Posted on

T1NC Final Legislative Update

by Jordan Ghawi Twitter: @JordanGhawi

After nearly five months, the 86th Legislature has come to an end. A total of 7,324 bills were introduced in both the House and Senate with 1,429 of those heading to the Governor’s desk for action (19.5% passage). 


HB2439 (Building Materials Bill)

Update: The San Antonio Development Services Department (DSD) is issuing a Rule Interpretation Decision (RID) that says NCDs designated by the city prior to April 1, 2019 are protected from the new rules in the building materials bill.  Full Bill

Recap: Originally filed, this bill was of great concern as it could have killed NCDs and other districts.  This was not the author’s intent and the bill was amended to exclude such designations. Historic districts and some NCD districts are excluded for now.

Bill text: https://capitol.texas.gov/tlodocs/86R/billtext/pdf/HB02439F.pdf#navpanes=0

Senate vote: 26 Yeas, 5 Nays

House vote: 133 Yeas, 9 Nays, 1 PNV

Recap: Originally filed, this bill was of great concern as it could have killed NCDs and other districts.  This was not the author’s intent and the bill was amended to exclude such designations. 

Bill text: https://capitol.texas.gov/tlodocs/86R/billtext/pdf/HB02439F.pdf#navpanes=0

Senate vote: 26 Yeas, 5 Nays

House vote: 133 Yeas, 9 Nays, 1 PNV

HB3432 (Partisan Municipal Elections) Status: Dead – Expect this to be filed again in the 87th Legislature 

Bill text: https://capitol.texas.gov/tlodocs/86R/billtext/pdf/HB03432I.pdf#navpanes=0

Recap: Bill would require candidates for municipal office to declare party affiliation.  Party affiliation would also be required to appear on the ballot next to the candidate’s name. 

HB2496 (Municipal Historic Designation) 

Status: Signed into law with immediate effect

Recap: Initially filed, a municipality would not be able to designate a property as a historic landmark without homeowner’s consent. T1NC and others contacted the bill’s authors and committee members to

voice opposition to this bill.  Enrolled version of the bill allows a municipality to designate a property as historic with homeowner’s consent or three-fourths vote of the governing body of the municipality and the zoning, planning, or historical commissions of the municipality. This closely mirrors the City’s process with exception of zoning and historic, which currently requires a simple majority (51%). 

Bill text: https://capitol.texas.gov/tlodocs/86R/billtext/pdf/HB02496F.pdf#navpanes=0

Senate vote: 25 Yeas (Flores), 6 Nays (Menéndez)

House vote: 124 Yeas (Alison, Gervin-Hawkins, Larson, Pacheco, Lopez, Cortez, Martinez-Fischer), 11 Nays (Bernal, Minjarez), 3 PNV

HB3778 (Short-term Rentals)

Status: Dead – Expect this to be filed again in the 87th Legislature

Recap: Would restrict the authority of municipalities to regulate short-term rental units and would cap the allowable fee for registration of these units at the lesser of the amount needed to cover administrative costs or $450

Bill text: https://capitol.texas.gov/tlodocs/86R/billtext/pdf/HB03778I.pdf#navpanes=0

HB2730 (Anti-SLAPP)  

Status: Awaiting action from Governor

Recap: The original bill stripped away many of the important aspects of the Texas Citizens Protection Act (TCPA). After substantial opposition from first amendment organizations, the bill was amended favorably.  The only outstanding question on this bill is whether or not TCPA defendants are able to have their legal fees covered through pro-bono representation or a contingent-fee counsel. 

Bill text: https://capitol.texas.gov/tlodocs/86R/billtext/pdf/HB02730F.pdf#navpanes=0

Senate vote: 31 Yeas, 0 Nays

House vote: 143 Yeas, 1 Nays, 2 PNV

T1NC plans to expand our legislative presence for the 87th Legislature to ensure that neighborhoods continue to be protected, empowered, and heard.  

I look forward to working with you all more in-depth to accomplish these goals. 

Posted on

RM/MF Task Force – Issues

In this video, Mary Johnson, President of the Monte Vista Terrace Neighborhood Association, explains some of the problems with San Antonio’s UDC Sections 35-310 and 35-517, which deal with building heights on properties zoned MF-33.

Background

In 2017 the Monte Vista Terrace Neighborhood Association faced a development on a property in their neighborhood that was zoned MF-33. The property is surrounded by single-family homes, but the proposal included four new condos, detached from one-another, each four stories high.

Condo development proposed at four stories high in a single-family district. – Courtesy Monte Vista Terrace Neighborhood Association
Site Plan showing proposal of four units on an MF-33 lot in a single-family district. -Courtesy Monte Vista Terrace Neighborhood Association

When the section of the UDC dealing with MF-33 zoning was written, this development pattern was not anticipated. Historically, a multi-family property in a neighborhood would have attached units, for example a duplex, triplex or quadplex. Developing the lot with detached units creates a far more intense development while maintaining the historic density of the property’s zoning. While it’s still just four units, the units themselves are larger, taller, and taking up more of the lot.

The Monte Vista Terrace Neighborhood Association filed an appeal with the Board of Adjustment when they found out that the project was approved for building heights exceeding what was specified in the Unified Development Code.

