5. Ordinance establishing a six month dockless vehicle pilot program, the creation of permit and application fees, and amending City Code to allow riding and parking dockless vehicles in the Right of Way. [Lori Houston, Assistant City Manager; John Jacks, Director, Center City Development & Operations]

[5. Ordinance establishing a six month dockless vehicle pilot program, the creation of permit and application fees, and amending City Code to allow riding and parking dockless vehicles in the Right of Way. [Lori Houston, Assistant City Manager; John Jacks, Director, Center City Development & Operations]]

MOTION CARRIES.

ITEM NO. 5.

>> ITEM NO. 5 IS AN ORDINANCE ESTABLISHING A SIX-MONTH DOCKLESS VEHICLE PILOT PROGRAM, THE CREATION OF PERMIT AND APPLICATION FEES, AND AMENDING CITY CODE TO ALLOW RIDING AND PARKING DOCKLESS VEHICLES IN THE RIGHT OF WAY.

>> GOOD MORNING, MAYOR, CITY COUNCIL.

THE ITEM BEFORE YOU TODAY IS CONSIDERATION TO ADOPT AN ORDINANCE AND AMEND EXISTING ORDINANCES IN ORDER TO IMPLEMENT A PILOT PROGRAM FOR THE DOCKLESS VEHICLES THAT YOU CURRENTLY SEE HERE IN SAN ANTONIO, WHICH IS SCOOTERS, BUT COULD POSSIBLY BE BIKES IN THE FUTURE.

WE HAVE A BRIEF PRESENTATION FOR YOU.

AS YOU'VE PROBABLY SEEN, WE CURRENTLY HAVE SCOOTERS.

A LOT OF THEM IN THE DOWNTOWN AREA, BUT WE'VE ALSO SEEN THEM IN OTHER PARTS OF TOWN APPEARING, FOR EXAMPLE, AT THE UTSA AREA OUT IN THE NORTHWEST AREA OF SAN ANTONIO AS WELL AS SOME OF THE INNER CITY NEIGHBORHOODS.

CURRENTLY THERE ARE 1700 BIRD SCOOTERS THAT ARE DEPLOYED, 850 LIME SCOOTERS, AND 453 BLUE DUCKS.

WE HAVE ALSO RECEIVED QUITE A BIT OF INTEREST FROM OTHER COMPANIES.

WE HAVE MET WITH THEM, TALKED TO THEM.

RAZOR USA, ZACHSTER, SPIN, AND SKIP ARE ALSO INTERESTED IN LAUNCHING THEIR SCOOTERS AS WELL HERE IN SAN ANTONIO.

REALLY THE PURPOSE OF THIS IS TO ANALYZE AND STUDY OVER THE NEXT SIX MONTHS THE ACTIVITIES, THE RIDERS, THE RIDERSHIP, REALLY TO GET A BETTER UNDERSTANDING OF WHAT THE IMPACT IS ON THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO, OUR STREETS, AND OUR CITIZENS.

AS PART OF THIS PROGRAM IT WILL INCLUDE A $10 PER VEHICLE FEE WITH A VENDOR APPLICATION FEE OF $500.

WE ARE NOT RECOMMENDING AT THIS TIME ANY CAPS ON THE NUMBER OF VEHICLES OR THE NUMBER OF VENDORS.

WE THINK IT'S TOO EARLY.

WE DON'T HAVE ENOUGH DATA TO DETERMINE YET, IF THERE WERE TO BE A CAP, WHAT THAT NUMBER WOULD BE.

ANY NUMBER WE WOULD RECOMMEND WOULD BE VERY ARBITRARY.

WE ARE ALSO NOT RECOMMENDING THAT WE LIMIT THEM GEOGRAPHICALLY TO THE CITY.

IN OTHER WORDS, THEY ARE ALLOWED TO RIDE ANYWHERE IN THE CITY.

WE DO HAVE RULES ABOUT HOW YOU RIDE THEM AND WHERE YOU RIDE THEM BUT WE'RE NOT TELLING THE COMPANIES THAT THEY SHOULD OR SHOULD NOT BE IN A CERTAIN PART OF TOWN.

ALSO, WE'RE REQUIRING THAT THEY HAVE A SAN ANTONIO-BASED FLEET MANAGER.

SO THAT'S SOMEBODY LOCALLY THAT'S HERE IN SAN ANTONIO THAT WE HAVE DIRECT COMMUNICATION WITH TO ADDRESS ANY ISSUES OR PROBLEMS, OR ALSO JUST TO GET INPUT FROM AND COMMUNICATE WITH.

WE ALSO WILL BE REQUIRING SOME MONTHLY REPORTING ON USAGE, VIOLATIONS, AND TRIP DATA.

WE'LL USE THAT DATA TO HELP INFORM US BETTER GOING FORWARD SO THAT AT THE END OF THE SIX-MONTH PERIOD WE'LL HAVE A BETTER IDEA OF WHETHER OR NOT WE NEED TO MAKE ANY AMENDMENTS, MAKE THINGS SIMPLER, EASIER, OR ADD ITEMS AS WELL.

WE'RE ALSO REQUIRING THAT THE APP THAT IS USED WILLSE HAVE AN EDUCATION PIECE.

THEY'RE CURRENTLY DOING THIS.

BUT WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT IT CONTINUES.

SO IT WILL MAKE RECOMMENDATIONS FOR RIDERS BEFORE THEY RIDE OR AS PART OF THE SIGN-UP PROCESS FOCUSING ON RIDER SAFETY, AREAS WHERE RIDING IS PROHIBITED AND ALSO SAFE AND LAWFUL PARKING AS WELL.

INCLUDED IN THE RECOMMENDATION IS A REQUIREMENT THAT RIDERS BE 16 YEARS OR OLDER.

WE'RE ALSO REQUIRING THAT IT IS PROHIBITED TO RIDE SCOOTERS ON STREETS WITH A SPEED LIMIT OF 3.

SO WE'RE LIMITING IT TO THOSE LOCAL STREETS AND COLLECTORS.

IF YOU'RE RIDING ON A THOROUGHFARE, WE RECOMMEND YOU USE THE SIDEWALK OR A BIKE LANE IF IT'S AVAILABLE.

WE'RE ALSO RECOMMENDING THAT WHEN BIKE LANES ARE AVAILABLE THAT THAT'S THE PROPER PLACE TO USE A SCOOTER.

AND THEN, FINALLY, WE ARE CONTINUING TO PROHIBIT MOTORIZED VEHICLES IN OUR PARKS AND TRAILWAYS.

THE PARKS DEPARTMENT IS WORKING

[00:20:02]

ON A MORE ROBUST COMPREHENSIVE STUDY OF HOW THE TRAILS ARE USED TO AVOID CONFLICT BETWEEN PEDESTRIANS, BICYCLISTS, AND POTENTIALLY MOTORIZED VEHICLES AS WELL.

WE'RE REQUIRING THAT RIDERS YIELD TO PEDESTRIANS.

AND THAT MEANS THEY NEED TO KEEP A TWO-FOOT DISTANCE BETWEEN RIDERS AND PEDESTRIANS FOR SAFETY.

AGAIN, YIELDING TO PEDESTRIANS ON THE SIDEWALKS.

WE'RE ALSO REQUIRING THAT THEY HAVE A LIGHT ON THE FRONT AND A RED LIGHT ON THE BACK, WHICH THEY CURRENTLY ALL HAVE.

AND ALSO THAT THEY HAVE A BELL OR A HORN OR SOME OTHER MECHANISM TO MAKE SOUND, WHICH THEY ALSO CURRENTLY HAVE BELLS AS WELL.

AS FAR AS PARKING IS CONCERNED, WE'RE FOCUSING ON MAKING SURE THAT WHEN THE SCOOTERS ARE DEPLOYED THAT THEY'RE DONE IN AN ORDERLY AND UP RIGHT MANNER TO AVOID CONFLICTS WHERE PEDESTRIANS HAVE A CLEAR PATHWAY.

ALSO, WHEN RIDERS ARE PARKING THEM, THAT'S PART OF THE EDUCATION PIECE, TO MAKE SURE THEY'RE BEING PARKED PROPERLY.

WE ARE REQUIRING A THREE-FOOT CLEARANCE FOR PEDESTRIANS ON SIDEWALKS.

THIS IS IN LINE WITH ADA REQUIREMENTS.

THIS WOULD BE THREE FEET FROM, SAY, STREET FURNITURE LIKE BENCHES OR TRASH CANS, THINGS LIKE THAT, TO MAKE SURE THAT PEDESTRIANS HAVE A CLEAR PATHWAY TO WALK ON THE SIDEWALKS.

WE WILL ALLOW THEM TO BE PARKED IN BIKE RACKS.

WE HAVE SEEN INSTANCES WHERE PEOPLE ARE ACTUALLY TRYING TO DOCK THEM IN CYCLE STATIONS, WHICH WOULD DISCOURAGE A B-CYCLE OR SWELL CYCLE RIDER FROM PARKING THERE.

AND THEN ALSO PROHIBITING PARKING IN CITY PARKS EXCEPT FOR IN DESIGNATED AREAS.

AND REALLY WHAT THAT MEANS IS WE DON'T WANT PEOPLE PARKING THEM, FOR EXAMPLE, ON THE PLAYGROUND IN A PARK.

THE SIDEWALKS THAT SURROUND THE PARK OR INTERSECT A PARK WOULD BE APPROPRIATE PLACES TO PARK A SCOOTER.

WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE DON'T HAVE SCOOTERS PARKING IN CONFLICT WITH HOW PEOPLE ARE USING THE PARK TO THE POINT WHERE IT CREATES A HAZARD.

WE HAVE HEARD A LOT FROM BUSINESS OWNERS HERE PARTICULARLY IN THE DOWNTOWN AREA.

THEY LIKE THE SCOOTERS.

THEY LIKE THAT PEOPLE CAN USE THE SCOOTERS TO GET TO THEIR BUSINESS, BUT THEY'RE CONCERNED ABOUT THE SCOOTERS CREATING CONGESTION IN THEIR ENTRYWAYS.

AND SO WE ARE REQUIRING THAT THEY PARK NO CLOSER THAN EIGHT FEET OF THE ENTRANCE OF A BUILDING.

WE HAVE HAD SOME CONCERNS WITH SCOOTERS PARKING IN LOADING ZONES, PARTICULARLY PASSENGER LOADING ZONES.

FOR EXAMPLE, AROUND THE CONVENTION CENTER WHERE A LOT OF THE CHARTER BUSES ARE PICKING UP CONVENTIONEERS AND DROPPING THEM OFF.

WE'RE REQUIRING THAT THEY NOT PARK THE SCOOTERS IN THOSE AREAS WHERE PASSENGERS ARE DISEMBARKING OR EMBARKING INTO BUSES.

AND ALSO NO PARKING WITHIN FOUR FEET OF STREET FURNITURE.

THIS IS WHERE THERE'S TOO MANY SCOOTERS AROUND, FOR EXAMPLE, A BENCH OR A BUS POLE OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT, AND IT TENDS TO CREATE CONGESTION.

AND THEN ALSO VERY IMPORTANTLY IS TO NOT BLOCK CURB RAMPS OR ENTRYWAYS OR DRIVEWAYS.

THIS IS PARTICULARLY IMPORTANT FOR PEOPLE WITH DISABILITIES USING THOSE CURB RAMPS TO CROSS INTERSECTIONS.

AND THEN, FINALLY, WORKING CLOSELY WITH VIA TO COME UP WITH SOME LANGUAGE THAT WILL ADDRESS BUS STOPS IN PARTICULAR WHERE YOU HAVE A LOT OF PEOPLE CONGREGATING, WAITING FOR THE BUS.

AND THEN PARTICULARLY BUSES WHEN THERE'S A PERSON IN A WHEELCHAIR AND THE RAMP HAS TO DEPLOY, WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THAT AREA IS CLEAR SO THOSE PEOPLE CAN GET ON AND OFF THE BUSES EASY.

SO WE'RE RECOMMENDING A 15-FOOT, FOR SIMPLE PURPOSES CALL IT A BOX.

YOU CAN SEE IT IN PINK THERE.

THAT PROTECTS THAT AREA AROUND THE BUS STOP.

AS FAR AS COMPLIANCE, WE ARE REQUIRING THAT THE VENDORS WILL HAVE TWO HOURS TO CORRECT VIOLATIONS.

SO THIS IS IN THE EVENT THEY ARE NOTIFIED THAT THERE'S A PARKING VIOLATION, THEY WILL HAVE TWO HOURS TO CORRECT THAT VIOLATION.

IF THE SCOOTERS ARE PARKED IN A PROHIBITED AREA, A PROHIBITED AREA WOULD BE AROUND THE BUS STOP OR IN ONE OF THE PLAZAS DOWNTOWN, THAT THEY WOULD HAVE ONE HOUR TO CORRECT THAT VIOLATION.

WHAT WE'VE SEEN, THOUGH, IS THAT TYPICALLY A LOT OF THESE ARE SELF-CORRECTED.

THE SCOOTER MAY BE IN VIOLATION FOR A VERY SHORT PERIOD OF TIME BEFORE SOMEBODY RENTS IT AGAIN.

SO FAR WE HAVE SEEN THAT -- WITHIN THAT TIME-FRAME THE SCOOTERS ARE TYPICALLY BEING USED AGAIN.

OR, IF IT'S IN THE DOWNTOWN AREA, CENTER CITY DEVELOPMENT, PARKING ENFORCEMENT, AS WELL AS CENTRO HAS BEEN ASSISTING US WITH WHAT I WOULD TERM AS

[00:25:01]

CORRECTING SCOOTERS, WE ARE NOT IMPOUNDING THEM OR COLLECTING THEM.

WE ARE JUST MOVING THEM TO A MORE APPROPRIATE LOCATION.

USUALLY THAT'S ONLY A COUPLE OF FEET.

WE'LL CONTINUE TO STUDY THAT THROUGH THE SIX-MONTH PERIOD.

IF SCOOTERS ARE REPORTED AS BROKEN OR INOPERABLE THAT THEY BE REMOVED WITHIN TWO HOURS.

THAT'S TO PROTECT POTENTIAL RIDERS IN THE EVENT THAT MAYBE THE BRAKE CABLE IS BROKEN OR CUT THAT SOMEONE IS NOT USING THAT SCOOTER.

WE WANT TO GET THE SCOOTERS BACK INTO THE HANDS OF THE VENDORS SO THEY CAN MAKE THE REPAIRS AND GET THEM BACK ON THE STREET.

ALSO WE ARE GOING TO REQUIRE THAT ON THE SCOOTERS THEMSELVES THERE WILL BE A BRANDING SO YOU KNOW WHO THAT SCOOTER BELONGS TO.

THERE WILL ALSO BE A 24-HOUR CUSTOMER SERVICE PHONE NUMBER POSTED ON THAT SCOOTER SO AN INDIVIDUAL CAN CALL AND REPORT EITHER A VIOLATION OR REPORT, FOR EXAMPLE, THAT MAYBE THE SCOOTER IS INOPERABLE OR NOT WORKING.

DURING THE SIX-MONTH PILOT PROGRAM, I MENTIONED THIS EARLIER, WE'LL BE DOING A LOT OF DATA COLLECTION, A LOT OF CONSULTATION WITH VARIOUS ENTITIES, THE VENDORS THEMSELVES TO REALLY LOOK AT A NUMBER OF DIFFERENT THINGS.

WE'RE LOOKING AT HOW LONG IS IT TAKING US TO DO ENFORCEMENT.

HOW MUCH TIME ARE WE SPENDING CORRECTING VIOLATIONS.

WE'RE WORKING VERY CLOSELY WITH CENTRO.

THEY'RE AMBASSADORS ARE ASSISTING WITH THIS AS WELL TO START COLLECTING THAT DATA TO SEE HOW MUCH TIME, HOW MUCH STAFF TIME, WHAT ARE THE RESOURCES REQUIRED ON OUR PART TO MAKE SURE THAT THINGS ARE DONE IN AN ORDERLY WAY.

WE'LL BE LOOKING AT THE NUMBER OF VIOLATIONS, 311 CALLS, PRIMARILY CENTERED AROUND ACCIDENTS, LOOKING AT ACCIDENT REPORTS.

WORKING CLOSELY WITH THE FIRE DEPARTMENT AND POLICE DEPARTMENT.

WE'LL BE COLLECTING THE DATA THAT'S PROVIDED BY THE SCOOTER COMPANIES SO WE CAN LOOK AT HOW OFTEN PEOPLE ARE USING THEM, WHERE THEY ARE USING THEM, HOW ARE THEY USING THEM.

FOR EXAMPLE, HOW LONG IS AN AVERAGE TRIP.

SO WE'LL BE LOOKING AT ALL OF THAT INFORMATION.

AND THEN AGAIN WE'LL BE CONTINUING TO MEET WITH STAKEHOLDERS, THE VENDORS, THE RIDERS, OUR PARTNERS THROUGHOUT THE CITY, VIA, CENTRO.

WE HAVE MET WITH THE UNIVERSITIES HERE IN TOWN REALLY TO GATHER EVERYONE'S INPUT.

SO IN SIX MONTHS WE'LL HAVE A MUCH BETTER IDEA WHETHER OR NOT WHAT WE'RE PROPOSING, HOW IT'S WORKING, AND WHETHER OR NOT WE NEED TO MAKE ANY ADJUSTMENTS.

WE'RE ALSO FOCUSING A LARGE AMOUNT OF TIME AND RESOURCES ON RIDER EDUCATION.

WE THINK THIS IS REALLY KEY TO MAKING THIS WORK.

WE DO HAVE REGULATIONS, AS I'VE GONE OVER, IN ENFORCEMENT, BUT WE REALLY THINK EDUCATION IS THE KEY HERE.

AS PEOPLE GET MORE AND MORE ACCUSTOMED TO THE SCOOTERS WE THINK THAT WILL IMPROVE OVER TIME.

WE'RE GOING TO FOCUS OUR MARKETING EFFORTS AS WELL AS WORKING WITH THE VENDORS TO DO THIS.

I HEARD WE HAVE DIGITAL KIOSKS COMING TO THE CITY.

WHEN THOSE DIGITAL KIOSKS ARE PUT UP ONE OF THE FIRST THINGS YOU WILL SEE ON THOSE IS A SAMPLE UP HERE THAT WILL BE A HOW TO RIDE SAFE.

WHAT'S THE SAFEST WAY TO RIDE.

SO THAT'S A GREAT OPPORTUNITY.

THE PICTURE ON THE UPPER RIGHT THERE, A COUPLE OF FRIDAYS AGO WE HAD AN EVENT DOWNTOWN.

ONE OF OUR LUNCHEONS THAT WE HAVE ON THE STREET AND WITH FOOD TRUCKS.

BIRD WAS THERE AND LIME WAS THERE HANDING OUT HELMETS, EDUCATING PEOPLE.

THEY ACTUALLY, BETWEEN LIME AND BIRD THEY GAVE AWAY MORE THAN 200 FREE HELMETS TO PEOPLE THAT WERE INTERESTED.

SO IT WAS VERY POPULAR.

SO WE'LL CONTINUE TO DO THINGS LIKE THAT AT OUR VARIOUS PROGRAMMING EVENTS.

WE'LL INVITE THE VENDORS TO BE THERE TO ANSWER QUESTIONS, LET PEOPLE RIDE THE SCOOTERS AND REALLY EDUCATE PEOPLE ON HOW TO USE THEM.

WE HAVE ALREADY PREPARED SOME MARKETING MATERIALS THAT WE'RE SENDING OUT IN VARIOUS DIFFERENT WAYS ON SOCIAL MEDIA, ON OUR WEBSITE.

AND WE'LL BE HANDING THOSE OUT IN VARIOUS LOCATIONS THROUGHOUT TOWN REALLY TO TRY TO EDUCATE PEOPLE ON HOW TO RIDE THEM PROPERLY, HOW TO PARK THEM PROPERLY.

THINGS THAT I THINK THAT YOU MAY SEE AS PART OF THIS PILOT PROGRAM WHEN WE COME BACK.

WE ALREADY TALKED ABOUT -- AND THIS MAY HAPPEN BEFORE THE END OF THE SIX MONTHS, IS AREAS WHERE ARE POPULAR DESTINATIONS FOR PEOPLE THAT USE SCOOTERS, OR ARE SENSITIVE AREAS LIKE, FOR EXAMPLE, MAIN PLAZA.

WE MAY PUT UP SOME SIGNAGE INDICATING WHERE THE PROPER PLACE TO PARK IS.

IT COMES BACK TO THAT EDUCATION PIECE SO AREAS WHERE WE -- SENSITIVE AREAS WHERE WE THINK WE MAY NEED THAT WE MAY INSTALL SOME

[00:30:07]

SIGNAGE.

WE'LL PUT LIKE A BRAND OR EMBLEM ON THE SIDEWALK SO IT'S NOT PERMANENT.

JUST TO TEST IT AND SEE IF IT WORKS.

IDEAS LIKE THAT.

ANOTHER THING THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT VERY CLOSELY, AND THE VENDORS HAVE BEEN VERY COOPERATIVE IN THIS AREA, IS LOOKING AT TECHNOLOGY TO HELP RIDERS COMPLY.

AND THAT WOULD BE IN THE FORM OF GEOFENCING.

IN THIS APPLICATION WHAT THAT MEANS IS REALLY TWO AREAS THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT IS FOR PARKING AND RIDING.

SO FOR PARKING, USING THE GPS TECHNOLOGY AND THE APP WE COULD RESTRICT CERTAIN AREAS FROM PARKING.

WHERE YOU WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO END YOUR RIDE.

THE APP REQUIRES YOU TO CLOSE OUT YOUR RIDE OR ELSE IT WILL KEEP CHARGING YOU.

SO BY USING THIS TECHNOLOGY WE COULD MAKE IT TO WHERE YOU COULD NOT END YOUR RIDE OR END YOUR SESSION IN A CERTAIN AREA.

RIGHT NOW WE'RE LOOKING AT A COUPLE OF AREAS THAT WE ARE CONCERNED THAT THERE MAY BE AN ACCUMULATION OVER TIME OF SCOOTERS.

AND ALSO IN THE FORM OF RIDING.

THIS IS KIND OF A SECOND AREA THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT.

IT'S A LITTLE BIT MORE DIFFICULT.

IT WOULD BE -- ACTUALLY, THE APP WOULD ACTUALLY SLOW THE SCOOTER DOWN.

SO IF YOU'RE IN AN AREA YOU'RE NOT SUPPOSED TO BE RIDING.

FOR EXAMPLE, IF YOU'RE ON THE LOOP OF THE RIVER WALK DOWNTOWN, THAT'S AN AREA THAT'S PROHIBITED FROM RIDING.

YOU COULD POTENTIALLY SLOW THE SCOOTER DOWN.

WE WANT TO MAKE IT SO IT'S SAFE FOR THE RIDER SO THAT WHEN THEY'RE IN AN AREA IT DOESN'T STOP AND CAUSE AN ACCIDENT.

SO WE'RE LOOKING AT THAT AS WELL.

BUT ALL THE COMPANIES HAVE BEEN VERY COOPERATIVE IN TRYING TO ADDRESS THIS.

WE THINK THIS IS SOMETHING THAT WILL WORK.

AND THAT CONCLUDES MY PRESENTATION.

IF ANYBODY HAS ANY QUESTIONS, I'M MORE THAN HAPPY TO HELP ANSWER.

>> MAYOR NIRENBERG: GREAT.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR THE PRESENTATION, JOHN.

WE HAVE SEVERAL CITIZENS SIGNED UP.

ACTUALLY, NO CITIZENS SIGNED UP TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM.

OKAY.

JACK FINGER.

>> WELL, MAYOR NIRENBERG AND OTHER MEMBERS OF OUR CITY COUNCIL AND MS. VIAGRAN AND MS. GONZALES.

YES, I HOPE YOU HAD A VERY PLEASANT CONVERSATION EARLIER THERE.

YES.

PLEASE UNDERSTAND WHEN YOU OFFER SUCH BEHAVIOR TOWARDS CITIZENS WHO CAME BY ON THEIR OWN DIME TO TESTIFY HERE TODAY YOU'LL UNDERSTAND WHY IT'S CALLED SILLY COUNCIL, NOT CITY COUNCIL.

YES.

ANYWAY, SCOOTERS.

GREAT IDEA, APPARENTLY.

WHAT WAS THE MAIN IDEA FOR Y'ALL WANTING TO INCORPORATE SCOOTERS HERE IN SAN ANTONIO? AT LEAST UPON THE DOWNTOWN PUBLIC SIDEWALKS? WELL, I GUESS BASICALLY TO GET PEOPLE OUT OF THEIR CARS.

WELL, MAYBE.

IT DEPENDS ON WHAT YOU PUT THEM ON.

