE, WE DO HAVE, UH, FOR THE NEXT ITEM, AGENDA, ITEM NUMBER, UH, 15. WE DID ACTUALLY HAVE ONE EXTRA E OR VOICEMAIL, NOT EMAIL, SORRY, THAT WE MISSED. SO WE'RE GONNA GO AHEAD AND PLAY THAT. I PROMISE IT'S ONLY THE ONE THOUGH. THIS IS MONICA SABINO. AGAIN, I'M WAS AT 1120 CROSS DISTRICT TWO AND THIS IS PART TWO OF MY SUPPORT FOR AGENDA [03:10:01] ITEMS FOR PCT TODAY. UH, AGENDA NUMBER 13 16 3. AS IT RELATES TO AGENDA NUMBER NINE, CLARIFICATION ON SHORT TERM RENTAL TAX AND I SUPPORT THAT AGENDA. ITEM NUMBER 14, AMENDMENT 19 ONE WEST SIDE CREEK WATER QUALITY PROTECTION AREA. THIS IS SO IMPORTANT AND I I REALLY SUPPORT THIS ONE. UH, AGENDA ITEM 1527, NOTICE PROVISIONS BY L H P AND ITS COMPANION AMENDMENT. UH, AGENDA ITEM 16 WITH AMENDMENT 2217. BY PLANNING, I SUPPORT THOSE COMPLETELY. I SUPPORT BOTH AGENDA ITEM 17 AND 18 PRUDENCE TO NOTICE PROVISIONS AND NOTICE PROVISIONS THAT INCLUDES COMMUNITY ORGANIZATIONS. AGENDA 20 SEVERAL AMENDMENTS FILED TO ADDRESS 35, SECTION 35 4 0 8. UH, I SUPPORT 1610. COMMUNITY REGISTRATION. THAT'S IT THERE, A STAFF PRESENTATION FOR, UM, THIS ITEM. HELLO, UH, COREY EDWARDS, OFFICE OF HISTORIC PRESERVATION. UM, THIS IS AN AMENDMENT TO THE NOTICE PROVISIONS FOR A FEW OF OUR H C R C RELATED ITEMS. UM, THE FIRST IS CLARIFICATION THAT THE NOTICE REQUIREMENT PERTAINING TO CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS IS SPECIFIC TO ITEMS REQUIRING A PUBLIC HEARING THAT IS PRACTICED NOW. UM, THIS IS KIND OF, THIS IS SOMETHING THAT SHOULD HAVE BEEN DONE ABOUT 10 YEARS AGO WHEN WE ADDED THE ADMINISTRATIVE APPROVAL PROCESS IN THE CODE. UM, SO WE'VE BEEN DOING THIS IN PRACTICE SINCE THEN. SO THIS IS REALLY A CLARIFICATION. UM, FOR THE OTHER TWO COLUMNS, K AND N, UM, THIS IS A DISTINCTION ACTUALLY. UM, SO K IS A DISTINCTION THAT, UM, THE, UH, DEMOLITION REVIEW PROCESS IS SPECIFIC TO HISTORICAL LANDMARKS OR CONTRIBUTING PROPERTIES. UM, IT IS NOT DEPENDENT ON WHETHER IT'S POTENTIAL OR NOT. UM, SO THAT IS NOT A PLACE IN CODE WHERE THAT'S ADDRESSED. AND SO WE'RE DOING CLARIFICATION THERE. UM, AND THEN L AND N ARE SEPARATION OF TWO DIFFERENT, UH, REQUEST TYPES, UM, THAT HAVE BEEN DISTINGUISHED IN THE CODE AND OTHER PLACES AND OTHER AMENDMENTS THAT WE'RE PROPOSING, UM, AS REQUIRED BY STATE LAW. UM, SO THE DESIGNATION PROCESS IS A REALLY A SEPARATE, SEPARATE PROCESS. IT'S MORE CLOSELY ALIGNED TO ZONING THAN IT IS THE QUESTION ABOUT WHETHER SOMETHING IS POTENTIALLY HISTORIC. AND SO WE'RE OUTLINING THE REQUIREMENTS THERE, UM, TO STAFF. I ACTUALLY NOTICED SOMETHING ON THIS WHEN I WAS SITTING OVER THERE. UM, UNDER COLUMN L UM, UNDER MAIL. SO IT SAYS 2, 8, 10, THAT 10 IS NEW, SO THAT NEEDS TO BE BLUE AND UNDERLINED. AND THEN IF YOU'LL SCROLL DOWN, I'LL SHOW YOU WHAT 10 IS. UM, AND SO THIS IS A REQUIREMENT BY STATE LAW FOR LANDMARK DESIGNATION PROCESS. WE ARE REQUIRED TO PROVIDE THESE ITEMS AS NOTICE TO THE OWNER. AND SO WE'RE LISTING THEM HERE. UM, AND THEN A LITTLE BIT ABOVE THIS, UM, AS YOU KNOW WITH UH, PUBLIC HEARINGS, THERE'S OFTEN A REQUIREMENT TO PLACE A PHYSICAL SIGN ON A PROPERTY. UM, I DON'T KNOW ABOUT YOU, BUT I FIND THE CASE NUMBER TO BE NOT VERY HELPFUL. UM, PEOPLE CALL AND THEY ASK ABOUT A CASE NUMBER. I DON'T ALWAYS KNOW WHAT THEY'RE TALKING ABOUT. AND SO WE'RE ACTUALLY PROPOSING TO SAY WHAT THE ADDRESS OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS ON THE SIGN AS WELL AS THE DESCRIPTION OF THE REQUEST. THAT IS WHAT PEOPLE ARE LOOKING FOR. AND SO WE JUST WANNA PROVIDE THAT INFORMATION. CORY, I HAVE A QUESTION. YES. UM, IS CONTRIBUTING PROPERTY DEFINED OR IS THAT JUST AT YOUR DISCRETION? IT'S CURRENTLY DEFINED AND THEN IT'S ALSO CLARIFIED IN AN AMENDMENT THAT'S COMING HERE LATER. YEP. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS, COMMENTS, MOTION FOR APPROVAL? DEBBIE REED. SECOND. WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? AYE. ANY OPPOSED? NO. ALL RIGHT. MOTION PASSES. ITEM NUMBER 1622 DASH 17. GOOD AFTERNOON EVERYONE. I AM MIKE A. DIAZ WITH THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT. UH, THIS AMENDMENT IS INTENDED TO, UM, LIKE MANY OF OUR PREVIOUS AMENDMENTS, UM, JUST UPDATE THE REFERENCE TO SECTION 35, 4 20 ABOUT THE TYPES OF PLANS THAT ARE INVOLVED. UM, FOR BREVITY, SINCE THIS WAS PART OF A, A, YOU KNOW, TABLE HEADING, UM, WE PROPOSED STRIKING THE, THE ACTUAL TYPES OF PLANS AND JUST REFERENCING THE SECTION, UM, THAT WAY WHENEVER THE SECTION IS AMENDED IN THE FUTURE, WE DON'T HAVE TO FIND EVERY REFERENCE. UM, BUT IF YOU WOULD RATHER KEEP THE EXISTING LANGUAGE AND JUST ADD SUB AREA PLANS TO IT, IT WOULD CAPTURE THE SAME INTENT FOR US. OKAY, [03:15:01] THIS IS BIANCA. I WOULD ASK THAT WE DO THAT BECAUSE OTHERWISE I WAS GONNA ASK IF WE COULD TABLE THIS BECAUSE THERE'S A DISCUSSION GOING ON OUTSIDE OF THIS MEETING ABOUT NEIGHBORHOOD AND COMMUNITY PLANS, ABOUT ANOTHER AGENDA THAT'S COMING UP ON THE 25TH. IT'S TO LEAVE THE EXISTING LANGUAGE AND ADD, I BELIEVE YOU WERE SAYING MICAH, TO ADD THE SUB AREA, WHICH IS I THINK CONSISTENT WITH THE OTHER AMENDMENTS THAT WE HAVE APPROVED FROM THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT THUS FAR. AND IT'S CONSISTENT WITH THE, UM, REMAINING AMENDMENT LANGUAGE AND THE NOTES, UM, WHERE THE DIFFERENT PLAN TYPES ARE ALL LISTED OUT, RIGHT. AND THE NOTES AND NUMBER ONE, SO WE COULD JUST COPY THE SAME LANGUAGE. AND IS THIS NOT COVERED IN SECTION 35, 4 20? SO WE ARE PROPOSING FURTHER AMENDMENTS TO 35 4 20 AS IS TIER ONE AND SOME OTHER NEIGHBORHOOD GROUPS. UM, IN MY OPINION, THE QUICK REFERENCE WOULD CAPTURE WHATEVER AMENDMENTS MOVE FORWARD, UM, WHETHER THEY BE PLANNING DEPARTMENTS OR TIER ONES OR SOME COMBINATION OF IT. UM, BUT IF YOU PREFER TO HAVE ALL OF THE DIFFERENT PLAN TYPES LISTED OUT, WELL THAT'S WHAT WE'VE DONE IN IN MANY OF THE OTHER REFERENCES THAT WE'VE PROPOSED FOR PURPOSES OF BT, IF IT'S REFERENCED IN SECTION 35, 4 20, I DON'T PERSONALLY NEED THE, THE, THE LIST OUT ALL THE OTHER ONES. I THINK THE CONCERN IS WHEN YOU REMOVE THEM WHEN THEY WERE PRESENT, THAT IS THE CONCERN IS THAT, YOU KNOW, YOU'RE TAKING AN ACTION THAT WOULD REMOVE THEM WHERE THEY HAD BEEN CODIFIED BEFORE. AND SO I WOULD JUST ASK FOR CONSISTENCY THAT WE KEEP THE RED STRIKE OUT, THAT WE PUT THAT BACK AND THAT WE ADDED THE SECTOR OR SUBAR PLANS TO SEE ON THE TABLE CHART. BIANCA, IF WHAT MICAH'S SAYING WE HAVE A, A FUTURE AMENDMENT IN HERE THAT WILL ADDRESS THIS, THEN WE GONNA COME BACK AND THEN RE-LOOK AT THIS AGAIN TO, DO YOU WANNA TABLE THIS AMENDMENT? NO, BUT I'M, I'M GOING TO, I'M TAKING TRUSTING THE CITY PLANNING DEPARTMENT THAT IF, IF IT'S ADDRESSED IN THE FUTURE AMENDMENT THAT WE'RE COMING UP WITH TO SEE, THEN WHY, WHY NOT JUST TAKE IT AS THEY'RE RECOMMENDING THE FUTURE AMENDMENT HAS SOME SIGNIFICANT CONTROVERSY. SO IF WE DO NOT AMEND IT AND LEAVE THE RED LANGUAGE WHERE IT IS, I'D LIKE TO MOTION THAT WE TABLE IT UNTIL WE HEAR THE LARGER PORTION OF DISCUSSION ABOUT THE REMOVAL OF THE REFERENCE TO NEIGHBORHOOD AND COMMUNITY PLANS IN THE U D C AND OTHER PLACES. SO I WOULD SAY THE INTENT HERE WAS NEVER TO REMOVE A COMMUNITY PLAN, NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN, SECTOR PLAN, PERIMETER PLAN THAT HAS BEEN ADOPTED AND IS STILL IN EFFECT. UM, IT'S JUST TO RECOGNIZE THE CONTROLLING PLAN THAT WE HAVE SPOKE ABOUT BEFORE AS FAR AS LAND USE PLAN AMENDMENTS. SO I THINK THERE SHOULD BE NO PROBLEM WITH KEEPING THE LANGUAGE THAT'S THERE AND ADDING TO IT. SO THAT WOULD BE MY MOTION IS THAT WE MOTION FOR APPROVAL OF THIS ITEM WITH THE C SUBSECTION OF REINSTATING THE RED STRIKEOUT AREA. BACK TO THE PLAN, ADDING THE, WHAT DO YOU NEED? YOU NEED THE PERIMETER, THE SECTOR SUB AREA AND THE SUBAR PLAN LANGUAGE TO SEE. I JUST MOVE, WE WHAT? MOVE WE TABLE IT THEN BECAUSE IF THERE'S CONTROVERSY, THERE'S CONTROVERSY ON WHAT THOSE ARE, THEN WHY ARE WE GONNA AMEND IT? I MEAN I DON'T THINK THERE IS, BUT IT'S LIKE, LET'S JUST, THERE'S CONTROVERSY WITH REMOVAL OF THE LANGUAGE AND SO ALL I'M ASKING IS THAT THE LANGUAGE STAY, WHICH ARE THE OTHER AMENDMENTS THAT WE'VE ALREADY APPROVED FOR THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT? WE HAVE A MOTION. IS THERE A SECOND? SECOND. OKAY. MOTION AND SECOND. SO MOTION IS TO LEAVE THE LANGUAGE AS WAS DELETING THE BLUE LANGUAGE UNDER CATEGORY OR COLUMN C THERE TO MATCH THE LANGUAGE THAT'S BELOW UNDER THE NOTE SECTION ONE. