* This transcript was created by voice-to-text technology. The transcript has not been edited for errors or omissions, it is for reference only and is not the official minutes of the meeting. [00:00:03] ALRIGHT, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, IF YOU'D PLEASE TAKE YOUR SEATS. UM, ALRIGHT. ALRIGHT. GOOD AFTERNOON LADIES AND GENTLEMEN. UM, WE WILL SHORTLY CALL THIS MEETING OF THE ZONING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO INTO ORDER, BUT BEFORE WE DO SO, IF WE COULD PLEASE HAVE OUR SPANISH INTERPRETATION SERVICES STATEMENT PRETTY PLEASE WITH A CHERRY ON TOP. SPANISH INTERPRETATION. . NO, I WAS GONNA BUTCHER IT AND I CAN'T DO THAT. UM, OKAY. SPANISH. ALRIGHT. UH, BEFORE WE BEGIN, UH, OUR BUSINESS IN EARNEST, WE WILL HAVE THE SPANISH INTERPRETATION SERVICES READ THEIR STATEMENT INTO THE RECORD. UH, IN THE MEANTIME, UH, WE DO STILL HAVE MASKS AVAILABLE OR DO WE NOT? YES, WE DO. ALRIGHT. UH, AS YOU MAY OR MAY NOT KNOW, C O V I IS STILL AROUND AND SPREADING RAPIDLY IN BEXAR COUNTY. SHOULD YOU WANT A MASK? WE DO HAVE MASKS AVAILABLE TO YOU. UH, IF YOU HAVE PLANS FOR A VACATION, PERHAPS A MASK WOULD BE A GOOD IDEA. UH, SO YOU DON'T HAVE TO SCRAP YOUR PLANS AT THE LAST MINUTE. AS MY WIFE REMINDED ME, I DON'T WANT TO SCRAP MY PLANS AT THE LAST MINUTE. UH, SO THERE ARE MASKS AVAILABLE. MASKS ARE RECOMMENDED GIVEN THE SIZE OF THIS ROOM, IF YOU WANT TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THEM, PLEASE DO. ALRIGHT. MY NAME IS JOHN BUSTAMONTE AND I'M THE CHAIR OF THE ZONING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO, AS WELL AS THE DISTRICT FIVE'S ZONING. COMMISSIONER, I HEREBY CALL THIS REGULARLY NOTICED MEETING OF THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO ZONING COMMISSION INTO SESSION. UH, I'D LIKE TO DO ROLL CALL BY ALLOWING THE ZONING COMMISSIONERS TO INTRODUCE THEMSELVES, STARTING WITH THE COMMISSIONER ON MY FAR LEFT. MR. CHAIR. UH, MARCO BATTLES REPRESENTING DISTRICT NINE, ALDO ORTIZ, DISTRICT EIGHT, TAYLOR WATSON, DISTRICT TWO. SUMMER GRADE HOUSE DISTRICT ONE. ROB SIPES, DISTRICT SEVEN KEN HUI, DISTRICT SIX. ALRIGHT. STAFF IS A QUORUM PRESENT. A QUORUM IS PRESENT. VERY GOOD. UH, WOULD YOU PLEASE STAND FOR THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE? I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND TO THE REPUBLIC FOR WHICH IT STANDS, ONE NATION UNDER GOD, INDIVISIBLE, WITH LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL. ALRIGHT, EXCUSE ME. [Zoning Items  ] PRIOR TO BEGINNING OUR HEARING, UH, I WOULD LIKE STAFF TO PLEASE REVIEW OUR MEETING FORMAT FOR THE BENEFIT OF THOSE IN THE AUDIENCE AND PERHAPS FOR OUR COMMISSIONERS AS WELL. STAFF. BEFORE I BEGIN, PLEASE TURN YOUR PHONES ON VIBRATE OR TURN THEM OFF. THE ZONING COMMISSION IS AN 11 MEMBER BODY APPOINTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL TO MAKE RECOMMENDATIONS ON ZONING CASES UPON RECEIVING A RECOMMENDATION FROM THE COMMISSION. YOU HAVE SIX MONTHS FROM THE DATE OF THE COMMISSION'S RECOMMEND RECOMMENDATION TO FORWARD YOUR CASE TO CITY COUNCIL. IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS PROCEDURE, PLEASE CONTACT YOUR CASE MANAGER. STAFF WILL BEGIN EACH CASE WITH A SHORT PRESENTATION OF THE REQUEST. PART OF THE PRESENTATION INCLUDES A MAP THAT SHOWS THE AREA TO BE CONSIDERED FOR REZONING AND PROPERTY WITHIN 200 FEET OF THE SUBJECT. PROPERTY CHECK MARKS INDICATE THOSE PROPERTY OWNERS IN FAVOR OF THE REQUEST AND AN X INDICATES THOSE PROPERTY OWNERS IN OPPOSITION. FOLLOWING THIS PRESENTATION AND ANY QUESTIONS BY THE COMMISSION, THE APPLICANT WILL PRESENT THEIR REQUEST. FOR THOSE THAT SIGNED UP TO SPEAK FOR OR AGAINST THE PROPOSED REZONING. YOU WILL BE CALLED AN ORDER THAT YOU SIGNED UP TO SPEAK. THOSE IN SUPPORT AND OPPOSITION WILL BE ALLOWED A MAXIMUM OF THREE MINUTES PER SPEAKER AND YOU ARE NOT OBLIGATED TO UTILIZE, UTILIZE THE MAXIMUM TIME LIMITATION. YOU WILL BE INFORMED THAT THE THREE MINUTES ARE UP. FOR THOSE THAT WOULD LIKE TO GIVE THEIR TIME TO A SPEAKER, THAT SPEAKER WILL BE ALLOWED A MAXIMUM OF TWO PEOPLE GIVING THEIR TIME FOR A TOTAL OF NINE MINUTES. THOSE GIVING UP THEIR TIME MUST BE PRESENT AND SIGNED IN TO SPEAK. THE APPLICANT WILL THEN BE GIVEN AN OPPORTUNITY FOR REBUTTAL LIMITED TO ONE SPEAKER WITH A THREE MINUTE TIME [00:05:01] LIMIT, ALONG WITH AN OPPORTUNITY TO ADDRESS COMMISSION QUESTIONS, MR. CHAIR. ALRIGHT. THANK YOU SO MUCH, UH, PRIOR TO BEGINNING OUR BUSINESS AND, UM, WE DO HAVE A GOOD DEAL BECAUSE WE ARE CONSIDERING THE U D C AMENDMENTS TODAY. UM, I DO WANNA TAKE A POINT OF PERSONAL PRIVILEGE AT THIS TIME. UH, ONE OF OUR STAFF IS GOING TO A NEW DEPARTMENT IN THE CITY. UM, AND CAT HERNANDEZ HAS BEEN AN INTEGRAL PART OF THE ZONING PROCESS IN THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO FOR A VERY LONG TIME. SHE HAS HELPED LEAD THIS COMMISSION AND ALL OF THE CASES THAT HAVE COME THROUGH IT, UH, SMOOTHED OVER RUFFLED RUFFLED FEATHERS AT TIMES, WHETHER IT'S THE COMMISSIONERS, THE PUBLIC, OR ANYONE ELSE, AND HAD AN ALMOST ENCYCLOPEDIC KNOWLEDGE OF THIS ZONING PROCESS. AND SO IT IS WITH A GREAT DEAL OF SADNESS, UH, THAT I SAY GOODBYE TO KAT TODAY IN HER CAPACITY HERE AT DEVELOPMENT SERVICES, UH, AND A GREAT DEAL OF HAPPINESS FOR HER IN THIS PROMOTION AND ALL THE BEST WISHES OF GOOD LUCK AND FURTHER SUCCESS. KAT, THANK YOU SO MUCH. AND MR. CHAIR, THIS IS MELISSA AMI, ASSISTANT DIRECTOR. I JUST WANNA CLARIFY, THIS IS AN INTERIM ASSISTANT DIRECTOR POSITION, SO WE ARE, SHE'S ON A TOUR OF DUTY FOR A MOMENT, MICHAEL AND I HAVE NOT LET HER GO A HUNDRED PERCENT , UH, BUT WE WILL DEFINITELY KEEP YOU UPDATED ON ANY PROGRESS. BUT YES, THIS IS A GREAT OPPORTUNITY FOR KATT TO PURSUE. THANK YOU. ALRIGHT, WELL I'M, I'M GLAD Y'ALL KEPT YOUR CLAWS IN HER. HOW ABOUT THAT? UM, ALRIGHT. UM, ONE FURTHER POINT OF PERSONAL PRIVILEGE. UH, SPEAKING OF SMOOTHING OVER RUFFLED FEATHERS, UM, WE DON'T DO THIS FREQUENTLY AND I HOPE STAFF DOES IMPRESS THIS UPON APPLICANTS, UM, BECAUSE IT IS REALLY IMPORTANT AS AN APPLICANT THAT YOU REACH OUT, UH, TO YOUR ZONING COMMISSIONER FOR THE DISTRICT IN WHICH YOUR CASE IS PENDING. I CANNOT STRETCH THE STRESS THIS ENOUGH. WE HAVE A GOOD DEAL OF CASES THAT COME THROUGH EVERY APPROXIMATELY TWO WEEKS BEFORE US. UH, WE CANNOT MASTER THEM ALL INDIVIDUALLY AS MEMBERS OF THIS COMMISSION. SO AS AN APPLICANT, IT IS INCUMBENT UPON YOU TO NOT ONLY REACH OUT TO YOUR COMMISSIONER FOR THE DISTRICT IN WHICH YOUR CASE SITS, BUT REACH OUT TO THE NEIGHBORS, FACILITATE THAT COMMUNICATION. IT IS THE ONLY WAY THAT THIS PROCESS WILL WORK EFFICIENTLY AND EFFECTIVELY AND COME OUT WITH THE BEST OUTCOME FOR OUR DISTRICTS INDIVIDUALLY AND OUR CITY GENERALLY. SO PLEASE, APPLICANTS, PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE DO THAT. ALRIGHT, THAT IS THE END OF MY LECTURE. UH, DO WE HAVE INTERPRETATION SERVICES YET? WE'RE REACHING OUT TO THEM. OKAY. UM, CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE, CAN WE PROCEED WITHOUT INTERPRETATION SERVICES? ALRIGHT, VERY GOOD. I HAVE GOTTEN AN AFFIRMATIVE HEAD NOD FROM THE CITY ATTORNEY. UH, WE WILL BEGIN NOW WITH OUR WITHDRAWN POSTPONED ITEMS. ITEM NUMBER ONE, ENDING IN 1 4 0 CD HAS BEEN WITHDRAWN. IT WILL NEED TO REAPPLY AND RE NOTIFIED IF IT GOES BACK FORWARD. AND ITEM NUMBER FIVE, ENDING IN 1 24 CD IS POSTPONED. WE'LL RE AND RE NOTIFY ONCE THAT'S READY TO GO. ALRIGHT, THANK YOU SO MUCH. UH, FOR THE PEOPLE IN THE AUDIENCE, UH, JUST TO KEEP BEATING A DEAD HORSE, IF YOU ARE HERE FOR ITEM NUMBER ONE, WHICH IS AT 23,293 IH 10, OR ITEM 5 2 0 3 WEST BUCHANAN BOULEVARD. YOU DO NOT NEED TO BE HERE TODAY TO ADDRESS THOSE ITEMS. THEY WILL NOT BE CONSIDERED. AND PRIOR TO THEM COMING BEFORE THIS BODY, AGAIN, YOU WILL RECEIVE PUBLIC NOTICE IN THE USUAL COURSE. SO, UH, Y'ALL CAN GO ABOUT AND ENJOY YOUR DAY. UM, SEEING NO ONE LEAVING, WE'RE GONNA MOVE ON TO OUR COMBINED HEARING. NUMBER ONE, WHICH ARE THE ITEMS ON OUR CONSENT AGENDA. STAFF, IF WE COULD JUST BRIEFLY GO OVER THE LIST TO ENSURE THAT COMMISSIONERS DON'T WANT TO PULL ANY OTHER ITEMS. PLEASE GO AHEAD AND PULL UP THE, UH, CONS, UH, ZONING SUMMARY. ALL RIGHT, SO WE'RE GONNA READ IN ITEMS NUMBER 3, 7, 8, 10, AND 12. ALRIGHT, THANK YOU SO MUCH, COMMISSIONERS. ANY OTHER ITEMS PULLED FOR INDIVIDUAL [00:10:01] OR CONTINUANCE HEARING FROM THE COMBINED HEARING? NUMBER ONE AGENDA. LOOKING TO MY LEFT, SEEING NONE, LOOKING TO MY RIGHT, SEEING NONE. IF WE COULD PLEASE READ IN COMBINED HEARING AGENDA NUMBER ONE, PLEASE. ALL RIGHT. ITEM NUMBER THREE IS GOING FROM I ONE AND MF 33 TO C TWO NA, ALL OVERLAYS REMAIN THE SAME. LOCATED ON 10 10 CLEVER ROAD 31. NOTICES WERE MAILED OUT ONE IN FAVOR, ZERO OPPOSED NO RESPONSE FROM THE WEST END NEIGHBORHOOD. ASSOCIA NEIGHBORHOOD WEST END HOPE AND ACTION NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION ITEM NUMBER SEVEN GOING FROM I ONE AND I TWO TO C THREE. ALL OVERLAYS REMAIN THE SAME. LOCATED ON FIVE 19 SINE 15 NOTICES WERE MAILED OUT, ZERO IN FAVOR AND ZERO OPPOSED NO RESPONSE FROM THE GOVERNMENT HILL ALLIANCE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION. ITEM NUMBER EIGHT, GOING FROM R SIX H AND R SIX, OR SORRY, R SIX H AND C ONE TWO R SIX TWO C ONE. ALL OVERLAYS REMAIN THE SAME. LOCATED AT 2338 MISSION ROAD AND 32 44 MISSION ROAD, 26. NOTICES WERE MAILED OUT ZERO. ZERO IN FAVOR. ZERO OPPOSED NO RESPONSE FROM ADMISSION. SAN JUAN NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION. ITEM NUMBER 10 IS GOING FROM RE TO NC. ALL OVERLAYS REMAIN THE SAME. IT'S N C SS WITH ALL OVERLAYS REMAIN THE SAME WITH A SPECIAL USE AUTHORIZATION FOR MEDICAL OFFICES LOCATED AT 41 0 3 ROLAND AVENUE. THREE NOTICES MAILED OUT ONE IN FAVOR, ZERO OPPOSED NO RESPONSE FROM THE SOUTHEAST SIDE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION. AND ITEM NUMBER 12, GOING FROM C ONE TO C TWO LOCATED AT 33 20 OAKWELL COURT. 14. NOTICES WERE MAILED OUT, ZERO IN SUPPORT, ZERO IN OPPOSITION. NO RESPONSE FROM THE OAKWELL FARMS. H O A COMMISSIONER. ALRIGHT, THANK YOU SO MUCH. SO THOSE ARE THE INDIVIDUAL ITEMS ON OUR AGENDA FOR CONSIDERATION TODAY. ADDITIONALLY, TODAY ON OUR CONSENT AGENDA, WE HAVE, UH, U D C AMENDMENTS. UM, SO MR, WE'RE GONNA GO AHEAD AND, AND PUT THE LIST UP ON THE SCREEN, BUT TODAY, UH, AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 14 INCLUDES 62 PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO THE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE. UH, CURRENTLY 51 OF THOSE WILL REMAIN ON CONSENT. UH, SPECIFICALLY, UH, THE, THE FOLLOWING WILL BE CONSIDERED INDIVIDUALLY. AMENDMENT ONE DASH ONE SUBMITTED BY DAVID LITTLEFIELD RELATED TO QUALIFIED TRANSITIONAL HOUSING AMENDMENT 10 DASH THREE SUBMITTED BY THE ZONING COMMISSION RELATED TO REQUIRING A SPECIFIC USE AUTHORIZATION FOR GAS STATIONS IN THE C TWO DISTRICT AMENDMENT FIVE DASH 29 SUBMITTED BY DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT RELATED TO THE DEFINITION OF AN INDOOR ENTERTAINMENT VENUE. AMENDMENT FIVE DASH 35 SUBMITTED BY DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT RELATED TO THE REQUIREMENT THAT RMM 4 56, UH, AND CERTAIN, UH, MULTI-FAMILY DEVELOPMENTS BE ENCLOSED WITHIN A SINGULAR STRUCTURE. AMENDMENT FIVE DASH 55 RELATED TO STANDALONE PERSONAL HYGIENE FACILITIES, WHICH WAS SUBMITTED BY DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT AMENDMENT FIVE DASH 57 RELATED TO PERMANENT SUPPORTIVE HOUSING SUBMITTED BY DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT AMENDMENT 10 DASH FOUR UH, RELATED TO REIFICATION PROCESSES FOR ZONING REQUESTS SUBMITTED BY THE ZONING COMMISSION AMENDMENT 23 DASH SIX RELATED TO ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS SUBMITTED BY THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND HOUSING SERVICES DEPARTMENT AMENDMENT 13 DASH ONE RELATED TO THE MILITARY PROTECTION OVERLAY DISTRICT SUBMITTED BY THE MISSION SAN JOSE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION AMENDMENT 19 DASH ONE RELATED TO THE WEST SIDE CREEK WATER QUALITY PROTECTION AREA SUBMITTED BY THE SAN ANTONIO RIVER AUTHORITY AND AMENDMENT 30 DASH ONE RELATED TO SUPPORTING, UH, PARDON ME, SUPPORTIVE HOUSING CAMPUSES SUBMITTED BY JAMES MCKNIGHT. THOSE 11 WILL BE CONSIDERED INDIVIDUALLY. THANK YOU CHAIR. THANK YOU MR. SPARROW. UH, COMMISSIONERS, ARE THERE ANY ITEMS FROM THE U D C AMENDMENTS THAT YOU WOULD LIKE TO PULL FOR INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERATION? LOOKING TO MY LEFT TO MY RIGHT. SEEING NONE. UH, WE WILL NOW CONSIDER THE CONSENT AGENDA. IS THERE A DISCUSSION OR A MOTION? SORRY. THANK YOU COMMISSIONER GREATHOUSE FOR REALLY HELPING ME TODAY. UM, WE DO HAVE SOME PUBLIC COMMENT ON THE U D C AMENDMENTS. UH, IF WE COULD PLEASE PLAY THE, I BELIEVE 21 VOICEMAILS. YES. [00:15:01] WE HAVE 21 VOICEMAILS TO PLAY. YES. THANK YOU. HI, MY NAME IS ANNA SMITHERMAN. I LIVE AT ONE THREE TWO ZERO SEVEN NORTH HUNTERS CIRCLE. MY PHONE NUMBER IS (765) 215-1909 AND I'M CALLING TO COMMENT ON AMENDMENT 16 DASH TWO. I'M VERY CONCERNED ABOUT ENTIRE HOME SHORT-TERM RENTALS IN SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL AREAS IN APRIL, UM, THE NEW OWNERS OF THE HOUSE ACROSS THE STREET FROM ME BEGAN RENTING OUT THE HOUSE AS AN ENTIRE HOME RENTAL ACCOMMODATING UP TO 12 GUESTS. I'M A MOTHER OF TWO SMALL CHILDREN AND MY MAIN CONCERN IS THEIR SAFETY. THE CONSTANT IN AND OUT OF DIFFERENT PEOPLE EVERY FEW DAYS, MAKES IT IMPOSSIBLE TO MONITOR SUSPICIOUS BEHAVIOR IN MY NEIGHBORHOOD. IT FEELS UNSAFE TO LET MY CHILDREN PLAY IN THE FRONT YARD. NOW THE, THE STATE OF TEXAS REQUIRES SEX OFFENDERS TO REGISTER BEFORE THEY RESIDE OR WHERE THEY RESIDE, BUT WITH THESE RENTERS THERE ARE NO BACKGROUND CHECKS AND THE QUOTE HOSTS DON'T EVER EVEN INTERACT WITH THESE RENTERS IN ANY CAPACITY EXCEPT ONLINE. AND THEY'RE NOT EVEN ABLE TO VERIFY IF THE PROFILE THEY'RE INTERACTING WITH IS REAL. THEY INVITE THESE RISKS TO OUR FRONT DOORS. ONE OF MY NEIGHBORS HAS ALREADY CAUGHT PEOPLE WATCHING HER THROUGH THE FENCE WHILE SHE RELAXED BY HER POOL. THE RENTAL NEAR ME IS DIRECTLY ACROSS THE STREET FROM A SCHOOL BUS STOP. AND THERE ARE SEVERAL ENCLOSED PROXIMITY TO OUR NEAREST PUBLIC ELEMENTARY SCHOOL. I TALKED TO THE OWNER AND PROPERTY MANAGER OF THE HOUSE ACROSS THE STREET FROM ME. I TEARFULLY EXPRESSED THESE CONCERNS ABOUT SAFETY AND BEGGED THEM TO RECONSIDER AND ASKED THEM, WOULD YOU WANT YOUR KIDS GROWING UP ACROSS THE STREET FROM THIS? AND HIS ANSWER WAS NO. NOT WHEN I PUT IT THAT WAY. BUT HE ALSO SAID THAT HE DID NOT INTEND TO CHANGE HIS PLANS. OF NOTE, THESE PEOPLE DO NOT LIVE IN SAN ANTONIO. JUST LAST MONTH, A MAN STABBED HIS MOTHER TO DEATH IN A SHORT-TERM RENTAL IN A FAMILY AREA. SOME OF THESE PROPERTIES MAY NOT SEEM PROBLEMATIC UNTIL ALL OF THE SUDDEN THEY ARE. THE CURRENT REGULATIONS AND PROPOSED AMENDMENT DO ALMOST NOTHING TO PROTECT OUR FAMILIES AND COMMUNITIES AND ARE RARELY ENFORCED AT THAT. SAN ANTONIO NEEDS TO RESTRICT ENTIRE HOME SHORT-TERM RENTALS IN SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL AREAS AND DEVELOP A STRONG PLAN FOR ENFORCEMENT TO KEEP FAMILIES SAFE AND IN AFFORDABLE HOMES. THANK YOU. MY NAME IS CAMERON PATTERSON. ADDRESS IS 9 0 6 RIGSBY AVENUE, 5 1 2 9 2 1 7 7 2 6. I'M SPEAKING ON AGENDA ITEM 14 FOR PROPOSED U D C AMENDMENTS. SPECIFICALLY THOSE REGARDING ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS. I'M A YOUNG PROFESSIONAL WHO WORKS DOWNTOWN AND OWNS A SMALL CENTURY OLD BUNGALOW AND HIGHLAND PARK. I WANNA SHARE MY SUPPORT FOR THE PROPOSED U D C AMENDMENTS TO THE ACCESSORY DWELLING ORDINANCE. I BELIEVE WE SHOULD BE DOING EVERYTHING WE CAN TO EMPOWER AND INCENTIVIZE HOMEOWNERS TO BUILD ADUS TO CREATE NATURALLY AFFORDABLE LOW IMPACT HOUSING FOR THE CITY, WHICH STARTS WITH REMOVING THE RESTRICTIONS PRODUCE PROPOSED U D C AMENDMENTS. I PERSONALLY WOULD LOVE TO CONTRIBUTE TO THE CITY AND MY NEIGHBORHOOD BY BUILDING AN A D U BE A GREAT UNIT FOR A STUDENT OR EARLY CAREER PROFESSIONAL TO RENT. AND THEN IT'D BE THE PERFECT SPOT FOR GRANDMA AND GRANDPA TO SETTLE IN WHEN THEY'VE RETIRED AND HAVE GOTTEN MORE KIDS THAN HANDS. CURRENTLY THOUGH THE RESTRICTIONS ARE SO ONEROUS THAT IT MAKES ZERO SENSE FOR ME TO DO SO. SIZE OF THE LIMIT OF THE, THE SIZE LIMIT OF THE UNIT BASED ON MY PRIMARY HOUSE. THIS AREA MAKES IT LESS THAN THE SIZE OF ANY REASONABLE STUDIO APARTMENT. THE SETBACKS AND PARKING REQUIREMENTS MAKE IT TAKE UP WAY TOO MUCH OF THE LIMITED BACKYARD THAT I HAVE AND THE UTILITY AND CHARACTER REQUIREMENTS DRIVE UP THE COST UNNECESSARILY. THERE'S NOTHING ABOUT THESE RESTRICTIONS CURRENTLY THAT ARE IMPROVING THE OUTCOMES FOR HOMEOWNER'S, NEIGHBORS, OR FOR THE END USERS. THEY'RE DATED, UNHELPFUL AND OVERLY BURDENSOME, BOXING OUT HOMEOWNERS FROM HELPING CONTRIBUTE TO OUR IMMENSE LACK OF HOUSING AT A TIME WHEN SAN ANTONIO IS GROWING FASTER THAN EVER. IF WE DON'T EMPOWER HOMEOWNERS ENOUGH TO CONTRIBUTE TO HOUSING SUPPLY IN OUR CURRENT CRISIS, WE SHOULDN'T BE SURPRISED IN 10 YEARS WHEN OUR NEIGHBORHOODS COST TOO MUCH TO LIVE. WE'RE OVER RENT IN AND THE ONLY SIGNIFICANT NEW HOUSING IS A HANDFUL OF LUXURY APARTMENT BLOCKS AND EXPENSIVE SUBURBAN GREENFIELD PLOTS. THOSE U D C AMENDMENTS, SELF REMEDY. THIS CAN MAKE IT START TO MAKE IT MAKE SENSE FOR MANY HOMEOWNERS TO BUILD AN A D U. THANKS. HELLO, MY NAME IS SUNNY DIAZ. I AM THE RESIDENT AND HOMEOWNER OF 7 24 NORTH PINE STREET. UM, I'M CALLING A DAY IN SUPPORT OF THE PROPOSED U D C AMENDMENT TO THE ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT ORDINANCE. UM, ADUS ARE A GREAT WAY TO SUPPORT INTERGENERATIONAL HOUSEHOLDS AND TO HELP HOMEOWNERS BE PREPARED TO TAKE, UH, CARE OF, UH, FOR SAY OUR AGING PARENTS. UM, FOR EXAMPLE, WE'D LOVE TO BE ABLE TO BUILD A SPACE TO ACCOMMODATE OUR FOLKS WHEN THE TIME COMES AND HAVE THEM LIVING COMFORTABLY, UM, ON OUR PROPERTY WITH, UM, WITH AN ADEQUATE AMOUNT OF SPACE. UM, SPEAKING TO, I SUPPORT AMENDING THE SITES REQUIREMENTS TO INCREASE THE FOOTPRINT OF ADUS. [00:20:01] FOR EXAMPLE, IF SOMEONE HAS A THOUSAND SQUARE FOOT, UM, HOME FOOTPRINT TO THEIR HOUSE, UM, I DON'T BELIEVE THAT THEY SHOULD BE LIMITED TO A 400 SQUARE FOOT. A D U, FOR EXAMPLE, WOULD BE REALLY DIFFICULT TO ACCOMMODATE AGING PARENTS IN SUCH A SMALL SPACE, ESPECIALLY WHILE TRYING TO FOLLOW THE A D A GUIDELINES. I THINK THAT ADUS ARE A GREAT CONCEPT THAT INCREASES THE, YOU KNOW, HOUSING SUPPLY, ESPECIALLY WITHIN EXISTING NEIGHBORHOODS, UH, CLOSE TO DOWNTOWN SUCH AS OUR HISTORIC DISTRICTS. I FEEL THAT ADUS DON'T DRAMATICALLY AFFECT THE NEIGHBORHOOD CHARACTER, UM, WITHIN THE NEIGHBORHOODS THAT THEY'RE BUILT IN. UH, ANOTHER POINT I'D LIKE TO MAKE IS THIS INTEREST RATES ARE INCREASING AND IT'S BECOMING MORE EXPENSIVE FOR, UM, FOLKS AND, YOU KNOW, YOUNG FOLKS TO BUY HOUSES WITHIN A MARKET AS LIMITED HOUSING STOCK. I THINK THAT AD ARE A GREAT WAY TO ENCOURAGE PEOPLE TO LIVE CLOSE TO DOWNTOWN IN AN AFFORDABLE MANNER. AT THE SAME TIME HELPING, UM, THE HOMEOWNERS GENERATE INCOME FOR INCREASING, UM, HELP THEM PAY THEIR INCREASING PROPERTY TAX BILLS. AGAIN, SUNNY DIAZ 7 24 NORTH PINE STREET. I'M IN FULL SUPPORT OF AMENDING THE U D C TO MAKE IT MORE FEASIBLE FOR HOMEOWNERS TO HAVE ACCESS TO BUILDING, UM, ADUS. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME. BYE-BYE. HI, MY NAME IS VIANNA PENA. I LIVE AT, UM, 3 4 3 WEST HOLLYWOOD, UM, 7 8 2 1 2. AND I'M CALLING IN FAVOR OF ITEM NUMBER 14. MY PHONE NUMBER IS (956) 206-1346. UM, MY COMMENT IS THAT, UM, AS FAR AS THE HOUSING AFFORDABILITY CRISIS, THIS IS THE MOST RESPONSIBLE LOW IMPACT WAY TO HELP ADDRESS THESE BARRIERS. FOR, FOR PEOPLE WHO, WHO NEED HOUSING DESPERATELY AND QUICKLY. IT'S ENVIRONMENTALLY RESPONSIBLE AND VERY PRO UM, HOMEOWNER. THE WAY IT'S WRITTEN, YOU KNOW, SORT OF ENSURES THAT DEVELOPERS CAN'T, YOU KNOW, USE OR TAKE ADVANTAGE. UM, AND, AND RATHER IT GIVES MORE POWER TO A HOMEOWNER TO, TO HELP GENERATE INCOME AND, UM, AT THE SAME TIME PROVIDE AFFORDABLE ACCESS TO HOUSING FOR OTHERS WHO WANNA LIVE IN WALKABLE NEIGHBORHOODS WITHIN THE INNER CITY. SO IT'S A WIN-WIN AND I REALLY URGE OUR CITY TO, TO, YOU KNOW, MAKE THIS HAPPEN. THIS IS KEY, KEY IN IN, IN PART OF THIS CRISIS FOR AFFORDABILITY. THANKS. SIX. HELLO, THIS IS LESLIE ABUMRAD. I LIVE IN 1 0 3 ROBIN HOOD PLACE 7 2 0 9 7 8 2 0 9. AND THIS IS IN SUPPORT OF ITEM 14. I BELIEVE THAT A OR AN AN INCREDIBLE ASSET AND NEED IN OUR COMMUNITY, ESPECIALLY AS WORKING PARENTS. WE NEED TO BE ABLE TO PROVIDE CARE FOR OUR ELDERS, YOU KNOW, OR OUR PARENTS THAT SO MANY TIMES GRACIOUSLY CARE FOR OUR CHILDREN. AND, UM, AND IT'S SUCH AN EASY WAY TO PROVIDE, YOU KNOW, YOUR FAMILY WITH, WITH A SPACE SO THAT YOU CAN TAKE CARE OF BOTH YOUR CHILDREN, YOUR PARENTS. THEY CAN, THEY CAN DEFINITELY BENEFIT FROM THIS STRUCTURE IN THE FUTURE. AND IT WOULD BE GREAT IF WE CAN JUST DO IT MORE EASILY IN THE CURRENT HOUSE THAT I'M PAYING FOR. THIS WAS NOT DONE UP TO CODE. WE DISCOVERED WHEN I FINALLY BOUGHT THE HOUSE AND IT WAS A LOT OF MONEY TO BRING IT UP TO CODE BECAUSE IT WAS APPARENTLY SO HARD TO DO IT PROPERLY THE FIRST TIME. SO IT WAS DONE ON THE DARK. SO THIS IS IN SUPPORT OF ITEM 14. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME. HI, MY NAME IS STEVE HENDERSON. I LIVE AT 9 0 5 CATON AND HIGHLAND PARK. I BELIEVE THIS IS FOR ITEM NUMBER 14, THE A D U AMENDMENTS. UH, I'D LIKE TO SPEAK IN SUPPORT OF THE PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO MAKE THE BUILDING OF ADUS LESS BURDENSOME. UM, MY WIFE AND I ARE TRYING TO DECIDE WHETHER TO BUILD AN A D U IN OUR BACKYARD. UH, WE SEE THE FOLLOWING BENEFITS. UM, WE WOULD CERTAINLY APPRECIATE THE PASSIVE INCOME HELP OFFSET SOME OF THE INCREASES IN PROPERTY TAXES. 50 80 WERE TO BE LARGE ENOUGH, MY WIFE AND I WOULD EVEN CONSIDER LIVING IN THE 80, EVEN RENTING OUT THE MAIN HOUSE. UM, AND LASTLY, BOTH OF OUR MOTHERS ARE AGING AND LIVE ALONE. UM, AND WE, WE WOULD LIKE TO BE ABLE TO OFFER THEM A PLACE TO LIVE WHEN THE TIME COMES, IF THEIR MOBILITY REQUIRES MORE SUPPORT THAN THEY HAVE NOW. UM, OUR HOME IS UNDER 1100 SQUARE FEET, UH, WHICH MAKES N A D U AT THE CURRENT SIZE LIMITATIONS REALLY TOO SMALL TO BE FEASIBLE. UM, AND SO I HOPE THE COMMISSION MOVES FORWARD WITH AN INCREASE IN THE A D U SIZE AND ANY AMENDMENTS THAT LOWER THE [00:25:01] COST OF INVESTING IN THIS WOULD WOULD CERTAINLY BE WELCOME TOO. UM, OKAY, THANKS FOR LETTING ME SPEAK. HI, NAME IS . UM, MY ADDRESS IS ONE 10 BROADWAY, UM, TWO 50. UH, AND I JUST WANTED TO SPEAK ON ITEM 14 AND UH, I WANTED TO SPEAK TODAY IN SUPPORT OF THE PROPOSED U D C AMENDMENTS TO THE ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT ORDINANCE. UH, THERE IS A REAL NEED FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING AND I ALSO THINK THIS WOULD HELP FAMILIES WHO ARE TAKING CARE OF AGING PARENTS BY GIVING PARENTS AUTONOMY BUT ALSO KEEPING CLOSE. I THINK THERE'S A REAL NEED FOR THAT, SO I JUST WANTED TO LEAVE A MESSAGE IN SUPPORT FOR IT. THANK YOU. HI, MY NAME IS ELIZABETH O'TOOLE. I LIVE AT 2 39 CENTER STREET, SAN ANTONIO, UM, 7 8 2 0 2. I'M CALLING ABOUT ITEM 14. UM, I WANNA STICK TODAY IN SUPPORT OF THE PROPOSED U TWO C AMENDMENTS TO THE ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT ORDINANCE. ADUS INCREASED TOTAL HOUSING SUPPLY WITHIN EXISTING NEIGHBORHOODS WITHOUT DRAMATICALLY AFFECTING NEIGHBORHOOD CHARACTER. THEY USE EXISTING INFRASTRUCTURE SUPPORT, INTERGENERATIONAL HOUSING HOUSEHOLDS AND AGING IN PLACE, UM, ALLOW HOMEOWNERS TO INVEST IN AND BUILD EQUITY AND PROPERTY. UM, IF THEY'RE USED AS RENTAL, THEY CAN PROVIDE PASSIVE INCOME AND ALLOW HOMEOWNERS TO RENT OR SUPPORT FAMILY, FRIENDS AND NEIGHBORS. UM, YEAH, SPEAKING FROM EXPERIENCE OF HAVING DONE RESEARCH, UH, WITH SOMEONE WHO WAS, UH, LOOKING AT A D U DEVELOPMENTS AND HOW THEY SUPPORT, UH, LOCAL NEIGHBORHOODS AND INCREASED AFFORDABLE HOUSING SUPPLY, UM, YEAH, I FEEL REALLY CONFIDENT THAT THIS WOULD BE AN IMPORTANT STEP FOR, UH, SECURING SAN ANTONIO'S HOUSING FUTURE. AND, UM, YEAH, I'M SPEAKING IN SUPPORT OF THIS AMENDMENTS. THANK YOU SO MUCH. BYE. HELLO, MY NAME IS LAURA GARCIA ANGO. I LIVE IN THE SOUTH SIDE OF SAN ANTONIO AT 2 4 6 HAL UH, SAN 7 8 2 0 4. UH, I'M CALLING TODAY IN SUPPORT OF THE PROPOSED U D P AMENDMENTS TO THE ACCESSORY DUAL DUALING UNIT ORDINANCE ITEM 14. UM, I BELIEVE THE OWNER OCCUPANCY REQUIREMENT, IT'S VERY IMPORTANT, SO THESE BENEFITS THE HOMEOWNERS AND NOT DEVELOPERS. UM, AND IT'S A WAY FOR HOMEOWNERS TO INVEST IN THEIR PROPERTY, SUPPORTING THEIR FAMILY OR FRIENDS. UM, INCREASING ALSO THE TOTAL HOUSING OF A NEIGHBORHOOD. WE ARE AFFECTING THE NEIGHBOR, THE NEIGHBORHOOD CHARACTER, WHICH TO ME IS VERY IMPORTANT. UH, KEEPING THE CULTURE OF THESE NEIGHBORHOODS AND NOT MAKING BUILDINGS AND HAVING DEVELOPERS MOVING, WHICH I'VE SEEN AFFECTING MY NEIGHBORHOOD. UM, THANK YOU. MY PHONE NUMBER IS (512) 912-6514. HI, THIS IS GARRETT JONES AND I LIVE AT 8 31 EAST MAGNOLIA AVENUE IN RIVER ROAD IN SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS SEVEN EIGHT TWO ONE TWO. MY PHONE NUMBER IS (210) 901-1435 AND I'M CALLING TODAY IN, UH, REFERENCE TO ITEM NUMBER 14 AND ULTIMATELY TO SPEAK IN SUPPORT FOR THE, UH, PROPOSED U D C AMENDMENTS TO THE ACCESSORY DRILLING UNIT ORDINANCE. I'M REALLY, UM, EXCITED ABOUT THE OPPORTUNITY TO BUILD A BACKYARD A D U I. I THINK THAT THIS IS AN INFRASTRUCTURE THAT, UH, IS SORT OF, UH, INTEGRAL AND NATURAL TO SAN ANTONIO THAT ALREADY SUPPORTS A LOT OF MULTI-FAMILY HOUSING AND INTERGENERATIONAL HOUSING, AND I REALLY LOVE THAT IT'S, UH, AN OPPORTUNITY THAT ALLOWS HOMEOWNERS TO INVEST IN AND BUILD EQUITY IN THEIR OWN PROPERTY. SO WOULD LIKE TO EXTEND MY SUPPORT. THANK YOU. HELLO, MY NAME IS RNA GONZALEZ. I LIVE IN 86 11 AGRI COURT TO AN EIGHT TWO FORTY FIVE. MY PHONE NUMBER IS +1 058-955-5555. THIS VOICEMAIL IS IN REGARDS TO CASE 14. I WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK TODAY IN SUPPORT OF THE PROPOSED U D C AMENDMENTS TO THE ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS. IN THE FUTURE, I WOULD LIKE TO BUILD AN ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT FOR MY AGING PARENTS. IT'S IMPORTANT FOR ME TO HAVE MY PARENTS CLOSE TO ME AS THEY AGE WHILE WE EACH HAVE OUR OWN SPACE. THE PROPOSED A U D C AMENDMENTS TO THE A D U WOULD MAKE IT EASIER FOR ME TO BILL AN A D U. THANK YOU. I LIVE AT 1 3 2 0 7 NORTH HUNTER CIRCLE IN SAN ANTONIO, 7 8 2 3 0. SO I'M CALLING REGARDING AMENDMENT 16 DASH TWO. I'M CALLING BASICALLY TO EXPRESS MY CONCERN ABOUT [00:30:01] SOME OF THE SHORT TERM RENTALS IN SAN ANTONIO. THAT BUSINESS HAS JUST BEEN EXPLODING AND MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT THERE ARE OVER 4,500 ENTIRE HOUSE RENTALS IN SAN ANTONIO, A LOSS. I HAVE A NEIGHBOR ACROSS THE STREET WHO SOLD THEIR HOUSE, AND NOW OF COURSE THERE ARE CRAZY PARTNER PARTIES AND SUCH, DESPITE THE FACT THAT QUOTE UNQUOTE, THEY'RE NOT ALLOWED IN AIRBNB ANYWAYS, YOU KNOW, AS ALL OF THESE HOMES ARE NOW UNAVAILABLE TO PERMANENT RESIDENTS, AND THIS IS IN THE MIDST OF A DEEP HOUSING CRISIS, FROM WHAT WE CAN TELL, LIKE INVESTORS ARE JUST BUYING THESE THINGS UP. CORPORATIONS ARE BUYING THESE THINGS UP AND TURNING THIS INTO A MASS BUSINESS WHERE THESE SHOULD BE NEEDY FAMILIES BEING ABLE TO PURCHASE HOMES OR AT LEAST HAVING THE OPPORTUNITY. BUT THIS COMPETITION WITH THESE INVESTORS JUST SKYROCKETS THE PRICING OF HOUSES AROUND HERE CAUSING RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY TAXES TO INCREASE ARTIFICIALLY INCREASING PROPERTY VALUES. YOU KNOW, ONLY INVESTORS CAN MEET THESE PRICING DEMANDS. SAN ANTONIO NEEDS TO CHANGE THEIR APPROACH. SO FAR IT SEEMS LIKE YOU GUYS ARE ALL JUST, OH YES, OF COURSE THE CORPORATIONS. WE LOVE THIS BUSINESS. PLEASE THINK OF THE PEOPLE HERE. PLEASE THINK OF ALL THE NEEDY FAMILIES, ALL OF THESE FINANCIAL PROPERTIES ON THE RESIDENCES AND ALL THE OTHER RESIDENTS. I WOULD MUCH, MUCH PREFER THAT YOU GUYS WERE MUCH MORE RESTRICTIVE SO THAT WHOLE HOUSE RENTALS, FOR EXAMPLE, WERE NOT ALLOWED SUCH THAT IT WAS KEPT ALL IN DOWNTOWN. I DON'T KNOW, JUST A VASTLY MORE AGGRESSIVELY RESTRICTIVE APPROACH WITH ACTUAL, ACTUAL ENFORCEMENT OF WHATEVER RULES YOU COULD POSSIBLY COME UP WITH. THANK YOU. HI THERE. MY NAME IS ANN FERGUSON. I AM A D ONE RESIDENT AND I'M CALLING TODAY IN SUPPORT OF THE PROPOSED U D C AMENDMENTS TO THE A D U ORDINANCE BECAUSE INCREASING THE AMOUNT OF EDS IN OUR NEIGHBORHOODS IS A CONCRETE WAY TO FIGHT OUR CITY'S AFFORDABLE HOUSING INCREASES. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. GOOD MORNING. MY NAME IS JOHN NICHOLAS. MY ADDRESS IS 1 3 2 1 1 NORTH HUNTERS CIRCLE, SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS 7 8 2 3 0. I'M IN DISTRICT EIGHT. MY PHONE NUMBER (210) 827-8361. I'M CALLING ABOUT THE ORDINANCE, UH, RELATED TO SHORT TERM RENTALS. I BELIEVE IT'S AGENDA ITEMS, BELIEVE IT'S AGENDA ITEM 16 TWO. I'M CONCERNED ABOUT SAFETY WITH SHORT-TERM RENTALS, UH, PARTICULARLY THE WHOLE HOUSE, UM, RENTAL WITH THE OWNER NOT PRESENT. THOSE, I BELIEVE THOSE PARTICULAR HOMES ARE, UH, A SAFETY RISK TO OUR NEIGHBORHOODS, UH, HAVE SOME EXPERIENCE WITH THAT, BUT I BELIEVE THAT, UH, SHORT-TERM RENTALS, PARTICULARLY THE WHOLE HOUSE SHOULD BE REGULATED OR SHOULD BE ZONED AS IF THEY'RE APARTMENTS OR MULTI-FAMILY OR HOTELS BECAUSE THAT'S ESSENTIALLY WHAT THEY ARE. UM, AND DESPITE, UH, THE OWNER'S, UH, INTENTIONS AND, AND, UH, THEIR EFFORTS, UH, THEY CANNOT PREVENT SOMETHING FROM HAPPENING. THEY CAN ONLY MAKE RULES, WHICH I'VE ALREADY SEEN IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD THAT THE RULES AREN'T FOLLOWED. THAT, UH, WE'VE SEEN, UH, MORE THAN A DOZEN CARS IN THE STREET. WE'VE SEEN, UH, AND THIS WAS A, A FAMILY PARTY, NOT A, NOT A OUT OF CONTROL PARTY. SO, UM, HOPING THAT WE DON'T HAVE A SITUATION WHERE THERE'S VIOLENCE, BUT, UH, YOU CAN'T CONTROL THAT. SO AGAIN, I APPRECIATE THE OPPORTUNITY TO PROVIDE INPUT IF YOU NEED TO REACH ME AGAIN, MY PHONE NUMBER IS (210) 827-8361. THE NAME IS JOHN NICHOLAS. THANK YOU. HI, MY NAME IS JOSEPH LIK, RESIDENT AT THREE ZERO TWO TWO MANILA DRIVE, PHONE NUMBER (210) 573-4054. AND I'M CALLING IN REFERENCE TO AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 14 IN REFERENCE TO THE CHANGES TO THE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE. AND I'M CALLING IN FAVOR OF THE ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT ORDINANCE IN SUPPORT OF HOME OWNERSHIP AND HOME HOME OWNERSHIP OWNER'S PROPERTY RIGHTS IN ORDER TO PIPE GENTRIFICATION TO HELP INCREASE AFFORDABLE HOUSING STOCK BY, BY REMOVING BARRIERS FOR PEOPLE TO BUILD DWELLING UNITS IN THEIR BACKYARD IN SAN ANTONIO. THANK YOU. HELLO, THIS IS CHRISTOPHER FULLERTON. UH, I'M A SAN ANTONIO RESIDENT, UH, AND I I LIVE AT, UH, 36 0 2 HUNTERS DRAIN HERE IN, UH, SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS 7 8 2 3 0. I AM CALLING REGARDING, UH, THE U D C AMENDMENT REVIEW PROCESS, SPECIFICALLY REGARDING U D C AMENDMENT 16 DASH TWO, ALSO REFERRED TO AS RUNNING AMENDMENT NUMBER 1 0 4. IN THE FAR LEFT COLUMN, UH, I'M CALLING IN PART, [00:35:01] UH, FROM MY OBSERVATIONS AND MY LEARNING CURVE AS A RESIDENT OF HUNTERS CREEK. AND FROM WHAT I LEARNED, UH, SERVING ON THE, UH, THE P CT H C MYSELF DURING THE REVIEW PROCESS AND DEVELOPMENTS THAT HAVE HAPPENED SINCE THEN, I, I WANNA POINT OUT THAT THE ENABLING LANGUAGE OF FIXING DASH TWO AS IT CURRENT, OR, OR OF THAT SECTION OF CODE AS IT CURRENTLY STANDS, POINTS TO THE IMPORTANCE, UH, OF PRESERVING THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOODS. THAT'S A POWERFUL AND FUNDAMENTAL ELEMENT HERE THAT I HOPE YOU'LL TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION. AND IT SEEMS ESPECIALLY IMPORTANT TO BE PROTECTING OUR NEIGHBORHOODS DURING THIS SEA CHANGE OF HOW OUR RESIDENTIAL AREAS, UM, ARE, ARE DEVELOPING, UH, THANKS TO CHANGES IN HOME PRICES, UH, EXPLODING PRICES ACROSS THE CITY, UM, AND HOW THAT'S AFFECTING BOTH THE OWNER OWNERSHIP AND THE RENTAL PATTERNS. WE HAVE A RAPIDLY EVOLVING SITUATION ACROSS THE ENTIRE CITY WITH STRS. THESE ARE REALLY UNCHARTED WATERS. I THINK THE TECHNOLOGY THAT HAS BEEN INTRODUCED THAT ALLOWS PEOPLE TO, UH, RENT THEIR HOUSES, UH, OR PARTS OF THEM. I HOPE YOU'LL AGREE. WE NEED TO PROCEED CAUTIOUSLY AS WE STUDY THIS SITUATION AND LEARN FROM OTHERS. UH, EVEN BEFORE THE S D R SITUATION, CITIES LIKE CHARLESTON, SOUTH CAROLINA AND OTHER MAJOR DESTINATION CITIES HAD SIGNIFICANT PROBLEMS WITH, UH, PART-TIME OCCUPANTS WHO WERE ONLY THERE FOR PART OF THE YEAR. AND AS A RESULT, IT BECAME VERY DIFFICULT TO SUSTAIN, UH, LOCAL BUSINESSES AND RESIDENTIAL AREA BUSINESSES. AND, AND THE F D R PROCESS HAS MAGNIFIED THIS AND THEY ACCELERATED IT IN MANY WAYS, WHICH I THINK REQUIRES ADDITIONAL STUDY. FREDERICKSBURG IS A GOOD EXAMPLE WHERE WE CAN LOOK TO PRECAUTIONARY TALES NOT FAR FROM HOME, UH, AT CURRENT. UH, AT, AT PRESENT, ABOUT 11% OF THE ENTIRE HOUSING STOCK INSIDE THE CITY LIMITS IS PARTICIPATING IN AN S D R PROGRAM. AND WITHIN THE FREDERICKSBURG ZIP CODE, IT'S OVER 20%. NOW, FREDERICKSBURG IS A UNIQUE CASE, BUT I THINK IT CAN SERVE TO INFORM, UH, HOW IT, CERTAIN NEIGHBORHOODS IN PARTICULAR CAN BE AFFECTED HERE. UH, BUT, UH, AS THE CURRENT REGISTRATION, UH, MAPS SHOW SCRS ARE NOT JUST AROUND THE RIVER WALL, UH, THEY'RE SCATTERED ACROSS THE ENTIRE CITY. HELLO, MY NAME IS ALICIA, CURRENTLY AT TWO 40 CLAREMONT, PHONE NUMBER (918) 232-1266. I WANNA SPEAK TODAY IN SUPPORT OF THE PROPOSED U D C AMENDMENTS TO THE A D U ORDINANCE UNDER AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 14. I'VE BEEN LIVING AND WORKING IN SAN ANTONIO FOR THE LAST FIVE YEARS, AND I HAVE LONG-TERM PLANS TO RAISE A FAMILY IN THE HIGHLAND PARK NEIGHBORHOOD. AS MY PARTNER AND I PLAN FOR OUR FUTURE AND THE FUTURE OF OUR FAMILY, WE RECOGNIZE THAT DEVELOPING AN A D U BEHIND OUR HOME WILL BE A CRITICAL FINANCIAL ASSET FOR US. THE THREE BIGGEST BENEFITS AND MY PERSPECTIVE ARE ONE, THE RELIABLE INCOME THAT WILL HELP US KEEP UP WITH THE MAINTENANCE AND RISING PROPERTY TAXES. SECONDLY, WE RECOGNIZE THAT OUR PARENTS ARE BOTH GETTING OLDER. HAVING AN A D U WILL ALLOW US TO PREPARE FOR A FUTURE OF CARING FOR OUR PARENTS AND IN RETURN, IT ALSO ALLOWS US TO HOUSE OUR PARENTS PROVIDING OPPORTUNITY FOR THEM TO MOVE HERE AND HELP US RAISE OUR CHILDREN, WHICH WILL SAVE TREMENDOUSLY ON CHILDCARE COSTS. AND LASTLY, ON A MORE BROAD NOTE, THERE'S THOUSANDS OF NEW RESIDENTS MOVING TO SAN ANTONIO EACH YEAR, AND THIS IS RAISING THE DEMAND FOR HOUSING. AND WE NEED THAT HOUSING TO BE AFFORDABLE, LOW IMPACT AND ALLOW US, US TO PRESERVE THE CHARACTER OF OUR NEIGHBORHOOD. WE CAN'T KEEP SPRAWLING OR BUILDING MASSIVE RENTAL DEVELOPMENTS THAT ARE WELL OUT OF REACH OF A MAJORITY OF THE CITY'S INCOME BRACKET AS IT CURRENTLY STANDS. SAN ANTONIO'S POLICIES ON ADUS MAKE THE PROSPECT OF BUILDING ONE UNNECESSARILY RESTRICTED AND UNVIABLE FOR MY PARTNER AND MYSELF. THE PROPOSED U D C AMENDMENTS FOR THE A D U ORDINANCE ARE THE POLICY CHANGES WE'RE RELYING ON TO MAKE AN A D U A REALITY FOR OUR HOUSEHOLD. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME. HELLO, MY NAME IS JEFF SNYDER AND I LIVE AT 9 0 5 NORTH MESQUITE STREET, UH, SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS 7 2 0 2. UM, THE AGENDA ITEM NUMBER IS NUMBER 14, AND I WAS JUST CALLING TO EXPRESS MY SUPPORT FOR THE A D U AMENDMENTS THAT ARE PROPOSED TO THE ZONING COMMISSIONS. I THINK THEY WOULD BE, UM, A GOOD ADDITION TO OUR CITY PLANNING INITIATIVES IN SAN ANTONIO. THANK YOU SO MUCH. BYE-BYE. OH, I THINK I, MY, MY NUMBER IS, UH, 3 1 6 5 1 9 1 8 7 4. HELLO, MY NAME IS PAULA HERNANDEZ. I'M A LOCAL PLANNER AND COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT COORDINATOR. MY ADDRESS IS ONE 29TH STREET. UM, I'M CALLING FOR CASE NUMBER 14. I WANT TO SPEAK TODAY IN SUPPORT OF THE PROPOSED G V C AMENDMENTS TO THE A D U ORDINANCE. UM, ADUS UTILIZE [00:40:01] EXISTING INFRASTRUCTURE AND SPACE INSTEAD OF KEEPING ON SPRAWLING AND BUILDING ON GREEN SPACE. UH, ADDITIONALLY TO OUR IMPACTING AND, AND IMPROVING OUR URBAN FABRIC, IT GIVES HOMEOWNERS, UH, AN OPPORTUNITY TO EMBELLISH AND BUILD EQUITY ON THEIR PROPERTY. THANK YOU. MY NAME IS THOMAS MEDINA OF 2011 WEST CRAIG PLACE, SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS SEVEN EIGHT TWO ZERO ONE. AND MY PHONE NUMBER IS (737) 275-4031. AND I WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ABOUT ITEM 14 IN SUPPORT OF THE PROPOSED U D C AMENDMENT TO THE ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT ORDINANCE. I'M A DESIGN AND PLANNING PROFESSIONAL AND IN MY LAST POSITION I HELPED A, A PROPERTY OWNER BUILD AN A D U FOR HER DISABLED ADULT SON IN AUSTIN. THE A D U ALLOWED THE SON TO LIVE INDEPENDENTLY WHILE ALSO ALLOWING FOR FAMILY SUPPORT CLOSE BY ALLOWING THE BUILDING OF ADUS CAN HELP FAMILIES BY GIVING THEM THE OPPORTUNITY TO GROW, CHANGE, AND ADAPT ALL WHILE BEING ABLE TO STAY IN PLACE. I THINK EVERYONE DESERVES THE OPPORTUNITY TO MAKE THEIR HOUSE A HOME. THANK YOU. HI, MY NAME IS WALKER DUNN AND UM, I'M A SAN ANTONIO CITIZEN. MY ADDRESS IS 6 33 SOUTH ST. MARY STREET IN DOWNTOWN SAN ANTONIO, AND I WANTED TO SPEAK TODAY IN SUPPORT OF THE PROPOSED U D C AMENDMENTS, THE ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT ORDINANCES, ORDINANCE, ALSO KNOWN AS THE A D U. UM, I DO BELIEVE THAT THIS WILL INCREASE THE TOTAL HOUSING SUPPLY WITH EXISTING NEIGHBORHOODS WITHOUT DIRECTLY IMPACTING THE, THAT KIND OF NEIGHBORHOOD CHARACTER. I DON'T THINK THAT THAT WILL BE AFFECTED BY THESE A D I THINK IT'S A BENEFICIAL THING WILL HELP HOMEOWNERS THAT, UM, ALREADY HAVE HOMES TO BE ABLE TO INVEST AND BUILD EQUITY IN THEIR PROPERTY. AND IT ALSO HELPS INTERGENERATIONAL HOUSING, FOR EXAMPLE, IF YOU HAVE A LOVED ONE THAT YOU WANT TO LIVE WITH. UH, SO ANYWAY, I AM IN SUPPORT OF THIS AMENDMENT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THAT'S ALL THE VOICEMAILS. ALRIGHT, THANK YOU SO MUCH MR. SPARROW. IF YOU WOULD, UH, SIMPLY GIVE US A SUMMARY OF THESE ITEMS, UM, FOR THE U D C AMENDMENTS. UH, DID YOU WANT ME TO READ THE SUMMARY THAT WE RECEIVED OR ASK FOLKS THAT HAVE SIGNED UP IF THEY WANNA SPEAK ON, UH, THESE, UH, ITEMS ON CONSENT OR WAIT FOR INDIVIDUAL FIRST? BOTH. LET'S DO BOTH. UM, LET'S FIRST ASK THOSE IN THE AUDIENCE IF THEY WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON INDIVIDUAL ITEMS OR RIGHT NOW. AND THEN LET'S GO AHEAD AND READ THE SUMMARY OF THE U D C AMENDMENT AND THE PROCESS. OKAY, SO FOR THE 11 FOLKS THAT SIGNED IN TO SPEAK ON U D C AMENDMENTS, UH, TODAY, I'M GONNA CALL YOUR NAME. JUST LET ME KNOW IF YOU WANT TO SPEAK NOW FOR ITEMS ON CONSENT OR IF YOU WANT TO SPEAK LATER WHEN WE GET TO THE INDIVIDUAL ITEMS. THE FIRST IS CYNTHIA SPIELMAN. ALL RIGHT, LET ME CLARIFY THIS. UM, YOU WILL HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK ONCE, CORRECT? RIGHT. SO IF YOU WANNA SPEAK NOW, YOU CAN SPEAK FOR THE CONSENT AGENDA OR YOU CAN SPEAK, UH, FOR INDIVIDUAL ITEMS LATER ON. ALRIGHT, THANK YOU MS. SPIELMAN . THANK YOU. UM, I'M CYNTHIA SPIELMAN. I LIVE AT 900 WEST WOODLAWN, UM, IN BEACON HILL. IN YOUR PACKETS, YOU'VE RECEIVED 46 LETTERS THAT REPRESENT 34 NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS. HOAS TWO COALITIONS REPRESENTING MULTIPLE NEIGHBORHOODS ACROSS EIGHT COUNCIL DISTRICTS. 12 INDIVIDUALS SUBMITTED LETTERS BECAUSE OF THEIR KNOWLEDGE, ENGAGEMENT, AND LEADERSHIP IN THEIR RESPECTIVE COMMUNITIES. THESE LETTERS ARE NOT THE RESULT OF QUICK ACTION. BELIEVE ME, MOST ARE FROM NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS AND ORGANIZATIONS THAT VETTED THE AMENDMENTS CAREFULLY AND VOTED ON THEM. IT TOOK TIME IN CONSIDERATION. THESE NEIGHBORHOODS, COALITIONS, AND INDIVIDUALS ARE ACTIVELY SUPPORT 21 AMENDMENTS AND ONLY OPPOSE FOUR. THEY HAVE SERIOUS CONCERNS ABOUT TWO AMENDMENTS, UM, ONE OF WHICH IS 23 6, THE ONE ABOUT A D U, WHICH RAISED SOME CONCERNS THAT SOME OF THE ELEMENTS ARE JUST FOR INVESTMENTS FOR STR AND APPROPRIATE USE BY INVESTORS. UM, ISSUES OF SETBACK AND STORM WATER. SADLY, THESE CONCERNS FOR AMENDMENTS, UM, 23 6, REFLECT THE LACK OF MEANINGFUL SERIOUS ENGAGEMENT OF RESIDENT STAKEHOLDERS ON THESE ISSUES BY THE CITY. ISSUES THAT DIRECTLY AFFECT THESE RESIDENTS [00:45:01] BETTER PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT, COULD HAVE PRODUCED BETTER POLICY TO HELP RESIDENTS BUILD ADUS MORE EASILY AND LESS EXPENSIVELY, WHILE AT THE SAME TIME MITIGATING POSSIBLE ADVERSE EFFECTS. TIER ONE'S U D C AMENDMENT, UH, I'M SORRY, AMENDMENT COMMITTEE HAS BEEN WORKING ON THE AMENDMENT ISSUES INTENSIVELY SINCE 2019, GETTING INFORMATION OUT TO RESIDENTS THROUGH, UH, MEDIA, THROUGH VISITING NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION MEETINGS. AND WE HELD TWO MAJOR WORKSHOPS. WE GATHERED CONCERNS AND INFORMATION FROM NEIGHBORHOODS THAT RESULTED IN OUR 13 ORIGINAL AMENDMENTS. WE WANNA THANK D S D FOR THEIR VALUABLE HELP AND FOR CREATING A PARTNERSHIP. AND WE ARE APPRECIATIVE TO THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO MEET AND TO WORK TOGETHER. THE FOLLOWING NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS, ORGANIZATIONS, AND COALITIONS HAVE TAKEN THE TIME AND EFFORT TO REACH OUT TO YOU TODAY BY SUBMITTING LETTERS. ALAMO FARMSTEADS, BABCOCK ROAD, BEACON HILL, CHURCHILL FOREST, CROWN HILL PARK, DEL CREST CONCERNED CITIZENS OF DIGNITY HILL, EASTERN TRIANGLE GROUP. HIGHLAND PARK, HISTORIC WEST SIDE, INGRAM HILLS, INSPIRATION HILLS KEYSTONE, KING WILLIAM ASSOCIATION, LAS PALMAS MONKEY PARK, MEMORIAL HEIGHTS MISSION, SAN JOSE MONTEVISTA, HISTORIC ASSOCIATION, MONTEVISTA TERRACE, NORTH CENTRAL THOUSAND OAKS, OAKLAND ESTATES, RIVER ROAD, TANGLEWOOD, TOBIN HILL, UPTOWN VIA CORONADO WEST END HOPE IN ACTION. WESTWOOD SQUARE, WOODLAWN LAKE, LOS MONTICELLO PARK, LA VACA, AND NORTHSIDE. NEIGHBORHOODS ORGANIZED FOR DEVELOPMENT. INDIVIDUALS WHO SENT IN LETTERS INCLUDE BONNIE CONNOR FROM DISTRICT EIGHT, PATRICIA CHER FROM RIVER ROAD, GEMMA KENNEDY FROM RIVER ROAD, GRACE ROSE GONZALEZ FROM KEYSTONE, REBECCA DAVIS FROM DENVER HEIGHTS. ALAN NEFF FROM DENVER HEIGHTS, BEATRICE MORENO FROM TOBIN HILL, MARGARET LEEDS, KING WILLIAM, SUSAN RICHARDSON FROM LAVACCA AND MONICA SAVINO, DIGNA, WITTY HILL. STEVE TY, GOVERNMENT HILL, AND CHRISTINA WRIGHT FROM ALTA VISTA. THANK YOU. THANK YOU MS. SPIELMAN. NEXT, MR. MR. CHAIR IF I MAY? YES, MRS. MELISSA RAMIREZ. I JUST WANTED STATE FOR THE RECORD THAT OUR TRANSLATORS ARE NOW TRANSLATING. UM, SO I DON'T KNOW IF YOU WANNA TAKE A MOMENT JUST TO GET THEM TO COME TO THE PODIUM. YES. IF WE COULD. THANK YOU. AND I'M SORRY I COMPLETELY BLANKED ON THAT'S, IF WE COULD HAVE OUR INTERPRETATION SERVICES STATEMENT, UH, AT THIS POINT, THANK YOU SO MUCH. PLEASE COME UP. GOOD AFTERNOON. THANK YOU. ALRIGHT, THANK YOU SO MUCH. ALRIGHT MA UH, NEXT SPEAKER PLEASE. ALRIGHT, CHRIS ALONSO, DID YOU WANNA SPEAK NOW OR DURING INDIVIDUAL? I'D LIKE TO SPEAK LATER PLEASE. YES SIR. UH, RAY MORALES, I'D LIKE TO SPEAK LATER AND I'M MUTE MY TIME TO TONY GARCIA. I ASSUME THAT MEANS TONY GARCIA WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK LATER AS WELL. UH, THAT IS CORRECT. AND BIANCA MALDONADO. BARBARA WHITT HOWELL? YES. STEVE VERTE. JIM BAILEY LATER PLEASE. MARIO PENA LATER. AND SMA KIRAN SPEAK LATER. OKAY, THAT'S ALL I CAN READ. THE SUMMARY OF WRITTEN COMMENT NOW IF YOU WOULD, MR. SPARROW. THANK YOU. TRY TO DO THIS QUICKLY FOR AMENDMENT ONE DASH ONE. WE RECEIVED ONE LETTER IN SUPPORT 46 IN OPPOSITION FOR AMENDMENT FIVE DASH EIGHT. WE RECEIVED ONE UH, IN SUPPORT AND ONE UH, THAT WAS A NEUTRAL POSITION FOR AMENDMENT FIVE DASH 14. WE RECEIVED 46 COMMENTS IN SUPPORT, ZERO IN OPPOSITION FOR AMENDMENT FIVE DASH 23. WE RECEIVED 47 NOTICES IN SUPPORT FOR AMENDMENT 5 24. WE RECEIVED ONE AMENDMENT OR PARDON ME, ONE NOTIFICATION IN SUPPORT FOR FIVE DASH 30 ZERO IN SUPPORT. ONE OPPOSED FOR ITEM FIVE DASH 35. WE HAD 47 RESPONSES IN SUPPORT, ZERO IN OPPOSITION FOR FIVE DASH 54 1 IN SUPPORT. ZERO OPPOSED FIVE DASH 57 48 IN SUPPORT. ZERO OPPOSED 10 DASH TWO WAS 46 IN SUPPORT. ZERO OPPOSED 13 DASH ONE WAS 47 IN SUPPORT. TWO OPPOSED 14 DASH EIGHT THREE IN SUPPORT. ZERO OPPOSED 16 DASH 1 53 IN SUPPORT. ZERO OPPOSED 16 DASH 2 57 IN SUPPORT. 18 OPPOSED FOUR I ITEM UH, 16 DASH FIVE [00:50:01] WE HAD 50 IN SUPPORT. ZERO OPPOSED FOR 16 DASH 6 51 IN SUPPORT. ZERO OPPOSED 16 DASH 8 51 IN SUPPORT. ZERO OPPOSED 16 DASH 10 51 IN SUPPORT. ZERO OPPOSED 16 DASH 12 IS 51 IN SUPPORT ZERO OPPOSED FOR 16 DASH 1347 IN SUPPORT. ZERO OPPOSED FOR 19 DASH 1 47 IN SUPPORT. ZERO OPPOSED FOR 20 DASH 1747 IN SUPPORT AND ZERO OPPOSED FOR 23 DASH SIX SEVEN IN SUPPORT. 47 OPPOSED FOR 25 DASH 180 2 IN SUPPORT. ZERO OPPOSED FOR 26 DASH ONE TWO IN SUPPORT. ZERO OPPOSED. AND LASTLY FOR 30 DASH 1 47 IN SUPPORT AND ZERO IN OPPOSITION. ALRIGHT, THANK YOU SO MUCH MR. SPARROW AND THANK YOU FOR THOSE IN ATTENDANCE FOR BEARING WITH US. UM, ALRIGHT. GIVEN THE VOICEMAILS AND GIVEN THE SUMMARY PROVIDED BY MR. SPARROW, THIS IS THE LAST CALL COMMISSIONERS FOR ANY OTHER AMENDMENTS TO BE PULLED FOR INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERATION. SEEING NONE, HEARING NONE. IF WE COULD PLEASE READ, UH, BOTH OUR INDIVIDUAL AGENDA ITEMS AS WELL AS THE UM, U D C AMENDMENTS INTO THE RECORD. WAIT, WE'VE ALREADY DONE THAT. SORRY. WE ARE NOW OPEN FOR DISCUSSION OR MOTION. MR. CHAIR, I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION FOR APPROVAL OF THE FOLLOWING ITEMS, ITEMS NUMBER THREE, NUMBER SEVEN, NUMBER EIGHT, NUMBER 10, NUMBER 12. AND NUMBER 14 EXCEPT FOR THE ITEMS TO BE HEARD ON INDIVIDUAL, WHICH ARE ONE DASH ONE 10 DASH THREE FIVE DASH 29 5 DASH 35 5 DASH 55 5 DASH 57 10 DASH 4 23 DASH SIX 13 DASH 19 AND 31. ALRIGHT, I'LL SECOND THAT MOTION THEN. ALRIGHT. THERE WAS A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER SIPES THAT I'M NOT GOING TO REPEAT AND A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER BARROS. UH, ANY DISCUSSION? COMMISSIONERS TO MY LEFT? COMMISSIONERS TO MY RIGHT. VERY GOOD. ROLL CALL VOTE PLEASE. COMMISSIONER SIPES? YES. COMMISSIONER BOTTLES? YES. COMMISSIONER GREATHOUSE? YES. COMMISSIONER WATSON? YES. COMMISSIONER WE AYE. COMMISSIONER ORTIZ? YES. CHAIR BUSANTE. AYE. MOTION PASSES FOR APPROVAL. ALRIGHT, VERY GOOD. UM, IF YOU HAD AN INDIVIDUAL ITEM FOR CONSIDERATION AND YOU ARE THE APPLICANT, YOU CAN MOVE ALONG UNLESS YOU WANT TO COMMENT ON THE U D C AMENDMENT PROCESS OR ANY OTHER CASE. UH, OTHERWISE WE ARE NOW GONNA MOVE ON TO OUR CONTINUANCE DOCKET. ALL RIGHT. I'M GONNA READ ITEM NUMBER TWO BY ITSELF. UM, ITEM NUMBER TWO. ITEM NUMBER TWO IS GOING FROM C TWO TO C TWO C D FOR CONDITION USE FOR MOTOR VEHICLE SALES AT 1 0 9 3 1 T JORDAN 10 FREEWAY. ALL OVERLAYS REMAIN THE SAME. ALL RIGHT. 30 NOTICES WERE MAILED OUT. ZERO IN FAVOR. TWO OPPOSED AND TWO OPPOSED OUTSIDE. 200 FEET AND THEY'RE REQUESTING A FOUR WEEK CONTINUANCE TO AUGUST 2ND. ALRIGHT. UM, VERY GOOD. WITH RESPECT TO ITEM TWO. IS THERE A MOTION MR. CHAIRMAN MAKE A MOTION FOR A CONTINUANCE FOR ITEM TWO TO THE AUGUST 2ND MEETING. IS THERE A SECOND? I'LL SECOND. ALRIGHT, THANK YOU COMMISSIONER ORTIZ FOR THE SECOND. UH, THE MOTION IS FOR A CONTINUANCE FOR FOUR WEEKS TO THE AUGUST 2ND MEETING BY COMMISSIONER SIPS WITH THE SECOND BY COMMISSIONER ORTIZ. UH, ANY DISCUSSION? COMMERS TO MY LEFT COMMISSIONER TO MY RIGHT. VERY GOOD. ROLL CALL VOTE. MOTION FOR CONTINUANCE TO FOUR FOR FOUR WEEKS. FOUR. ITEM NUMBER TWO. COMMISSIONER SIPES. YES. COMMISSIONER ORTIZ? YES. COMMISSIONER GREATHOUSE? YES. COMMISSIONER WATSON? YES. COMMISSIONER WE AYE. COMMISSIONER BARROWS? YES. CHAIR BUSTAMONTE. [00:55:01] AYE. MOTION PASSES FOR APPROVAL FOR CONTINUANCE. ALRIGHT, IF WE CAN MOVE ON TO THE NEXT THREE ITEMS ON OUR CONTINUANCE DOCKET, PLEASE. ALL RIGHT. THE, THE CONTINUED FOR, UM, SEVEN 19. FIRST ONE IS ITEM NUMBER FOUR GOING FROM R FOUR MF 33 AND I ONE TO I D Z ONE WITH USE OF PERMITTED FOR SIX DWELLING UNITS. ALL OVERLAYS REMAIN THE SAME. LOCATED AT 1 0 1, 1 0 7 RIO CITY ROAD. 31. NOTICES WERE MAILED OUT. ZERO IN FAVOR. SEVEN OPPOSED. COLIN GUARDIAN'S NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION IS OPPOSED AND SEVEN OPPOSED OUTSIDE. 200 FEET. THERE ARE FOUR PEOPLE SIGNED UP FOR THIS CASE. ITEM NUMBER ITEM NUMBER SIX GOING FROM R SIX TO RM FOUR LOCATED 1672 RIGSBY AVENUE. 30 23 NOTICES WERE MAILED OUT. ZERO IN FAVOR AND ZERO OPPOSED NO RESPONSE FROM THE PASADENA HEIGHTS NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION OUT SOUTHEAST SIDE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION . AND ITEM NUMBER 11 IS GOING FROM N NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL TO C THREE GENERAL COMMERCIAL LOCATED AT 43 11 BLANCO ROAD. THERE ARE 22 NOTICES WERE MAILED OUT. NINE IN FAVOR. ZERO OPPOSED NO RESPONSE FROM THE CENTRAL LOS ANGELES HEIGHTS NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION OR NORTHMORE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION. AND ONE IN FAVOR OUTSIDE 200 FEET CHAIR. ALRIGHT, THANK YOU SO MUCH. THERE IS PUBLIC COMMENT FOR AT LEAST ITEM NUMBER FOUR, CORRECT? CORRECT. FOUR PEOPLE SIGNED UP. VERY GOOD. UH, WITH RESPECT TO THIS ITEM, YOU CAN SPEAK NOW, YOU CAN SPEAK WHEN IT COMES BACK IN TWO WEEKS. YOU CAN SPEAK AT BOTH MEETINGS. SO WHEN YOUR NAME IS CALLED, YOU CAN LET US KNOW IF YOU WANNA SPEAK NOW AND PLEASE DO SO THERE. JOE CARBO. GOOD AFTERNOON. EXCUSE ME. MY NAME IS JOE CARAMBAS. I AM ONE OF THE TWO OWNERS OF 1 0 3 FREE. OH CITY ROAD. UH, I'VE JUST PASSED OUT A COUPLE OF DOCUMENTS FOR Y'ALL. AND ON THE UH, TOP ONE, THE DOCUMENT I PRESENTED TO YOU WAS THE, UH, BRAND NEW, UH, SURVEY DONE FOR 1 0 3 FREE, OH CITY ROAD, WHICH IS BUTTED UP AGAINST THE 1 0 7, 1 0 9 OR WHATEVER THE OTHER ADDRESSES ARE. UM, I WANTED TO PRESENT SOME OF THIS STUFF TO YOU SO YOU CAN KIND OF SEE WHAT'S GOING ON WITH THIS PARTICULAR AREA. THIS, UH, PROPERTY 1 0 3 AND ACTUALLY THE OTHER ONES WERE IN MY FAMILY'S FOR OVER A HUNDRED YEARS. UH, MY MOTHER'S HERE AS WELL AND UM, SHE GREW UP ON THAT PROPERTY. SHE WAS ACTUALLY BORN IN THE GROCERY STORE AT I THINK 1 0 9, SOMEWHERE IN THAT AREA RIGHT THERE. BUT, UM, THE REASON I'M TRYING TO SHOW YOU A LITTLE BIT ABOUT EVERYTHING, IF YOU SEE THE PICTURE, THE VERY FIRST PICTURE THAT, UH, I'VE PRESENTED HERE, THIS PICTURE IS ACTUALLY SHOWS THE LINES AND WILL GIVE YOU A LITTLE BIT MORE IDEA OF WHAT'S GOING ON WITH MY MOTHER'S PROPERTY, WHICH IS RIGHT NEXT DOOR. IF YOU'LL LOOK AT THIS PHOTO, THIS IS UNFORTUNATELY MY HANDWRITTEN DESIGN OF THE REMAINING PROPERTY, WHICH IS BEING PROPOSED FOR FIVE OR SIX HOMES, WHICH I'M A DEVELOPER. I HAVEN'T BUILT HOMES, BUT I DO COMMERCIAL BUILDINGS AND I THINK THAT IT'S ALMOST IMPOSSIBLE TO SQUEEZE THAT NUMBER AND REALISTICALLY MAKE THIS ALL WORK. MY MOTHER AND I HAVE BEEN GOING AND SPEAKING WITH A BUNCH OF THE NEIGHBORS AROUND, UH, THE AREA. MY MOTHER'S OWNED THAT PROPERTY SINCE MY GRANDMOTHER PASSED AWAY AND WIELDED IT TO HER. AND MY, UH, WE HAVE SPOKEN TO DOZENS OF NEIGHBORS. [01:00:01] ALL OF 'EM ARE DRASTICALLY OPPOSED TO THIS PARTICULAR PROJECT BECAUSE OF THE THINGS THAT ARE BEING PROPOSED. LARGE SCALE HOMES, TRYING TO CRAM 30 PEOPLE IN THERE. IT'S JUST IMPOSSIBLE. UH, IN ADDITION TO THAT, THERE'S CONCERNS, UH, BECAUSE OF WHAT MY MOTHER DECIDES SHE REALLY WANTS TO DO WITH HER PROPERTY, WHICH RIGHT NOW, EVEN THOUGH IT WAS A PREVIOUS UH, GAS STATION, SHE MAY IN FACT MAKE IT A GAS STATION AGAIN. AND THEN YOU'D HAVE ALL THESE PEOPLE THAT ARE SITTING ON TOP OF GAS TANKS OR CLOSE ENOUGH TO GAS TANKS THAT IT MAY NOT BE REALLY A SMART MOVE. UM, WE'VE GOT PASO CHICO, WHICH IS THE ALLEYWAY, UH, THAT IS RIGHT ALONGSIDE OF THE PROPERTY. AND IF YOU LOOK AT THE BACKSIDE OF MY MOTHER'S BUILDING, YOU'LL SEE WHERE IT'S ACTUALLY TOUCHING THE PROPERTY LINE BECAUSE THAT BUILDING WAS BUILT, UH, I THINK ABOUT A HUNDRED YEARS AGO ROUGHLY. SO, UM, YOU KNOW, WITH ALL OF THIS SAID, THAT BUILDING RIGHT THERE, INCLUDING THE CANOPY, WELL THE BUILDING ITSELF IS NOT EVEN 400 SQUARE FEET. IT'S LESS THAN 400 SQUARE FEET, THE CANOPY AS WELL. AND IF YOU LOOK AT THAT, YOU'LL SEE THAT IT'S SITTING ON THREE OF THOSE THREE LOTS. ALMOST IDENTICAL. IF YOU LOOK AT NUMBER LOT, NUMBER THREE, I BELIEVE IT'S, THANK YOU MA'AM. THAT'S YOUR TIME. BUT OH MY MOTHER, I'M, I'M TAKING MY MOTHER'S TIME AS WELL. ALRIGHT. UM, IS THAT, UM, THE OTHER MS. CAR EZ? YES. OKAY. OKAY. UM, VERY GOOD. IF YOU WOULD PLEASE, IF YOU'RE, UH, ASSIGNING YOUR TIME, PLEASE DO IT BEFORE YOU BEGIN TO SPEAK, BUT WE'LL DO IT RIGHT NOW. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. SO ARE WE FINISHED? NOPE. YOU HAVE THREE MORE MINUTES. OKAY, VERY GOOD. SO BASICALLY WHAT I WAS TRYING TO SHOW, WHEN YOU LOOK AT THIS, UH, DIAGRAM, WHICH IS A SURVEY, THE, UH, BUILDING ON THE BACK, WHICH IT SHOWS IT'S A BRICK BUILDING THAT'S, THAT'S NOT EVEN 400 SQUARE FEET. SO IF SOMEONE'S GONNA TRY TO TAKE FOUR OF THE LOTS, LIKE LOT NUMBER THREE AND TRY TO CRAM IN, UH, 3, 4, 5, 6 BUILDINGS, WHATEVER IT IS THEY'RE TRYING TO CRAM IN THERE, I THINK IT'S GONNA BE LITERALLY IMPOSSIBLE TO DO THAT. UM, IS THERE, IS THERE ANY QUESTIONS THAT ANYBODY MIGHT HAVE WITH REFERENCE TO ANY OF THE DESIGN? I'M GONNA ASK YOU A QUICK QUESTION. YES, SIR. UH, I'M PRESUMING YOU'RE SPEAKING TODAY 'CAUSE YOU MAY NOT BE ABLE TO ATTEND IN TWO WEEKS. SO I DO WANT TO ASK YOU ONE QUICK QUESTION. UM, ARE THE GAS TANKS THAT HELD GAS AT THIS FORMER GAS STATION STILL PRESENT ON THE PROPERTY? NO. NO. WE, I REMOVED THOSE ABOUT 40 YEARS AGO. OKAY. 35 OR 40 YEARS AGO. BUT THAT DOES BRING UP A VALID POINT. SO IF YOU'RE LOOKING, IF YOU'RE LOOKING AT THIS PROPERTY RIGHT HERE, THE PROPOSED PROPERTY, THE THINGS THAT WERE ON THAT PROPERTY UP UNTIL A FEW YEARS AGO WERE A GROCERY STORE THAT MY GRANDPARENTS RAN. THEY OPENED THE SAME TIME AS HUB'S. FIRST STORY IN KERRVILLE. THE SECOND THING THAT WAS OVER THERE WAS A DRY CLEANERS. AND AS WE KNOW, THERE'S HAZARDOUS WASTE ON THERE FOR DRY CLEANING. NOW ON THE BACKSIDE OF THIS, WE HAVE RAILROAD TRACKS. THOSE RAILROAD TRACKS WERE PUT IN THERE BY, UM, I BELIEVE IT WAS UNION PACIFIC RAILROAD OR IT MIGHT'VE BEEN BP. BUT THOSE RAILROAD TRACKS FROM MY UNDERSTANDING, ARE CONSIDERED HAZARDOUS AREAS, PERMANENT, HAZARDOUS AREAS TO EVER PUT RESIDENTIAL HOUSING ANYWHERE NEAR THEM. ALRIGHT, THANK YOU MA'AM. MM-HMM. . ALRIGHT, NEXT PLEASE. NEXT IS KAREN SPEAR. MY NAME IS KAREN SPEAR. I LIVE AT 4 53 DRAKE. I'M THE PRESIDENT OF THE COLLINS GARDENS NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION. AND WHAT I WANTED TO SPEAK ON TODAY IS THE PROPOSED DEVELOP, UH, DUPLEX DEVELOPMENT WAS FIRST PRESENTED TO THE ZONING COMMISSION ON MAY 17TH, BASED ON OPPOSITION FROM THE COLLINS GARDENS NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION AND A GROUP OF AFFECTED NEIGHBORS THAT EXPRESSED THEIR VERBAL OPPOSITION TO THE BOARD. THE APPLICANT WAS GRANTED A CONTINUANCE TO ALLOW US TO WORK OUT A MORE ACCEPTABLE DEVELOPMENT. THE COLLINS GARDENS NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION AND A GROUP OF CONCERNED C CONCERNED NEIGHBORS MET WITH THE APPLICANT ON MAY 21ST. WE HAD A GOOD EXCHANGE OF VIEWS AND IDEAS. THE NEIGHBORS WERE FIRM IN THEIR CONCERNS THAT THIS PROJECT CREATED A LARGE CONCENTRATION OF PEOPLE IN A SMALL AREA AND WOULD CONTRIBUTE TO AN UNSAFE INCREASE IN NOISE AND TRAFFIC AND RECOMMENDED THAT SINGLE FAMILY USES BE CONSIDERED. AS A RESULT OF THIS MEETING, THE APPLICANT AGREED TO REWORK POSSIBLE DEVELOPMENT OPTIONS TO INCLUDE SINGLE FAMILY USES AND MEET FURTHER AND MEET AND FURTHER DISCUSSED WITH THE GROUP. IN THE ZONING COMMISSION MEETING OF JUNE 7TH, THE APPLICANT REQUESTED AN ADDITIONAL CONTINUANCE TO CONTINUE, UH, WORKING ON IDEAS. WE [01:05:01] CONTINUED TO STAY IN CONTACT WITH THE APPLICANT REGARDING THE STATUS AND WERE INFOR INFORMED THAT WORK WAS CONTINUING AND THEY WOULD GET BACK IN CONTACT WITH US ON OR ABOUT THE MIDDLE OF JUNE. ALL COMMUNICATIONS STOPPED. WE WOULD ATTEMPT TO CONTACT THE APPLICANT AND NO RETURN CALLS. WE TRIED TO CONTACT OUR CASE MANAGER AND ALSO DID NOT RECEIVE ANY RETURN CALLS. FINALLY, WE CALLED THE ZONING MANAGER AND SHE HAD ONE OF HER ASSISTANTS CALL US AND INFORMED US THAT THE APPLICANT HAD SUBMITTED THEIR APPLICATION AND WERE MOVING FORWARD IN THE JULY 5TH MEETING. THIS WAS ALREADY ON OR ABOUT JUNE 30TH, 2022. AFTER A CAREFUL REVIEW OF FACTS AND EVENTS, WE FELT MISLED AND DECEIVED AS OUTLINED IN OUR MEMO DATED MAY 17TH. WE FEEL THAT THIS PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT DOES NOT MEET THE NEEDS OF OUR COMMUNITY AND I AM HERE TO REQUEST THAT THE ZONING BOARD DENY THE REQUEST SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT. IN ADDITION, WE CAN NO LONGER WORK IN GOOD FAITH WITH THE APPLICANT AND REQUEST THAT YOU DENY ANY ADDITIONAL REQUEST FOR A CONTINUANCE THAT MAY BE REQUESTED. THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR YOUR TIME. THANK YOU MS. SPEAR EDMA HOFFMAN. OKAY. OKAY. HELLO COMMISSIONERS AND THANK YOU FOR GIVING US THE TIME TO SPEAK TODAY. MY NAME IS EDMA HOFFMAN, 30 11 WHITE HILL DRIVE, UH, A MEMBER OF HISTORIC WEST SIDE AND ALSO COLLINS GARDEN. 'CAUSE WE'RE RIGHT ON THE BOUNDARY TOGETHER. FIRST OF ALL, I DO, WE DO WANT TO THANK MR. LAN, WHO WAS THE, UH, REPRESENTING THE DEVELOPERS AND HIS ARCHITECT, MR. PADIA, FOR COMING TO THE MEETING AND, UH, TRYING TO WORK WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD. BUT AS, UM, WE CONTINUED IN OUR MEETING, WE BECAME VERY CONCERNED THAT, UH, MR. LAN WAS VERY, UM, ADAMANT ABOUT KEEPING HIS UNITS, UH, IN THAT SMALL AREA. AND HE SAID IT WOULD BE BETWEEN 25 TO 30 PEOPLE IN THAT SMALL AREA. UM, AND, UM, AND WE, UH, WE REALLY TALKED ABOUT THE CHARACTER OF, OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND ALSO THE PEOPLE WHO LIVE RIGHT ALONG THE, UH, THE ALLEYWAY. UM, I'D LIKE TO GIVE THIS TOO, PLEASE, IF I MAY, WE'RE ALSO CONCERNED ABOUT THE TRAFFIC THAT'S RIGHT THERE. UM, ON THE THREE POINT AREA, IT'S RIO CITY ROAD, BRAZOS AND HAZEL, AND IT'S RIGHT IN FRONT OF THE TRAIN TRACKS AND IT, IT CAUSES A LOT OF CONTINUOUS CONGESTION. UM, THERE WAS ALSO CONCERN ABOUT, UH, AS ONE OF OUR EXPERIENCED ZONING, UH, MEMBERS SAID YOU CANNOT GET A, UH, AN AMBULANCE OR A, UM, FIRE TRUCK THROUGH THERE. UH, IF, UH, THERE WERE ANY EMERGENCY SITUATIONS. SO, UM, ANOTHER THING THAT WE DISCUSSED WITH MR. LAN WAS, UH, THE COST AND HE SAID HE WANTED TO MAKE IT VERY AFFORDABLE FOR THE, FOR THE PEOPLE, UM, IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD. UH, SO HE WANTS TO BUILD SIX UNITS AT 250,000, UH, PER UNIT. AND WE JUST FEEL THAT THAT IS, THAT IS BEYOND THE, UM, THE CATEGORY OF, OF, UH, EX UH, WHAT IS IT, SALARIES THAT WE HAVE IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD OR EVEN IN SAN ANTONIO IN GENERAL. UH, SO AGAIN, WE, WE REALLY HAVE TRIED TO BE OPEN. WE ASKED IF HE COULD BUILD, UM, MAYBE THREE SMALL HOMES WITH NICE LITTLE YARDS, UH, WHERE THERE COULD BE DRIVEWAYS AND, UH, THE RESIDENTS COME IN AND OUT. BUT HE SAID IT WAS, AND I'M PARAPHRASING, HE SAID IT WOULD NOT BE, UH, MONETARILY BENEFICIAL FOR HIS, UM, INVESTMENT COMPANY. SO, UM, WE, UH, WE REGRET THAT WE HAVE NOT COME TO SOME REASONABLE AGREEMENT FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND FOR THE PEOPLE, UH, THERE, UH, IN THE HAZEL RIO CITY ROAD, UH, AREA. SO THANK YOU. THANK YOU, MS. HOFFMAN. ANY FURTHER PUBLIC COMMENT ON ANY OF THE ITEMS ON THE CONTINUANCE DOCKET OR THE REMAINING ITEMS ON THE CONTINUANCE DOCKET? THAT'S ALL. ALRIGHT, THANK YOU SO MUCH. IS THERE A MOTION WITH RESPECT TO ITEMS FOUR, SIX, AND 11? MR. CHAIR? I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION FOR A CONTINUANCE FOR TWO WEEKS TO THE JULY 19TH MEETING FOR THE FOLLOWING ITEMS. ITEMS NUMBER FOUR, NUMBER SIX. NUMBER 11. ALRIGHT, THERE IS A MOTION FOR CONTINUANCE BY COMMISSIONER S SIPES. IS THERE A SECOND? I'LL SECOND. SECOND. BY COMMISSIONER ORTIZ. ANY DISCUSSION? COMMISSIONERS TO MY LEFT? COMMISSIONERS TO MY RIGHT. UM, [01:10:01] BECAUSE MS. SPEAR BROUGHT UP THE CONTINUANCE AND THEIR OPPOSITION TO IT, UH, THAT IS A DISTRICT FIVE CASE. I DO WANT TO TAKE THE OPPORTUNITY TO ADDRESS THAT. I UNDERSTAND THAT CONTINUANCES ARE NOT ALWAYS WANTED. UM, AND I UNDERSTAND THAT THERE IS A FEELING AMONG THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS THAT NO FURTHER COMMUNICATION IS POSSIBLE. I WANT TO ENCOURAGE YOU ALL TO TRY TO CONTINUE TALKING. IF WE CAN FIND A SOLUTION THAT WILL BE MUTUALLY AGREEABLE, THAT IS WHAT I'D LIKE TO SEE. IF IT'S NOT POSSIBLE, THAT IS OKAY TOO. UH, BUT I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THAT IS THE LAST POSSIBLE OUTCOME. UH, AND SO THAT'S WHY I'M GONNA SUPPORT THIS MOTION FOR A CONTINUANCE TODAY. I UNDERSTAND YOUR POSITION. I APPRECIATE Y'ALL BEING HERE, AND THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME AND COMMENTS. VERY WELL. THE MOTION IS FOR A CONTINUANCE TO SEVEN 19 FOR ITEMS FOUR, SIX, AND 11 BY COMMISSIONER SIPES WITH A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER ORTIZ. ROLL CALL THE VOTE, PLEASE. COMMISSIONER SIPES? YES. COMMISSIONER ORTIZ? YES. COMMISSIONER GREATHOUSE? YES. COMMISSIONER WATSON? YES. COMMISSIONER WE AYE. COMMISSIONER BARRIOS? YES. CHAIR BUSANTE. AYE. MOTION PASSES FOR CONTINUANCE. ALRIGHT, THANK YOU SO MUCH. I HAVE BEEN INFORMED THAT THERE IS A REQUEST FOR A RECONSIDERATION OF OUR CONTINUANCE OF ITEM NUMBER TWO. UH, I WILL NOW OPEN THE FLOOR FOR A MOTION WITH RESPECT TO ITEM NUMBER TWO. UM, MR. CHAIR. MOTION TO RECONSIDER ITEM NUMBER TWO. THERE IS A MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION OF ITEM NUMBER TWO. IS THERE A SECOND? SECOND. THERE IS A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER GREATHOUSE. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF RECONSIDERING ITEM NUMBER TWO. UH, WAIT. NO. WE HAVE TO DO A ROLL CALL. VOTE YES WE DO. UM, UH, ANY DISCUSSION REGARDING THIS MOTION? ALRIGHT, UH, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF RECONSIDERING ITEM NUMBER TWO, ROLL CALL. VOTE PLEASE. COMMISSIONER SIPES? YES. COMMISSIONER GREATHOUSE? YES. COMMISSIONER WATSON? YES. COMMISSIONER, WE AYE. COMMISSIONER ORTIZ? YES. COMMISSIONER BORROWS? YES. CHAIR BUSANTE AYE. MOTION PASSES. ALRIGHT, UH, LET'S GO AHEAD AND ONCE AGAIN, READ ITEM NUMBER TWO INTO THE RECORD AND THEN WE WILL HAVE THE APPLICANT, UH, MAKE A PRESENTATION. ITEM NUMBER TWO IS GOING FROM C TWO TO C TWO CD, CD FOR MOTOR VEHICLE SALES FULL SERVICE. ALL OVERLAYS REMAIN THE SAME AT 1 0 9 3 1 POTE JORDAN FREEWAY THERE 30 NOTICES MAILED OUT, ZERO IN FAVOR, ZERO IN OPPOSITION, AND TWO OUTSIDE 200 FEET OPPOSED. THE EXISTING C TWO IS AN APPROPRIATE ZONING FOR THE PROPERTY AND SURROUNDING AREA. THE PROPOSED C TWO CD FOR MOTOR VEHICLE SALES. ALSO APPROPRIATE AND MAINTAINS THE C TWO BASED DISTRICT, WHICH ALLOWS CONSIDERATION, UH, FOR MOTOR VEHICLE SALES. THE CONDITION USE ALSO REQUIRES A SITE PLAN THAT ALLOWS THE APPLICATION OF ANY NECESSARY CONDITIONS TO THE REQUEST. STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL WITH CONDITIONS, THE CONDITIONS BEING ONE, NO TEMPORARY SIGNAGE, WIND WAIVERS, SNIPE SIGNS AND OR PENANCE. DOWNWARD, DOWNWARD FACING LIGHTING, SIX FOOT SOLID SCREEN FENCING ABUT ABUTTING RESIDENTIAL ZONING AND OR RESIDENTIAL USES A TYPE B 15 FOOT LANDSCAPE BUFFER ABUTTING RESIDENTIAL ZONING AND OR RESIDENTIAL USES. AND ALL REPAIRS SHALL HAVE BEEN CONDUCTED INDOORS ONLY. SURE. ALRIGHT, THANK YOU SO MUCH. IS THE APPLICANT PRESENT? ALL RIGHT. IF YOU WOULD PLEASE COME UP, UH, GIVE US YOUR NAME, YOUR ADDRESS, AND TELL US ABOUT YOUR REQUEST FOR REZONING PLEASE. MOHAMMED SAMMY ON BEHALF OF UNION SERVICES INCORPORATED, 1 0 9 3 1 PORT T JORDAN 10 FREEWAY, SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS. UM, REQUESTING A REZONING TO OPEN A SMALL DEALERSHIP. THAT'S ALL, SIR. OKAY. UM, THANK YOU. I THINK JUST STAY CLOSE, MAYBE SIT DOWN IN THE FRONT ROW. ABSOLUTELY. WE'LL GO FROM THERE. ALRIGHT. THIS IS A COMMISSIONER, I'M SORRY, THIS IS A DISTRICT FOUR CASE. UH, COMMISSIONER KAMATH WAS NOT ABLE TO BE HERE TODAY, BUT I BELIEVE COMMISSIONER BARTOS, YOU ARE COVERING THIS CASE FOR HIM. YEAH, THE ONLY CONCERN THAT I HAVE, UM, IS A LETTER RECEIVED FROM THE SCHOOL DISTRICT THAT IT'S FOR CAR SALES ONLY. UH, THAT'S ONE OF THE REQUIREMENTS AND I'D RECEIVED THIS MORNING PHOTOGRAPHS THAT THERE'S SOME ABANDONED CARS THAT SHOULD NOT BE IN THE LOT RIGHT NOW. UH, THEY'RE NOT IN OPERATING, [01:15:01] SO THAT'S MY ONLY CONCERN. THAT'S WHY I WAS TRYING TO MOVE THIS TO, UH, JULY THE 19. BUT COMMISSIONER, UH, KENNETH IS NOT IN TOWN ON THAT DATE. SO, UH, I MEAN IF THE APPLICANT CAN SHOW IN GOOD FAITH TO MOVE ALL THAT BEFORE, UM, WE VOTE, UM, I'LL BE IN FAVOR OF IT, BUT IF NOT, I WILL DENY IT. OKAY. CAN WE, UH, ASK A QUESTION OF THE APPLICANT TO THAT EFFECT? THAT WOULD BE GREAT. YES, SIR. THANK YOU SO MUCH. UH, ARE THE PICTURES RECENT? BECAUSE I YESTERDAY MOVED MOST OF THE CARS THAT WERE ADJACENT TO THE NEIGHBORS BEYOND THE 30 FEET POINT AND THERE ARE NO ABANDONED VEHICLE WHATSOEVER. NOW, I'M NOT SURE WHEN THOSE PICTURES WERE TAKEN. THEY WERE RECEIVED THIS MORNING AROUND 10 30, 11 O'CLOCK. SO I WAS TOLD THERE WERE PHOTOGRAPHS FROM TODAY. SO, UM, I MEAN IF IT'S TO OPERATE A CAR SALES LOT BUT WITHOUT ABANDONED CARS ON THE SIDE, UM, ABSOLUTELY. AND THAT'S ONE OF THE REQUIREMENTS, UH, CONDITIONS, UM, BY THE SONY COMMISSION? YES, I HAVE THE PICTURES FROM YESTERDAY. OKAY. ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONERS TO MY LEFT. ALRIGHT. COMMISSIONERS TO MY RIGHT. ALRIGHT, SO LET ME JUST DOUBLE CHECK A COUPLE OF THINGS HERE. ONE, YOU SAID THAT THERE WERE, UH, PICTURES OF THE ABANDONED CARS FROM YESTERDAY AND YOU MOVED THEM UPON RECEIVING THOSE PICTURES. IS THAT CORRECT? YES. NO. WHAT HAPPENED? NO, SIR. I'M, I TOOK OVER FROM A PREVIOUS TENANT MM-HMM. AND I'M TAKING THIS MATTER INTO MY OWN HANDS. OKAY. UM, THERE WERE ABA NOT ABANDONED VEHICLES, BUT DAMAGED VEHICLES AND THEY WERE ADJACENT TO THE NEIGHBORS BEHIND US YESTERDAY. I MADE SURE THERE WAS NOTHING ON THAT LINE. AND ALL THE VEHICLES THAT WE HAVE IN ORDER FOR US TO HAVE A DEALER LICENSE IN ORDER FOR US TO START SELLING THEM ARE IN LINE IN, IN A GOOD CONDITION. OKAY. UM, AND YOU HEARD, UH, MR. AVI READ THE CONDITIONS, UH, FOR THIS PROPERTY, WHICH INCLUDED, UM, NO TEMPORARY SIGNAGE, UM, DOWNWARD FACING LIGHTING, SIX FOOT SCREENING AS TO WHERE THE PROPERTY ABUTS RESIDENTIAL AND A 15 FOOT LANDSCAPE BUFFER WITH RESPECT TO WHERE THIS PROPERTY ABUTS RESIDENTIAL USES. DO YOU AGREE TO THOSE? YES, SIR. THERE WAS ONE MORE. ALL OF THE REPAIRS WERE TO BE ENDORSED. OH, AND ALL OF THE REPAIRS INDOOR. ABSOLUTELY. OKAY. ALRIGHT. COMMISSIONER BARTOS, ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS? NO, UH, WITH THOSE CONDITIONS, I'LL MAKE A MOTION THEN. ALRIGHT. UH, SEEING NO FURTHER DISCUSSION, IS THERE A MOTION COMMISSIONER REBUTS? YEAH. UM, I'LL MAKE A MOTION FOR APPROVAL OF, UM, ITEM NUMBER TWO WITH THE PRESENT CONDITIONS THAT, UH, OUR CHAIRMAN HAS INDICATED AND STAFF HAS INDICATED ALSO. ALRIGHT, THANK YOU. SO I'LL MAKE A MOTION FOR THAT. THERE'S A MOTION FOR APPROVAL WITH CONDITIONS. IS THERE A SECOND? I'LL SECOND THAT CHAIR. THERE IS A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER ORTIZ. ANY DISCUSSION? COMMISSIONER ON MY LEFT? COMMISSIONER'S ON MY RIGHT. ALRIGHT. UH, THE MOTION IS FOR APPROVAL WITH CONDITIONS BY COMMISSIONER BARTOS WITH A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER ORTIZ. ROLL CALL, VOTE PLEASE. COMMISSIONER BARTLES? UH, YES. COMMISSIONER ORTIZ? YES. COMMISSIONER SIPES? YES. COMMISSIONER GREATHOUSE? YES. COMMISSIONER WATSON? YES. COMMISSIONER WE AYE. CHAIR BUSTAMANTE AYE. MOTION PASSES FOR APPROVAL WITH CONDITIONS. ALRIGHT, THANK YOU SO MUCH. WE WILL. THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR YOUR TIME. THANK YOU, SIR. I SINCERELY APPRECIATE, UM, WE WILL MOVE ON TO WHAT I THINK IS OUR LAST INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERATION ITEM. TWO MORE. OH DANG. UH, LET'S MOVE ON TO OUR NEXT INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERATION ITEM, UH, BEFORE THE U D C AMENDMENTS, PLEASE. THAT WOULD BE ITEM NUMBER NINE. HELLO EVERYONE. MY NAME IS KELLY SANDERS, SENIOR PLANNER. I'M HERE TO INTRODUCE ITEM NUMBER NINE, WHICH IS A REQUEST TO REZONE FROM R SIX TO MF 18 WITH ALL ZONING OVERLAYS TO REMAIN THE SAME. LOCATED AT 2 3 7 CHICKERING AVENUE 45 NOTICES WERE SENT OUT, ZERO IN FAVOR AND ZERO OPPOSED HAVE BEEN RETURNED. PASADENA HEIGHTS NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION DID REQUEST A CONTINUANCE IN ORDER TO PROVIDE AN OPPORTUNITY FOR THE OWNER AND DEVELOPER TO MEET WITH HOMEOWNERS AND BRIEF THEM OF THE PROJECT. UH, STAFF DOES FIND EVIDENCE OF LIKELY ADVERSE IMPACTS ON NEIGHBORING LANDS IN RELATION TO THIS ZONING CHANGE REQUEST. ADJACENT PROPERTIES ARE ZONED R SIX RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY DISTRICT AND LARGELY DEVELOPED WITH RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY UNITS AND A [01:20:01] SINGLE CHURCH DEVELOPMENT. ALTHOUGH THERE IS MF 33 MULTIFAMILY TO THE EAST OF THE PROPERTY, IT IS ESTABLISHED AS AN EXISTING RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY UNIT. ALSO, THE LOCATION OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS A FLAG LOT, UM, THAT SITS INTERIOR OF THE BLOCK SURROUNDED BY SINGLE FAMILY UNITS. NOT TYPICALLY THE CORNER OR EDGE, UH, PROPERTIES THAT ARE USUALLY DESIGNATED FOR THE HIGHER DENSITY OR COMMERCIAL USES. UM, STAFF DOES RECOMMEND DENIAL WITH AN ALTERNATE RECOMMENDATION OF RM FOUR RESIDENTIAL MIXED U DISTRICT. THE LARGER SIZE OF THIS PROPERTY, UM, IN COMPARISON TO THE ADJACENT PROPERTIES SIZE COULD ACCOMMODATE SLIGHTLY MORE DENSITY THAN JUST ONE AND NOT CAUSE ADVERSE IMPACTS THE APPLICANT IS PRESENT. ALRIGHT, IF WE COULD HAVE THE APPLICANT COME FORWARD, PLEASE TELL US ABOUT THIS PROJECT. UH, INTRODUCE YOURSELF AND GIVE US YOUR ADDRESS FIRST PLEASE. THANK YOU. GOOD AFTERNOON. MY NAME IS ES 27 19 BRA BLUE, SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS. APPRECIATE THIS TIME. UM, I HAVE A POWERPOINT. YES. UH, BASICALLY I WANNA GO OVER A LITTLE BIT ABOUT OUR THOUGHT PROCESS. WHY, UH, WE'RE, UH, SUPPORTING THIS THIS PROJECT. UM, I'M GONNA SKIP MAYBE ALL THIS 'CAUSE I THINK YOU'RE AWARE WHERE IT'S, WHERE IT'S AT. WE'RE, WE'RE NOT DEFINITELY IN FAVOR OF PROBLEMATIC, UH, SOLUTIONS THAT AFFECT NEIGHBORS. HOWEVER, THIS IS ONE OF THOSE CASES WHERE WE BELIEVE THAT BECAUSE OF THE CHARACTERISTICS OF, OF, OF THE LOT AND, AND THE LOCATION, IT IS POSSIBLE TO DENSIFY A LITTLE BIT. UM, THIS, THIS, UH, SLIDE SHOWS A LITTLE BIT OF SOME OF THIS, UH, MF 33 THAT ARE IN THE AREA AND THE ONE IN THE LOWER, UH, SECTION AND THE ONE ON THE UPPER RIGHT SIDE ARE OUR PROJECT, SIMILAR TO WHAT WE'RE PROPOSING, A LITTLE BIT DENSER ACTUALLY, UH, MORE UNITS. AND THAT'S WHY WE BELIEVED IT COULD BE POSSIBLE AS WELL AS WHERE IS LOCATED. CAN WE GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE? UM, I WANT TO GIVE A LITTLE BIT OF BACKGROUND OF WHY THIS IDEA CAME ABOUT. UH, THIS COMES FROM A, FROM A CHURCH, FROM RELIGIOUS INSTITUTION THAT, UH, DUE TO THE FACT OF ALL THIS, UH, UM, LACK OF, UH, AFFORDABLE HOUSING CAME WITH THE IDEA OF MAYBE BUILDING SOME AFFORDABLE HOUSING IN THAT AREA. COULDN'T DO IT FOR MANY YEARS UNTIL IT WAS SOLD TO ONE OF THE CONGREGANTS THAT CAME WITH THE IDEA OF DOING IT. SO I WANT TO POINT OUT THAT THIS IS A FAMILY THAT IS TRYING TO DO THIS BUSINESS TO CALL IT LIKE THAT. IT'S NOT A BIG CORPORATION THAT IS TRYING TO GENERATE PROBLEMS. CAN WE GO TO THE NEXT ONE, PLEASE? THANK YOU. SO, LIKE I MENTIONED ORIGINALLY, THERE IS A GOOD, UH, AREA IN THE HEART OF THIS BLOCK THAT IS NOT, UM, DENSE AT ALL WITH, WITH ANY, UM, HOUSING. AND THAT'S WHY WE BELIEVED IT COULD BE A POSSIBILITY. UH, THE NEXT ONE PLEASE. UM, ESPECIALLY THAT THE LOT IS SURROUNDED BY GREEN AREA AND OF COURSE IT'S CONNECTED TO THE CHURCH THAT I JUST MENTIONED. IF WE CAN GO TO ONE MORE. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. UM, JUST, UH, AS A COMMENT, THESE ARE THE OTHER, UH, MF 33 OPTIONS THAT I MENTIONED PREVIOUSLY WERE, ARE SIMILAR IN THEIR CHARACTERISTICS AS THEY HAVE ONE STREET AND AND ADJACENT TO THE STREET. UH, THE UNIT. NEXT ONE PLEASE. THANK YOU. SO WHAT WE'RE PROPOSING IS FOUR DUPLEXES. UH, IT'S GONNA BE EIGHT UNITS. I'M SORRY, THERE'S A MISTAKE THERE. I DON'T WANNA MISLEAD ANYBODY. IT'LL BE EIGHT UNITS FOR, FOR BUILDINGS. UH, EACH UNIT AROUND 1200 SQUARE FEET. WE DON'T HAVE A PROJECT YET. WE'RE STILL ON THE, ON THE PROCESS OF DEFINING WHAT'S BEST. UM, LIKE I MENTIONED, A LATERAL STREET THAT WILL CREATE A BUFFER WITH ONE OF THE NEIGHBORS. AND, UH, WE'RE TRYING TO COMPLY WITH ALL THE, UM, CODES BY HAVING 16 PARKING LOTS, WHICH IS THE MAXIMUM ALLOWED. NEXT ONE, PLEASE. SO, UH, THE REASON OF THIS PROJECT IS, UH, THAT IT'S GONNA BE CONNECTING TO THE CHURCH. SO, UM, THE CHURCH CAN PRO PROVIDE PEOPLE IN NEED TO, TO THIS AFFORDABLE HOUSING. WE ARE LOOKING AT THE FACT THAT THERE'S, LIKE I MENTIONED, NO RANDOM DENSITY. UH, THE STREET CREATES, LIKE I MENTIONED, THIS, THIS BUFFER WITH THE ONLY NEIGHBOR THAT WE HAVE ON THE LEFT SIDE. AND THE SAME BUFFER IS CREATED THANKS TO THIS LONG, NARROW STREET THAT LEADS YOU TO THE BACK, UH, WITH THE NEIGHBORS ON THE RIGHT. NEXT ONE PLEASE. UM, OF COURSE WE'RE NOT IN ANY, UH, FLOOD ZONE AFFECTION. WE ARE TRYING TO MEET. WE MEET DEFINITELY FILINGS, UH, FOR SAFETY AND WE'RE TRYING TO CREATE THE MINIMUM IMPACT ON THE EXISTING NEIGHBORS. NEXT ONE, PLEASE. UH, THIS, THIS SLIDE BASICALLY SHOWS HOW THERE'S A DEMAND FOR RENT IN THE AREA. THEY'RE NOT GONNA SELL THE, THE PROPERTIES. THEY ARE GONNA KEEP THE PROPERTIES AND THE IDEA IS TO RENT THEM, UH, ONE OF THE FAMILY MEMBERS. IT'S GOING TO LIVE THERE AND IT'S GONNA ACTUALLY MANAGE. AND LIKE I MENTIONED, IT'S GONNA PROVIDE AFFORDABLE RENTAL FOR PEOPLE IN THE COMMUNITY. NEXT ONE, PLEASE. UM, OF COURSE, UH, THE NEIGHBORS HAD A COUPLE OF CONCERN AND NOT THE NEIGHBORS, I MEAN [01:25:01] THE, THE H O A IN THE AREA HAS CONCERN ABOUT, UH, FLOODING, TRAFFIC, ET CETERA. OF COURSE, AS YOU KNOW, WE NEED TO COMPLY WITH, UH, ALL THE CODES. WE NEED TO COMPLY WITH THE CITY. IT'S NOT GONNA BE POSSIBLE TO GET A PERMIT FOR THIS BUILDING IF WE DON'T COMPLY WITH ABSOLUTELY EVERYTHING THAT GUARANTEES THE, UH, PROPER SAFETY AND WELLBEING FOR EVERYBODY AROUND US. AND ONE MORE, UM, THEIR CONCERN WAS BASICALLY THE IMPACT WITH THE TRASH COLLECTION. EMERGENCY VEHICLES, UH, THE WAY WE SEE ALL THE SURROUNDINGS ARE PRETTY DENSE AND THIS AREA, IT'S NOT. SO WE CONSIDER THAT EIGHT UNITS, IF, IF WE'RE CAPABLE OF DOING IT, WILL NOT DEFINITELY IMPACT IN THE WAY THEY, THEY FEEL WILL IMPACT. UM, AND LAST ONE, I THINK. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. WELL, BASICALLY MY, MY POINT IS WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO IS, AS WE HEARD IN ALL THE RECORDINGS PREVIOUS, UH, THERE'S A NEED FOR, FOR COST OF LIVING. THAT'S THE INTENTION OF THIS FAMILY. THEY ARE OPEN TO THE PROPOSAL THAT THAT WAS GIVEN OF ONLY, UH, FOUR UNITS TO, TO GO TO THAT. BUT IF THEY ARE, IF THEY, IT'S POSSIBLE TO HAVE A LITTLE BIT MORE THAN FOUR UNITS, IT'LL BE GREAT BECAUSE THEY WILL BE HELPING A LOT MORE PEOPLE IN THIS AREA. AND BASICALLY, THAT'S MY PRETENTION. THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR YOUR TIME. ALRIGHT, THANK YOU MR. ANTES. IS THERE ANY PUBLIC COMMENT ON THIS ITEM? NO, SIR. ALRIGHT. UH, COMMISSIONER FUENTES IS CELEBRATING, UH, THE BIRTH OF A CHILD, UH, FROM LAST THURSDAY. SO HE IS NOT PRESENT AT THIS MEETING TODAY. UH, SO COMMISSIONER SIPES TO YOU FOR QUESTIONS. THANK YOU. UH, FIRST QUESTION IS FOR STAFF. UM, AND THAT IS, UH, YOUR RECOMMENDATION OF RMM FOUR. HOW MANY UNITS WOULD THAT ALLOW? FOUR. FOUR UNITS. OKAY. FOR THE, OKAY. AND, UM, LET'S SEE, FOR THE APPLICANT. THANKS . UM, YES. UH, PASADENA HEIGHTS HAD MENTIONED THAT THEY WOULD LIKE TO, TO JUST TO TALK WITH YOU. HAVE YOU HAD ANY OUTREACH WITH THEM? YES SIR, WE DID. OKAY. WE DID, UH, AND SOME OF THOSE QUESTIONS CAME TO THE TABLE AND THEY WERE ADDRESSED PRETTY MUCH THE SAME, UH, RESPONDERS WE DID TODAY THAT, UH, THEY CAN BE CERTAIN THAT THE CITY WILL NOT ALLOW US TO GET A LICENSE PERMIT. I'M SORRY FOR THIS, IF WE DON'T COMPLY WITH, UH, WHAT THE CODES, UH, REQUEST. OKAY. THEY WERE PRETTY CONCERNED WITH SOME QUESTIONS REGARDING ENGINEERING FLOODING AND, AND I TOLD 'EM, WELL IT HAS TO BE, IT HAS TO GO THROUGH A CIVIL ENGINEER AND IT HAS TO BE DONE CORRECTLY. SO PLEASE DON'T WORK, BE CONCERNED ABOUT THAT. YES, SIR. OKAY. THANKS. UH, THOSE ARE ALL THE QUESTIONS I HAVE AT THIS TIME. THANK YOU. ALRIGHT. UM, ANY QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONERS TO MY LEFT? YES. COMMISSIONER BATTLES FOR THE APPLICANT. I, I WAS TAKING NOTES WHILE YOU WERE TALKING, SO I MISSED HOW, HOW BIG ARE THEY IN SQUARE FOOTAGE WISE? WE DON'T HAVE A, A PROJECT, UH, YET, BUT MAXIMUM 1200 SQUARE FEET PER UNIT. OKAY. I ACTUALLY HAVE A QUESTION, UM, FOR THE APPLICANT. I'M LOOKING AT AN AREA VIEW THROUGH THE, UM, GOOGLE, BUT THERE'S A PROPERTY THAT'S CURRENTLY BEING BUILT. ARE YOU, IS YOUR PROPOSAL TO BUILD TOWARDS THE BACK OF THAT PROPERTY THAT'S CURRENTLY BEING BUILT OR HOW ARE, HOW'S YOUR PROPOSAL? CORRECT? CORRECT. EVERYTHING WILL BE BUILT IN THE BACK. AND ARE YOU ARE AS WELL AS THE OWNER OF THAT HOUSE IS BEING DEVELOPED RIGHT? OR IS THAT SOMEBODY TOTALLY DIFFERENT THAN YOU? TOTALLY DIFFERENT. AND YOU'VE SPOKEN WITH THEM HOW THE BUFFERING IS GONNA BE WITH THEM AS WELL? THE OWNERS HAVE THE, THE, THE, THE OWNERS OF THE PROPERTY HAVE ALREADY SPOKEN? YES SIR. AND THEY WERE IN AGREEMENT WITH YOU AS WELL? THEY WERE IN AGREEMENT. OKAY. HONESTLY, THEY DIDN'T TALK TO THEM. THE OWNERS HAVE KNOW EACH OTHER AND THAT THEY HAVE SPOKEN TO US IN MY UNDERSTANDING. PERFECT. THANK YOU SO MUCH. YES, SIR. ALRIGHT, THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER ORTIZ. QUESTIONS COMMERS TO MY LEFT? YES. COMMISSIONER WATSON, UH, FOR THE APPLICANT. CAN YOU EXPLAIN A LITTLE BIT MORE ABOUT THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING SCHEME THAT'S PROPOSED? IS IT JUST TRYING TO PROVIDE AN OPTION THAT'S AT A LOWER POINT OF ENTRY OR ARE YOU DOING SOMETHING MORE FORMAL, LIKE ACCEPTING SECTION EIGHT HOUSING VOUCHERS? THEY WILL BE RENTING THE UNITS AND FROM MY UNDERSTANDING AND IN COMBINATION WITH THE EXISTING CHURCH, THEY WILL BE PROVIDING IT TO PEOPLE I BELIEVE FROM THE, FROM THE COMMUNITY IN NEED OF, OF, OF AFFORDABLE RENTALS. THAT'S, FROM MY UNDERSTANDING, THAT'S A PROJECT THAT WAS BROUGHT TO ME TO, TO DEVELOP. THANK YOU. ALRIGHT, THANK YOU COMMISSIONER WATSON. QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONERS TO MY LEFT. COMMISSIONERS TO MY RIGHT. YES. COMMISSIONER WHEAT. THANK YOU MR. CHAIR. UH, QUESTION FOR THE APPLICANT. CAN YOU GO BACK TO YOUR DRAWING OF YOUR SITE PLAN? YES, PLEASE. THAT'S IT. OR MAYBE THEY'LL PRE WHATEVER YOU PREFER. THAT'S FINE. UH, THERE YOU GO. RIGHT THERE. YES. YES SIR. CAN YOU TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THE, UH, TRAFFIC FLOW IN AND OUTTA YOUR [01:30:01] PROJECT, PLEASE? YES. OKAY. THE, THIS IS A PREVIOUS CONCEPT. UH, WE DON'T HAVE A FULL PROJECT YET. WE'RE, WE'LL, I MEAN THIS IS COMPLETELY OPEN TO NEGOTIATION, BUT THE WHOLE IDEA IS TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THIS 25 FEET, UH, FRONTAGE THAT WE HAVE, UH, CONVERT INTO A STREET AND ALONG THE STREET LOCATE THIS, THIS, THIS FOUR BUILDINGS THAT WILL BE DUPLEXES. UH, WE'LL HAVE A HAMMERHEAD IN THE BACK FOR THE EMERGENCY VEHICLES AND ALSO FOR THE, UH, USERS TO BE ABLE TO CIRCULATE AND EXIT. THERE WILL BE PARKING ON EACH ONE OF THE UNITS AND ADJACENT TO THEM THERE WILL BE ADDITIONAL PARKING FOR VISITORS. THANK YOU. YES, SIR. COMMISSIONER SIPES, ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS? IF NOT, I HAVE A COUPLE. IF YOU WANNA WAIT, I'LL WAIT. ALRIGHT. UM, SO STAFF, GIVEN, UH, THE REQUESTED MF 18 AND THE SIZE OF LOT, HOW MANY UNITS WOULD HE BE ENTITLED TO? SHOULD, UH, THE MF 18 BE GRANTED? I BELIEVE I, WHEN I MADE THIS, UM, CALCULATION IT'S 12, IT WAS 12 UNITS MM-HMM. . YEAH. IS THERE ANY WAY TO LIMIT THAT TO THE EIGHT UNITS IN QUESTION STAFF? NO, SIR. OKAY. UH, BUT 12 IS TOTAL, SO THAT'S THE ENTIRE POINT. SIX WHATEVER ACRES, UH, WITHOUT CONSIDERATION OF STREETS AND THINGS OF THAT NATURE, BILLABLE AREA, CORRECT? RIGHT. OKAY. ALRIGHT. UM, NOW TO THE APPLICANT, SORRY. THANK YOU. NO, YOU'RE, UM, YOU KNOW, YOU MENTIONED THAT THERE IS THE POSSIBILITY THAT THE APPLICANT WOULD CONSIDER THE RMM FOUR SUGGESTED BY STAFF. IS THAT CORRECT? CORRECT. ALRIGHT. BUT IF THAT WERE TO BE THE CASE, UH, THIS PROPERTY WOULD STILL HAVE, PROPERTY, WOULD STILL HAVE THAT SINGLE ENTRANCE ALONG CHICKERING, CORRECT? CORRECT, SIR. AND YOU WOULD NEED THAT SAME ROAD TO GO BACK THERE? CORRECT. AND IT WOULDN'T CHANGE THE DIMENSIONS OF THAT ROAD AT ALL, WOULD IT? THERE'S NO ROOM TO CHANGE THE DIMENSIONS, YES, SIR. . OKAY. ALRIGHT. THANK YOU. I THINK THOSE ARE ALL MY QUESTIONS AT THIS TIME. THANK YOU COMMISSIONER SIPES, IF YOU HAVE FURTHER QUESTIONS, YOU CAN DO THAT OR I DO NOT HAVE ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS. ALRIGHT. IF YOU HAVE DISCUSSION IN THE MOTION. ALRIGHT. UM, I, I, I, I KIND OF SAW WHERE, UH, THE CHAIR WAS GOING WITH HIS QUESTIONING ABOUT EIGHT BECAUSE WHEN I LOOK AT THIS, I THINK EIGHT'S FINE. UM, BUT I UNDERSTAND THE 12 AND I THINK 12 WOULD BE TOO MANY. UM, I, I THINK AT THIS TIME I'M GOING TO, UH, CONSIDERING THE, THE COMMISSIONER IS NOT PRESENT FOR VERY GOOD REASONS. UM, I'M GONNA MAKE A MOTION FOR THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION OF, UH, RMM FOUR. OKAY. THERE IS A MOTION FOR, UH, THE ALTERNATE RECOMMENDATION OF R M FOUR WITH RESPECT TO ITEM NUMBER NINE. IS THERE A SECOND? WE DO A SECOND MOTION. COMMISSIONER RE BARTOS IS A SECOND AND I'M GONNA GO A LITTLE OUT OF ORDER HERE. STAFF. WOULD THIS HAVE BEEN, UM, ELIGIBLE FOR I D Z? IT, IT COULD BE. UH, I'VE GOTTA CHECK THE MAP. THE MAP IS TINY, SO WE'LL LOOK FOR YOU . OKAY. IT'S WITHIN FOUR 10. IT'S IN WITHIN FOUR. IT IS WITHIN FOUR 10. AS LONG AS IT'S WITHIN FOUR 10. YES. OKAY. I D Z. YEAH. UH, IN THAT CASE I'M GONNA ASK THE APPLICANT A QUICK QUESTION. UH, SORRY, I'M GOING OUT OF ORDER. , UM, SEE WHERE YOU GOING, BUT ARE, DO YOU KNOW WHAT I D Z'S ZONING IS? YES. YES. OKAY. WE'RE AWARE OF IT. UM, AND SO ONE OF THE ISSUES I THINK THAT HAS BEEN VOICED FROM THIS COMMISSION IS, UH, EIGHT VERSUS 12 UNITS. MM-HMM. , UM, I D Z WOULD LOCK YOU INTO THAT EIGHT UNITS MM-HMM. AND WOULD BE MORE LIKELY TO GET YOU THE FOUR X EXTRA UNITS UNDERSTOOD THAT YOU HAVE RIGHT NOW. UM, IT WOULD, IT WOULD REQUIRE RE NOTICING, UH, WHICH IS THE DOWNSIDE, BUT RIGHT NOW THE MOTION IS FOR APPROVAL OF FOUR UNITS. OKAY. SO [01:35:01] WE'RE GONNA MOVE FORWARD WITH THAT MOTION AND A VOTE. UH, DO YOU WANT TO CONSIDER I D Z? IT MIGHT INFLUENCE HOW COMMISSIONERS VOTE ON THIS ITEM. YEAH, DEFINITELY. I WOULD LIKE TO CONSIDER. YOU WANT TO CONSIDER IT I D C? YES, SIR. ALRIGHT. WHAT THAT MEANS IS THAT THE ITEM WOULD BE POSTPONED TODAY AND IT WOULD COME BACK WITH THE NEW REQUEST AND WITH YOUR SITE PLAN A MORE DETAILED SITE PLAN THAN THAT OF COURSE. ALRIGHT. CITY ATTORNEY, IF HE WITHDRAWS OR POSTPONES THE ITEM RIGHT NOW WE DON'T HAVE A ROLL CALL VOTE, BUT CURRENTLY WE DO HAVE A PENDING MOTION. YEAH, THAT'S CORRECT. YOU DON'T HAVE TO TAKE A VOTE IF HE'S WITHDRAWING HIS APPLICATION AT THIS POINT OR POSTPONING IT IN ORDER TO, TO RESUBMIT, UH, TO HER REQUEST. OKAY. IS THAT WHAT YOU WANNA DO, SIR? I WOULD LIKE TO, YES. YES. ALRIGHT, VERY GOOD. UM, THANK YOU SO MUCH, WE, WE'LL SEE YOU AGAIN SOON. APPRECIATE IT AND HOPEFULLY THIS WILL GIVE YOU A SOLUTION THAT YOU WANT. ALRIGHT, SO THE NEXT AVAILABLE DATE WILL BE AUGUST THE SECOND. OKAY. AUGUST THE SECOND. WE'LL SEE YOU BACK THEN, SIR. THANK YOU SIR. UM, ALRIGHT. WE DO HAVE ONE MORE ITEM. UM, HOWEVER, I WOULD LIKE TO TAKE A QUICK BREAK. IT'S A LITTLE EARLY, BUT WE WILL CONSIDER ITEM NUMBER 13 AND THEN THE U D C AMENDMENTS FOLLOWING APPROXIMATELY A FIVE MINUTE BREAK. THANK YOU SO MUCH. THE TIME IS 2 36 AND WE, UH, ARE TAKING A BRIEF RECESS, WELL CONCERN DURING YOUR PRESENTATION. SO, I MEAN, I THINK, ALRIGHT, UM, AS THE COMMISSIONERS RETAKE THEIR SEATS, THE TIME IS 2 43 AND WE ARE BACK IN SESSION FOR THIS MEETING OF THE ZONING COMMITTEE COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO. IF WE COULD PROCEED WITH ITEM NUMBER 13 AT THIS TIME. THANK YOU. GOOD AFTERNOON. MY NAME IS ELIZABETH STEWART, ZONING PLANNER WITH DEVELOPMENT SERVICES. ITEM NUMBER 13 IS LOCATED AT 2 55 MAUREEN DRIVE, GOING FROM R FIVE TO NC WITH ALL OVERLAYS STAYING THE SAME. THERE WERE 19 NOTICES SENT OUT. ZERO RECEIVED IN FAVOR, ONE RECEIVED IN OPPOSITION. NO RESPONSE FROM HIGHLAND HILLS NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION AND ZERO OR IN FAVOR OR OPPOSED OUTSIDE 200 FEET. THE EXISTING R FIVE RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY DISTRICT IS AN APPROPRIATE ZONING FOR THE PROPERTY AND SURROUNDING AREA. THE PROPOSED EA NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL DISTRICT INTRODUCES USES TO THE PROPERTY THAT ARE NOT APPROPRIATE IN AN AREA PREDOMINANTLY DEVELOPED AS HOMES. THE INTRODUCTION OF A COMMERCIAL ZONING DESIGNATION WOULD DISRUPT THE CHARACTER OF AN ESTABLISHED NEIGHBORHOOD. THE CLOSEST COMMERCIAL ZONING IS COMPLETELY ISOLATED TO THE EAST SIDE OF SOUTH. NEW BRAUNFELS STREET STAFF FINDS EVIDENCE OF LIKELY ADVERSE IMPACTS ON NEIGHBORING LANDS IN RELATION TO THE ZONING CHANGE REQUEST. THE PROPOSED USE IS NOT CONSISTENT WITH THE ESTABLISHED DEVELOPMENT PATTERN OF THE SURROUNDING AREA. THE SURROUNDING PROPERTIES ARE ZONED R FIVE RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY, AND ARE DEVELOPED AS RESIDENTIAL HOMES. STAFF RECOMMENDS DENIAL STAFF IS AVAILABLE FOR QUESTIONS AND THE APPLICANT IS PRESENT. THANK YOU. ALRIGHT, IF WE COULD HAVE THE APPLICANT PLEASE COME UP, GIVE YOUR NAME, UH, ADDRESS AND TELL US ABOUT YOUR REZONING REQUEST. YES SIR. MY NAME IS LOUISVILLE. I'M HERE TO SPEAK ABOUT THE PROPERTY AT, CAN WE RAISE THE MICROPHONE UP A LITTLE BIT CLOSER TO YOUR MOUTH? YES, SIR. YES. THE PROPERTY AT 2 55 MARON DRY. UH, WE WOULD LIKE TO RESUME INTO, UM, NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL FOR THE, UH, CLEANER OFFICE. AND, UH, IN THERE WE ONLY PROVIDE SERVICE. UM, WE DON'T DO ANY, UM, WALK-IN FOR THE SERVICE, BUT IT JUST PICK UP AND DROP OFF TO THE CUSTOMER. OKAY. I'M SORRY SIR. COULD YOU SAY WHAT THE USE WAS AGAIN? I'M SORRY. UH, OFFICE FOR WHAT? FOR CLEANER OFFICE? DRY CLEANER. DRY CLEAN? YES, SIR. A DRY CLEANING OFFICE? YES, SIR. OKAY. JUST FOR THEM TO COME DROP OFF AND PICK UP. AND FOR US, WE WILL PICK UP AT CUSTOMER LOCATION AND DROP OFF BACK TO THEM THE NEXT DAY. THANK YOU. UH, WE MIGHT HAVE SOME FURTHER QUESTIONS. IS THERE ANY PUBLIC COMMENT ON THIS ITEM? THERE IS NONE. OKAY. ALRIGHT. COMMISSIONER SIPES, UH, ONCE AGAIN, THIS IS A DISTRICT THREE CASE AND COMMISSIONER FUENTES IS OUT ON PATERNITY LEAVE, SO IT IS TO YOU. ALRIGHT, THANK YOU. UH, QUESTION FOR THE APPLICANT. UM, YES SIR. SO YOU SAID IT'S A, IT'S A DROP OFF, SO, SO NO, THERE'S NO DRY CLEANING THAT ACTUALLY OCCURS AT THE SITE. IT, IT'S JUST A OFFICE BECAUSE, UH, A COMPANY FROM DOWNTOWN WILL COME AND PICK IT UP AND TAKE BACK TO THE WAREHOUSE AND THEY BRING BACK IN THE LATE AFTERNOON AND FOR US TO COME AND PICK THAT UP AND THEN DROP OFF TO THE CUSTOMER LOCATION FROM HOUSES OFFICE. OKAY. SO IT'S OFF MORE OFFICE USE. OKAY. YES. AND, UM, UH, QUESTION FOR STAFF, UM, [01:40:01] IT IT'S BECAUSE OF THE, UH, NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL THAT, I MEAN, WAS WAS AN OPTION PERHAPS EXPLORED? I KNOW WE'VE SEEN PROFESSIONAL OFFICES USED AS A CD. UH, WE DID CONSIDER THE IDEA OF CONDITIONING THIS DOWN, HOWEVER, WE STILL DID NOT BELIEVE THAT THE INTRODUCING THAT USE INTO THIS CORNER OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD WOULD BE APPROPRIATE DUE TO THE FACT THAT IT IS ON THE CORNER OF A RESIDENTIAL STREET AND THE TRAFFIC HAZARDS AND SAFETY COULD CAUSE. OKAY, THANK YOU. UM, I DON'T HAVE ANY OTHER COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS AT THIS TIME. ALRIGHT, THANK YOU COMMISSIONER SIPES, UH, QUESTIONS. COMMISSIONER TO MY RIGHT FIRST? NO COMMISSIONERS TO MY LEFT. QUESTIONS. ALRIGHT, COMMISSIONER SIPES, UH, YOU'RE NOT GONNA GET ANY HELP, UM, FOR TO YOU FOR DISCUSSION AND POTENTIAL MOTION. ALRIGHT. UM, I HAVE SEEN WHERE WE'VE, WE'VE ON ON CORNER LOTS. WE'VE, UH, CONDITIONED THEM DOWN TO ALLOW FOR, UM, OFFICES. HOWEVER, UM, I DO SEE THAT THE, THAT THIS AREA, THE NEIGHBORHOOD, IF YOU EVEN ZOOM BACK, IT IS EVERY HOUSE ALONG NEW BRAUNFELS UNTIL YOU GET TO THE NEXT INTERSECTION. IT'S, IT'S, IT'S RESIDENTIAL. IT'S, UH, 100% RESIDENTIAL. AND MY FEAR WOULD BE THE, UM, INTRODUCTION OF NEIGHBORHOOD, COMMERCIAL, COMMERCIAL WOULD START TO ERODE THE, THE EDGE OF THAT NEIGHBORHOOD. SO WITH THAT, I WILL BE SUPPORTING THE, UM, STAFF RECOMMENDATION OF DENIAL. ALRIGHT, THERE IS A MOTION FOR DENIAL OF ITEM NUMBER 13. IS THERE A SECOND? SECOND. THERE IS A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER WATSON. UM, DISCUSSION COMMISSIONERS TO MY LEFT, COMMISSIONERS TO MY RIGHT, UH, BRIEFLY MYSELF. UM, YOU KNOW, I THINK THIS IS SOMEWHAT OF A CLOSE CASE GIVEN, YOU KNOW, WE CAN SEE THE CHICK-FIL-A WHEN WE LOOK DIRECTLY EAST, UH, STRAIGHT OFF THE PROPERTY. UH, NEVERTHELESS, I, I THINK I AM GONNA SUPPORT THE MOTION FOR DENIAL OR RECOMMENDATION OF DENIAL. UM, BECAUSE IT DOES SEEM LIKE THERE IS THE POTENTIAL FOR SIGNIFICANT TRAFFIC ISSUES COMING IN AND OUT ON THAT SHORT STREET BETWEEN THE I 37 ACCESS ROAD AND SOUTH NEW BRAUNFELS. UH, EVEN IF YOU WERE SOMEHOW TO WORK SOMETHING OFF OF SOUTH NEW BRAUNFELS, IT WOULD STILL, UH, INTRODUCE SOME OTHER ISSUES. SO I WILL BE SUPPORTING THE MOTION. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? COMMISSIONERS, SEEING NONE. MOTION IS FOR DENIAL BY COMMISSIONER SIPES WITH A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER WATSON. ROLL CALL, VOTE PLEASE. COMMISSIONER SIPES? YES. COMMISSIONER WATSON? YES. COMMISSIONER GREATHOUSE? YES. COMMISSIONER, WE AYE. COMMISSIONER ORTIZ? YES. COMMISSIONER BURROWS? YES. CHAIR BUSANTE. AYE. MOTION PASSES FOR DENIAL. I'M SORRY, BUT BEST OF LUCK. THANK YOU, SIR. ALRIGHT. AND NOW FOR THE MAIN EVENT. DOES ANYONE HAVE A BALLOT? SO BEFORE WE JUMP INTO THE PRESENTATION, I WANTED TO, UH, MAKE AN ANNOUNCEMENT THAT AMENDMENT 19 DASH ONE RELATED TO THE WEST SIDE CREEK WATER QUALITY PROTECTION AREA. WE'RE GONNA SEEK TO CONTINUE THAT ITEM TO JULY 19TH. UH, THAT IS A TWO WEEK CONTINUANCE, UH, TO ALLOW, UH, BOTH, UH, INTERESTED PARTIES TO ATTEND AND OKAY. AND STATE THEIR POSITIONS. SO LET'S GO AHEAD AND TAKE THAT INDIVIDUAL. UM, ITEM 19 ONE, WHICH RELATES TO THE WEST SIDE CREEK, UH, WATER QUALITY PROTECTION AREA, WATER QUALITY PROTECTION AREA. THANK YOU SO MUCH, MR. SPARROW. UM, I'M GONNA TURN IT TO, OR GIVE IT TO YOU COMMISSIONER SIPES FOR A MOTION WITH RESPECT TO 19 ONE. UH, THANK YOU MR. CHAIR. UM, I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION FOR A CONTINUANCE FOR, LET'S SEE, HOW SHOULD I SAY THIS? AMENDMENT FOR AMENDMENT 19 POINT 19 DASH ONE OF, I GUESS ITEM 14, OF THE U D, THE U D C, UH, CONSIDERATIONS, UH, FOR A TWO WEEK CONTINUANCE TO JULY 19TH. ALRIGHT, THERE IS A MOTION FOR CONTINUANCE OF AMENDMENT 19 DASH ONE OF ITEM NUMBER 14 FOR TWO WEEKS. IS THERE A SECOND? SECOND. THERE'S A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER WATSON. DISCUSSION. SEEING NONE. UH, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? SORRY. ROLL CALL. VOTE FOR, UH, MOTION OF CONTINUANCE BY COMMISSIONER S SIPES WITH A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER WATSON. ROLL CALL VOTE. COMMISSIONER SIPES? YES. COMM COMMISSIONER WATSON? YES. COMMISSIONER GREATHOUSE? YES. COMMISSIONER, WE AYE. COMMISSIONER ORTIZ? YES. COMMISSIONER BARROWS? YES. CHAIR BUSTAMONTE. AYE. MOTION [01:45:01] PASSES FOR CONTINUANCE. ALRIGHT. THANK YOU MR. SPARROW [Other Items] FOR THAT. AND NOW IF WE CAN BEGIN WITH THOSE AMENDMENTS THAT WE ARE GOING TO CONSIDER TODAY. SO, UH, WE WANTED TO START TODAY WITH A QUICK PRESENTATION. JUST KINDA LET Y'ALL KNOW WHERE WE STARTED. EVERYTHING WE'VE BEEN THROUGH TO GET TO THIS POINT. I WILL BE BRIEF. UH, WE ARE HAVING A LITTLE DIFFICULTY WITH THIS COMPUTER GETTING THAT PULLED UP, BUT I'VE GIVEN THE PRESENTATION ABOUT A HUNDRED TIMES, SO I'VE GOT IT ALMOST MEMORIZED. UH, SO WE UPDATE THE, UH, U D C TYPICALLY EVERY FIVE YEARS, AND WE GO THROUGH THAT PROCESS FOR A NUMBER OF REASONS. UH, WE WANT AN OPPORTUNITY TO UPDATE OUR CODE FOR CHANGES IN STATE LAW. UH, THOSE ARE MANDATES DOWN FROM THE STATE OR FROM THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT. UH, WE GO THROUGH A U D C AMENDMENT TO ADJUST FOR STANDARDS AND PLANNING OR TECHNOLOGY, UH, CHANGES. UH, AND WE GO THROUGH, UH, THE U D C AMENDMENT PROCESS, UH, TO MAKE SURE THAT OUR CODE IS AS WORKABLE AND ADMINISTRATIVELY EFFICIENT AS POSSIBLE. AND I THINK THAT YOU'LL FIND THAT A LOT OF THE AMENDMENTS PRESENTED HERE AND, YOU KNOW, ITEMS GO INTO TO PLANNING COMMISSION AND ZONING COMMISSION STRIVE TO DO JUST THAT. THEY WANNA MAKE SURE THE CODE IS CLEAR AND USABLE. AGAIN, WE GO THROUGH THIS PROCESS, TYPICALLY, I SHOULD SAY, EVERY FIVE YEARS. WE ARE IN YEAR SIX. UH, WE STARTED THIS PROCESS IN 2019. IN 2020, WE HAD TO DELAY IT AS A RESULT OF THE C OVID 19 PANDEMIC. UH, AMENDMENTS THEMSELVES CAN BE SUBMITTED BY A WIDE VARIETY OF PARTIES. I'M NOT GONNA GO THROUGH ALL OF THEM HERE. WE HAVE SLIDES LATER. UH, BUT EVERY, UH, ENTITY ON THAT, UH, SLIDE, WITH THE EXCEPTION OF CITY COUNCIL, WE DID IN FACT RECEIVE AMENDMENTS FROM NEXT ONE. UH, CERTAINLY DEVELOPMENT SERVICES WAS COMMITTED TO, UH, YOU KNOW, ROBUST PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT. MM-HMM. , UH, WE WENT OUT AND, UH, HAD POSTERS, POSTCARDS, FLYERS. WE DISTRIBUTED THOSE TO LIBRARIES AND SENIOR CENTERS, UH, COUNCIL OFFICES. UH, WE GAVE OUR CODE ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS COPY OF THOSE, UH, SO THAT THEY COULD DISTRIBUTE THEM AS THEY WERE INTERACTING WITH THE COMMUNITY. UH, WE, UH, HEAVILY USED, UH, EMAIL BLASTS, SOCIAL MEDIA, AS WELL AS THE CITY'S ESSAY SPEAK UP PROGRAM, UH, TO COMMUNICATE OPPORTUNITIES TO ENGAGE IN THIS PROCESS. UH, D S D ACADEMY IS SOMETHING THAT THE, UH, DEPARTMENT ROLLED OUT A COUPLE YEARS AGO. WE, UH, MEET IN THIS ROOM ON SATURDAY MORNINGS AT 9:00 AM TO TEACH THE PUBLIC ABOUT A VARIETY OF TOPICS. COULD BE CODE ENFORCEMENT, WHEN DO YOU NEED A PERMIT? WHAT IS ZONING? UH, WE HAVE HELD A NUMBER OF SESSIONS YOU SEE ON THE SCREEN THE DATES, UH, TO, UH, ENGAGE WITH THE COMMUNITY AND TEACH THEM HOW THEY CAN PARTICIPATE AND BE A PART OF THIS PROCESS AS WELL. UH, WHILE THE APPLICATION WINDOW TO SUBMIT PROPOSED AMENDMENTS WAS OPEN, WE WENT OUT AND HELD FOUR, UH, COMMUNITY MEETINGS KIND OF GEOGRAPHICALLY DISPERSED AROUND THE CITY. UH, WE HAD, UH, MEETINGS ON THE NORTHEAST, SOUTH, AND WEST SIDE. UH, THAT WEST SIDE MEETING, YOU SEE WAS, UH, CONDUCTED VIRTUALLY. UH, THAT WAS, IF YOU RECALL FROM EARLIER IN THE YEAR, WE HAD A PRETTY RAPID SPIKE IN C OVID 19 TRANSMISSION. SO THE JANUARY 15TH AND JANUARY 19TH, UH, D SS D ACADEMY AND COMMUNITY MEETINGS WERE HELD VIRTUALLY. UH, WE ALSO HELD MEETINGS THAT WERE IN SPANISH. WE HAD THE PRESENTATION TRANSLATED INTO SPANISH. UH, AND WE HAD SPANISH SPEAKERS PRESENT TO ANSWER QUESTIONS FOR OUR, OUR RESIDENTS HERE THAT, UH, THAT CANNOT, UH, SPEAK ENGLISH. UH, WE ALSO HAD INDIVIDUAL MEETINGS WITH A NUMBER OF DIFFERENT NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS, UH, COMMUNITY ORGANIZATIONS THAT WE HAD AN OPPORTUNITY TO MEET WITH, UNDERSTAND WHAT THEY WERE TRYING TO ACHIEVE WITH THEIR U D C AMENDMENT, AND TRIED TO FACILITATE THE BEST POSSIBLE LANGUAGE FOR THEM TO PUT FORTH. UH, AND THEN, UH, LASTLY, UH, MEETINGS WITH OTHER STAKEHOLDER GROUPS. THE DEVELOPMENT PROCESS, TASK FORCE, UH, THE PEP A I A GROUP AMONG OTHERS, AGAIN, WITH THE STATED OBJECTIVE TO MAKE SURE, UH, THAT EVERYONE WAS AWARE OF THE PROCESS AND HOW TO PARTICIPATE FOR A QUICK TIMELINE CHECK. SO YOU'LL SEE, NUMBER ONE, WE BEGAN ACCEPTING AMENDMENTS ON OCTOBER 1ST, 2021. THAT APPLICATION WINDOW REMAINED OPEN FOR FOUR MONTHS. FEBRUARY 1ST, 2022 WAS THE DEADLINE. UH, BY CLOSE OF BUSINESS ON THAT DAY. WE HAD RECEIVED 234 PROPOSED AMENDMENTS. UH, BY WAY OF COMPARISON, IN 2015, WE HAD 296, UH, SO NOT QUITE AS MANY, BUT STILL A PRETTY, UH, A PRETTY HEFTY LOAD FOR THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE TO GET THROUGH. UH, STARTING IN FEBRUARY, UH, THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE LAUNCHED KIND OF THEIR PHASE ONE, WHICH WAS, LET'S TAKE A LOOK AT ALL OF THOSE EXTERNAL AMENDMENTS TO DETERMINE IF THEY ARE EDITS, IF THEY ARE CLARIFICATIONS, OR IF THEY ARE SOMETHING MORE. AND ANYTHING DEEMED MORE THAN AN EDIT OR CLARIFICATION WAS FORWARDED TO THE PLANNING [01:50:01] COMMISSION FOR SPONSORSHIP. SO OUTTA 43 EXTERNAL AMENDMENTS, THEY DEEMED THAT 40 WERE GREATER THAN AN EDITOR. CLARIFICATION AND SENT THOSE TO STEP NUMBER FOUR, PLANNING COMMISSION. OF THE 40 ITEMS FORWARDED TO PLANNING COMMISSION, THEY SPONSORED 37. THERE WERE ONLY THREE ITEMS THAT WERE NOT RETURNED TO PLANNING COMMISSION'S. TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE FOR FURTHER CONSIDERATION. UH, FROM THERE, FEBRUARY THROUGH MAY, SPECIFICALLY MAY 9TH, 2020 20 20 22. UH, THE TAC UH, HELD MEETINGS, UH, VARIOUS MEMBERS IN THIS ROOM PARTICIPATED, UH, ON, UH, ON THAT COMMITTEE. UH, AND OVER THE COURSE OF SEVERAL MEETINGS, THEY WENT ITEM BY ITEM, LINE BY LINE OVER 234 AMENDMENTS, UH, TO GET TO, UH, THEIR FINALIZED RECOMMENDATIONS, WHICH ARE FORWARDED TO YOU AND THE OTHER BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS. UH, WE WILL BE, UH, WRAPPING UP THE CONS, THE, THE ACTION FOR THE ZONING COMMISSION, PLANNING COMMISSION, BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT, AND HISTORIC DESIGN AND REVIEW COMMISSION IN JULY. WE WILL THEN FORWARD THOSE RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE OF CITY COUNCIL TENTATIVELY SCHEDULED FOR SEPTEMBER 22ND. THAT COULD CHANGE, UH, FROM THERE. UH, CITY COUNCIL AT A DATE TO BE DETERMINED IN OCTOBER, WE'LL HAVE THE FINAL SAY ON THE AMENDMENTS PUT FORWARD, UH, D S D STAFF, PUBLIC WORK, STAFF, TRANSPORTATION, AND OTHERS WILL THEN BEGIN CONDUCTING INTERNAL AND EXTERNAL TRAINING ON APPROVED AMENDMENTS. STARTING IN NOVEMBER, WE WILL UTILIZE, UH, NOVEMBER AND DECEMBER TO CONDUCT THAT TRAINING WITH, UH, ENFORCEMENT OF THESE NEW REGULATIONS SET TO BEGIN ON JANUARY 1ST. THAT WAY THERE IS AN OPPORTUNITY FOR THE DEVELOPMENT COMMUNITY FOR OUR NEIGHBORHOOD, UH, GROUPS, FOR STAFF TO LEARN THE CHANGES BEFORE THEY ARE IMPLEMENTED. NEXT SLIDE. I PROMISE NOT TO GO LINE BY LINE ON THIS SLIDE, BUT WHAT I DO WANT TO POINT OUT, THESE ARE THE INTERNAL AMENDMENTS. SO YOU SEE THE DIFFERENT ENTITIES THAT SUBMITTED THEM, ZONING, COMMISSION, BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT, DEVELOPMENT SERVICES, AND OTHERS. AND ON THE FAR RIGHT, YOU LOOK AT THE PERCENTAGE APPROVED. AND I THINK WHAT YOU'LL FIND ON THIS SLIDE, AND THE NEXT SLIDE IS THAT BY AND LARGE, IF YOU SUBMITTED AN AMENDMENT, IT MAY HAVE HAD SOME EDITS THROUGH TAC THERE WAS FAVORABLE CONSIDERATION FOR YOUR IDEA. A HUNDRED PERCENT OF FOOD POLICY COUNCIL, UH, A HUNDRED PERCENT FOR, UH, THE, THE DON DAVIES, JAMES MCKNIGHT, THE SAN ANTONIO WATER SYSTEM. UH, YOU'LL ALSO SEE THE WITHDRAWN COLUMN FOR BOTH INTERNAL AND EXTERNAL PARTIES. THERE WERE A NUMBER OF AMENDMENTS THAT WERE SUBMITTED THAT AFFECTED THE SAME SECTION OF CODE THAT ANOTHER APPLICANT HAD PROPOSED TO CHANGE TO. SO YOU WILL FIND THAT A NUMBER OF THOSE WITHDRAWN ITEMS ARE BECAUSE I PUT FORTH AN AMENDMENT, AN EXTERNAL PARTY PUT FORTH AN AMENDMENT, WE COMPROMISED, I WITHDREW MINE AND SUPPORTED THEIRS. THAT HAPPENED, UH, RELATIVELY FREQUENTLY. ACTUALLY. AGAIN, THE BREAKDOWN OF THE 234 AMENDMENTS WE RECEIVED, 43 CAME FROM EXTERNAL PARTIES. 