AND ALSO TO REDUCE AIR POLLUTION.

OKAY.

WELL, THAT'S A LAUDABLE IDEA.

BUT JUST LIKE YOUR IDEA WANTING PEOPLE TO RIDE BIKES MORE -- AND PLEASE UNDERSTAND, I ENJOY HAVING BICYCLISTS AROUND, BUT WHEN YOU GUYS GIVE MORE RIGHTS TO BICYCLISTS AND SCOOTERS THAN YOU GIVE TO US THE MOTORIST, THEN I START HAVING PROBLEMS, MS. SANDOVAL.

YES.

ON HER PHONE THERE.

YES, THE AGE LIMIT, 16 YEARS ON UP.

WHAT IF A 15-YEAR-OLD STARTS ZIPPING AROUND AT 35 MILES PER HOUR ON THE STREET? WHO IS GOING TO STOP HIM? HUH? IF HE GOES THROUGH A RED LIGHT LIKE BICYCLISTS DO SO MUCH OF THE TIME, WHO IS GOING TO TICKET HIM? HUH? IS ANYBODY GOING TO REQUIRE HIM TO HAVE INSURANCE IN THE EVENT THAT HE BUMPS INTO SOME VEHICLE OR INJURIES SOME PERSON, PEDESTRIAN ALONG THE SIDEWALK, AS HAS BEEN SO MANY NEAR MISSES IN THE PAST HERE.

HUH? I DON'T SEE THAT.

DON'T SEE ANYTHING HERE UNDER THE RULES HERE.

YEAH.

[00:35:02]

RIDERS WITH DRIVER'S LICENSES.

DON'T SEE THAT EITHER.

ONE SUGGESTION TO REDUCE THE MISHAPS AND NEAR MISHAPS THAT YOU HAVE WITH THESE THINGS, SINCE YOU HAVE CONTROL OVER THIS THING AS FAR AS THE SPEED LIMIT ON THESE PERSONS WHO USE IT, INSTEAD OF GIVING THEM A MAXIMUM OF 35, GIVE THEM A MAXIMUM OF 5 MILES PER HOUR.

WHO NEEDS TO RIDE FASTER THAN 5 MILES PER HOUR ON A SIDEWALK? HUH? NOT 35.

>> MAYOR NIRENBERG: THANK YOU, MR. FINGER.

COUNCILWOMAN VIAGRAN.

>> VIAGRAN: THANK YOU.

I DON'T HAVE MANY QUESTIONS.

ACTUALLY, I DON'T HAVE ANY QUESTIONS BECAUSE YOU ANSWERED ALL MY QUESTIONS IN THE PRESENTATION.

SO IF WE SEE PARKING VIOLATIONS TO CALL 311 OR ANY PEOPLE -- ESPECIALLY DURING THE SIX-MONTH PILOT PROGRAM, CORRECT?

>> WHAT WE ARE ENCOURAGING PEOPLE TO DO IS CONTACT THE SCOOTER COMPANY FIRST.

THAT WILL BE THE FASTEST WAY TO GET SOMETHING CORRECTED.

THAT'S WHY WE'RE REQUIRING THAT NUMBER TO BE ON THE SCOOTER.

BUT, SURE, PEOPLE CAN ALSO CALL 311 AND REPORT VIOLATIONS OR COMMENTS AS WELL AS OUR OFFICES TOO.

BUT REALLY WE WANT TO GET THAT INFORMATION TO THE VENDOR AS FAST AS POSSIBLE.

THAT WAY THEY CAN GO OUT AND CORRECT THOSE VIOLATIONS.

>> VIAGRAN: RIGHT.

I THINK THE ONLY REASON I WANTED TO SAY THAT IS IN DISTRICT 3, EVEN THE SOUTHERN SECTOR OF SAN ANTONIO, WE'RE SEEING THEM ALL OVER, WHICH IS FINE, BUT THE RESIDENTS ARE SEEING THEM AS THEY DRIVE BY.

AND SO THEY'RE NOT NECESSARILY STOPPING AND --

>> TO SEE THE NUMBER.

>> VIAGRAN: ET CETERA.

SO WHAT WE'VE BEEN SHARING IS JUST IF THEY SEE IT CALL 311.

BUT THEY ARE ALLOWED TO MOVE THEM.

IF THEY ARE BLOCKING A SIDEWALK AND PEOPLE CAN'T GO THROUGH THERE, RESIDENTS, PEOPLE CAN MOVE THE SCOOTERS OUT OF THE WAY.

IS THAT CORRECT?

>> SURE.

>> VIAGRAN: THANK YOU.

THAT'S ALL MY QUESTIONS.

>> MAYOR NIRENBERG: THANK YOU, COUNCILWOMAN VIAGRAN.

COUNCILWOMAN GONZALES.

>> GONZALES: OKAY.

THANK YOU.

THANK YOU, MAYOR.

I HAVE JUST A FEW QUESTIONS REGARDING THE STAKEHOLDER FEEDBACK.

YOU MENTIONED -- COULD YOU BRING UP THAT SLIDE? I'M NOT SURE WHICH ONE IT WAS.

BUT THERE WERE CIRCLES WITH SOME VISUALS.

TOWARDS THE END OF THE PRESENTATION.

THAT ONE.

THIS ONE REGARDING PROGRAM ASSESSMENT AND STAKEHOLDER INPUT, RIDERS, AND OTHER STAKEHOLDERS.

SO IF PEOPLE WANT TO REPORT A VIOLATION THEY WOULD CALL 311.

>> THERE'S MULTIPLE WAYS.

THEY COULD CALL 311.

WE'RE ENCOURAGING PEOPLE, IF THEY SEE A PARKING VIOLATION, TO CALL THE SCOOTER COMPANY DIRECTLY AND REPORT THAT THAT A SCOOTER IS PARKED IN VIOLATION.

>> GONZALES: AND HOW WOULD THEY KNOW HOW TO GET THAT INFORMATION? FROM AN APP OR VEHICLE?

>> WE ARE REQUIRING THE SCOOTERS HAVE MULTIPLE THINGS ON THEM SO IT'S EASY TO IDENTIFY WHO THE SCOOTER BELONGS TO.

WE'RE REQUIRING THAT THE COMPANY BRAND THE SCOOTERS.

CURRENTLY THEY'LL SAY BIRD ON THEM, THEY SAY LIME OR BLUE DUCK.

SO THE NAME OF THE COMPANY IS CLEARLY VISIBLE ON THE SCOOTER.

EVERY SCOOTER WILL HAVE A UNIQUE IDENTIFYING NUMBER.

AND THEN THERE WILL BE A 24-HOUR CUSTOMER SERVICE NUMBER THAT A PERSON CAN CALL AND REPORT EITHER A PARKING VIOLATION, FOR EXAMPLE, OR MAYBE THAT THE SCOOTER'S INOPERABLE.

SO THERE COULD BE A NUMBER OF REASONS WHY THEY WOULD NEED TO CALL THEM.

BUT REALLY, TO US, THAT'S THE FASTEST WAY TO GET A CORRECTION IS TO NOTIFY THE COMPANY.

AND A PART OF THAT IS A REQUIREMENT THAT THE COMPANY HAS TWO HOURS TO CORRECT THAT VIOLATION AS WELL.

IF SOMEBODY DOESN'T KNOW -- SAY COUNCILWOMAN VIAGRAN MENTIONED SOMEBODY IS DRIVING BY AND SEES IT AND THEY DON'T KNOW THE NUMBER, THEY CAN ALWAYS CALL 311 AS WELL.

OR THEY CAN CALL CENTER CITY DEVELOPMENT OFFICE.

IT'S REALLY A TEAM EFFORT.

IT COULD BE CODE ENFORCEMENT.

IF IT'S IN A CITY PARK, IT MIGHT BE THE PARKS DEPARTMENT.

>> GONZALES: I THINK FOR THE PURPOSES OF NOTIFICATION IT WOULD BE GOOD TO HAVE ONE SOURCE FOR PEOPLE TO GO.

BUT MY QUESTION WAS NOT NECESSARILY REGARDING VIOLATIONS BUT REGARDING INPUT.

SO ONE OF THE REASONS WHY I'M SO GLAD TO HAVE THESE SCOOTERS AND TO SEE SO MANY PEOPLE USING THEM IS THAT IT ADVANCES, OF COURSE, OUR BIKE ADVOCACY PLAN.

SO THAT INSTEAD OF HAVING BIKE LANES, WHICH THE CYCLING COMMUNITY FOR MANY TIMES HAS HAD THIS CONFLICT TRYING TO GET MORE ACCESS ON OUR ROADWAYS, NOW THAT THEY'RE OPEN TO OTHER MODES OF

[00:40:01]

TRANSPORTATION WE HAVE MORE SUPPORT.

SO WHAT IF THERE'S PEOPLE THAT SAY I USE THIS ROAD EVERY DAY TO TRAVEL ALONG.

CAN WE GET DEDICATED MULTI-USE LANES ON THIS STREET? DO THEY HAVE TO WAIT FOR THE INPUT SESSIONS OR COULD THEY REGULARLY GIVE FEEDBACK ABOUT WHERE THEY'RE USING THEM MOST?

>> SO PART OF OUR MARKETING AND EDUCATION PLAN WOULD BE TO MAKE SURE THAT WE HAVE VARIOUS DIFFERENT OPPORTUNITIES FOR STAKEHOLDERS TO PROVIDE INPUT.

SO IT'S NOT JUST, SAY, IN A FORMAL PUBLIC COMMUNITY MEETING.

I THINK WE'LL HAVE A DEDICATED WEBSITE, SOCIAL MEDIA.

WE HAD A VERY, I THINK, SUCCESSFUL SURVEY.

WE HAD OVER 4,000 PEOPLE TAKE THE SURVEY LEADING UP TO COUNCIL TODAY.

SO WE'LL CONTINUE TO DO SURVEYS AND GO OUT AND MEET WITH VARIOUS PEOPLE.

I KIND OF FAILED TO MENTION THE AMOUNT OF STAKEHOLDERS WE HAD LEADING UP TO THIS.

WE WORKED VERY CLOSELY AND HAD NUMEROUS MEETINGS WITH VARIOUS STAKEHOLDERS.

TECH BLOC HAS BEEN VERY HELPFUL.

WE MET WITH THEM MANY, MANY TIMES TO LOOK AT THE PROPOSED ORDINANCE, GET THEIR IDEA.

THEY HAVE BEEN VERY HELPFUL KIND OF LOOKING AT WHAT THE REST OF THE COUNTRY IS DOING AND THEN COMMUNICATING WITH THE DIFFERENT COMPANIES.

WE WORK CLOSELY WITH CENTRO.

WE MET WITH VIA, THE UNIVERSITIES, ANYBODY THAT IS IMPACTED TO COLLECT THIS DATA, THIS INFORMATION DURING THIS SIX-MONTH PERIOD.

>> GONZALES: LET ME JUST INTERRUPT YOU FOR A SECOND.

IS THERE A PORTAL OR AN APP OR WHATEVER THAT SHOWS WHERE A LOT OF PEOPLE ARE USING THEM THAT'S LIVE? SO I'M THINKING OF STRAVA THAT CYCLISTS USE TO UPDATE THEIR CYCLING ROUTES.

AND THERE'S LITTLE COMPETITIONS THERE ABOUT A VARIETY OF THINGS.

DO WE HAVE SOMETHING LIKE THAT FOR THIS?

>> NOT YET, BUT WHAT WE ARE REQUIRING IS THAT EVERY MONTH THE DIFFERENT COMPANIES WILL HAVE TO PROVIDE US THE DATA OF THEIR RIDERSHIP.

SO THAT WILL BE ABLE TO SHOW US WHERE PEOPLE ARE RIDING.

BECAUSE IT IS A GPS-BASED VEHICLE.

THEY ARE ABLE TO SEE WHERE RIDES ARE GOING, WHERE THEY ARE UNLOCKING THEM AND WHERE THEY'RE LOCKING THEM SO WE CAN SEE IF THERE'S AN AREA OF TOWN WHERE WE SEE A LOT OF RIDERSHIP.

THAT COULD HELP TCI AND THEIR TRANSPORTATION PLANNING TO SEE WHETHER OR NOT THIS WILL BE AN AREA THAT WE NEED TO ADD BIKE LANES.

OR MAYBE WE NEED TO IMPROVE SIDEWALKS IN THIS AREA.

THAT'S THE KIND OF DATA THAT WE THINK WILL BE USEFUL, PARTICULARLY FOR TRANSPORTATION PLANNING.

AND THEN ALSO HOW LONG ARE THE RIDES.

ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE'VE KIND OF ASKED OURSELVES IS THIS REPLACING PEOPLE WALKING? OR IS THIS REPLACING PEOPLE DRIVING THEIR CAR? IN OTHER WORDS, HOW LONG IS THE AVERAGE TRIP.

THAT WILL BE HELPFUL FOR US TO KNOW.

>> GONZALES: BUT JUST BECAUSE YOU HAVE AN AVERAGE TRIP DOESN'T NECESSARILY MEAN THAT PEOPLE ARE NOT DRIVING THERE.

I MEAN, EVEN IF YOU HAVE A TRIP THAT'S WALKING A FEW MINUTES, YOU KNOW, PEOPLE OFTEN WILL STILL GET IN THEIR CAR AND DRIVE.

I KNOW PEOPLE THAT LIVE, JUST EVEN IN THE DOWNTOWN AREA, AND STILL DRIVE TO CITY HALL.

>> I THINK WE'LL KNOW THAT IF THE TRIPS ARE LONGER WE'LL KNOW THAT PROBABLY THE AVERAGE PERSON WOULD NOT HAVE WALKED.

THEY PROBABLY WOULD HAVE DRIVEN.

BUT THAT'S THE KIND OF DATA WE WANT TO COLLECT.

WE'LL GIVE THAT TO ART REINHART AND HIS TRANSPORTATION PLANNERS TO ANALYZE.

AND THAT WILL HELP THEM IN THE FUTURE DETERMINE, YOU KNOW, WHAT ARE PEOPLE'S TRENDS, WHAT ARE THEY DOING.

THAT WAY IF THEY HAVE A -- AS PART OF THEIR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS THEY KNOW THERE'S A LOT OF PEOPLE RIDING SCOOTERS DOWN THIS STREET, MAYBE THERE'S SOMETHING WE CAN DO TO ASSIST THAT.

AND THAT WOULD HELP WITH CYCLISTS AS WELL.

>> GONZALES: HOPEFULLY YOU DON'T HAVE A LOT OF PRE-CONCEIVED NOTIONS ABOUT WHETHER PEOPLE WOULD WALK OR DRIVE.

AND DATA WILL SHOW THAT PEOPLE ARE USING IT.

I THINK IT'S PROBABLY A FALSE ASSUMPTION TO SAY BECAUSE THE RIDE WAS LONGER THAT THAT TRIP WOULD HAVE BEEN DONE BY AUTOMOBILE, BECAUSE THERE'S A LOT OF REASONS WHY AUDIO] AND THEN TO SAY -- SO, ANYWAY, I THINK YOU GET MY POINT THAT WE ARE NOT MAKING ASSUMPTIONS ABOUT WHETHER OR NOT PEOPLE WOULD CHOOSE TO DRIVE.

THERE'S A LOT OF REASONS WHY PEOPLE DON'T DRIVE.

>> I'M SORRY IF I CAME THAT WAY.

WHAT I MEANT WAS WE'LL HAVE SIX MONTHS OF DATA THAT ART AND HIS TEAM CAN USE TO ANALYZE AND MAKE SOME DECISIONS ABOUT GOING FORWARD, WHETHER OR NOT WE NEED TO ADJUST THIS PROGRAM OR THEY CAN USE THAT INFORMATION TOO TO

[00:45:02]

HELP THEM IN TRANSPORTATION PLANNING EFFORTS.

>> GONZALES: I HOPE SO.

I KNOW WE'RE LOOKING FORWARD TO -- OR AT LEAST I SHOULD SAY I'M LOOKING FORWARD TO USING THE INFORMATION MUCH MORE FOR ALTERNATIVE TRANSPORTATION USES AND HOW TO DESIGN MORE WALKABLE, COMPACT, SUSTAINABLE CITY.

I LOOK FORWARD TO THAT INFORMATION AS IT GOES.

I THINK THIS IS A VERY EXCITING TIME FOR US HERE IN SAN ANTONIO.

AND LOOKING FORWARD TO THE PRESENTATION.

IT WOULD JUST BE NICE TO HAVE IT LIVE.

AND SO I'M SURE THAT IN VERY SHORT ORDER THAT ALTERNATIVE WILL BE AVAILABLE TO SEE, PERHAPS, JUST LIKE WITH CYCLISTS, WHAT IS THE SAFEST ROUTE, WHAT IS THE FASTEST ROUTE TO GET FROM HERE TO THERE IF YOU'RE GOING TO BE WITHIN A MILE RADIUS OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT.

>> AND ALSO I FAILED TO MENTION THAT OUR PLAN WOULD BE TO COME BACK TO THE TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE BEFORE THE SIX MONTHS IS UP TO GIVE YOU A BRIEFING ON KIND OF WHAT WE'RE SEEING, HOW IS THAT LOOKING, HOW'S THE DATA, WHAT WE'RE GOING.

DO WE NEED TO ADJUST THAT? AND MAYBE THERE'S MORE DATA OUT THERE THAT WE COULD FIND USEFUL TOO.

>> GONZALES: GREAT.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

THANK YOU, MAYOR.

>> MAYOR NIRENBERG: THANK YOU, COUNCILWOMAN GONZALES.

COUNCILMAN COURAGE.

>> COURAGE: I THINK WE'RE ON THE RIGHT TRACK IN PUTTING TOGETHER A PILOT PROGRAM AND LOOKING AT HOW IT'S GOING TO TURN OUT AFTER SIX MONTHS OR SO.

BECAUSE THIS CERTAINLY IS VERY NEW TO SAN ANTONIO AND IT'S STILL FAIRLY UNIQUE IN THE WAY OF A SERVICE OR A METHOD OF TRANSPORTATION.

I LIKED SOME OF THE PLANNING THAT WE HAVE IN THIS PRESENTATION, PARTICULARLY I NOTICED THAT YOU HAVE, ON PAGE .

IT'S THE CARD INFORMATION.

OR I BELIEVE IT'S INFORMATION THAT MIGHT BE ON A KIOSK.

AND IT LOOKS LIKE THIS.

SO I'M NOT SURE WHICH PARTICULAR SLIDE IT WAS.

>> SLIDE 11.

>> COURAGE: NOT THAT ONE.

IT LOOKED LIKE THIS.

THE BLUE CARD IN THE MIDDLE.

I THINK THAT IS VERY VALUABLE, NOT JUST AS A FEATURE ON A KIOSK FOR SOMEBODY WALKING BY WHO MAY NOT BE INTERESTED IN A SCOOTER, BUT PARTICULARLY I WANT TO ENSURE THAT ANYONE WHO IS GOING TO RIDE A SCOOTER UNDERSTANDS WHAT OUR REGULATIONS ARE.

AND RIGHT NOW MY GUESS IS THAT WHEN THEY GO TO RENT A SCOOTER THERE'S GOING TO BE AN APP THAT THEY USE, AND THE FIRST THING THAT MAY COME UP ON THAT APP IS WHAT ARE THE RULES FOR OPERATING AND SAFETY OF THIS SCOOTER, WHICH IS FINE.

BUT IT'S THE SAME AS WHEN YOU WANT TO SIGN UP FOR SOFTWARE ON THE INTERNET.

IT SAYS THESE ARE ALL THE PRIVACY POLICIES AND THESE ARE ALL THE RULES AND EVERYTHING.

PLEASE READ THESE AND LET US KNOW THAT YOU READ THEM.

NONE OF US EVER DO.

WE JUST CHECK IT OFF AND MOVE ON.

PEOPLE NEVER READ WHAT'S ON THE APP WHEN THEY'RE SIGNING UP FOR IT.

WHEN I LOOKED AT THIS I SAID THIS LOOKS LIKE A GREAT MOCK UP FOR A CARD THAT CAN BE PUT ON THE HANDLEBARS THAT WOULDN'T OBSTRUCT THE VIEW OF THE DRIVER OR THE OPERATION OF THE VEHICLE BUT WOULD PUT RIGHT IN FRONT OF THEM THE RULES AND REGULATIONS THAT ARE MOST IMPORTANT FOR THEM TO BE OBSERVANT TOO AS THEY'RE OPERATING THIS VEHICLE.

I KNOW WE ARE NOT EMPLOYING THAT RIGHT NOW WE WE NEED TO BE ABLE TO UNDERSTAND HOW MANY PEOPLE ARE ABIDING BY THE RULES IN THIS PROJECT AND POSSIBLY LOOK TO THIS AS A SIMPLE AND EFFICIENT AND INEXPENSIVE REMEDY TO MAKE SURE PEOPLE UNDERSTAND HOW TO OPERATE SAFELY THESE VEHICLES ON OUR STREETS AND SIDEWALKS.

SO I WANT TO EMPHASIZE THAT.

I KNOW IT'S A POINT I MADE BEFORE.

THE OTHER THING THAT SEEMS CURIOUS TO ME IS WE HAVE ONE SPEED LIMIT AND WE'RE NOT SUPPOSED TO GO ANY FASTER THAN THAT SPEED LIMIT.

BUT THAT'S 35 MILES PER HOUR.

IS THAT THE SAME FOR STREETS AND SIDEWALKS?

>> COUNCILMAN, WE'RE CURRENTLY NOT RECOMMENDING A MAXIMUM SPEED LIMIT FOR THE SCOOTER ITSELF.

THE MOTOR AND THE SCOOTER RIGHT NOW IS LIMITING THAT TOP SPEED.

IT'S REALLY 20 MILES PER HOUR, BUT WHEN YOU ADD THE WEIGHT OF A PERSON ON THAT IT COMES DOWN.

SO IT'S CLOSER TO ABOUT 15 MILES PE HOUR.

THAT'S THE TOP SPEED CURRENTLY THAT THE ACTUAL SCOOTER CAN GO.

>> COURAGE: WELL, THAT'S GOOD TO HEAR.

BUT IT SAYS RIDE ON ROADS -- OKAY.

SO YOU CAN OPERATE THE VEHICLE ON A ROAD WITH NO GREATER THAN

[00:50:03]

35.

>> YES, SIR.

OUR CONCERN IS SOMEONE WOULD RIDE IT ON A MAJOR THOROUGHFARE WHERE THE SPEED LIMIT IS 45.

>> COURAGE: I WAS WRITING SOMETHING DOWN AND DIDN'T QUITE CATCH THAT.

SO THE MAXIMUM SPEED IS LIKELY TO BE 20 MILES PER HOUR, BUT DEPENDING ON THE USER THEY MAY OPERATE SLIGHTLY SLOWER.

THAT'S THE SIDEWALK ON THE STREET.

>> WE'RE NOT RECOMMENDING ANY MAXIMUM SPEED LIMIT, EITHER ON THE SIDEWALK OR ON THE STREET.

>> COURAGE: DO WE KNOW IF THE VEHICLE PROVIDERS HAVE THE ABILITY TO LIMIT SPEEDS ON THEIR VEHICLES, ON THEIR SCOOTERS?

>> THEY DO.

THEY CAN GOVERN DOWN THE TOP SPEED.

AND WE'RE WORKING WITH THEM ON THAT.

IT'S REALLY A SINGLE-GEAR VEHICLE.

AND SO WHEN THEY START TO GOVERN IT DOWN IT STARTS TO IMPACT THE START-UP SPEED.

AND SO IT CAN MAKE IT DIFFICULT FOR SOMEBODY TO GET STARTED RIDING.

AND SO THERE'S A LITTLE BIT OF SAFETY CONCERN WITH THAT.

BUT IT'S DEFINITELY BEEN A TOPIC OF DISCUSSION ON WHETHER OR NOT, YOU KNOW, DO WE NEED TO ACTUALLY HAVE A MAXIMUM SPEED LIMIT.

WE THINK RIGHT NOW WITH JUST THE ACTUAL MOTOR THAT'S IN IT, IT'S REALLY ABOUT 15 MILES PER HOUR IS THE TOP SPEED WITH SOMEBODY RIDING IT.

WE THINK THAT'S OKAY.

IN THE EVENT THEY WOULD START TO PUT LARGER MOTORS IN THEM THEN I THINK WE WOULD START TO HAVE MORE DISCUSSION.

BUT I THINK THAT'S A GOOD POINT AND THAT'S DEFINITELY SOMETHING WE'LL LOOK AT FOR THE NEXT SIX MONTHS.

>> COURAGE: OKAY.

WELL, I LOOK FORWARD TO SUPPORTING THE PILOT PROGRAM AND FINDING THOSE RESULTS AFTER A FEW MONTHS.

THANK YOU, MAYOR.