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, PLEASE. OH, MR. HANLEY, MY QUESTION IS, IF, IF IN THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT AND PART OF THEIR PLAN IS TO RECLASSIFY THESE NAMES, THEY'RE NOT GONNA TAKE NEIGHBORHOOD PLANS AND CALL THEM SUB PLANS OR REGIONAL PLANS. AND THE OTHER AMENDMENTS THAT WE APPROVED, THEY HAD COMMUNITY AND NEIGHBORHOOD PLANS AND THEN ADDED SUB AREA AND SECTOR PLANS. BUT WHY THEY WERE NOT CONSISTENT IN THEIR RECOMMENDATION FOR THIS PARTICULAR U D C AMENDMENT. CHANGE IS INCONSISTENT AND THAT'S WHAT I'M, I'M SAYING IT JUST NEEDS TO BE CONSISTENT TO ALL THE OTHERS AND IF WE'RE GONNA DO SOMETHING DIFFERENT, THEN WE SHOULD NOT, I THINK WAIT AND HEAR THE OTHER AMENDMENT IN CONJUNCTION WITH IT. SO I'M JUST PROPOSING THE SAME LANGUAGE THAT THEY HAVE CONSISTENTLY APP APPRO, UH, SUBMITTED TO US. I BELIEVE IT'S BEEN LIKE IN FOUR AND FIVE OTHER AMENDMENTS THAT THEY'VE SENT TO US. IT, IT'S IN MULTIPLE AMENDMENTS AND, AND REALLY THE, THE REASON THAT WE JUST CITED THE SECTION HERE WAS BECAUSE IT'S IN THE HEADING OF A TABLE AND WE WERE TRYING TO SAVE SOME SPACE AND [03:20:01] KEEP FROM HAVING TO UPDATE IT AGAIN IN THE FUTURE. BUT FOR CONSISTENCY'S SAKE, WE ARE ABSOLUTELY ACCEPTING OF JUST ADDING SUB AREA PLANS TO THE EXISTING LIST. SO ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, UM, WE'RE GONNA TAKE A VOTE. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, WE ARE VOTING TO KEEP THE LANGUAGE THAT'S IN RED. SO COLUMN C WILL SAY AMENDMENTS TO FUTURE LAND USE OR TEXT CHANGES TO THE COMMUNITY, NEIGHBORHOOD, PERIMETER SECTOR AND SUB AREA PLANS. YES. YES. TAKEN AND TAKEN AWAY THAT NOT ADDING THAT BLUE STUFF, BLUE TEXT. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR PLEASE SAY AYE. AYE. ANY OPPOSED? AYE. MR. HANLEY IS OPPOSED. UM, OKAY, MOVING ON. ITEM PASSES. ALRIGHT, GIVE GIVE US JUST ONE SECOND TO MAKE THOSE CHANGES. OKAY. MOUSE CHEESE PLEASE. I MEAN IT IS BEING RECORDED. IT'S RECORDED. OKAY. OKAY, IF WE ARE ON ITEM NUMBER 19, IT'S AMENDMENT NEXT ONE. LAUREN AMENDMENT ITEM 10 DASH FOUR. I KNOW, BUT THIS IS YOU KAT. THANK YOU. SORRY, I WAS TRYING TO PULL UP MY INFORMATION TOO. UM, SO THIS ONE WAS INTRODUCED BY THE ZONING COMMISSION TO, UH, ALLOW SOME FLEXIBILITY OF MAKING AMENDMENTS AT THE DICE. UM, THIS ONE WOULD ALLOW, UM, AN AMENDMENT TO OCCUR WHEN THEY ARE DECREASING UH, THE DENSITY OF A SINGLE FAMILY, UH, DISTRICT THAT WOULD NOT TRIGGER REIFICATION. OKAY, ANY COMMENTS? MOTION, MOVE APPROVAL. MOVE A MOTION FROM MS. WRIGHT. DO WE HAVE A SECOND? SECOND, SECOND. SECOND FROM BIANCA. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR PLEASE SAY AYE. AYE. ANY OPPOSED? OKAY. MOTION PASSES. I KNOW ITEM 20 WAS ONE OF THOSE THAT WE HAD. UM, YES ACTUALLY IT'S BEEN REQUESTED TO MOVE IT BACK BUT I'M GOING TO PULL IT UP LATER. SO WE'RE GONNA MOVE TO ITEM 21. IT'S, THIS IS AMENDMENT ITEM 22 DASH 18. I CAN FORESEE THE SAME ISSUE, THE LANGUAGE COMING UP HERE. UM, AGAIN, JUST TRYING TO CAPTURE ALL OF THE DIFFERENT TYPES OF PLANS WITHOUT LISTING THEM OUT, BUT WE ARE FINE WITH KEEPING THEM LISTED OUT. UM, IN THE FIRST SECTION, THE APPLICABILITY SECTION AND SECTION B. UM, WE PREVIOUSLY SUGGESTED UPDATING IT THE, UM, DEPARTMENT THAT MAINTAINS THE NEIGHBORHOOD REGISTRY TO NEIGHBORHOOD AND HOUSING SERVICES BECAUSE THAT'S WHO INHERITED IT FROM THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT. BUT I HAVE SINCE LEARNED THAT NOW IT IS THE COMMUNICATIONS AND ENGAGEMENT DEPARTMENT. SO WE PROPOSE THAT AMENDMENT, UM, IN BOTH THE FIRST PARAGRAPH OF SECTION B AND THE, THE LAST PARAGRAPH OF SECTION B. RIGHT. AND AGAIN, IF WE WOULD, IF YOU PREFER TO KEEP THE DIFFERENT TYPES OF PLANS, THEN WE WOULD SUGGEST ADDING PERIMETER AND SUB AREA PLANS BECAUSE THEY'RE BOTH NOT CURRENTLY LISTED. I WOULD LOVE FOR THOSE AMENDMENTS TO BE MADE ON THE SCREEN SO WE CAN, AND I WOULD BE SUPPORTIVE OF IT IF BY LEAVING THE LANGUAGE THAT'S THERE, THEY'RE ADDING THE ADDITIONAL LANGUAGE YOU MENTIONED AND THEN CORRECTING THE NEIGHBORHOOD HOUSING SERVICES DEPARTMENT INTO, WHO DID YOU CALL THE DEPARTMENT COMMUNITY? OH NO, I'M SORRY. COMMUNICATIONS AND ENGAGEMENT. IT'S GONE THROUGH A COUPLE OF ITERATIONS. SO ARE THEY A DEPARTMENT, ARE THEY UNDERNEATH G P A NO, THEY ARE THEIR OWN DEPARTMENT NOW. OH. WE NEED A PRESS RELEASE ABOUT THAT. THAT'S MY UNDERSTANDING. ANYWAY. SO FOR FOR THE TIME BEING, WE CANNOT MAKE LIVE EDITS IN THE MEETING BECAUSE OUR K DRIVE IS, UH, NOT WORKING AT THE MOMENT. BUT WE ARE TAKING NOTES AND WE WILL UPDATE THESE ACCORDINGLY AND GET THEM POSTED ONLINE. OH, PERFECT. WELL THEN I MOTION FOR APPROVAL, UH, BASED ON THE AMENDMENTS THAT WE DISCUSSED WITH LEAVING THE EXISTING LANGUAGES THERE, ADDING THE PERIMETERS SECTOR. [03:25:01] WHAT ELSE AM I MISSING? SUBAR? UM, NEIGHBORHOOD COMMUNITY AND PERIMETER ARE ALREADY THERE, SO WE WOULD ADD SECTOR AND SUB AREA PLANS. SO REINSTATE THE RED, ADD THAT BACK, AND THEN PUT THE APPROPRIATE DEPARTMENT. SO MOVED. SECOND. SECOND. MOTION. AND SECOND. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, PLEASE SAY A AYE. OKAY. ITEM PASSES. UM, MOVING ON TO NUMBER 22. THIS IS AMENDMENT ITEM 23 DASH TWO. NEED TO STATE FOR THE MINUTES ALSO THAT MR. ZUKI AND MR. TAPIA HAVE LEFT THE MEETING. I WOULD JUST LIKE TO CLARIFY. YES. UH, THE PREVIOUS ONE DID, IT CAPTURED THE CHANGE OF THE DEPARTMENT NAME. OKAY. OKAY. THANK YOU. SO WE FOR, UH, AGENDA ITEM 22, UH, I'M GONNA RECOMMEND THAT WE CONSIDER THAT, UH, WITH, UH, AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 20. 'CAUSE WHAT WE'RE HEARING FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND HOUSING SERVICES DEPARTMENT IS THAT IF TIER ONE'S AMENDMENT, UH, PASSES OR HAS SUPPORT, THEY WILL WITHDRAW, UH, NUMBER 22. OKAY. WELL, WE ARE GONNA HEAR NUMBER 20 NEXT. SO THE TIMING IS PERFECT. SO I'M ACTUALLY, I KNOW WE HAD SAID WE WERE GOING TO HAVE IT SEPARATE, BUT WE ARE GONNA PULL IT NOW AND WE ARE GONNA HEAR NUMBER 20. THIS IS AMENDMENT 16 DASH 10. UH, HELLO AGAIN. STEVE STEIG, 1 0 5 RENO STREET. I'M A MEMBER OF THE TIER ONE NEIGHBORHOOD COALITION, UH, STEERING COMMITTEE. AND ON THE TIER ONE U D C COMMITTEE AS MENTIONED EARLIER. OH, WELL, WE'RE NOT GOING IN ORDER. UM, COMMUNITY ORGANIZATIONS CAN ONLY ENHANCE COMMUNICATION TIER ONE REQUESTS. THESE ORGANIZATIONS, WHICH THE CITY MAINTAINS A REGISTRY FOR ALREADY BE INCLUDED IN SECTION 35, 4 0 8. TO GET NOTICES THIS WOULD, THEY WOULD NEED TO SUPPLY THE NECESSARY INFORMATION, UH, WHICH INCLUDES BOUNDARIES. THERE IS A REVISION TO THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT AFTER DISCUSSIONS WITH D S D STAFF, UH, WHICH THAT'S WHAT WE'RE LOOKING AT, RIGHT? YES. OKAY. SO CORRECTED HERE WAS THE DEPARTMENT, WHICH I THINK IS, AS IT WAS JUST SAID, AND ALSO AGREED, WAS TO KEEP, UH, THE LAST TWO SENTENCES. UM, UH, I, I WOULD JUST NOTE THAT THOSE SENTENCES CREATE