191 CAME FROM INTERNAL. THAT IS TO SAY CITY DEPARTMENTS. IF WE LOOK, UH, AGAIN AT THE BREAKDOWN BETWEEN INTERNAL AND EXTERNAL AMENDMENTS, UH, 191 THE EX, OR PARDON ME, THE INTERNAL AMENDMENTS 168 WERE SUPPORTED. TWO WERE DENIED, AND 21 WERE WITHDRAWN. AND THEN EXTERNAL PARTIES OUT OF 43 25, I SHOULD SAY, APPROVED OR APPROVED WITH EDITS. UH, THREE WERE DENIED. 12 WERE WITHDRAWN, AND THREE WERE NOT SPONSORED. AGAIN, YOU CAN SEE THE BREAKDOWN OF APPROVED ITEMS, UH, WITH THE PLANNING COMMISSION TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE. RECOMMENDATIONS WHEN YOU DEDUCT ITEMS NOT SPONSORED AND ITEMS WITHDRAWN, WE HAVE 198 AMENDMENTS MOVING FORWARD IN THIS PROCESS. OF THE 198 193 HAVE FAVORABLE, UH, RECOMMENDATIONS FROM THE TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE. AND AGAIN, STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION VARIES EVER SO SLIGHTLY FROM TAX. UH, WE ARE RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF 190, UH, DENIAL OF FOUR. WE ARE RECOMMENDING MODIFICATIONS, UH, TO THREE ITEMS THAT WERE APPROVED BY PLANNING COMMISSION TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE. AND WE ARE RECOMMENDING THE MODIFICATION OF ONE ITEM THAT WAS DENIED. SO THAT IS THE FULL 198. UH, ON THE NEXT SLIDE, AGAIN, I'M NOT GONNA GO INTO A GRANULAR LEVEL OF DETAIL, BUT WHEN WE LOOK AT THE AMENDMENTS THAT WERE CONSIDERED, UH, I THINK THAT WE CAN SEE THAT THEY'RE KIND OF BROKEN DOWN BY AND LARGE INTO REALLY SIX MAIN CATEGORIES. UH, CERTAINLY INFRASTRUCTURE. IF YOU LOOK AT ABOUT ANYTHING THAT OUR PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENTS SUBMITTED, THAT IS ALL ABOUT INFRASTRUCTURE, DRAINAGE, FLOOD CONTROL, AFFORDABLE HOUSING, PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT, [01:55:01] ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY, TRANSPORTATION. AND I MENTIONED IT AT THE TOP OF THE PRESENTATION, ADMINISTRATIVE EFFICIENCY, CORRECTING THOSE AREAS OF CONFUSION TO MAKE SURE EVERYONE'S ON THE SAME PAGE. SO THAT IS THE FULL 198 AMENDMENTS MOVING FORWARD IN THIS PROCESS. AS YOU ARE AWARE, ONLY 62 WERE ON YOUR AGENDA TODAY. THE PLANNING COMMISSION GETS TO LOOK AT ALL 198 OF THEM. CONGRATS. UM, SO WITH, UH, THE ITEMS THAT WERE CONSIDERED ON CONSENT, WE HAVE 11 ITEMS, UH, THAT HAVE BEEN REQUESTED TO BE PULLED FOR INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERATION. UH, WE CAN, UH, IF YOU, UH, IF YOU'D LIKE, JUST START AT THE TOP AND START TO RUN THROUGH THOSE, OR IF WE COULD, MR. SPARROW, LET'S GO AHEAD AND USE THE, UH, ORGANIZATION WE HAVE MM-HMM. FROM THE SHEET WE'VE GOT DURING WORK SESSION. UH, SO IT STILL MEANS WE START WITH THE TOP, WHICH MEANS WE START WITH AMENDMENT ONE ONE. YEP. SO AMENDMENT ONE ONE IS RELATED TO QUALIFIED TRANSITIONAL HOUSING. THIS ITEM WAS SUBMITTED BY DAVID LITTLEFIELD. UH, THIS IS AN ITEM THAT HAD A RECOMMENDATION OF DENIAL FROM THE PLANNING COMMISSION TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE. UM, THE APPLICANT I BELIEVE IS HERE AND WE CAN CALL HIM UP TO SPEAK TO THIS AMENDMENT. UH, AND I'D BE HAPPY TO ENTERTAIN ANY QUESTIONS IF WE COULD. THANK YOU SO MUCH, MR. SPARROW, MR. LITTLEFIELD, OR ANY OTHER REPRESENTATIVE ON BEHALF OF THE ARCHDIOCESE. ALRIGHT, SEEING NONE EARLIER, UM, I WILL OPEN IT UP FOR ANY QUESTIONS OF STAFF WITH RESPECT TO AMENDMENT ONE, ONE, UH, WHICH HAS A RECOMMENDATION OF DENIAL FROM THE PTAC. SO, ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF COMMISSIONERS? ALRIGHT, SEEING NONE, UH, I WILL NOW OPEN THE FLOOR FOR A MOTION WITH RESPECT TO AMENDMENT ONE ONE. WELL, MR. CHAIR, I MAKE A MOTION FOR DENIAL OF AMENDMENT ONE, ONE. ALRIGHT. THERE'S A MOTION FOR DENIAL. IS THERE A SECOND? WE'LL SECOND THAT. ALRIGHT. UH, WITH RESPECT TO AMENDMENT ONE ONE, THERE IS A MOTION FOR DENIAL BY COMMISSIONER S SIPES WITH A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER BOTTLES ROLL CALL. VOTE PLEASE. COMMISSIONER SIPES? YES. COMMISSIONER BOTTLES? YES. COMMISSIONER GREATHOUSE? YES. COMMISSIONER WATSON? YES. COMMISSIONER, WE AYE. COMMISSIONER ORTIZ? YES. CHAIR BUSANTE. AYE. MOTION PASSES FOR DENIAL. ALRIGHT. OKAY. I BELIEVE NEXT MR. SPARROW IS TEN THREE. YES SIR. AMENDMENT 10 DASH THREE IS RELATED TO REQUIRING A SPECIFIC USE AUTHORIZATION FOR GAS STATIONS WITHIN THE C TWO COMMERCIAL BASE ZONING DISTRICT. UH, THIS ITEM WAS SUBMITTED BY THE ZONING COMMISSION FOR CONSIDERATION. UH, AGAIN, I WILL INTRODUCE THAT THE, UH, PLANNING COMMISSION'S TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE SUPPORTED A SLIGHTLY DIFFERENT VERSION, UH, FROM THE TIER ONE NEIGHBORHOOD COALITION. UH, REG, IT ESSENTIALLY REGULATES OR, OR REQUIRES A SPECIFIC USE AUTHORIZATION IF THAT GAS STATION IS WITHIN A PROXIMITY OF A RESIDENTIAL USE, UH, A, A DAYCARE CENTER, A SCHOOL, AN ASSISTED LIVING FACILITY, ET CETERA. UM, SO WHAT WE NEED TO KNOW IS IF THE ZONING COMMISSION WOULD LIKE TO PROCEED WITH THIS VERSION OR HAVE A MOTION TO WITHDRAW IT. ALRIGHT. SO I THINK I WAS THE PRIMARY, UH, ENGINE BEHIND THIS AMENDMENT ON BEHALF OF THE ZONING COMMISSION. UM, AND SO AS A RESULT, BECAUSE AS WE DISCUSSED IN WORK SESSION AND AS MR. SPARROW JUST REPRESENTED NOW IN PUBLIC HEARING, UH, THERE IS AN AMENDMENT THAT BASICALLY, UH, COVERS THE SAME GROUND THAT IS MOVING FORWARD. I MOVE TO WITHDRAWAL AMENDMENT TEN THREE FROM CONSIDERATION. IS THERE A SECOND? I'LL SECOND THAT CHAIR. THERE'S A SECOND FROM COMMISSIONER ORTIZ. ANY DISCUSSION? COMMISSIONER'S ON MY LEFT? COMMISSIONER'S ON MY RIGHT. ALRIGHT. THE MOTION IS FOR WITHDRAWAL BY ME OF, UH, AMENDMENT TEN THREE. SECOND BY COMMISSIONER ORTIZ. ROLL CALL, VOTE PLEASE. COMMISSIONER BUSTA AYE. COMMISSIONER ORTIZ? YES. COMMISSIONER SIPES? YES. COMMISSIONER GREATHOUSE? YES. COMMISSIONER WATSON? YES. COMMISSIONER, WE AYE. COMMISSIONER BARTIS? YES. MOTION PASSES FOR WITHDRAWN. OKAY, MR. SPARROW? UH, I BELIEVE OUR NEXT IS 5 29? YES SIR. AMENDMENT FIVE DASH 29 IS RELATED TO THE DEFINITION OF AN INDOOR ENTERTAINMENT VENUE. UH, WE HAVE, WHAT IS PULLED UPON THIS SCREEN WAS THE VERSION THAT WAS APPROVED BY TTAC. UH, BUT IF YOU READ IT, IT'S A LITTLE CONFUSING. MAY HAVE BEEN A TYPO IN THERE AS WELL. I THINK THAT [02:00:01] WHAT, UH, THE ZONING COMMISSION ASKED THIS TO BE PULLED FOR INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERATION TO MAKE CLEAR, UH, THAT WHAT THIS AMENDMENT IS SEEKING TO DO IS TO MAKE CLEAR THAT IF YOU ARE GOING TO HAVE ANY OF THOSE USES ENTIRELY CONTAINED WITHIN A STRUCTURE, 100% INDOOR GO-KART TRACK, 100% INDOOR, UH, PERFORMING ARTS VENUE OR CARNIVAL, THAT THOSE WOULD BE CLASSIFIED AS INTERNAL, UH, OR INDOOR ENTERTAINMENT VENUES. BUT, UH, SPECIFICALLY ADDING THAT THIS CATEGORY EXCLUDES OUTDOOR VENUES FOR THE ABOVE LISTED USE ARE SIMILAR. UH, WE WERE ABLE TO TAKE YOUR VERSION AND GET THIS TYPED UP. SO HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS, UH, WITH THAT AMENDED OR UPDATED DEFINITION. OKAY. FANTASTIC. AND ONE THING I HAVEN'T BEEN ASKING AS WE GET THROUGH THESE EARLY ONES, IS THERE ANY PUBLIC COMMENT? AND I BELIEVE MR. SPARROW, YOU'RE GONNA TELL ME IF THERE IS? YEAH, I, I HAVE THE SIGNUP SHEET. I CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, BUT I, I BELIEVE, UM, NONE OF THE ITEMS WE'VE DISCUSSED SO FAR ARE ITEMS YOU'RE SIGNED UP FOR. SO WHEN WE ANY, ANY FOR THIS ONE? INDOOR ENTERTAINMENT? NO, DON'T THINK SO. ALRIGHT. THANK YOU SO MUCH MR. SPARROW. UH, I UNFORTUNATELY DID GIVE STAFF A VERSION THAT DIDN'T INCLUDE A CORRECTION BY COMMISSIONER GREATHOUSE. UH, BUT ABOVE LISTED SHOULD BE HYPHENATED AS COMMISSIONER GREATHOUSE REMINDED ME EARLIER. LAUREN, DID YOU GET THAT? ? ALRIGHT. UH, UM, COMMISSIONERS, ANY QUESTIONS OF STAFF REGARDING THIS ITEM AND THE CHANGE THAT IS CURRENTLY UP ON THE SCREEN? LEFT? YES. COMMISSIONER SIPES. OKAY. QUESTION FOR STAFF. UM, HATE TO DO THIS. THIS IS THE BUILDING STRUCTURE QUESTION AGAIN. SO, ACCORDING TO THE CITY, NOT ACCORDING TO ME, ACCORDING TO THE CITY, A BUILDING COULD BE OPEN AIR. A STRUCTURE IS FULLY ENCLOSED. CORRECT? CORRECT. SO WHEN IT SAYS INDOOR ENTERTAINMENT VENUE SHALL BE ENTIRELY CONTAINED WITHIN A BUILDING, WOULD THAT YOU YOU COULD AMEND IT TO SAY, WITHIN A STRUCTURE. 'CAUSE THE DEFINITION OF A STRUCTURE STARTS WITH A WALLED AND ROOFED BUILDING THAT AND IT GOES ON. OKAY. NOT A HANGAR. CORRECT? YES. YEAH. YES. SO I, I'M THINKING OF LIKE, YOU KNOW, WHEN WE'VE SEEN, UM, UM, NOT YET BASKETBALL COURTS, YOU'LL HAVE LIKE A COVERING MM-HMM. , YOU KNOW, BUT, BUT THERE'S NO WALLS. THERE'S JUST A ROOF COVERING THAT IS CONSIDERED BY THE CITY AGAIN MM-HMM. TO BE A BUILDING. WHEREAS A STRUCTURE MEANS IT HAS WALLS. WALLS. AND THE INTENT OF THIS AMENDMENT IS THAT THE USES ARE WITHIN A WALLED ENCLOSED. OKAY. SO I WOULD RECOMMEND THAT WE CHANGE BUILDING TO STRUCTURE. AM I ON THE RIGHT TRACK? I I THINK YOU'RE ON THE RIGHT TRACK. AND, UH, COMMISSIONER GREATHOUSE AND YOU BUILDING JUST A FURTHER YEAH. MAKING SURE THAT THAT FIRST REFERENCE TO BUILDING GETS IS STRICKEN AS WELL. IF WE'RE GONNA SAY AN INDOOR ENTERTAINMENT VENUE SHALL BE ENTIRELY CONTAINED WITHIN A STRUCTURE, THEN YEAH, I THINK THAT MAKES SENSE. AND NOW STRIKE WITHIN A BUILDING STRUCTURE. I THINK IT STRUCTURE WITHIN A STRUCTURE, UH, THE RIGHT. GOOD CATCH. YES. NO CARPORT, GO-KART TRACKS. DOES THAT VERSION LOOK GOOD? YEAH. I DON'T KNOW THAT WE NEED USES IN THIS CATEGORY SHALL BE CONTAINED ENTIRELY. UM, AND THEN THE NEXT SENTENCE, WE CAN PROBABLY GET RID OF ONE OF THOSE. THEY SEEM DUPLICATIVE. YEAH, I'D STRIKE THAT TOO. THAT'S FINE. ENTIRELY THE STRUCTURE. YEAH. OKAY. ALRIGHT. UH, COMMISSIONERS, ANY FURTHER EDITS, CHANGES, UH, STRIKE THE COMMA IN THE FIRST PHRASE. STRUCTURE COMMA, STRIKE THAT. COMMA. YEAH. AND, UH, SUBJECT VERB AGREEMENT IN THE LAST SENTENCE. THIS CATEGORY SPECIFICALLY EXCLUDES. SORRY. THAT MIGHT'VE BEEN [02:05:01] ME. IT WASN'T ME. HA HA. THERE YOU GO. ALRIGHT. UH, ANY ANY FURTHER CHANGES? COMMISSIONERS. ALRIGHT. SEEING NONE, IS THERE A MOTION WITH RESPECT TO AMENDMENT 5 29? MR. CHAIR, I MAKE A MO A MOTION TO APPROVE AMENDMENT 5 29 AS CHANGED, AS AMENDED. ALRIGHT. REDUNDANCY'S ACCEPTED. THERE'S A MOTION TO, UH, APPROVE AMENDMENT 5 29 AS AMENDED. IS THERE A SECOND? SECOND. SECOND BY COMMISSIONER GREATHOUSE. ALRIGHT, ANY DISCUSSION? SEEING NONE. THE MOTION IS FOR APPROVAL OF AMENDMENT 5 29 AS AMENDED BY COMMISSIONER S SIPES WITH A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER GREATHOUSE. ROLL CALL. VOTE PLEASE. COMMISSIONER SIPES? YES. COMMISSIONER GREATHOUSE? YES. COMMISSIONER WATSON? YES. COMMISSIONER, WE AYE. COMMISSIONER ORTIZ? YES. COMMISSIONER BURROWS? YES. CHAIR BUSTAMONTE. AYE. MOTION PASSES FOR APPROVAL AS AMENDED. ALRIGHT, COMMISSIONER, I'M SORRY, MR. SPARROW, IF WE CAN MOVE ON TO AMENDMENT 5 35. ALRIGHT. AMENDMENT FIVE DASH 35 IS RELATED TO RESIDENTIAL MIXED DISTRICTS. UH, SOME MULTI-FAMILY DISTRICTS ON LOTS, ONE THIRD OF AN ACRE OR LESS BEING REQUIRED TO BE CONTAINED WITHIN A SINGULAR STRUCTURE. UH, WE DO NOT HAVE NEW LANGUAGE TO PROPOSE THIS ITEM WAS REQUESTED TO BE PULLED FOR DISCUSSION. UH, IS ANYONE THAT SIGNED IN WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS? OKAY. UM, DO YOU WANNA TALK ABOUT ADUS AS WELL? YES. YES, I'M SIGNED IN ON THAT ONE INDIVIDUAL. ALL RIGHT. SO THIS IS CHAIR'S DISCRETION, MORE PUBLIC COMMENT, BETTER. SO WE'RE GONNA GO AHEAD ALLOW YOU TO DISCUSS BOTH. WE'RE NOT GONNA LIMIT YOU. SO GO AHEAD IF YOU WANNA TALK ABOUT THIS ONE AND WE'LL CALL YOU BACK UP FOR ADUS AS WELL. PERFECT. THANK YOU. THAT'S WHY I SIGNED IN TWICE. UM, THANK YOU BIANCA MALDONADO 4 57 K CLUB DRIVE. UM, THANK YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK. I SIGNED UP TO SPEAK BECAUSE OF, UH, COMMISSIONER GREATHOUSE IN OUR CONVERSATION REGARDING THIS AMENDMENT. AND I WOULD HOPE THAT STAFF COULD GIVE YOU A LITTLE BIT OF DETAIL BECAUSE THIS IS A STAFF SPONSORED AMENDMENT THAT WAS PROPOSED AS A DIRECT RESULT OF A TASK FORCE AND A DIRECT REQUEST BY A COUNCIL MEMBER TO MOVE THIS FORWARD THROUGH THE P TAC PROCESS. SO WHEN IT CAME TO P TAC, I ACTUALLY SERVED AS A COMMUNITY MEMBER ON THE P TTAC. THIS GO AROUND, UM, WE AMENDED IT TO PUT THE, A THIRD OF AN ACRE OR LESS ON THAT PARTICULAR, UH, SIZE OF PROPERTY. AND WHEN I LOOKED AT THIS AS THE RMM FOUR, FIVE, AND SIX, IT'S REALLY ABOUT COMPATIBLE HOUSING DEVELOPMENT WITHIN THE URBAN CORE BECAUSE WHEN YOU START LOOKING AT YOUR RMM FOUR, FIVE, AND SIX, YOU DON'T FIND IT OUTSIDE THE URBAN CORE. THAT'S NOT A PREVALENT ZONING DESIGNATION. AND SO WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE BUILT ENVIRONMENT, IT IS A SINGLE HOUSED STRUCTURE THAT HAS MULTIPLE UNITS ENCLOSED. AND THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT EXISTS IN EVERY SINGLE RMM FOUR, FIVE, AND SIX. UNLESS IT'S A SINGLE FAMILY, WHICH IT NEEDS TO BE REZONED. AND THAT'S A WHOLE NOTHER DISCUSSION. UM, AND THAT'S THE REASONING BEHIND THIS PARTICULAR, UH, AMENDMENT THAT WAS PROPOSED BY STAFF. AND I WOULD LEAVE LOGAN TO GO INTO DETAIL ABOUT THE HISTORY OF THE TASK FORCE AND HOW THIS CAME ABOUT. AND MY UNDERSTANDING IS THE TASK FORCE DIDN'T COME TO A CONSENSUS TO MOVE IT FORWARD. THAT TASK FORCE CAME TO VERY LITTLE CONSENSUS IN MOVING ITEMS FORWARD, IF YOU DO REMEMBER THAT PROCESS, BUT I'M REALLY HERE TO SPEAK IN FAVOR OF IT BECAUSE IT REALLY ADDRESSES A NEED WITHIN THE URBAN CORE. THERE IS A CONCERN, I THINK, UH, COMMISSIONER GREATHOUSE THAT YOU BROUGHT UP AND MAYBE A CONTINUANCE. I DID ASK STAFF FOR THE NUMBER OF PROPERTIES THAT WERE ZONED RM FOUR, FIVE, AND SIX. AND I WAS TOLD JUST TO PUT UP A MAP OF MY AREA WHEN WE TALKED ABOUT IT AT PTAC, BECAUSE THERE IS THE CONCERN THAT YOU GET INTO, UM, A NON-CONFORMING SITUATION AND WHEN A 50% THRESHOLD IS REACHED. HOWEVER, I I THINK THERE ARE SEVERAL NON-CONFORMING ISSUES THAT THE CITY GETS INTO. BUT THIS IS FOR THE GREATER GOOD. THIS IS REALLY FOCUSING ON, UM, A COMPATIBLE DESIGN WHEN YOU HAVE AN RM FOUR, FIVE, AND SIX ADJACENT TO A SINGLE FAMILY. AND THAT'S WHAT I HAVE IN MY COMMUNITY. THAT'S WHAT I HAVE SEEN IN MY ZONING MAP ANALYSIS. NOW, DID I LOOK AT THE ENTIRE CITY? NO, BECAUSE THAT ZOOM MAP ONLY GOES SO FAR. SO THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. I, I DO WANT TO CLARIFY FOR THE BENEFIT OF THOSE IN THE AUDIENCE THAT WE, WE DID CONDUCT MULTIPLE WORK SESSIONS WHERE WE HAD AN OPPORTUNITY TO INTRODUCE THIS AS WELL. SO I'M CERTAINLY HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS, BUT SAVE GOING OVER THE WHOLE PRESENTATION ALL OVER AGAIN. ALRIGHT, THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER SPARROW. I'M SORRY MR. SPARROW. UM, I, I JUST, I JUST WANT YOU UP HERE WITH US, LOGAN. THAT'S WHAT IT COMES DOWN TO. . UM, ALRIGHT. THANK YOU MR. SPARROW. UM, NO FURTHER PUBLIC COMMENT [02:10:01] ON THIS ITEM. UH, DISCUSSION. COMMISSIONER GREATHOUSE? YES. UM, SO I, I RAISED THIS AS AN ISSUE, UM, AND REALLY TRULY JUST WANTED TO GET SOME INPUT FROM STAFF AND THEN ALSO RAISE THIS AS WE WEREN'T ALLOWED TO REALLY SPEAK ABOUT ISSUES IN OUR WORK SESSION. WANTED TO RAISE IT AS AN ISSUE FOR THE, THE REMAINDER OF THE ZONING COMMISSION AND HEAR INPUT FROM EVERYONE. UM, I COULD NOT COME UP WITH LANGUAGE ON MY OWN TO POTENTIALLY, UH, RESOLVE WHAT I SEE AS BEING A POTENTIAL ISSUE HERE. UM, SO I WANTED TO ASK YOU GUYS IF ANYONE HAS LOOKED AT THE POTENTIAL FOR THERE BEING NON-CONFORMING USES? AND IF SO, HOW MANY ARE WE CREATING? BECAUSE THERE ARE QUITE A FEW STRUCTURES, AT LEAST IN AREAS THAT I'M FAMILIAR WITH IN THE CITY WITHIN DISTRICT ONE. MM-HMM. ESPECIALLY WHERE WE DO HAVE, FOR EXAMPLE, A DUPLEX THAT'S ON A LOT THAT HAS, THAT'S ONE THIRD OF AN ACRE OR LESS MM-HMM. THAT ALSO HAS WHAT WOULD HAVE BEEN AN ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT IF IT WAS A SINGLE FAMILY STRUCTURE. BUT IT'S, AND IT'S ZONED RM THREE, OR SORRY, RMM FIVE OR RMM FOUR, WHICH ALLOWS FOR THREE UNITS. SO WE HAVE QUITE A FEW OF THOSE. WE'RE, WE'RE NOT ALL CONTAINED WITHIN A SINGLE STRUCTURE. SO HOW DO WE LOOK AT THAT? DO WE KNOW THE NUMBER OF THOSE PROPERTIES? WE, WE DO NOT, WE DO NOT KNOW THE NUMBER OF PROPERTIES THAT WOULD MADE WOULD BE MADE NON-CON. I MEAN THAT, THAT LEVEL OF ANALYSIS IS, IT'S ALMOST IMPOSSIBLE. UH, NO MATTER WHAT MANPOWER YOU HAVE TO CONDUCT THAT LEVEL OF DETAIL. CERTAINLY THERE WILL BE PROPERTIES THAT WILL BE MADE NON-CONFORMING BY THIS, BUT THOSE PROPERTIES WILL ALSO HAVE NON-CONFORMING RIGHTS PROTECTIONS. UH, WE DO NOT RETROACTIVELY GO BACK AND MAKE PEOPLE TEAR DOWN STRUCTURES. THEY WILL BE ABLE TO CONTINUE TO OPERATE THOSE STRUCTURES. THEY WILL BE ABLE TO MAINTAIN THOSE STRUCTURES PROVIDED THE VALUATION OF THE WORK THAT THEY'RE PERFORMING DOES NOT EXCEED 50% THE REPLACEMENT COSTS OF THAT, OF THOSE UNITS THEMSELVES. CAN YOU JUST EXPLAIN TO ME HOW THAT 50% IS CALCULATED? SO IF YOU OWN A PROPERTY AND YOU UNDERTAKE MM-HMM. ONE PROJECT AND IT'S 25% OF THE VALUE AND THEN TWO YEARS LATER YOU UNDERTAKE ANOTHER PROJECT AND THAT'S 30%, HAVE YOU TRIPPED THAT OR IS THAT LIKE PER PROJECT? SO IT'S A REALLY CONVOLUTED ANSWER, BUT I'LL SAY WE'RE ACTUALLY PROCESSING ANOTHER, UH, CODE AMENDMENT RIGHT NOW TO STRIKE THE REPLACEMENT VALUE LANGUAGE WITH APPRAISED VALUE. SO IF, IF YOU WERE TO COME IN, LET'S SAY YOU HAD A DUPLEX WITH A THIRD DETACHED UNIT BEHIND IT AND YOU WERE MADE NON-CONFORMING, SHOULD THIS PASS AND THAT PROPERTY WAS APPRAISED AT $250,000. AS LONG AS YOU WERE COMING IN WITH A SCOPE OF WORK WITH LESS THAN $125,000 WORTH OF WORK, THEN YOU COULD GET A PERMIT TO MAINTAIN THAT STRUCTURE. BUT IF YOU WERE COMING IN WITH $200,000 WORTH OF WORK, WE'D SAY, UH, YOU GOTTA COMPLY WITH THIS NEW RULE. OKAY. BUT AGAIN, SO IS IT THAT ONE PROJECT AT A TIME OR IF ONE PROJECT AT RIGHT. OKAY. RIGHT. YEAH, IT'S RIGHT. YEAH. WE, WE DO NOT SAY, WELL, FIVE YEARS AGO YOU DID $10,000 WORTH OF WORK AND THIS YEAR YOU'RE DOING $20,000 WORTH OF WORK. CORRECT. OKAY. AND YEAH, ALSO ENFORCEMENT ISSUES WITH RESPECT TO THAT. OKAY. UM, I THINK, I THINK THAT'S ALL THE QUESTIONS THAT I HAVE. I MAY HAVE MORE COMMENTARY. ALRIGHT. THANK YOU COMMISSIONER GREATHOUSE. ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONERS ON MY LEFT. UH, COMMISSIONERS ON MY RIGHT. UM, I THINK I HAVE COMMENTARY AS WELL, BUT, SO I WILL SAVE THAT. UM, SEEING NO FURTHER QUESTIONS AT THIS TIME, I WILL OPEN IT UP FOR DISCUSSION. UH, COMMISSIONER GREATHOUSE, WOULD YOU LIKE ME TO GO FIRST? OR YOU CAN GO FIRST. ALRIGHT, I WILL GO FIRST THIS TIME. UH, I WILL GIVE COMMISSIONER GREATHOUSE THE FINAL WORD. AND COMMISSIONER WATSON, YOU WANTED TO GO AS WELL. ALRIGHT. SO I THINK, UM, YOU KNOW, AS REPRESENTATIVES OF DISTRICT FIVE FOR ME, DISTRICT TWO FOR COMMISSIONER WATSON AND DISTRICT ONE FOR COMMISSIONER GREATHOUSE, THIS IS A CHANGE THAT IMPACTS OUR DISTRICTS MORE THAN ANY OTHERS. UH, POSSIBLY INCLUDING, UH, COMMISSIONER SIPES, HE'S PROBABLY A CLOSE FOURTH. UM, I THINK THE IDEA BEHIND LIMITING THE MULTI-UNIT CONSTRUCTION, NEW CONSTRUCTION FOR RMM FOUR, RMM FIVE, AND RMM SIX UNDER ONE THIRD OF AN ACRE IS A GREAT ONE. I DO HAVE THE CONCERNS THAT I BELIEVE COMMISSIONER GREATHOUSE HAS REGARDING THE NON-CONFORMING STRUCTURE, UH, NON-CONFORMING USES THAT WILL BE CREATED IF THIS AMENDMENT WERE TO PASS. UM, THAT BEING SAID, GIVEN MR. SPARROW'S DESCRIPTION OF THE WAY THAT THE, UH, NON-CONFORMING USE WILL BE LOST DUE TO REPAIR OR REPLACEMENT, UH, THAT'S THE PATENT WORD, AND I CAN'T THINK OF THE DEVELOPMENT WORD ANYMORE, UH, [02:15:01] DUE TO THE REPAIR OR REPLACEMENT, UM, I THINK I WOULD BE SUPPORTIVE OF THIS 'CAUSE I DO WANT TO SEE AS, UM, THE CITIZEN TO BE HEARD SAID THAT THIS DOES SORT OF KEEP OUR NEIGHBORHOODS, UH, KEEP OUR NEIGHBORHOODS, UH, IN THE SAME KIND OF BUILT ENVIRONMENT THAT THEY HAVE BEEN. SO, IN MY NEIGHBORHOOD, I SEE A LOT OF THESE UNITS WHERE THEY ALREADY ARE A SINGLE, UH, FAMILY HOUSE THAT HAS BEEN CONVERTED OR WAS BUILT TO LOOK LIKE A SINGLE FAMILY HOUSE, BUT HAS FOUR TO FIVE UNITS. AND, YOU KNOW, THOSE SHOULD BE MULTIFAMILY AGAIN. UH, AND I DO NOT WANT TO DISTURB THAT IF AT ALL POSSIBLE. UH, THAT BEING SAID, I WOULD LIKE NEW CONSTRUCTION, UH, TO BE SINGLE FAMILY TO FIT IN WITH THE SINGLE FAMILY WHERE THIS KIND OF ZONING WILL BE MOST COMMON. AND I THINK I RAMBLED ON, SO I'M GOING TO NOW PASS IT OFF TO COMMISSIONER WATSON. UM, I THINK THAT THE NON-CONFORMING ISSUE IS WELL ADDRESSED IN THE OTHER AMENDMENTS THAT MR. SPARROW DISCUSSED. I WILL BE SUPPORTING THIS AMENDMENT BECAUSE IT IS CRITICAL TO PROTECTING URBAN CORE NEIGHBORHOODS. UM, WE WANT TO HAVE PRO NEIGHBORHOOD DEVELOPMENT AND MULTI-FAMILY AFFORDABLE OPTIONS AND PROTECT THAT HOUSING STOCK THAT'S THERE. UM, A LOT OF THE SITUATIONS IN MY DISTRICT SPECIFICALLY, UM, THAT COME FORWARD, THERE IS A CHOICE OFTEN BETWEEN SINGLE FAMILY, RESIDENTIAL, OR MULTI-FAMILY THAT CREATES AFFORDABILITY CHALLENGES, THAT CREATES, UH, CHALLENGES FOR THE CHARACTER OF DEVELOPMENT IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD. AND THIS IS A REALLY GREAT WAY TO INCENTIVIZE, UM, DEVELOPMENT THAT ACTUALLY WILL CREATE MORE HOUSING AND, AND IT INCENTIVIZE LOCAL PROPERTY OWNERS TO CONTINUE IMPROVING THEIR PROPERTY WHILE LIMITING SOME OF THE NEGATIVE IMPACTS LIKE DISPLACEMENT THAT COME FROM HAVING TO UP ZONE TO MF RIGHT NOW IN DISTRICT TWO SPECIFICALLY. SO I'LL BE SUPPORTING THIS. DO YOU WANT THE LAST WORD? OKAY. ANY, UH, ANY OTHER COMMISSIONER'S DISCUSSION? DISCUSSION? COMMISSIONER SIPES? YES, I'LL BE SUPPORTING THE MOTION AND, OR WELL, IF THERE'S A MOTION FOR APPROVAL, BUT I'M IN SUPPORT OF THE AMENDMENT, UM, BECAUSE, UM, AS, UH, COMMISSIONER WATSON SAID, BUT ONE OF THE THINGS THAT I'VE NOTICED ON THE, ON, ON VARIOUS CASES WITHIN ZONING ON OUR, ON OUR COMMISSION IS THAT WE'LL HAVE NEIGHBOR COME AND SAY, WE DON'T LIKE THE WAY THAT IT LOOKS. AND, AND, AND I UNDERSTAND WE'RE LOOKING AT, AT LAND USE, BUT, UM, THIS IS ONE WAY THAT I THINK WILL ALLOW FOR, UH, MULTIFAMILY TO BE INTRODUCED ONTO A SITE AND ALSO, UH, ALLEVIATE THE, UH, CONCERN OF THE NEIGHBORS THEMSELVES. SO, UM, I, I'M, I WILL GLADLY SUPPORT THE AMENDMENT. ALRIGHT. THANK YOU COMMISSIONER SIPES. ALRIGHT, COMMISSIONER GREATHOUSE LAST WORD. THANKS. UM, I, I WILL BE SUPPORTING THE AMENDMENT. UM, AND THANK YOU FOR YOUR INPUT. FELLOW INNER CITY COMMISSIONERS, UM, . I REALLY DID. I REALLY WAS WANTED TO HEAR, UM, WHAT, WHAT EVERYONE ELSE HAD TO SAY ON THIS. UM, I, I AM STILL CONCERNED THAT THERE WILL BE PROPERTIES THAT WILL BECOME NON-CONFORMING BECAUSE OF THIS, UM, AND THAT THOSE WILL BE POTENTIALLY NATURALLY OCCURRING AFFORDABLE HOUSING THAT WE ALREADY HAVE. OR WE HAVE MULTIPLE UNITS AND THEY ARE, WERE, YOU KNOW, A HOUSE THAT WAS CONVERTED THAT HAD A CARRIAGE HOUSE. UM, BUT I DO THINK THAT KIND OF IN BALANCING THAT, UM, AND THAT'S WHY I WANNA KNOW HOW MANY THERE WERE. BUT I UNDERSTAND THAT THAT'S DIFFICULT. BUT KIND OF BALANCING THE, THE, THE CONSEQUENCES THAT THAT MAY HAVE ON THOSE PROPERTIES VERSUS LOOKING AT, THERE ARE A LOT OF VACANT LOTS THAT ARE RM FOUR IN DISTRICT TWO AND PROBABLY IN DISTRICT FIVE AS WELL. UM, MAYBE NOT. I, I DON'T SEE AS MANY IN MY DISTRICT. I, I THINK IN BALANCING THE CONCERNS THAT WE HAVE WITH THE TYPE OF CONSTRUCTION THAT'S GOING ON IN THE, ON THOSE, UM, VACANT LOTS, I THINK THAT IN THE END IT WEIGHS IN FAVOR OF SUPPORTING THE, THE MOTION AND, AND HOPEFULLY WE DON'T HAVE THE UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES THAT, THAT FOLKS DON'T WANNA MAINTAIN THE, UH, NON-CONFORMING USE PROPERTIES. SO, THAT'S IT. ALRIGHT, THANK YOU SO MUCH. THE FLOOR IS NOW OPEN FOR A MOTION, UH, WITH RESPECT TO AMENDMENT FIVE DASH 35. I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION FOR APPROVAL OF AMENDMENT FIVE DASH 35 AS PRESENTED. ALRIGHT. THERE IS AN MOTION FOR APPROVAL OF AMENDMENT FIVE DASH 35. IS THERE A SECOND? WE'LL SECOND THAT. ALRIGHT. SECOND BY COMMISSIONER BARTOS. UH, ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? COMMISSIONERS, UH, SEEING NONE, UH, MOTION IS FOR APPROVAL OF AMENDMENT FIVE DASH 35 BY COMMISSIONER WATSON WITH A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER BOTTLES ROLL CALL VOTE PLEASE. COMMISSIONER WATSON? YES. COMMISSIONER BOTTLES? YES. COMMISSIONER SIPES? YES. COMMISSIONER [02:20:01] GREATHOUSE? YES. COMMISSIONER, WE AYE. COMMISSIONER TIZ? YES. CHAIR BUSTAMONTE. AYE. MOTION PASSES FOR APPROVAL. ALRIGHT, THANK YOU SO MUCH. UH, MR. SPARROW, IF WE COULD MOVE ON TO, UH, AMENDMENT FIVE DASH 55. ALRIGHT. UH, AMENDMENT FIVE DASH 55 IS RELATED TO THE REGULATION OF STANDALONE PERSONAL HYGIENE FACILITIES, UH, PERMANENT. UH, THIS ITEM WAS SUBMITTED BY DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT AND CAME IN THE FORM OF A RULE INTERPRETATION, UH, DECISION. UH, THIS ITEM WAS REQUESTED TO BE PULLED FOR INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERATION. UH, IF YOU RECALL, THIS IS RELATED TO THE, I BELIEVE THEY WERE CALLED THE PORTLAND LOU, UH, DOWNTOWN, UH, BEN COUNCILMAN TREVENO HAD REQUESTED, UH, THAT, UH, WE PUT TOGETHER SOME REGULATIONS. THE R CAME FROM THAT BACK IN, I BELIEVE, 2017. AND THIS IS SIMPLY CODIFYING THAT. ALRIGHT, THANK YOU MR. SPARROW. ANY PUBLIC COMMENT ON THIS ONE? NOT A BIG CROWD FOR PUBLIC TOILETS. GOT IT. ALRIGHT. UM, ANY QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONERS TO MY LEFT? YES. COMMISSIONER GREATHOUSE. UM, MY QUESTION IS, WHY 100 FEET OF SEPARATION FROM SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL S SO THAT'S WHAT THE RED HAD PROPOSED. UH, I THINK THAT THE, UH, THE ARGUMENT OR THE RATIONALE FOR IT WAS, IF WE ARE GOING TO TAKE A PIECE OF PROPERTY THAT ITS PRIMARY USE IS A PUBLIC TOILET, IS THAT SOMETHING THAT SHOULD BE WITHIN 100 FEET OF A RESIDENTIAL USE? UH, SO I I, THE REGULATION WAS PUT FORTH TO PROTECT, YOU KNOW, PROPERTY OWNERS, RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY OWNERS, UH, FROM HAVING THAT BE THE NEXT DOOR NEIGHBOR, UH, 100 WAS THE AGREED UPON NUMBER. OKAY. THAT, I GUESS THAT WAS MY QUESTION. WHY, WHY 100 AND NOT 200 OR SOMETHING DIFFERENT? OKAY. I I I THINK PART OF THE REASON THAT IT'S 100, ESPECIALLY BECAUSE THESE WERE PLACED DOWNTOWN, YOU START GOING TOO FAR OUT, YOU'RE NOT GONNA BE ABLE TO PUT 'EM ANYWHERE. UH, BECAUSE YOU'LL ALWAYS BE WITHIN A COUPLE HUNDRED FEET OF SOME SORT OF RESIDENTIAL USE DOWNTOWN. UH, THAT'S WHERE THE, UH, THE FIRST PORTLAND LEW WAS ESTABLISHED. OKAY. YES. COMMISSIONER GREATHOUSE. SO WHO IS, COULD, COULD SOME PRIVATE INDIVIDUAL ZONE THEIR PROPERTY FOR THIS? IF, IF THEY WANNA, LIKE WHO IS, WHO IS USING THIS ZONING CATEGORY? SO RIGHT NOW IT'S THE CITY. I MEAN, THERE, THERE WOULD BE NOTHING TO PRECLUDE A PRIVATE PROPERTY OWNER FROM PUTTING A PUBLIC TOILET ON A PARCEL OF PROPERTY. BUT THE MARKET IS PROBABLY NOT SIGNIFICANT THAT WANT TO BUY LAND AND PUT A PUBLIC TOILET ON IT. SO, MR. CHAIR? YES. COMMISSIONER BOTTLES. ONE SECOND. IF COMMISSIONER GREATHOUSE CAN JUST FINISH HER QUESTIONING, BUT YEAH, YOU COULD HAVE LIKE A C THREE WITH LIKE ANOTHER USE AND ALSO HAVE THAT. SO THERE YOU'RE MULTIPLE. SO WE'RE, WHAT WE'RE LOOKING AT IS, THESE ARE REGULATIONS WHEN THE PRIMARY USE OF THE PROPERTY IS A PUBLIC RESTROOM. SO IF YOU ARE A RESTAURANT, YOU HAVE TO HAVE A BATHROOM. THAT BATHROOM CAN BE OPEN TO THE PUBLIC. YOU HAVE AN ACRE, PROBABLY NOT THAT BIG, YOU HAVE A THOUSAND SQUARE FEET. AND THE ONLY THING ON THAT PROPERTY IS A PUBLIC RESTROOM. OKAY. SORRY. COMMISSIONER BOTTLES. FORGIVE ME SINCE YOU'RE THERE. SO THE PRIMARY USE APPLICANT SO FAR HAS BEEN THE CITY WITH THE TWO PUBLIC BATHROOMS. ONE ON ALAMO AND LASSO AND THE OTHER ONE THAT WAS OPEN RECENTLY. SO YES, I, THAT'S THE ONLY APPLICANT SO FAR TO MY KNOWLEDGE. I'M NOT AWARE OF ANYONE ELSE IN THE CITY THAT HAS SAID I HAVE PROPERTY AND THIS IS WHAT I, THIS IS WHAT I WANNA DO WITH IT. ALRIGHT, THANK YOU. UM, ANY QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONERS ON MY RIGHT. UH, BRIEFLY, MR. SPARROW, UM, THIS CHANGE OF COURSE WOULD NOT REQUIRE THAT ANY OF THE EXISTING PUBLIC TOILETS SPONSORED BY THE CITY WOULD BE CLOSED. IS THAT CORRECT? CORRECT. YEAH. NOTHING IN THIS AMENDMENT WOULD FORCE THE HAND OF ANYONE TO CLOSE OR OPEN ANYTHING ELSE? CORRECT. OKAY. THANK YOU SO MUCH. UM, BRIEFLY, YOU KNOW, I GET THE A HUNDRED FEET BECAUSE RIGHT BEHIND MY HOUSE IS AN I ONE AND THIS WOULD BE A PERMITTED USE AND I DON'T WANT THAT, YOU KNOW, RIGHT UP AGAINST THE ALLEY IN MY PROPERTY. UM, BUT, SO I THINK THE A HUNDRED FEET IS A GOOD COMPROMISE. UH, ALRIGHT. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? COMMISSIONERS? COMMISSIONERS. ALRIGHT. FLOORS OPEN FOR A MOTION WITH RESPECT TO AMENDMENT FIVE DASH 55. MR. CHAIR, I RECOMMEND OR I MOTION FOR APPROVAL FOR AMENDMENT FIVE DASH 55. ALRIGHT, THERE'S A MOTION FOR APPROVAL OF AMENDMENT FIVE DASH 55 BY COMMISSIONER S SIPES. IS THERE A SECOND? WE'LL SECOND THAT OR, UH, COMMISSIONER BOTTO, YOU ALREADY SAID IT TOO LATE. CAN'T TAKE IT BACK. ALRIGHT. THERE'S A MOTION FOR APPROVAL OF AMENDMENT FIVE DASH 55 BY COMMISSIONER SIPES [02:25:01] AND A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER BOTTO. UM, ROLL CALL VOTE PLEASE. COMMISSIONER SIPES? YES. COMMISSIONER BOTTLES? YES. COMMISSIONER GREATHOUSE? YES. COMMISSIONER WATSON? YES. COMMISSIONER, WE AYE. COMMISSIONER TI? YES. CHAIR BUSANTE AYE. MOTION PASSES FOR PASSES FOR APPROVAL. OKAY, THANK YOU. IF WE CAN MOVE ON NOW, MR. SPARROW TO AMENDMENT FIVE DASH 57. YES, SIR. AMENDMENT FIVE DASH 57 IS RELATED TO PERMANENT SUPPORTIVE HOUSING. IT WAS SUBMITTED BY THE DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT. IT PROPOSES A DEFINITION AND EDITS TO THE USE, I SHOULD SAY UPDATES TO THE USE MATRIX, UH, RESIDENTIAL USE MATRIX SPECIFICALLY, UH, TO, UH, PROVIDE FOR WHERE THOSE, UH, USES ARE PERMITTED. UH, THE, THE DEFINITION OF A PERMANENT SUPPORTIVE HOUSING, UH, IT IS A, A COMBINATION OF HOUSING AND SERVICES DESIGNED FOR PEOPLE WITH SERIOUS MENTAL ILLNESSES OR OTHER DISABILITIES WHO NEED SUPPORT TO LIVE STABLY IN THEIR COMMUNITIES. THESE SERVICES CAN INCLUDE CASE MANAGEMENT, SUBSTANCE ABUSE OR MENTAL HEALTH COUNSELING, ADVOCACY AND ASSISTANCE IN LOCATING AND MAINTAINING EMPLOYMENT RES. UH, THE RESIDENTIAL UNITS MUST MEET THE DWELLING DASH UNIT AS DEFINED IN THIS CHAPTER. THAT WOULD BE AN APPENDIX A, UH, TO BE AUTHORIZED BY SPECIFIC USE AUTHORIZATION IN RMM SIX, RMM FIVE, AND RMM FOUR AND PERMITTED IN MULTIFAMILY DISTRICTS. AGAIN, THIS ITEM WAS REQUESTED TO BE PULLED FOR INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERATION. THANK YOU MR. SPARROW. AND THERE IS NO PUBLIC COMMENT ON THIS ITEM. ALRIGHT, UM, QUESTIONS, COMMISSIONERS. COMMISSIONER GREATHOUSE? MY ONLY QUESTION ON THIS, WELL, IT'S TWO QUESTIONS. ONE QUESTION, TWO PARTS. UM, WHAT IS SERIOUS MENTAL ILLNESS AND WHO DETERMINES THAT? UH, YEAH, I, IF I RECALL FROM DOING MY BEST TO RECALL FROM TECH, THERE ARE DEFINITIONS IN STATE LEGISLATION. WHAT THOSE ARE SPECIFICALLY, I DON'T KNOW OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD. I THINK IN THE MEDICAL, THIS IS, UM, MELISSA RAMIREZ, I THINK IN OUR, UM, HOUSING AND, I'M SORRY, NOT HOUSING IN OUR, UH, HUMAN SERVICE DEPARTMENT. WE WORKED WITH THEM ON CREATING THIS AND I THINK THERE ARE STATE AND FEDERAL, UH, DEFINITIONS THAT WE ARE FOLLOWING. AND SO, UM, THIS IS, THIS WAS MADE, THIS AMENDMENT WAS PROPOSED. BASED OFF OF THOSE DISCUSSIONS, WOULD IT MAKE SENSE TO REFERENCE THOSE HERE OR OTHERWISE CLARIFY WHAT THAT IS? AND THAT'S A TRUE QUESTION. I, I WOULD BE HESITANT TO, TO TRANSLATE THEM INTO THIS SECTION BECAUSE AS THEIR REGULATIONS CHANGE, THEN WE HAVE TO GO THROUGH AND UPDATE OUR CODES AS WELL. UH, YOU COULD POTENTIALLY ADD REFERENCE TO THEM, BUT I WOULD NOT ADD THE REGULATIONS THEMSELVES INTO THE CODE OR THE DEFINITIONS FROM THE FEDS INTO OUR CODE. OKAY. JUST THINKING THROUGH WHEN THIS COMES UP AND DETERMINING LIKE WHAT IS, I MEAN, DO IS JUST MENTAL ILLNESS, IS THAT, WOULD THAT BE CONSIDERED PERMANENT SUPPORTIVE HOUSING? DOES IT HAVE TO BE SERIOUS? KIND OF WHO, WHO MAKES THOSE DETERMINATIONS? AND IS THAT CLEAR FROM THE CODE? AND, AND CAN WE, WOULD THEN APPLICANTS KNOW WHAT THEY'RE DEALING WITH RIGHT WHEN THEY'RE, WHEN THEY'RE TRYING TO INTERPRET THIS? THAT, THAT'S KIND OF WHERE I'M GETTING AT WITH JUST TRYING TO CLARIFY THAT. SO SORRY COMMISSIONER WATSON. IT'S A RELATED BUT DIFFERENT QUESTION. COMMISSIONER, DO YOU MIND USING YOUR MICROPHONE? YEAH. THANK YOU. UM, SO KIND OF BUILDING OFF OF THE LATTER PART OF COMMISSIONER GREAT HOUSE'S QUESTION. WHEN AN APPLICANT COMES TO DEVELOPMENT SERVICES, AND THIS IS A USE THAT THEY'RE REQUESTING IN THEIR REZONE, WHERE, WHERE IS, WHAT ARE YOU GONNA BE AT? LIKE, HOW DOES THAT IMPACT THE PROCESS? I KNOW WE'VE HAD A FEW MM-HMM. CASES WITH THIS THIS YEAR WHERE YEAH. DIFFERENT KINDS OF INFORMATION WERE PRESENTED THAT SIG SUBSTANTIALLY IMPACTED OUR DECISION. SO LIKE, DO THEY HAVE SPECIFIC EVIDENCE THAT THEY HAVE TO BRING FORWARD? IS THAT BURDEN ON THE APPLICANT? IS THAT BURDEN ON US? COULD YOU, LIKE, HOW IS THIS GONNA IMPACT THE PROCESS? I I THINK THAT THE, THE, THE KIND OF, THE ROOT OF THIS AMENDMENT STEMMED FROM SOME ITEMS AS I UNDERSTAND IT, THAT WENT TO ZONING COMMISSION EARLIER IN THE YEAR WHERE THE ONLY THING THAT WE HAD IN OUR USE MATRIX WAS A HUMAN [02:30:01] SERVICES CAMPUS, WHICH IS WAY ABOVE AND BEYOND WHAT THIS PARTICULAR USE IS. AND IN FACT, THERE'S ANOTHER AMENDMENT THAT WE'LL DISCUSS A COUPLE DOWN THE LIST THAT'S KIND OF ANOTHER ALTERNATIVE TO THIS. SO WHAT, WHAT THIS IS SEEKING TO DO IS PROVIDE FOR A USE THAT IS FEDERALLY RECOGNIZED. THERE ARE GRANT PROGRAMS TO HELP FUND THESE WITHOUT REQUIRING AN APPLICANT IN SAN ANTONIO TO ASK FOR SOMETHING AS INTENSE AS HAVEN FOR HOPE. SO WE'RE TRYING TO PROVIDE THAT MIDDLE GROUND AND ALTERNATIVES WHERE TODAY THEY DO NOT EXIST IN THE CODE. OKAY. MR. CHAIR? YES. MR. BOTTLES COMMISSIONER? I TEND TO AGREE WITH COMMISSIONER SAMARA. I THINK THAT IF THERE WAS A GENERIC ENDING AT THIS THAT SAID PER FEDERAL DEFINITIONS, WELL, I MEAN AS SIMPLE AS THAT. SO WE DON'T GET INVOLVED IN ALL THE LEGAL LANGUAGE, BUT, UH, SOMETHING AS SIMPLE AS THAT. SO, UH, LO LAUREN JUST PULLED UP THE FEDERAL DEFINITION MATCHES THAT WORD FOR WORD THAT THAT IS THE FEDERAL DEFINITION OF A PERMANENT SUPPORTIVE HOUSING. WE, WE DID ADD. OH YEAH, THE ONLY THING WE ADDED IS THE LAST SENTENCE THAT SAYS THEIR DEFINITION OF UNIT HAS TO MEET OUR DEFINITION OF UNIT. BUT EVERYTHING BEFORE THAT SENTENCE IS WORD FOR WORD FROM THE FEDERAL, UH, LE UH, LEGISLATION. OKAY. WELL THEN THAT KIND OF GETS RID OF MY QUESTION 'CAUSE I WAS GONNA ASK IF WE CAN JUST STRIKE SERIOUS AND MOVE ON. UM, BUT OKAY. UM, YOU KNOW, OKAY. I THINK THAT'S THE END OF MY RAMBLING. UM, ALRIGHT, LET'S GO AHEAD AND DISCUSS THIS AMENDMENT AND, UH, WE'RE GONNA START WITH COMMISSIONER GREATHOUSE THIS TIME. SO, UM, SORRY THAT I HAVE BRAIN DAMAGE FROM BEING A LAWYER. UM, BUT I DO THINK, BECAUSE MY CONCERN HERE WAS LIKE, IF, IF, HOW DO YOU DETERMINE THAT AND ARE YOU PRECLUDING SOMEONE FROM BEING ABLE TO OPERATE SOMETHING LIKE THIS? IF WHO DETERMINES IF IT'S SERIOUS? BUT THE FACT IS, LIKE IT SAYS OTHER DISABILITIES WHO NEED SUPPORT TO LIVE STABLY IN THEIR COMMUNITIES. SO I THINK THAT CATCHALL HELPS ALLEVIATE ANY CONCERNS THAT I HAVE ON LIKE, HOW THIS IS INTERPRETED AND, AND THEN SUBSEQUENTLY IMPLEMENTED. SO I'M GONNA BE SUPPORTING THIS. ALRIGHT, THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER GREATHOUSE. COMMISSIONERS TO MY LEFT COMMISSIONER RE BARDOS. I STILL HAVE A LITTLE CONCERN. WE EITHER ELIMINATE THE WORD SERIOUS OR WE PUT PREFERRED DEFINITION SOMEWHERE AS A SOURCE OF THIS. YEAH. OKAY. UN UNDERSTAND. UH, COMMISSIONER ORTIZ OR WATSON DISCUSSION, I FEEL COMFORTABLE WITH THIS BEING THE FEDERAL DEFINITION AND I WOULD, THIS IS LIKE COMMENTARY COMPLETELY THAT I HAVE NO CONTROL OVER. BUT IN THE PROCESS OF, YOU KNOW, APPLICANTS COMING FORWARD, LIKE EN ENCOURAGING THEM TO INCLUDE IN THEIR PACKET, SOME JUST DETAIL ABOUT THIS TO ALLEVIATE SOME OF THE CONCERNS THAT I KNOW WE'RE GONNA GET FROM NEIGHBORS. I, I THINK THIS IS A VERY NECESSARY IMPROVEMENT FROM WHAT WE'RE CURRENTLY DEALING WITH. UM, NO MISTAKE THERE, BUT YOU KNOW, I KNOW THERE'S GONNA BE POTENTIALLY SOME INTERESTING LEGAL INTERPRETATION THAT COME BEFORE US, SO. OKAY. THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER WATSON. COMMISSIONER ORTIZ. OKAY. COMMISSIONER HU. THANK YOU MR. CHAIR. SO SERIOUS MENTAL ILLNESS IS A SPECIFIC DEFINITION IN THE INSTITUTE OF MENTAL HEALTH. SO IT IS A DEFINITIONS A TERM. IT IS NOT A DESCRIPTION, IT IS A DEFINITION. SO I WOULD, UH, MOVE, I WOULD SAY LEAVE THAT TERM IN YOUR AMENDMENT OR IN YOUR DEFINITION. ALRIGHT. THANK YOU. UH, COMMISSIONER SIPES. ALRIGHT. THIS IS NOT A SECRET OF NIM IT IS SIMPLY, SORRY. ANYONE? OH YEAH. NO ONE LIKED THE SECRET OF NIM REFERENCE. ALRIGHT, FINE. UH, THAT WAS IN FACT THE NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF MENTAL HEALTH. UM, THAT'S WHERE IT COMES FROM. ALRIGHT. UM, I AGREE WITH COMMISSIONER GREATHOUSE AND THERE BEING NO FURTHER DISCUSSION. IS THERE A MOTION FOR, UH, WITH RESPECT TO AMENDMENT FIVE DASH 57? UH, MR. CHAIR, I MAKE A MOTION FOR APPROVAL OF AMENDMENT FIVE DASH 57. IS THERE A SECOND? SECOND. SECOND BY COMMISSIONER WATSON. ALRIGHT, ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? SEEING NONE, UH, THE MOTION IS FOR APPROVAL OF AMENDMENT FIVE DASH 57 BY COMMISSIONER SYS WITH A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER WATSON. ROLL CALL, VOTE PLEASE. COMMISSIONER SYS? YES. COMMISSIONER WATSON? YES. COMMISSIONER GREATHOUSE? YES. COMMISSIONER, WE AYE. COMMISSIONER ORTIZ? YES. COMMISSIONER BURROWS? YES. CHAIR BUSTAMONTE. AYE. MOTION PASSES FOR APPROVAL. WE HAVE THE VERSION THAT I EDITED. OKAY. UH, [02:35:01] MR. SPARROW, IF WE CAN MOVE ON TO AMENDMENT 10 DASH FOUR. ALRIGHT, SO AMENDMENT 10 DASH FOUR IS RELATED TO, UH, NOT REQUIRING REIFICATION WHEN AN APPLICANT AMENDS THEIR, UH, CHANGE OF ZONING REQUESTS TO DECREASE DENSITY. SO WHAT, WHAT'S ON THE SCREEN RIGHT NOW WAS THE VERSION THAT WAS, UH, ULTIMATELY SUPPORTED BY TAC. WE'RE GONNA GO AHEAD AND PULL UP, UH, A VERSION. WE TOOK A STAB AT IT BASED UPON, UH, SOME OF THE COMMENTS. UH, SO IF YOU LOOK, UH, INITIALLY WE DIDN'T HAVE ANYTHING IN A ONE, SO, YOU KNOW, IT SAID AMENDING A ZONING REQUEST TO, UH, OR FROM ANY MULTIFAMILY DISTRICT. AND THE INTENT WAS IF YOU TOLD THE PUBLIC THAT YOU WANTED 50 UNITS PER ACRE AND YOU SAID, ALL RIGHT, I'VE MET WITH THE COMMUNITY AND I'VE AGREED TO DO 33 UNITS PER ACRE, THAT DROP IN DENSITY SHOULD NOT REQUIRE YOU SENDING NOTICES FOR SOMETHING LESS INTENSE THAN WHAT WAS ORIGINALLY NOTICED. SAME THING. AND B FOUR, THE FOLLOWING REQUESTS FOR ZONING SHALL NOT REQUIRE REIFICATION AMENDING A ZONING REQUEST TO DECREASE THE DENSITY OF A SINGLE FAMILY OR MULTIFAMILY DISTRICT. SO I THINK IT, UH, WILL SAVE A LOT OF PAPER. UH, BUT THAT WAS OUR STAB AT, UH, AT CORRECTING THAT. ALRIGHT. AND THANK YOU. UM, QUICK QUESTION FOR STAFF. THIS, FOR EXAMPLE, CAME UP, UH, WITH THE PROPERTY ON FOUR 10, JUST AROUND ONE OF THE MISSIONS, UM, ESPADA A MISSION ESPADA WHERE THE APPLICANT REQUESTED MF 33, I THINK ORIGINALLY AND WANTED TO DROP IT DOWN. OR ACTUALLY THE CITIZENS AROUND IT WANTED TO DROP IT DOWN TO M MF 25, MAYBE 1718. MF 18. THERE'S NO 17. ALRIGHT. MF 18. UM, AND THEY WERE NOT ABLE TO DO THAT WITHOUT REIFICATION, CORRECT? CORRECT. CORRECT. OKAY. AND SO BY ACCEPTING THIS LANGUAGE THAT WOULD THEN SAY THAT THAT WOULD BE OKAY, WE WOULD NOT REQUIRE REIFICATION. YES. AND WE COLLABORATED WITH LOGAN AND HIS TEAM AS WELL AS THE ATTORNEY'S OFFICE ON THIS. VERY GOOD. ALRIGHT. UM, IS THERE ANYONE, I WANNA SEE IF THERE WAS ANYONE, YEAH. SORRY. ANY PUBLIC COMMENT ON THIS ONE? ALRIGHT, ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONERS? COMMISSIONERS. ALRIGHT. UM, UH, FLOORS OPEN FOR A MOTION WITH RESPECT TO AMENDMENT TEN FOUR. MR. CHAIRMAN, I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION FOR APPROVAL AS AMENDED HERE, UM, FOR ITEM OR FOR AMENDMENT 10 DASH FOUR. ALRIGHT. IS THERE A SECOND? SECOND. SECOND BY COMMISSIONER WATSON. UH, ANY DISCUSSION? SEEING NONE. THE MOTION IS FOR APPROVAL OF AMENDMENT 10 DASH FOUR AS AMENDED BY COMMISSIONER S SIPES WITH A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER WATSON. ROLL CALL, VOTE PLEASE. COMMISSIONER SIPES? YES. COMMISSIONER WATSON? YES. COMMISSIONER GREATHOUSE? YES. COMMISSIONER, WE AYE. COMMISSIONER TIZ? YES. COMMISSIONER BORROWS? YES. CHAIR BUSANTE. UH, AYE. MOTION PASSES FOR APPROVAL AS AMENDED. ALRIGHT, NOW COMES THE FUND. ALRIGHT, MR. SPARROW, IF WE CAN MOVE ON TO AMENDMENT 23 DASH SIX. ALRIGHT. AMENDMENT 23 DASH SIX IS RELATED TO, UH, THE REGULATION OF ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS. IT WAS SUBMITTED BY THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND HOUSING SERVICES DEPARTMENT. UH, I AM GOING TO INVITE, UH, SARAH WITH N H S D TO COME UP AND KIND OF INTRODUCE, UH, SOME OF THE AMENDMENTS. UH, THERE HAVE BEEN, UH, A COUPLE MEETINGS, UH, WITH ADDITIONAL INPUT. UM, WE CAN GO AHEAD AND PULL UP THE POWERPOINT. DO. ALL RIGHT. GOOD AFTERNOON COMMISSIONERS. I'M GONNA TRY AND DISCONNECT MY MASK FROM MY EARRING AND THEN I CAN GET STARTED. ALL. ALRIGHT, MY NAME'S SARAH WAMSLEY. I'M THE HOUSING POLICY ADMINISTRATOR WITH NEIGHBORHOOD AND HOUSING SERVICES DEPARTMENT. I HAVE A SHORT DECK FOR YOU TODAY TO JUST GO OVER, UM, BRIEFLY THE ORIGINS OF THESE AMENDMENTS, A HIGH LEVEL OVERVIEW OF WHAT THEY ARE, AND THEN A QUICK AMENDMENT THAT WE'RE OFFERING TO OUR AMENDMENT TODAY. ALRIGHT. SO JUST BY WAY OF BACKGROUND HERE, UM, ADUS COME UP IN TWO OF OUR SORT OF NORTH STAR PLANNING DOCUMENTS IN N H S D, BOTH OUR HOUSING POLICY FRAMEWORK AND THE STRATEGIC HOUSING IMPLEMENTATION PLAN, UM, WHICH CALLED FOR US, WE ADOPTED THAT IN DECEMBER OF THIS LAST YEAR. AND IT CALLS FOR US TO TAKE A SYSTEM-WIDE APPROACH TO INCREASING, UH, THE PREVALENCE OF ADUS AND HOMEOWNER'S ABILITY TO USE THEM. UM, SO THIS IS ONE STEP OF MANY THAT WE'RE TAKING TO DO THAT. ONE OF THE OTHERS WAS AMENDING OUR CITY FEE WAIVER POLICY, WHICH WE ALSO DID IN DECEMBER TO MAKE SURE THAT ADUS ARE AN, UM, ALLOWABLE USE UNDER THAT PROGRAM. [02:40:01] NEXT SLIDE. SO, I THINK YOU HEARD IN SEVERAL OF THE, THE COMMENTS TODAY ABOUT WHY ADUS WOULD SHOW UP IN THESE DOCUMENTS. UM, THEY'RE VERY IMPORTANT FOR HELPING FOLKS AGE IN PLACE, PROVIDING PASSIVE INCOMES TO HOMEOWNERS, MEETING MULTI-GENERATIONAL LIVING NEEDS, UM, AND HELPING MEET OUR COMMUNITY'S UNMET HOUSING NEEDS, INCLUDING FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING. ALTHOUGH NOT EXPLICITLY ALWAYS FOR THAT, I WILL SAY THAT THE CODE ITSELF ALSO TALKS ABOUT THE INTENT BEHIND HAVING ADUS IN THERE. UM, AND SPECIFICALLY SITES OLDER ADULTS, SMALLER HOUSEHOLD STUDENTS, UM, AND OTHER, OTHER NEEDY POPULATIONS AS THEY DEFINE IT. NEXT SLIDE. SO THE ORIGINS OF THESE AMENDMENTS, THEY CAME OUT OF AN AD HOC WORKING GROUP THAT THE MAYOR, UH, CONVENED THAT BEGAN MEETING IN 2019. UM, THIS WAS A CO-CHAIR PROCESS BY JIM BAILEY, WHO'S HERE TO SPEAK. STEVE PAPO AND CYNTHIA SPIELMAN. THEY HOSTED NINE MEETINGS TO CO-CREATE THESE AMENDMENTS BETWEEN AUGUST, 2019 AND DECEMBER, 2020. UM, AFTER THAT, THE WORK PAUSED DUE TO C OVID 19, UM, AND WAS NOT RESUMED UNTIL, UH, JUST AFTER WE HEARD FROM D S D THAT WE WERE GOING TO BE ACCEPTING AMENDMENTS. SO, UM, INFORMATION ABOUT THOSE MEETINGS ONLINE. THE WORK GROUP HAS SINCE BECOME A FORMAL SUBCOMMITTEE UNDER THE HOUSING COMMISSION. UM, AND THOSE MEETINGS CONTINUE TO BE PUBLIC. NEXT SLIDE. SO WHEN THE WORK GROUP BECAME A SUBCOMMITTEE OF THE HOUSING COMMISSION IN OCTOBER, THEY HOSTED FOUR ADDITIONAL MEETINGS. UM, BUT FOR THESE A D U AMENDMENTS, AND IT'S IMPORTANT TO KNOW THEY DIDN'T MAKE ANY CHANGES. THEY JUST TOOK EXACTLY AS HAD GONE THROUGH THE A D U WORKING GROUP AND SAID, OKAY, LET'S SEND THOSE OUT, UM, TO THE HOUSING COMMISSION. UM, SO THEIR ADDITIONAL PUBLIC MEETINGS WERE TO LOOK AT OTHER AMENDMENTS. THE HOUSING COMMISSION RELEASED A SURVEY THAT WAS LIVE FOR 25 DAYS FROM, UM, DECEMBER 20TH THROUGH JANUARY 14TH. AND WE HOSTED ONE, UH, SORT OF FORMAL PUBLIC MEETING ON THIS ON JANUARY 5TH. WE RECEIVED 118 RESPONSES TO THAT SURVEY, AND ALL OF OUR AMENDMENTS RELATED TO ADUS GOT BETWEEN 66 AND 86%. SO WE WERE PRETTY PLEASED WITH THAT. AND THE HOUSING COMMISSION UNANIMOUSLY, UM, AUTHORED TO, UH, SUPPORT THOSE AND SEND THOSE ONTO YOU. AND THEY'VE INCLUDED A LETTER OF SUPPORT WITH OUR AMENDMENTS AS WELL. NEXT SLIDE. SO, UM, AT A HIGH LEVEL, WE HAVE, UH, SOME PROPOSED CHANGES TO MAKE TO OUR ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT CODE. UM, AN IMPORTANT THING TO NOTE IS THAT, UM, THE OWNER OCCUPANCY REQUIREMENT IS STILL IN EFFECT. WE ARE NOT PROPOSING TO CHANGE THAT. UM, SO ALL OF THESE ARE ONLY, UH, IN APPLICATION FOR HOMEOWNERS WHO WANT TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THEIR BUYRIGHT ABILITY TO BUILD AN A D U. SO THE INTENT BEHIND THIS SUBCOMMITTEE IS TO MAKE IT EASIER FOR THEM TO DO THAT. SO, UM, ALL TYPES OF ADUS, WHETHER THEY ARE ATTACHED OR DETACHED. UH, THE COMMITTEE PROPOSES REMOVING THE REQUIREMENT THAT THERE BE, UH, A SEPARATE METER. THIS DOESN'T MEAN THAT YOU HAVE TO HAVE A SEPARATE METER, IT JUST MEANS THAT YOU CAN, UM, WITHOUT COMING TO ZONING FOR A VARIANCE. THE SECOND WOULD BE REDUCING OR REMOVING, EXCUSE ME, THE OCCUPANCY LIMITATIONS BECAUSE THOSE ARE ALREADY GOVERNED BY OTHER PARTS OF THE CODE THAT REPLY, OR EXCUSE ME, UP APPLY TO RESIDENTIAL DWELLINGS. THEY WANNA ALLOW MORE FLEXIBILITY IN SIZE. SO, UH, ALLOWING AN A D U TO BE THE GREATER OF 800 SQUARE FEET OR 50% OF THE GROSS AREA OF THE PRIMARY STRUCTURE, RESTRICTING THE MAXIMUM HEIGHT DOWN FROM THREE STORIES TO TWO. AND THEN, UH, CLARIFYING THE DEFINITION OF GROSS FLOOR AREA. NEXT SLIDE. SO FOR DETACHED UNITS, UH, THEY WOULD BE REMOVING THE ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN REQUIREMENT. UM, SO IN OTHER WORDS, THE PROPERTY WOULD NO LONGER HAVE TO MATCH IDENTICALLY, UH, THE PRIMARY STRUCTURE REMOVING THE BEDROOM LIMIT BECAUSE THAT'S GOVERNED BY OTHER AREAS OF THE CODE. CLARIFYING THAT, UH, DETACHED UNITS, UH, WHICH CURRENTLY CAN BE BUILT IN THE SIDE YARD, UH, SHOULD ONLY BE BUILT IN THE BACKYARD. FOLKS COULD STILL DO THAT IF THEY WANTED. THEY'D JUST HAVE TO COME TO YOU FOR A VARIANCE. UM, AND CURRENTLY ON THE PARKING CODE, UM, THE CODE DOES NOT REQUIRE PARKING. UM, BUT WE WOULD SAY THAT IF THE UNIT IS GOING TO BE LARGER, UH, THAN 800 SQUARE FEET, THAT IT SHOULD HAVE A PARKING SPACE AND IT'S UP TO THE HOMEOWNER'S DISCRETION WHERE THAT GOES. AND THEN LASTLY, UM, CHANGING THE SETBACK REQUIREMENTS TO BE CONSISTENT WITH OTHER STRUCTURES. SO RIGHT NOW, UH, THE CODE REQUIRES FIVE FOOT SETBACK. WE'RE PROPOSING A THREE FOOT, SO THAT IT WOULD MAKE IT EASIER FOR EXISTING STRUCTURES TO BE, UM, ADAPTIVELY REUSED INTO ADUS. LAST ONE, UM, THIS IS, UH, ATTACHED ONLY AND IT'S, UH, REDUCING THE OCCUPANCY LIMITATION AGAIN BECAUSE THAT'S, UH, GOVERNED BY ELEMENTS OF THE CODE. NEXT SLIDE. SO THIS IS MY LAST SLIDE FOR [02:45:01] YOU. AND IT'S, UH, A PROPOSED AMENDMENT, UM, FROM US, WE REALIZED THAT THE LANGUAGE AROUND, UM, 35 3 7 1 SECTION B ONE, UM, IS NOT CONSISTENT WITH SECTION A. SO THIS HIGHLIGHTED SECTION YOU SEE HERE, WE'RE PROPOSING TO STRIKE SO THAT ALL DIFFERENT TYPES OF ADUS ARE GOVERNED THE SAME WAY THAT WAS THE ATTEND OF THE COMMITTEE. SO, UM, INSTEAD OF THIS LANGUAGE, IT WOULD BE, UM, THE GREATER OF 800 SQUARE FEET OR 50% OF THE GROSS FLOOR AREA OF THE PRIMARY STRUCTURE. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. UM, OKAY. AND WE DO HAVE PUBLIC COMMENT ON THIS ONE. YEAH. FIRST IS, UH, CHRIS ALONSO. ALRIGHT, MR. ALONSO, IF YOU WOULD, YOUR NAME, ADDRESS, AND WHAT YOU FEEL ABOUT THIS AMENDMENT. YES SIR. MY NAME IS CHRISTOPHER ALONSO. I LIVE AT 2 6 3 2 2 QUAIL GROVE LANE. UM, IT'S IN BEXAR COUNTY, UH, BUT IT'S A BERNIE ADDRESS. BUT, UH, 7 8 0 0 6. UH, I AM A, UH, A RESIDENT OF BEXAR COUNTY. I HAVE FOUR, UH, UH, PROPERTIES INSIDE THE CITY LIMITS. UH, MY WIFE AND I OWN THREE HISTORIC STRUCTURES IN THE NEAR WEST SIDE. UM, UH, I'M, I'M NOT, I NORMALLY DON'T, DO NOT ENJOY PUBLIC SPEAKING, BUT I FELT IT WAS IMPORTANT TO SPEAK OUT TODAY BECAUSE, UH, I FEEL LIKE I'VE BEEN INFORMED ABOUT THIS SUBJECT MATTER. I I WROTE A THESIS ON THIS SUBJECT WHILE, WHILE WORKING ON MY, UH, UH, A GRADUATE, UH, DEGREE AT U T S A, UH, A FEW YEARS AGO. UM, BUT THIS PARTICULAR, UH, SUBJECT, UH, WAS VERY INTERESTING TO ME. UH, BECAUSE OF THE INVESTMENTS, INVESTMENTS THAT WE'VE MADE, UH, IN THESE HISTORIC STRUCTURES, WE, WE WOULD ENJOY THE FLEXIBILITY OF, UH, YOU KNOW, OF IMPROVING OUR INVESTMENTS. WE SEE A REAL NEED, UH, WITHIN, UH, UH, THE, THE, UH, AREA THAT WE INVESTED IN AND THE NEAR WEST SIDE PROSPECT HILL. UH, IT NEEDS TO BE REVITALIZED. WE UNDERSTAND THERE'S ISSUES WITH GENTRIFICATION, UH, UH, BUT, BUT WE DO FEEL THAT THE, THE SMALL INVESTOR NEEDS TO BE ENCOURAGED. YOU NEED ALL THE FLEXIBILITY YOU CAN GET TO MAKE THAT INVESTMENT IN THOSE STRUCTURES, WHICH WOULD IMPROVE THE AREA, IMPROVE THE, THE SCHOOL SYSTEMS, EVERYTHING WITH THE IMPROVED TAX BASE. AND, UH, BUT I DO THINK IT'S EXTREMELY IMPORTANT TO AVOID, UH, UH, YOU KNOW, THE GENTRIFICATION ISSUES, UM, YOU KNOW, BY STIMULATING THOSE SMALL INVESTORS. BUT, UH, THE, THE ADUS, UH, ARE UNIQUELY, UH, BENEFICIAL IN NUMEROUS WAYS TO THOSE SMALL INVESTORS. UH, SO I DON'T WANNA SEE, UH, THAT THOSE INVESTORS HURT BY THE, THE FEAR OF THE SHORT TERM RENTAL ISSUES. UH, I CAN SEE THAT THAT'S, UH, A TREMENDOUS CONCERN, BUT IT'S, I BELIEVE IT'S ENTIRELY SEPARATE, ALTHOUGH THEY CAN BE ASSOCIATED, BUT WE SHOULDN'T LOSE ALL THOSE BENEFITS TO THE INDIVIDUAL INDIVIDUAL. AND ALSO, I WANNA STRESS THROUGH MY THESIS THAT THE ONE THING THAT I, THAT I REALLY LEARNED IN WRITING THAT WAS THAT, UH, WHEN YOU ADD UP ALL THE INDIVIDUALS THAT RECEIVE THOSE BENEFITS, THERE'S A TREMENDOUS BENEFIT TO THE ENTIRE REGION AND TO THE, AND TO THE GREATER COMMUNITY, UH, WITH THE REDUCED, UH, UH, STRESS ON OUR, ON THE ENVIRONMENT OUTSIDE, UH, WITH THE, WITH THE, UH, UH, URBAN SPRAWL AND SUCH. AND SO WE WANT TO, WE WANNA FOCUS ON THE INNER, UH, UH, WORKINGS OF OUR, UH, UH, INFRASTRUCTURE. WE WANNA IMPROVE THOSE. WE WANT THE INFILL. UM, SO ANYWAY, SO I WANNA, I WANNA REALIZE THAT GREATER BENEFIT BY HELPING THE INDIVIDUAL BENEFIT AS WELL AND GETTING A, UH, SYNERGISTIC EFFECT WITH, UH, THE MANY, UH, INVESTORS IMPROVING. AND THEN, UM, I DO WANT TO STRESS THAT, UH, BECAUSE I'M NOT A OWNER OCCUPIED INVESTOR, BUT I'M A VERY SMALL INVESTOR. I, WE OWN THREE STRUCTURES. I AND I, AND I DO NOT WANNA BE LUMPED INTO THAT GROUP OF, OF, UH, INVESTORS THAT, YOU KNOW, THE, THE DEEP POCKETS, SO TO SPEAK, THAT COULD, COULD TRULY CHANGE THE NEIGHBORHOOD. WHAT I WANNA DO IS, IS STIMULATE THE INDIVIDUAL HOMEOWNER, BUT ALSO THOSE SMALL INVESTORS THAT HAVE MORE THAN ONE HOME. BECAUSE I CAN TELL YOU, UH, THOSE THREE STRUCTURES THAT I OWN, UH, I KNOW ALL MY NEIGHBORS AND, AND SEVERAL OF MY NEIGHBORS, MANY OF MY NEIGHBORS HAVE MULTIPLE, UH, HOUSES THAT THEY'VE INVESTED THROUGH THE YEARS. UH, AND SO THEY, THEY NEED THAT FLEXIBILITY. SO, THANK YOU. THANK YOU, SIR. ALRIGHT. RAY MORALES, AND, OKAY. DID YOU WANT TO GIVE YOUR TIME OR? YES. I, I'M GIVING MY TIME TO TONY GARCIA. ALRIGHT. TONY GARCIA WITH SIX MINUTES. ALL RIGHT, MR. GARCIA, YOU WILL HAVE SIX MINUTES. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. GOOD AFTERNOON COMMISSIONERS. MY NAME IS TONY GARCIA. I LIVE AT 2 43 EAST SATCH AVENUE, 7 8 2 1 2. I AM A MEMBER OF THE TIER ONE NEIGHBORHOOD COALITION STEERING COMMITTEE. UH, THIS STATEMENT IS MADE ON BEHALF OF THE TIER ONE, UH, STEERING COMMITTEE. UH, AND ALSO, UH, IT IS BEING MADE PRIOR TO SOME, [02:50:01] UH, REVISIONS TO THE, UH, TO THE AMENDMENT. TIER ONE CONSIDERS THE ROLE OF NEIGHBORHOODS AS THE MOST IMPORTANT ELEMENT IN THE DEVELOPING A, JUST SUSTAINABLE AND AFFORDABLE SAN ANTONIO. TIER ONE SUPPORTS POLICIES WHICH SEEK TO REDUCE HOUSING COSTS AND CATALYZE INVESTMENTS TO RENOVATE AND PRESERVE EXISTING AFFORDABLE HOUSING AND TO BUILD NEW AFFORDABLE HOUSING. TIER ONE HAS BEEN A SUPPORTER OF THE CITY'S STRATEGIC HOUSING IMPLEMENTATION PLAN, BUT NOT AT THE EXPENSE OF NEIGHBORHOODS. AND ITS EXISTING AFFORDABLE HOUSING INVENTORY NOR THE CRIMINAL, UH, CRIMINALIZATION OF ITS HOUSING. UH, FABRIC AMENDMENT 23 DASH SIX SUBMITTED BY THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND HOUSING SERVICES DEPARTMENT HAS TWO AREAS. WE SUPPORT THE HEIGHT REDUCTION FOR THE ADUS AND PARKING LOCATION. IT IS IMPORTANT TO NOTE THE CITY'S U D C IN SECTION 35 DASH 3 7 1 ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS. ADUS CURRENTLY REQUIRE A PROPERTY OWNER TO OCCUPY EITHER THE PRINCIPAL UNIT OR THE ACCESSORY DWELLING AS THEIR PERMANENT RESIDENCE. WE HAVE FOUND THAT IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF THIS AMENDMENT, THE CITY HAS NO IDEA HOW MANY ADUS EXIST WITHIN ITS CITY LIMITS, AND THEREFORE THE CITY HAS NO IDEA WHETHER ADUS MEET CODE REQUIREMENT FOR OCCUPANCY NOR THE PERMANENT RESIDENCE REQUIREMENT. SINCE 11 20 11 20 20, WHEN BUILDING PERMIT DATA FOR A D U STARTED TO BE COLLECTED, 50 PERMIT PERMITS HAVE BEEN ISSUED, BUT THE CITY STILL HAS NO IDEA WHETHER THESE MEET OWNER OCCUPANCY REQUIREMENTS PER THE U D C. PER THE NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF REALTORS. IN 2021, INVESTORS PURCHASED 46% OF ALL SINGLE FAMILY HOMES IN BEXAR COUNTY COMPARED TO 11% IN 2020. THESE WERE NOT HOMEOWNERS WANTING TO AGE IN PLACE OR MULTI-GENERATIONAL HOUSEHOLDS TRYING TO BUILD WEALTH. THESE ARE THE, THESE ARE THE FOLKS YOU HEARD FROM TODAY. NO, THESE WERE CORPORATE INVESTORS SEEKING TO ADD OUR CITY'S NEIGHBORHOODS AND EXISTING HOUSING FABRIC TO THEIR INVESTMENT PORTFOLIO. MANY OF THE URBAN, URBAN CORE NEIGHBORHOODS HAVE ADUS IN THEIR BUILT ENVIRONMENT OR THE OPPORTUNITY FOR DETACHED STRUCTURES TO BE CONVERTED. AND WE CAN ONLY IMAGINE THE PROLIFERATION OF NON-PERMANENT RESIDENTS, ADUS OR THE PROLIFERATION OF TYPE TWO NON-OWNER OCCUPIED SHORT-TERM RENTALS IN THESE INVESTMENT PORTFOLIOS WITH LAX ENFORCEMENT AND A PROPOSED RELAXED CODE, SAN ANTONIO ONLY CREATES A NICHE MARKET FOR CORPORATE INVESTORS AND NEVER ENSURES AFFORDABLE HOUSING AND DISPLACES EXISTING AFFORDABLE HOUSING INVENTORY. HOW CAN WE PLAN FOR A JUST SUSTAINABLE AND AFFORDABLE SAN ANTONIO WHEN WE HAVE NO IDEA WHERE WE ARE AT WITH THE CURRENT CODE? THERE ARE OTHER ISSUES WITH THE PROPOSED AMENDMENTS. THE ADDING OF AN ELECTRICAL METER DOES NOT SEEK TO REDUCE THE COST OF CONSTRUCTION, BUT ADDS COST AND ADDS ADDITIONAL CITY SERVICE COSTS AND INFRASTRUCTURE SUCH AS TRASH CANS TO A PROPERTY OWNER. REVISED SECTIONS REGARDING BUILDING FOOTPRINT OF ADUS ALLOW TO EXCEED 40% OF PRIMARY STRUCTURE FOOTPRINT AND ALSO ALLOWING ADUS 50% OF GROSS FLOOR AREA IS AMBIGUOUS AND CONFLICTING. REVISIONS TO THE CODE INCREASES THE LIKELIHOOD OF DENSITY AND MASSING PROBLEMS OFTEN EXPERIENCED IN NEIGHBORHOODS. THESE SECTIONS NEED CLARIFICATION TO AVOID INCOMPATIBLE DEVELOPMENT. THERE ARE OCCUPANCY AND BEDROOM REQUIREMENTS BEING REMOVED WITHOUT ANY REFERENCE TO ANY CODE REQUIREMENTS UNDER THE INTERNATIONAL RESIDENTIAL CODE OR THE INTERNATIONAL BUILDING CODE PARKING REQUIREMENTS ARE BEING REMOVED AND THEREBY INCREASING PARKING DENSITY IN MANY NEIGHBORHOODS. WE BELIEVE THAT THERE ARE LIFE SAFETY ISSUES BY ARBITRARILY REDUCING SETBACKS THREE FEET WITHOUT CONSIDERATION TO SPATIAL RELATIONSHIPS OF STRUCTURES IN THE BUILT ENVIRONMENT. AND FINALLY, WITH THE INCREASE OF IMPERVIOUS COVER, THERE IS NO MITIGATION IN PLACE TO ADDRESS STORM WATER ISSUES. WE RESPECTFULLY REQUEST THE ZONING COMMISSION TO ADDRESS THE CONCERNS MENTIONED BY TIER ONE, A COALITION OF CITY NEIGHBORHOODS BY MAKING EDITS TO THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT. PLEASE TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION OUR PUBLIC COMMENTS AND THANK YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK. THANK YOU MR. GARCIA. THE NEXT SPEAKER IS BIANCA MALDONADO. UP. THANK YOU. AND BARBARA WHIT HOWELL IS YIELDING HER TIME TO ME ALSO. SO I'M SORRY, BARBARA WHITT. HOWELL IS YIELDING HER TIME TO ME ALSO. SHE SHOULD BE SIGNED IN RIGHT BELOW ME ON THE SIGN-IN SHEET. BIANCA MALDONADO RESIDE AT 4 57 CLUB DRIVE 7 8 2 0 1. I COME BEFORE YOU TODAY BECAUSE [02:55:01] OF CONCERN THAT I HAVE WITH THIS AMENDMENT. STILL NO ONE'S MENTIONED THAT WHEN IT CAME BEFORE P TTAC IT PASSED BY ONE VOTE. THE COUNT WAS TEN NINE. SORRY MR. SIPES, WE MISSED YOU THAT DAY. MISSED ONE MEETING. SO YES. MISSED ONE MEETING. SO I'LL PICK ON YOU NOW. SO WHAT I DID IS I, YOU KNOW, I TOOK A STEP BACK AND I THOUGHT, GOSH, DON'T YOU UNDERSTAND WHERE YOU, WHERE YOU'VE BEEN BEFORE, YOU CAN DETERMINE WHERE YOU WANT TO GO. ISN'T THAT A FUNDAMENTAL THING WHEN WE PLAN FOR THE FUTURE, RIGHT? SO I TOOK A STEP BACK AND I ANALYZED A BLOCK IN MY NEIGHBORHOOD TO SEE HOW MANY ADUS EXIST BECAUSE I KNOW THERE'S A SUBSTANTIAL AMOUNT IN THE BUILT ENVIRONMENT. ON A SMALL BLOCK ON THE 300 BLOCK OF MARY LOUISE DRIVE, THERE ARE 17 HOMES, THERE ARE SEVEN DETACHED ADUS. THERE'S ONE ATTACHED. A D U 47% ON THAT BLOCK BY ITSELF HAS AN ATTACHED OR DETACHED A D U. AND IN THOSE PARTICULAR SITUATIONS, THERE'S ONLY TWO THAT HAVE EVER BEEN OPENED UP TO THE PUBLIC FOR RENTAL. THEY HAVE PRIMARILY BEEN USED WITHIN THEIR FAMILIES. NOT A SINGLE ONE HAS BEEN BUILT PROBABLY WITHIN AT LEAST 20 YEARS. OKAY? A LOT OF THESE ARE EXISTING STRUCTURES THAT HAVE BEEN CONVERTED AND OR WERE BUILT MANY DECADES AGO. SO THE QUESTION IS, YOU GOTTA UNDERSTAND WHERE YOU ARE BEFORE YOU CAN LEAP THROUGH BOUNDS TO GO SOMEWHERE IN THE FUTURE. WE'VE LEARNED HERE IN THE CITY THAT THERE'S SOME UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES OF THINGS LIKE THE DECADE OF DOWNTOWN IF WE DON'T TAKE CERTAIN PRECAUTIONS TO UNDERSTAND WHERE WE ARE TODAY BEFORE WE LEAP TO WHERE WE WANT TO GO. SO THE QUESTION IS, WHERE'S THE INVENTORY OF OUR EXISTING ADUS? WHERE'S THE INVENTORY? NOT JUST OF ATTACHED, BUT DETACHED ADUS? WE HAVE NO IDEA. IT'S THE WILD, WILD WEST OUT THERE. AND HOW DO WE KNOW THAT? BECAUSE CODE COMPLIANCE CREATED THIS PLACE, THIS TEAM CALLED THE STRIKE TEAM. AND WHAT WAS THEIR PRIMARY FUNCTION TO GO AFTER THE WILD WILD WEST PEOPLE WHO WERE DOING RENOVATIONS TO HOMES THAT WERE NOT PULLING ANY PERMITS. SO THAT'S WHEN YOU GET INTO YOUR LIFE SAFETY ISSUE. SO WE TALK ABOUT RELAXING OF SETBACKS. WHAT'S YOUR BUILT ENVIRONMENT? DO YOU KNOW HOW MANY STRUCTURES ARE ACTUALLY BUILT ON THE PROPERTY LINE? A LOT OF TIMES SAN ANTONIO GETS COMPARED TO OTHER CITIES WITH ADUS, WE'RE AN OLDER CITY, 300 YEARS, WE HAVE A LOT OF OLDER STRUCTURES, AND THERE WAS NO SUCH THING AS SETBACKS BACK THEN. A SETBACK COULD BE 18 INCHES HERE IN SAN ANTONIO. AND I, YOU KNOW, WE HAVE A FIRE DEPARTMENT AND WE CAN RELY ON THEM, BUT THEY'RE NOT THERE FOR ALL THESE DWELLING AREAS WHERE PEOPLE SLEEP. AND THAT'S THE AREA WE SHOULD HOLD THE MOST PRECIOUS, BECAUSE THAT'S WHEN YOU'RE, AT LEAST YOU'RE THE MOST VULNERABLE IN THOSE PARTICULAR SITUATIONS. SO ONCE AGAIN, WHAT HAS BEEN CONVERTED, BECAUSE THIS IS TALKING ABOUT NEW CONSTRUCTION, BUT ONE OF THE BIGGEST AREAS TO GAIN IS WHAT CAN BE RETROFITTED WHAT EXISTS TODAY THAT CAN BE UTILIZED IN THE EXISTING FOOTPRINT. BECAUSE ONE OF THE FUNDAMENTAL THINGS THAT THE HOUSING TASK FORCE FOUND IS THE MOST AFFORDABLE HOUSING WE HAVE TODAY IS THE HOUSING THAT WE'RE IN TODAY. RIGHT? AND SO, WHILE THEY MENTION AFFORDABILITY, THERE IS NO AFFORDABILITY COVENANT IN HOW THESE ADUS WILL BE LEASED OUT AS LONG AS THEIR OWNER OCCUPIED, RIGHT? AS LONG AS THEY'RE OWNER OCCUPIED. HOW OFTEN DO WE SEE CODE ENFORCE THAT? THAT WAS MY BUDGET ASK TO THE DIRECTOR WAS, PLEASE, HI, HIRE A CODE OFFICER TO ENFORCE THE OWNER OCCUPIED ADUS. 