>> MAYOR NIRENBERG: THANK YOU, COUNCILMAN COURAGE.

COUNCILMAN PELAEZ.

>> PELAEZ: THANK YOU, MAYOR.

SO SCOOTERS AND BIKES.

I DON'T THINK THERE'S ANYBODY UP HERE ON THIS DAIS THAT WILL DISAGREE WITH THE FOLLOWING, THAT THAT TECHNOLOGY, THOSE COMPANIES, THE RIDERS, THEY CAN BE REAL ALLIES IN OUR PROBLEM-SOLVING EFFORTS AS WE LOOK AT THIS FIRST MILE, LAST MILE ISSUE.

I ALSO THINK THAT RIDERS WHO NEGOTIATE TRAFFIC SAFELY AND OUR CONSCIOUS OF SAFETY RULES AND USE COMMON SENSE WHEN THEY RIDE THEIR SCOOTERS OR THEIR BIKES ARE ALSO ALLIES IN THAT EFFORT.

BUT THERE'S ALWAYS GOING TO BE THAT KNUCKLE HEAD OUT THERE THAT DRIVES LIKE A JERK AND PUTS HIMSELF OR OTHERS AT RISK.

I HAVE RIDDEN THE SCOOTERS AND THEY'RE AS DANGEROUS AS A BICYCLE.

AND, IN MY CASE, AS DANGEROUS AS WALKING.

BUT I'VE HEARD THE COMPLAINTS AND A LOT OF PEOPLE WALK UP TO ME AND SAY, OH, COUNCILMAN, YOU GUYS ARE GOING TO HAVE VERY BIG PROBLEMS WITH THESE THINGS.

VERY BIG PROBLEMS. AND I DON'T SEE THE PROBLEMS BEING THAT DIFFERENT THAN PEOPLE DRIVING UNSAFELY ON ROADS, FOR EXAMPLE.

WE HAVE FATALITIES IN THIS CITY ALMOST EVERY SINGLE DAY.

AND ALMOST ALL OF THEM ARE DUE TO PEOPLE JUST NOT FOLLOWING THE RULES AND PEOPLE NOT EXERCISING SOME DEGREE OF COMMON SENSE.

I AGREE, YOU KNOW, THAT THERE'S A LOT OF PEOPLE OUT THERE THAT DESPITE WHAT I JUST SAID WILL SAY THIS IS A SCOURGE.

THESE SCOOTERS ARE DISRUPTING.

AND THAT'S THE NATURE OF DISRUPTIVE TECHNOLOGY IS THAT IT DISRUPTS.

I HAVE A FEELING THAT FUTURE CITY COUNCILS WILL BE DEALING WITH THE SCOURGE OF HOVER SHOES OR WHATEVER, RIGHT? ALTHOUGH I'M NOT SURE THE HOVER SHOE SHARING CONCEPT IS VERY SANITARY.

BUT I WILL TELL YOU THAT THIS IS A STRUGGLE THAT I THINK PRIOR CITY COUNCIL HAD TO DEAL WITH THE ADVENT OF FASTER CARS.

WITH THE ADVENT OF CARRIAGES WITH BICYCLES, PEOPLE ON ROLLER SKATES AND ALL THAT.

SO OUR JOB HERE IS TO MAKE SURE MORE PEOPLE THAN NOT ARE SAFE.

AND THIS TECHNOLOGY IS HERE TO STAY, NO MATTER WHAT WE DO.

AND SO THE BEST THING SOMETIMES IS TO ACCEPT THE CARDS THAT HAVE BEEN DEALT WITH US AND TRY TO ADAPT.

NOW, I WILL TELL YOU THAT -- AND IF THERE'S ANY OF THE OPERATORS HERE, WITH THE EXCEPTION OF ONE OF THESE OPERATORS, BOY, WHAT A BAD WAY TO ENTER A MARKET BY JUST DROPPING BIG HUNKS OF EQUIPMENT ON OUR SIDEWALKS.

YOU KNOW, IF COUNCILMAN PERRY AND I WANTED TO START A BUSINESS WHERE WE STARTED DOING A CHAIR-SHARING COMPANY AND WE JUST STARTED DUMPING CHAIRS ALL OVER THE CITY.

ROCKING CHAIRS AND HAD AN APP TO

[00:55:02]

IT, I THINK WE WOULD BE ARRESTED FOR LITTERING, RIGHT? THAT'S NOT THE WAY TO BE A GOOD CORPORATE CITIZEN.

I WOULD LIKE TO THANK BLUE DUCK FOR BEING VERY CONSCIOUS ABOUT HOW TO BE A CORPORATE CITIZEN AND HOW TO BE A GOOD NEIGHBOR AND BEING CONSCIENTIOUS ABOUT THEIR ENTRY INTO THIS MARKET.

BUT, THAT SAID, THIS IS A PILL THAT WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO SWALLOW.

AND SO I'M GOING TO BE SUPPORTIVE OF YOUR EFFORT TODAY.

THANKS FOR ALL THE HARD WORK.

THANKS, MAYOR.

>> MAYOR NIRENBERG: THANK YOU, COUNCILMAN PELAEZ.

COUNCILMAN PERRY.

>> PERRY: THANK YOU, SIR.

THANK YOU, JOHN.

APPRECIATE THE PRESENTATION.

I DO HAVE A FEW QUESTIONS HERE.

THE COST OF THE PROGRAM, THE INITIAL REGISTRATION FEE AND THEN THE COST PER SCOOTER.

HOW DID WE COME UP WITH THOSE COSTS?

>> WE WERE LOOKING AT REALLY JUST TRYING TO COST RECOVERY.

AND I DON'T THINK WE'RE GOING TO GET THERE YET WITH THESE RATES.

LOOKING AT WHAT OTHER CITIES ARE CHARGING, TALKING TO THE VENDORS, WE WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT WE WEREN'T PRICING THEM OUT OF THE MARKET.

BUT ALSO BEING SENSITIVE TO VARIOUS SIZES OF THOSE COMPANIES.

SOME OF THE COMPANIES ARE VERY LARGE.

THEY'RE INTERNATIONAL SO THEY HAVE A LOT OF RESOURCES.

SOME OF THE COMPANIES ARE VERY SMALL.

SO WE WANTED TO MAKE SURE WE WEREN'T PRICING SOMEBODY OUT OF THE MARKET.

AND SO IT'S AN ATTEMPT TO HAVE A FAIR PERMIT APPLICATION THAT WILL HELP US RECOUP SOME OF OUR COST.

THAT'S PART OF THE SIX-MONTH PILOT PROGRAM IS TO LOOK AT IF WE HAVE SIX MONTHS OF STAFF OUT THERE CORRECTING, WHAT DOES THAT LOOK LIKE TIME-WISE.

RIGHT NOW WITH THE THREE VENDORS THAT WE HAVE, WE HAVE 3,003 SCOOTERS THAT ARE DEPLOYED, SO THE FEES COLLECTED FROM THOSE NUMBERS WOULD BE $31,530.

THAT'S ABOUT A THIRD OF A FULL-TIME EMPLOYEE.

AND SO WE'RE GOING TO -- BUT IF THERE'S MORE SCOOTERS COMING, MORE COMING IN THE MARKET, OBVIOUSLY THAT NUMBER IS GOING TO START TO GROW.

SO WE'LL BE LOOKING AT HOW MUCH TIME ARE WE REALLY SPENDING OUT THERE CORRECTING THESE.

SO WE TRIED TO BE -- WE TRIED TO COME UP WITH A GOOD ESTIMATE OF WHAT WAS FAIR AND ALSO WHAT WAS EQUITABLE.

AND ALSO HOW MUCH TIME WE THINK WE'RE GOING TO SPEND DOING THIS.

>> PERRY: OKAY.

BUT THAT'S -- IF IT ENDS UP UP TO USE MORE THAN A THIRD OF A PERSON --

>> RIGHT.

>> PERRY: WE CAN GO BACK AND MAKE THOSE ADJUSTMENTS FAIRLY EASILY? OR DO WE HAVE TO GO BACK AND REVISE THIS WHOLE ORDINANCE?

>> I THINK WHEN WE COME BACK TO COUNCIL IN SIX MONTHS THAT MAY BE ONE OF THE ITEMS THAT WE'RE PROPOSING IS THAT WE WOULD EITHER INCREASE FEES -- AND IT MAY BE AN INCREASE TO THE PERMIT, THE YEARLY PERMIT VERSUS PER VEHICLE.

I THINK IT'S ALSO GOING TO DEPEND ON WHAT OUR REGULATIONS ARE AND HOW WE'RE ENFORCING IT.

AND I THINK OUR FOCUS IS REALLY GOING TO BE ON HAVING THE VENDORS SELF-CORRECT.

SO WE'RE NOT USING CITY STAFF RESOURCES TO GO OUT THERE AND DO REALLY WHAT WE THINK THEY SHOULD BE DOING.

IN LOOKING AT THAT TECHNOLOGY THAT'S THERE TO SEE CAN THAT HELP US IDENTIFY PROBLEMS FASTER.

AND WE'VE ALREADY SEEN, JUST IN THE PAST FEW MONTHS, THAT JUST BY COMMUNICATING WITH THE COMPANIES SOME OF THE VIOLATIONS OR POTENTIAL VIOLATIONS WERE WHEN THEY WERE DEPLOYED IN THE MORNING.

SO WE HAVE BEEN KIND OF BACK AND FORTH FEEDBACK WITH THEM SAYING, HEY, WHEN YOU DEPLOY IN THIS AREA CAN YOU MAYBE MOVE THOSE SCOOTERS DOWN 30 OR 40 FEET OUT OF THAT BUS AREA? AND SO I THINK WE'LL SEE LESS AND LESS OF THOSE VIOLATIONS.

AND SO I THINK AFTER SIX MONTHS WE'LL HAVE A MUCH BETTER IDEA OF REALLY WHAT IT MEANS FROM A STAFFING PERSPECTIVE.

AND THEN WE CAN ADJUST FEES ACCORDINGLY, IF NEED BE.

>> PERRY: OKAY.

AND THEN I KNOW TAKING A PORTION OF THE PROFITS AND DONATING IT TO NONPROFITS HERE IN THE CITY.

IS THAT BEING -- ARE ALL THE COMPANIES PARTICIPATING IN THAT?

>> SEVERAL OF THEM HAVE OFFERED TO DO THAT.

TO MY KNOWLEDGE, RIGHT NOW, I DON'T KNOW THAT THEY ARE DOING THAT.

IN OTHER CITIES THEY HAVE DONE THAT.

IT'S SOMETHING THAT WE CAN LOOK AT AS TO WHETHER OR NOT SHOULD ANY OF THESE FEES GO TO A CERTAIN PROGRAM.

BUT THEY HAVE OFFERED TO DO THAT.

BUT WE'RE NOT REQUIRING THAT AS PART OF THIS PILOT PROGRAM.

>> PERRY: WE'RE NOT REQUIRING WHO IS DOING THAT AND WHAT

[01:00:04]

ORGANIZATIONS THEY ARE PARTICIPATING WITH IN MAKING THESE DONATIONS.

I WOULD LIKE TO KNOW THAT.

AND THEN THEY'RE OKAY WITH A TWO-HOUR LIMIT ON VIOLATIONS ON CORRECTING ANY PROBLEMS OUT THERE?

>> YEAH.

AND THAT'S SOMETHING THAT SEVERAL OTHER CITIES ARE DOING AS WELL.

AND I DON'T WANT TO SPEAK FOR EACH COMPANY, BUT THEY HAVE MENTIONED THAT THEY THINK THAT'S AN APPROPRIATE AMOUNT OF TIME, BECAUSE IN A LOT OF CASES THE TURNOVER OF THE SCOOTERS IS LESS THAN TWO HOURS.

SO A LOT OF TIMES THE SCOOTER MAY BE PARKED IN VIOLATION BUT IT'S A VERY SHORT AMOUNT OF TIME BEFORE THE NEXT RIDER COMES AND USES IT.

SO THE RIDERS THEMSELVES, IN A WAY, ARE CORRECTING IT BY USING IT.

>> PERRY: OKAY.

AND THEN TICKETS.

HAVE WE ISSUED ANY TICKETS HERE IN THIS CITY TO ANY VIOLATORS?

>> I DON'T THINK SO.

>> PERRY: RUNNING STOP SIGNS, RUNNING RED LIGHTS.

>> NO VIOLATIONS YET.

>> PERRY: NO VIOLATIONS.

>> AND A LOT OF THESE WE REALLY DON'T HAVE ANY SPECIFIC REGULATIONS TODAY THAT THEY WOULD BE IN VIOLATION OF.

>> PERRY: IF THEY'RE ON THE ROAD SHOULDN'T THEY BE OBEYING STOP SIGNS AND TRAFFIC LIGHTS AND ALL THAT?

>> YES.

>> PERRY: AND I HAVE SEEN TRAFFIC LIGHTS AND STOP SIGNS BEING RUN BY SCOOTERS.

>> RIGHT.

>> PERRY: I GUESS IS THE POLICE DEPARTMENT EVEN CURRENT TRAFFIC LAWS WITHIN THE ROAD SYSTEM?

>> YES.

AND SO WE HAVE WORKED CLOSELY WITH THE POLICE DEPARTMENT.

I THINK REALLY WHAT WE'RE ALL LOOKING FOR WAS THIS NEW ORDINANCE, SOME GUIDANCE, SOME REGULATIONS ON WHAT WE WOULD ENFORCE, HOW WE WOULD ENFORCE IT.

SO I THINK GOING FORWARD YOU'LL MAYBE START TO SEE SOME MORE VIOLATIONS, PARTICULARLY AREAS THAT WE'RE CONCERNED ABOUT ARE ON THE RIVER WALK, WORKING CLOSELY WITH THE PARKS POLICE DEPARTMENT TO MAKE SURE PEOPLE AREN'T RIDING ON THE RIVER WALK WHERE YOU HAVE A LOT OF PEDESTRIANS WHERE YOU HAVE POTENTIAL CONFLICTS.

>> PERRY: I'M JUST CONCERNED THAT WE WERE WAITING ON THIS ORDINANCE TO START ENFORCING TRAFFIC LAWS ON OUR STREETS.

I'M JUST CONCERNED ABOUT EVERYBODY SHOULD BE OBEYING THOSE -- IF YOU'RE ON THE STREET YOU SHOULD BE STOPPING AT STOP SIGNS, STOPPING AT TRAFFIC LIGHTS.

WE DON'T HAVE TO BE WAITING ON THIS ORDINANCE TO DO THAT.

>> SURE.

>> PERRY: SO I WOULD HAVE EXPECTED SOMETHING, YOU KNOW, BUT YOU'RE SAYING WE HAVEN'T ISSUED ANY TICKETS TO DATE.

>> THAT'S WHAT I'M BEING TOLD.

>> PERRY: ALL RIGHT.

AND THEN I AM INTERESTED IN THIS ABOUT THE GEO FENCING.

HOW WOULD THAT -- I KNOW THIS IS FUTURE BUT HAVE Y'ALL THOUGHT ABOUT, YOU KNOW, AUDIO] COUNCIL MEMBER, WOULD IT BE CITY STAFF, HOW WOULD THAT WORK IN CONCEPT?

>> IT COULD BE BOTH OF THOSE WAYS.

WE HAVE ALREADY IDENTIFIED, FOR EXAMPLE, THE RIVER WALK.

PARTICULARLY THE RIVER WALK IN THE DOWNTOWN AREA WHERE YOU HAVE QUITE A BIT OF PEDESTRIANS.

WE KNOW THAT'S AN AREA THAT WE WOULD LIKE TO GEO FENCE.

NOT ONLY BECAUSE IT'S PROHIBITED BUT ALSO BECAUSE OF THE CHANCES O AN ACCIDENT HAPPENING.

SO THAT'S AN AREA WE HAVE ALREADY IDENTIFIED AS SAYING THAT'S AN AREA THAT NEEDS TO BE GEO FENCED, NOT ONLY FROM PARKING BUT ALSO FROM RIDING.

IT COULD BE OVER TIME WE SEE A LOT OF PEOPLE ARE RIDING SCOOTERS TO A LOCATION AND THERE'S ACCUMULATION OR STACKING OF SCOOTERS AT THAT AREA.

IT MIGHT BE A LIBRARY.

IT MIGHT BE JUST AN EVENT VENUE OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT.

THAT'S AN AREA WE NEED TO MAKE SURE WE'RE CONTROLLING A LITTLE BIT BETTER.

SO IT COULD BE JUST FROM INPUT FROM VARIOUS STAKEHOLDERS.

FOR EXAMPLE, THE CONVENTION CENTER IS ONE THAT'S EXPRESSED SOME CONCERN TO US.

BUT CERTAINLY IT COULD COME FROM CITIZENS AND COUNCIL MEMBERS.

AND WE WOULD TAKE INPUT FROM ANYBODY AND EVERYBODY TO HELP US MAKE THOSE DECISIONS.

>> PERRY: GREAT.

THAT'S ALL MY QUESTIONS.

THANK YOU, JOHN.

APPRECIATE IT.

>> MAYOR NIRENBERG: THANK YOU, COUNCILMAN PERRY.

COUNCILMAN TREVINO.

>> TREVINO: THANK YOU, MAYOR.

JOHN, GREAT WORK ON THIS.

I THINK THIS IS DEMONSTRATING OR IS GOING TO SET AN EXAMPLE FOR THE REST OF THE STATE, AND CERTAINLY APPRECIATE THE LIGHT TOUCH APPROACH.

BUT WE WILL BE MONITORING, AND I THINK THAT'S WHAT'S CRITICAL HERE.

WHAT I THINK THIS HAS DONE IS ALSO EXPOSED SOME OF OUR DEFICIENCIES, MAYBE, IN INFRASTRUCTURE.

AND I WOULD SUGGEST THAT AS WE ARE LOOKING TO HIRE A PEDESTRIAN MOBILITY OFFICER THAT WE WOULD INCLUDE THE PEDESTRIAN MOBILITY OFFICER IN THAT EVALUATION.

[01:05:01]

BECAUSE THIS IS REALLY ABOUT PEOPLE.

WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT PEOPLE ARE SAFE.

PEOPLE HAVE SAFE ACCESS TO ALL OUR CITY.

AND I THINK THIS IS A GREAT OPPORTUNITY TO WORK WITH THIS NEW PEDESTRIAN MOBILITY OFFICER TO GET A REPORT ABOUT WHAT THIS MEANS, WHAT WE CAN ANTICIPATE TO LEARN FROM IT TO APPLY TO OUR INFRASTRUCTURE NEEDS.

WOULDN'T YOU AGREE WITH THAT? WHAT WE'RE HOPING WE CAN GATHER FROM THIS DATA IS SOMETHING THAT IS COOPERATIVE FROM THESE COMPANIES SO THAT WE CAN APPLY IT TO HOW WE STUDY WHERE SOME OF THESE INFRASTRUCTURE NEEDS ARE.

ARE THESE COMPANIES BEING COOPERATIVE?

>> YES.

THEY HAVE ALL BEEN VERY COOPERATIVE.

THEY HAVE BEEN ACCESSIBLE.

WE HAVE HAD MULTIPLE MEETINGS WITH THEM.

THEY HAVE BEEN VERY WILLING TO HELP, PROVIDE US INFORMATION.

IT'S REALLY BEEN A COLLABORATIVE EFFORT TO MAKE SURE THAT WHAT WE'RE PROPOSING IS REASONABLE BUT ALSO LOOKS OUT FOR THE INTERESTS OF OUR CITIZENS AS WELL.

SO I THINK THEY'VE BEEN VERY COOPERATIVE.

EVEN THE ONES THAT AREN'T HERE YET HAVE BEEN COOPERATIVE TOO.

>> TREVINO: GOOD.

WELL, I THINK THE EDUCATION CAMPAIGN IS ALSO IMPORTANT, WHICH IS WHY I WANT TO INCLUDE THE PEDESTRIAN MOBILITY OFFICER.

I THINK IT'S CRITICAL THAT WE ALL NEED TO MAYBE TAKE A LOOK AT THIS HOLISTICALLY.

IT'S GOT TO BE THE SCOOTERS PLUS, RIGHT? ALL OF US HAVE TO BE VERY AWARE.

IT'S A COMMON ADAGE, LOOK BOTH WAYS BEFORE CROSSING THE STREET.

WE WANT ADDED PEDESTRIAN SAFETY AND OF COURSE THERE'S VISION ZERO THAT I THINK NEEDS TO BE VERY MUCH A PART OF OUR EVALUATION AS WELL.

GREAT WORK, JOHN.

I'LL BE SUPPORTING THIS.

THANK YOU.

>> MAYOR NIRENBERG: THANK YOU, COUNCILMAN TREVINO.

COUNCILWOMAN SANDOVAL.

>> SANDOVAL: THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MAYOR.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH, JOHN, FOR YOUR WORK ON THIS AND TO ALL THE COMPANIES THAT HAVE BEEN PARTICIPATING AND HELPING YOU FIGURE THIS OUT, AS WELL AS I SEE SOME REPRESENTATIVES FROM CENTRO HERE.

I IMAGINE THAT'S WHY THEY'RE HERE.

SO THANKS A LOT FOR YOUR HELP ON THAT.

SO I'M SUPPORTIVE OF HAVING SCOOTERS AS A TRANSPORTATION ALTERNATIVE FOR OUR RESIDENTS AND OUR VISITORS IN SAN ANTONIO.

I DO AGREE THAT THE POINT IS TO KEEP PEOPLE SAFE.

THE POINT OF THESE REGULATIONS IS TO KEEP PEOPLE SAFE.

SO THANKS FOR HAVING THAT FOREMOST IN THIS PROPOSAL.

I DO HAVE A QUESTION ABOUT THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THIS PROXIMITY TO PEDESTRIANS AND YIELDING TO THEM.

SO IN MY DISTRICT -- WE DON'T HAVE A LOT OF SCOOTERS.

BUT IN MY DISTRICT SOMETHING THAT FOLKS REALLY HARP ON IS THEY WANT TO FEEL SAFE WALKING ON THEIR STREETS, WHETHER IT'S ON THE SIDEWALK, AND SOMETIMES CARS INTERFERE WITH THAT ABILITY.

BUT THAT'S ONE OF THEIR BIGGEST PRIORITIES IS SAFETY JUST WALKING ON YOUR STREET -- PEDESTRIAN SAFETY.

SO WHAT I WOULDN'T WANT IS FOR THE SCOOTERS TO PRESENT ANOTHER WAY TO BE UNSAFE ON A STREET.

I'VE ALREADY RECEIVED SOME CONCERNS ABOUT THAT.

I FORWARDED THOSE TO YOU.

>> THANK YOU.

>> SANDOVAL: AT LA VILLITA, IN PARTICULAR.

I WANT TO KNOW HOW DURING THIS PILOT PHASE WE ARE GOING TO ENFORCE THAT.

>> SURE.

AND SO I THINK IN SOME AREAS IT WILL OBVIOUSLY BE EASIER THAN OTHERS.

DOWNTOWN WHERE WE HAVE MORE PEOPLE, WE HAVE MORE STAFF, WE HAVE MORE PARKS POLICE THAT ARE ON BIKES.

IN THE INSTANCE OF LA VILLITA, THAT'S AN AREA WE'RE LOOKING AT GEO FENCING, PARTICULARLY INSIDE LA VILLITA.

I THINK THAT WAS THE CONCERN THAT WAS FORWARDED TO ME IS TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE PARTICULARLY FOCUSED ON AREAS WHERE WE HAVE HIGH CONCENTRATIONS OF PEDESTRIANS WHERE THERE'S MOST LIKELY TO BE CONFLICTS.

I THINK PART OF OUR THOUGHT ABOUT SIDEWALKS WAS IS THAT THERE'S SIDEWALKS WHERE IT'S PROBABLY VERY APPROPRIATE, MAYBE, TO RIDE A SCOOTER.

THERE'S MAYBE NOT A LOT OF PEDESTRIAN TRAFFIC.

OBVIOUSLY AREAS DOWNTOWN YOU HAVE A LOT MORE PEDESTRIANS, SO WE HAVE TO BE KIND OF STRATEGIC ABOUT ENFORCEMENT.

BUT NOT ONLY ENFORCEMENT BUT ALSO EDUCATION WHERE WE KNOW THAT WE'RE LIKELY TO HAVE CONFLICTS.

THOSE ARE THE AREAS THAT WE'RE GOING TO PUT A LOT OF EMPHASIS ON RIDERSHIP SAFETY.

SO YOU MAY SEE MORE MARKETING EFFORTS, SAY, IN DOWNTOWN WHERE THERE'S MORE LIKELY TO BE A CONFLICT.