A GREAT AMOUNT OF RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE LEADERS RECEIVING THESE NOTICES. AND THAT, UH, THIS IS WHY INCLUDING MORE REGISTERED GROUPS IS VERY NEEDED SO THAT A GREATER NUMBER OF PEOPLE THAT ARE CONSIDERED NOTIFIED ARE ACTUALLY NOTIFIED. SO, UH, PLEASE APPROVE THIS IMPROVEMENT TO PUBLIC PARTICIPATION AND AN IMPROVEMENT TO CITY CITIZEN ENGAGEMENT BROUGHT TO YOU TODAY BY THE TIER ONE NEIGHBORHOOD COALITION. OKAY, THANK YOU, MR. VERTI. ANY COMMENTS, QUESTIONS, MC COMMITTEE? YEAH, I HAVE ONE QUESTION ON THIS. I, I SEE THE PROCESS OF BEING IDENTIFIED AS A COMMUNITY ORGANIZATION, BUT I DON'T SEE ANYTHING HERE HOW OFTEN THEY NEED TO UPDATE THIS SO THAT THE CITY IS CURRENT. IF THEY LIST SOMEBODY AS THE PRIMARY POINT OF CONTACT AND FOUR YEARS LATER THEY'RE NOT THERE ANYMORE. UH, SO HOW DO WE ACCOUNT FOR THAT TO NOT, TO PUT THE BURDEN ON THE CITY? SO, CURRENTLY, AND THIS IS, I'M GONNA SPEAK FROM MEMORY, SARAH, 'CAUSE WE USED TO DO THIS IN THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT MANY YEARS AGO WHEN I WAS IN THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT. WE, UM, WE CREATED THE REGISTRY. WE ALSO CREATED THE REGISTRATION FOR COMMUNITY ORGANIZATIONS. THERE'S AN INTERNAL PROCEDURE THAT THE DEPARTMENTS HAVE TO, UH, CONTINUE TO RECEIVE UPDATES, UM, WHETHER IT BE MONTHLY, QUARTERLY, OR ANNUALLY, TO MAKE SURE THAT THOSE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS AND COMMUNITY ORGANIZATIONS PROVIDE THE RIGHT CONTACT INFORMATION. UH, SO WE WOULD LEAVE THAT TO THE DEPARTMENT TO MAKE SURE THAT THEY ARE UPDATING THOSE. AND I WILL TELL YOU, BECAUSE WE NOTIFY NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS, SOMETIMES THEY REACH OUT TO US TO SAY, HEY, UH, WE HAVE A NEW EMAIL, OR WE HAVE A NEW CONTACT, AND THEN WE'LL REFER THEM TO THE DEPARTMENT SO THEY CAN UPDATE THEIR INFORMATION. THANK YOU, KATT. NO PROBLEM. I WANNA THANK STAFF FOR MEETING WITH TIER ONE BECAUSE WE'RE GONNA HEAR ANOTHER AMENDMENT THAT THIS ONE SEEKS TO ADDRESS THE CONCERN THAT ANOTHER AMENDMENT WILL SEE, UH, LATER ON OUR AGENDA. AND SO FOR THAT REASON, I, I THINK THAT THE MORE PEOPLE THAT ARE INFORMED ABOUT CHANGES THAT ARE COMING TO THE COMMUNITY, UH, IT'S JUST AS IMPORTANT. IT INCREASES THAT COMMUNICATION AND THAT LEVEL OF TRUST. AND SO FOR THAT REASON, I MOTION FOR [03:30:01] APPROVAL AS AMENDED ON THE SCREEN. THANK YOU. SECOND. OKAY. ALL THOSE, OR ANY ADDITIONAL COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, PLEASE SAY AYE. A ANY OPPOSED? OKAY, SO MOTION PASSES. I'LL TAKE ITEM NUMBER 23. THIS IS AMENDMENT 29 DASH ONE IS 22 WITHDRAWN NOW? NOW, YEAH, WE CAN YOU JUST CONFIRM THAT ON THE RECORD? WE ARE 22 IS WITHDRAWN FORMALLY. OH, HI EVERYONE. SARAH WAMSLEY WITH NEIGHBORHOOD AND HOUSING SERVICES DEPARTMENT. UM, WE WERE SUPPORTIVE OF THE AMENDMENT THAT YOU ALL JUST VOTED ON, AND WITH THAT, UM, ARE COMFORTABLE WITHDRAWING OURS. SO ONE MORE, ONE MORE CHECKED OFF YOUR LIST. THANK YOU FOR THAT. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. SO NOW ITEM 23. SORRY ABOUT THAT Y'ALL. MY NAME IS MARLENE HAWKINS. I LIVE AT 6 0 1 EAST CARSON, GOVERNMENT HILL, PRESIDENT OF GOVERNMENT HILL COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION, WHERE WE HAVE 2,500 HOUSEHOLDS, OVER 3,500 MEMBERS THAT ARE MEMBERS WITHOUT HAVING TO PAY DUES VERY MUCH LIKE BEACON HILL DOES. AND WE ARE THE ONES THAT ARE AFFECTED BY WHAT I'M GOING TO TALK ABOUT. FOR YEARS, WE HAVE BEEN RESTRICTED FROM BEING ON THE REGISTRATION LIST BECAUSE OF AN INTERPRETATION BY THE CITY OF AN INTERNAL POLICY IN, UH, THE DEPARTMENT. I GUESS IT ORIGINATED IN THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT THAT SAID NO OVERLAPPING BOUNDARIES. THAT'S NOT WHAT THE U D C SAYS. THE U D C HAS NO RESTRICTIONS ON WHO CAN APPLY IF THEY CAN MEET THOSE QUALIFICATIONS AND PROVIDE THAT, READ WHAT IT SAYS THAT, THAT THAT'S WHAT IS REQUIRED TO BE ON THE REGISTRY. UM, EXCUSE ME. UM, THE CODE SAYS ONE THING, THE POLICY SAYS ANOTHER, THE CODE OVERRIDES THE POLICY. SO THE CODE IS RIGHT. BUT IN TALKING WITH THE U D C STAFF, UH, THEY RECOMMENDED THAT WE PUT SOME WORDING IN SO THAT IT'S NOT CONFUSING, SO THAT IT'S ACTUAL SPELLS OUT WHAT THE REGISTRATION, WHAT THE INTENT OF THE U D C 35 4 0 8 IS. IF, UH, I ATTENDED, SIR, I ATTENDED ALL OF THE 2010, UH, UH, 2020 MEETINGS. YES, I ATTENDED AS AN INDIVIDUAL, BUT I REALIZED AT THE TIME THAT I WAS ALSO THE NEIGHBORHOOD REGISTRAR PRESIDENT CONCERNED WITH MY, THE PEOPLE IN MY MEMBERSHIP IN, UH, 2010, THERE WERE 282 REGISTERED NEIGHBORHOODS. AND THERE, THE VISION HERE IN 2010, WHICH FOR 2020 WAS THAT BY 2020 90% OF THE CITY WOULD BE COVERED BY I NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS. UNFORTUNATELY, WE HAVE NOT EVEN COME CLOSE TO THAT. WE HAVE ON THE REGISTERED LIST 444. AND OF THOSE MANY, MANY, MANY HAVE NOT REG HAVE NOT UPDATED THEIR REGISTRATION IN YEARS. CAN YOU SHOW THAT, PLEASE? THESE ARE, I, THIS IS, I BELIEVE, UH, DISTRICT ONE. I JUST DID A COUPLE OF THEM. YOU SEE THE MARKINGS OUT TO THE SIDE. THOSE ARE ALL ON THE REGISTRATION LIST. I JUST GOT THIS FROM OPEN RECORDS JUST A FEW DAYS AGO. LOOK, HOW MANY HAVE NOT, UH, HAVE NOT REGISTERED. SOME OF THEM, I, I START, I JUST WENT TO TWO 19 AND BACK. AND THAT SHOW ALL THOSE MARKS SHOW HOW MANY HAVE NOT REGISTERED OR REGISTRY IS NOT CORRECT. IT'S NOT UP TO DATE, AND YET OTHER PEOPLE ARE BEING DENIED TO GET ON THE REGISTRY. THE SECOND PAGE IS DISTRICT TWO, I BELIEVE I'M GOING [03:35:01] TO GET THESE TO THE COUNCIL PEOPLE. THEY NEED TO KNOW AND THEY NEED TO MAKE THE CONTACTS THEMSELVES. I AGREE WITH YOU. STAFF DOES NOT HAVE, THERE'S NOT ENOUGH STAFF TO TAKE CARE OF THIS. SO SOMEHOW IT HAS TO BE DONE. THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS ARE VERY IMPORTANT TO THE VITALITY OF OUR, OF OUR CITY. IN TALKING ABOUT THE THE AMENDMENT, THIS WAS MY FIRST GO AT THIS, PROBABLY MY LAST GO AT THIS, BUT IT WAS AN EXPERIENCE AND Y'ALL DO TREMENDOUS WORK. AND THE FIRST THING YOU SEE THAT THE NEIGHBORHOOD, IF IT'S NOT, IF IT'S GONNA ADD THE ORGANIZATIONS TO IT, IT'S NOT GONNA BE A NEIGHBORHOOD REGISTRATION ANYMORE. LET'S CHANGE IT TO A COMMUNICATION REGISTRY. THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO COMMUNICATION REGISTRY SHORTENED TO COMMUNICATION REGISTRY. AND THEN IF YOU LOOK ON DOWN, UH, THE WORD NEIGHBORHOOD REGISTRY HAS BEEN CHANGED EACH TIME TO COMMUNICATION REGISTRY. BUT WHEREVER THERE WAS JUST A NEIGHBORHOOD WE ADDED AND ORGANIZATIONS TO, UH, INCLUDE THE ORGANIZATIONS WHO ARE NOW ON A SEPARATE LIST AND DO NOT GET ANY NOTIFICATIONS, BUT THEY ARE CITIZENS OF THIS NEIGHBORHOOD REPRESENTING CERTAIN GROUPS OF PEOPLE THAT THEY DESERVE TO GET THE, THE GET THE NOTIFICATIONS TOO. AND THE PART THAT IS EXCEEDINGLY IMPORTANT IS WHERE IT SAYS UNDER CONTENT, THE VERY FIRST ONE SAYS A MAP OR WRITTEN DESCRIPTION OF, AND IT USED TO SAY NEIGHBORHOOD BOUNDARIES. UH, WE CHANGED THE, WE DID AWAY WITH NEIGHBORHOOD BOUNDARIES IF WE'RE GONNA ADD ORGANIZATIONS BECAUSE THEY HAVE DIFFERENT BOUNDARIES. UH, AND THE LAST WORDS, THERE ARE IMPORTANT AS CHOSEN BY THE ORGANIZATION AND ASSOCIATION, NOT AS CHOSEN BY THE ONE WHO'S OWNED THE REGISTRY THAT SAY YES OR NO TO THE SECOND OR THIRD LISTING ON THE REGISTRY. WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT IS THE LAW. THE CODE IS THE LAW, AND IT IS NOT RESTRICTIVE. THE POLICY THAT HAS BEEN ENFORCED, THAT HAS KEPT, KEPT MY ORGANIZATION OFF, I HAVE APPLIED THREE TIMES IN THE LAST FIVE YEARS AND BEEN DENIED EVERY TIME. WE NEED TO CHANGE. THE, THE WHOLE THING IS ABOUT THE BOUNDARIES, THE POLICY, THE LITTLE INTERNAL POLICY THAT THE D U DO YOU SEE OVERRIDES SAYS NO OVERLAPPING BOUNDARIES. BUT THAT'S NOT WHAT THE U D C SAYS. THE UDC DOESN'T SAY ANYTHING ABOUT BOUNDARIES EXCEPT THAT THEY MUST BE DESCRIBED. AND WE'RE ADDING THE PHRASE, AND THIS IS WITH U D C STAFF'S, UH, OVERSIGHT AND APPROVAL THAT WE READ SOMETHING. SO THERE'LL BE NO REASON FOR ANYBODY TO BE CONFUSED ABOUT WHO CAN BE ON THE REGISTRY. SO THAT'S VERY IMPORTANT AS CHOSEN BY THE ASSOCIATION OR ORGANIZATION. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME. THANK YOU, MS. HAWKINS. UM, GO, GO AHEAD. ASHLEY. UH, MARLENE. CAN I, MARLENE, SORRY. CAN I ASK YOU A QUICK QUESTION? I YES, PLEASE, PLEASE. THE MICROPHONE. I HAVE A HARD TIME HEARING. OKAY. ABSOLUTELY. DID YOU SEE THE LAST AMENDMENT? DO YOU THINK THAT YOUR GROUP WOULD FALL UNDER THE COMMUNITY ORGANIZATION THAT WE JUST APPROVED? I DON'T THINK Y'ALL SHOULD HAVE APPROVED THAT ONE UNTIL YOU HEARD THIS ONE. BUT NOW THIS ONE HAS A SEPARATE, HAS A SEPARATE LITTLE THING TO IT. AND IT'S ABOUT MAKING THE LAW MORE, MORE, I, YOU HAVE TO READ WHAT IT SAYS ON THAT LAST ONE. IT DOES NOT NECESSARILY OPEN IT UP TO OTHER ORGANIZATION, TO OTHER, I THINK THIS AMENDMENT, THIS ADDING OF THESE WORDS IS IMPORTANT. I, I THINK THEY'RE VERY SIMILAR. THEY'RE VERY SIMILAR, BUT I DON'T THINK THEY TAKE THE PLACE OF THOSE WORDINGS ABOUT BOUNDARIES. THAT'S THE KEY WORDING. SO THIS IS BIANCA. I JUST HAD A COUPLE OF COMMENTS. UM, I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO NOTE THAT THE CITY EVALUATED THEIR ADMINISTRATIVE POLICY FOR OVERLAPPING BOUNDARIES FOR NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS TWO TIMES, TWICE. AND A MEDIATOR WAS HIRED SPECIFICALLY TO ADDRESS THE SITUATION. PLEASE TALK LOUDER INTO YOUR, TO SPECIFICALLY ADDRESS THE SITUATION ON THE EAST SIDE. AND THIS PARTICULAR NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION, THE PRIOR AMENDMENT THAT WAS JUST APPROVED, SPECIFICALLY IDENTIFIES BOUNDARIES. BECAUSE IF YOU REGISTER AS A COMMUNITY ORGANIZATION, [03:40:01] YOU REGISTER WITH BOUNDARIES, YOU WILL BE, RECEIVE NOTICES. THAT WAS THE INTENT WITHOUT REMOVING ALL THE NEIGHBORHOODS, BECAUSE BY STATE LAW, THEY HAVE TO MAINTAIN A NEIGHBORHOOD REGISTRY. I DIDN'T REMOVE THE NEIGHBORHOODS, MA'AM. THEY'RE NOT HERE. YOUR LANGUAGE. YOU DID, YOU YOU STRUCK IT OUT. YOU PUT, UH, YOU CHANGED THIS JUST TO A COMMUNICATION INDUSTRY. COMMUNICATION, YEAH. REGISTRY. AND I KNOW THAT ESSAY SPEAK UP IS LOOKING TOWARDS DOING SIGNUPS FOR ADDITIONAL THINGS THAT MAY INTEREST YOUR COMMUNITY ORGANIZATIONS. BUT THE INTENT OF WANTING TO BE NOTIFIED FOR CASES FOR BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT, FOR ZONING IS ACCOMPLISHED IN THE ACTION THAT WE TOOK IN THE PRIOR, UM, ITEM. AND THEIR, THEIR ORGANIZATION IS REGISTERED AND WOULD RECEIVE THOSE NOTICES. IF THAT U D C AMENDMENT IS APPROVED BY COUNSEL, THIS PARTICULAR AMENDMENT THAT'S BEFORE US IS MORE, UM, IT REMOVES MORE OF WHAT IT EXISTS TODAY FOR NEIGHBORHOOD REGISTRIES. AND IT SEEKS TO CHANGE THE ENTIRE, REMOVE THE REGISTRY ALTOGETHER AND TURN IT INTO YOU'RE A COMMUNICATION TOOL. UM, SO I KNOW THAT, YOU KNOW, I UNDERSTAND THE PLITH BEHIND THIS. I UNDERSTAND THAT WHEN YOU HAVE, UM, ADVERSITY WITHIN NEIGHBORHOOD ORGANIZATIONS SEEKING TO CHANGE THE BOUNDARIES AND ALLOWING ANOTHER ORGANIZATION TO COME IN WITHIN THOSE BOUNDARIES IS DETRIMENTAL TO THE HISTORY OF SEVERAL NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS WHO HAVE WORKED THROUGH ALL OF THIS. IT'S KIND OF LIKE EVEN AN H O A, COULD YOU IMAGINE ESTABLISHING AN H O A AND HAVING A SEPARATE H O A REGISTER WITHIN THE BOUNDARIES? I MEAN, THEY'RE A LITTLE BIT MORE LEGAL NESS BEHIND THOSE STRUCTURES OF THEIR ORGANIZATIONS THAN NEIGHBORHOODS. BUT I UNDERSTAND THE REASON WHY THIS HAS COME UP. BUT I THINK THAT THE, THE, THE SITUATION WITH WANTING TO RECEIVE THE NOTICES BASED ON THEIR ESTABLISHED BOUNDARIES THAT THEY HAVE REGISTERED WITH THE CITY AS A COMMUNITY ORGANIZATION IS MET WITH THE PRIOR AMENDMENT. AND SO FOR THAT REASON, I RECOMMEND DENIAL FOR THIS AMENDMENT. THANK YOU. DOES THAT GUARANTEE THAT ALL, MA'AM, WE'RE GONNA CONTINUE COMMITTEE 'CAUSE CONVERSATIONS. THANK YOU SO MUCH. ARE THERE ANY ADDITIONAL COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS FROM THE COMMITTEE? DOES THAT GUARANTEE THAT ALL PEOPLE CAN REGISTER ON OUR NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS COMMITTEE DISCUSSING ARE ONLY THOSE? DOES THE COMMITTEE HAVE ANY ADDITIONAL COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT OR STAFF? OKAY, WE HAVE A MOTION FROM BIANCA. IS THERE A SECOND? SECOND. SECOND FROM MR. MANNA. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, PLEASE SAY AYE. AYE. ANY OPPOSED? ALL RIGHT. MOTION FOR DENIAL PASSES. SHE WORKS FOR TIER ONE TWO. OKAY, WE'RE GONNA GO. MOVING ON TO ITEM 25, AMENDMENT ITEM 22 DASH 19. MA'AM, THIS ITEM, UM, THIS ITEM SIMILAR TO THE PREVIOUS ONE, UM, IS INTENDED TO UPDATE THE NAME OF THE DEPARTMENT THAT ADMINISTERS THE NEIGHBORHOOD REGISTRATION. UM, SO THAT WOULD NEED TO BE AMENDED HERE FROM NEIGHBORHOOD AND HOUSING SERVICES TO COMMUNICATIONS AND ENGAGEMENT. THE SECOND PART OF THIS AMENDMENT IS JUST A CORRECTION. UM, SECTION 35, 420 IS CURRENTLY CITED, BUT THE NEIGHBORHOOD REGISTRATION SECTION THAT SHOULD BE CITED IS 35 4 0 8 ADMISSIONS FROM THE COMMITTEE. DEBBIE REED. MOTION TO APPROVE ROBERT HANLEY. SECOND. THAT WAS AS AMENDED, CORRECT? YES, BECAUSE WE'RE CORRECTING IT FROM NEIGHBORHOOD AND HOUSING SERVICES TO COMMUNITY COMMUNICATIONS AND ENGAGEMENT. COMMUNICATIONS AND ENGAGEMENT, YES. OKAY. OKAY. THANK YOU. SO, MOTION FROM DEBBIE. SECOND FROM MR. HANLEY. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, PLEASE SAY AYE. A AYE. ANY OPPOSED? ALL RIGHT. MOTION PASSES ON TO ITEM NUMBER 26. NOW WE'RE GOING BACK TO ITEM NUMBER ONE 16 DASH ONE ALL. SO AGAIN, I JUST WANT KIND OF TEE THIS ONE UP BY SAYING THAT THE AMENDMENTS SUBMITTED FROM TIER ONE. WE HAD AN OPPORTUNITY TO SIT DOWN, WORK OUT SOME COMPROMISES WITH THE APPLICANTS. UH, WE'RE GONNA GO AHEAD AND PULL UP THE AMENDED LANGUAGE. I THINK YOU'LL FIND THAT IN EVERY SITUATION, IT'S A LITTLE, UH, STREAMLINED, A LITTLE CLEARER TO GET THROUGH. [03:45:01] UM, BUT I WILL GO AHEAD AND LET THE APPLICANT TEE UP, UH, KIND OF WHY THE AMENDMENT WAS SUBMITTED. AND THEN WE'RE OF COURSE HERE TO ANSWER QUESTIONS AS WELL. OKAY, OLA. GOOD AFTERNOON. I'M RAY MORALES, RETIRED ARCHITECT, AND ON BEHALF OF T, T ONE AND C, THE HISTORIC WEST SIDE RESIDENCE ASSOCIATION, I'M PROPOSING AND ASKING FOR YOUR SUPPORT FOR AMENDMENT 16 DASH ONE. UH, THIS AMENDMENT SEEK TO PROTECT OUR OLDER LEGACY NEIGHBORHOODS THAT COMPRISE THE ORIGINAL 36 SQUARE MILES, WHICH DEFINES SAN ANTONIO IN THE CITY'S 1837. CHARTER AMENDMENT 16 DASH ONE IS KEY TO STABILIZING OUR INNER CITY NEIGHBORHOODS, AND IT BEGINS TO ADDRESS INCOMPATIBLE DEVELOPMENT IN OUR UNIQUELY HISTORIC AND CULTURAL COMMUNITIES. IT'S ALSO CONSISTENT WITH THE SAN ANTONIO TOMORROW, TOMORROW COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, WHICH SEEKS TO ENSURE THAT NEW DEVELOPMENT IS COMPATIBLE WITH SURROUNDING DEVELOPMENT AND USED CHARACTER AND SIZE. PER U D C STATEMENT OF PURPOSE SECTION 35 DASH 3 0 1. WHAT WE ARE ASKING FOR WITH THIS AMENDMENT IS WHAT OUR NEIGHBORHOODS HAVE BEEN ASKING FOR EVEN BEFORE THE GUADALUPE WESTSIDE COMMUNITY PLAN OF 2007 FOR COMPATIBLE DEVELOPMENT AND LAND USE APPROPRIATE TO OUR COMMUNITIES. THE ORIGINAL INTENT WHEN R ONE R TWO DISTRICTS WERE INTRODUCED BACK IN 2018 WAS TO PROVIDE OPTIONS FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING, STARTED