'CAUSE I TOOK A SAMPLING OF LOOKING IN MY NEIGHBORHOOD AND I FOUND SHORT TERM RENTALS FOR TYPE TWO OPERATING IN SUCH STRUCTURES. THAT'S NOT POSSIBLE TODAY. AND SO THE QUESTION IS, IS AS WE GROW TOGETHER AS A CITY, UNDERSTANDING WHERE WE HAVE BEEN AND WHERE WE WANNA GO, YOU THINK OF WHY THEY'RE REDUCING AND MAKING THESE CHANGES IN THE U D C AMENDMENT. IT PREVENTS PEOPLE FROM HAVING TO GO TO BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT, RIGHT? WHAT IS BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT? BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT IS A PUBLIC HEARING THAT GIVES YOU NOTIFICATION, GIVES AN OPPORTUNITY TO HAVE A DISCUSSION, GIVES PEOPLE INPUT, THE ABILITY TO PROVIDE INPUT. AND I THINK THAT'S CRITICAL BECAUSE WHEN WE TALK ABOUT THE ELEMENTS REGARDING THE ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS, IT'S A VERY TECHNICAL PROCESS AS FAR AS THE OVERALL DISCUSSION OF IT. I DON'T THINK IN A ONE HIT WONDER, A RESIDENT'S GONNA COME UP AND UNDERSTAND THIS ENTIRE COMPLEXITY OF THIS ONE U D C AMENDMENT FROM ONE PRESENTATION. THEY'RE GONNA GO HOME AND HIM AND HAW ABOUT THESE DIFFERENT ELEMENTS AND HOW IT RELATES TO THEM JUST LIKE YOU DO TOO SOMETIMES. YOU KNOW, IT DOESN'T ALWAYS COME TO YOU DURING THE FIRST MEETING. IT DOESN'T ALWAYS COME TO YOU DURING THAT INITIAL CONVERSATION WITH AN APPLICANT. AND SO THAT'S WHY I ASK YOU TO TAKE A STEP BACK FOR THIS PARTICULAR AMENDMENT, BECAUSE THE GOAL IS ULTIMATELY TO UTILIZE AND LEVERAGE WHAT WE HAVE TODAY, BUT WE DON'T WANNA ABUSE IT AND WE DON'T WANT TO HAVE IT MANIPULATED BECAUSE THAT NUMBER OF INVESTORS AT 46% FOLKS, THAT'S SCARY. THAT IS SCARY. [03:00:01] WHO IS TRACKING THE LOSS OF HOMESTEAD EXEMPTIONS? ONE OF THE THINGS I LEARNED SERVING ON P TAC IS THAT NOT ALL U D C AMENDMENTS IMPACT EVERY RESIDENT IN THIS CITY EQUALLY AND EQUITABLE. BECAUSE WHY IS THAT? THERE'S RESTRICTIVE COVENANTS, THERE'S MASTER PLAN DEVELOPMENT COMMUNITIES. SO WHEN YOU TALK ABOUT THESE ADUS, YOU'RE ESSENTIALLY RED LINE THE CITY OF WHERE THEY CAN AND CANNOT BE BUILT, RIGHT? BECAUSE OTHER AREAS ARE PROTECTED. SO THAT'S WHY WE SHOULD SHUT UP, STAND UP AND TAKE NOTICE TO THIS BECAUSE SOME OF THOSE AREAS ARE OUR MOST VULNERABLE POPULATIONS, AND WE MUST DO EVERYTHING WE CAN TO ENSURE THAT THEY ARE ABLE YES, TO AGE IN PLACE. I MEAN, I HAVE LOOKED AT BUILDING AN ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT FOR MY PARENTS TO LIVE BEHIND MY HOME, BUT I'LL TELL YOU, IT'S NOT THESE LITTLE, UH, REQUIREMENTS, THEY'RE, THEY'RE SEEKING TO REMOVE. IT IS THE FUNDAMENTAL COST OF CONSTRUCTION AND THE INCREMENTAL COST FOR YOUR APPRAISAL VALUE. SO PLEASE TAKE A SECOND LOOK. THANK YOU FOR LISTENING. THANK YOU MS. MALDONADO. UH, STEVE VERTI. MR. VERTI, UH, HE LEFT. YEAH. OKAY. UH, JIM BAILEY. GOOD AFTERNOON COMMISSIONERS. UH, JIM BAILEY, 2 41. KING WILLIAM, I'M HERE TODAY WEARING A COUPLE OF DIFFERENT HATS, UH, WON'T KEEP YOU LONG ONE. I'M ONE OF THE AUTHORS OF THE HOUSING POLICY FRAMEWORK. I SERVED ON THE STEERING COMMITTEE FOR THE STRATEGIC HOUSING IMPLEMENTATION PLAN. UH, I WAS ONE OF THE TRI CHAIRS OF THE COMMITTEE THAT DEVELOPED THE SPECIFIC LANGUAGE, UH, THAT YOU SEE BEFORE YOU TODAY IN SLIGHTLY MODIFIED FORM. AND I AM CURRENTLY THE CHAIR OF THE HOUSING COMMISSIONS. UH, REMOVING BARRIERS TO AFFORDABLE HOUSING SUBCOMMITTEE WON'T GO INTO A LOT OF DETAIL. I THINK STAFF DID A PRETTY GOOD JOB, UH, AND AS DID SOME OF THE 15 TO 17 FOLKS WHO CALLED IN TO TALK ABOUT THE IMPORTANCE OF ADUS. UM, BUT, BUT I WILL SAY, TH THIS IS NOT A NEW CONVERSATION. WE'VE BEEN TALKING ABOUT THIS A LONG TIME. YOU KNOW, WE ALL UNDERSTAND THAT, UM, YOU KNOW, SAN ANTONIO AND EVEN, EVEN SOME OF THE COMMENTATORS JUST NOW JUST SAID THAT THERE'S A LOT OF ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS IN THIS TOWN THAT WE DON'T KNOW ABOUT. UM, YOU KNOW, SAN ANTONIO, UH, IN PARTICULAR, IF YOU'VE SPENT ANY, ANY SERIOUS AMOUNT OF TIME ON THE SOUTH SIDE, ON THE WEST SIDE, ON THE EAST SIDE, WE KNOW THAT ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS PROLIFERATE. UM, BECAUSE WE HAVE, UH, EXTENDED FAMILIES LIVING UNDER, UNDER ONE ROOF. MULTI-GENERATIONAL FAMILIES NEED MORE ROOM. UM, THE OTHER, YOU KNOW, THE, THE OTHER HAT I'M WEARING IS JUST ME, JIM BAILEY, THE GUY THAT LIVES FOUR BLOCKS DOWN THE ROAD IN AN ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT BEHIND MY MOTHER'S HOUSE. UH, THAT ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT, AS BIANCA SAID, YOU KNOW, THERE'S, THERE'S A LOT OF OLD ONES. THIS ONE WAS BUILT IN 1898, UH, SERVED AS SERVANT'S QUARTERS INITIALLY, UM, DURING, YOU KNOW, PRE-WAR POST-WAR. IT WAS BROKEN UP INTO APARTMENTS. THE WHOLE HOUSE WAS SERVED A LOT OF DIFFERENT FAMILIES. UH, SINCE MY, UH, PARENTS BOUGHT THE HOUSE IN THE EARLY SEVENTIES, IT SERVED AS A STARTER HOME FOR, UH, MY BROTHER AND HIS WIFE. IT'S A PLACE WHERE MY LITTLE BROTHER LIVED. UM, WE'VE HAD SHORT AND LONG-TERM, UH, FOLKS LIVING THERE, AND SINCE I'VE BEEN LIVING THERE THE LAST COUPLE OF YEARS, MY MOTHER'S BEEN ILL. IT'S BEEN GREAT. YOU KNOW, I'VE BEEN ABLE TO GO IN AND HAVE LUNCH WITH HER. YOU KNOW, SHE CAN WHISTLE REALLY LOUD OR , YOU KNOW, TEXT ME AND SAY, JIM, I NEED, YOU KNOW, I NEED SOME HELP. CAN YOU COME IN HERE AND PICK SOMETHING UP? AND MY SON ALSO LIVES IN AN A D U. HE'S GOING TO SAC NOW, UH, NEEDS A COUPLE OF YEARS TO KIND OF FIGURE OUT WHERE HE IS GONNA GO, LIVING IN AN ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT BEHIND HIS MOTHER'S HOUSE, MY OLD STUDIO IN THE HOUSE THAT HE GREW UP IN. SO I'LL LEAVE YOU WITH THAT. AND I JUST WANT YOU TO KNOW THAT I'M HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THAT YOU HAVE ABOUT THIS LENGTHY PROCESS THAT LED US TO THIS DAY, TO THIS DAY, UM, AND, UH, AND ABOUT ANY OF THE, KIND OF THE TECHNICAL ELEMENTS OF THIS. AND I'LL LEAVE YOU WITH THAT. THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION. THANK YOU, MR. BAILEY. MARIO PENA, GOOD AFTERNOON COMMISSION. UH, MARIO PENA. I AM A RESIDENT OF THE MONTE VISTA NEIGHBORHOOD AT 3 4 3 WEST HOLLYWOOD. UM, AND I'M AN ARCHITECT AND A PLANNER. I'M ACTUALLY, I'M ACTUALLY VERY FAMILIAR WITH A LOT OF THE, UH, CODES THAT ARE COMING OUT SPECIFICALLY WITH THIS ONE. UM, OTHER EFFORTS THAT I'M INVOLVED WITH HAD THEIR OWN PAIRING TO THIS, UH, INITIATIVE TO MAKE ADUS EASIER TO BUILD IN SAN ANTONIO. SO, UM, COMING AT THAT FROM THIS PLACE, I THINK I'VE GOT A FIRM UNDERSTANDING ABOUT THE CONSEQUENCES OF, OF THE LANGUAGE THAT WE'RE CONSIDERING HERE TODAY. UM, AND I'M IN FIRM, YOU KNOW, AGREEMENT OF, OF, OF WHAT IS BEING CONSIDERED. AS A MATTER OF FACT, I THINK IT MIGHT BE A LITTLE, A LITTLE TOO INNOCUOUS AS FAR AS LIKE, WHAT IT, WHAT IT ALLOWS, UM, IN MY OPINION. BUT I THINK THIS IS A GOOD FIRST STEP FORWARD, UH, TO ALLOW A LOT OF GREAT THINGS TO HAPPEN IN THE CITY. UM, [03:05:01] SO TAKING OFF A PROFESSIONAL HAT, YOU KNOW, TALKING TO YOU AS A, AS A RESIDENT OF A HISTORIC NEIGHBORHOOD THAT I LOVE. UM, WE HAD A FIRE IN OUR HOUSE, UH, IN AUGUST. WE WERE LIVING IN OUR CASITA IN OUR A D U UH, AT THE MOMENT. UM, OUR TENANT, UH, HAD GONE ON VACATION, AND SO SHE LEFT THE HOUSE FREE FOR US. SO WHEN THEY WERE REMODELING OUR HOUSE, UH, WE GOT TO STAY THERE FOR A COUPLE OF WEEKS. SO THANK GOD THE FIRE HAPPENED WHEN WE WERE OUTSIDE. WE HAD THE PLACE TO BE. FIRE HAPPENED. AND SO NOW THE, UM, NOW THE HOUSE IS BEING REBUILT, IT DOESN'T HAVE POWER. UM, SO WHEN IT FIRST HAPPENED, I, I HAD A TENANT THAT DIDN'T HAVE A PLACE TO LIVE BECAUSE THERE WAS NO POWER IN THE PACK. SO I CALLED, UM, C P SS TO SEE IF THEY CAN HOOK ME UP, BUT AS WE KNOW, YOU CAN'T GET HOOKED UP BECAUSE IT'S AN A D U. SO I COULDN'T HAVE MY OWN METER OUT THERE. SO IT TOOK ME THREE OR FOUR WEEKS TO FINALLY GET SOME TEMPORARY POWER OUT THERE FOR OUR POOR TENANT WHO HAD TO STAY IN DALLAS FOR A LONG TIME. SO THIS IS A SITUATION THAT HAPPENED TO ME. IT'S ONE OF MANY. I THINK, UM, THE FEAR WE HAVE OF, OF THOSE, UM, UM, SCARCE SITUATIONS THAT COULD HAPPEN WITH DEVELOPERS, THE SCARY DEVELOPERS THAT EVERYONE IS SORT OF FEARING THAT ARE GONNA TAKE OVER SAN ANTONIO. UM, YOU KNOW, FOR EVERY ONE OF THOSE MAYBE POSSIBILITIES THAT COULD HAPPEN, IF THEY CAN KIND OF SQUEEZE THROUGH THIS LANGUAGE SOMEHOW, UM, YOU KNOW, I CAN PROBABLY TELL YOU 10 OR, YOU KNOW, OR MORE SITUATIONS OF REALLY GREAT THINGS THAT ARE HAPPENING IF WE JUST ALLOW THESE THINGS TO HAPPEN. SO IT CREATED STABILITY FOR MY FAMILY TO LIVE IN THIS GREAT NEIGHBORHOOD. IT CREATED AN AFFORDABLE PLACE TO LIVE FOR MY TENANT, WHICH WAS A LONG-TERM TENANT. UM, AND SO WE LIVE HAVING HER. SHE, YOU KNOW, NOW SHE'S, SHE'S HAD TO MOVE OUT. SHE HAD TO FIND A PLACE THAT WAS MORE EXPENSIVE. UM, THINGS ARE COMPLICATED. UM, IT IS NOW A SHORT-TERM RENTAL, AND SO I KNOW NOT MANY PEOPLE LIKE THAT, BUT IT'S LEGAL AND WE'RE DOING IT AND IT'S REGISTERED WITH THE CITY. BUT I CAN TELL YOU THE ECONOMICS OF THE SHORT-TERM RENTAL VERSUS MY LONG-TERM TENANT, WHICH WE PREFER TO HAVE, THEY'RE BASICALLY THE SAME. LIKE THE MARKET PRESSURES AREN'T THERE TO PUSH ME INTO SHORT-TERM RENTAL. SO IT'S NOT SOMETHING WE SHOULD FEAR. UM, WE PREFER HAVING A LONG-TERM TENANT. WE PREFER THE COMMUNITY WE'VE BUILT WITH HER. SHE ACTUALLY BECAME A, A MUSIC TEACHER FOR MY KIDS ANYWAY, SO PLEASE CONSIDER PASSING THIS AS IS. THANK YOU. THANK YOU MR. PENA. OKAY, THE FINAL SPEAKER IS SIMA CARAM. I, GOOD AFTERNOON. THANK YOU FOR HAVING ME. MY NAME IS SIMA KYRA. UM, I LIVE AT 8 3 1 EAST MAGNOLIA AVENUE. UM, I'M SPEAKING TODAY ON, UM, IN SUPPORT OF THE, UM, PROPOSED, UH, AMENDMENT CHANGES FOR ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS. UM, I THINK, YOU KNOW, JUST IN GENERAL IN TERMS OF ALL OF THE DIFFERENT WAYS THAT WE CAN INVEST IN REAL ESTATE IN THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO, ADUS ARE SPECIFICALLY BENEFIT HOMEOWNERS MORE SO THAN DEVELOPERS. IT'S AN OPPORTUNITY FOR HOMEOWNERS TO INVEST IN THEIR, IN THEIR OWN PROPERTY, THEIR MOST, YOU KNOW, OFTEN THEIR MOST VALUABLE ASSET. UM, YOU KNOW, WHEREAS OTHER TYPES OF REAL ESTATE, UM, DEVELOPMENT ARE REALLY, YOU KNOW, IT'S THE BIG INVESTOR, THE DEVELOPER THAT ARE, UM, YOU KNOW, PROFITING FROM, AND THEN ALSO DIRECTING THE USE THE INCOME LEVELS, THE PRICE POINTS OF HOW HOUSING IS BEING BUILT. SO I THINK THERE'S A, A UNIQUE OPPORTUNITY WITH ADUS FOR HOMEOWNERS, YOU KNOW, THE EVERYDAY PEOPLE OF SAN ANTONIO TO BE, UM, DIRECTING WHAT TYPES OF HOUSING GETS BUILT AND FOR WHOM. UM, SO I THINK WE REALLY, YOU KNOW, MAKING, UM, MAKING IT EASIER FOR HOMEOWNERS TO MAKE THAT CHOICE. UM, AND ALSO MAKING IT CHEAPER BY REDUCING THE AMOUNT OF REGULATION, UM, I THINK IS REALLY IMPORTANT. UM, HOMEOWNERS CAN BUILD EQUITY. THEY CAN PROVIDE HOUSING FOR THEIR FRIENDS AND FAMILY. THEY CAN MOVE INTO THE A D U AND AGE IN PLACE, UM, YOU KNOW, AND, AND ALSO PROVIDE A PASSIVE SOURCE OF INCOME IF THEY CHOOSE TO RENT. UM, SO THAT'S KIND OF THE SORT OF MY GENERAL, UM, BIG PICTURE. AND I WANTED TO SHARE A LITTLE BIT, UM, OF A STORY, UH, OF A PERSONAL EXPERIENCE. UM, SO A COUPLE OF YEARS AGO I WAS LIVING IN ST. PAUL, UM, AND IT HAS HAD VERY SIMILAR, UM, A D U RES, UM, UH, ZONING AS CURRENTLY EXISTS IN SAN ANTONIO. AND WE LIVED, YOU KNOW, ONE BLOCK AWAY FROM THE LIGHT RAIL STATION RIGHT DOWN THE STREET FROM THE UNIVERSITY. WE WANTED TO BUILD A GARAGE AND WE SAID, HEY, LET'S BUILD AN A D U ON TOP, WHICH WAS A VERY TYPICAL FORM IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD. UM, AND SO WE WENT THROUGH THE RIGAMAROLE OF TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHETHER OR NOT THAT WAS POSSIBLE. UM, WE WANTED TO PROVIDE A PASSIVE INCOME, UM, BOTH OFFERING A UNIT OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING FOR THE COMMUNITY, BUT THEN ALSO JUST GENERATING THAT PASSIVE INCOME FOR OUR FAMILY. UM, AND LOOKING THROUGH THE CODE, IT JUST LIKE VERY QUICKLY BECAME CLEAR THAT THE CODE WAS WRITTEN TO STOP ME FROM BUILDING AN A D U. UM, THERE WAS, YOU KNOW, UM, ISSUES AROUND OUR LOT SIZE. WE HAD ISSUES AROUND THE HEIGHT LIMITATIONS THAT, UM, [03:10:01] YOU KNOW, MADE THAT GARAGE APARTMENT, UM, HARDER TO BUILD. UM, THERE WAS ACTUALLY KIND OF THE OPPOSITE FROM SAN ANTONIO. THERE WAS A REQUIREMENT THAT THE SEWER CONNECTION BE SEPARATE FROM, UM, THE PRIMARY STRUCTURE, WHICH WOULD'VE MEANT THAT WE WOULD'VE HAD TO TRENCH A SEWER LINE THROUGH A RETAINING WALL OUT TO THE, UM, YOU KNOW, ACROSS OUR ENTIRE PROPERTY. UM, AND THEN REALLY THE, UM, THE BIGGEST THING FOR US WAS, UM, THERE WAS AN OWNER OCCUPANCY REQUIREMENT. AND AS, UM, YOU KNOW, WE WOULD'VE, WE DIDN'T JUST HAVE MONEY SITTING IN THE BANK, WE WOULD'VE HAD TO FINANCE IT. UM, AND WE WOULD WANT FOR THERE TO BE A RETURN OH, ON OUR INVESTMENT. UM, AM I DONE? THANK YOU. THAT'S IT. SORRY. SORRY. WE MIGHT CALL YOU UP FOR QUESTIONS. OKAY, THANK YOU. ALRIGHT. NO FURTHER PUBLIC COMMENT AT THIS TIME, IS THAT CORRECT? ALRIGHT. THAT'S CORRECT. UM, I DID HAVE A QUICK QUESTION. I THOUGHT THAT THERE WAS A, UH, CHANGE TO, UH, SECTION A ONE OR SUBSECTION A ONE TO HERE. IS THAT, IS THAT INCLUDED IN WHAT WE HAVE CURRENTLY? YEAH, THAT'S SHOWN ON THE SCREEN. OKAY. ALRIGHT. ALRIGHT. I'M GONNA OPEN IT UP TO FELLOW COMMISSIONERS. UH, I IMAGINE THERE WILL BE A GREAT DEAL OF DISCUSSION. SO I'M NOT GONNA START WITH COMMISSIONER GREATHOUSE. UM, ANY, ANY DISCUSSION COMMISSIONERS ON MY LEFT. ALRIGHT. OH, QUESTIONS. LET'S DO QUESTIONS. SORRY. ALRIGHT, WE'LL COME BACK TO YOU, COMMISSIONER WATSON. ALRIGHT, ANY QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONER SIPES? ALRIGHT, UH, THESE ARE GOING TO BE QUESTIONS FOR STAFF. WE THERE, THERE'S BEEN A LOT OF TALK ABOUT DIFFICULTY IN BUILDING ADUS. ADUS AREN'T REQUIRED. ADUS ARE CURRENTLY ALLOWED RIGHT NOW. YES. UP TO 800 OR 800 SQUARE FEET. IS THERE A LIMITATION RIGHT NOW ON THE 800 SQUARE FOOT? IS IT, IS IT, I GUESS WHERE I'M GOING IS, IS, IS WE'RE TALKING ABOUT CHANGING AND I DIDN'T THINK TO LOOK BEFORE I GOT A CHANCE TO SPEAK. UM, THE CHANGE IN THE LANGUAGE IS SHALL NOT EXCEED 800 SQUARE FEET OR 50% OF GROSS FLOOR AREA, WHICHEVER IS LARGER. IS THERE, HOW DOES THAT READ RIGHT NOW? IS IT JUST 800 SQUARE FOOT IS THE LIMIT? NO. CORRECT. OKAY. SO, SO JUST TO CLARIFY THAT 800 SQUARE FEET IS THE MAX, THE CODE AS IT'S WRITTEN TODAY REGULATES THE SIZE DIFFERENTLY BASED UPON WHETHER IT IS DETACHED OR ATTACHED. IF IT, IF IT IS ATTACHED, IT'S 35% THE SIZE OF THE HOUSE NEVER TO EXCEED 800 SQUARE FEET. AND CURRENTLY IN THE CODE FOR DETACHED STRUCTURES, IT REGULATES THE FOOTPRINT IN ADDITION TO THE MAXIMUM 800 SQUARE FEET. SO WE HAVE THREE DIFFERENT WAYS OF APPROACHING THE REGULATION OF THE A D U ONE, GENERALLY APPLICABLE TO BOTH. AND THEN TWO DIFFERENT SETS OF CRITERIA IF IT'S ATTACHED OR DETACHED. WHAT THE AMENDMENTS BEFORE YOU TODAY SEEK TO DO IS TO SAY 800 SQUARE FEET OR 50% THE SIZE FOR ATTACHED OR DETACHED, WHICHEVER IS GREATER. SO IT, IT SIMPLIFIES THE REGULATIONS. AND, AND I GUESS, UH, ONE OF THE QUESTIONS IS WHERE THE, WHICHEVER IS LARGER CAME INTO PLAY BECAUSE I, I SEE A LOT OF ISSUE WITH THE, WHICHEVER IS LARGER AND, AND I GUESS DURING DISCUSSION, I'LL, I'LL GET INTO THAT MORE SPECIFICALLY. I WAS JUST KIND OF CURIOUS ON WHERE THAT CAME FROM. I'M, I'M GONNA LET SARAH TACKLE THAT ONE. THAT WAS A RECOMMENDATION THAT CAME OUT OF THE COMMITTEE AND THEIR REASONING WAS THAT, UM, MAYBE FOR LOTS WITHIN FOUR 10 THAT ARE VERY SMALL. IT MIGHT NOT EVEN MAKE SENSE TO GET TO 800 SQUARE FEET, BUT OUTSIDE OF FOUR 10, WHERE YOU TEND TO HAVE LARGER LOTS, THEN AN 800 SQUARE FOOT, UM, A D U COULD BE VERY SMALL IN RELATION TO THE PRIMARY STRUCTURE AND ALSO NOT AS FUNCTIONAL IF YOU WANNA BUILD A LARGER UNIT FOR SAY, TWO BEDROOMS. UM, SO THEY WANTED TO ALLOW THAT FLEXIBILITY IN LOOKING AT OTHER CITIES. UM, THERE WERE EXAMPLES FOR THAT. I TO, TO ADD TO THAT. I'LL, I'LL GIVE YOU A SCENARIO FROM PROBABLY THREE YEARS AGO NOW. WE HAD A VARIANCE, UH, REQUEST SUBMITTED, WENT TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT. IT WAS A PROPERTY OWNER THAT LIVED IN THE DOMINION IN A HOUSE THAT WAS 15,000 SQUARE FEET, WHATEVER IT WAS. AND HE HAD TO GO TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT TO GET PERMISSION TO BUILD A 1500 SQUARE FOOT ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT. SO I THINK THAT THIS REGULATION, BY SAYING WHICHEVER IS LARGER, IT'S STILL AOR IT'S STILL A RATIO OF THE MAIN TO THE ACCESSORY, BUT IT DOESN'T PUT A STRICT LIMIT ON IT AND REQUIRES SOMEONE THAT WANTS A 900 SQUARE FOOT A D U IN THE [03:15:01] DOMINION TO SEEK SPECIAL PERMISSION. IF I COULD ALSO ADD, UM, YOU KNOW, A LOT OF THE HOUSING STOCK INSIDE OF FOUR 10, PARTICULARLY OUR HISTORIC HOUSING STOCK TENDS TO BE SMALLER. YOU KNOW, WE DIDN'T START REALLY BALLOONING OUT UNTIL THE, THE 1960S AND 1970S. THERE'S A LOT OF HOUSING STOCK THAT'S, YOU KNOW, 800, 900, A THOUSAND, 1100 SQUARE FEET AND 35% OF 900 SQUARE FEET IS REALLY NOT ENOUGH SPACE TO LIVE, LIVE IN. RIGHT. AND SO, UM, THINKING ABOUT A, A POLICY AND, AND WHERE TO RESTRICT IT WITH EQUITY IN MIND MEANS THAT WE NEED TO UNDERSTAND THE HOUSING STOCK THAT'S OUT THERE ON THE GROUND. AND SO IT SERVES TWO PURPOSES. IT MAKES IT EASIER TO DO, UH, THAT OUT IN THE DOMINION, BUT IT ALSO MAKES IT POSSIBLE TO CREATE FUNCTIONAL LIVING SPACES NEAR THE INNER CITY WHERE WE NEED THEM. OKAY, THANK YOU. BUT I, I GUESS MY QUESTION IS AGAIN, LOGAN, UM, WE HAVE THE MULTIPLE DEFINITIONS, BUT SAY IN THE INNER CITY ON A TYPICAL 50 FOOT WIDE LOT THAT HAS A, BECAUSE IT'S EASY TO DIVIDE 2000 SQUARE FOOT HOUSE AT THIS TIME, YOU COULD DO AN 800 SQUARE FOOT A D U. WAS IT, WAS THAT A D U SIZE, UH, DETACHED? SORRY, WAS THAT A D U SIZE LIMITED BY A SQUARE FOOTAGE? SO SAY IF THE MAIN STRUCTURE WAS A THOUSAND SQUARE FOOT, WOULD THEY STILL BE ALLOWED TO DO CURRENTLY AN 800 SQUARE FOOT A D U OR IT'S, SO THE DETACHED CURRENTLY IS LIMITED BY A PERCENTAGE IS WHAT YOU'RE SAYING? YEAH, IT'S, IT'S, I BELIEVE IT'S LIMITED TO 40% THE BUILDING FOOTPRINT OF THE PRIMARY AND THEN THE, THE FLOOR AREA NEVER DO EXCEED 800 SQUARE FEET. BUT, BUT FOOTPRINT DOESN'T. NEC DO WE HAVE A LIMIT THEN ON, ON STORIES? SO 40% FOOTPRINT VERSUS FLOOR AREA IS, OR SQUARE FOOTAGE IS, ARE TWO DIFFERENT THINGS. RIGHT? SO IF, IF YOU LOOK AT THE, THE BLACK TEXT WHERE IT SAYS FIVE'S CROSSED OUT AND IT SAYS THREE, THAT'S THE EXISTING LANGUAGE. THE ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT SHALL NOT EXCEED 800 SQUARE FEET. SO FORGET, OR 50% THAT'S BEING ADDED. IF WE LOOK AT DETACHED IN B B ONE THAT THEY ARE PROPOSING TO STRIKE, YOU ALSO HAVE A REGULATION THAT SAYS THE FOOTPRINT OF THE ACCESSORY DETACHED DWELLING UNIT SHALL NOT EXCEED 40% THE FOOTPRINT OF THE PRINCIPLE. SO WHEN WE'RE LOOKING AT FOOTPRINT, WE'RE LOOKING AT EFFECTIVELY AREA OF THE FOUNDATION. SO YOU HAVE AN, AN ADDITIONAL LIMITATION, BUT YOU STILL CANNOT EXCEED 800 SQUARE FEET, WHICH IS APPLICABLE TO ATTACHED OR DETACHED. BUT YOU COULD DO TWO STORIES CURRENTLY. YOU CAN STILL DO TWO STORIES, BUT YOU CANNOT BE GREATER THAN 800 SQUARE FEET. COLLECTIVELY. YES, BUT I MEAN, SO THE 40% I UNDERSTAND WHERE, I UNDERSTAND WHY THERE'S A DIFFERENCE, WHY WE HAVE 50% ON ONE AND 40% ON THE OTHER, IS WHAT I'M SAYING IS BECAUSE I'M SEEING GROSS SQUARE FOOTAGE OR GROSS FLOOR AREA VERSUS FOOTING FOOTPRINT BEING TWO DISTINCT DIFFERENT ITEMS. MM-HMM. . UM, BUT, BUT TODAY, BUT TODAY, RIGHT IN, IN A, IN A 1000, IN A 1000 SQUARE FOOT HOUSE, I SUPPOSE, I MEAN IF THE FOOTPRINT WAS LESS THAN 40%, YOU COULD DO UP TO 800 SQUARE FEET. YOU'D HAVE TO FIND A WAY TO FIT IT IN THE FOOTPRINT. AND I BELIEVE ONE OF THEIR AMENDMENTS ACTUALLY SEEKS TO INTRODUCE A LIMIT ON THE HEIGHT TO TWO STORIES WHERE THAT DOES NOT EXIST TODAY. OKAY. THANK YOU. AND I GUESS MY FINAL QUESTION IS ON, UM, I GUESS TALKING ABOUT THE, UH, SETBACKS. WHEN TALKING ABOUT SETBACKS, FIVE FOOT IS KIND OF IN THE BUILDING CODE, KIND OF BEGINS A SACRED LINE IT SEEMS, AT FIVE FEET OR WHEN, WHEN WE GET PA, WHEN WE GET LESS THAN FIVE FEET, THEN WE START NEEDING TO RATE THAT WALL AND NOT JUST FROM THE INSIDE. EVERYBODY THINKS, OH, IT'S JUST FROM THE, IT'S FROM BOTH SIDES. UM, THAT IS CORRECT. CONSTRUCTION LESS THAN FIVE FEET FROM THE SIDE PROPERTY LINE WILL REQUIRE ADDITIONAL FIRE RATING MEASURES. BUT I DO WANNA STRESS THAT NOTHING IN THIS CODE AMENDMENT WOULD LIMIT OUR ABILITY TO REQUIRE COMPLIANCE WITH APPLICABLE BUILDING CODES. OKAY. OKAY. ALRIGHT. I THINK THAT'S IT FOR RIGHT NOW AS FAR AS QUESTIONS. THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER SIPES. UM, I'M GONNA GO TO MYSELF, WATSON AND GREATHOUSE. UM, ALL RIGHT. I HAVE A KIND OF A DUMB QUESTION. LOOKING AT THE FOOTPRINT, UH, WHAT'S THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A PORCH AND A PATIO? [03:20:02] LET ME GET THE DEFINITIONS. , I, I PRESUME THAT'S WHAT IT IS, BUT I JUST WANNA KNOW WHAT IT IS IN THE CODE. YEAH. STRUCTURE AND BUILDING. WE'RE BACK TO STRUCTURE AND BUILDING. YOU'RE RIGHT. 2025. HERE WE COME. STRUCTURE AND BUILDING. WE'RE GONNA FIX IT. UH, WHILE Y'ALL ARE WORKING ON THAT, ACTUALLY, MR. BAILEY, I HAVE A QUESTION FOR YOU. I HAD THE CHANCE TO READ YOUR COMMENTARY IN THE SAN ANTONIO REPORT, UH, OVER THE WEEKEND. AND, UM, YOU KNOW, ONE ISSUE THAT I THINK HAS COME UP IS WHETHER OR NOT A RESTRICTION ON THE NUMBER OF OCCUPANTS SHOULD BE PART OF THIS, A D U OR A D D U, UH, CODE PROVISION. UH, DO YOU BELIEVE THAT COVERED THAT LIMITATION SHOULD BE LIFTED? AND IF SO, WHY? UH, I BELIEVE THAT THE NUMBER OF OCCUPANTS IS ALREADY COVERED BY THE INTERNATIONAL RESIDENTIAL CODE AND THERE'S NO NEED TO, YOU KNOW, TO FURTHER CREATE CONFLICT WITHIN OUR LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE AND A ZONING ORDINANCE. UM, WHEN EVERYTHING INCLUDING THE, THE, THE, THE FIRE RATINGS THAT WE WERE JUST TALKING ABOUT IS REGULATED IN THE INTERNATIONAL RESIDENTIAL CODE. OKAY. ALRIGHT. UM, LET ME ASK ONE OTHER QUESTION. UM, I THINK SOME PEOPLE HAVE RAISED THE IDEA THAT THE CURRENT, UH, CODE, WHICH PROVIDES FOR THE SINGLE UNIT, OR SORRY, THE ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT AND THE PRINCIPAL HOUSING UNIT ARE BOTH ON THE SAME METER. UH, WHY DO YOU THINK THAT THE, UH, FLEXIBILITY OF POSSIBLY HAVING MULTIPLE UNITS IS BENEFICIAL IF YOU DO? UH, THERE, THERE ARE A LOT OF DIFFERENT REASONS. UM, YOU KNOW, ONE IS YOU MAY HAVE TECHNICAL CHALLENGES AS SEMA WAS JUST DISCUSSING. UM, YOU MAY HAVE, UM, YOU MAY HAVE A SITUATION WHERE YOU WANT TO DO A LONG-TERM RENTAL, BUT YOU DON'T WANNA BE RESPONSIBLE FOR YOUR TENANT'S BILLS, YOU KNOW, ESPECIALLY THIS SUMMER, RIGHT? UM, WE MAY WANT THE ELECTRIC METER ON A DIFFERENT, YOU KNOW, A DIFFERENT METER AND YOU'RE METERING YOUR TENANT, UH, DIRECTLY. THERE ARE A LOT OF DIFFERENT REASONS. UM, ONE OF, ONE OF THE THINGS THAT, UM, WE WILL FIND IS THAT ESPECIALLY IN THE OLDER PARTS OF TOWN, THAT THERE ARE A NUMBER OF SINGLE FAMILY LOTS THAT HAVE, YOU KNOW, TWO, YOU KNOW, TWO SEPARATE SERVICES. I I ACTUALLY HAVE ONE AND PULLED OUT THE SERVICE, BUT ONLY BECAUSE I CONVERTED IT FROM A, FROM A DUPLEX BACK TO A SINGLE FAMILY, A SMALL DU SMALL SINGLE FAMILY ABOUT 20 YEARS AGO. UM, BUT THEY EXIST ALL OVER THE PLACE. AND SO ONE OF THE THINGS WE'RE DOING IS WE'RE SAYING IT'S, IT'S OKAY, YOU NO LONGER HAVE A NON-CONFORMING USE. I THINK WE DID SOME LARGE AREA REZONING, MONTE VISTA, BEACON HILL, AND ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE DISCOVERED WAS THAT WE HAD TO, WE HAD TO GO IN AND UP ZONE THESE PROPERTIES TO RECTIFY NON-CONFORMING USES. RIGHT? AND SO I THINK IT'S JUST SAYING, LOOK, IT, IT'S HAPPENING ALL OVER THE PLACE. THERE'S NOTHING WRONG WITH IT. UM, I'VE INCREASES, UH, POTENTIAL VALUE FOR SPECULATORS AND INVESTORS. AND I, MY OWN PERSONAL OPINION, I I, I LOOK AT THE MARKET A LOT. I'M, I'M IN THE MARKET IS THAT EVERYTHING IN SAN ANTONIO, IN BAYER COUNTY RIGHT NOW IS ATTRACTIVE. WHETHER IT'S ONE UNIT, TWO UNITS, 250 UNITS, WHETHER IT'S IN, IN MONTE VISTA OR DOWN ON THE SOUTH SIDE, WHETHER IT'S A MILLION DOLLAR HOUSE OR $110,000 HOUSE. AND WHETHER IT HAS AN A D U ON IT OR NOT, IT'S A TARGET FOR INVESTMENT ACTIVITY. AND, AND MY OPINION IS THAT ULTIMATELY WHOEVER OWNS THE HOUSING STOCK, THAT IT'S BETTER TO HAVE AN ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT, WHETHER IT'S ON THE MAIN METER OR ON A SEPARATE METER, UM, BEHIND AS MANY HOUSES AS WE CAN FIT THEM ON SO THAT WE'VE GOT PLACES FOR, FOR PEOPLE TO LIVE. ALRIGHT. THANK YOU MR. BAILEY. YES, SIR. ALRIGHT. DID WE GET IT? ALRIGHT, WHAT'S THE, WHAT'S THE DEFINITION? WE HAVE A DEFINITION OF PORCH, BUT WE DO NOT HAVE A DEFINITION OF PATIO. BUT THE MAIN DIFFERENCE IS THE PRESENCE OF A ROOF. A PORCH PATIO IS IN THE BUILDING CODE DEFINITION. OKAY. WHICH I HAVE. YEAH, WE, WE, WE HAVE THE U D C DEFINITION OF A PORCH IS A ROOFED AREA, WHICH MAY BE GLAZED OR SCREENED ATTACHED TO OR PART OF AND WITH DIRECT ACCESS TO OR FROM A STRUCTURE AND USUALLY LOCATED ON THE FRONT OR SIDE OF THE STRUCTURE AND GOES ON FROM THERE. BUT, OKAY. UH, ALRIGHT, WELL THAT ENDED UP BEING MORE COMPLICATED THAN I WAS EXPECTING. UM, ALRIGHT. I THINK THOSE ARE ALL OF THINK THOSE ARE ALL OF MY QUESTIONS AT THIS TIME. UH, ALTHOUGH MAYBE ONE QUESTION TO STAFF, 'CAUSE WE DID PULL UP THAT INITIAL LANGUAGE IN, UM, THE A ONE SECTION, UM, WHERE I BELIEVE THE CODE CURRENTLY [03:25:01] PROVIDES, UH, A REQUIREMENT FOR A COVENANT, UH, THAT REQUIRES THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY TO NOTIFY THE BUYER. DO WE HAVE THAT? YEAH. AND THAT LAST SENTENCE, UM, CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, SEEMS TO INDICATE THAT, YOU KNOW, IF YOU END UP SELLING THE PROPERTY AS CURRENTLY IN THE CODE, IF A HOMEOWNER WHO'S SELLING A PROPERTY WITH AN A D U SELLS THAT PROPERTY AND THE OTHER, THE BUYER, THE PROTECTED BUYER DOESN'T WANNA LIVE IN THE HOUSE, THAT THE A D U HAS TO BE REMOVED. IS THAT WHAT THAT SEEMS TO READ? THAT WAS HOW WE READ IT. UM, AND OF COURSE OUR CONCERN WOULD BE NOT THAT THIS IS ENFORCEABLE BECAUSE DSDS CONFIRMED THEY'RE NOT ENFORCING THIS, UM, BUT THAT IT COULD BE A SITUATION WHERE, UM, SOMEONE WHO IS A SAVVY AND, UH, PREDATORY INVESTOR SAYS, I WANNA BUY YOUR HOME AND YOU NEED TO TALK, YOU NEED TO KNOCK $20,000 OFF THE PRICE SO I CAN DEMO THIS UNIT. AND THEY MAY NOT DO THAT. OKAY. SO, UM, WE HEARD THERE WERE SOME CONCERNS AND WANTED TO OFFER SOME POSSIBLE LANGUAGE TO LOOK AT THAT. OKAY. AND AS A GENERAL RULE, WE DON'T WANT RULES IN PLACE THAT WE'RE NOT GONNA ENFORCE. IS THAT FAIR? WELL, SO, SO AGAIN, TODAY, IF, IF, IF THAT WERE TO HAPPEN, IF SOMEONE HAD AN A D U, THEY SOLD IT TO A PARTY THAT WAS NOT GONNA LIVE ON THE PROPERTY, THAT NEW PURCHASER COULD CHOOSE NOT TO USE IT AS AN ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT. YOU KNOW, YOU CAN USE IT AS A STORAGE SHED IN THE BACKYARD. UM, AND CERTAINLY, YOU KNOW, IF, IF THEY WERE OCCUPYING IT AND THEY, THEY WEREN'T LIVING ON SITE, CODE ENFORCEMENT COULD GO OUT THERE AND START AN INVESTIGATION. BUT YEAH, WE, WE DO NOT GO AROUND REQUIRING PEOPLE TO KNOCK OVER ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS THAT ARE NOT BEING OCCUPIED ILLEGALLY, THAT ARE NOT IN VIOLATION OF CODES OR DANGEROUS STRUCTURES, ET CETERA. OKAY. THANK YOU MR. SPARROW. ALRIGHT. UM, WE'VE BEEN GOING ABOUT TWO HOURS. DO YOU WANNA TAKE A BREAK BEFORE WE GO INTO THE WATSON GREAT HOUSE SHOOTING GALLERY OR? SURE. ALRIGHT, LET'S GO AHEAD. UH, WE'RE GONNA TAKE A FIVE MINUTE BREAK AT THIS POINT 'CAUSE I THINK WE ARE GONNA GET THROUGH SOME, UH, SIGNIFICANT DISCUSSION HERE. THE TIME IS 4 34, THIS MEETING OF THE ZONING COMMISSION. THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO IS IN RECESS FOR APPROXIMATELY FIVE MINUTES. THANK YOU ALL SO MUCH. YEAH. 'CAUSE I GOT A LOT OF DISCUSSION. ALRIGHT. OH, ALRIGHT. I HOPE EVERYONE WAS ABLE TO WARM UP SLIGHTLY AND THEN COME BACK INTO THIS MEAT LOCKER. UM, THE TIME IS 4 41 AND THIS MEETING OF THE ZONING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO IS BACK IN SESSION. UH, PRIOR TO GOING TO QUESTIONS FROM COMMISSIONER WATSON AND COMMISSIONER GREATHOUSE RESPECTIVELY, UH, COMMISSIONER, WE, I BELIEVE YOU SAID YOU HAVE A QUESTION. THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. SO THIS IS A REALLY IMPORTANT DISCUSSION WE'RE HAVING HERE. AND I HAVE A QUESTION FOR STAFF. SO WHEN IT COMES TO ADUS, ARE MODULAR HOMES CONSIDERED IN A D U? I THINK THE ANSWER TO THAT QUESTION IS IT DEPENDS. IT IT DEPENDS. AND I'M GONNA LET LOGAN TELL YOU WHAT. IF IT IS, IF THEY'RE TRYING TO USE A MODULAR HOME AND IT MEETS ALL THE OTHER SIZE LIMITATIONS, ET CETERA, AND IT'S BUILT TO THE INTERNATIONAL RESIDENTIAL CODE THAN IT COULD BE PERMITTED. BUT THAT'S THE KEY. IT HAS TO BE BUILT TO THE SAME CONSTRUCTION STANDARDS AS A STICK BUILD A D U. SO IN PREVIOUS CASES WE'VE SEEN, UH, WHERE FOLKS HAVE USED, UM, OH, OR REUSE, YOU KNOW, CARGO CONTAINERS AND USE THEM AS MODULAR HOMES. WOULD THAT BE ACCEPTABLE AS AN A D U? THERE ARE OR IS IT? IT DEPENDS. THERE ARE WAYS TO CONVERT SHIPPING CONTAINERS INTO HABITABLE STRUCTURES THAT MEET THE INTERNATIONAL RESIDENTIAL CODE. IT'S DIFFICULT, UH, BUT IT CAN BE DONE. THANK YOU. NOW WE GO TO SHOOTING GALLERIES, SIR. . THANK YOU COMMISSIONER. ALRIGHT, COMMISSIONER WATSON TO YOU, UH, I HAVE A QUESTION FOR CYNTHIA SPIELMAN? YES, MA'AM. UH, SO YOU WERE ALSO A CO-CHAIR OF THE SHIP COMMITTEE AND I WAS, I WAS DCH CHAIR OF THE AD HOC, UM, WORKING GROUP FOR REMOVING BARRIERS TO AFFORDABLE HOUSING, AND I WAS CHAIR OF THE A D U COMMITTEE. OKAY. SO YOU, COULD YOU PLEASE EXPLAIN YOUR PERSPECTIVE ON, UM, THE CHALLENGES WITH THE LANGUAGES PRESENTED HERE FROM YOUR EXPERIENCE WORKING ON THE A D U COMMITTEE? WE HAD A VERY OPEN, VERY WELCOMING EVERYBODY TO THE TABLE KIND OF EXPERIENCE. BUT EVERYTHING, EVERYTHING THAT WE [03:30:01] RECOMMENDED WAS PREDICATED ON THE IDEA THAT WE WERE GOING TO GO OUT AND HAVE A RIGOROUS PUBLIC DISCUSSION SIMILAR TO WHAT WE'RE HAVING HERE SO THAT EVERYBODY COULD HELP CRAFT THE BEST POLICY. IT WAS NEVER OUR INTENTION THAT THIS WAS THE LAST WORD. WE HAD, UM, ANOTHER SUBCOMMITTEE THAT CREATED AN OUTREACH PLAN. WE HAD A PRESENTATION AND THEN COVID HIT, THAT WAS FEBRUARY, 2020. THEN WE GOT A FEW YEARS LATER IT WAS FOLDED INTO THE HOUSING COMMISSION AND THEN THERE WAS NO PUBLIC, YOU KNOW, THERE WAS A SPEAK UP ESSAY, THERE WAS A PUBLIC MEETING WITH 11 PEOPLE AND THAT WAS IT. AND THEIR SUBCOMMITTEE ON, UM, ON OUTREACH BASICALLY WERE TOLD, JUST PUT THIS OUT TO YOUR EMAIL LIST. THIS WAS NOT A PRIORITY. MY, YOU KNOW, I'M, THIS IS PAINFUL FOR ME BECAUSE I SPENT A YEAR WORKING ON THIS. I WANT PEOPLE TO BE ABLE TO BUILD, INCLUDING MYSELF, TO BUILD ADUS AND MY OWN NEIGHBORHOOD. WE HAVE A, A GROUP THAT'S GONNA MEET WITH SENATOR MENENDEZ BECAUSE THEY'RE THE PEOPLE IN MY NEIGHBORHOOD WHO WANNA BUILD ADUS FOR THEIR ELDERS. IT'S NOT THE SETBACKS, IT'S NOT THE DOUBLE METERS, IT'S NOT THOSE THINGS, UM, THAT ARE, ARE, ARE BARRIERS FOR THEM. IT'S CITY FEES. IT'S SOME STATE LEGIS, SOME STATE STATUTES THAT ARE GETTING IN THE WAY OF FUNDING. AND IT'S, UM, I FORGOT MY TRAIN OF THOUGHT. I'M SORRY. I'M A LITTLE NERVOUS. UM, IT'S FUNDING, IT'S THE, THE, THE FEES AND IT'S THE, UM, DESIGN STANDARDS. I MEAN, YOU KNOW, WE HAVE AN N C D AND SO WE'RE GONNA NEED TO REVISIT THAT TO LOOK AT HOW CAN WE PROMOTE ADS IN OUR COMMUNITY AND NOT BE, AND LOOSEN UP THOSE STANDARDS A LITTLE BIT. UM, AND SO WE WELL, I'M SORRY, GO AHEAD. I DON'T, THAT'S OKAY. I HAVE A COUPLE OTHER VERY SPECIFIC QUESTIONS FOR YOU. COULD YOU PLEASE EXPLAIN FROM YOUR PERSPECTIVE, UM, THE BENEFIT OF HAVING A SINGLE METER VERSUS A DOUBLE METER OPTION? WE JUST WENT THROUGH IN BEACON HILL TO OUR LARGE AREA REZONING, I BET 30%. WELL, NO, I BET THE MAJORITY, AND I MAY BE WRONG ABOUT THIS, I DON'T HAVE THE, BUT, BUT HAVING GONE THROUGH THIS OF, OF HOUSES WITH ADUS ARE OWNED BY INVESTORS. THERE'S NO WAY OF OF, I MEAN THERE IS, BUT IT'S A VERY TIME CONSUMING PROCESS TO FIGURE OUT WHO OWNS IT. IF IT'S INVESTMENT, THERE'S NO ENFORCEMENT. I MEAN, WHAT AM I GONNA DO? CALL CITY CODE AND SAY I WANT THOSE PEOPLE EVICTED. UM, AND, AND ONE OF THE PROCESSES IS, UM, DOUBLE METERS, ANYTHING THAT WAS, UM, PEOPLE ASKING FOR DOUBLE METERS BEFORE 2012 WERE GIVEN IT REGARDLESS OF ZONING AFTER THAT, THEN THERE WAS ZONING WAS REQUIRED. AND I FEEL LIKE BECAUSE THERE IS SUCH AN INVESTOR PRESENCE IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD, I MEAN, WE SEE BUSES ALL THE TIME WITH PEOPLE WITH PLACARDS COMING OUT AND LOOKING AT PROPERTIES. WE ARE TRYING TO CON CONTINUE TO HAVE HOUSING THAT PEOPLE CAN BUY. UM, IN OUR COMMUNITY. I BET WE'RE 80% RENTALS. SO IT'S NOT, WE'RE NOT AGAINST RENTALS. I MEAN, WE HAVE A HEALTHY MIX, BUT WE ARE STRUGGLING FOR PEOPLE TO BE ABLE TO BUY IN OUR COMMUNITY. OH, AND DO YOU UNDERSTAND THAT WHEN INVESTORS COME IN, THEY PAY CASH, THEY PAY OVER THE PRICE. IT'S ANOTHER THING THAT CREATES, UM, UM, VALUES THAT GO UP AND LEGACY HOMEOWNERS. ANOTHER CHALLENGE IS WHEN IT COMES TO THEIR PROPERTIES AND PAYING THEIR TAXES. OKAY. OKAY. THANK YOU BIANCA MALDONADO. NOW YOU HAVE ME SCARED. , I KNOW YOU MENTIONED SAFETY ISSUES IN YOUR COMMENTARY EARLIER, AND WE'VE HEARD FROM STAFF SOME DISCUSSION ABOUT HOW THE OTHER KINDS OF CODE THAT EXIST THAT WOULD INFLUENCE OR IMPACT HAVE IMPACTED THE CHOICE OF LANGUAGE. UM, HERE IS, IS THERE REASON FOR THEIR USE? DO YOU FEEL THAT THERE WOULD BE A SPECIFIC CHANGE THAT YOU WOULD LIKE TO SEE TO ADDRESS SAFETY ISSUES FROM THE LANGUAGE AS PRESENTED THAT WOULD EITHER REFERENCE THOSE OTHER CODES OR, UM, ADDRESS SOME OF THE CONCERNS THAT YOU HAVE WITH SAFETY IN TERMS OF RESIDENTS BEING ABLE TO GRASP WHAT, WHAT THEY'RE SUPPOSED TO BE DOING? YOU KNOW, FUNDAMENTALLY I LOOK BACK ON WHAT'S THE DATA AVAILABLE. IF YOU LOOK AT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT CASES, WHICH IS WHERE YOU GO FOR A VARIANCE, WHEN YOU WANT SOMETHING LESS THAN FIVE FEET WHEN YOU GO FOR A THREE FOOT SEC BACK, WHY DID STAFF NOT RECOMMEND THOSE AT A HUNDRED PERCENT FOR APPROVAL? THERE'S REASONS THEY DID NOT. NOW IT'S NOT MY JOB TO GO ANALYZE EVERY SINGLE CASE, BUT IN MY OPINION, IT RAISES CONCERN OF WHY ARE WE GOING TO THE ARBITRARILY THREE FOOT? YOU'RE AVOIDING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT FOR THAT VARIANCE. SO IF THERE WAS NOT AN ISSUE, LIKE THERE WASN'T FOR BARBERSHOPS AND THEY RECOMMENDED A HUNDRED PERCENT OF THOSE CASES FOR APPROVAL, STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION WOULD'VE BEEN APPROVAL A HUNDRED PERCENT OF THE TIME. THE [03:35:01] DATA'S THERE. SOMEBODY COULD GO PULL IT VERY EASILY OF HOW MANY VARIANCES WE'RE TALKING ABOUT. CITY STAFF STOOD UP HERE AND TOLD YOU THAT IF YOU DIDN'T LIKE THE PARKING LOCATION OR OTHER THINGS YOU DIDN'T LIKE ABOUT IT, YOU COULD COME BACK BEFORE ZONING. WELL, HECK ZONING'S A LOT MORE EXPENSIVE THAN GOING BEFORE B O A FOR VARIANCE. SO LET'S FUNDAMENTALLY THINK ABOUT, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT AFFORDABILITY, BUT KIND OF REALLY WE'RE NOT, YOU'RE REALLY TALKING ABOUT THE COST OF DEVELOPMENT. ULTIMATELY THERE IS A CHANCE TO GET A VARIANCE AND THROUGH THE VARIANCE PROCESS IS A PUBLIC PROCESS. IT'S A DIALOGUE TOO, BECAUSE A LOT OF TIMES WHEN YOUR NEIGHBORS ARE NOTIFIED, YOU CAN HAVE A CONVERSATION OF WHAT'S GOING ON. IF YOU JUST ARBITRARILY PUT A THREE FOOT VALUE ON THERE, IT DOESN'T TAKE INTO ACCOUNT THAT STRUCTURE THAT MAY BE ON THAT PROPERTY LINE, THAT STRUCTURE THAT MAY HAVE BEEN CONVERTED WITHOUT PERMITS. UM, THAT STRUCTURE THAT MAY NOT HAVE A FIRE RATED WALL. WHEN WE TALK ABOUT GARAGES, THEY DON'T HAVE FIRE RATED WALLS, BUT WHAT DO THEY CONTAIN? SOME OF THE MOST FLAMMABLE LIQUIDS, YOU KNOW, PEOPLE WITH THE LAWNMOWERS, OTHER THINGS OF THAT NATURE. SO, AND I THINK OF URBAN CORE, YOU KNOW, WHERE IT'S POSSIBLE. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. QUESTION FOR STAFF. UM, WE'VE REFERENC YOU'VE REFERENCED FIRE CODES AND OTHER BUILDING CODES IMPACTING THIS MULTIPLE TIMES. IN A SITUATION LIKE THAT WHERE IT'S PRESENTED, HOW DO YOU DETERMINE IF AN A D U HAS A FIRE RATED WALL? LIKE WHAT IS THE CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY PROCESS FOR THAT? WELL, THE, MY UNDERSTANDING, AND CRYSTAL, CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, ANYTIME YOU HAVE RESIDENTIAL CONSTRUCTION LESS THAN FIVE FOOT, IT AUTOMATICALLY TRIGGERS A DEGREE OF FIRE RATING AS OUTLINED IN THE BUILDING CODES. CORRECT. SO THAT, THAT'S NOT ON A CASE BY CASE BASIS. THAT'S REQUIRED ACROSS THE BOARD. IF, IF WE'RE LOOKING ON A INDIVIDUAL PROPERTY THAT MAY HAVE GONE TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT IN THE PAST AND STAFF RECOMMENDED DENIAL, YOU KNOW, A LOT OF THOSE REQUESTS WE'RE LOOKING AT SOMEONE THAT WANTS A STRUCTURE WITH AN EVE OVERHANG THREE FEET FROM THE SIDE PROPERTY LINE. AND WITH 18 INCHES OF EVE YOU'RE A FOOT AND A HALF, WHICH MEANS EVERY TIME IT RAINS, YOU'RE SATURATING YOUR NEIGHBOR'S PROPERTY. SO THERE'S, I MEAN THERE'S A LOT THAT GOES INTO THE CASE BY CASE ANALYSIS OF A BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT VARIANCE. THE BUILDING CODES ARE CLEAR IF IT IS NOT FIVE FEET, THERE IS A DEGREE OF FIRE RATING REQUIRED. THE THE OTHER THING I WILL POINT OUT IS THAT THIS IS NOT A MANDATE, THIS IS NOT A, YOU MUST BUILD IT THREE FEET FROM THE SIDE PROPERTY LINE. YOU CAN, IF, YOU KNOW, MOST PEOPLE IF GIVEN THE SPACE, ARE NOT GOING TO CHOOSE TO DO THAT BECAUSE THE COST OF DOING THAT IS SIGNIFICANTLY HIGHER THAN DOING IT AT FIVE FEET. IT'S PROVIDING FLEXIBILITY ONLY. I HAVE ANOTHER QUESTION FOR, I THINK IT'S GONNA BE D S D STAFF. UM, WHEN SOMEONE WANTS TO GET A METER, WHAT CAN YOU JUST FOR EVERYONE'S BENEFIT AND KNOWLEDGE, TALK ABOUT WHAT THAT PROCESS IS LIKE. WHAT DOES C P SS HAVE TO DO? DO THEY HAVE TO COME, WHAT IS THE PROCESS BASICALLY? DOES CCP SS HAVE TO TALK TO YOU? DOES THE OWNER HAVE TO TALK TO YOU? LIKE SOMEBODY'S JUST LIKE, OH, I'M CONVERTING SOMETHING. HOW DOES THAT WORK? SO WHEN, WHEN SOMEONE COMES TO, TO GET A METER, THEY, THEY HAVE TO GET A PERMIT. YOU KNOW, WE TAKE A LOOK AT THAT AND I THINK IT WAS ALLUDED TO EARLIER, EVER SINCE 2012, THAT INCLUDES ZONING SIGN OFF. SO IF SOMEONE WALKED IN, THEY WERE REQUESTED A SECOND METER. IF THEY WENT STRAIGHT TO C P S C P S WOULD TELL THEM, YOU HAVE TO GET D S D ZONING TO SIGN OFF ON IT. WE CAN SIT DOWN AND TAKE A LOOK AND SAY, HEY, YOUR ZONED SINGLE FAMILY, YOU'RE NOT ELIGIBLE. IF YOU WANT ONE, YOU CAN SUBMIT A CHANGE OF ZONING APPLICATION OR I DON'T KNOW, THERE'S 6,000 SQUARE FOOT, THERE'S ZONED RM SIX, THE CODE LETS THEM HAVE TWO METERS AND WE SIGN OFF ON IT. CAN I ADD TO THAT? IT, IT'S A LITTLE COMPLICATED PROCESS, PLUS YOU HAVE TO PAY FOR THE METER ALSO AND YOU CAN'T JUST COME IN WITH AN ADDRESS. THE CITY HAS TO VERIFY THE PHYSICAL ADDRESS AND THE OWNERSHIP OF THE PROPERTY. SO, UH, I WENT THROUGH A CASE LIKE THAT WHERE IT TOOK THREE EXTRA WEEKS 'CAUSE WE COULDN'T FIND THE RIGHT ADDRESS. ALRIGHT, UH, NO FURTHER QUESTIONS. THANK YOU COMMISSIONER WATSON. COMMISSIONER GREATHOUSE. THANKS. UM, A LOT OF MY QUESTIONS HAVE BEEN ANSWERED, BUT I DO HAVE A COUPLE MORE. UM, WITH RESPECT TO THE PARKING, COULD YOU PLEASE GO OVER AGAIN WHAT THE CURRENT REQUIREMENT IS FOR PARKING AS WELL AS WHAT THE EFFECTS OF THE AMENDMENT ARE ON THAT? YES. SO CURRENTLY IN THE CODE, THERE IS NO PARKING REQUIREMENT FOR ADUS. WE ARE ADDING THAT IF YOU ARE TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THE ADDITIONAL SQUARE FOOTAGE THAT WE ARE OFFERING THROUGH THESE AMENDMENTS, THAT, BECAUSE IT'S MORE LIKELY THAT YOU HAVE MORE PEOPLE IN THE UNIT. AND BECAUSE THAT MIGHT MEAN MORE DRIVERS, THERE SHOULD BE A PARKING SPACE, BUT THE HOMEOWNER CAN CHOOSE WHERE THAT IS ON SITE. OKAY, THANK YOU. UM, ANOTHER CLARIFICATION ON THIS, I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE I'M TOTALLY CLEAR [03:40:01] ON LIKE THE SQUARE FOOTAGE AND THE, THE LIMITATION OR NOT LIMITATION. SO WHAT WE'RE SAYING HERE IS THAT THE LIMITATION WOULD BE EITHER 800 SQUARE FEET OR REMIND ME WHAT THE OTHER ONE IS THAT 50% OF THE GROSS FLOOR AREA AND GROSS FLOOR AREA IS OF THE PRIMARY, THE ENTIRE SQUARE FOOTAGE OF THE HOME. SO IF YOU HAD A TWO STORY HOUSE THAT WAS HAD A 2000 SQUARE FOOT FOOTPRINT, THEN YOU WOULD HAVE A 4,000 SQUARE FOOT HOME AND IT WOULD BE 50% OF THAT. OKAY. ALRIGHT. I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE THAT I WAS CLEAR WITH THAT. UM, ANOTHER QUESTION FOR STAFF WITH RESPECT TO WIFE SAFETY ISSUES. UM, HAS THE FIRE MARSHAL, HAS ANYONE TALKED TO THEM ABOUT THESE AMENDMENTS? IF SO, WHAT WERE THE OUTCOMES OF THOSE DISCUSSIONS? YES, WE DID HAVE THE FIRE MARSHAL REVIEW THESE AMENDMENTS AND THEY SAID THAT THEY WERE NOT ONLY NOT CONCERNED ABOUT THEM, BUT LIKED THE HEIGHT, UM, RESTRICTIONS. SO NO CONCERNS FROM THE FIRE MARSHAL. OKAY. UM, QUESTION WITH RESPECT TO THE TWO METERS, I THINK THIS IS PROBABLY D SS D WITH RESPECT TO SOME OF THE LARGE AREA REZONINGS. UM, IF WE HAD THE CODE AS IS BEING PROPOSED TO BE AMENDED, SO IT, IT BASICALLY SAYS YOU CAN HAVE TWO METERS AND YOU'RE GOING THROUGH THE LARGER AREA REZONING PROCESS. I REMEMBER ONE OF THE MAIN FACTORS THAT WAS CITED FOR RECOMMENDING PROPERTIES FOR LIKE, FOR EXAMPLE, LIKE AN R FOUR CD FOR TWO UNITS WAS THE PRESENCE OF TWO METERS GOING FORWARD. IF THERE WERE TO BE ADDITIONAL LARGE AREA REZONINGS, WOULD THAT CONTINUE TO BE A REASON THAT D S D STAFF SITES TO AN ORDER FOR A ANOTHER REASON THAT THAT D S D SITES TO SUPPORTING THE CD FOR TWO UNITS OR CD FOR MULTIPLE UNITS? I THINK THAT MOVING FORWARD, AS WE HAVE PREVIOUSLY, WE WOULD BE TAKING A LOOK AT THE LEGALITY OF THAT SECOND METER. UH, AGAIN, THERE, THERE WAS, IT'S BEEN MENTIONED TWICE, YOU KNOW, C P S USED TO YOU ASKED FOR IT, YOU COULD GET IT. UM, YOU KNOW, CERTAINLY IF WE'RE LOOKING AT A STRUCTURE IN A LARGE AREA REZONING THAT HAS BEEN A DUPLEX SINCE THE FORTIES, YOU KNOW, THAT WAS DOWN ZONED TO SINGLE FAMILY IN THE NINETIES, THAT MAY BE A REASONABLE CANDIDATE FOR CONDITIONAL ZONING. BUT A PROPERTY THAT HAS BEEN ZONED SINGLE FAMILY FOR 60 YEARS THAT IN 2011 CAME IN AND JUST GOT A SECOND METER, I DON'T KNOW THAT WE WOULD BE SO WILLING TO OFFER THEM CONDITIONAL ZONING TO, UH, TO SOLIDIFY THAT BASED ON THE AMENDMENT. 'CAUSE I THINK THAT THAT WAS, I I WOULD SAY REGARDLESS OF THE PRESENCE OF THE AMENDMENT, WE WOULD CONTINUE TO EVALUATE THOSE ON A CASE BY CASE BASIS. OKAY. UM, FINALLY, I THINK MY LAST QUESTION, WELL, I HAVE TWO MORE QUESTIONS. UM, THE REMOVAL OF THE DESIGN STANDARD, JUST TO BE CLEAR, SINCE A LOT OF MY NEIGHBORHOODS IN MY AREA ARE, UM, HAVE THE N C D REQUIREMENTS, HISTORIC REQUIREMENTS, THOSE STRUCTURES THAT ARE PROPOSED TO BE BILLED, BUILT IN THOSE AREA IN AREAS THAT HAVE ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS, THEY WILL STILL HAVE TO FOLLOW THOSE GUIDELINES. CORRECT. SO ANY UH, HISTORIC DISTRICT OF THE STATE LAW ALSO CARVED OUT, UH, NEIGHBORHOOD CONSERVATION DISTRICTS OVERLAY OTHER CORRIDOR OVERLAY DISTRICTS ESTABLISHED PRIOR TO THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THAT PARTICULAR STATE LEGISLATION. THOSE WOULD STILL BE ENFORCEABLE. AND THEN, UM, MY LAST QUESTION IS IF IT IS POSSIBLE TO ADD LANGUAGE OR IF THERE WAS A REASON THAT LANGUAGE WAS NOT INCLUDED. UM, WITH RESPECT TO, UH, NOT PERMITTING TYPE TWO STR OR SAYING THAT IN ORDER FOR AN A D U TO BE BUILT THAT UNLESS IT'S OWNER OCCUPIED, IT CANNOT BE A SHORT-TERM RENTAL. SO WE, WE HAVE A, AN ALTOGETHER SEPARATE SHORT-TERM RENTAL ORDINANCE THAT EFFECTIVELY ADDRESSES THAT CONCERN. SO WE HAVE TYPE ONE SHORTTERM RENTAL. SO I OWN THE PROPERTY AND I LIVE ON THE PROPERTY AND I RENT A BEDROOM. I RENT AN A D U ON THE PROPERTY, BUT I LIVE THERE. AND THEN WE HAVE TYPE TWO, WHICH IS, I DO NOT LIVE ON THE PROPERTY. UH, WE, WE ALREADY HAVE REGULATIONS ON SHORT-TERM RENTALS THAT REGULATE WHEN YOU ARE AND ARE NOT ALLOWED TO OCCUPY AN A D U FOR THE PURPOSE OF A TYPE TWO SHORT-TERM RENTAL. SO I, I THINK THAT ADDING IT HERE WOULD BE A, A WOULD BE DUPLICATIVE BECAUSE IT ALREADY EXISTS ELSEWHERE. OKAY. THANK YOU. ALRIGHT, THANK YOU COMMISSIONER GREATHOUSE. UH, BECAUSE THIS IS SUCH A COMPLICATED ISSUE AND WITH A GREAT NUMBER OF, UH, [03:45:01] POTENTIAL EDITS, I DO WANT TO GO AHEAD AND GO AROUND THE HORN ONCE MORE, SEE IF THERE ARE ANY QUESTIONS. COMMISSIONER BARTOS, IT LOOKS LIKE YOU HAVE ONE. YEAH, I, I'M INTERESTED IN ASKING LOGAN AND MELISSA THE HISTORY ABOUT THIS. I MEAN IT'S, I HEARD COMMENTS THAT WE DON'T KNOW, THE CITY DOESN'T KNOW HOW MANY OF THESE A D V USE UNITS WE HAVE. UH, I KNOW UNLESS A NEIGHBOR CALLS, HEY, THEY'RE BUILDING A UNIT OR CALLS A BUILDING INSPECTOR OR SOMEONE WE REALLY DON'T KNOW. BUT WHAT'S THE HISTORY OF ALL THIS, THE LAST FIVE, SIX YEARS? HAVE PEOPLE BUILT THIS FOR STORAGE OR A REALITY THAT MOVE IN? OR WHAT, WHAT HAS CAUSED THIS INCREASE? UH, WELL, I, I DON'T THINK THAT WE'VE SEEN A DRAMATIC INCREASE IN THE LAST COUPLE YEARS AND THE NUMBER OF FOLKS PULLING PERMITS TO BUILD ADUS AND IN FACT, I THINK, SORRY, PLAN REVIEW PULLED SOME NUMBERS BACK TO 20, I THINK IT WAS 2019, MAYBE IT WAS 2020 TO PRESENT AND ONLY 50 PERMITS HAD BEEN ISSUED OVER THAT TIME. SO YEAH, 2020 I THINK SO 2020 TO ABOUT THREE WEEKS AGO, WE'VE ISSUED 50 PERMITS FOR ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS. THE REASONS THAT PEOPLE BUILD THEM, I MEAN, AGAIN, I THINK WE'VE HEARD A LOT OF THEM TODAY, YOU KNOW, HAVE ELDERLY PARENTS MOVE IN. YOU KNOW, THEY WANNA PROVIDE A SPACE FOR THEIR KIDS TO, YOU KNOW, HAVE SOME INDEPENDENCE, LITTLE STARTER HOME, ET CETERA. UH, BUT YEAH, WE, WE DON'T KNOW EXACTLY HOW MANY ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS ARE OUT THERE. AND IT'S BEEN POINTED TO EARLIER, A LOT OF THEM WERE BUILT, I MEAN THE 18 HUNDREDS WHERE WE JUST DON'T HAVE RELIABLE PERMITTING DATA AVAILABLE. ALRIGHT, THANK YOU SO MUCH, COMMISSIONER BARDOS. UM, ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONERS ON MY LEFT? YES. COMMISSIONER WATSON, UH, GOING OFF OF, UH, COMMISSIONER BAR'S, LAST QUESTION, JUST AS A CLARIFICATION. THE 50 PERMITS ISSUED ARE FOR NEW, NEW BUILDS OF ADU? CORRECT. NEW, THOSE WOULD BE EITHER NEW BUILDS OR CONVERSIONS FROM EXISTING ACCESSORY STRUCTURES. SO I HAVE A DETACHED GARAGE. I'M SUBMITTING A PERMIT TO TURN IT INTO AN ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT. QUESTION FOR STAFF. UM, AS FAR AS WE KNOW THAT THERE ARE POTENTIAL ISSUES WITH OLDER ADUS, IS THERE ANY PLAN OR POTENTIAL FOR THERE TO BE, OR WHAT WOULD THE MECHANISM BE FOR GREATER ENFORCEMENT OF GUIDELINES HERE FOR THINGS THAT HAVE BEEN BUILT PRIOR TO 2020 OR THIS AMENDMENT BEING ADOPTED? I COULD, I, I'M, MAYBE I'M NOT UNDERSTANDING THE QUESTION. SO WE KNOW THAT THERE'S ALL THESE ISSUES WITH ADUS, BOTH GOOD AND BAD THAT HAVE BEEN PRESENTED. IS THERE SOME ENFORCEMENT MECHANISM THAT EXISTS TODAY OR THAT IS PLANNED FOR THE FUTURE TO ENFORCE THESE STANDARDS OR PREVIOUS ONES? SO CODE ENFORCEMENT WILL, IF, IF WE RECEIVE A COMPLAINT OR IF CODE ENFORCEMENT IS PROACTIVELY, YOU KNOW, THEY'RE DRIVING AROUND A NEIGHBORHOOD, THEY NOTICE CONSTRUCTION, THEY LOOK IT UP AND THERE'S NO PERMITS. WE HAVE MECHANISMS TO OPEN INVESTIGATIONS AND TAKE ACTIONS FOR ILLEGAL ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS TODAY THAT WILL CONTINUE, THAT WILL NOT GO AWAY IN THE FUTURE. WE DON'T HAVE A WAY TO CODE IN INVESTIGATIONS BASED UPON ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT VIOLATIONS. THOSE ARE PROCESSES, ZONING VIOLATIONS. 'CAUSE THAT'S WHAT THEY ARE ALONG WITH 25,000 OTHER POSSIBLE ZONING VIOLATIONS. SO WE, WE DON'T HAVE A WAY TO SPECIFICALLY TRACK A D U VIOLATIONS TODAY, BUT WE ARE ENFORCING THE CURRENT ORDINANCE ALREADY. BUT COMMISSIONER WATSON, THIS IS MELISSA RAMIREZ, THAT IS SOMETHING THAT WE ARE LOOKING INTO BECAUSE I THINK IT'S SOMETHING THAT, UH, WE SHOULD FOCUS ON FOR FUTURE, UH, REPORTING DATA. SO WE ARE LOOKING AT OPTIONS ON HOW TO TRACK THAT INFORMATION. THAT'S NOT GONNA BE SOMETHING THAT'S GONNA HAPPEN OVERNIGHT BECAUSE THAT IS A REQUIREMENT OF CHANGING OUR EXISTING, UM, TRACKING SYSTEM, WHICH, UH, WE ALREADY HAVE A, UM, A LIST OF ITEMS THAT WE'RE WORKING ON. BUT THAT IS ONE ITEM THAT HAS BEEN DISCUSSED. THANK YOU. IF I MAY, COMMISSIONER WATSON, UM, IN ADDITION TO THE WORKS THAT D S D IS DOING, THIS ISN'T THE END ALL BE ALL FOR N H S D ON ADUS, THE CODE, UM, AMENDMENTS ARE PART OF A SHIP STRATEGY THAT ALSO INCLUDES UNDERSTANDING, YOU KNOW, WHY DO PEOPLE CREATE ADUS OUT OF NECESSITY AND NOT NECESSARILY GO THROUGH A CODE PROCESS? RIGHT? SO WE HAVE A PARTNERSHIP RIGHT NOW WITH LISC, UM, WHO IS WORKING WITH NONPROFITS TO GO AND BUILD THOSE CONNECTIONS WITH FOLKS WHO, YOU KNOW, IF YOU KNOCK ON YOUR DOOR AND ASK THEM, DO YOU HAVE AN A D U? THEY MIGHT TELL YOU NO. RIGHT? IF THAT'S, EVEN IF THAT'S NOT THE CASE AND YOU KNOW, HOW IS IT THAT WE CAN HELP FOLKS WHO ARE IN THAT SITUATION BRING THEIR A D U UP THE CODE UP TO CODE WITH CAPITAL, UM, AND WITH OTHER SUPPORTS SO THAT ENFORCEMENT DOESN'T HAVE TO COME TO THEIR DOOR? RIGHT. JUST WANNA ADD THAT. THANK [03:50:01] YOU. THANK YOU MS. WILLIAMSON. UM, ALRIGHT. COMMISSIONER WATSON. THANK YOU SO MUCH. COMMISSIONER GREATHOUSE, JUST CLAR TO KIND OF CLARIFY ON WHAT COMMISSIONER WATSON SAID IS THERE, BECAUSE I UNDERSTOOD HERS TO BE MORE WITH RESPECT TO BUILDING OR CONVERTING, BUT WHAT ABOUT THE, IS IS ANYONE LOOKING AT POTENTIALLY TRYING TO ENFORCE THE OWNER OCCUPANCY REQUIREMENT? SO IF WE HAVE, UM, A PROPERTY THAT'S SOLD TO AN INVESTOR AND IT'S NO LONGER OWNER OCCUPIED, WOULD THERE BE SOME KIND OF REGISTRY OR SOMETHING WHERE THAT CAN BE TRACKED AND FOLLOWED SO THAT IT'S NOT JUST THAT IT WAS BUILT OR CONVERTED ILLEGALLY, BUT THAT IT'S BEING USED ILLEGALLY? SO CODE ENFORCEMENT CURRENTLY IS ENFORCING THE OWNER OCCUPIED REQUIREMENT. THAT, THAT IS, I MEAN, IF WE RECEIVE A COMPLAINT OR IF WE GO OUT AND, AND OPEN AN INVESTIGATION AND FIND THAT A PROPERTY OWNER LIVES IN MICHIGAN BUT IS RENTING THE MAIN HOUSE IN THE A D U, THAT IS A VIOLATION OF THE CODE AND CODE ENFORCEMENT WILL TAKE ACTION. THEY HAVE THE OPTION ON HOW TO COMPLY. THEY CAN, THEY CAN REMOVE THE TENANT FROM THE S D R OR NOT THE S T R, THE A D U. SO IT'S NOT BEING OCCUPIED. YEAH, WE DON'T WANNA GO INTO THAT . UH, THEY CAN, THEY CAN CHOOSE TO SUBMIT A CHANGE OF ZONING APPLICATION TO SEE IF THEY CAN ZONE THE PROPERTY TO SOMETHING THAT WILL ALLOW TWO UNITS IN PERPETUITY. BUT THAT IS ENFORCED TODAY. AND COMMISSIONER, THE OTHER WAY WE SEE THESE IS IF AN APPLICANT IS COMING IN OR A PROPERTY OWNER IS COMING IN TO DO SOME RENOVATIONS TO THE PROPERTY AND WE'RE LOOKING THROUGH THE SCOPE OF WORK AND WE SEE SOME RED FLAGS THERE, WE'LL CATCH THEM AT THAT POINT. AND WE'RE HAVING THE DISCUSSION ABOUT, OKAY, THIS IS GONNA BE A PROBLEM YOU MIGHT HAVE TO REZONE, UM, YOU KNOW, WHAT OTHER OPTIONS DO YOU HAVE? AND JUST TO BE CLEAR, UM, QUESTION TO STAFF, THE OWNER OCCUPIED PROVISION OF THE EXISTING CODE REMAINS IN THIS AMENDMENT. THIS AMENDMENT DOES NOTHING TO CHANGE THE OWNER OCCUPIED ASPECT OF THIS SECTION OF THE U D C. CORRECT. THAT WOULD TO TO BE A, A LEGAL A D U THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY STILL HAS TO RESIDE ON SITE. OKAY. THANK YOU. UM, QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONER ON I RIGHT. ALRIGHT, VERY GOOD. I AM GOING BACK AND FORTH, SO I AM CONSIDERING HOW BEST TO GO ABOUT THIS. UM, BUT I THINK AT THIS POINT, UH, I'M GONNA ASK FOR A MOTION. NO. SO THE FLOOR IS OPEN FOR A MOTION WITH RESPECT TO AMENDMENT 23 DASH SIX. QUESTION? YES. CAN THE, CAN THE MOTION INCLUDE PROPOSED CHANGES? IT CAN, IF YOU BELIEVE AS THE MOVEMENT THAT, THAT IS WISE. ONE, ONE COMMENT THAT I CAN SAY . SO WE, WE APPROVE THE EMOTION, BUT PEOPLE STILL HAVE TWO MORE PROCESSES. REMEMBER WHAT I ASKED EARLIER. IT CAN, IT GOES TO ANOTHER COMMITTEE AND THEN IT GOES TO CITY COUNCIL. SO THERE ARE STILL A LOT, LOT OF TIME FOR TO MAKE ADJUSTMENT IN CASE WE FIND A LEGAL WORD IN THE DOCUMENT. BUT HERE'S MY TAKE ON THIS. MM-HMM. , I'D RATHER HAVE A RESTRICTION BY THE CITY AND A PROCESS THAT WE HAVE IN PLACE JUST LIKE WE DO T A B C LICENSES, UH, AND ALL THE PROCESS OF BUILDING PERMITS. I THINK IT'S BETTER TO HAVE SOMETHING IN PLACE THAT WE CAN IMPROVE ALONG THE WAY. BECAUSE WITHOUT THIS, UM, ANYONE CAN DO WHATEVER THEY WANT TO. OKAY. UM, ALRIGHT, I THINK THAT'S HELPFUL. UM, ALRIGHT. TELL YOU WHAT, I'M GONNA MAKE A MOTION. ALRIGHT. I MOVE, UM, TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF AMENDMENT 23 DASH SIX AS AMENDED AND PRESENTED HERE TODAY. I'LL MAKE A SECOND THE MOTION. ALRIGHT. UH, THERE IS A MOTION FOR APPROVAL AS AMENDED AND PRESENTED TODAY OF AMENDMENT 23 6 BY ME, UH, WITH A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER BARTOS. UM, THE FLOOR. WE'RE GONNA GO WITH DISCUSSION. WE'RE GONNA START WITH COMMISSIONERS TO MY RIGHT. COMMISSIONER SIPES. ALRIGHT. I, I CANNOT SUPPORT THE MOTION AS MADE CURRENTLY. UM, AND, UM, I'VE GOT A LOT AND LONG REASONS, BUT I'LL TRY AND BE BRIEF. UM, IN [03:55:01] MY OPINION, THERE SEEMS TO BE A LOT OF MISCONCEPTIONS ON THE BUILDINGS, ON THE BUILDING OF ADUS. UM, YOU KNOW, WE, WE'VE HEARD A LOT OF, A LOT OF TALK, UH, AND PRESENTATION ABOUT HOW IT'S ABOUT AGING IN PLACE, ABOUT, ABOUT, UM, GRANDPARENTS OR PARENTS COMING BACK TO LIVE OR, OR, OR SOMEONE STARTING OUT, YOU KNOW, AND THOSE ALL THE, IN, IN FACT, IN THE PRESENTATION THAT WE SAW TODAY, WE SAW THESE IMAGES OF NICE SMALL LITTLE CASITAS. AND THOSE ARE ALL CURRENTLY LEGAL WITH THE EXISTING LANGUAGE THAT EXIST TODAY. SO MY BIG ISSUE IS ON THE POSSIBILITY OF THIS, OPENING IT UP TO INVESTORS THAT UNFORTUNATELY ARE NOT LOOKING AT THE AFFORDABILITY PART OF IT. UM, WE HEARD TALK ABOUT LIKE, WELL, THIS WILL ALLOW PEOPLE, YOU KNOW, THEY, THEY WILL BE ABLE TO BUILD AN A D U AND, UM, IN ORDER TO, TO RENT OUT OR SOMETHING TO LOWER THEIR TAXES. YOU KNOW, UNFORTUNATELY THAT'S A POLITICAL DISCUSSION I DON'T WANT TO GET INTO. UM, BUT THAT CURRENTLY EXISTS TODAY WE CAN BUILD AN 800 SQUARE FOOT A D U, WHICH WOULD ALLOW BASICALLY ALL THE, THE, THE, THE, THE ITEMS THAT WE, WE, WE, WE DISCUSSED, YOU KNOW, UH, YOU KNOW, GRANDPARENTS LIVING THERE, UM, UH, UH, A SINGLE PERSON, A STUDENT THAT EXISTS. NOW, UM, MY MY FEELING IS THAT THE LANGUAGE SHOULD BE, THAT THERE SHOULD BE A LIMIT TO THE MAX. I I REALLY HAVE AN ISSUE WITH THE 50%, YOU KNOW, WHICHEVER IS GREATER 50% OF THE MAIN. AND, AND THE REASON IS, IS BECAUSE, BECAUSE A, UM, WELL, I'M GONNA USE MY STREET AS AN EXAMPLE. ON MY STREET, WE HAVE HOMES BUILT FROM UNDER 1900 SQUARE FEET TO OVER 4,000 SQUARE FEET. IT'S AN OLD NEIGHBORHOOD. THAT'S HOW THINGS WERE. YOU KNOW, YOU HAVE A MIX OF EVERYTHING. WE'RE SAYING THAT BY DOING THE 50% OF THE PRIMARY STRUCTURE, BECAUSE WHICHEVER IS LARGER, YOU CAN BUILD A SEPARATE UNIT IN THE BACK THAT IS LARGER THAN AN EXISTING HOME ON THAT STREET. AND TO ME, THAT DOES NOT SPEAK TO COMPATIBILITY. THOSE LARGER HOMES, THOSE LARGER UNITS DO NOT SPEAK TO AFFORDABILITY. UM, I MEAN, TO ME, IF THERE WAS A LIMIT OF A THOUSAND SQUARE FOOT, AND THAT'S IT, THAT WOULD ALLOW FLEXIBILITY, WOULD ALLOW, UM, A STARTING OUT FAMILY. I MEAN, WELL WOULD ALLOW, UM, GRANDPARENTS OBVIOUSLY, BUT WOULD STILL KEEP THE IT WITHIN THE PARAMETERS OF ENSURING AFFORDABILITY. BECAUSE I THINK WE ALL KNOW THAT IF YOU OPEN IT UP TO ALLOWING 1500, 1800, 2000 SQUARE FOOT SECOND UNITS, THOSE ARE NOT GONNA BE AFFORDABLE. AND THAT LIMITS WHO, AND IT JUST, IT JUST, I DON'T KNOW. SORRY. UM, I'M THINKING, OKAY, CALIFORNIA, FOR AN EXAMPLE, CALIFORNIA DOES NOT ALLOW ADUS OVER 1200 SQUARE FEET. IN FACT, MANY OF THE, OF THE AREAS IN CALIFORNIA, THEY HAVE A LIMIT. CALIFORNIA, UH, SOME OF THE CITIES DO NOT ALLOW SEPARATE METERING, YOU KNOW, AND, AND YET WE'RE TRYING TO DO THINGS THAT PLEASE INVESTORS AND, AND, AND NOT DO THINGS THAT ARE THE ACTUAL IMPEDIMENTS TO BUILDING THESE ADDITIONAL AFFORDABLE UNITS. THAT BEING, UM, EITHER THE STATE STATUTES, THE CITY FEES AND THINGS LIKE THAT, WE'RE, WE'RE, WE'RE KIND OF EVERYTHING THAT IN THIS, IN THIS, UM, WELL, ALMOST EVERYTHING IN HERE IS GEARED TO PLEASING AN EXTERNAL INVESTOR AND NOT WORKING TO ENSURE AN AFFORDABILITY AND ENSURING THAT THE PEOPLE THAT THAT HAVE, UM, LIVED IN THEIR NEIGHBORHOOD FOR DECADES ARE ABLE TO REMAIN IN THEIR NEIGHBORHOOD. AND SO AT THIS POINT, I CAN'T SUPPORT YOUR MOTION. SORRY. THAT'S QUITE ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU SO MUCH, COMMISSIONER SIPES, UH, COMMISSIONERS TO MY LEFT DISCUSSION. WE'LL GET TO YOU TOO. , UH, COMMISSIONER BOTTLES, OR I THINK I WAS JUST GONNA COMMENT ON IS 'CAUSE I DO SEE SOME INSIGHT OF WHAT, UH, MR. LOGAN WAS SAYING EARLIER ABOUT A HOUSE THAT'S MAYBE 15,000 SQUARE FEET AND HIS PERCENTAGE OF 1500 SQUARE FEET. SO I THINK IT'S GONNA COME DOWN TO WHERE THESE PROPERTIES RESIDE. INNER CITY PROPERTIES ARE NOT GONNA HAVE THAT AVAILABILITY TO BUILD A HOUSEHOLD THAT BIG, WHERE THEN YOU WOULD HAVE TO MAXIMIZE THEM AT 800 [04:00:01] SQUARE FEET VERSUS A PROPERTY THAT'S SITTING ON A LARGER, UH, PROPERTY OR A STATE. SO I, AGAIN, I WILL, I'M, I'M BACK AND FORTH ON THAT AS WELL. SO THAT'S MY DISCUSSION. ALRIGHT, THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER ORTIZ. COMMISSIONER BOTTLES, I, I'M IN FAVOR OF THIS AND FOR MANY REASONS, I, I REALLY BELIEVE THAT WE HAVE TO HAVE A, SOMETHING IN PLACE, SOME SORT OF REGULATION. UH, IF, IF NOT THIS THING IS GONNA GO OUT OF, PLUS I READ THE FIRST PARAGRAPH THAT THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY, IF Y'ALL READ THE VERY FIRST PARAGRAPH, UH, THERE'S, UH, AT NO TIME THE OWNER CAN RECEIVE RENT FOR THIS. SO I THINK THAT MAKES MY LIFE A LOT EASIER, APPRO THIS KNOWING THAT IN THE NEXT YEAR SOMEONE, I, I DON'T KNOW HOW THE LEGAL LANGUAGE CAN BE CHANGED OR HOW LONG IT CAN TAKE, BUT I, READING THAT FIRST PARAGRAPH, IT GIVES ME CONFIDENCE THAT AT LEAST WE HAVE A STARTING POINT. ALRIGHT, THANK YOU COMMISSIONER BOTTLES. ALRIGHT, YOU WANNA FLIP A COIN OR WHO WANTS TO GO FIRST? DISTRICT ONE FIRST. I CAN GO FIRST. ALRIGHT, COMMISSIONER GREATHOUSE. UM, I CANNOT SUPPORT THE MOTION AS, UM, AS PRESENTED, UM, MOSTLY BECAUSE I THINK THERE ARE LIKE COMMISSIONER S SIPES, I HAVE A FEW CONCERNS, ALTHOUGH NOT EXACTLY THE SAME CONCERNS AS YOU. AND I ACTUALLY DISAGREE WITH YOU ON SOME OF THOSE, UM, . BUT I DO THINK THAT, UM, THAT HAVING SOME TYPE OF LANGUAGE IN HERE THAT IS CLEAR ABOUT NOT ALLOWING THE TYPE TWO SS T R I THINK THAT THAT, AND, AND I DON'T EVEN KNOW THAT SAYING TYPE TWO S T R, BUT JUST SAYING THAT THE, IT MUST BE OWNER OCCUPIED IF IT'S GOING TO BE USED AS A SHORT-TERM RENTAL, I THINK THAT THAT JUST, I, I REALIZE IT MAY BE DUPLICATIVE, BUT I DO THINK THAT THAT IS IMPORTANT IN CASE WE HAVE CHANGES TO THE OTHER CODE, RIGHT? UNDERSTANDING THAT THE S T R CODE MAY CHANGE. UM, I THINK THAT IS IMPORTANT, UM, TO HAVE IN HERE. UM, I AM TORN ON THE TWO METER SITUATION, I'LL JUST BE CLEAR ABOUT THAT. BUT, BUT I DO THINK THAT THERE'S A LOT OF GOOD THAT COMES FROM THESE AMENDMENTS. AND UM, TO BE PERFECTLY TRANSPARENT, I ACTUALLY SAT ON THE AD HOC COMMITTEE THAT CYNTHIA AND JIM CO-CHAIRED. I WAS INVOLVED IN MANY OF THESE DISCUSSIONS MYSELF. MANY OTHER AFFORDABLE HOUSING, UH, PROFESSIONALS AND EXPERTS SAT IN MANY MEETINGS TO TRY TO COME UP WITH SOMETHING THAT HELPS OUR COMMUNITY DEAL WITH. AND AT THAT POINT IN TIME, I WOULDN'T HAVE EVEN SAID THAT WE WERE IN A HOUSING CRISIS. NOW I WOULD SAY WE ARE SMACK IN THE MIDDLE OF A HOUSING CRISIS. SO I THINK THAT WE NEED TO MAKE SOME STEPS, TAKE SOME STEPS TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THIS. I JUST DON'T KNOW IF EXACTLY THIS IS WHAT I'M GONNA BE IN SUPPORT OF AND I'LL RESERVE I, I HAVE A LOT MORE TO SAY DEPENDING ON WHERE WE GO FROM HERE. ALRIGHT, THANK YOU COMMISSIONER GREATHOUSE. I SOMEWHAT HOPE THAT YOU DON'T HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO SAY IT, BUT WE'LL SEE. UM, COMMISSIONER WATSON, I CANNOT SUPPORT THE MOTION. I, FIRST OF ALL THIS, THERE IS, THERE IS SOMETHING IN THE CODE TODAY THAT TO COMMISSIONER SIPES POINT EARLIER ALLOWS CASITAS TO BE BUILT. SO IN NOT MOVING FORWARD WITH THIS AMENDMENT AS PRESENTED, WE ARE NOT PREVENTING ADUS PERIOD. THERE IS SOMETHING IN PLACE TODAY. ARE THERE ISSUES WITH IT? YES, AND SUBSTANTIAL ONES. I DON'T LOVE THE CODE THAT WE CURRENTLY HAVE, BUT I ALSO CANNOT SUPPORT THIS LANGUAGE BECAUSE I DO NOT THINK IT PROVIDES ENOUGH CLARITY. AND I THINK WE ARE DEPENDING ON REFERENCES TO MANY, MANY OTHER CODES, ORDINANCES AND REGULATIONS AND ASSUMING THAT IT'S GOING TO WORK OUT WELL. AND I HAVE NOT FELT COMFORTABLE WITH THIS SERIES OF QUESTIONS I'VE ASKED TODAY THAT WE REALLY HAVE THOUGHT THROUGH UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES OF DEPENDING ON THAT LEVEL OF TECHNICAL COMPLEXITY FOR THE AVERAGE PERSON THAT MAY BE WANTING TO DO AN A D U IN THEIR BACKYARD, UM, WITH THIS LANGUAGE IS PRESENTED, I DON'T WANT THE CURRENT CODE TO BE WHAT WE MOVE FORWARD WITH, BUT I JUST FEEL LIKE THERE ARE TOO MANY UNANSWERED QUESTIONS AND OPEN DOORS FOR CHALLENGES, PARTICULARLY WITH THE FOOTPRINT, UM, AND SQUARE FOOTAGE INFORMATION. AND I STILL AM VERY TORN ON THE TWO METER THING. UM, I'VE HEARD A LOT TODAY ABOUT BOTH THINGS. I DON'T, I DON'T LOVE IT BEING ONE OR THE OTHER. UM, THERE WERE, THERE IS A POSSIBILITY THAT THE OWNER OCCUPANCY REQUIREMENT COULD ADDRESS SOME OF MY CONCERNS, BUT I DO NOT FEEL COMFORTABLE WITH THE FACT THAT WE'RE ENFORCING IT WELL OR THAT WE'VE THOUGHT THROUGH HOW WE'RE GOING TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THAT. UM, WITHOUT ADDITIONAL CLARIFICATION IN THE LANGUAGE, I CANNOT SUPPORT THE AMENDMENT MOVING FORWARD AS PRESENTED FOR THOSE REASONS. ALRIGHT, THANK YOU COMMISSIONER WATSON. UM, I MADE THIS MOTION AND I MADE IT, UM, FOR A NUMBER OF REASONS. BUT TO BEGIN WITH THIS [04:05:01] AMENDMENT AS PROPOSED AND AS PRESENTED TODAY WAS THE PROCESS OF A LONG PUBLIC PROCESS WITH MULTIPLE COMMISSIONS, WITH MUCH PUBLIC INPUT AS MS. WAMSLEY POINTED OUT IN HER OPENING PRESENTATION. UM, AND SO IS IT 100% WHAT I WOULD WANT TO DO? POSSIBLY NOT. IN FACT, THERE'S A GOOD CHANCE THAT IF I HAD TO WRITE THIS ON MY OWN, I'D STRIKE THE HOMEOWNER HOME OWNER OCCUPIED PROVISION AND BASICALLY BACKDOOR ABOLISH SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL IN THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO. UH, BUT THAT'S NOT WHAT WE'RE DOING TODAY. UM, AND SO WHEN WE LOOK AT THIS AMENDMENT AS PRESENTED, YOU KNOW, THE PRIMARY THINGS I'VE HEARD IS THAT THIS OPENS THE DOOR TO INVESTORS AND THAT WAS A GREAT DEAL OF COMMISSIONER SIPES, UH, DISCUSSION. AGAIN, WE ARE GOING TO PROVIDE A CODE THAT AS COMMISSIONER BOTTLES POINTED OUT VERY EXPLICITLY IN ITS INITIAL SENTENCE, SAYS THIS REQUIRES AN OWNER TO OCCUPY ONE OF THE TWO UNITS. WHETHER THE, WHETHER THE PRINCIPAL UNIT OR THE ACCESSORY UNIT DOESN'T MATTER, BUT THAT OWNER HAS TO BE THERE. AND SO WHEN WE WRITE THIS CODE, WE HAVE TO ASSUME THAT PEOPLE ARE GOING TO FOLLOW IT AS THE LAW, AS THE LAW THAT IT IS. UH, WE CAN TALK ABOUT ENFORCEMENT AT A LATER DATE, WE CAN TALK ABOUT AN IMPROVED ENFORCEMENT, BUT WITHIN THE AMBIT OF WHAT WE ARE DOING TODAY, I THINK THAT OWNER OCCUPIED PROVISION IN THAT FIRST SENTENCE IS SUFFICIENT TO ADDRESS THE INVESTOR CONCERN OR WE GET A LOT OF FEES FOR ENFORCEMENT AND NEW ZONING REQUESTS. UM, WITH RESPECT TO THE METERS. I THINK FOR ME THE FACT THAT THE METERS ARE NOT COMPULSORY, THIS IS NOT GONNA REQUIRE ANY SINGLE PERSON WHO WANTS TO HAVE AN A D U TO HAVE TWO METERS IS EXCELLENT. THE FLEXIBILITY OF CHOOSING BETWEEN A SINGLE METER FOR THE TWO UNITS PRINCIPLE AND ACCESSORY OR ALLOWING TWO SEPARATE METERS IS CRITICAL. WHEN WE LOOK AT DISTRICT FIVE, WHAT WE ARE GOING TO END UP SEEING AS WE SEE THESE SKYROCKETING VALUATIONS AS WE SEE THE SKYROCKETING, UH, TAX BURDENS, ANOTHER METER, ALTHOUGH INCREASED IN INITIAL COST, CAN END UP BENEFITING THOSE PEOPLE WHO WANT TO RENT OUT AN ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT TO PROVIDE AN ADDITIONAL STREAM OF INCOME BECAUSE IT WILL MAKE SURE THAT THEY'RE NOT PAYING FOR SOMEONE ELSE'S POWER OR WATER AND THEREFORE NOT BURDENING SOMEONE WHO MIGHT BE ON THE VERY EDGE OF AFFORDING THEIR HOME. AND THAT A D U MAKES A DIFFERENCE. THAT ADDITIONAL RENTAL COM INCOME MAKES THE DIFFERENCE AND GETTING KICKED OUT BECAUSE YOU KNOW, THE KID WHO'S RENTING FROM YOU DOESN'T CARE IF THEY TAKE TWO HOUR SHOWERS OR DOESN'T CARE IF THEY'RE RUNNING, YOU KNOW, HIGH INTENSITY, LOW EFFICIENCY ELECTRONICS. UM, AND SO THE METERS, THE FLEXIBILITY IS A HUGE BENEFIT TO ME OF THIS PROPOSED AMENDMENT. AND FINALLY, GOING BACK TO SORT OF THE INVESTOR SLASH S T R ASPECT BY DEFINITION, BECAUSE OF THAT FIRST SENTENCE THAT IS IN THE EXISTING CODE TODAY AND WILL BE IN THIS AMENDMENT, SHOULD IT PASS THIS COMMISSION, THE PLANNING COMMISSION, THE CITY COUNCIL, UM, OF THE HOMER HOMEOWNER OCCUPIED ASPECT OF THIS A D U SYSTEM, IT'S NECESSARILY A TYPE ONE S T R BECAUSE YOU'RE NOT JUST GETTING RID OF BOTH OF THEM. SO, YOU KNOW, FOR THAT REASON I MADE THIS MOTION I APPRECIATE AND I THINK MY FELLOW COMMISSIONERS AS ALWAYS HAVE BEEN DILIGENT, HAVE RAISED IMPORTANT POINTS. I APPRECIATE EVERY SINGLE PERSON HERE. UM, BUT GIVEN THE LENGTHY PROCESS THAT HAS LED TO THIS AMENDMENT, GIVEN THE DISCUSSIONS THAT WE'VE HAD AND GIVEN THE HOUSING CRISIS THAT THIS CITY IS CURRENTLY UNDERGOING, I THINK THIS IS A GREAT FIRST STEP TO ADDRESSING THOSE ISSUES. IT'S A GREAT FIRST STEP TO HELPING THOSE HOMEOWNERS WHO NEED THIS INCOME. IT'S NOT PERFECT, BUT THAT'S WHY I MADE THE MOTION AND THAT'S WHY I'M ASKING MY FELLOW COMMISSIONERS [04:10:01] TO SUPPORT