IT DOES NOT MEAN WE WON'T BE ADDRESSING THE ENTIRE CITY, BECAUSE THIS IS A CITY-WIDE --

>> SANDOVAL: JOHN, IF YOU DON'T MIND, I WOULD LIKE TO HEAR FROM THE CHIEF ABOUT HOW HE'S ROLLING THIS OUT WITH THE GUYS ON THE ROAD, ON THE STREET.

THANKS.

>> WHAT'S THE QUESTION, COUNCILWOMAN?

>> SANDOVAL: ENFORCEMENT FOR

[01:10:04]

PEDESTRIAN SAFETY AROUND SCOOTERS.

IF YOU HAVE SOMEONE RIDING A LITTLE TOO FAST ON THE SIDEWALK COMING A LITTLE TOO CLOSE TO A PEDESTRIAN OR NOT YIELDING, HOW WILL OUR OFFICERS BE TAKING THAT ON?

>> CHIEF: THE SAME WAY THEY WOULD ENFORCE A BICYCLE REGULATION OR ELECTRICAL BICYCLE REGULATION.

IF THEY SEE IT AND THEY'RE NOT ON SOMETHING OF A HIGHER PRIORITY, THEN THEY WOULD ENFORCE IT.

>> SANDOVAL: OKAY.

HOW DO YOU ANTICIPATE THAT HAPPENING DOWNTOWN? I MEAN, DO THEY HAVE THE TIME TO ENFORCE THAT?

>> CHIEF: PRIMARILY I THINK IT WOULD BE THE BICYCLE -- BIKE OFFICERS WHO WOULD BE MOST EXPOSED TO THAT.

>> SANDOVAL: OKAY.

AND DO YOU NEED ANOTHER SORT OF OPERATING PROCEDURE TO IMPLEMENT THIS? OR IT CAN BE IMPLEMENTED IMMEDIATELY?

>> CHIEF: WELL, WHENEVER COUNCIL MAKES IT EFFECTIVE IT WOULD BE ENFORCED.

>> SANDOVAL: WELL, THANK YOU VERY MUCH, CHIEF.

JOHN, I DO HAVE ONE SUGGESTION.

YOU TALKED ABOUT GATHERING A LOT OF DATA, NOT JUST IN TERMS OF WHAT RESOURCES WE USE BUT ALSO WHERE PEOPLE ARE GOING, ORIGIN, DESTINATION.

I THINK THAT'S VERY INTERESTING.

INSTEAD OF JUST HAVING OUR OWN STAFF REVIEW IT, I WOULD RECOMMEND HAVING A DATA-THON.

PEOPLE WHO AREN'T CAUGHT UP IN THE INFORMATION MAY HAVE OTHER CREATIVE WAYS OF INTERPRETING IT.

>> THANK YOU.

YEAH.

WE CAN DEFINITELY LOOK INTO THAT.

>> SANDOVAL: THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

I APPRECIATE YOUR WORK ON THIS AND WE'LL BE SUPPORTIVE OF THE ORDINANCE.

>> MAYOR NIRENBERG: THANK YOU, COUNCILWOMAN SANDOVAL.

COUNCILMAN SALDANA.

>> SALDANA: THANK YOU, MAYOR.

I JUST WANTED TO COMMENT ABOUT THE IMPORTANCE OF WHAT THE CONVERSATION LOOKS LIKE FOR US TODAY AND WHAT I THINK IT WILL EVENTUALLY EVOLVE INTO IN THE FUTURE.

I WAS POINTED THIS OUT BY A MEMBER OF MY COMMUNITY WHO IS A MEMBER OF THE DISABLED COMMUNITY.

THEY ARE RESTRICTED TO A WHEELCHAIR.

AND WHAT THEY BELIEVE IS WHAT I THINK EXISTS IN THE FUTURE FOR A CONSTITUENCY OF PEOPLE WHO CARE ABOUT THINGS LIKE SIDEWALKS THAT ARE NAVIGABLE, THAT THERE ARE ACCESS POINTS THAT ARE SAFE TO EITHER -- WHETHER YOU'RE ON A WHEELCHAIR OR MOTORIZED SCOOTER OR A BIKE OR AN ELECTRICAL SCOOTER LIKE WE'RE TALKING ABOUT TODAY.

THEY ALL NEED THE SAME THINGS, WHICH IS A SAFE AND NAVIGABLE OR WALKABLE CITY.

AND WHAT'S INTERESTING TO ME IS TO THINK ABOUT THE FUTURE THAT EXISTS WITH PARTNERSHIPS THAT INCLUDE VIA FOR THE FIRST MILE, LAST MILE OPTIONS.

SO THIS MICROTRANSPORTATION REVOLUTION WILL BE AN IMPORTANT ONE BECAUSE IT WILL HAVE A SPILLOVER TO CONSTITUENCIES THAT WE DON'T EVEN CONSIDER TODAY.

IF YOU LIVE IN A MORE SUBURBAN SETTING AND THERE IS ALL OF A SUDDEN A LIGHTER, FOLDABLE SCOOTER THAT HAS STORAGE ON A MASS TRANSIT SYSTEM LIKE VIA, ALL OF A SUDDEN YOU'RE SEEING A SHIFT IN THE WAY PEOPLE ARE MOVING, TO THE EXTENT I THINK YOU'LL SEE AS UBIQUITOUS AS IT IS TO CARRY A BRIEFCASE, IT IS UBIQUITOUS TO CARRY A HELMET.

NOT ONLY IN SAN ANTONIO BUT LARGE AREAS WHO NEVER THOUGHT MASS TRANSIT, OTHER THAN JUST THE INDIVIDUAL VEHICLE WOULD BE THE FUTURE.

SO I THINK WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO IS FIND OUT WHERE WE NEED TO APPLY THE RULES TODAY AND FIGURE OUT HOW WE CAN ADJUST THEM IN THE FUTURE IF WE NEED TO.

BECAUSE IT'S MY PREDICT'LL PROBT WHERE WE WILL HAVE TO CAP THE NUMBER OF SCOOTERS.

BUT I DON'T KNOW WHERE THAT NUMBER IS TODAY, WHICH IS WHY I THINK WE'RE GOING THROUGH A PRETTY FLEXIBLE PATH ON THAT CONVERSATION BUT ULTIMATELY WE'LL REVISIT THIS.

WITH THAT, I'M EXCITED TO SEE WHAT THIS MICROTRANSPORTATION HAS FOR SAN ANTONIO AND HOW WE'RE GOING TO RESPOND TO IT.

BECAUSE I THINK THERE'S SOME CONSTITUENCIES OUT THERE THAT WOULD BE SUPPORTIVE, WHETHER THEY'RE RIDING THE BUS TODAY OR THEY'RE MEMBERS OF THE DISABLED COMMUNITY WHO UNDERSTAND THERE'S GOING TO BE SOME SPILLOVER EFFECTS FROM CITY COUNCIL AND A CITY APPROACHING TRANSPORTATION IN A MORE DIVERSE WAY.

WITH THAT I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE ITEM.

>> MAYOR NIRENBERG: OKAY.

THERE'S A MOTION AND A SECOND FOR APPROVAL OF ITEM NO. 5.

JOHN, I DON'T HAVE MUCH MORE TO ADD.

I WISH YOU WERE A LITTLE BIT MORE EXCITED ABOUT WHAT YOU'RE DOING TODAY.

BECAUSE THIS IS KIND OF A BIG DEAL.

I'M EXCITED ABOUT THE FACT THAT WE DEMONSTRATED HERE IN SAN ANTONIO THAT WE CAN AUDIO].

AND I THINK THAT'S A BIG DEAL.

AND I THINK PEOPLE NEED TO KNOW THAT ABOUT OUR CITY IS THAT THIS IS ESSENTIALLY A BRAND NEW INDUSTRY THAT WAS CROWD SOURCED BECAUSE THEY SEE A NEED ON THE STREETS AND THE PRIVATE MARKET CREATED, RESOLVED THAT.

AND RATHER THAN TRYING TO FIT A ROUND PEG INTO A SQUARE HOLE, WE'VE SORT OF WATCHED THIS

[01:15:03]

DEVELOP, SEEN WHERE THE PRESSURE POINTS ARE, AND RESPONDED ACCORDINGLY.

AND WHAT I LIKE ABOUT THIS IS IT'S A SIX-MONTH PILOT.

WE CAN COME BACK AND REVIEW HOW IT'S WORKING.

BUT IT'S REALLY UNDERGIRDED BY WHAT I THINK EVERY POLICY THAT DEALS WITH A NEW INDUSTRY SHOULD DO, WHICH IS COMMON SENSE.

THERE ARE SOME THINGS THAT WE HAVE TO DEAL WITH, SPEED ISSUES, PROXIMITY TO HANDICAP ACCESS, PROXIMITY TO PEDESTRIANS.

WHAT TO DO WHEN PEOPLE ARE BEHAVING IN A WAY THAT IS OBNOXIOUS.

IT DEALS WITH THAT BUT IT DOESN'T DO SO IN A WAY THAT PUSHES OUT THE INDUSTRY.

I'M REALLY EXCITED ABOUT THAT.

AND I LIKE THE FACT THAT THERE'S NO CAP.

THE MARKET WILL DECIDE WHERE THE DEMAND AND THE SUPPLY NEED TO BALANCE OUT.

SO I THINK THAT'S A BIG DEAL AND I HOPE THAT PEOPLE ARE PAYING ATTENTION TO WHAT THIS COUNCIL HAS DONE AND WHAT YOUR STAFF HAS DONE, JOHN.

I WILL SAY I'M BOMBARDED CONSTANTLY WITH TWITTER MESSAGES AND FACEBOOK MESSAGES WITH PICTURES OF SCOOTERS JUST CRAMMED SOMEWHERE WHERE THEY SHOULDN'T BE.

AND I'D LIKE TO SAY WITHOUT SINGLING OUT ANY COMPANY, THE GOOD WAY FOR US TO RESPOND IS TO ASK.

IS TO ASK NICELY, TAKE CARE OF THE STUFF.

REALLY THE BURDEN FALLS ON THE COMPANY, AND THEY'LL DO THAT AND THEY HAVE BEEN DOING THAT.

BUT THIS DOES ALLOW US TO HAVE A SAFETY MECHANISM FOR THE PUBLIC THAT DEMANDS IT FROM US THAT ON OCTOBER 12 WE STOP ASKING NICELY.

WHICH I THINK OUR CITIZENS WANT TO HEAR FROM US TOO.

I'M VERY EXCITED BY THIS.

I DIDN'T MEAN TO RAISE THE VOLUME TOO MUCH, BUT CONGRATULATIONS TO THE COUNCIL AND TO THE STAFF FOR FIGURING THIS OUT IN A GOOD WAY.

SO WITH THAT, I'M FULLY SUPPORTIVE OF THE ORDINANCE AND I LOOK FORWARD TO SEEING HOW THIS PILOT PROGRAM DEVELOPS AND LOOK FORWARD TO GETTING ON A SCOOTER.

THANKS.

>> THANK YOU.

>> MAYOR NIRENBERG: THERE'S A MOTION AND A SECOND FOR APPROVAL OF ITEM NO. 5.

[15. Ordinance amending the land use categories in Chapter 35 of the City's Unified Development Code to implement the SA Tomorrow]

PLEASE VOTE.

MOTION CARRIES.

ITEM NO. 15.

>> ITEM NO. 15 IS AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE LAND USE CATEGORIES IN CHAPTER 35 OF THE CITY'S UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE TO IMPLEMENT THE S.A. TOMORROW COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.

>> MAYOR NIRENBERG: COUNCILWOMAN VIAGRAN.

>> VIAGRAN: THANK YOU, MAYOR.

I THINK THERE'S A PRESENTATION.

RUDY, IF YOU COULD PLEASE GIVE THAT.

>> YES, MA'AM.

GOOD MORNING, MR. MAYOR AND COUNCIL MEMBERS.

THE NEXT ITEM IS AUDIO] AS DETAILED IN YOUR PACKET.

THIS ITEM WAS FIRST CONSIDERED AT YOUR JUNE 21ST PUBLIC HEARING.

BUT WAS TABLED AT THE REQUEST OF COUNCIL TO CONDUCT A FURTHER ROUND OF PUBLIC OUTREACH, WHICH THE DEPARTMENT COMPLETED IN THE SUMMER OF THIS YEAR.

AS PART OF MY PRESENTATION I'LL INCLUDE DETAILS OF THE STAFF PROPOSAL AS PRESENTED TO THE COMMUNITY IN OPEN FORUMS, AS WELL AS AN OUTLINE OF THE FULL PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT EFFORT.

FIRST I WOULD LIKE TO BEGIN WITH A PRIMER ON WHAT S.A. TOMORROW IS AND HOW IT'S BEING IMPLEMENTED IN THE COMMUNITY.

THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN IS THE CITY'S LAND USE AND URBAN PLANNING POLICY.

THE PLAN DETAILS HOW AND WHERE THE CITY SHOULD AGGREGATE FUTURE GROWTH.

ADDITIONALLY THE PLAN ALSO RECOMMENDS THE DEVELOPMENT OF COMMUNITY PLANS TO PROVIDE A LAND USE PLAN AND MAP FOR THE BALANCE OF THE CITY.

THESE AREAS PARTNER NEIGHBORHOODS THAT HAVE SIMILAR CHARACTERISTICS, TIME OF DEVELOP, NUMBER OF NEIGHBORHOODS AND SIMILAR CHALLENGES AND OPPORTUNITIES.

IT SHOULD BE NOTED THAT COMMUNITY AREAS ARE NOT INTENDED TO SPECIFICALLY ACCOMMODATE SIGNIFICANT AMOUNTS OF FUTURE GROWTH.

THE IDEA BEHIND THESE PLANS IS TO ENSURE WE HAVE ADDRESSED LAND USE, MOBILITY, AND INFRASTRUCTURE REQUIREMENTS FOR THESE AREAS AT A COMMUNITY SCALE AND TO HAVE A COMPREHENSIVE ASSESSMENT AND GUIDANCE FOR FUTURE IMPROVEMENTS AND BOND PROJECT.

THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT WILL UTILIZE EXISTING PLANS AS A CRITICAL BASELINE FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF MODERN PLANS THAT ADDRESS LAND USE AT THE COMMUNITY SCALE, BUT ALSO SUPPORT NEIGHBORHOOD CONSERVATION AND PROMOTE LOCAL PRIORITIES.

THE COUNCIL DIRECTED THE DEPARTMENT TO INITIATE THE REGIONAL CENTER PLANS WITHIN A THREE-YEAR WORK PLAN AND THE BALANCE OF THE PLANS WITHIN FIVE YEARS.

THEN THE DEPARTMENT WILL TAKE THE NEXT STEPS RELATED TO IMPLEMENTING THE PLAN SO THEY DO NOT SIT ON THE SHELF.

THIS SLIDE DETAILS WHAT A LAND USE PLAN IS.

IN SUMMATION, THE CITY'S LAND USE POLICY FOR A SPECIFIC AREA THAT DETAILS HOW THE AREA WILL GROW AND DEVELOP, WHAT PATTERN IT WILL TAKE.

IN SHORT, LAND USE IS INTENDED TO PROVIDE COHESIVE DISTRICTS WITH COMPATIBLE USES.

[01:20:01]

IT SHOULD BE NOTED THAT A LAND USE PLAN IS MUCH MORE THAN A MAP.

IT DEFINES A FUTURE FOR THE COMMUNITY THROUGH POLICY.

THESE POLICIES AND LAND USE MAP ARE GUIDING PRINCIPLES FOR DECISIONS RELATED TO THE LAND USE PLANNING AND FUTURE INVESTMENTS IN THE COMMUNITY.

THESE DECISIONS ARE MADE BY THE DEVELOPMENT RELATED BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS OF THE CITY AS WELL AS CITY COUNCIL.

HAVING SAID ALL OF THIS, A PART OF IMPLEMENTING THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND TO BETTER DEVELOP MODERN MORE COMPREHENSIVE SUB AREA PLANS, THE DEPARTMENT IS PROPOSING TO UPDATE THE LAND USE CATEGORIES IN THE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE TO ENSURE THAT WE HAVE A CLEAR CONCISE SET OF LAND USE CATEGORIES THAT WILL GUIDE OUR CITY INTO THE FUTURE WHILE ADDRESSING LONG STANDING NEEDS IN OUR COMMUNITY.

THROUGH THE YEARS AND BASED ON THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ADOPTED IN THE 1970S AND UPDATED IN 1999 THE CITY IMPLEMENTED A SERIES OF NEIGHBORHOOD AND COMMUNITY PLANS TO GUIDE GROWTH AND DEVELOPMENT.

OVER 40 PLANS IN ALL THE CITY HAS YET TO ENJOY A LAND USE MAP FOR ALL OF SAN ANTONIO.

AND THIS FACT REMAINS AFTER 40 YEARS.

EACH OF THESE PLANS HAS THEIR OWN SET OF LAND USE CATEGORIES, YET MOST DIFFER FROM THOSE CATEGORIES IN NEIGHBORING PLANS.

SETTING THE COMMUNITY UP FOR A DISJOINTED LAND USE PATTERN AND DISALLOWING OPPORTUNITY AND CHOICE IN SOME AREAS OF OUR COMMUNITY.

S.A. TOMORROW RECOMMENDS AN APPROACH WHERE OPPORTUNITY AND CHOICE RELATED TO FUTURE LAND USE IS AVAILABLE TO ALL AREAS OF OUR COMMUNITY.

CHOICE FOR FOLKS THAT HAVE FEWER OPTIONS ADDRESSING COMMUNITY EQUITY AND ACCESS TO THE SERVICES NEEDED NO MATTER WHERE YOU LIVE IN THE CITY.

THE PROPOSED AMENDMENTS WOULD TAKE THE CITY FROM THE CURRENT SET OF OVER 50 CATEGORIES TO A HARMONIOUS ON THE SCREEN NOW YOU CAN SEE THE COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT EFFORT THAT WAS CONDUCTED TO GET TO THIS POINT IN THE PROCESS.

FROM FOCUS GROUP MEETINGS TO CITY-WIDE MEETINGS WITH RESIDENTS, TO OUTREACH WITH ORGANIZATIONS LIKE SAGE, TO ENGAGEMENT WITH STAFF IN YOUR OFFICES AT A NUMBER OF KEY POINTS IN THE PROCESS.

ADDITIONALLY THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN COMMITTEE FORWARDED THESE PLANS TO THE CITY COUNCIL AFTER A SERIES OF MEETINGS ■CONDUCTED.

[01:27:00]

I WOULD NOW LIKE TO MAKE AN ADDITIONAL REQUEST, WHICH IS THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT HAS MOVED FORWARD TO MAKE CHANGES AT THE EXPENSE OF NEIGHBORHOOD PLANS.

AS YOU GO FORWARD AND PRESUMABLY APPROVE THESE LAND USE CATEGORY CHANGES, I WOULD URGE YOU TO DO A COUNCIL CONSIDERATION REQUEST TO GET STRENGTHENING NEIGHBORHOOD PLANS ONTO YOUR AGENDA SO THAT IT CAN BE ADDRESSED.

FOR RESIDENTS OF OLDER NEIGHBORHOODS NOT PROTECTED BY RESTRICTIVE COVENANTS, THE FUTURE LAND USE PLANS AND NEIGHBORHOOD PLANS ARE THE ONLY MEANS FOR ANY INPUT INTO THE FUTURE LAND USE IN THEIR NEIGHBORHOODS.

THE CITIZEN INPUT PROCESS IS FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF THESE LAND USE PLANS, THEY'RE EXHAUSTING AND SOMETIMES DIVISIVE.

REDEVELOPMENT INTEREST CAN BUY A SINGLE LOT AND THEN GET A SEAT AT THE TABLE AND SEEK TO CHANGE THE ENTIRE NEIGHBORHOOD.

IN THIS CONTEXT, COUNCIL MEMBERS EVENTUALLY NEED TO MAKE HARD DECISIONS BEFORE PLANS ARE APPROVED BY COUNCIL.

THEY SHOULD NOT BE EXCESSIVELY CONSIDERED.

CONCERNS IS THAT WHEN A SUBAREA PLAN COMES TO COUNCIL, YOU'RE GOING TO PASS IT, BECAUSE IT'S SO LARGE, YOU'RE NOT GOING TO REJECT IT BECAUSE OF A PROBLEM IN AN INDIVIDUAL NEIGHBORHOOD.

PLANNING SAYS IT WILL HONOR LAND USE PLANS, BUT INTENDS TO REQUIRE THEM TO BE REDONE TO REMAIN EFFECTIVE.

THIS IS THE PROBLEM THAT THE PLANNING PROCESS IS SO EXHAUSTING, AND YOU HAVE LITERALLY HUNDREDS OF CITIZENS THAT HAVE PUT IN HUNDREDS OF HOURS, NOW WE'RE BASICALLY LOOKING AT THAT BEING DISRESPECTED.

I HAVE PARTICULARLY LOOKED AT THE EXISTING UDC PROVISIONS THAT REQUIRE FIVE-YEAR INTERVAL, FULL PROCESS RENEWAL OF NEIGHBORHOOD PLANS.

PLANNING IS NOT ALLOCATED TO SUFFICIENT RESOURCES TO SUPPORT THIS REQUIREMENT.

SO THEY'VE LET THESE NEIGHBORHOOD PLANS BASICALLY GO TO WHERE THEY'RE NOT FULLY INFLUENTIAL, BUT VERY RECENTLY A TEMPORARY RULE DETERMINATION WAS MADE TO PROTECT THEM IN THE INTERIM, LED IN FACT BY DEVELOPMENT SERVICES, BUT ACQUIESCED BY PLANNING.

MY PROBLEM IS NOTHING LEGALLY ENFORCEABLE, REQUIRES PLANNING TO RETAIN NEIGHBORHOOD BASED LOCAL CONTROL OVER THE CITIZEN INPUT PROCESS FOR FUTURE LAND USE PLAN DEVELOPMENT, REVISION, OR RENEWAL.

SO FOR EXAMPLE, I'M IN OAKLAND ESTATES.

WE KNOW WHAT WE WANT IN OAKLAND ESTATES.

WE HAVE A LAND USE PLAN.

WE HAD TO FIGHT A GREAT DEAL FOR IT WITH THE LAND DEPARTMENT, BUT WE HAVE IT.

BUT IF LATER ON THIS GETS ROLLED UP INTO A SUBAREA PLAN, THERE'S NOTHING COMMITTING THE PLAN WITH THE DEPARTMENT TO USE OAKLAND ESTATE RESIDENTS TO LAND USE.

WE COULD SIMPLY BE ONE PERSON ON A COMMITTEE OF TEN OVER A LARGER AREA.

THEY ARE NOT LOCKED IN.

THERE'S TOO MUCH DISCRETION, AND THEY'VE BLOWN AWAY THE LITTLE INFLUENCE WE HAVE BY PUTTING NEIGHBORHOOD PLANS IN PLAY.

OAKLAND ESTATES HAS DRAFTED PROPOSED ORDINANCE TO SOLVE

[01:30:01]

THESE MATTERS.

PART OF THAT IS ON THERE.

IF I COULD ASK YOU, SIR, TO SHOVE IT UP A LITTLE, BECAUSE THE PART AT THE TOP IS LESS RELEVANT.

KEY ELEMENTS OF THIS ORDINANCE ARE TO ROLL FORWARD THE CURRENT LAND USE PLANS INTO SA TOMORROW, WITHOUT THE GATING REQUIREMENT OF THESE EXHAUSTING RENEWALS, TO MAKE PLAN RENEWALS AT THE DISCRETION OF THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT.

THEY STILL HAVE THE POWER TO COME IN IF THEY'RE ROLLED FORWARD, BUT YOU NEED TO UNDERSTAND, THE WAY IT'S WRITTEN RIGHT NOW, ANY DEVELOPER CAN REQUIRE A WHOLESALE PLAN RENEWAL.

ALL THEY'VE GOT TO DO IS BUY ONE PIECE OF PROPERTY OR PUT IT UNDER OPTION IN MY NEIGHBORHOOD AND THEN THEY CAN REQUIRE US TO GO THROUGH THIS EXHAUSTING PROCESS.

THEY DON'T NEED THAT POWER BECAUSE THEY ALREADY HAVE A PARALLEL POWER WHEN THEY WANT TO REZONE.

THEY CAN ACTUALLY GET A CONCURRENT PLO SES BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMISSION FOR A SPOT PLAN AMENDMENT SO THAT THEY CAN DO THE REZONING.

SO IF YOU GIVE THEM THE REZONING, THEY DON'T NEED THIS POWER.

THIS IS A SEPARATE POWER WHERE THEY CAN OF MY NEIGHBORS TO PUT IN, I DON'T KNOW, 50 OR 100 HOURS OVER A PERIOD OF SIX MONTHS TO A YEAR, JUST TO TECHNICALLY RENEW THE NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN UNDER THE EXISTING ORDINANCE LANGUAGE WHICH IS NOT PROPOSED FOR AMENDMENT.