HOMES IN EMPTY DISTRICT HOMES. ADDING A SECOND STORY, OR EVEN A THIRD STORY, IS A LUXURY WHICH WOULD REDUCE AFFORDABILITY FOR THE FIRST TWO CATEGORIES, AFFORDABLE HOMES AND STARTER HOMES. AS AN ARCHITECT, ARCHITECT, I AM ALWAYS FOCUSED ON FUNCTIONALITY AND ACCESSIBILITY. I WOULD NOT RECOMMEND TO AN OLDER CLIENT OR A DISABLED PERSON TO BUILD A TWO STORY RESIDENCE. THIS WOULD VOID THE THIRD CATEGORY, EMPTY NESTER HOMES. WE, T ONE AND C AND D S D HAVE WORKED TOGETHER MEETING NUMEROUS TIMES TO CRAFT A STRONGER AMENDMENT THAN MY ORIGINAL AMENDMENT AND HAVE AGREED TO REVISE AMENDMENT 60 DASH ONE TO JOINTLY PROPOSE R ONE AND R TWO TO BE ONE AND A HALF STORIES, 25 FEET HEIGHT, WAIVE THE OFF STREET PARKING REQUIREMENT FOR R ONE ONLY, PER NOTE, NEW NOTE NUMBER 15, R THREE TO BE TWO AND A HALF STORIES, 35 FOOT HEIGHT. WE'VE ALSO AGREED JOINTLY WITH D S D TO, TO COORDINATED HALF STORY DEFINITION. NOTE NUMBER 14 ON THIS AMENDMENT, ADDRESSING THE PROPOSED HALF STORY DEFINITION ON THE RELATING AMENDMENT 16 DASH FIVE AT THE NEXT PTAC AGENDA OF 4 25. OUR FINAL AMENDMENT REPRESENTS JUST A NODE TOOL THAT WE AS A COMMUNITY CAN EMPLOY TO MAKE OUR NEIGHBORHOODS MORE VIABLE, STABLE, HEALTHY, AND TRULY PRO PROTECT OUR, OUR INNER CITY NEIGHBORHOODS. OUR CITY, OUR INNER CITY NEIGHBORHOODS ARE RICH WITH INTANGIBLE CULTURAL HERITAGE AND HELP DEFINE THE CITY'S ROLE AS AN EPICENTER OF HISPANIC CULTURE, HISTORIC PRESERVATION, AND ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY. FINALLY, I'D LIKE TO THANK OUR D S D ADMINISTRATORS FOR WORKING WITH US ON THIS AMENDMENT ON THE OTHER 11 AMENDMENTS THAT WE HAVE LISTENED TO FROM, UH, TIER ONE NEIGHBORHOOD COALITION. THANK YOU. SO REAL QUICK, UM, LAUREN, CAN WE SCROLL UP TO THE TOP? WHAT'S ON THIS SCREEN IS THE AMENDMENT, UH, THAT WAS THE PRODUCT OF THOSE MEETINGS. AND THE FIRST THING YOU CAN SEE IS THAT WE'VE ADDED A NOTE 14 TO ALL OF COLUMN L RATHER THAN ADDING IT TO ALL OF THE ZONING DISTRICTS INDIVIDUALLY, WHERE A HALF STORY, UH, IS PERMITTED AS THE UPPERMOST, UH, NOTE 14 AT THE BOTTOM OF THAT TABLE DEFINES WHAT A HALF STORY IS. UH, AND IT EFFECTIVELY, IF THE, THE EXISTING DEFINITION SAID THAT A HALF STORY USUALLY HAS A DORMER WINDOW, IT WENT ON. YOU KNOW, IT'S, IT WAS A DEFINITION THAT WASN'T REALLY ENFORCEABLE. UH, SO WE CREATED A DEFINITION, UH, THAT CERTAINLY ALLOWS FOR DORMERS AND A SLOPING ROOF, BUT IT ALSO ALLOWS FOR, UH, THE UPPERMOST HALF STORY, UH, TO BE, UH, WITHOUT A SLOPING ROOF PROVIDED ITS SETBACK 20% FROM ALL OPPOSING WALLS. SO IF YOU THINK OF VERY MODERN ARCHITECTURE, THINK OF KIND OF THE CUBE PLACED ON TOP OF THE, THE UNDER, UH, THE STORIES UNDERNEATH IT. UH, AND THEN WE ADDED, UH, AT THE REQUEST OF OUR PLAN REVIEW DIVISION, A CLARIFICATION THAT A BASEMENT AS DEFINED IN THE BUILDING CODE DOES NOT COUNT TOWARDS, UH, THE CALCULATION OF A, OF A STORY. UH, IF WE GO BACK UP, UH, WE MADE A COUPLE EDITS TO THE MAXIMUM BUILDING HEIGHT PERMITTED IN A COUPLE ZONING DISTRICTS. SO IN THE R THE R THREE, THAT'S A RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY LOT WITH A MINIMUM LOT SIZE OF 3000 SQUARE FEET. THE EDIT IS TO ALLOW THAT STRUCTURE TO BE 35, 2 AND A HALF STORIES. UH, FOR R TWO, UH, IT IS, UH, 25 FEET, ONE AND A HALF STORY MAX. 'CAUSE THAT'S A VERY SMALL LOT. AND THEN THERE'S A SPECIAL NOTE, 15 ON THE R ONE MINIMUM LOT SIZE OF 1,250 [03:50:01] SQUARE FEET. AGAIN, KEEPING THE PROPOSED HEIGHT LIMITATION OF ONE AND A HALF STORY, BUT ADDING A NOTE 15 THAT OFF STREET PARKING IS WAIVED, UH, ON A 1,250 SQUARE FOOT LOT, THERE IS NO WAY TO PROVIDE A PARKING SPACE AND THEN HAVE A ONE AND A HALF STORY MAX. UH, SO IT WAIVES THAT REQUIREMENT, UH, JUST FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE TAC R ONE AND R TWO ARE, UH, THEY WERE CREATED, UH, SEVERAL YEARS AGO TO PROVIDE AN ALTERNATIVE TO SEEKING I D Z ZONING, WHICH FOR YEARS WAS THE ONLY THING YOU COULD ASK FOR IF YOU HAD A LOT SMALLER THAN 3000 SQUARE FEET. SO IT, UH, ENABLES A PROPERTY OWNER TO ZONE TO THOSE SINGLE FAMILY DISTRICTS. AVOID THE I D Z PROCESS, UH, BUT STILL HAVE EITHER ENOUGH SPACE ON THE LOT IN THE CASE OF R TWO TO HAVE A ONE AND A HALF STORY BUILDING AND A PARKING SPACE OR AN R ONE, A ONE AND A HALF STORY, UH, DWELLING WITH NO REQUIREMENT THAT YOU PROVIDE AN OFF STREET PARKING SPACE. OKAY, YOU'RE GONNA HAVE TO STOP AND GO WAY BACK ON THOSE ONE BY ONE. I MEAN, IT WAS JUST WENT A LOT FAST. BUT WHEN THOSE WERE ADOPTED, IT WAS EXACTLY WHAT LOGAN IS SAYING. INSTEAD OF HAVING TO GO THROUGH THE I D Z, UH, THAT YOU COULD BUILD, UH, TO JUSTIFY, GRANTED, YOU HAVE TO UNDERSTAND WHAT LAND COST IS AND THE INNER CITY VERSUS OUT ON THE SUBURBS. MY BIGGEST PROBLEM WITH THIS, IF WE ACCEPT THIS, IS IT IMPACTS THE WHOLE CITY. EXACTLY. AND NOT JUST SOMEBODY'S PERSONAL. SO UNLESS THERE'S ANOTHER METHOD WHERE WE CAN ACCOMPLISH THIS FOR THE INNER CITIES, I THINK THIS IS A BAD AMENDMENT. CAN I ADDRESS THAT? UH, WHEN, GO AHEAD. GO AHEAD, SIR. OKAY. WHEN R ONE NOR TWO WERE INTRODUCED, IT WAS TO ADDRESS THAT, LIKE YOU SAID, I D C, BUT IT, IT'S ALSO, UH, TO, UH, UH, I GUESS, UH, IMPACT THE SMALL LOTS IN THE INNER CITY. MOST OF THE INNER CITY LOTS ARE, ARE SMALL, UH, OR NOT, NOT, UH, MOST OF THE SMALL LOTS IN THE ARE IN THE INNER CITY. AND, UH, SO THIS WOULD NOT IMPACT OUTSIDE, UH, TREMENDOUSLY. I I WILL SAY THAT IF WE'RE LOOKING AT LOTS THAT ARE BETWEEN 1,250 AND 2,999 SQUARE FEET, THE LION'S SHARE OF THOSE PROPERTIES ARE WITHIN THE ORIGINAL 36 SQUARE MILES OF THE CITY. WHEN, WHEN YOU HAD BUILT YET, I'M SORRY. WELL, AND CAN YOU SPEAK TO THAT? LIKE CAN WE SPEAK TO THE DEVELOPMENT? CAN YOU WAIT, I'M SORRY. GO AHEAD. GO AHEAD, LOGAN. SO IF, IF WE'RE LOOKING AT, I, I KNOW THE COMMENT WAS HOW CAN WE, YOU KNOW, WE DON'T WANT TO AFFECT DEVELOPMENT, CITYWIDE DEVELOPMENT OUTSIDE LOOP 1604 IS NOT BEING PLATTED AS 1,250 SQUARE FOOT LOTS. THERE, THERE IS, THE R ONE ZONING DISTRICT CAN ONLY BE SOUGHT ON A PROPERTY BY PROPERTY BASIS. YOU CAN'T EVEN ZONE A SUBDIVISION FOR 1,250 SQUARE FOOT LOTS. SO AGAIN, THIS WAS A, THIS WAS A ALTERNATIVE TO I D Z, UH, SO THAT PEOPLE DIDN'T HAVE TO GO THROUGH THE PROCESS OF PUTTING TOGETHER A COMPLEX SITE PLAN WHEN ALL THEY WANTED TO DO WAS BUILD A SINGLE FAMILY HOME. THE CONCERN THAT WE'VE HEARD FROM A LOT OF NEIGHBORHOODS IS WE DON'T WANT TO SEE A TOWERING 35 FOOT STRUCTURE NEXT TO WHAT ARE PREDOMINANTLY IN THESE COMMUNITIES. SINGLE FAM OR SINGLE STORY, ONE AND A HALF STORY HOMES. WELL, CAN WE GO BACK TO THOSE SECTIONS OF THIS? BECAUSE WHAT I THINK YOU SAID IS WE'RE TRYING TO LIMIT THESE TWO, ONE AND A HALF STORY. SO TO, IN ATTEMPT TO DO AFFORDABLE PRODUCTS, YOU WOULD WANT TO GO VERTICAL, NOT OUT. BUT THIS WOULD NOT ALLOW A TWO STORY. I GET NOT A 10 STORY OR A FIVE OR A FOUR, BUT THIS WOULDN'T EVEN ALLOW A TWO STORY ON A SMALL LOT. AND ONE OF THE FUNDAMENTAL COMPONENTS OF THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING TASK FORCE, WHICH HAD MY BOSS IN MY EAR THIS WEEK GOING REMEMBER, WAS ZONING BY RIGHT TO ENCOURAGE AND PROMOTE AFFORDABLE HOUSING THROUGHOUT THE CITY. ONE. THIS IS MICHAEL. ONE OF THE OTHER THINGS ABOUT IT IS IF YOU HAVE A TWO STORY PRODUCT, YOU CAN BUILD TWICE AS MUCH OR, OR ALMOST TWO THIRDS AS MUCH AS YOU CAN BUILD WITH A ONE AND A HALF STORY, THEREBY LOWERING YOUR COST PER SQUARE FOOT, MAKING IT MORE AFFORDABLE. UM, CAN I ASK A QUESTION? I DON'T REALLY CARE. BUT, UM, DO THE, DO THE, UM, REQUIREMENTS OF HEIGHT LIMITATION WHERE YOUR SIDE REAR ARE SETBACK. IF YOU SET BACK, YOU GET AN EXTRA TWO FEET FOR EVERY, DOES THAT APPLY IN THIS SITUATION? NO, IT DOES