IT. ALRIGHT, ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? YES. YES I DID, RIGHT? YEAH. OKAY. THERE IS A MOTION. I'LL SECOND THAT MOTION. YOU ALREADY DID. UM, ALRIGHT, SO THE MOTION IS FOR APPROVAL OF AMENDMENT 26 3, I'M SORRY, 23 6. UM, AS AMENDED AND AS PRESENTED TODAY BY ME WITH A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER BOTTLES ROLL CALL VOTE PLEASE. CHAIR BUSANTE AYE. COMMISSIONER BOTTLES? YES. COMMISSIONER SIPES? NO. NO. COMMISSIONER GREATHOUSE? NO. NO. COMMISSIONER WATSON? NO. NO. COMMISSIONER, WE AYE. COMMISSIONER OR THI YES. MOTION FILLS. ALRIGHT. FLOOR. I'M SORRY. FLOOR IS OPEN FOR A MOTION. MOTION TO RECONSIDER. SO WE, WE'VE DECIDED TO QUIT DOING THAT. YEAH. OH YEAH. WE'RE SAVING TIME. GOSH, REALLY? I DON'T, YEAH, NEITHER. DIDN'T WE RECONSIDER SOMETHING EARLIER? OH, THAT WAS A MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION BECAUSE WE HAD THE ROLL CALL VOTE. THAT'S OKAY. YEAH. AND, AND, AND WE NEEDED TO CHANGE THE OUTCOME ON THAT ONE. SO IN THIS CASE, BECAUSE THE MOTION FAILED, WE ARE NO LONGER DOING THE MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION AND THEN DOING THE ACTUAL MOTION. WE'RE JUST GOING STRAIGHT TO THE ACTUAL MOTION. CITY ATTORNEY TOLD ME IT WAS OKAY. , I WAS NEVER GOOD WITH ANY OF THESE RULES. SO, UM, OKAY. SO, UM, MOTION FOR APPROVAL WITH THE FOLLOWING, NOT VERY WELL STATED AMENDMENTS, UM, TO INCLUDE LANGUAGE THAT LIMITS, UM, THE, THE USE OF ANY A DDUS OR ADU, UM, FOR USE AS A SHORT TERM RENTAL IF THE OWNER DOES NOT RESIDE ON THE PROPERTY. FOUR. AND THAT'S GONNA BE IT AS FAR AS MY AMENDMENTS, OH, SORRY. AND LIMITATION OF THE, THE, UM, MAXIMUM SQUARE FOOTAGE TO 1600 SQUARE FEET HE USED. RIGHT. WELL IT'S ADDING THE MAXIMUM RIGHT OF 1600. SO IF WE LIMIT THE LIMITATION WOULD STILL BE 50%. CAN I MINIMUM 800? SORRY. YEAH, I'M SORRY. CAN I TAKE A CRACK AT IT? SURE, PLEASE. UP THERE. UM, WHY DON'T Y'ALL GO AHEAD AND DO THE S T R FOR THE SHORT. DID YOU WANT IT TO SAY A TYPE TWO S T R OR ANY TYPE OF SST R NO, BECAUSE I DON'T WANT IT TO BE TIED TO THE S T R ORDINANCE, WHICH MAKES ME NERVOUS. ALRIGHT, BUT, OKAY, SO LET'S, LET'S TALK COMMISSIONER GREATHOUSE. UM, . ALRIGHT, SO THEN YOU JUST HAVE TO AMEND THE CODE IN TWO PLACES WITH RESPECT TO THE SIZE, UM, LIMITATION. COMMISSIONER GREATHOUSE, MAY I SUGGEST THE FOLLOWING LANGUAGE IF IT, IF IT IS ACCEPTABLE TO YOU? UH, THE ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT SHALL NOT EXCEED 1600 SQUARE FEET OR 50%, WHICHEVER IS SMALLER. NO, NO, NO. I DON'T THINK THAT GETS US THERE BECAUSE OKAY. SHALL NOT EXCEED 50% OF GROSS NO SHALL NOT EXCEED OUT 800 OR 50% UP TO UP FROM A MAXIMUM RIGHT UP TO 50% OF THE GROSS FLOOR AREA NOT TO EXCEED 1600 SQUARE FEET OR 50% OF THE GROSS FLOOR AREA. THE PRIMARY STRUCTURE, UM, NOT TO EXCEED. WE CAN DO LIKE PER NOT TO EXCEED SEED. NO, I THINK WE, WE HAVE TO START, START AGAIN ENTIRELY . UM, I'M SO SORRY. I SAID THEY WAS NOT GONNA BE WELL STATED. THE, THE ACCESSORY DWELLING SHALL BE LIMITED TO 1600 SQUARE FEET OR SHALL LIMITED, SHALL SHALL BE LIMITED TO EXCEED 16 TO SIX, A MAXIMUM OF 1600 SQUARE FEET OR 50% OF GROSS FLOOR AREA OF THE PRIMARY STRUCTURE, WHICHEVER IS LARGER. [04:15:01] NO, NO, I DON'T THINK THAT GETS US THERE. NO. I THINK IT NEEDS TO SAY THE ACCESSORY DWELLING SHALL NOT EXCEED 800 SQUARE FEET OR 50% OF GROSS FLOOR AREA OF THE PRIMARY STRUCTURE. AND THEN BEFORE THAT COMMA, I THINK WE'D SAY OPEN PARENTHESES NOT YES. NOT TO EXCEED 1600 AND THEN COMMA, WHICHEVER IS LARGER. NO, NO, NO. STRIKE THAT PHRASE. HOW ABOUT NO, NO. HOW ABOUT, HOW ABOUT UP TO OR 50% OF GROSS FLOOR AREA OF THE PRIMARY STRUCTURE UP TO 800 SQUARE FEET? PERFECT. SOUNDS GREAT. OKAY. AND, AND GET RID OF THE, THE COMMA FIRST SO SLOWLY FROM THE TOP. . ALRIGHT. THE ACCESSORY, NO, COMMISSIONER GREATHOUSE AND I HAVE GOT IT. SO LET'S JUST GO . UM, ALRIGHT, SORRY. OKAY, SO LET'S, OKAY, SO ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT OR ACCESSORY DWELLING SHALL BE LIMITED. OH, SORRY. SHALL NOT EXCEED. SO GET RID OF SHALL GET RID OF TWO 800 SQUARE FEET OR 50% OF GROSS FLOOR AREA OF THE PRIMARY STRUCTURE. COMMA, NO, NO COMMA, THAT'S ALL GONNA BE ONE PHRASE UP TO A MAXIMUM OF 1600 SQUARE FEET. AND THEN STRIKE THE PHRASE, WHICHEVER IS LARGER. YEAH. GET RID OF WHICHEVER IS LARGER. AND WE STILL NEED SQUARE FEET IN THERE SOMEPLACE. YEAH. IT SHOULD GO AFTER THE YEAH, IT SHOULD BE AFTER THE TOO MANY LAWYERS ON THE COMMISSION. OKAY. I MEAN, IF WE WANTED, WE COULD PUT IN, YOU KNOW, SORT OF PARAGRAPHS MM-HMM. , THE, THE, YOU STILL NEED THE WHICHEVER IS YEAH. WE, WE DO NEED TO DELETE WHICHEVER IS LARGER SHALL NOT, I MEAN, IF WE SAID, SHALL NOT EXCEED EITHER ROMANT, ONE BLAH OR TWO ROMANAT, THAT WOULD DO IT. HOW, HOW PEDANTIC DO WE WANNA BE? THE ACCESSORY DWELLING SHALL NOT EXCEED 800 SQUARE FEET OR 50% OF THE GROSS FLOOR. NO, IT'S NOT THE GREATER, IT'S NOT THE GREATER OF THAT'S, THAT'S THE ISSUE. IT'S NOT THE GREATER. SO I THINK Y'ALL ARE GETTING THERE WITH THIS LANGUAGE ON THE SQUARE FOOTAGE, BUT I DID WANNA EXPRESS SOME CONCERNS WITH THE LANGUAGE YOU'RE PROPOSING FOR THE SHORT-TERM RENTAL. IT IS CONTRADICTORY TO THE EXISTING CODE THAT WE HAVE TODAY FOR SHORT-TERM RENTALS. SO LEGALLY I DON'T THINK WE CAN DO THIS? YES. AND JUST TO CHIME IN FROM THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE PERSPECTIVE, I WAS TALKING WITH MELISSA FROM D S D AND THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE WOULD ALSO HAVE SOME CONCERNS WITH THE LANGUAGE THAT'S BEING PROPOSED, THE WAY THAT IT'S BEING PROPOSED CURRENTLY, IF THERE IS SOME LANGUAGE MAYBE THAT YOU COULD ENTERTAIN OF, UM, NO ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT MAY BE USED AS, OR SOMETHING TO THE, IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE EXISTING SHORT-TERM RENTAL, UH, ORDINANCE, SOMETHING POINTING BACK TO OUR ORDINANCE, BECAUSE THEN, THEN IT CAPTURES THE DENSITY REQUIREMENTS. UM, AND IT STILL ALLOWS FOR THE TYPE ONES TO BE ALLOWED BY WRIGHT ON THERE. CAN WE REFERENCE TO CODE AND THAT? YES, WE CAN. OKAY. BUT LOGAN HAS SOMETHING TO ADD. I I, I THINK OUR MAIN CONCERN IS THAT SHORT TERM RENTALS WERE NOT REALLY WHAT WAS ON THE AGENDA TODAY. AND THERE'S A LOT OF STAKEHOLDERS IN THE COMMUNITY. THAT WOULD BE A PRETTY SURPRISE TO SEE THAT WE HAVE STRUCK CARTE BLANCHE THE ABILITY TO USE A SHORT-TERM TO USE AN A D U AS A SHORT-TERM RENTAL WITHOUT HAVING AN OPPORTUNITY FOR PUBLIC DISCUSSION. WELL, SO JUST TO BE CLEAR, THIS LANGUAGE I HOPEFULLY IS NOT WHAT I SAID. IF IT IS, THEN WE NEED TO CLARIFY. MY POINT IS IT SHOULDN'T BE USED AS A SHORT-TERM RENTAL, AND UNLESS IT IS OWNER OCCUPIED, IT IS JUST [04:20:01] TYING BACK TO THE OWNER OCCUPANTS. IT'S NOT THAT THIS COULDN'T BE USED AS A TYPE ONE S T R THAT WOULD, THAT WOULD MEAN THAT YOU COULD NEVER HAVE AN A TYPE ONE S T R. DOES THAT MAKE SENSE? IT IT, IT DOES. I I THINK, I, I THINK THAT WE, WE CONTINUE TO HAVE THAT CONCERN BY INTRODUCING EVEN THAT LANGUAGE BECAUSE RIGHT NOW, I MEAN WE WENT THROUGH A, A YEARS LONG PUBLIC INPUT PROCESS TO DEVELOP OUR SHORT-TERM RENTAL ORDINANCE, AND THAT WAS NOT DISCUSSED IN THAT PUBLIC SETTING. WELL, BUT I MEAN, AS STAFF IS SAYING, WHAT, WHAT WE'RE ESSENTIALLY DOING IS JUST TO DUPLICATING WHAT'S ALREADY REQUIRED AND JUST MAKING IT VERY CLEAR AND I MEAN, I GUESS I'M, I WOULD BE OKAY WITH US REFERENCING BACK TO THE CODE. IT'S JUST THAT THEN YOU GET INTO THE INSTANCE OF, AGAIN, IT ALL KIND OF HAS A RIPPLE EFFECT. AND I THINK THAT ONE OF THE CONCERNS OF A LOT OF CONSTITUENTS IN DISTRICT ONE, UM, IS THE SHORT-TERM RENTAL ASPECT OF THIS AND THE FACT THAT THERE MAY NOT BE GREAT ENFORCEMENT. SO WANTING TO MAKE SURE THAT THAT IS VERY CLEAR TO ANYONE WHO IS ATTEMPTING TO BUILD AN A D U. SO I DO AGREE WITH POINTING BACK TO THE SHORT-TERM RENTAL ORDINANCE. I, THAT'S WHAT I WOULD RECOMMEND. UH, THE ENFORCEMENT PIECE. WE WORK CLOSELY WITH, UM, OUR CODE OFFICERS, SS A P D, UM, 3 1 1. WE ALSO HAVE A, A CONSULTANT HOST COMPLIANCE THAT SENDS US REPORTING DATA MONTHLY THAT WE WORK WITH. WE'RE WORKING WITH, UH, TIER ONE ON THEIR ENFORCEMENT CONCERNS. SO I THINK WE HAVE A LOT OF THE PUZZLE PIECES REGARDING ENFORCEMENT. WE'RE WORKING TOWARDS MAKING SURE THAT THE ENFORCEMENT PIECE IS SOMETHING THAT IS, IS SUPPORTED CONTINUOUSLY TO BE SUPPORTED. UM, THERE WAS SOMETHING ELSE, BUT I FORGOT. I'M SORRY. I'LL WAIT. THAT'S OKAY. UM, I THINK I'M FINE WITH US POINTING BACK TO THAT CODE. ALRIGHT. MAY I SUGGEST SOME LANGUAGE? MAYBE I'M NOW REGRETTING MAKING THE OFFER. UM, ANY, HOW ABOUT ANY SHORT TERM RENTAL? LOGAN WAS PUTTING SOMETHING TOGETHER. MR. CHAIR? YEAH, LOGAN, LET'S SEE WHAT YOU GOT. AND THEN I'LL PROBABLY SIT ON MY OWN IDEA. THIS, THIS WAS A LOT OF THE DISCUSSION THAT WE HAD IN OTHER SECTIONS OF THE CODE WHEN WE WERE GOING OVER U D C AMENDMENTS OF POINTING TO OTHER SECTIONS. SO I'M PRETTY SURE HE HAS IT RIGHT AT THE TOP OF HIS TONGUE. MELISSA, YOU CAN ALSO ADD THE OTHER PEOPLE THAT HELP YOU KEEP THOSE PEOPLE STRAIGHT IS THE SAN ANTONIO HOTEL ASSOCIATION. YES. UH, AND THANK YOU, BECAUSE THAT HELPS REMIND ME. UH, WE'RE ALSO WORKING WITH THE SAN ANTONIO SHORT-TERM RENTAL ASSOCIATION AS WELL, UH, TO ENSURE, UM, THERE'S COMPLIANCE. WE'RE WORKING WITH THE PLATFORMS, UM, TO HELP THEM INFORM THEIR, UM, HOSTS OF THE ORDINANCE COMPLIANCE AND ALSO, UH, VIOLATIONS IF THEY'RE REPORTING VIOLATIONS. SO YES, SIR, YOU ARE CORRECT. THANK YOU FOR POINTING THAT OUT. NOT ONLY THAT, BUT THE, THE REPORTING IS REALLY IMPORTANT AND THE REVENUES FOR THE CITY. SO WE WORKED ON THAT THREE, FOUR YEARS AGO AND, AND I'M, I'M GLAD THAT IT'S WORKING. AND EVEN THE HOTELS OWNERS AND MANAGERS ARE REPORTING THOSE, UM, THEY'RE HELPING THE PROCESS. THAT'S CORRECT. AND THERE'S MANY DIFFERENT WAYS TO REPORT A SHORT-TERM RENTAL VIOLATION THROUGH THREE ONE ONE. OUR CALL CENTER HERE IN OUR OFFICE, WE HAVE A SHORT-TERM RENTAL, UH, DEDICATED EMAIL ADDRESS TO REPORT THOSE AS WELL AND THROUGH CODE, I'M SORRY, I KNOW THIS IS NOT A SHORT TERM RENTAL CONVERSATION, BUT WE'RE WORKING ON LANGUAGE. UM, OKAY. SO COMMISSIONER GREATHOUSE, UH, I BELIEVE THE TWO, UH, CHANGES THAT YOU REQUESTED ARE NOW REFLECTED IN SUBSECTION FIVE AND WHAT WILL EVENTUALLY BE RENUMBERED SUBSECTION SIX. ONE HOPES. YES. SO GO BACK UP THIS ONE RIGHT NOW IT SAYS FOUR, BUT OH, IS IT A FOUR? OH, OKAY. FOUR. YEAH. I'M SORRY. I LOST, I LOST MY RED LINING. UH, SO COMMISSIONER GREATHOUSE, DOES THIS REFLECT, YES, THIS REFLECTS I THINK SOME, SOME OF THE CONCERNS THAT I HAVE? I JUST WANNA BE VERY CLEAR THAT, UM, I THINK FROM A PUBLIC POLICY PERSPECTIVE, THIS IS EXTREMELY IMPORTANT. UM, YOU KNOW, ONE OF THE OBJECTIVES OF THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO IS AFFORDABLE HOUSING AND NEIGHBORHOOD STABILITY. AND I THINK THAT MANY OF THESE CHANGES ARE IMPERATIVE TO THAT AND TO NOT ONLY, UM, INCENTIVIZING ADDITIONAL ADUS, UM, WHETHER THEY'RE BEING BUILT OR WHETHER THEY'RE BEING, UM, EXISTING STRUCTURES THAT ARE BEING CONVERTED. BUT ALSO WE HAVE A HEIGHT LIMITATION IN HERE, WHICH WAS A MAJOR ISSUE ON A FEW A, UM, ADUS THAT WERE BUILT IN, IN [04:25:01] DISTRICT ONE IN TOBIN HILL. UM, AND ALSO THE FACT THAT, YOU KNOW, WE ARE IN A HOUSING CRISIS, WHICH I SAID EARLIER, AND I KNOW I'M NOT SAYING ANYTHING THAT WE DON'T ALREADY KNOW BECAUSE EVERYONE SEES THEIR PROPERTY TAX BILL. UM, THE MEDIAN SALE PRICE OF A HOME IN SAN ANTONIO IS OVER $300,000. THREE YEARS AGO IT WAS $200,000. SO, LIKE WE JUST HAVE TO BE COGNIZANT OF, AND ALSO THE FACT THAT SAN ANTONIO CONTINUES TO GROW AT AN ASTONISHING PACE. UH, I THINK THERE WAS AN ARTICLE THAT JUST CAME OUT IN THE EXPRESS NEWS THAT SAID SAN ANTONIO HAS GROWN FASTER THAN ANYWHERE ELSE IN THE LAST TWO YEARS, UM, IN THE US. SO I JUST THINK THAT IT'S, AGAIN, EXTREMELY IMPORTANT. I UNDERSTAND A LOT OF NEIGHBORHOOD CONCERNS HERE AND, AND SHARE, HAVE SHARED SIMILAR CONCERNS, UM, WITH FOLKS, BUT I THINK THAT A LOT OF THE CONCERNS ARE ALLEVIATED BY THE CHANGES IN THE EDITS THAT WE'VE PUT IN. UM, I ALSO BELIEVE THAT THE OWNER OCCUPIED SITUATION, AGAIN, AS COMMISSIONER BUSANTE SAID, I TOTALLY AGREE WITH YOU, DESPITE THE FACT I DIDN'T SUPPORT YOUR MOTION. YOU KNOW, WE, WE HAVE TO GO FORWARD ASSUMING THAT THIS WILL BE ENFORCED. AND IF IT'S NOT BEING ENFORCED, THEN WE NEED TO TALK TO OUR CITY COUNCIL OFFICES AND HAVE THEM MANDATE THAT THIS BE ENFORCED AND THAT THERE BE A C C R THAT, YOU KNOW, THAT, THAT GETS PUT FORTH TO INVESTIGATE HOW WE CAN DO THIS BETTER. I DON'T THINK PERFECT SHOULD BE THE ENEMY OF THE GOOD, RIGHT? WE HAVE TO MAKE PROGRESS. AND SO I THINK THE BETTER PROCESS IS NOT OPPOSING THE AMENDMENTS, BUT INSTEAD TO ENGAGE WITH CITY COUNCIL. UM, AND THEN I DID WANNA ADDRESS THE CONCERN ABOUT THE PUBLIC PROCESS. UH, AGAIN, I WAS ON THIS COMMITTEE, UM, THERE WERE MANY FOLKS FROM NEIGHBORHOODS. IN FACT, I WOULD SAY THERE WAS PROBABLY MORE NEIGHBORHOOD REPRESENTATION THAN, UM, DEVELOPERS OR EVEN AFFORDABLE HOUSING EXPERTS. SO FROM A POINT OF PUBLIC INPUT AND PUBLIC PROCESS, IF I DIDN'T SUPPORT THIS, JUST BASED ON THAT ONE FACT, I WOULDN'T HAVE BEEN ABLE TO SUPPORT ANY OTHER AMENDMENT THAT CAME FORTH TODAY BECAUSE I KNEW THE AMENDMENTS THAT WE PUT FORTH AS A COMMISSION. WE HAD WORK SESSION, WE DISCUSSED HERE AS A COMMITTEE, I MEAN AS A, AS A COMMISSION IN A PUBLIC MEETING. AND THAT WAS IT. AND THEN IT WENT TO PTAC AND IT WENT THROUGH THE REST OF THAT, BUT IT WASN'T NEAR THE PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT THAT WENT FORTH IN THIS AD HOC COMMITTEE. THAT WAS A SERIES OF NINE MEETINGS OVER THE COURSE OF EIGHT MONTHS. SO I WANNA MAKE SURE THAT THAT'S VERY CLEAR THAT THE PUBLIC PROCESS THAT THIS WENT THROUGH WAS EXTENSIVE. UM, SO FOR THOSE REASONS, THAT'S WHY I'VE MADE THE, THE MOTION AND THE AMENDMENTS THAT I HAVE. ALRIGHT. ACTUALLY, COMMISSIONER GREATHOUSE, I'M GONNA ASK JUST FOR A POINT OF CLARITY FOR YOU TO REMAKE THE MOTION, GIVEN THAT WE NOW HAVE THE LANGUAGE. OKAY. SO MOTION TO APPROVE. WHAT NUMBER IS THIS? 23 DASH AMENDMENT. 23 DASH SIX WITH THE AMENDMENTS AS PRESENTED. THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER. I'LL SECOND THAT. THERE A SECOND. UH, COMMISSIONER BARTOS IS THE SECOND. ALRIGHT, UM, DISCUSSION COMMISSIONER TO MY RIGHT. COMMISSIONER SIPES. UM, WITHOUT ASKING QUESTIONS OF MY FELLOW COMMISSIONER, UM, I WAS WONDERING IF, UM, SHE WOULD ENTERTAIN A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT TO REMOVE THE, THE LINE OF THE SEPARATE METERING. UM, AND IF NOT, I, YOU KNOW, JUST, JUST, UM, I'M JUST CURIOUS. UM, AND THEN, AND THEN JUST, I, I WAS KIND OF CURIOUS ON, ON THE 1600 SQUARE FEET, JUST, JUST, I'M JUST CURIOUS WHERE THAT NUMBER CAME FROM AND THAT'S ALL. SORRY. NO, IT'S FINE. THANKS. UM, AS FAR AS THE SEPARATE METER, UM, I GUESS I WOULD BE CURIOUS AS TO WHAT THE CONCERN IS. I THINK THE CONCERN IS OVER THE FUTURE, UM, YOU CAN SUB-METER IF, IF, IF THAT'S A CONCERN ON, UM, GETTING, YOU KNOW, IDENTIFYING HOW MUCH A RENTAL OR HOW MUCH ANOTHER UNIT IS USING. BUT I THINK DOING A SEPARATE METER KIND OF BRINGS IT MORE INTO FORCING IT, WELL, NOT FORCING IT, BUT ENCOURAGING IT TO BE A RENTAL. WHEREAS IF IT'S ON A SAME METER, YOU'RE ENCOURAGING THE TRADITIONAL USE OF THE A D U AS FOR EXTENDED FAMILY AND STUFF LIKE THAT, THAT, THAT, THAT, THAT'S RIGHT. AND, AND I GUESS I WOULD SAY THAT HAVING IT BE A RENTAL, NOT A SHORT TERM RENTAL, BUT HAVING IT BE A RENTAL [04:30:01] IS ACTUALLY, I THINK A GOAL OF THIS IS TO PROVIDE MORE, NOT ONLY TO PROVIDE HOUSING FOR PEOPLE WHO ARE AGING IN PLACE OR FOR FAMILY OR FOR LIKE WHAT JIM BAILEY TALKED ABOUT. YOU KNOW, HE'S LIVING BEHIND HIS MOM'S HOUSE, BUT ALSO TO PROVIDE ADDITIONAL AFFORDABLE HOUSING. I HAVE AN A D U AT MY HOUSE AND A FOOD SERVICE INDUSTRY PROFESSIONAL LIVES IN MY A D U, RIGHT? AND SO I, I'M ABLE TO PROVIDE VERY, VERY AFFORDABLE HOUSING FOR HIM BECAUSE THE VALUE TO ME IS THAT I HAVE SECURITY. HIS HOURS ARE DIFFERENT THAN MINE. SO THERE'S ALWAYS SOMEONE AT MY PROPERTY IF I GO OUTTA TOWN, HE'S THERE. RIGHT? AND SO I THINK THERE'S, THERE'S A LOT OF OTHER REASONS WHY SOMEONE MIGHT WANT TO DO THAT. AND I THINK HONESTLY FOR IT TO BE AN S T R, IF, IF WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THAT ISSUE FOR A SECOND, SEPARATE METERING DOESN'T REALLY NECESSARILY HELP YOU, RIGHT? BECAUSE YOU THEN YOU'RE PAYING FOR THE PERSON WHO IS TAKING HOUR LONG SHOWERS OR RUNNING THE AC AT 62 IN THE MIDDLE OF THE SUMMER. SO I DON'T KNOW THAT THAT IT NECESSARILY, LIKE WHY WOULD SOMEONE DO THAT IF, IF, IF, UH, YOU KNOW, I THINK HAVING, HAVING A SEPARATE METER ACTUALLY, UM, IS, IS HELPFUL. AND NOW I'VE TALKED MYSELF INTO A CORNER. I DON'T KNOW WHAT I WAS TALKING ABOUT. UM, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO. BUT I DO THINK THAT THAT, AND IT'S NOT A REQUIREMENT THAT YOU HAVE THE SECOND METER, RIGHT? I DON'T THINK THAT IT'S SOMETHING THAT, THAT IT GIVES YOU THE OPTION TO DO IT, BUT IT'S NOT A REQUIREMENT THAT YOU DO IT. OKAY. RIGHT. AND NO, THAT, AND, AND THAT'S GREAT. YOU KNOW, I, IT'S, I I HOPE I DIDN'T COME OFF AS ADVERSARIAL. IT'S JUST WE CAN'T TALK ABOUT IT PRIVATELY OUT IN THE, IN THE OTHER ROOM. WE HAVE TO TALK ABOUT IT OPENLY. SO THAT'S, THAT'S THE ONLY REASON WHY I BRING THINGS UP. ALRIGHT, BUT IT SOUNDS LIKE THE FRIENDLY AMENDMENT'S REJECTED . YEAH, THAT'S WHERE I WAS COMING ALONG, WAY AROUND ASKING. AND THEN THE 1600 SQUARE FEET, I WAS JUST TRYING TO GIVE US SOME TYPE OF A LIMITATION. I KNOW YOU MADE THE COMMENT EARLIER THAT, UM, YOU DIDN'T THINK THAT 1500 SQUARE FEET OR, OR 1200 SQUARE FEET WOULD BE AFFORDABLE, BUT YOU COULD HAVE A TWO OR THREE BEDROOM SMALL BEDROOMS THAT COULD STILL BE AFFORDABLE. I DON'T THINK THAT THE MERE SIZE OF IT IS NECESSARILY INDICATIVE OF WHETHER OR NOT IT'S AFFORDABLE, RIGHT? LIKE I THINK TO LIKE UNITS IN, IN AFFORDABLE HOUSING COMPLEXES THAT THERE ARE THREE BEDROOM UNITS THAT WOULD BE, YOU KNOW, 1200, 1300 SQUARE FEET, BUT THAT THOSE ARE ALSO AFFORDABLE. SO I GUESS I, I THOUGHT 1600, IT'S KIND OF DOUBLE 800. I, I DON'T WANT TO GET RID OF ALLOWING BECAUSE AS, AS THE CODE IS WRITTEN RIGHT NOW, YOU ARE NOT PERMITTED. SOMEONE WHO HAS A 900 SQUARE FOOT HOME CANNOT BUILD AN A D U THAT IS OF ANY SIZE TO REALLY PROVIDE HOUSING FOR ANYONE IN, IN A, IN COMFORTABLE QUARTERS. SO I FEEL LIKE GIVING A RANGE KIND OF WOULD GIVE US A COMPROMISE, AT LEAST. MM-HMM. . NO, I AGREE. UM, AND I THINK THAT, UM, I MEAN I'LL, I MEAN, I WOULD, I WOULD, I UNDERSTAND YOUR POINT OF VIEW AND I UNDERSTAND WHERE THE NUMBER COMES FROM. UM, AND MY PREFERENCE WOULD BE LIKE 1200 SQUARE FEET, BUT I DON'T WANT, I MEAN, THAT'S NOTHING TO LIKE, LIKE I'M NOT LIKE GOING LIKE BACK AND FORTH OVER 50 SQUARE FEET OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT. UM, AND, AND I DO AGREE THAT, THAT THE CHANGES, THE OVERALL CHANGES TO THE AMENDMENT TO OR TO THIS, TO THIS SECTION ARE, ARE, ARE VALID, UM, AND IMPORTANT. AND, UM, YOU MENTIONED THE, THE TWO STORY LIMITATION. I THINK THAT'S VERY IMPORTANT. UM, AND, UH, I DO APPRECIATE THE, AT LEAST HAVING A LIMIT OF THE 1600 SQUARE FEET. UM, BUT, UH, OKAY. I'M DONE TALKING. THANK YOU COMMISSIONER SIPES. WE'RE NOT DONE YET, SO STAY WITH US. UM, ALRIGHT, UH, COMMISSIONERS TO MY LEFT. DISCUSSION, DISCUSSION OR FRIENDLY AMENDMENTS OR NOT SO FRIENDLY AMENDMENTS VOTE. SO I WAS GONNA MAKE A CALL FOR A VOTE. I THINK WE HAVE DISCUSSED THIS FOR ALMOST TWO HOURS. I I THINK WE'RE GONNA LET A LITTLE MORE DISCUSSION. I WOULD ENCOURAGE COMMISSIONERS TO KEEP THEIR COMMENTS SOMEWHAT BRIEF, BUT QUICKLY WE'LL GO THROUGH. COMMISSIONER GREATHOUSE DOESN'T GET TO SPEAK AGAIN THOUGH, COMMISSIONER, NO. COMMISSIONER WATSON. I WILL TRY TO FOLLOW MILITARY TRADITION AND DO BULLET POINTS. UM, I FEEL SOMEWHAT MORE COMFORTABLE WITH THE AMENDMENTS. [04:35:01] I STILL DON'T LOVE WHAT IS PROPOSED. I HAVE A LOT OF LAYERS OF CONCERNS ABOUT THIS. SO EXPECT TO SEE ME AT FUTURE COMMISSIONS AND TO BE WORKING WITH THE COUNCIL OFFICE ON ENFORCEMENT ISSUES IN MY DISTRICT. UM, THERE ARE REALLY VALID CONCERNS THAT HAVE BEEN PRESENTED, UM, TODAY BY NEIGHBORHOODS. UH, BUT I I HAVE BEEN PERSUADED BY AND ALSO INFORMED BY PERSONAL EXPERIENCE ABOUT THE METER ARGUMENT THAT, UM, HAVING THE FLEXIBILITY TO DO EITHER OR SINGLE OR DOUBLE IS POTENTIALLY ADVANTAGEOUS. UM, I'M JUST GONNA SPEAK FROM PERSONAL EXPERIENCE. I AM A RENTER IN DISTRICT TWO. I AM NOT A HOMEOWNER. I AM DIRECTLY IMPACTED BY SOME OF THESE AND HAVE BEEN THROUGHOUT MY ENTIRE TIME LIVING AS A YOUNG PROFESSIONAL IN SAN ANTONIO. AND SO AFFORDABILITY IS A VERY REAL ISSUE TO ME. I MEAN, I JUST RECENTLY CHANGED JOBS AND I'M DEALING WITH THESE ISSUES ON A DAY-TO-DAY BASIS IN MY LIFE. UM, SO THE FACT THAT WE'VE PUT IN SOME ADDITIONAL PROTECTION, SPECIFICALLY THE MENTION OF REFERENCE TO THE S T R ORDINANCE IS IMPORTANT. WE KNOW A LOT OF THIS STUFF GOES UNENFORCED. I WAS ON A RUN THIS MORNING IN MY NEIGHBORHOOD WHERE AN PLEX IS CURRENTLY BEING USED AS AN S T R IN ALL OF THE UNITS. AND I REMEMBER AS THE MINKE PARK NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION PRESIDENT WRITING A LETTER OPPOSING THAT AND IT GETTING VOTED FOR DISAPPROVAL AND IT'S STILL BEING USED. SO AS MUCH AS I KNOW STAFF IS TRYING TO ENFORCE SOME OF THESE THINGS AND LIKE THEORETICALLY OWNER OCCUPANCY PROTECTS NEIGHBORHOODS AND STILL, YOU KNOW, ENCOURAGES AND INCENTIVIZES TRULY AFFORDABLE DEVELOPMENT, THERE ARE ISSUES. UM, SO I'M GOING TO BE ADVOCATING FOR ADDITIONAL ENFORCEMENT AND SOME WORK WITH THE COUNCIL OFFICE ON THAT. BUT I HAVE BEEN PERSUADED, UM, OVER THE COURSE OF THIS THAT SOME, THAT THESE IMPROVEMENTS ARE OVERALL BENEFICIAL. UM, I WILL BE WORKING ON SOME LANGUAGE TO BRING TO PLANNING COMMISSION AS A, AS A CITIZEN , UM, FOR THE NEXT ROUND. BUT, UM, FOR THOSE REASONS I WILL BE SUPPORTING THE MOTION AS AMENDED. WITHOUT THE AMENDMENTS, I WOULD NOT HAVE BEEN ABLE TO SUPPORT THIS. ALRIGHT, UM, BRIEFLY MY OWN POINTS. UH, I LIKED THE ADDITIONAL FLEXIBILITY, UH, WITH RESPECT TO SIZE. THAT'S WHY I MADE MY ORIGINAL MOTION. BUT HEATING WHAT? PROFICIENT WHAT, UH, PROFESSOR GREATHOUSE, I'M GONNA GIVE YOU A, I'M GONNA GIVE YOU AN UPGRADE. UM, COMMISSIONER PROMOTION. THAT'S WHAT I WAS LOOKING FOR. . BUT, BUT AS COMMISSIONER GREATHOUSE WARNED, I'M NOT GONNA LET, UH, THE PERFECT BE THE ENEMY OF THE GOOD. AND SO I WILL SUPPORT THIS MOTION AS AMENDED. AND WITH THAT, UM, THE MOTION IS FOR APPROVAL AS AMENDED AND CURRENTLY PRESENTED BY COMMISSIONER GREATHOUSE WITH A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER BOTTO. STILL. CHAIRMAN BUS? YES. JUST TO CLARIFY, TO MAKE SURE I'M UNDERSTANDING THE INTENT OF WHAT YOU ALL ARE WRITING. SO IF YOU HAD A PRIMARY STRUCTURE THAT WAS 1400 SQUARE FEET AND I'M JUST RANDOMLY USING NUMBERS, THEY WOULD STILL BE ABLE TO BUILD UP 800 SQUARE FEET, EVEN THOUGH THAT'S MORE THAN 50%, CORRECT? YES, THAT IS CORRECT. OKAY. IF YOU HAD A STRUCTURE THAT WAS 4,000 SQUARE FEET, THEN THEY CAN GO ALL THE WAY UP TO 1600. THEY JUST CAN'T DO THE 2000, WHICH IS THE 50%. YES, THAT'S CORRECT. JUST CLARIFYING FOR THE RECORD. RIGHT? UH, THAT IS A GOOD EXAMPLE OF HOW THIS SHOULD WORK. I THINK GIVEN COMMISSIONER GREAT HOUSE'S AMENDMENT. ALRIGHT, ONCE AGAIN, THE MOTION IS FOR APPROVAL OF AMENDMENT 23 6 AS AMENDED BY COMMISSIONER GREATHOUSE, UH, WITH THE SECOND BY COMMISSIONER BARTOS. ROLL CALL. VOTE PLEASE. COMMISSIONER GREATHOUSE? YES. COMMISSIONER BURROWS? YES. COMMISSIONER SIPES? YES. COMMISSIONER WATSON? YES. COMMISSIONER, WE AYE. COMMISSIONER ORTIZ? YES. CHAIR BUSTAMANTE. AYE. MOTION PASSES FOR APPROVAL AS AMENDED. ALRIGHT, THANK YOU SO MUCH. UH, WE ARE NOW GONNA MOVE ON AMENDMENT 13 DASH ONE. ALRIGHT. AMENDMENT 13 DASH ONE IS RELATED TO THE MISSION PROTECTION OVERLAY DISTRICT AND WAS SUBMITTED BY THE MISSION SAN JOSE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION. UM, THE, UH, AMENDMENT ITSELF SEEKS TO EXPAND THE MISSION PROTECTION OVERLAY DISTRICT. UH, I UNDERSTAND THAT THE APPLICANT IS HERE TODAY TO MAKE SOME AMENDMENTS TO THAT, TO STILL EXPAND IT, BUT BY NOT SUCH A LARGE RADIUS. SO, UH, I'LL GO AHEAD AND CALL THE APPLICANT UP. GO AHEAD, MS. IVANEZ. GOOD AFTERNOON. MY NAME IS THERESA YEZ. I'M PRESIDENT OF MISSION SAN JOSE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION. UM, MY ADDRESS IS 1438 NAPIER AVENUE. SO, UM, ONE OF OUR GOALS FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS THAT [04:40:01] ARE WITHIN THE MISSION OVERLAY DISTRICT IS TO BE, UH, GUARDIANS OF OUR MISSIONS. AND WHAT WE'RE PROPOSING IS TO EXTEND, INITIALLY WE HAD PROPOSED TO EXTEND THE VIEW SHED FROM 1,500 TO 2,500. UM, WE ARE AMENDING IT TO JUST INCREASING IT BY 300 FEET. SO 1,800 INSTEAD OF THE 2,500. UH, WE HAVE SOME MAPS THAT, UH, COREY EDWARDS FROM PLANNING, UH, CREATED THAT SHOWED ME, UH, WHAT THE EXTENSION WAS GOING TO INCLUDE SO THAT WE WOULD NOT HAVE IT, UH, THE 2000 INITIALLY, THE 2,500 EXTENDING OUTSIDE OF THE MISSION, UH, HISTORIC OVERLAY. AND SO WITH THE THREE EXTRA 300 FEET, IT'S GOING TO PROTECT A LOT OF THE VACANT PROPERTIES THAT I HAD INITIALLY SHARED, UH, IN THE P TAC, UH, THAT WE WERE REALLY CONCERNED ABOUT BECAUSE THEY WERE RIGHT OUTSIDE OF THAT 1,500 FEET. THIS F SHE AMENDMENT FOR THE MPOS IS ONLY TO PROTECT FROM DEVELOPMENT THAT WOULD BE TOO HIGH. IT'S NOT AFFECTING ANYTHING ELSE EXCEPT HEIGHT. AND WHAT WE ARE WORRIED ABOUT WITH, UH, LET ME GIVE YOU AN EXAMPLE, IS, UH, WE'RE LOOKING, I BELIEVE AT M POD ONE, OH NO, THIS IS MISSION SON JOSE. UM, WE CAN STAY AT THIS ONE. UH, SO A COUPLE OF THE PROPERTIES WE WERE LOOKING AT, UM, IF YOU LOOK AT THE GREEN CIRCLE, THE, THE MIDDLE CIRCLE, THAT LIGHT BLUE OR VIOLET IS THE, THE ORIGINAL VIEW SHED OF 1,500 FEET. THE GREEN REPRESENTS THE 300 EXTRA FEET, AND THEN THAT DARKER YELLOW REPRESENTS 500 EXTRA FEET. AND THEN, UH, UP TO, TO THE OUTER PERIMETER WOULD BE WHAT WE WERE INITIALLY ASKING FOR. SO WHAT WE DECIDED WAS, YOU KNOW WHAT, LET'S STAY WITHIN THE MISSION OVERLAY DISTRICT. UH, LET'S EXTEND IT OUT SO THAT IT WOULD PROTECT SOME OF THE, THE VACANT PROPERTIES THAT WE'RE WORRIED ABOUT, UM, THAT ARE RIGHT OUTSIDE OF THAT 1,500 FEET. AND IT WOULD PROTECT THE VIEW SHED. SO, UH, WHAT I'M HOPING IS YOU WOULD CONSIDER, UH, PASSING THIS AMENDMENT TO, UH, FURTHER ENSURE PROTECTION OF THE MISSIONS. UM, WE ARE VERY PROUD OF OUR MISSIONS AND WE'RE VERY PROUD IN THE FACT THAT, UH, WE HAVE, UM, SOME INSURANCES TO PROTECT THE MISSION LIKE THE MPOS, BUT WE THINK IT NEEDS TO BE TWEAKED AND JUST INCREASED A LITTLE BIT MORE SO THAT WE CAN REST ASSURED THAT APARTMENT BUILDINGS OR OFFICE BUILDINGS DON'T GO TOO HIGH. THANK YOU, MA'AM. I, I DO WANNA JUST ADD TWO THINGS. SO, UH, SHOULD CITY COUNCIL ULTIMATELY ADOPT THIS? UH, IT WILL NECESSITATE A PART TWO, WHICH IS A LARGE AREA REZONING. UH, AND I DO ALSO WANT TO CLARIFY THAT THE OFFICE OF HISTORIC PRESERVATION IS NOT OPPOSED TO THIS. THEY'VE MET, THEY'VE REVIEWED, I THINK SHE MENTIONED THEY HELPED GENERATE THE MAPS, BUT THEY ARE ON BOARD. ALRIGHT, UM, IS THERE ANY PUBLIC COMMENT ON THIS ONE? NO. PUBLIC COMMENT. VERY GOOD. UH, COMMISSIONERS OPEN TO QUESTIONS. I JUST WANNA SAY THANK YOU FOR BRINGING THIS UP TO US. I, UM, WAS VERY INVOLVED IN THE EARLY STAGES WITH THE SANTA ANTONIO CONSERVATION SOCIETY AND I'M VERY PROUD THAT YOU KEEP PROTECTING AND YOUR ASSOCIATION, ESPECIALLY WHEN UNESCO, WELL, HERITAGE DESIGNATED THIS AREA AND SAN ANTONIO. SO THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR BRINGING THIS UP AND I WILL SUPPORT THIS. UH, IN FACT, I'LL MAKE THE MOTION IN A COUPLE MINUTES UNLESS THE CHAIR DOES IT. ALRIGHT, THANK YOU SO MUCH. UH, ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONERS TO MY LEFT? COMMISSIONERS TO MY RIGHT? YES. COMMISSIONER SIPES. REAL QUICK. ONE AND THIS ONE IS TO, TO LOGAN. UM, TAC APPROVED OR RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL OF THE 2,500 FEET SO YOU COULD CONSIDER, SO I GUESS WE COULD CONSIDER THAT TAC WOULD PROBABLY BE IN SUPPORT OF THE 1800 FEET AS WELL, RIGHT? I I THINK THAT COULD BE IMPLIED. YEAH. ALRIGHT, VERY GOOD. ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS? SEEING NONE, THANK YOU. FLOOR IS OPEN FOR A MOTION AND I FORGOT THE NUMBER. I IF YOU COULD LOWER THE SCREEN. [04:45:01] 13 1 13 DASH ONE. I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE THIS. UH, 13.1. UM, SO, UM, CHANGES, UH, AS PRESENTED TODAY. OKAY. UM, I'M GONNA INTERPRET THAT AS MOTION, UH, FOR APPROVAL OF 13 DASH ONE AS AMENDED. ALRIGHT, IS THERE A SECOND? SECOND. SECOND BY COMMISSIONER GREATHOUSE. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? SEEING NONE, UH, THE MOTION IS FOR APPROVAL OF AMENDMENT 13 DASH ONE AS AMENDED AND PRESENTED TODAY BY COMMISSIONER BARTOS. SECOND BY COMMISSIONER GREATHOUSE. ROLL CALL, VOTE PLEASE. COMMISSIONER BARTOS? YES. COMMISSIONER GREATHOUSE? YES. COMMISSIONER SIPES? YES. COMMISSIONER WATSON? YES. COMMISSIONER, WE AYE. COMMISSIONER ORTIZ? YES. CHAIR BUSA MONTH. AYE. MOTION PASSES FOR APPROVAL AS AMENDED. ALRIGHT, BECAUSE WE HAVE ALREADY CONTINUED, UH, AMENDMENT 19 DASH ONE, WE ARE GOING TO MOVE ON TO OUR FINAL AMENDMENT. 30 DASH ONE. ALRIGHT. AMENDMENT 30 DASH ONE IS RELATED TO SUPPORTIVE, UH, PARDON ME, THE, THE DEFINITION AND AND USE OF A SUPPORTIVE HOUSING CAMPUS. IT WAS SUBMITTED BY JAMES MCKNIGHT. UH, THIS IS, UH, SIMILAR TO AN ITEM WE DISCUSSED EARLIER. UH, THIS YOU CAN THINK IS KIND OF SLOTTED BETWEEN THAT ONE AND A HUMAN SERVICES CAMPUS. UH, IF YOU LOOK AT THE DEFINITION OF USE IN WHICH MULTIPLE STRUCTURES AND RELATED GROUNDS OR PORTIONS THEREOF ARE USED TO PROVIDE A MULTITUDE OF SERVICES, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO MEDICAL, SO FORTH AND SO ON. UH, WE ARE PROPOSING, UH, A SLIGHT EDIT TO THE DEFINITION. UH, IF WE SCROLL DOWN, UM, WE DO WANT TO, TO CLARIFY, YOU KNOW, THE, THE LANGUAGE THAT SAYS, YOU KNOW, A MULTITUDE OF USES, IT'S VERY OPEN-ENDED, UH, YOU KNOW, SAYING MEDICAL SERVICES LIKE CLINICAL, YOU KNOW, UH, UH, DENTAL OPTICAL AND THIS IS NOT INTENDED TO BE A HOSPITAL, A SURGICAL CENTER, ET CETERA, ONSITE. UH, SO JUST NARROWING THE SCOPE OF THAT, UH, COMPARED TO WHAT TAC INITIALLY HAD APPROVED. BUT THAT IS THE ONLY, THE ONLY EDIT. AND THE APPLICANT IS HERE FOR THIS AMENDMENT AS WELL. IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR HER, WOULD YOU LIKE TO MAKE A PRESENTATION? MS. MCDONALD? NO. . I AM ALL TIME. I AM SO SORRY YOU HAD TO STAY HERE ALL THE WAY THROUGH FOR THIS. UM, ALRIGHT. UM, QUESTIONS, COMMISSIONERS. SEEING NONE. I THINK MOST OF Y'ALL KNOW THE ORIGIN OF THIS IS FROM OUR CONSIDERATION OF THE Y W C A ISSUE IN DISTRICT FIVE. UH, EARLIER. NOPE, LATE LAST YEAR. UM, EARLIER THIS YEAR. UH, COVID HAS MESSED UP MY TIME. UH, SO I REALLY APPRECIATE BROWN AND ORTIZ, UH, MAKING THIS. I APPRECIATE ALL OF STAFF'S HARD WORK ON THIS. I MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE, UH, 30 DASH ONE AS AMENDED AND PRESENTED TODAY. IS THERE A SECOND? I'LL SECOND. ALRIGHT. THERE IS AN MOTION FOR APPROVAL OF AMENDMENT 30 DASH ONE AS AMENDED AND PRESENTED BY ME WITH A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER ORTIZ. ANY DISCUSSION? SEEING NONE. ROLL CALL, VOTE PLEASE. CHAIR BUSANTE AYE. COMMISSIONER SIPES? YES. COMMISSIONER GREATHOUSE? YES. COMMISSIONER WATSON? YES. COMMISSIONER, WE AYE. COMMISSIONER TIZ? YES. COMMISSIONER BOTTLES? YES. MOTION PASSES FOR APPROVAL. ALRIGHT, THE FINAL ITEM [Approval of Minutes] ON OUR AGENDA TODAY IS, UH, THE CONSIDERATION OF THE JUNE 21ST MINUTES. ARE THERE ANY CORRECTIONS, AMENDMENTS, COMMENTS, ARGUMENTS? ALRIGHT. HEARING NONE. IS THERE A MOTION? MOTION TO APPROVE? THERE IS A MOTION TO APPROVE. IS THERE A SECOND? I'LL SECOND. SECOND BY COMMISSIONER ORTIZ. UH, THIS CAN BE BY ACCLAMATION. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE. AYE. ABS. ALL THOSE OPPOSED. SAME SIGN AND ABSTENTION BY COMMISSIONER GREATHOUSE. ALRIGHT. THAT BEING ALL BUSINESS BEFORE THE ZONING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO FOR JULY 5TH, 2022, WE ARE ADJOURNED AT 6 0 3. THANK YOU ALL. THANK YOU COMMISSIONERS. SORRY. * This transcript was created by voice-to-text technology. The transcript has not been edited for errors or omissions, it is for reference only and is not the official minutes of the meeting.