I DON'T KNOW IF I HAD THREE OR SIX.

I'LL CONCLUDE.

ACTION SHOULD BE TAKEN WHILE PLANNING IS MODIFYING UDC, BECAUSE THE NEIGHBORHOODS ARE PAYING ATTENTION TO RIGHT NOW.

YOU SHOULD RESPECT THE VOLUNTEER EFFORTS.

WE REQUEST A CCR AND I ASK MR.M MR. SAN ZONY GET INVOLVED.

>> MAYOR NIRENBERG: THANK YOU, MR. LAWHEAD.

TONY GARCIA?

>> GOOD MORNING, MAYOR.

AND CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS.

MY NAME IS TONY GARCIA.

I LIVE AT 243 EAST WHICHSACH IN THE HISTORIC DISTRICT.

I'M A BOARD MEMBER OF THE HISTORIC ASSOCIATION.

THE ASSOCIATION IS ALSO A MEMBER OF THE TIER ONE NEIGHBORHOOD COALITION.

I HAVE A STATEMENT TO READ ON BEHALF OF THE ASSOCIATION.

AGREES THAT THE FUTURE LAND USE CATEGORIES WILL HELP CREATE A CONSISTENT, PREDICTABLE CLAFGS THAN WHAT IS CURRENTLY FOUND UNDER THE UDC.

THE ASSOCIATION FURTHER AGREES THAT THESE FUTURE LAND USE CATEGORIES WILL HELP ADDRESS INCONSISTENT CATEGORIES FOUND IN MANY OF SAN ANTONIO'S OUTDATED NEIGHBORHOOD PLANS.

WITH THE ABOVE UNDERSTANDING, THE ASSOCIATION DOES HOPE THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO WILL NOT DISCARD OUR 1988 NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN, BUT UPDATE AND MAKE IT AN INTEGRAL PART OF THE SUBAREA LAND USE DISCUSSIONS WITHIN THE SA TOMORROW PROCESS.

THE HISTORICAL ASSOCIATION SUPPORTS THE FUTURE LAND USE CATEGORIES BEING PROPOSED BY THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO.

FURTHERMORE, THE ASSOCIATION STRONGLY SUPPORTS AMENDMENTS BEING PROPOSED BY DISTRICT 1 OFFICE AS IT FURTHER REFINES A FUTURE LAND USE CATEGORY WHILE MAINTAINING THE RESIDENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE HISTORIC DISTRICT AND MANY OTHER INNER CITY NEIGHBORHOODS.

THESE AMENDMENTS ARE BASED ON COMMUNITY INPUT, INCLUDING THAT OF THE MODIVISTA HISTORICAL ASSOCIATION.

WE REQUEST YOUR SERIOUS CONSIDERATION OF THESE AMENDMENTS TO THE FUTURE LAND USE CLASSIFICATIONS.

THE COMMUNITY, PRESIDENT OF THE HISTORICAL ASSOCIATION.

THANK YOU.

>> MAYOR NIRENBERG: THANK YOU, MR. GARCIA.

PHILLIP NA?

>> I LIVE AT 9525 ROCHEL.

I AM THE PRESIDENT OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION, AND I WAS A PLANNING CHAIR OF THE HEBNER CREEKS COMMUNITY PLAN.

FOR THE LAST THREE YEARS, I'VE BEEN ONE OF THE FEW COMMUNITY MEMBERS ON THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO PLANNING COMMISSION TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE.

THERE'S A LARGE CADRE OF WELL-FUNDED, FULL-TIME DEVELOPERS AND THEIR SUPPORT TEAMS THAT LOOK TO MAXIMIZE THEIR POTENTIAL RETURN ON DEVELOPMENT OPPORTUNITIES.

SOMETIMES AT THE DETRIMENT OF EXISTING COMMUNITIES SUPPORTED BY ILL-FUNDED PART-TIME VOLUNTEERS THAT ARE NEIGHBORS THAT ARE TRYING TO PROTECT THEIR COMMUNITIES.

THE PRIMARY TOOL USED FOR THE GROWING CITY BETWEEN COMMUNITIES AND DEVELOPERS ARE COMMUNICATION.

AND FORTUNATELY THE CITY HAS PROVIDED A LOT OF GOOD TOOLS FOR THIS, WHICH INCLUDES THE COMMUNITY PLANS, NEIGHBORHOOD PLANS, COMMUNITY ZONING COMMISSIONS, AND THE UDC.

[01:35:01]

EACH OF THESE AVENUES ALLOWS FOR INPUT AND FEEDBACK ON HOUR DEVELOPERS MUST ENGAGE WITHIN COMMUNITIES.

THE LEON CREEK PLAN WAS ONE OF THE FIRST TO BE APPROVED BY THE CITY.

IN 2003.

SINCE THEN, MANY PLANS HAVE BEEN CREATED WITHIN COMMUNITIES, THAT HAVE LEVERAGED THE EXISTING UDC, WHICH INCLUDES THOSE DEFINED WITHIN LOW DENSITY AND MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL.

I DO AGREE THE COUNCIL SHOULD APPROVE THE MEDIUM DENSITY TO LOW DENSITY CLASSIFICATION.

THE LAST 20 YEARS I SPENT A LOT OF TIME WORKING WITH DEVELOPERS SEEKING TO MOVE THE ZONING FROM DENSITY TO LOW DENSITY, REMOVES ONE OF THE POINTS FOR DEVELOPMENT INTO OUR LOW TENSE DENSITY COMMUNITIES.

WE WANT TO ENSURE THERE'S COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT.

THIS WEEK WE HAD ENCOURAGING DIALOGUE FROM THE DISTRICT 7 OFFICE THAT ENGAGED WITH A DEVELOPER TO BRING IN A MORE DENSE COMMUNITY TI ACTUALLY WITHIN AN EXISTING LOW DENSITY DEVELOPMENT, AND IT SEEMS LIKE IT'S GOING TO WORK THROUGH VERY WELL.

SO IT'S GOOD TO HAVE THOSE DIALOGUES THAT ARE PROVIDED THROUGH THESE RULES THAT IT PLAYS.

OVERALL IT'S NOT FOR THAT.

THE SAME DIALOGUE ABOUT MOVING THE MM 33 TO THE HIGH DENSITY TO LOW DENSITY.

IS MISLEADING AND SHOULD BE RENAMED TO URBAN MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL BECAUSE IT MORE CLOSELY ALIGNS WITH THE CATEGORIES OF THE OTHER ZONING DISTRICTS IN THE LOW DENSITY VERSUS THE MEDIUM DENSITY.

BY DOING SO, THE FUTURE -- IT ALLOWS FOR THE FUTURE DIALOGUE FOR COMMUNITY WITH THOSE DEVELOPERS.

FINALLY, A GENERAL COMMENT.

I THINK ANYTHING THAT WE DO IN THE UDC THAT POTENTIALLY DIMINISHES THE STRENGTH OF COMMUNITY NEIGHBORHOOD PLANS IS DETRIMENTAL TO THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO.

TONS OF HOURS HAVE BEEN SPENT AND I'D LIKE TO RESPECT THOSE HOURS SPENT.

THANK YOU.

>> MAYOR NIRENBERG: THANK YOU, MR. NA.

CYNTHIA SPIELMAN?

>> GOOD MORNING, MY NAME IS CYNTHIA SPIELMAN, I LIVE AT 900 WEST WOOD LAWN AND I'M A RESIDENT OF DISTRICT 1.

I'M ALSO ON THE BOARD OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION, AND STEERING MEMBER OF TIER ONE NEIGHBORHOOD COALITION.

DEAR MAYOR AND COUNCIL MEMBERS, THE NEIGHBORHOOD HAS DEALT MUCH OF THE TENSIONS AND STRESS THAT MANY DOWNTOWN AREA NEIGHBORHOODS HAVE FELT REGARDING INCOMPATIBLE DEVELOPMENT AND INCONSISTENT ZONING CHANGES.

LAND USE IS AN IMPORTANT TOOL TO HELP CREATE CONSISTENCY FOR NOT ONLY DEVELOPERS, BUT THE NEIGHBORS THAT LIVE WITHIN THE DEVELOPMENTS.

WE'VE WORKED WITH OTHER NEIGHBORHOODS THROUGH OUR MEMBERSHIP IN THE TIER ONE, AS WELL AS AIA MEETINGS TO ADVOCATE CHANGES TO THE PROPOSAL THAT MAKE IT MORE BALANCED AND THOUGHTFUL FOR THE CATEGORY OF MF 43, MF 45.

AS WE CREATE NEW SUBAREA PLANS AND SEE DEVELOPMENT INCENTIVES THROUGH CCHIP AS WELL AS POSSIBLE BUY-RIGHT ZONING, THERE HAS TO BE A STRUCTURE IN PLACE THAT GUIDES US IN THE FUTURE AS WE ACCOMMODATE CHANGE THAT HELPS MAINTAIN RESILIENT NEIGHBORHOODS INSTEAD OF DESTROYING THEM.

IF IMPLEMENTED CORRECTLY, NEIGHBORHOODS WILL BE ABLE TO CREATE LAND USE PLANS FOR THEIR COMMUNITY AND FUTURE ZONING CHANGES WILL BE ON THOSE PLANS.

INCOMPATIBLE DEVELOPMENTS THAT EXIST NOW WOULD NOT BE POSSIBLE WITH THE PLANNING CHANGE IF THE PROPOSALS HAD ALREADY BEEN ADOPTED.

THE FLU CHANGES HELP US MAINTAIN NEIGHBORHOOD CHARACTER WHILE ACCOMMODATING FUTURE DEVELOPMENT.

PLEASE SUPPORT THE FUTURE LAND USE CHANGES INCLUDING THE AMENDMENTS FROM DISTRICT ONE, THAT HAVE BEEN INCORPORATED FEEDBACK FROM SAN ANTONIO NEIGHBORHOODS.

THANK YOU.

>> MAYOR NIRENBERG: THANK YOU, MISS SPIELMAN.

COLLIN JONES?

>> GOOD MORNING.

MY NAME IS COLLIN JONES.

I LIVE AT 1123 NOLAN IN SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS.

I'LL BE READING A LETTER HERE ON BEHALF OF TIER ONE STEERING COMMITTEE.

TIER ONE NEIGHBORHOOD COALITION IS A COALITION OF OVER 50 INTERLOOP 410 NEIGHBORHOODS THAT ENCOMPASS ALL BY THREE COUNCIL DISTRICTS.

WHILE NO ONE CAN REPRESENT THAT MANY DIFFERENT ENTITIES WITHOUT A VOTE, OUR STEERING COMMITTEE COMES FROM THE FOUR PARTS OF THE INNER CITY AND WE ASK CITY COUNCIL TODAY TO SUPPORT THE PROPOSED FUTURE LAND USE PLAN.

WE PROPOSED -- EXCUSE ME.

WE HELD A WELL-ATTENDED WORKSHOP AT SAN ANTONIO COLLEGE ON THE FUTURE LAND USE CHANGES AS WELL

[01:40:01]

AS COUNTLESS SMALLER MEETINGS WITH DIFFERENT NEIGHBORHOOD STAKEHOLDERS, WORKED ON ISSUES OVER THE LAST SEVERAL MONTHS TO SUGGEST BALANCED CHANGES IN THE PROPOSAL, AND HELPED CREATE AN EFFECTIVE TOOL TO PLAN FOR THE FUTURE AS WE PARTICIPATE IN THE SA TOMORROW COMPREHENSIVE SUBAREA PLANNING.

WE WORKED WITH INDIVIDUAL NEIGHBORHOODS AND MORE LOCAL COALITIONS TO HELP PRODUCE CHANGES WE HOPE WILL GUIDE THE FUTURE OF OUR COMMUNITIES WHILE PROTECTING AND PRESERVING WHAT IS BEST ABOUT US.

NO DOCUMENT IS PERFECT.

SO MUCH DEPENDS ON OUR TRUST IN THE CITY TO WORK IN GOOD FAITH WITH ITS RESIDENTS, BUT THE FUTURE LAND USE CHANGES WILL GIVE STRUCTURE TO UNWIELDY LAND USE WHICH WE HOPE WILL HELP US MAKE SOUND DECISION BUSINESS OUR FUTURE.

TIER ONE COMMITTEE, CHRISTINE DRENAN, TONY GARCIA, HOMER HAYES, MYSELF, RICKY KUSHNER AND TERESA IBANEZ.

THANK YOU.

>> MAYOR NIRENBERG: THANK YOU, MR. JONES.

VELMA PENA?

>> GOOD MORNING, COUNCIL MEMBERS, MAYOR.

I RESIDE AT 1635 PORT OCE.

I'M PRESIDENT OF THE RESIDENCE ASSOCIATION.

>> I'M PRESIDENT OF THE WESTWOOD SQUARE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION, AS WELL AS THE WEST SIDE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION'S COALITION.

I LIVE AT 1208 PATTON.

>> THE FUTURE OF LAND USE CHANGES GIVE STRUCTURE TO PROGRESS IN OUR NEIGHBORHOODS, SO THAT RESIDENTS AND DEVELOPERS KNOW THE RULES.

WE'RE SEEING OUR NEIGHBORHOODS DESTROYED.

ONE CASE AT A TIME.

ESPECIALLY WHAT HAPPENED YESTERDAY AT 1201 MONTEZUMA.

WE WANT PROGRESS FOR THE RESIDENTS WHO LIVE HERE.

COUNCILWOMAN GONZALEZ, PLEASE, CONTINUE TO PREFER OUR COMMUNITY AND WORK FOR THE BETTERMENT OF US ALL BY ENDORSING THIS PLAN.

COUNCIL MEMBERS, PLEASE, SUPPORT THE FLU AS WE MOVE INTO THE FUTURE, ESPECIALLY THE AMENDMENTS PROPOSED BY DISTRICT ONE.

THANK YOU.

>> MAYOR NIRENBERG: THANK YOU, MISS PENA.

MARY JOHNSON? MARY JOHNSON? ANN ENGLETTER? ENGLERT?

>> THANK YOU.

MY NAME IS ANN ENGLERT, AND I LIVE IN DELVIEW.

YESTERDAY I BECAME A PARENT THAT MANY OF US NEEDED TO STEP FORWARD.

SO I PREPARED A LETTER AND I WAS ABLE TO SEND THAT TO ALL OF YOU ALL IN THE WEE HOURS BEFORE GOING TO BED AT MIDNIGHT.

I'M WRITING TO ASK YOU TO SUPPORT THE LAND USE CHANGES THAT HAVE BEEN INCORPORATED, WITH FEEDBACK FROM THE NEIGHBORS.

CONTEMPORARY AND FUTURE NEIGHBORHOOD DEVELOPMENTS TO BE USED AND MEANINGFUL TO OUR BELOVED AND UNIQUE NEIGHBORHOODS AS WELL AS ALLOW FOR GROWTH AND DENSITY.

YOU'VE ALREADY HEARD FROM CYNTHIA AND OTHERS TODAY ABOUT BEACON HILL.

IT'S JUST IMPERATIVE THAT I FEEL THAT WE HAVE SOMETHING THAT'S CONSISTENT GOING FORWARD.

BECAUSE IF WE DON'T HAVE IT, THEN WE'VE GOT OPPORTUNITIES WHERE NEIGHBORHOODS ARE GOING TO BE LEFT BEHIND.

BUT MORE IMPORTANTLY, THE VOICES OF THE RESIDENTS WILL BE, TOO.

SO I APPRECIATE YOUR TIME.

THANK YOU.

>> MAYOR NIRENBERG: THANK YOU, MISS ENGLERT.

COUNCILWOMAN VIAGRAN?

>> VIAGRAN: I WANT TO THANK EVERYONE FOR COMING OUT AND ALL OF THE LETTERS AND EVERYTHING THAT HAS BEEN SHARED AND COMMUNICATED WITH OUR OFFICES.

BECAUSE THIS IS VERY IMPORTANT.

THIS IS A VERY IMPORTANT STEP THAT WE'RE TAKING RIGHT NOW.

AND IT INVOLVES THOROUGH AND TRANSPARENT COMMUNICATION AND PROCESS AS WE MOVE FORWARD.

I KNOW BACK IN JUNE, THIS WAS MOVING FORWARD ON THE COUNCIL AGENDA, BUT WE MOVED FORWARD WITH THE CONTINUANCE TO CONTINUE TO HAVE PUBLIC INPUT INTO THIS PROCESS.

AND THE PUBLIC INPUT HAS BEEN HAPPENING.

SO RUDY, I HAVE SOME QUESTIONS FOR YOU RIGHT NOW.

CAN YOU PLEASE, ON -- SO THE CPC ON AUGUST 15TH, THE PROCESS WAS AGAIN -- SO ON JUNE 21ST, THE PROCESS WAS FIRST PAUSED TO HAVE MORE COMMUNITY INPUTS IN ORDER TO REENGAGE OUR COMMUNITIES, THE DISTRICT RESIDENTS NEEDED MORE TIME TO GET A BETTER UNDERSTANDING OF THE ORDINANCE AS WE WERE AMENDING THE LAND USE

[01:45:03]

CATEGORIES.

TO IMPLEMENT THIS SA TOMORROW COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.

AND THEN FURTHER, ON AUGUST 15TH, THE PROCESS WAS AGAIN PAUSED, SO AIA COULD COME IN AND DO SOME MEETINGS BEFORE RETURNING TO FULL COUNCIL TODAY.

AND WHAT FEEDBACK DID THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT RECEIVE FROM THOSE AIA MEETINGS?

>> SPECIFICALLY RELATED TO THE AIA MEETINGS, THE DEPARTMENT FEEDBACK ABOUT THOSE.

WE DID RECEIVE FEEDBACK FROM ONE OF THE ARCHITECTS THAT PARTICIPATED IN THE PROCESS RELATED TO HIS SPECIFIC PRESENTATION, THAT WAS MARIO PENA.

WE APPRECIATED THAT, RELATED TO HIS EQUITY PRESENTATION.

BUT NOTHING SPECIFIC TO LAND USE, MA'AM.

>> VIAGRAN: THE REASON THE PUBLIC HEARING ON THE 21ST WAS PAUSED WAS BECAUSE STAFF, WE REQUESTED STAFF HOLD MORE COMMUNITY MEETINGS, AND FROM WHAT I UNDERSTAND, OBVIOUSLY THOSE MEETINGS WERE HELD.

AND WHAT WERE THOSE MEETINGS -- WHAT WERE THE TAKEAWAYS FROM THOSE COMMUNITY MEETINGS?

>> THAT'S A GREAT QUESTION, COUNCILWOMAN.

ACTUALLY, THE TAKEAWAYS WERE RELATIVELY SPLIT FROM THE COMMUNITY MEMBERS.

WE HAD OVER 120 FOLKS PARTICIPATE IN THE PROCESS, AND PARTICIPATE IN THOSE COMMUNITY MEETINGS.

WE RECEIVED 78 COMMENT CARDS BACK FROM FOLKS WHO WANTED TO ACTUALLY WRITE OUT WHAT THEIR CONCERNS WERE, OR THEIR SUPPORT.

WITH A TOTAL OF 91 INDIVIDUAL COMMENTS.

AND FROM ALL OF THE FEEDBACK THAT WE RECEIVED, IT WAS FAIRLY EVIDENT IT WAS SPLIT DOWN THE MIDDLE.

ABOUT HALF THE FOLKS THOUGHT THAT WE WEREN'T PROVIDING ENOUGH OPPORTUNITY FOR MORE DENSITY, OR ENOUGH OPPORTUNITY FOR MORE CHOICE WHEN IT CAME TO LAND USE.

THE OTHER HALF THOUGHT THERE WAS TOO MUCH EMPHASIS ON DENSITY.

SO IT WAS SPLIT DOWN THE MIDDLE, WHICH MADE US FEEL EVEN MORE COMFORTABLE THAT WE'RE PROVIDING A MODERATE PROPOSAL FORWARD TO COUNCIL.

>> VIAGRAN: ALL RIGHT.

THANK YOU.

AND FROM WHAT WAS ORIGINALLY PRESENTED IN JUNE, WHAT HAS CHANGED BECAUSE OF THOSE MEETINGS? WHAT DID YOU ALL CHANGE?

>> WELL, IN TERMS OF MODIFICATIONS TO STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION, THE INTERACTION THAT WE HAD WITH FOLKS, AND THE TAKEAWAYS THAT WE HAD FROM THOSE COMMUNITY MEETINGS IS THE RECOMMENDATION WAS SOUND.

SO WE WANTED TO PROCEED FORWARD WITH A RECOMMENDATION THAT YOU ALL HAVE IN FRONT OF YOU ALL TODAY.

A RECOMMENDATION THAT PROVIDED THAT FLEXIBILITY.

IT WAS ONE THAT HAS GONE THROUGH THE ENTIRE PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT PROCESS.

MODIFICATIONS HAVE BEEN MADE THROUGHOUT THIS PROCESS.

AN EXAMPLE WOULD BE FOLLOWING KEY POINT IN THE PROCESS WHERE WE HAD A CITYWIDE COMMUNITY MEETING.

IT WAS FAIRLY EVIDENT THAT THERE WAS WORK TO BE DONE WITH REGARD TO THE RM 4 MIXED RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT.

SINCE WE HEARD THAT NOT JUST FROM INDIVIDUAL RESIDENTS, BUT ALSO FROM SOME STAFF MEMBERS WITHIN YOUR OFFICES, WE THOUGHT IT PRUDENT TO REMOVE IT, AND TO MAKE THE MODIFICATIONS BETWEEN NOW AND THE 2020 AMENDMENT PROCESS.

AND THEN BRING IT BACK FORWARD SO THAT IT CAN BE UTILIZED WELL AND INCORPORATED INTO THE LAND USE FRAMEWORK.

>> VIAGRAN: AND ON THE SA TOMORROW COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, WE ARE GOING TO HAVE A FIVE-YEAR REVIEW.

>> CORRECT.

>> VIAGRAN: SO WHEN WE MOVE FORWARD, THERE'S ALWAYS -- THIS IS GOING TO BE A DYNAMIC PLAN WHERE WE'RE GOING TO BE ABLE TO REVIEW IT AND GO THROUGH A COMMUNITY OUTREACH PROCESS.

MY UNDERSTANDING IS IN 2019, WE'RE GOING TO OPEN UP THAT REVIEW AGAIN.

>> SO THERE'S TWO THINGS THAT WILL ACTUALLY BE OCCURRING OVER THE COURSE OF THE NEXT COUPLE OF YEARS.

THE FIRST ONE IS, YOU'RE CORRECT, THE AMENDMENTS THAT WOULD BE FORWARDED TO THE CITY COUNCIL PLANNING DEPARTMENT, THROUGH FUNDING DEDICATED FROM THE COUNCIL WILL BE CONDUCTING A UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE ASSESSMENT.

WHAT WE'RE GOING TO DO IS HIRE A THIRD-PARTY CONSULTANT TO LOOK AT THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND THE GOALS AND POLICIES THEREIN TO LOOK AT THE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE AND TO SEE WHAT DO WE NEED TO MODIFY IN ORDER TO MAKE SURE WE'RE ACTUALLY IMPLEMENTING THOSE GOALS AND POLICIES.

ADDITIONALLY, THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT ALSO WILL BE PROVIDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL FOLLOWING A FIVE-YEAR PROCESS A STATUS REPORT ON WHERE ARE WE ACTUALLY IN IMPLEMENTING THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.

SO THE COUNCIL WILL HAVE THE TWO OPPORTUNITIES TO PROVIDE GUIDANCE, ONE, ON THE DEVELOPMENT CODE, AND NUMBER TWO, ON THE POLICIES THAT ARE IN THE PLANNING ZONE.

>> VIAGRAN: I NEED CLARIFICATION, WHAT WE'RE MOVING FORWARD WITH RIGHT NOW IS NOT ABOUT THAT WHOLE IDC CATEGORY.

>> THAT IS CORRECT, MA'AM.

>> VIAGRAN: THAT IS STILL SOMETHING WE NEED TO TALK ABOUT LATER.

>> AS I UNDERSTAND IT, THERE IS A COMPLETELY SEPARATE CCR PROCESS DRIVEN BY THE DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT TO PROVIDE REFORM AND RECOMMENDATIONS ABOUT IDZ.

THAT IS NOT PART OF WHAT THIS PROPOSAL WOULD ENTAIL.

>> VIAGRAN: THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR THAT CLARIFICATION.

>> YES, MA'AM.

>> VIAGRAN: I THINK AS WAS MENTIONED IN MANY OF THE STATEMENTS HERE, WE ARE A VERY DIFFERENT COMMUNITY.