NOT. OKAY. [03:55:01] YOU, YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT THE WAITING CAKE APPROACH, CORRECT? YEAH, NO, IT DOESN'T APPLY TO RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS. THAT'S IN ARTICLE FIVE. UH, LOGAN, NOT SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS. OKAY, LOGAN, THIS IS ROBERT HANLEY. I UNDERSTAND THAT YOU'RE NOT GONNA BE OUT AT 1604 DOING R ONE AND R TWO ZONING. UM, BUT IF YOU UNDERSTAND HOW A CITY EVOLVES AND HOW IT GROWS, YOU'RE GONNA HAVE TO GET THE LAND COST WILL NOT WORK. AND MIKE CAN TALK TO YOU ABOUT THAT. BUT YOU'RE GONNA HAVE TO GET DENTURE, AND YOU'RE NOT GONNA GET DENTURE BY HAVING DOING HISTORIAN A HALF. AND I UNDERSTAND KEEPING THE HISTORICAL CHARACTER AND THE CULTURE CHARACTER OF A PARTICULAR NEIGHBORHOOD, BUT WE'RE REALLY PUTTING OUR HEAD IN THE SAND. IF YOU THINK THIS MAKES SENSE. THIS IS BIANCA. I HAD A COUPLE OF COMMENTS. IF YOU LISTEN TO OUR PUBLIC COMMENTS THAT WE RECEIVED ON THIS PARTICULAR AMENDMENT, THEY WERE PRIMARILY FROM ORGANIZATIONS AND STAKEHOLDERS IN THE WEST SIDE, UM, WHO HAVE SPECIFICALLY RAISED THIS AS A CONCERN IN THEIR COMMUNITY. NOW, WHEN YOU SAY R ONE, R TWO, R THREE, AND WE TALK ABOUT THIS IMPACTS EVERYWHERE, CITYWIDE, LET ME TELL YOU, R ONE, R TWO, R THREE IS NOT BEING BUILT ANYWHERE OUTSIDE OF THE URBAN CORE. UH, AND THIS IS SPECIFICALLY TO ADDRESS AN INFILL DEVELOPMENT SITUATION. WHEN THOSE AMENDMENTS WERE ORIGINALLY PASSED, REMEMBER, THEY CAN'T COME AND YOU CAN'T ZONE A WHOLE, UH, A WHOLE SUBDIVISION WITH R ONE, R TWO OR R THREE. IT MUST BE DONE INDIVIDUALLY, INDIVIDUAL PROPERTIES. AND SO WITH THAT, THAT'S WHY IT TOOK, THERE WAS A LOT OF DISCUSSION THAT HAPPENED ABOUT NEGATING THE PARKING REQUIREMENT. SO TO ENSURE THAT WHEN YOU HAVE AN R ONE WITH SUCH A SMALL LOT, THAT YOU'RE STILL ABLE TO MAXIMIZE THE FOOTPRINT THERE WITHOUT CREATING AN OVERT TOWERING SITUATION IN A COMPATIBILITY SITUATION FOR THOSE TINY, SMALL LOTS. AND IT WAS TO GIVE AN OPTION ABOVE AND BEYOND THE TOOLBOX OF I D Z FOR THIS PARTICULAR AREA. SO I, I THINK THAT THEY'RE, THEY HAVE COME FORWARD WITH, YOU KNOW, A SITUATION THAT HAS BEEN DRASTICALLY IMPACTING THEIR AREA AND THEY WANTED TO BE ABLE TO CODIFY IT BECAUSE WE DON'T SEE R ONE, R TWO, R THREE BEING USED ANYWHERE ELSE, NOWHERE ELSE. AND SO, AND, AND I, I KNOW THAT YOU SAY WE USE THIS FOR CITYWIDE, BUT R ONE, R TWO, R THREE WAS NOT DEVELOPED FOR CITYWIDE BECAUSE IF IT WOULD'VE BEEN THAT WAY, THEY WOULD'VE SAID, HEY, YOU COULD DO A WHOLE SUBDIVISION R ONE, YOU COULD DO A WHOLE SUBDIVISION R TWO, YOU COULD DO A WHOLE, BUT YOU CAN'T DO THAT. YOU HAVE TO COME IN AND REZONE EVERY PLOT INDIVIDUALLY. AND SO I WAS GONNA MOTION FOR APPROVAL AS AMENDED. THIS ROBERT HELEY, GO AHEAD, MR. HEMLEY. I, I JUST, PART OF THE THINGS, I, I WANT TO UNDERSTAND THE HISTORICAL NATURE OF THE APPLICANT WHO DID THIS WHILE WE WERE SITTING HERE, BECAUSE I WAS PART OF THIS, THE GUADALUPE, SAN ANTONIO PLAN THAT THEY DID ON THE WEST SIDE, THEN I WASN'T ON THE PLANNING COMMISSION, I WAS ON THE WEST SIDE DEVELOPMENT PLAN. THEY WANTED MIXED USE. THEY WANTED DENSER. SO HOW DO THESE AMENDMENTS CO UH, COORDINATE WITH SOME OF THE PREVIOUS EFFORTS MADE ON THE WEST SIDE OF TOWN WHERE THEY WERE LOOKING FOR MIXED USE, HIGHER DENSITY AND STUFF LIKE THIS? BECAUSE THIS SOUNDS LIKE DOESN'T MATTER ALL THE TIME AND THE ENERGY THAT WE SPENT ON, ON THESE PREVIOUS PLANS ON THE WEST SIDE, THAT'S NOT WHAT WE WANT ANYMORE. I JUST FIND IT A DISCONNECT HERE SOMEWHERE. I, I, I DO WANT TO ADD ONE OTHER THING. THIS, THIS AMENDMENT DOES NOT AFFECT DENSITY. WHETHER OR NOT IT'S TWO STORIES OR ONE AND A HALF STORIES, IT'S STILL ONE UNIT ON ONE LOT. AND IF I CAN CHIME IN. SO SINCE THE ADOPTION, WHICH IS ABOUT 2017, I, WE'VE ONLY HAD A HANDFUL OF CASES THAT HAVE COME INTO REZONE FOR R ONE AND R TWO. UH, ONE OF THE AMENDMENTS MADE BY COUNCIL WAS TO NOT ALLOW FOR, UH, SUBDIVISIONS TO BE CREATED R ONE AND R TWO LOTS. SO IF I WERE TO DO A LARGE AREA REZONING, I CANNOT CHOOSE R ONE AND R TWO, UH, FOR, UH, MANY OF THOSE LOTS BECAUSE IT, IT WOULD CREATE A SUBDIVISION OF R ONE, R TWO LOTS. SO IF SOMEBODY WANTED TO GO, LET'S JUST SAY THAT THESE AMENDMENTS MOVE, PROCEED FORWARD WITH THE HEIGHT, UH, THE HEIGHT RESTRICTION, THE OPTION THAT SOMEBODY COULD CHOOSE IN A NEIGHBORHOOD. LET'S SAY THAT THEY HAD A MIX OF, UH, HEIGHTS FROM ONE STORY TO TWO STORY TO TWO AND A HALF STORY. UM, THEY COULD REQUEST I D Z, UM, INSTEAD AND THEN REZONE FOR THAT. BECAUSE AGAIN, NONE OF THESE ARE BEING APPLIED CITYWIDE. YOU HAVE TO REZONE FOR R ONE AND R TWO. IT'S JUST, IT IS A, A MORE RESTRICTIVE, UM, IT IS CHANGING R THREE TO A MORE RESTRICTIVE, UM, HEIGHT. BUT, UH, YOU STILL HAVE OTHER OPTIONS IF YOU WANT TO DO WHAT EVERY OTHER TRADITIONAL RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT DOES. IT'S I D Z 'CAUSE IT HAS 35 FEET, TWO AND A HALF STORIES, RIGHT? KA, THIS IS ROBERT HANLEY. AGAIN, IF I'M OVER ON THE WEST SIDE, WHEN WE WERE WORKING ON SOME OF THESE, UM, DESIGN ETTES AND PLANS, THERE ARE A LOT OF LITTLE HOUSES THAT ARE EXISTING THAT SIT ON LOTS ABOUT THIS BIG. SO I THINK YOU PROBABLY UNDERSTAND THE CONCEPT OF THE LIFE OF A BUILDING, IF THE BUILDING IS GONNA COLLAPSE OR IF [04:00:01] IT'S MORE EXPENSIVE TO RESTORE IT AND TEAR IT DOWN AND START OVER, THEN THIS CHANGE WILL NOT ALLOW YOU TO DO THAT. ONLY IF IT'S REZONED FOR R ONE AND R TWO, WHICH WOULD'VE BEEN OWNER DRIVEN. IF IT'S A, IF IT'S A FEE SIMPLE LOT OVER OFF OF, UH, GUADALUPE, IF IT'S ZONED R FOUR, R FIVE, OR R SIX, THEY COULD DO TWO AND A HALF STORIES, 35 FEET. THE, THE ONLY TIME THAT ANYONE WOULD EVER BE SUBJECT TO THIS ONE AND A HALF STORY LIMITATION IS IF THEY SUBMITTED THE CHANGE OF ZONING APPLICATION SEEKING IT, THE CITY WILL NOT ZONE PROPERTY R ONE OR R TWO. OKAY, WE CAN'T, WE HAVE A MOTION IN SECOND. SECOND. WE'RE GONNA MOVE ON. WE HAVE A MOTION IN A SECOND. SECOND. WE'RE MOVING ON. HELLO PEOPLE. WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, PLEASE SAY AYE. AYE. ANY OPPOSED? AYE. ROLL CALL IS MR. HANLEY, MS. WRIGHT, AND MS. TACKETT AS BEING OPPOSED. MOTION PASSES AS AMENDED BY THE APPLICANT. UM, NUMBER TWO, ITEM 16 DASH 12. GOOD AFTERNOON. UH, MY NAME IS MARY JOHNSON. I'M THE PRESIDENT OF THE MONTE VISTA TERRACE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION. I'M ALSO A MEMBER OF THE TIER ONE NEIGHBORHOOD COALITION. UM, I LIVE AT 1 25 WEST RIDGEWOOD COURT. UM, I WAS ON THE R M M S TASK FORCE. I SUBMITTED THIS AMENDMENT ON BEHALF OF THE TIER ONE NEIGHBORHOOD COLLISION TO COMPLETE A LIST OF DESIRED CHANGES THAT WERE NOT FULLY ACCOMPLISHED IN THAT, UH, R M M F TASK FORCE. THE AMENDMENT I SUBMITTED CONCERNING THE HEIGHTS AND AREA LOCK COVERED RATIO FOR RMM FOUR, FIVE, AND SIX WERE DISCUSSED IN THAT TASK IN THE TASK FORCE MEETINGS. AND THERE WAS GENERAL CONSENSUS AND AGREEMENT FROM THE TASK FORCE MEMBERS ON THESE HEIGHTS AND AREA LOCK COVERAGE FOR RM FOUR, FIVE, AND SIX. UH, WHICH, WHICH I SUBMITTED IN THIS AMENDMENT. THE TIER ONE, UH, SUBCOMMITTEE MET SEVERAL TIMES WITH CITY STAFF OVER THE LAST THREE WEEKS TO DISCUSS THIS AMENDMENT AS WELL AS THE OTHER TIER ONE AMENDMENTS. THE MEETINGS WERE PRODUCTIVE AND WE CAME TO A FINAL CONSENSUS OF REVISION TO THIS U D C AMENDMENT THAT I SUBMITTED, AND I THINK STAFF HAS IT UP THERE. UM, AND I WOULD SINCE, UH, I WOULD SINCERELY LIKE TO THANK STAFF FOR ALL THEIR HARD WORK AND THEIR TIME THEY GAVE US AND THEIR GUIDANCE. IT WAS A GREAT LEARNING EXPERIENCE AND I'M ASKING FOR YOUR SUPPORT FOR THIS AMENDMENT. SO THE ONLY WITH THE AMENDMENT, THE ONLY THING THIS PROPOSAL SEEKS TO DO IS ADD TO THE RM DISTRICT'S A MAXIMUM 65% LOT AREA, UH, FOR IMPERVIOUS COVER. UH, NOTE 14 WAS ADDRESSED IN THE PREVIOUS AMENDMENT, UH, AND THEN THERE'S NO PROPOSED CHANGE TO THE HEIGHT FOR THE RM DISTRICT. SO ONLY THAT 65% MAX COVERAGE, IT'S BIANCA MOTION FOR APPROVAL AS AMENDED IS ERIC. SECOND. SECOND CHAIRMAN, WE HAVE A MOVEMENT IN A SECOND. LOGAN, LET ME ASK YOU A QUESTION. I CAN DRIVE YOU ALL AROUND THE INNER CITY AND, UH, ASK YOU WHETHER YOU CAN OBTAIN A 65 MAX IMPERVIOUS COVER WITH A LOT OF THE INFIELD DEVELOPMENT THAT HAS OCCURRED IN THE PAST FOUR OR FIVE YEARS. SO THIS IS GONNA PREVENT THIS GOING FORWARD, CORRECT? UH, NO. UH, THIS IS APPLICABLE TO THE RMM DISTRICTS ONLY RESIDENTIAL MIX. SO DUPLEX, TRIPLEX, QUADRUPLEX, OKAY. AFFORDABLE HOUSING AND, AND THE LOT COVERAGE ONLY APPLIES TO THE PRIMARY STRUCTURE. IT DOES NOT INCLUDE, IT DOES NOT INCLUDE ACCESSORY STRUCTURES, DOES NOT INCLUDE THE DRIVEWAY. IT'S APPLICABLE TO THE PRIMARY STRUCTURE. ONLY 5% OF 4,000 SQUARE FEET. D DOES THIS ALSO ONLY APPLY TO THE LOTS. THEY'RE A THIRD ACRE OR LESS, OR ALL RM FOUR. IT SHOULDN'T BE. THIS IS ALL ARM, ARM, UH, DISTRICTS. SO ON A, ON A 4,000 SQUARE FOOT LOT, YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT A 2,600 SQUARE FOOT BUILDING FOOTPRINT, PRIMARY ONLY. AND IF YOU SCROLL UP LAUREN, YOU'LL SEE THAT THIS IS CONSISTENT WITH THE OTHER SMALL LOTS THAT WE HAVE, UH, LOT SIZE, UH, MAXIMUMS FOR. SO WHEN WE DID THE R THREE R TWOS AND R ONES, WE ALSO ESTABLISHED, UM, MAXIMUM LOCKED AREA COVERAGES. WE'RE JUST SORT OF APPLYING THE SAME CONCEPT TO THE RMMS KAT. THIS IS ROBERT HANLEY. IS UM, THE IMPERVIOUS COVER APPLY ONLY TO THE FOOTPRINT OF THE BUILDING OR DOES IT APPLY TO THE SIDEWALKS AND DRIVEWAYS, ET CETERA? ONLY TO THE, UH, FOOTPRINT OF THE BUILDING. OF THE PRIMARY STRUCTURE. OKAY, SO THE WHOLE, THANK YOU. MM-HMM. . OKAY. WE DO HAVE A MOTION FROM YOKA AND A SECOND FROM ERIC. IS THERE ADDITIONAL [04:05:01] COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS ABOUT THIS ITEM? OKAY. UM, I'LL PLEASE SAY AYE. AYE. ANY OPPOSED? SAME. OKAY. WE HAVE AN ABSTENTION FROM MR. HANLEY. MOVING ON TO ITEM NUMBER EIGHT 16 DASH NINE. HI, MY NAME IS, UH, GEORGE DE LA GARZA. I AM ALSO A MEMBER OF THE TIER ONE, UH, STEERING COMMITTEE, UM, AND THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION. UM, UM, MY, UH, MY INTENT HERE IS TO, UM, I WORKED ON THE RMM, UH, MF TASK FORCE, UH, C C R COMMITTEE IN TWO, 2019. AND, UM, OUR INTENT WAS TO ADD SOME OF THE ITEMS, UM, THAT WERE LEFT OFF IN THE AMENDMENTS THAT WERE DONE FOR THE 2019, UH, UH, AMENDMENTS. SO THIS HAS KIND OF BEEN A DYNAMIC, UM, SITUATION BECAUSE, UM, IN ADDITION TO THIS, I THINK LOGAN CAN, UH, REITERATE, UM, WE HAVE NOW AN ATTACHED ON RMM FOUR OR FIVE AND SIX, THE UNITS HAVE TO BE ATTACHED, WHEREAS PREVIOUSLY IT, THAT'S A, AN AMENDMENT THAT IS UP FOR CONSIDERATION. NOW IT PASSES. THIS IS WHAT WOULD ADDRESS THOSE ATTACHED UNITS. UM, THE MAIN, WHAT WE MODELED, THE ORIGINAL AMENDMENT THAT YOU HAVE UNDER HERE WAS THE COTTAGE AMENDMENT, WHICH IS DIRECTLY ABOVE THIS. BUT AS WE GOT INTO THE, AND WE NEEDED SOMETHING TO ADDRESS THE MULTIPLE, UH, THE MULTIPLE UNIT STRUCTURES. SO WHAT WE DID WAS, UM, WE SKIIED THIS DOWN QUITE A BIT AND BASICALLY WHAT WE'RE AMENDING NOW IS THE, UM, NUMBER THREE, NUMBER FIVE, AND NUMBER SIX, WHICH IS THE DENSITY OF THE FLOOR AREA. UM, AND THE REQUIRED OPEN SPACE, WHICH WE'VE TAKEN FROM ANOTHER SECTION. ALSO, WE'RE AMENDING THE, UM, OR WE'RE ADDING SOME PARKING, A COUPLE OF PARKING PROVISIONS IN NUMBER SIX. AND THAT'S TO ALLOW, UM, TO PREVENT FRONT YARD PARKING, UM, IN FRONT OF THE STRUCTURE, NOT, UM, AND THEN ALSO TO PROVIDE, UM, UH, DRIVE, UH, DIMENSIONS TO ALLOW FOR A THREE FOOT, UH, BUFFER. SO THESE, THIS MAKES A NEW MULTIPLE ATTACHED UNITS, UH, CONTEXTUAL BY SCALE AND DENSITY WITH THE EXISTING NEIGHBORHOODS. UH, WE'D LIKE, UH, I'D LIKE TO HAVE YOUR APPROVAL FOR THIS AMENDMENT AND, UM, ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU HAVE. THANK YOU, MR. DE LA GARZA. ARE THERE ANY COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS FROM THE COMMITTEE CHAIR? IF I MAY? WE HAVE JUST A MINOR, A LITTLE, UH, ADJUSTMENT SO THAT WAY WE, WE ONLY USE CAPS WHEN WE'RE GOING TO REFER TO AN ACTUAL, UM, WORD THAT'S DEFINED IN, IN THE APPENDIX A. SO INSTEAD OF CAPITALIZING MULTIPLE ATTACHED UNITS, IF WE COULD UNCAP THAT, NOT, NOT IN THE DARK, NOT IN THE BOLT, BUT IN THE UNBOLDED THERE. PERFECT. AND THEN NOT USE AN ACRONYM, M A U JUST CONFERRING WITH LEGAL HERE SO WE CAN OKAY. MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE CONSISTENT WITH THAT. AND YOU'LL SEE ON THAT, THAT THIS WOULD ONLY APPLY TO LOTS THAT ARE ONE THIRD OF AN ACRE OR LESS. IF YOU'LL RECALL ONE OF OUR FIRST MEETINGS, WE HAVE A, A STAFF AMENDMENT, UH, THAT TALKED ABOUT REQUIRING ALL UNITS IN ONE STRUCTURE FOR R M AND M F LOTS, UH, THROUGH THE PTAC. WE, UM, REVISE THAT TO ONLY APPLY TO LOTS, ONE THIRD OF AN ACRE OR SMALLER. SO IT WOULD ONLY IMPACT THOSE IN THE INNER CITY. AND SO THESE, UM, REGULATIONS WHICH ARE IN OUR SUPPLEMENTAL USE REGULATIONS WOULD THEN APPLY TO THOSE LOTS, UM, IN ORDER TO, UH, DETERMINE HOW THEY ARE, UH, DESIGNED. AND THE ONLY REQUIREMENTS, ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS THAT ARE BEING PROPOSED WITH THIS AMENDMENT WOULD BE, UM, A MAXIMUM BLOCK COVERAGE. [04:10:01] UM, A REQUIRED OPEN SPACE. AND THAT REQUIRED OPEN SPACE IS SIMILAR LANGUAGE TO WHAT'S IN OUR TOWN HOME DEVELOPMENT. THAT'S ALSO IN SUPPLEMENTAL USE REGULATIONS. AND THEN, UH, PARKING AND WHERE THAT'S LOCATED AND MAKING SURE THAT CURB CUTS AND DRIVEWAYS, UM, ARE CONSISTENT. 'CAUSE AGAIN, THESE ARE LOTS THAT ARE WITHIN INNER CITY NEIGHBORHOODS WHERE THEY HAVE DETACHED GARAGES IN THE BACK, UH, WHERE THEY HAVE, UM, LARGER LOTS TO WHERE THEY HAVE A DRIVEWAY THAT LEADS TO THE REAR KA. HOW DO WE KNOW THESE ARE ONLY IN THESE INNER CITY LOTS? WE'RE NOT SAYING THEY'RE ONLY THERE, BUT MOST OF THE ONES THAT ARE GOING TO BE IMPACTED ARE IN INNER CITY. YOU WILL HAVE, UH, THOSE OCCASIONAL DUPLEX, TRIPLEXES QUADPLEXES THAT, UM, ARE BUILT, UH, FIVE FOOT TO FIVE FOOT OR OR PLANNING TO BE BUILT, FIVE FOOT TO FIVE FOOT. IF THEY CAN'T COMPLY WITH THESE STANDARDS, IT WOULD TRIGGER A BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT VARIANCE REQUEST OR THEY CAN DESIGN IT TO MAKE SURE THAT THEY COMPLY WITH THESE STANDARDS. I MAKE A MOTION FOR APPROVAL AS AMENDED. SECOND COMMENT. OKAY. AND WE HAVE A COMMENT FROM WHAT I'M, WHAT I'M SEEING HERE IS THESE THINGS ARE REALLY TAKING A MAJOR HIT ON OUR AFFORDABLE HOUSING MARKET AND, UM, TREMENDOUS IMPACTS. AND BECAUSE THEY ARE CITYWIDE, WE KEEP ON TALKING ABOUT THESE AS IF THINGS DON'T CHANGE IN THE REAL ESTATE WORLD AND IN THE REAL ESTATE ENVIRONMENT, AS IF EVERYTHING THAT IS DONE TODAY DOWNTOWN AND ONLY APPLIES TO INNER CITY OR VERY LIMITED AREAS IS NOT FACTUAL. THAT DOESN'T AFFECT, UM, THAT DOESN'T STAY THE SAME OVER TIME. AND ALL OF THESE THINGS WE'RE GETTING INTO DESIGN ELEMENTS, WE'RE GETTING INTO SO MANY THINGS THAT TYPICALLY HAVE BEEN MARKET DRIVEN, NOT ORDINANCE DRIVEN. AND WHAT I'M SAYING IS THIS DRIVE TO CREATE STANDARDS THAT HAVE NOTHING TO DO WITH THE MARKETPLACE AND HAVE TO DO WITH CURRENT OPINIONS ON HOW WE DEVELOP AND I WILL REMAIN OPPOSED. YEAH. THIS IS MICHAEL. I JUST WANTED TO POINT OUT THAT THE 400 SQUARE FEET OF OPEN SPACE CAN BE UP TO, UH, TO AS MUCH AS 10% OF THE TOTAL LOT SIZE, WHICH SEEMS TO ME TO BE A LITTLE EXCESSIVE FOR EACH HUNDRED, FOR EACH THE HUNDRED SQUARE FEET PER UNIT. PER UNIT. PER UNIT. UM, LOGAN, UM, I'D LIKE TO MAKE A COMMENT THAT IT'S KIND OF HARD TO LOOK AT THESE