AND I THINK WE TOOK A BOLD STEP TO HAVE A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, THE SA TOMORROW PLAN FOR SAN ANTONIO, BECAUSE WE WANTED IT

[01:50:02]

THAT GUIDANCE AND WE WANTED THAT CLARIFICATION, AND AS IT WAS MENTIONED, SAFEGUARDING FOR OUR NEIGHBORHOODS AND OUR COMMUNITIES, AS MANY OF OUR NEIGHBORHOODS AND COMMUNITIES ARE GOING THROUGH TRANSITIONS.

AND AS WAS MENTIONED, TOO, THERE ARE A LOT OF INCONSISTENCIES, AND MYSELF AND IN MY DISTRICT WE'VE HAD TO INITIATE CCRS TO DO DIFFERENT ITEMS FOR LAND USE, ET CETERA.

LIKE I MENTIONED EARLIER, PAUSING THE JUNE 21ST COUNCIL MEETING WAS TO REENGAGE THE COMMUNITY AND WE HAVE DONE THAT, AND TO MAKE SURE THAT WE CONTINUE TO REACH OUT AND TRY AND ANSWER THOSE PENDING QUESTIONS TO THE CHANGES IN THE LAND USE CATEGORIES.

NOW, I ALSO UNDERSTAND THAT WHAT WE HAVE HERE PRESENTED TODAY, THE STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION HAS -- THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE AND ZONING COMMITTEE HAVE BEEN BASED ON STAFF CHANGES.

>> THAT'S CORRECT.

>> VIAGRAN: I WANT TO MAKE SURE WE FOLLOW THIS PROCESS.

AND I THINK MY COUNCIL COLLEAGUES FOR THIS CONTINUED VETTING OF THIS, AND THAT'S WHY WE'RE HERE TODAY.

BUT I ALSO WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT I KNOW THAT YOU ALL HAVE, AND WE HAVE RECEIVED JUST YESTERDAY THE COUNCIL MEMBERS, TWO AMENDMENTS TO THIS, AND IF WE'RE TALKING ABOUT PROCESS, AND WE'RE TALKING ABOUT TRANSPARENCY AND TRUE, I WOULD LIKE TO HAVE MORE VETTING OF THAT.

SO TO PUT THIS FORWARD IN THIS TIME AND PLACE, I DON'T THINK I COULD SPEAK TO THAT AS BEING THE PROPER AND TRUE PROCESS THAT WE NEEDED TO GO THROUGH.

SO I'M NOT SAYING THAT I WOULD -- I'M AGAINST THE MF 25, OR THE MEDIUM DENSITY, BUT WE HAVEN'T GONE THROUGH THE APPROPRIATE PROCESS AND VETTING THAT I THINK WE NEEDED TO DO IN THAT.

INSTEAD OF GETTING IT THE DAY BEFORE.

AND TO BE FAITHFUL TO ALL OF THE CITIZENS OF SAN ANTONIO, BECAUSE IT WOULD IMPACT ALL OF THE CITIZENS IN SAN ANTONIO.

AND YOU ALL KNOW, BECAUSE I'VE SHARED IT LAST TIME, THE BROOKS REGIONAL CENTER HAS BEEN WAITING TO MOVE FORWARD, AND THAT'S ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF SAN ANTONIO.

BUT BECAUSE OF THE DELAY, WE'VE HAD TO WAIT ON THIS AS WELL.

BUT I KNOW THAT IT NEEDS TO BE -- MY COLLEAGUES, JUST LIKE THEY DID WITH THE IDZ, YOU KNOW, IDZ CHANGES AND INVESTIGATIONS, THAT COULD HAPPEN THROUGH A CCR AS WELL.

SO WITH THAT, MAYOR, AT THIS TIME, I WOULD LIKE TO MOVE FORWARD AND MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION ON ADOPTING THE PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO CHAPTER 35, IN AUDIO].

>> MAYOR NIRENBERG: THERE'S A MOTION AND A SECOND FOR APPROVAL OF ITEM NUMBER 15.

AND WE HAVE MANY OF OUR COLLEAGUES SIGNED UP TO SPEAK.

WE'LL START WITH COUNCILMAN TREVINO.

>> TREVINO: THANK YOU, MAYOR.

I OFFER AN AMENDMENT TO THIS ITEM, BASED ON THE THOROUGH EVALUATION OF MYSELF AND MY DISTRICT ONE STAFF, ALONG WITH PLANNING AND THE DISTRICT ONE AND TIER ONE NEIGHBORHOODS.

THIS IS REALLY ABOUT THE CHARACTER OF THEIR COMMUNITIES.

AND FIRST I WOULD SIMPLY SAY, LOOK, RUDY AND BRIDGETT AND THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT, I APPRECIATE YOUR HARD WORK.

THIS IS A TREMENDOUS AMOUNT OF WORK.

YOU KNOW, WHAT WE'RE SIMPLY SAYING IS THAT THERE'S PIECES OF THIS THAT I THINK WE'VE BEEN FAIRLY CONSISTENT ABOUT IN WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO ACCOMPLISH.

AND AT THE HEART OF THAT IS PROTECTING THE CHARACTER AND SPIRIT OF THE NEIGHBORHOODS, AS YOU HEARD EARLIER.

FIRST I'D LIKE TO SUBMIT ALL THE LETTERS RECEIVED ON BEHALF OF NEIGHBORHOODS IN DISTRICT ONE AND TIER ONE, AND BEYOND, FOR THE RECORD.

BEFORE I GO THERE, AUDIO] FOR ALL OF YOUR WORK ON THIS, AND YOU'VE REALLY HAVE GONE ABOVE AND BEYOND TO MAKE SURE THAT THE NEIGHBORHOODS ARE BEING HEARD.

AND WE WANT TO PROTECT OUR NEIGHBORHOOD CHARACTERS, AND THAT IS NOT A NEW THING.

THAT IS NOT SOMETHING THAT WE JUST BROUGHT UP.

WHAT WE'RE SIMPLY SAYING IS THAT THERE ARE SOME THINGS THAT WE'RE EXPERIENCING, AND WE'VE BEEN TRYING TO ADDRESS THOSE.

AND IT WAS INDICATED FROM YOUR OFFICE THAT WE HAVE TO MAKE THIS AS INFORMATIVE OF AN AMENDMENT, AND WE'LL DO THAT.

I WANT TO POINT OUT WE HAVE LOOKED AT THESE, AND HOW THE CATEGORIES HAVE BEEN APPLIED, AND HOW THEY COMPARED TO THOSE DRAFT MAPS OUTSIDE OF OUR DISTRICT.

AND WE HAVE NOTICED THERE'S A CLEAR TREND IN THE APPLICATION OF THE CATEGORIES.

THE MEDIUM DENSITY CATEGORY IS BEING APPLIED TO NEIGHBORHOODS THAT HAVE SMALLER PARCELS, AND

[01:55:02]

THEREFORE, HIGHER LEVELS OF DENSITY.

BUT WHICH HAVE ONLY RESIDENTIAL USES FOR LARGE AREAS.

WE HAVE ALSO REVIEWED ALL OF 19 OF OUR EXISTING NEIGHBORHOOD AND SECTOR PLANS, NONE OF WHICH INCLUDE MF 33 IN THE MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL CATEGORY.

MOST OF WHICH ARE CAPPED AT THE CATEGORY OF MF 18.

THE CORRIDORS WHERE WE WOULD HOPE TO SEE THE LARGE MULTI-FAMILY COMPLEXES SUCH AS MF 33 AND ABOVE ARE BEING DESIGNATED MIXED USE, NOT MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL.

THESE PROJECT AREAS FOR APARTMENTS ARE NEXT TO COMMERCIAL SPACES AND SERVICES.

THE MIXED USE CATEGORY, WHICH HAS BEEN APPLIED TO OUR CORRIDORS IS CURRENTLY CAPPED AT MF 18 DENSITY.

OUR PROPOSAL IS TO EVEN THOSE TWO OUT.

AND AS THEY ARE ADJACENT TO EACH OTHER AND ALLOW FOR MORE DENSITY ON THE CORRIDORS AND NOT ALLOW HIGH-DENSITY APARTMENTS INSIDE NEIGHBORHOODS, AND I WANT TO BE CLEAR ABOUT WHAT I'M SAYING, BECAUSE THIS IS WHAT'S HAPPENING.

IT WAS HAPPENING YESTERDAY.

IT'S HAPPENING -- IN FACT, SINCE DAY ONE I'VE BEEN ON THIS COUNCIL, ALMOST FOUR YEARS.

OF A BLOCK.

SPLITTING NEIGHBORHOODS.

IT'S A REAL THING.

AND WE'RE -- WE HAVE FILED MANY CCRS TO TRY TO DEAL WITH THIS.

AND WE KNOW THAT IT'S NOT GOING TO BE A SILVER BULLET.

WE KNOW IT'S GOING TO TAKE THESE KINDS OF MOTIONS WHERE WE'RE ADJUSTING A LITTLE PIECE OF A MUCH BIGGER PLAN, WHICH, AGAIN, I WANT TO STRESS THAT I REALIZE THIS IS A BIG PLAN, AND THERE'S A LOT OF WORK THAT'S GONE INTO IT BY PLANNING.

SO WE CERTAINLY APPRECIATE THAT.

WE'RE SIMPLY ASKING FOR SOME CONSIDERATION.

WE'VE DISTRIBUTED TO MY COUNCIL COLLEAGUES OF WHAT MF 33 LOOKS LIKE WHEN BUILT TO CAPACITY IN TERMS OF HEIGHT AND DENSITY.

WHICH I HOPE WILL ILLUSTRATE WHY WE'RE PROPOSING THESE CHANGES.

AGAIN, I WANT TO POINT OUT, THIS IS ABOUT TIMING.

AND PART OF IT IS THE FACT THAT THIS IS PART OF THE YEAR ONE IMPLEMENTATION, AND WE WANT TO USE EVERY TOOL THAT'S AVAILABLE TO US, TO ADDRESS THE CONCERNS THAT THEY'RE AFFECTING OUR NEIGHBORHOODS.

ONE OF THOSE IS BASICALLY, IT'S A SIMPLE ASK, THE NEIGHBORHOOD PLANS.

I WILL CONTINUE TO ADVOCATE FOR NEIGHBORHOOD PLANS.

I WILL CONTINUE TO ADVOCATE FOR A WAY TO MAKE SURE THAT THE CHARACTER OF NEIGHBORHOODS ARE PROTECTED, ARE CONSIDERED, AS PART OF OUR PLANNING PROCESS.

THAT THEY'RE THOUGHTFUL, AND THEY'RE THE REASON THAT THE CITY HAS THE CHARACTER THAT IT HAS.

SO, THEREFORE, I MOVE TO AMEND LAND USE CATEGORIES BY REMOVING MF 33 FROM THE MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL CATEGORY AND ADDING MF 25 TO THE CATEGORY, TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD MIXED USE CATEGORY.

THANK YOU, MAYOR.

>> MAYOR NIRENBERG: THERE'S A MOTION AND A SECOND FOR AN AMENDMENT AS READ BY COUNCIL MAN TREVINO TO ITEM NUMBER 15.

AND SO AS WE PROCEED THROUGH THE REMAINDER OF THE DISCUSSION, I WILL ASK MY COLLEAGUES TO CONTAIN THEIR COMMENTS TO THE AMENDMENT.

WE'LL TAKE UP THE MOTION ON THE AMENDMENT AND THEN WE'LL MOVE FORWARD WITH THE MAIN ITEM AND THE MAIN MOTION.

SO WE'LL START WITH COUNCILMAN PERRY.

>> PERRY: THANK YOU, SIR.

IT'S ALREADY BEEN DISCUSSED ABOUT THE PROCESS, AND WE HAVE GONE THROUGH A LENGTHY PROCESS, IF YOU CAN PULL UP SLIDE 5.

I MEAN, THAT KIND OF TELLS A STORY THERE.

AND THE NEXT SLIDE 6? WE DO HAVE A PROCESS HERE.

AND THERE'S BEEN PLENTY OF OPPORTUNITIES TO MAKE CHANGES ALONG THE WAY.

AND I UNDERSTAND THAT THIS IS A FLEXIBLE PLAN THAT ADDITIONAL CHANGES CAN BE MADE IN THE FUTURE.

AND THEY PROBABLY WILL BE.

BUT JUST LOOK AT BOTH THE COMMUNITIES, THE NEIGHBORHOODS, AS WELL AS INDUSTRY HAS HAD AMPLE OPPORTUNITY -- I MEAN, WHEN DID WE ACTUALLY START THIS PROCESS? HOW LONG AGO?

>> THIS PROCESS ACTUALLY STARTED ABOUT ONE YEAR AGO.

>> PERRY: SO WE'VE HAD A LOT OF MEETINGS, A LOT OF MANPOWER, A LOT OF HOURS THAT HAS GONE INTO THIS PROCESS, AND THIS PRODUCT, THAT THE STAFF IS MAKING A RECOMMENDATION TODAY TO PASS.

WE'VE RECEIVED A LETTER FROM

[02:00:02]

RCSA, WE'VE JUST RECEIVED NOTIFICATION FROM THE DEPARTMENT ASSOCIATION, THAT THEY SUPPORT WHAT IS BEING OFFERED TODAY, BECAUSE THEY WERE A PART OF THAT PROCESS.

THEY JUST GOT THIS CHANGE, OR RECOMMENDED CHANGE YESTERDAY, AND THAT'S VERY UNFAIR FOR ALL THE PLAYERS IN THIS PROCESS TO MAKE A DECISION, OR TRY TO REVIEW AND GET EVERYBODY TO SIT DOWN AROUND A TABLE AGAIN TO MAKE A CHANGE IN SOMETHING THAT'S TAKEN OVER A YEAR TO PUT TOGETHER.

SO I'LL BE SUPPORTING THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION.

AND IF THERE'S SOME FATAL FLAWS IN THIS, WHAT CAN -- WE DON'T HAVE TO WAIT FOR THE NEXT MAJOR REVIEW OF THIS, RIGHT? I MEAN, CCR COULD BE SUBMITTED

>> IF THERE WERE FATAL FLAWS, OR THROUGH THE PROCESS WE FIND THERE ARE COMPLICATIONS THAT NEED TO BE ADDRESSED WHEN COUNCIL ADOPTED THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, THE ORDINANCE PROVIDES TOR THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT TO SUBMIT WE CAN ACTUALLY SUBMIT TO COUNCIL.

>> PERRY: SO THERE'S A PROCESS THAT CHANGES CAN BE MADE, THAT, AGAIN, GETS EVERYBODY AROUND THE TABLE TO HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO REVIEW AND MAKE COMMENTS, AND AGREE, OR AGREE TO DISAGREE, OR WHATEVER, TO GET TO THAT FINAL PRODUCT.

>> AGREED.

>> PERRY: GREAT.

WELL, AGAIN, I'LL BE SUPPORTING THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION.

THANK YOU, SIR.

>> MAYOR NIRENBERG: THANK YOU, COUNCILMAN PERRY.

COUNCILMAN COURAGE.

>> COURAGE: THANK YOU, MAYOR.

IN LOOKING AT THIS TIMELINE, THIS PROCESS THAT WE HAVE UP HERE, WERE YOU AT MOST OF THESE MEETINGS YOURSELF?

>> YES, SIR.

I PRESENTED AT THE VAST MAJORITY OF THESE MEETINGS, YES, SIR.

>> COURAGE: OKAY.

THE PARTICULAR ISSUES THAT ARE BROUGHT UP TODAY BY COUNCIL MAN TREVINO, THE MF 33 AND MF 25, REDESIGNATION IN DIFFERENT AREAS THAT YOU'RE RECOMMENDING, WERE THOSE ISSUES BROUGHT UP AND DISCUSSED EARLY IN THE PROCESS, BEGINNING OF THE PROCESS, ALL THROUGH THE PROCESS, OR DID THEY JUST COME UP AT THE END OF THIS PROCESS?

>> THROUGH THE PROCESS THAT HAS BEEN LAID OUT ON SLIDE 5 AND SLIDE 6, WE UNDERSTAND THAT THERE WERE SOME NEIGHBORHOODS THAT HAD SOME CONCERNS RELATED TO MF 33 WITHIN THE MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL.

WE HEARD THAT PROBABLY ABOUT THE MIDDLE POINT OF THE PROCESS.

WE HAD THOSE MEETINGS, WE HAD THOSE DISCUSSIONS, AND WE MADE IT VERY CLEAR THAT STAFF'S PROFESSIONAL OPINION, AND GIVEN THE BALANCED OPINION WE'RE HEARING FROM OTHER FOLKS IN THE COMMUNITY, WE HEARD THEIR CONCERNS.

SO JUST BECAUSE WE DON'T NECESSARILY AGREE DOESN'T MEAN THAT WE DIDN'T ACTUALLY HEAR THEM OUT.

WE HEARD THEM.

WE BELIEVE THAT THEY ARE VALID, AND THAT THROUGH THE COMMUNITY PLANNING PROCESS, THAT WE WILL WORK TO ENSURE THAT NEIGHBORHOOD CHARACTER, AND COMMUNITY PROTECTION ARE TAKEN INTO CONSIDERATION.

IN TERMS OF THE AMENDMENTS THAT HAVE BEEN PROPOSED AND ARE ON THE FLOOR FOLLOWING THE AMENDMENT, WE DIDN'T KNOW ABOUT THOSE UNTIL MONDAY SPECIFICALLY.

>> COURAGE: THANK YOU.

I UNDERSTAND WITH MF 33, ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WAS MENTIONED TO ME THAT SOMEONE COULD WANT TO REZONE A RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY IN THE MIDDLE OF A NEIGHBORHOOD TO MF 33, AND THAT WOULD ALLOW THEM TO BUILD A FOUR-STORY APARTMENT COMPLEX THERE?

>> WELL, GIVEN THE WAY THAT THE PROCESS WORKS, THEY CAN ACTUALLY DO THAT TODAY.

AT THE END OF THE DAY, AN APPLICANT CAN ALWAYS SUBMIT AN AMENDMENT TO ANY PLAN.

AND THEY CAN SUBMIT ANY SORT OF REZONING CASE THAT THEY WOULD LIKE.

THROUGH THIS PROCESS, WE'RE UPDATING ALL OF THESE PLANS, SO THEY WILL ALL HAVE NUMBER ONE UPDATED LAND USE CATEGORIES, BUT ALSO UPDATED POLICIES.

FOR INSTANCE, WHILE IT MAY NOT NECESSARILY DIRECTLY SPEAK TO THE ISSUE OF MF 33 WITHIN THE PARTICULAR BLOCK, WE CAN TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THE OPEN ESTATE SITUATION.

I KNOW THAT WAS BROUGHT UP EARLIER.

IT'S NOT NECESSARILY AN IMPROVED ROADWAY IN THE OAKLAND ESTATES, THERE IS CONCERN ABOUT R 4 ZONING PERMEATING INTO THE NEIGHBORHOOD GIVEN THE FACT THAT THERE IS A PROPOSED -- THE PROPOSED LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL CATEGORY.

HAVING SAID THAT, PART OF THE LOCALIZED POLICY THAT CAN BE DEVELOPED AS PART OF THE SA TOMORROW PLAN, GIVEN THAT WE HAVE BEEN PROMOTING THIS IDEA OF FLEXIBILITY WITHIN THESE PLANS, WE CAN DEVELOP A POLICY THAT SAYS WITHIN THE PROPERTIES THAT ARE LOCATED ALONG PRU ROAD, DENSITIES AT R 4 AND GREATER ARE NOT RECOMMENDED.

SO THAT POLICY WOULD ESSENTIALLY

[02:05:05]

SUPERSEDE THE MAP CATEGORY, BECAUSE IT WILL BE A TEXT POLICY.

BUT AGAIN, ANY APPLICANT AT ANY TIME CAN REQUEST A PLANNED AMENDMENT OR REZONING CHANGE FOR ANY PARCEL WITHIN THE CITY.

THAT IS PART OF THEIR RIGHT AS A PROPERTY OWNER.

>> COURAGE: RIGHT, BUT IF MF 33 WERE NOT INCLUDED IN MEDIUM DENSITY, THEN COULD SOMEONE GO INTO AN AREA AND TRY AND REZONE IT TO MF 33?

>> THERE IS ACTUALLY A PROCESS FOR THEM TO DO THAT AS WELL.

ANYONE CAN ALSO SUBMIT A TEXT AMENDMENT TO A PLAN.

SO LET'S JUST SAY THAT MF 33 WERE NOT INCLUDED WITHIN THE MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL CATEGORY.

SOMEBODY CAN ACTUALLY STILL THROUGH THE PLAN AMENDMENT PROCESS SUBMIT A TEXT AMENDMENT AND SAY, WE WANT MF 33 IN THESE CATEGORIES BECAUSE WE WANT TO APPLY FOR A ZONING CHANGE.

>> COURAGE: WHAT WOULD BE THE PROCESS TO HAVE THAT HAPPEN?

>> THEY WOULD HAVE TO SUBMIT AN APPLICATION TO THE AMENDMENT FOR THE DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT, AND THAT ULTIMATELY THAT REQUEST WOULD STILL HAVE TO COME TO CITY COUNCIL.

>> COURAGE: DOES IT HAVE TO GO THROUGH THE COMMUNITY?

>> WELL, RIGHT NOW THERE IS NO PUBLIC PARTICIPATION REQUIREMENT FOR THE SUBMITTAL OF AN APPLICATION.

SO IT'S JUST LIKE ANY OTHER APPLICATION.

THEY WOULD SUBMIT IT TO THE DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT, BUT THE DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT DOES NOTIFY THE COMMUNITY.

THEY NOTIFY REGISTERED NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS, WHEN IT COMES TO ZONING CHANGES, PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 200 FEET RECEIVE A NOTICE.

THERE IS A PROCESS LAID OUT TO MAKE SURE THAT THE COMMUNITY IS AWARE, AS WELL AS THE NEW UPDATED SIGNS THAT ARE PROVIDED TO THE COMMUNITY.

>> COURAGE: AND SO -- I'M JUST TRYING TO UNDERSTAND IF WE MOVE THIS OUT OF THIS AREA, YOU KNOW, WHAT THE IMPACT IS.

SO YOU'RE SAYING THAT SOMEONE CAN STILL REQUEST TO REPLAN A NEIGHBORHOOD TO ALLOW MF 33, BUT IT'S JUST A MATTER OF THEY MAKE THE REQUEST, THE CITY PLANNING DEPARTMENT HANDLES IT, THEY SEND OUT NOTICES SAYING THERE'S THIS REQUEST, THEY HAVE TO HAVE PUBLIC HEARINGS?

>> ABSOLUTELY.

THERE HAS TO BE A PUBLIC HEARING THAT'S INVOLVED IN ANY MODIFICATION TO ANY LAND USE PLAN BEING ADOPTED AND ZONING.

>> COURAGE: IF THE PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVES THAT MODIFICATION, IT STILL COMES TO COUNCIL --

>> IT STILL COMES TO COUNCIL FOR CONSIDERATION.

I ALSO WANT TO POINT OUT THAT THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE LAND USE CATEGORIES AND THE RECOMMENDED ZONING DISTRICTS THAT ARE ATTACHED TO THEM DO NOT NECESSARILY REFLECT WHAT MUST BE ON THE GROUND.

IF SOMETHING WERE CATEGORIZED AS MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL, IT DOESN'T HAVE TO BE ZONED MF 33.

THAT IS PART OF THE REASON WHY THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT RECOMMENDED AND THE COUNCIL APPROVED THE BUDGET SO THAT THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT CAN TAKE THE NEXT STEP IN IMPLEMENTING THESE LAND USE PLANS BY REZONING PROPERTY, SO IF WE'RE GOING TO WORK WITH A COMMUNITY TO DEVELOP THESE LAND USE PLANS, WE SHOULD ALSO BE WORKING WITH THE COMMUNITY TO ENSURE THAT THE ZONING IS MOST APPROPRIATE FOR THOSE PARCELS.

WE WILL BE WORKING WITH THE COMMUNITY TO ENSURE THAT THE APPROPRIATE LEVEL OF DENSITY IS PLACED ON THE PROPERTY.

THE CATEGORY IS THE FIRST STEP, THE LABELING OF PROPERTY.

ULTIMATELY THERE STILL HAS TO BE A ZONING PROCESS TO DETERMINE WHAT CAN GO ON THE GROUND.

IN THE INSTANCE OF A RESIDENTIAL AREA THAT'S CATEGORIZED AS MEDIUM, THROUGHOUT THAT BLOCK WOULD CATEGORIZE IT AT THE LEAST AMOUNT OF DENSITY THAT THAT WOULD BE APPROPRIATE WITHIN THAT CATEGORY.

I MEAN, WE WOULD CERTAINLY WORK WITH THE NEIGHBORHOODS TO MAKE SURE THAT THAT IS PART OF THE PROCESS.

>> COURAGE: WELL, IF THERE ARE SINGLE-FAMILY AND DUPLEXES, THEN DOES IT BECOME MORE OF A MID-DENSITY AREA THEN?

>> THERE IS THE POTENTIAL FOR THAT.

I THINK THAT, AGAIN, NEIGHBORHOODS AND COMMUNITIES ARE AS PART OF THE PROCESS ARE CASE BY CASE.

THERE ARE ALSO OTHER CATEGORIES.

IT DOESN'T NECESSARILY HAVE TO BE A MEDIUM-DENSITY CATEGORY.

IN AN INSTANCE LIKE THAT WHERE THERE'S A MIXED NEIGHBORHOOD THAT HAS DUPLEXES, TRI PLEXES AND SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCES, WE HAVE THE LOW DENSITY CATEGORY, THAT HAS PRECEDENCE IN SAN ANTONIO.

THERE ARE CURRENTLY PLANS WITHIN THE COMMUNITY THAT HAVE THAT CATEGORY LISTED WITHIN THEM.

SO WITH THE ADOPTED STAFF PROPOSAL, THAT CATEGORY WOULD BE AVAILABLE.

AND WE COULD USE IT IN INSTANCES LIKE THAT.

>> COURAGE: WOULD THAT ALSO MEAN A NEIGHBORHOOD MIGHT REQUEST TO BE LABELED ON URBAN LOW DENSITY?

>> SURE.

AS WE GO THROUGH THE COMMUNITY PLANNING PROCESS, THERE IS THE OPPORTUNITY FOR A NEIGHBORHOOD TO WORK WITH US TO CATEGORIZE THEM IN A NUMBER OF DIFFERENT WAYS.

IT DOESN'T HAVE TO BE LOW OR MEDIUM DENSITY.

WE COULD CATEGORY NEIGHBORHOODS BASED ON THE INPUT WE GET FROM THEM, BECAUSE THEY'RE THE ONES THAT LIVE THERE.

IF THEY BELIEVE THIS SECTOR OF OUR NEIGHBORHOOD REALLY COULD SEE ADDITIONAL DENSITY AND COULD ACCOMMODATE MORE, WE COULD CATEGORIZE IT ONE WAY, WHEREAS THE BALANCE OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD COULD BE CATEGORIZED A DIFFERENT WAY.

THAT IS PART OF THE COMMUNITY PLANNING PROCESS, HAVING THE SITDOWN MEETINGS, AND I THINK

[02:10:02]

THAT THE SPEAKER SAID IT POIGNANTLY, IT IS A VERY ARDUOUS PROCESS.

PROCESSES THAT WE MAKE SURE FOLKS ARE AT THE TABLE, THAT WE HAVE THE DETAILED MEETINGS TO ULTIMATELY GO ALMOST BLOCK BY BLOCK IN CERTAIN INSTANCES TO MAKE SURE WE'RE GETTING IT ROIT.

>> COURAGE: I REALIZE IN A LOT OF THE COMMUNITIES WE'VE HEARD FROM, AND I RECEIVED THE LETTERS AND LOOKED THESE OVER, THERE ARE AREAS THAT BECAUSE WE HAVEN'T HAD THESE KINDS OF NEW RESTRICTIONS THAT ARE PROPOSED, THE NEW GUIDELINES, THAT A LOT OF MULTI-FAMILY PROPERTIES HAVE ALREADY OPENS THE DOOR -- ANY REAL MECHANISM TO STOP THEM.

SOME OF THEM HAVE ALREADY BEEN PUT THERE.

DO YOU THINK THAT IF MF 33 WAS REMOVED FROM THESE MEDIUM DENSITY AREAS, THAT WOULD CREATE A GREATER BARRIER FOR THE CONTINUING DEVELOPMENT OF SIMILAR TYPES OF PROPERTIES IN THOSE NEIGHBORHOODS?

>> I WOULDN'T THINK SO, COUNCILMAN, GIVEN THE FACT THAT IF MF 33 PROPERTY WAS BEING DEVELOPED, UTILIZING THE CURRENT ZONING, THE ZONING WOULD STILL REMAIN.

AT THE END OF THE DAY, WE WOULD STILL HAVE TO WORK WITH THE COMMUNITY TO DEVELOP THE APPROPRIATE LAND USE PLAN.

IF THE COMMUNITY SAYS WE HAVE A NEIGHBORHOOD, AND WE HAVE CERTAIN INSTANCES FOR THIS.

WE HAD A MEETING WITH THE WESTSIDE NEIGHBORHOODS COALITION.

AND PART OF THE DISCUSSION THAT OCCURRED AT THAT MEETING WAS, THERE IS A SECTOR PLAN OUT IN THAT COMMUNITY FOR A PORTION OF THE WESTSIDE COMMUNITY PLAN THAT RECOMMENDS THE URBAN TIER, OR THE SUBURBAN TIER LAND USE CATEGORY, WHICH ALLOWS, ACCORDING TO THE LAND USE PLAT, ALLOWS UP TO THE MEDIUM DENSITY.

THAT COMMUNITY EXPRESSED NUMEROUS TIMES THEY WANT A LOWER DENSITY COMMUNITY.

SO PART OF OUR PROCESS HAS TO BE LOOKING AT THE CURRENT USES THAT ARE ON THE GROUND, LOOKING AT THE CURRENT ZONING, ADJUSTING THE LAND USE PLAN ACCORDINGLY, AND THEN FOLLOWING IT UP WITH A ZONING PROCESS.

WE CAN ADOPT A LAND USE FOR AN AREA, BUT IF WE DON'T ADDRESS IT WITH ZONING, THE ENTITLEMENT IS STILL ON THE GROUND FOR SOMEBODY TO STILL PUT IN AN MF 33 PROPERTY.

THE LAND USE CATEGORIES, THE RECOMMENDED ZONING ALLOWANCES WITHIN THOSE CATEGORIES ARE ONE SMALL PIECE OF A MUCH GREATER PROCESS THAT HAS TO OCCUR IN ORDER FOR US TO CONSERVE THE NEIGHBORHOOD CHARACTER.

>> COURAGE: CAN THERE BE MODIFICATIONS TO MF 33 THAT WOULD SAY THEY CAN ONLY BE DEVELOPED ON ARTERIAL STREETS RATHER THAN, YOU KNOW, CENTRAL NEIGHBORHOOD STREETS?

>> THERE CAN ALWAYS BE AMENDMENTS TO ZONING DISTRICTS THROUGH THE STANDARD AMENDMENT PROCESS.

SO IF WE FIND MF 33 HAS CHALLENGES THAT NEED TO BE ADDRESSED AND MAYBE THERE ARE SOME LOCATIONAL CRITERIA TO BE CONSIDERED, THAT WOULD BE THEN TYPICALLY THROUGH THE UDC PROCESS.

IF THAT IS A CONCERN THAT THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT CAN COLLABORATE WITH DEVELOPMENT SERVICES ON TO EXPLORE, AT LEAST LOOK AT THAT DISTRICT AND SEE, IS IT BEING ABUSED IN SOME WAY, IS THERE SOME SORT OF REFORM THAT WOULD NEED TO OCCUR FOR THAT DISTRICT.

AND THEN WE COULD MAKE SOME RECOMMENDED AMENDMENTS SO WE CAN BRING THOSE FORWARD AS PART OF THE AMENDMENT PROCESS.

>> COURAGE: COULD YOU AMEND MF 33S TO BE NO GREATER THAN THREE STORIES?

>> YES, THAT COULD BE IN THE PACKAGE IN THE FUTURE, FOLLOWING EXPLORATION.

>> COURAGE: OKAY.

THANK YOU.

I HAVE NO OTHER QUESTIONS.

>> MAYOR NIRENBERG: THANK YOU, COUNCILMAN COURAGE.

COUNCILMAN BROCKHOUSE.

>> BROCKHOUSE: THANK YOU, MAYOR.

APPRECIATE YOUR TIME.

YOU'RE DOING VERY WELL.

>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

>> BROCKHOUSE: A RESIDENT JUST TEXTED ME AND SAID VERY KIND WORDS ABOUT YOU.

I GUESS THEY'RE WATCHING.

HE'S ARTICULATE AND CONCISE AND PLEASANT.

THAT'S WHAT THEY SAID ABOUT YOU.

I HAVE TO AGREE, YOU ARE VERY PLEASANT.

>> I APPRECIATE THE COMMENTS.

>> BROCKHOUSE: IS A WONDERFUL TOPIC.

I JUST WANTED TO, REAL QUICK, I'M IN SUPPORT OF THE OVERALL PIECE.

BUT ON THIS PARTICULAR AMENDMENT, I WILL NOT BE SUPPORTING IT.

I'M NOT UNSYMPATHETIC TO THE NEEDS OF NEIGHBORHOODS, SPECIFICALLY I THINK BACK IN SERVING IN DISTRICT ONE, AND BEACON HILL AND THOSE NEIGHBORHOODS, AND WE'VE GOT TO FIND THE ANSWER FOR IT.

I JUST DON'T KNOW WHAT IT IS.

EXPANDING OPPORTUNITIES WITH THE DEVELOPMENT, WITH WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO WITH INCENTIVIZING HOUSING, AND GROWTH AND ALL THAT, I'M FULLY ONBOARD WITH THAT OPPORTUNITY BEING AVAILABLE.

BUT WE'LL HAVE TO ANSWER THAT QUESTION A LOT SOONER RATHER THAN LATER ABOUT PROTECTING AREAS IN COMMUNITIES LIKE BEACON HILL, RIGHT? WHICH ARE ON THE CUSP OF DOWNTOWN.

AND THEIR PROPERTIES ARE GOING TO GET PICKED UP AND BUILDING IS

[02:15:01]

COMING, AND THEY WANT TO KEEP HOLD OF THEIR CULTURE IN THEIR COMMUNITY.

AND THEY DON'T WANT TOO MUCH GROWTH.

BUT THEY WANT ENOUGH TO BRING IN THE YOUNGER POPULATION, AND TO KEEP THEIR NEIGHBORHOOD LIVING AND VIBRANT FOR YEARS AND DECADES TO COME.

SO WE HAVE TO FIND THE ANSWER.

AND THE FACT THAT, FRANKLY, THAT YOU BROUGHT IT UP AT THE END OF THE PROCESS, IT DIDN'T BOTHER ME AT ALL.

YOU'VE GOT A JOB TO DO AND YOU'RE REPRESENTING YOUR DISTRICT AND YOUR COMMUNITY.

IF SOMEBODY IN MY COMMUNITY BROUGHT IT TO ME IN THE LAST COUPLE OF DAYS, HE SAID, YOU NEED TO FIGHT FOR THIS, WHETHER DISTRICT ONE OR SEVEN, YOU PUT IT UP THERE AND TAKE A VOTE ON IT.

I WOULD LIKE TO GET -- WHEN THIS IS DONE, FROM -- THIS VOTE, WHEN IT'S FINISHED, WE NEED TO CONTINUE THAT CONVERSATION ABOUT, YOU KNOW, SAVING COMMUNITIES.

SOME DAY IN THE FUTURE, WHO KNOWS HOW LONG, DISTRICT 6 IS GOING TO BE THE DISTRICT 1.

AND WE'RE GOING TO BE HAVING THE SAME CONVERSATION ABOUT MY COMMUNITY 25, 30 YEARS DOWN THE ROAD, WHEN WE'RE ENCASED BY DEVELOPMENT AND BUILDING, AND THE COMMUNITIES OUTSIDE WANT THE HIGHER DENSITY, THE BIGGER ZONING OPPORTUNITIES AND BIGGER DEVELOPMENT OPPORTUNITIES.

WE'RE GOING TO BE STRUGGLING AS THE INNER CITY PORTION, RIGHT? INSIDE 1604 IS GOING TO BE TODAY'S INSIDE 410.

WE'VE GOT TO GET THAT ANSWER DONE QUICKLY.

AGAIN, NOT UNSYMPATHETIC AT ALL TO THE GOALS 6 PROTECTING NEIGHBORHOODS AND MAKING SURE.

OVERALL I THINK THIS IS A GOOD FIRST STEP.

THINGS, NEIGHBORHOODS AND THEIR IDENTITY ARE GOING TO -- USUALLY THE FIRST THING UP ON THE CHOPPING BLOCK WHEN IT COMES TO DEVELOPMENT.

WHICH I WANT TO PURSUE EVERYWHERE WE CAN IN THE CITY, IN THE CONTEXT OF WHAT IS BEST FOR THAT NEIGHBORHOOD AND COMMUNITY.

IN THAT CASE, THAT'S WHAT COUNCIL MEMBERS, MY COLLEAGUES, COUNCILMAN TREVINO ARE ATTEMPTING TO DO TODAY.

RIGHT CONVERSATION, I THINK, TO HAVE, BUT IN THIS PARTICULAR, JUST NOT THE RIGHT TIME.

BUT I WANT TO GET IT DONE AS SOON AS WE CAN.

I WILL BE SUPPORTING THE RECOMMENDATION TODAY.

>> THANK YOU.

WE LOOK FORWARD TO HAVING THAT DISCUSSION WITH THE COUNCIL.

THANK YOU.

>> MAYOR NIRENBERG: COUNCILWOMAN SANDOVAL?

>> SALDANA

>> SANDOVAL: I BELIEVE THE COUNCILMAN BROUGHT FORWARD GOOD POINTS AND THEY WERE WORTHY OF DISCUSSION BEFORE WE MOVED FORWARD ON THIS.

I THINK THE CHANGES, YOU KNOW, WE WERE TALKING YESTERDAY ABOUT HISTORIC AGREEMENT ON THE ALAMO.

I THINK THIS IS HISTORIC, TOO, SO WE WANT TO BE VERY THOUGHTFUL AS WE MOVE FORWARD.

YOU KNOW, THE MORE YOU WORK ON SOMETHING, SOMETIMES THE MORE THINGS YOU FIND, THE MORE YOU LEARN AS YOU'RE GOING ALONG AND YOU WANT TO KEEP IMPROVING IT.

BUT UNFORTUNATELY AT SOME POINT WE DO HAVE TO MAKE A DECISION, RIGHT? IN ORDER TO GET GOING.

BUT NONETHELESS, I DO THINK THIS IS WORTHY OF THE DISCUSSION, SO I'M GLAD THAT WE'RE HAVING IT RIGHT NOW.

I DO WANT TO -- I GUESS I NEED SOME CLARIFICATION HERE.

WHAT THE COUNCILMEN HAVE DISCUSSED IS WHAT DENSITY ARE WE SEEING -- WILL WE BE SEEING UNDER THIS PLAN ALONG THE MAJOR CORRIDORS?

>> I THINK TO BEST ANSWER THE QUESTION, IT REALLY DEPENDS, BECAUSE CORRIDORS, JUST LIKE NEIGHBORHOODS AND VARIOUS OTHER AREAS OF OUR CITY, THEY'RE ALSO DIFFERENT.

CORRIDORS TEND TO HAVE ALMOST CHARACTER AREAS.

AND JUST FOR THE SAKE OF THE CONVERSATION I'LL USE BANDERA ROAD.

THERE ARE A SIGNIFICANT NUMBER OF PARCELS ALONG THE ROAD THAT ULTIMATELY HAVE CREATED SEVERAL DIFFERENT CHARACTER TYPES WITHIN THE COMMUNITY.

SO THERE ARE SOME CORRIDORS THAT WOULD BE LIKE AN URBAN MIXED USE TYPE DENSITY, IF THERE IS THE OPPORTUNITY FOR YOU TO LEVERAGE INVESTMENTS THAT ARE IN THE AREA.

IF WE CAN MAKE IMPROVEMENTS TO WALKABILITY, AND APPROPRIATE LEVEL OF INFRASTRUCTURE IN AUDIO].

THERE COULD BE DENSITY ALONG THE SERVICE USES AND SO FORTH.

WE HAVE OTHER AREAS LIKE SAN PEDRO ROAD, EVEN THOUGH THAT'S A MAJOR CORRIDOR, THAT'S LINED WITH SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCES.

THAT WOULD BE VERY DIFFERENT AS WELL.

SO I THINK THAT IT'S INCUMBENT UPON THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT WHEN WE WORK WITH THE COMMUNITY TO BE SENSITIVE TO THAT, TO THE IDEA THAT NO CORRIDOR IS ALIKE, NO NEIGHBORHOOD IS ALIKE, THE CIRCUMSTANCES ARE VERY DIFFERENT.

AND THAT'S THE REASON WHY THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN RECOMMENDED IT.

WE'RE NOT MOVING FORWARD WITH SUBAREA PLANS, WHETHER THEY BE REGIONAL OR CORRIDOR PLANS, THAT RECOMMEND A BLANKET TYPE OF LAND USE FOR ANY ONE AREA.

WE HAVE TO HAVE A MAP, AND WE HAVE TO HAVE POLICIES LOCALIZED TO THAT SPECIFIC AREA.

>> SANDOVAL: SO IN TERMS OF THE COUNCILMAN IS PROPOSING TO HAVE A LAND USE CATEGORY THAT'S MIXED

[02:20:03]

USE, MF 25, THAT WOULD BE APPLICABLE ALONG THE HIGH CAPACITY TRANSIT CORRIDORS.

ARE YOU TELLING ME THAT'S NOT POSSIBLE WITH THE CURRENT STAFF RECOMMENDATION?

>> WITH THE CURRENT STAFF RECOMMENDATION, WE HAVE PROPOSED UP TO MF 18 TO THE MIXED USE CATEGORY, WHERE THE COUNCILMAN HAS RECOMMENDED ADDING MF 25.

OUR PROPOSAL TO THE COUNCIL WOULD BE TO CONTINUE TO BE FAITHFUL TO THE PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT THAT WE HAVE HAD.

WE WANT TO BE SURE THAT WE HAVE PROPOSED TO THE COMMUNITY, THAT MF 18 WOULD BE THE HIGHEST LEVEL OF DENSITY IN THAT PARTICULAR CATEGORY.

SO WE'RE PROPOSING THAT TODAY.

AT THE END OF THIS PROCESS, IT WOULD BE COUNCIL'S DISCRETION TO HAVE THE 25 DISTRICT WITHIN THAT CATEGORY.

>> SANDOVAL: SORRY, YOU PROMISED MF 18 WOULD BE THE HIGHEST DENSITY THEY WOULD BE ALONG --

>> WITHIN THAT LAND USE CATEGORY.

NOT NECESSARILY SPECIFICALLY WHERE, BUT WITHIN THE CATEGORY.

THE APPLICATION WOULD COME IN THE PLANNING PROCESS.

>> SANDOVAL: STATE AGAIN WHICH CATEGORY?

>> THAT IS THE NEIGHBORHOOD MIXED USE CATEGORY I BELIEVE IS WHAT I HEARD.

>> SANDOVAL: SORRY.

I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHY YOU WOULD RECOMMEND A LOWER DENSITY FOR MIXED USE THAN JUST NON-MIXED USE.

>> WHEN IT COMES TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD MIXED USE CATEGORY, WE HAVE HAD A NUMBER OF CONVERSATIONS WITH VARIOUS COMMUNITY STAKEHOLDERS, AND THERE HAS BEEN THIS CONVERSATION, SOME LEVEL OF CONSTERNATION RELATED TO DENSITY.

AND THE NEIGHBORHOOD MIXED USE CATEGORY BEING MOST APPROPRIATE ADJACENT TO NEIGHBORHOODS, WHERE NEIGHBORHOODS HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO ACCESS THE GOODS AND SERVICES THAT THAT CATEGORY WOULD PROVIDE.

ADDITIONALLY, THAT CATEGORY WOULD ALSO PROVIDE OPPORTUNITY IF SOMEBODY WANTED TO, LET'S SAY, LIVE IN THE PLACE WHERE THEY'RE CONDUCTING THEIR RETAIL OR CONDUCTING THEIR SERVICE USE, IF THEY WANTED TO HAVE APARTMENTS UPSTAIRS OR CONDOMINIUMS UPSTAIRS, OR SOMEWHERE WITHIN THAT FACILITY, THEN THE CATEGORY WOULD ALLOW THAT FLEXIBILITY AS WELL.

SO GIVEN THE FACT THAT THAT CATEGORY AND THE TEXT WITHIN THE CATEGORY DESCRIBES IT, SAYS IT WOULD BE ADJACENT TO RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOODS, THERE WAS A DISCUSSION WITH THE COMMUNITY ABOUT WHAT LEVEL OF DENSITY WOULD BE MOST APPROPRIATE THERE, WHAT LEVEL OF DENSITY WOULD THE COMMUNITY BE ABLE TO TOLERATE IF WE'RE CREATING THIS CATEGORY AT ALL.

THIS IS A NEW CATEGORY.

>> SANDOVAL: THEY WOULD BE ABLE TO BE ADJACENT, BUT IT BELIEVES THEY'RE WILLING TO TOLERATE A HIGHER DENSITY WITHIN THE NEIGHBORHOOD?

>> NOT NECESSARILY.

AGAIN, IT DEPENDS ON HOW THE COMMUNITY MOVES FORWARD IN THE PLANNING PROCESS, AND WHAT APPROPRIATE CATEGORY SHOULD BE WITHIN A PARTICULAR COMMUNITY.

THE EXAMPLE I GAVE EARLIER ABOUT A NEIGHBORHOOD, A SMALL POCKET FOR ADDITIONAL DENSITY COULD BE APPROPRIATE, THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT, OF COURSE, IS WILLING TO DISCUSS IT WITH THE COMMUNITY, IF THEY FEEL A COLLECTIVE OF PARCELS WOULD BE APPROPRIATE FOR HIGHER DENSITY.

BUT I WOULDN'T WANT TO COMPLETELY JUST SAY THAT THAT WOULD APPLY ACROSS THE BOARD.

>> SANDOVAL: OKAY.

THIS IS A COMPLICATED CHANGE.

I DON'T BELIEVE IT'S STRAIGHTFORWARD.

SO I'M STILL PROCESSING THAT.

I DO HAVE A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS.

BECAUSE THIS IS SO COMPLICATED, CAN YOU EXPLAIN TO ME, RUDY, WHY ARE WE SEEING THIS ON THE DAIS? THE COUNCILMAN MENTIONED THAT WAS THE DIRECTION YOU GAVE HIM AS OPPOSED TO INTEGRATING OR DISCUSSING IT AS A STAFF RECOMMENDATION?

>> THE COUNCILMAN IS MAKING -- THE MF 25 AND THE NEIGHBORHOOD MIXED USE AND MF 33, AND THE REMOVAL OF THE MF 33 FROM THE MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL, IS A REQUEST THAT COUNCILMAN TREVINO IS MAKING TO THE COUNCIL.

IT IS NOT PART OF STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION.

IT WOULD HAVE TO BE AN AMENDMENT THAT THE COUNCIL WOULD MAKE.

>> SANDOVAL: SO BASICALLY STAFF WOULD HAVE RECOMMENDED AGAINST IT, EVEN IF THIS CAME OUT TWO MONTHS AGO?

>> BECAUSE IT HAS NOT BEEN PART OF OUR COMMUNITY OUTREACH, THE PROPOSAL YOU HAVE IN FRONT OF YOU IS THE ONE WE'RE ADVOCATING FOR TODAY, YES, MA'AM.

>> SANDOVAL: AND CAN YOU EXPLAIN -- AGAIN, I'M JUST TRYING TO UNDERSTAND THE PROCESS HERE.

>> SURE.

>> SANDOVAL: SO HERE WE ARE AT COUNCIL VOTING ON SOMETHING EXTREMELY SIGNIFICANT.

WAS THIS DISCUSSED AT -- WHEN WAS THE LAST TIME THIS WAS DISCUSSED AT COMMITTEE? THE COMMITTEE DEDICATED TO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING PROCESS?

>> THEY MET ON JUNE 20TH, WHICH IS AT THE -- BECAUSE THE CITY COUNCIL -- THEY HEARD A BRIEFING ON THE 20TH.

THE CITY COUNCIL HERE CONSIDERED IT ON THE 21ST AND ASK THAT IT BE REMANDED BACK TO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING COMMITTEE.

OVER THE SUMMER IT WAS DETERMINED THAT THEY WOULD LIKE TO SEE ONE MORE ROUND OF COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT MEETINGS THAT WERE GOING TO BE CONDUCTED BY THE AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF ARC

[02:25:02]

TICKETS CHAPTER LOCALLY.

FOLLOWING THAT, IT WAS DETERMINED THAT WE SHOULD BRING IT BACK ON THIS DATE.

>> SANDOVAL: SO CPC SAID WE DO NOT WANT TO SEE ANY AUDIO].

>> THE CPC DID NOT AUDIO] AND NO MOTION WAS MADE TO REVISIONS AT THE CPC.