AMENDMENTS THAT WERE MADE ON THE FLY AND WE DIDN'T HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO LOOK AT THEM, JUST STUDY THEM. JUST STUDY THEM AND SEE WHAT THE RAMIFICATIONS. THERE'S A LOT OF GOOD DIALOGUE ON BOTH SIDES THAT HAVE COME OUT OF THIS. BUT IF THIS HAPPENS, AGAIN, I'M GONNA RECOMMEND THAT WE TABLE OR POSTPONE CONSIDERATION UNTIL WE HAVE, BECAUSE WE'RE SITTING HERE LOOKING AT LANGUAGE THAT YOU'VE WORKED OUT WITH THIS GROUP, THE APPLICANT, AND WE'RE TRYING TO, TO SEE WHAT THE IMPACT IS. AND AS YOU WELL KNOW THAT THE U D C IS NOT A SIMPLE PARAGRAPH BY PARAGRAPH. IT'S INTEGRATED INTO A LOT OF THINGS, HAS A LOT OF RAMIFICATION, AND, AND IT'S VERY DIFFICULT FOR US AS COMMITTEE MEMBERS TO EVALUATE THIS ON THE FLY. SO I'M, I WILL EXPRESS MY DISAPPOINTMENT IN SEEING THIS LEVEL OF THINGS THAT REALLY IMPACT THE, THE WHOLE CITY. I WOULD JUST ADD MY COMMENT TOO, AS I AM CONCERNED WHEN WE ARE NEGOTIATING ITEMS WITH STAFF PRIOR TO THESE BEING HEARD BY THE COMMITTEE AND MAKING AMENDMENTS WHEN WE HAVE NOT VOICED OUR OPINION. SO I'M NOT REAL PLEASED WITH THAT PROCESS AS WELL. WELL, WE DO HAVE A MOTION FROM BIANCA, HER, I DIDN'T HEAR WHO THE SECOND WAS FROM. WAS THERE A SECOND? THAT'S ERIC. ERIC, OKAY. UM, ARE THERE, IS THERE ANY ADDITIONAL, UM, DISCUSSION? OKAY, PAUL, I GUESS WE WILL, UH, VOTE ON THIS. UM, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, PLEASE SAY AYE. AYE. ALL THOSE OPPOSED ABSTAIN? AYE. AYE. AYE. WE'RE GONNA DO A ROLL CALL. VOTE. MS. MALDONADO. YES. MR. ESDA? YES. MR. SIPES? YES. MR. TEEL? YES. NO. MS. COHEN? NO. MS. WRIGHT? NO. MS. FAIRMONT? NO. MS. TACKETT? NO. MR. LEEMAN? NO. [04:15:01] MS. GANS? NO. MR. BROWN? YES SIR. MR. HANLEY? NO. . MR. DOMINGUEZ ABSTAIN. MR. MANNA? YES. MS. REED? YES. AND VICE CHAIR, HANS, NO. MOTION FAILS. MOTION FAILS. CAN I GET ANOTHER MOTION? MOTION TO POSTPONE SECOND POSTPONE. CONTINUING THAT TO A, TO A MEETING. A DENIAL THAT WAS NO, IT'S NOT, IT WAS A MOTION FOR APPROVAL. WHICH GOD, A MOTION TO APPROVE FAILED. NEW MOTION FOR APPROVAL DID NOT PASS. SO WE HAVE A MOTION FOR POSTPONEMENT? YES. MAKE A MOTION FOR DENIAL. WE ALREADY HAVE A MOTION ON THE FLOOR. WE, WE, WE WOULD NEED A MOTION. I WITHDRAW MY MOTION. AND FOR POSTPONEMENT, WITHDRAWN TO DENY. SECOND. SECOND. SO I JUST HAD A COMMENT. I, I THINK THAT YOU'VE EXPRESSED CONCERN THAT YOU HAVEN'T HAD TIME TO REVIEW IT. SO YOU WANNA DENY IT BECAUSE YOU DON'T WANNA ALLOW A ADDITIONAL TIME TO REVIEW THE INFORMATION. I, I JUST DON'T THINK THAT THAT'S IN GOOD FAITH TO THE PROCESS BECAUSE THE APPLICANT ENGAGED WITH CITY STAFF BECAUSE THERE'S NOT AN REALLY AN OPPORTUNITY TO DO IT UNTIL YOU GET A SPONSORSHIP BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION. YOU KNOW, I HAD MENTIONED SENDING THESE TO A SUBCOMMITTEE, BUT THEY COULDN'T GO TO A SUBCOMMITTEE UNTIL THEY WERE HEARD BY US. I JUST THINK THAT IT'S A LITTLE DISRESPECTFUL TO THE PROCESS IF WE DON'T GIVE THEM THE OPPORTUNITY TO COME BACK AND GIVE YOU THE OPPORTUNITY TO REVIEW THOSE OF YOU WHO HAVE CONCERN AS OPPOSED TO JUST DENYING IT BECAUSE YOU DIDN'T HAVE ENOUGH TIME TO REVIEW IT. THAT'S JUST MY 2 CENTS. BIANCA, I UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU'RE SAYING. WHAT WAS THE CUTOFF FOR AMENDMENTS TO THE U D C? FEBRUARY 1ST. AND WHERE ARE WE TODAY? HERE WE'RE, I'M GONNA INTERJECT HERE, FOLKS. WE'RE NOT GONNA HAVE THIS, THIS CONVERSATION. THERE IS A MOTION FOR, UM, DENIAL AND A SECOND. AND COMMENTS HAVE BEEN MADE ALREADY. UM, I THINK ENOUGH ON A POSITION FOR WHERE WE STAND ON THIS ITEM. SO WE'RE GONNA TAKE UP THE VOTE AND WE'RE GONNA DO A ROLL CALL. VOTE FOR MOTION FOR DENIAL. MR. BROWN? YES. MS. ETT? YES. MR. SIPES? NO. NO. MR. MR. TEAL? YES. MS. COHEN? YES. MS. WRIGHT? YES. MS. FAIRMONT? YES. MR. LEESMAN? YES. MS. PLUGINS? YES. MR. HANLEY? YES. MR. DOMINGUEZ? NO. MR. ESDA? NO. MR. MANNA? NO. MS. REED? NO. MS. MALDONADO? NO. VICE CHAIR CARAL HAYNES? YES. MOTION PASSES. MADAM CHAIR, CAN I JUMP IN WITH, WITH A COMMENT? YES, PLEASE. UH, THIS IS MIKE SHANNON, UH, DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DIRECTOR. I JUST WANNA CLARIFY ONE THING. UM, SO I THINK THAT WAS A GOOD DISCUSSION ON ALL THAT. I KNOW THAT WAS A DIFFICULT ONE. UH, BUT WHEN ANY APPLICANT, UM, PROPOSES AN AMENDMENT, UH, I THINK YOU ALL KNOW OUR ROLE AS CITY STAFF IS TO MEET WITH ANY APPLICANT IF THEY HAVE QUESTIONS, TO FINE TUNE THEIR AMENDMENT, HELP THEM WITH PROPOSED AMENDMENTS. AS YOU SEE HERE, SOME ARE VERY EASY, SOME ARE VERY INTRICATE. UM, BUT IT'S NOT A NEGOTIATION, IT'S JUST ACTUALLY WORKING THROUGH THEIR PROPOSAL, THE INTENT, TRYING TO PUT THEIR BEST FOOT FORWARD, UH, SO THAT THIS COMMITTEE CAN DECIDE IF IT'S GOOD OR NOT. SO I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE OUR STAFF IS AVAILABLE TO ANY APPLICANT, UH, ON ANY OF THESE. AND THAT'S WHAT WE'VE BEEN DOING. WE'LL CONTINUE TO DO THAT. UH, BUT I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE EVERYBODY UNDERSTANDS WHAT OUR ROLE SO FAR ON THIS IS. SO THAT'S IS MY 2 CENTS. THANK YOU. MANNA. YES. SO I HAVE A QUESTION FOR, UH, STAFF HERE. SO WE'RE GETTING READY TO REVIEW MORE, I GUESS 16 MORE. 16. AND IS IT, AND UH, IS IT GOING TO BE A SIMILAR PROCESS WITH REGARDS TO, UH, INPUT FROM THE CITY ON THESE SO THAT WE'RE GONNA BE READING SOME THAT HAVE WE'LL SAY, NOT NECESSARILY BEEN VETTED BY ALL OF US? UM, AND, UH, IS THAT, IS THAT A TRUE STATEMENT? YES. YES. SO ADDRESSING THAT ACTUALLY BEFORE YOU MOVE ON. UM, SO, SO MY QUESTION WOULD BE THAT, YOU KNOW, RATHER THAN GO THROUGH THE LABOR OF POTENTIALLY REJECTING ALL OF THESE 'CAUSE WE HAVEN'T HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO REVIEW THEM, UM, YEAH, I WOULD ALMOST LIKE TO PUT IN MOTION, UH, RAISE A MOTION TO, UM, [04:20:01] CONTINUE ALL OF THESE UNTIL THE NEXT MEETING, YOU KNOW, SO THAT WE HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO READ THESE. OKAY. THAT, THAT ACTUALLY SOUNDS BETTER THAN I WAS GONNA SAY. 'CAUSE I DO HAVE TO LEAVE. AND SO I WAS GONNA ASK IF WHETHER WE ALL WANTED TO CONTINUE THE MEETING OR PUSH THESE TO THE NEXT ITEM OR TO THE NEXT MEETING. SO, UM, YOU'RE, WE HAVE FIVE. WE HAVE FIVE. THAT WAS MY MOTION ITEMS. SECOND TO GO. SO THAT WILL BE ITEM 16 DASH TWO 16 DASH THREE, 16 DASH EIGHT, 16 DASH 11, AND 16 DASH SIX. IS THAT ACCURATE BY STAFF'S ACCOUNT? YES. OKAY. SO THE, DID, DID WE WANT TO CONTINUE THOSE TO THE NEXT AVAILABLE MEETING OR MAY 9TH WITH THE OTHERS THAT HAVE BEEN CONTINUED TODAY? NEXT AVAILABLE MEETING, IF THAT'S OKAY WITH STAFF. DOES THAT DOES FLOW? OKAY. MM-HMM. ? YES. YES. 16 DASH EIGHT. YES. POINT OF CLARIFICATION, CAN WE MAKE IT A PART OF THE MOTION THAT THESE, UH, THE AMENDED VERSIONS OF THESE AMENDMENTS ARE SENT OUT TO ALL OF US? BECAUSE OTHERWISE IF WE DON'T CLARIFY THAT, YOU'RE JUST GONNA GET THE AMENDMENT THAT WAS NOTICED. SO JUST TO YOUR WHOLE POINT TO HAVE TIME TO MULL IT OVER. THANK YOU. AND, AND THE CITY IS THAT, IS THAT OKAY WITH YOU WITH REGARDS TO MOVING THE AMENDED VERSIONS OUT TO EVERYBODY SO EVERYONE CAN READ IT? OKAY. YEAH, CERTAINLY WE HAVE AMPLE TIME TO DO THAT. OKAY. IF THEY'RE GONNA BE PUSHED TO THE, THE 25TH? YES. THANK YOU. OKAY. SO WE ARE MOVING THOSE FIVE ITEMS. I HAVE A MOTION FOR MR. MANNA, A SECOND FROM MS. WRIGHT. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? AYE. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. WE ARE ADJOURNED. SEE YOU ALL ON THE 25TH. THANK YOU. * This transcript was created by voice-to-text technology. The transcript has not been edited for errors or omissions, it is for reference only and is not the official minutes of the meeting.