>> SANDOVAL: THEY BASICALLY SAID WE ARE OKAY WITH WHATEVER HAPPENS ROUND OF ENGAGEMENT?

>> CORRECT, MA'AM.

THEY FORWARDED IT TO THE CITY COUNCIL AT THAT MEETING.

>> SANDOVAL: OKAY.

THANK YOU FOR EXPLAINING THAT PROCESS TO ME.

IT HELPS ME SORT OF PUT THE PIECES TOGETHER, HOW WE ENDED UP HERE TODAY.

I DO WANT TO MAKE JUST A COMMENT, AND -- THIS IS -- SO WE HAVE A PROCESS AT CITY HALL, AND I THINK IT'S A GREAT PROCESS THAT THE CITY MANAGER STARTED, IT'S CALLED HIGH-PROFILE SOLICITATION FOR CONTRACTS, RIGHT? THINGS THAT ARE EXTREMELY CONTROVERSIAL THAT WE WANT TO HAVE ABOVE-BOARD.

THERE IS A VERY CLEAR PROCESS ABOUT HOW THAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN.

I THINK WE NEED TO CONSIDER STARTING TO DO THAT FOR HIGH-PROFILE POLICY THAT WE BRING FORWARD, BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, EVEN BACK ON JUNE 21ST, AND THIS IS NO ATTACK ON YOU AT ALL --

>> UNDERSTOOD, MA'AM.

>> SANDOVAL: I'M JUST BRINGING UP A DISCUSSION ITEM.

EVEN BACK ON JUNE 21ST, I THINK THERE WAS SOME UNCERTAINTY ABOUT, WELL, WHAT'S THE APPROPRIATE WAY TO DO THE OUTREACH WHEN WE HAVE A MAJOR CHANGE COMING TO COUNCIL, THAT WE DIDN'T TAKE IT BACK TO THE STAKEHOLDERS, AND I PUT FORWARD A CCR, AND THANK YOU, RUDY, YOU AND YOUR TEAM HAVE TAKEN NOTICE AND STARTING TO INTEGRATE THE RECOMMENDATIONS IN THERE, I REALLY APPRECIATE THAT.

BUT I JUST WANT TO THROW IT OUT THERE TO MY COLLEAGUES, THAT I THINK WE DO NEED TO START THINKING ABOUT WHEN WE HAVE A HIGH-PROFILE POLICY ITEM, WHAT ARE GOING TO BE OUR STANDARDS, WHAT ARE GOING TO BE OUR EXPECTATIONS THAT THE PUBLIC CAN EXPECT FROM US THAT, YOU KNOW, WHEN WE'RE GOING TO GO TO THEM, WHEN WE'RE GOING TO GO TO COMMITTEE, ALL THAT STUFF.

SO THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR ANSWERING THOSE QUESTIONS.

I APPRECIATE IT, RUDY.

>> THANK YOU, MA'AM.

>> SANDOVAL: THANK YOU, MAYOR.

>> MAYOR NIRENBERG: THANK YOU, COUNCILWOMAN SANDOVAL.

>> PELAEZ: THANK YOU.

THERE'S AN OLD COWBOY SAYING THAT SAYS IF YOU DON'T KNOW WHERE YOU'RE GOING YOU BEST NOT PUT ON YOUR SPURS.

AND, TO BE HONEST, I HAVE NO IDEA WHAT I'M GOING TO DO HERE.

BUT WHAT I DO THINK IS I HAVEN'T HEARD ENOUGH, AND A LOT OF REALLY GOOD POINTS.

IF MR. TREVINO HAS ANY GOOD ANSWERS TO THIS, BECAUSE I'M REALLY CURIOUS TO HEAR WHAT YOU'VE GOT TO SAY.

NOW THAT I'VE CHIMED IN, MAYOR, I KIND OF REGRET IT.

AND I WOULD LIKE TO HEAR WHAT COUNCILMAN TREVINO HAS TO SAY.

THANKS, MAYOR.

>> MAYOR NIRENBERG: I'M SORRY, COUNCILMAN.

ARE YOU YIELDING THE FLOOR TO COUNCILMAN TREVINO? ALL RIGHT.

WE HAVE OTHER MEMBERS OF COUNCIL IN THE QUEUE.

ACTUALLY JUST ONE AND WE'LL GO BACK TO COUNCILMAN TREVINO, IF THAT'S OKAY.

COUNCILMAN SHAW.

>> SHAW: THANKS, MAYOR.

YOU DON'T HAVE TO SAY ANYTHING.

I'VE GOT IT.

YOU ANSWERED ALL MY QUESTIONS DAYS BEFORE TODAY.

SO THANK YOU TO YOU AND YOUR TEAM.

I ALSO UNDERSTAND THE CONCERNS OF COUNCILMAN TREVINO, AND I AM SURE WE CAN ADDRESS THOSE CONCERNS AS WE MOVE FORWARD.

BUT AS I HAVE DISCUSSED WITH HIM AS WELL AS MY COLLEAGUES, I WILL BE SUPPORTING THE RECOMMENDATION OF STAFF AND LOOKING FORWARD TO CONTINUING CONVERSATION REGARDING THE AMENDMENTS.

THANK YOU, MAYOR.

>> MAYOR NIRENBERG: THANK YOU, COUNCILMAN SHAW.

COUNCILMAN TREVINO.

>> TREVINO: THANK YOU, MAYOR.

AND I GUESS I HAVE TO ADDRESS SOMETHING THAT KEPT COMING UP.

BECAUSE IT FEELS LIKE WE'RE TALKING ABOUT TWO SEPARATE THINGS NOW.

AND YOU MADE A GREAT POINT, MAYOR, WHEN YOU SAID LET'S KEEP IT PERTINENT TO THE AMENDMENTS THAT I MADE.

AND WHAT I THINK IS BEING SUGGESTED IS THAT, AGAIN, THAT THIS JUST CAME UP.

SO, RUDY, I WOULD ASK YOU DID THIS JUST COME UP?

>> IN TERMS OF THE FULL PACKET?

>> TREVINO: FROM ME, FROM MY OFFICE IN WORKING WITH YOU IN THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT, DID THIS JUST COME UP?

>> AGAIN, IN TERMS OF BOTH OF THESE AMENDMENTS, WE JUST HEARD ABOUT THEM ON MONDAY.

THE MF-33, YES, HAS BEEN PART OF A LONG-STANDING CONVERSATION WITH YOUR OFFICE.

I DID SEE THAT.

AND ALSO THE NEIGHBORHOOD MIXED USE RECOMMENDATION.

>> TREVINO: THANK YOU.

THAT'S KEY.

THAT'S CRITICAL.

FIRST OF ALL, I APPRECIATE SOME OF THE COMMENTS AND I CERTAINLY WANT TO BE A PROPONENT OF PROCESS AND PROCESS IS IMPORTANT.

WE WANT TO HAVE A ROBUST COMMUNITY DISCUSSION.

WE WANT TO BE AS ENGAGED AS WE CAN WITH OUR RESIDENTS.

POINT, IN FACT, THIS PLANNING IS FOR THE RESIDENTS.

AND SO WE HAVE BEEN BRINGING THIS ISSUE UP SINCE DAY ONE.

I WANT TO BE CLEAR THAT IF MY

[02:30:03]

COUNCIL COLLEAGUES ARE CONFUSED, IT ALMOST FEELS LIKE IT'S BY DESIGN.

AND TO SUGGEST THIS IS JUST SOMETHING THAT JUST CAME UP IS SOMETHING THAT I TAKE EXCEPTION TO.

SO I JUST WANT TO POINT THAT OUT.

YOU CAN DISAGREE WITH ME, AND I THINK WE'RE OKAY.

THAT'S WHY WE'RE UP HERE TO DISCUSS POLICY AND WE WANT TO BE CLEAR ABOUT WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT TODAY.

SO I AGREE WITH THE MAYOR.

LET'S TALK ABOUT THESE AMENDMENTS.

LET'S TALK ABOUT WHAT THEY MEAN.

BUT I TAKE EXCEPTION WITH ANYBODY SUGGESTING THAT I JUST BROUGHT THIS UP.

I WANT TO BE CLEAR ABOUT THAT.

[APPLAUSE] THIS IS ABOUT NEIGHBORHOODS.

THIS IS ABOUT THE CHARACTER.

THIS IS ABOUT NEIGHBORHOOD PLANS.

I KEEP SAYING THIS OVER AND OVER AGAIN I'M CONFUSED ABOUT WHY THIS IS EVEN BEING SAID AT ALL.

I'M SORRY I CONFUSED SOME OF MY COLLEAGUES.

I DON'T MEAN TO.

BUT I LOOK FORWARD TO WORKING WITH EACH AND EVERY ONE OF YOU TO TRY TO HELP CLARIFY SOME OF THIS.

I TAKE THIS ROLE VERY SERIOUSLY AND I'LL TELL EVERY ONE OF MY STAFF PEOPLE, ESPECIALLY CHRISSY, HAS BEEN WORKING DILIGENTLY ON THIS FOR QUITE A LONG TIME.

AND I KNOW IT'S A LOT OF WORK AND I RESPECT THE WORK THAT GOES INTO THESE KINDS OF PROJECTS.

BUT CHRISSY HAS BEEN WORKING WITH OTHER COUNCIL STAFF.

WE BROUGHT THIS ISSUE UP.

WE WILL CONTINUE TO BRING THIS ISSUE UP AND I WILL CONTINUE TO ADVOCATE FOR WHAT I HAVE EXPERIENCED AND WHAT MY DISTRICT HAS EXPERIENCED AS INCOMPATIBLE DEVELOPMENT.

AND WE'RE JUST TRYING TO FIND A WAY FORWARD.

SO I ASK FOR THAT CONSIDERATION.

I REALIZE THAT THERE IS A LOT OF CONFUSION BUT I CAN ONLY HOPE THAT WE CONTINUE TO HAVE MORE DISCUSSIONS ON SUCH AN IMPORTANT TOPIC.

AND I THINK THIS IS ONE OF THE MOST IMPORTANT ISSUES MY DISTRICT IS FACING.

THANK YOU, MAYOR.

>> MAYOR NIRENBERG: THANK YOU, COUNCILMAN TREVINO.

AND FIRST OF ALL, I APPRECIATE ALL THE CONVERSATIONS.

SO LET ME JUST SAY FIRST THAT I'M NOT CONFUSED.

IN FACT, FOR THOSE OF US, MOST OF US, ACTUALLY, WHO HAVE BEEN UP HERE WORKING ON S.A.

TOMORROW, EVEN PRIOR TO COMING ON COUNCIL, COULD SEE THIS TRAIN COMING A MILE AWAY.

AND THAT IS THAT THE PREMISE OF S.A. TOMORROW AND THE WHOLE IDEA OF A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN WAS TO, NUMBER ONE, ACCOMMODATE AN INCREDIBLE AMOUNT OF GROWTH THAT'S HAPPENING IN OUR COMMUNITY RIGHT NOW AND THE FACT THAT THOSE INCOMPATIBLE DEVELOPMENTS THAT ARE OCCURRING IN DISTRICT 1 ARE STARTING TO BLEED OVER IN EVERY SINGLE OTHER DISTRICT, AND THEY'RE GOING TO CONTINUE TO HAPPEN.

AND WITHOUT A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN IT'S GOING TO BE EVEN WORSE AS WE EXPECT NEW DEVELOPMENT TO ARISE, PARTICULARLY AS WE'RE GETTING TO SOME REALLY SERIOUS POLICY DISCUSSIONS AND RESOLVING AN IMBALANCE IN HOUSING THAT'S OCCURRED.

THERE'S GOING TO BE WAY MORE DEVELOPMENT, GOOD-QUALITY DEVELOPMENT THAT WE HOPE ADDRESSES A DRASTIC NEED IN HOUSING THAT OUR CITY HAS CURRENTLY TODAY.

AND IF WE DON'T HAVE RULES OF THE ROAD, IF WE DON'T HAVE A COMPREHENSIVE COORDINATED LAND USE PLAN, THE PROBLEMS THAT ARE OCCURRING IN DISTRICT 1 AND THE REASONS THAT TIER ONE GOT TOGETHER AS A COALITION WILL ONLY CONTINUE TO GET WORSE.

SO LET ME FIRST -- LET ME SAY IN ADDITION TO THAT, I APPRECIATE EVERYTHING THAT COUNCILMAN TREVINO HAS BEEN DOING.

THE TIER ONE NEIGHBORHOODS, THE COALITION, HAS A SEAT AT THE TABLE BECAUSE OF COUNCILMAN TREVINO.

AND THE FEEDBACK THAT WE'VE GOTTEN DURING THOSE MEETINGS AND THE INTENSE DISCUSSIONS THAT HAVE HAPPENED HAVE NOT GONE ON DEAF EARS.

I HAVE SEEN A LOT OF CHANGES IN MY TIME WORKING ON S.A. TOMORROW ON THESE VERY LAND USE CATEGORIES.

I'LL ALSO SAY I TAKE MY PREVIOUS ROLE AS A DISTRICT 8 CITY COUNCIL MEMBER SERIOUSLY IN THIS DISCUSSION AS WELL BECAUSE ROSS LAWHEAD HAS BEEN A FREQUENTER IN CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS TO MAKE SURE THAT NEIGHBORHOODS HAVE PLANS AND THAT THEY'RE PROTECTED IN THE FUTURE.

SO LET ME CLARIFY ONE POINT.

AND THIS WAS TRUE IN THE PREAMBLE OF S.A. TOMORROW.

WHEN WE'RE CREATING NEW LAND USE PLANS, WHEN WE'RE RESOLVING SOME OF THE LAND USE CATEGORY CONTRADICTIONS, ONE OF THE PREMISES IS WE'RE DOING THAT TO PROTECT THE INTEGRITY OF NEIGHBORHOODS.

SO I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE DON'T LOSE THE TOOLS THAT WE HAVE AVAILABLE AS SINGLE-MEMBER DISTRICT REPRESENTATIVES TO MAKE CHANGES TO LAND USE CATEGORIES,

[02:35:02]

ZONING CATEGORIES, ZONING DISTRICTS.

WHEN WE SEE THAT THIS MAP THAT WE'VE APPLIED TO THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO DOESN'T WORK RIGHT IN THIS ONE INSTANCE.

NOBODY LIKES TO SAY DOWN ZONING IN THIS CHAMBER, BUT IT'S TRUE.

WE MAY HAVE TO DOWN ZONE A FEW IF IT LOOKS LIKE IT'S COMPATIBLE.

IT TAKES A BIT OF FORTITUDE TO DO IT AND WE'RE GOING TO DO IT AND WE HAVE DONE IT BEFORE.

WE HAVE TO ARRIVE AT A POINT WITH THIS LAND USE CATEGORY THAT MAKES THE MOST SENSE.

AND OUR CONSTITUENTS HAVE TO DO THEIR JOBS IN MAKING SURE THEY ELECT PEOPLE WHO RESPOND TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD CONCERNS.

AND THAT'S NOT JUST TRUE WHEN WE'RE DEFINING WHAT THE LAND USE CATEGORIES ARE TODAY.

BUT THAT'S TRUE IN THE FUTURE.

SO WITH REGARD TO THE AMENDMENTS, THERE ARE A COUPLE OF FUNDAMENTAL REALIZATIONS ABOUT OUR COMMUNITY THAT HAPPENED ABOUT FOUR YEARS AGO.

DURING S.A. TOMORROW.

ONE OF THEM IS THAT WE AGREE THAT WE NEED TO DENSIFY CERTAIN AREAS OF TOWN.

THAT'S THE REALITY.

WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE ALLOW FOR HIGHER DENSITY, EASIER HIGH DENSITY DEVELOPMENT TO OCCUR WHERE IT'S COMPATIBLE.

ROSS' NEIGHBORHOOD IN OAKLAND ESTATES NEEDS TO RETAIN THE STRENGTH AND BOUNDARIES OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD THAT IT HAS TODAY AND NOT BE OVERRUN BY LAND USE CHANGES AND A BIGGER MAP.

THAT'S SOMETHING I HAVE COMMITTED TO AND I KNOW MANNY HAS COMMITTED TO AND FUTURE COUNCIL MEMBERS WILL AS WELL.

THE SECOND REALIZATION THROUGH S.A. TOMORROW IS WE DON'T JUST HAVE ONE URBAN CORE.

WE HAVE NINE OF THEM.

IN FACT, WE'RE GOING TO HAVE 13 OF THEM WHEN THE REAL POPULATION BOOM OCCURS.

AND WITHIN THOSE URBAN CORES, THAT'S WHERE WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO FOCUS A LOT OF RESOURCES TO BUILD THE INFRASTRUCTURE TO MAKE THOSE KINDS OF LAND USE CATEGORIES BENEFICIAL TO EVERYONE AND ALSO TO ACCOMMODATE THE GROWTH AND THE TENTH THAT'S GOING TO OCCUR SO WE CAN PROTECT THE NEIGHBORHOODS.

ALL THAT BEING SAID, I KNOW THERE'S BEEN A TREMENDOUS AMOUNT OF WORK THAT'S GONE INTO THIS.

I AGREE WITH THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION.

I ALSO AGREE WITH MY COLLEAGUE THAT THERE ARE SOME AREAS WHERE IT'S JUST NOT GOING TO WORK THE WAY IT'S INTENDED.

AND WE MIGHT HAVE TO SEE SOME CCRS.

WE MIGHT HAVE TO SEE SOME INDIVIDUAL ACTION TO PROTECT AREAS THAT AREN'T TOTALLY COMPATIBLE.

SO I JUST WANTED TO LEVEL SET WITH EVERYONE TODAY THAT THIS IS NO SURPRISE.

I ALSO DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THE PROCESS.

WE MIGHT NEED TO SEE MORE OF THESE ACTIONS ON THE FLY.

BUT IT IS TRUE THAT WE'VE GOTTEN TO THIS POINT.

IT'S NOT A SURPRISE TO ANYBODY.

AND THIS IS REALLY WHY WE SAID FROM THE VERY START OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING PROCESS THAT ALL THAT FURY OVER ACTUALLY PASSING THE PLAN, FINALLY GETTING TO THE POINT TWO YEARS AGO NOW TO PASS S.A. TOMORROW.

THAT WAS THE EASY PART.

THIS IS WHERE THE RUBBER HITS THE ROAD.

IF WE'RE GOING TO HAVE A HIGH-QUALITY COMMUNITY AND IF WE'RE GOING TO HAVE A CITY THAT CAN GUARANTEE QUALITY OF LIFE, WHETHER YOU'RE IN BEACON HILL OR OAKLAND ESTATES OR SOUTH TOWN WE HAVE TO HAVE A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN THAT WORKS AND WE HAVE TO BE COMMITTED TO MAKE SOME PRETTY TOUGH DECISIONS.

THAT STARTS TODAY, IN MY OPINION.

I AGREE WITH THE COUNCILWOMAN WHO SAID THIS IS KIND OF HISTORIC.

IT IS.

BUT IT ALSO MEANS THAT STARTING TODAY WE ARE COMMITTED TO WORKING WITH OUR NEIGHBORHOODS TO IDENTIFY THE AREAS WHERE IT DOESN'T MAKE SENSE AND TO MAKE CHANGES.

AS MUCH AS WE GIVE YOU HEADACHES, THERE'S MORE COMING, RUDY AND BRIDGETT.

BUT WE'VE GOT TO DO THAT IN ORDER TO EXECUTE THIS PLAN THE WAY I THINK OUR NEIGHBORHOODS, OUR CONSTITUENTS, AND OUR COUNCIL BEFORE AND AFTER HAVE INTENDED.

COUNCILWOMAN SANDOVAL AS WELL, WHO ACTUALLY HAS TIER ONE FOLKS IN HER OFFICE MAKING SURE THAT WE'RE DOING THIS RIGHT.

SO THANK YOU FOR THE WORK AND I'LL BE SUPPORTING THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION TODAY.

ALL RIGHT.

THERE ARE NO OTHER -- YEAH.

COUNCILMAN PELAEZ.

>> PELAEZ: I HATE DOING THIS, BECAUSE THAT WAS REALLY GOOD AND I WANT TO ECHO ONE THING AND THEN I WANT TO ASK A QUESTION.

I WILL FIGHT YOU TOOTH AND NAIL IF I EVER SEE THAT WE ARE DOING

[02:40:01]

ANYTHING TO IMPERIL THESE NEIGHBORHOOD PLANS.

YOU KNOW, WE THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO HAVE LIMITLESS RESOURCES.

THEY DON'T.

AND THE AMOUNT OF WORK THEY'VE PUT INTO PROTECTING THE CHARACTER OF THEIR NEIGHBORHOODS IS HUGE.

AND THEY'VE DONE IT DESPITE THE FACT THAT THEY HAVE DAY JOBS AND FAMILIES TO TAKE CARE OF.

ROSS IS DOING THIS PRO BONO.

AND SO WORD OF WARNING, YOU KNOW, I'LL BE THE FIRST TO SCREAM AND YELL AT YA IF I EVER SEE ANYTHING THAT EVEN COMES CLOSE TO THAT.

THANKS, ROSS, FOR COMING OUT.

WITH REGARDS TO COUNCILMAN TREVINO -- I'M STILL CONFUSED.

I HATE TELLING YOU THAT.

AND SO I WALKED IN HERE TODAY WANTING TO MAKE TWO AMENDMENTS AS WELL.

I'VE TAKEN MINE BACK JUST TO KIND OF THINK ABOUT THEM A LITTLE BIT MORE.

THE COMMITMENT I MAKE TO YOU IS I STILL WANT TO TAKE A STAB AT MAKING SOME MINOR TWEAKS ON MY END AS WELL.

AND I'LL BE HAPPY TO WORK WITH YOU ON YOURS.

AND, YOU KNOW, THE BEST WAY TO FIND OUT IF YOU CAN TRUST ME ON THAT IS TO TRUST ME ON THAT.

AND SO BUT THAT'S MY COMMENT.

THANK YOU, MAYOR.

>> MAYOR NIRENBERG: THANK YOU, COUNCILMAN PELAEZ.

OKAY.

SO THERE ARE TWO MOTIONS ON THE FLOOR.

WE'LL TAKE UP THE SECONDARY MOTION FIRST, WHICH IS THE AMENDMENT OFFERED BY COUNCILMAN TREVINO, SECONDED BY COUNCILWOMAN SANDOVAL.

SO THIS IS THE AMENDMENT OFFERED BY COUNCILMAN TREVINO.

PLEASE VOTE.

MOTION FAILS.

NOW WE'LL MOVE NOW TO THE PRIMARY MOTION, WHICH IS THE MOTION MADE BY COUNCILWOMAN VIAGRAN FOR ITEM 15.

PLEASE VOTE.

MOTION CARRIES.

ALL RIGHT.

THANK YOU AGAIN, EVERYONE, FOR COMING OUT.

AND THIS EPISODE OF S.A.

TOMORROW WILL CONTINUE TO THE

[20. Resolution initiating historic landmark designation for 905 Nogalitos St (parcel includes 901, 903, 905 and 911 Nogalitos, and 118, 120 and 122 Ralph) and waiving all related fees. [Roderick Sanchez, Assistant City Manager; Shanon Shea Miller, Director, Office of Historic Preservation] (Continued from January 18, 2018)]

NEXT ADDITION.

ITEM NO. 20.

>> ITEM NO. 20 IS A RESOLUTION INITIATING HISTORIC LANDMARK DESIGNATION FOR 905 NOGALITOS STREET, PARCELS INCLUDE 901, 903, 905 AND 911 NOGALITOS AND 118, 120, AND 122 RALPH.

AND WAIVING ALL RELATED FEES.

>> MAYOR NIRENBERG: COUNCILWOMAN GONZALES.

>> GONZALES: SHANON, IS THERE A STAFF PRESENTATION? I KNOW WE HAVE SEEN THIS BEFORE BUT FOR THE BENEFIT OF MY COLLEAGUES, IF WE COULD GIVE THE PRESENTATION AGAIN.

>> THE ITEM BEFORE YOU TODAY IS A RESOLUTION TO INITIATE REZONING FOR THE PROPERTY AT 905 NOGALITOS.

IT IS A HISTORIC GAS STATION PROPERTY THAT IS LOCATED IN DISTRICT 5, AS YOU CAN SEE ON THE MAP.

THERE ARE ACTUALLY FOUR STRUCTURES ON THE PROPERTY BUT ONLY BUILDING NUMBER ONE, WHICH IS THE PURE OIL GAS STATION BUILT IN 1935 IS OF CONCERN.

THE OTHER PROPERTIES ARE NON-CONTRIBUTING.

SO IF THE PROPERTY WERE TO BE DESIGNATED, THE NON-CONTRIBUTING PROPERTIES COULD BE REMOVED.

THE PROPERTY, AS I MENTIONED, WAS BUILT IN 1935.