35-517. Building Height Regulations – San Antonio Unified Development Code

When Mary and her neighbors went to the city after reading the code, it was discovered that there was a typo in the UDC. The code is written to allow growth while at the same time protecting neighborhoods. This typo is being exploited.

The way developers and the city staff are interpreting the code is allowing excessive heights on lots zoned MF-33 and RM-4 that are adjacent to single-family homes or adjacent to single-family districts. This affects how other parts of the UDC are applied on projects such as storm water requirements.

These interpretations have led to many RM-4 and MF-33 projects being built with a higher intensity than some projects being developed on lots zoned IDZ. The projects are having much greater impacts on neighborhoods than what has historically been built on RM-4 and MF-33 lots, which were originally intended to be low-density zoning designations. Because there is no rezoning required for these lots, neighborhoods have little time to react.

What is being done?

In response to these problems, District 1 City Councilman Roberto Treviño filed a CCR to review these zoning designations. There is a Task Force working to strengthen and clarify the UDC for the RM and MF properties in our neighborhoods.

The RM/MF Task Force is made up of a mix of neighborhood members and representatives from the development community, including developers who have been using the RM-4 and MF-33 zoning designations to their advantage. The task force is being facilitated by Cat Hernandez in the Development Services Department.

At the most recent meeting, there was pressure from the city and the developers to leave code largely unchanged and rely on Neighborhood Conservation Districts and Historic Districts to protect neighborhoods. This is not satisfactory, since we know that many of our most vulnerable neighborhoods do not have NCDs or Historic Designation to help them, and even those that do are still seeing this kind of development occurring. In the same way, we cannot rely on the land use categories to protect us. The code as it is written is unclear and is being manipulated for profit to the detriment of the surrounding neighbors.

It is important to remember that the council and the mayor set the agenda for the task force; our council has asked for this CCR because the constituents in the various districts have asked for help concerning the incompatible, intense, and dense development in our traditional neighborhoods. It is the job of the task force to set the policy concerning MF and RM zoned lots scattered throughout our traditional neighborhoods. Those task force members representing neighborhoods need to keep pushing for accountability when the city and developers want to rush to conclude the task force meetings without meaningful changes to the code’s language that make the code clear.

How Neighbors Can Help

Community is allowed to attend/observe the RM/MF Task Force meetings. Having members of the community there is important for transparency and accountability. The neighborhood representatives on this task force need community support in the room, and the city needs to see that this is an issue that the community cares about. Please plan to attend the next RM/MF Task Force meeting. It has been scheduled for 2:00pm on May 28th at 1901 S. Alamo.

You may read a summary of the CCR and the Task Force meetings so far on the city’s website, here.

Posted on

T1NC Letter to State Lege re HB2162 (Anti SLAPP “Reform.” )

Note: The second reading of this bill will be on April 24th. Feel free to use this letter as a template and send to the addresses below letter. Also include your own representatives. State Senator Menendez and State Representative Bernal are already aware and have committed to working against its passage. For more information, please read “A Perspective on HB 2162

Tier One Neighborhood Coalition (T1NC) is a group of San Antonio downtown (inside Loop 410) neighborhoods organized to advocate and work for appropriate development, as well as other important issues that affect our communities, and to promote communication, cooperation, education, and support among neighborhoods. Contact t1nc.sat@gmail.com or visit T1NC.org ormail to P.O. Box 12337, San Antonio, TX, 78212

April 18, 2019 

Dear Members of the Legislature, 

We write to you as a coalition of 56 San Antonio neighborhoods and 16 partner organizations to express our opposition to HB 2730 and its companion, SB 2162. 

The Texas Citizen’s Participation Act (TCPA), signed into law in 2011 and updated in 2013, was designed to protect the average citizen’s rights to free speech and participation in government from Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation (SLAPP).  Just last year, the Texas Supreme Court opined that the TCPA has a “unique role in protecting the democratic process that allows our state to function.”

HB 2730, and its companion SB 1488, would strip away key protections from the existing law and would leave the average citizen vulnerable to financial ruin by meritless lawsuits filed by plaintiffs with deep pockets. Healthy public debate would be quickly replaced with silence as advocates and citizens who speak on matters of public concern would lose the protection provided by the TCPA. Citizens should not be forced into silence simply because an opposing party can outspend them while navigating the legal system. 

We ask that you help us preserve our First Amendment rights and allow us to continue to be an effective voice for neighborhoods by joining us in our opposition to this bill. 

Respectfully, 

Tier One Neighborhood Coalition Steering Committee

Cosima Colvin, Christine Drennon, Tony Garcia, Homer “Butch” Hayes, Cullen Jones, Ricki Kushner, Velma Pena, Cynthia Spielman, Amelia Valdez, and Theresa Ybanez


Authors:

Four.price@house.texas.gov

Sandra.talton@house.texas.gov

joe.moody@house.texas.gov

Ellic.sahualla@house.texas.gov

dustin.burrows@house.texas.gov

Sara.schmidt@house.texas.gov

Committee Members:

Jeff.Leach@house.texas.gov (Author)

Sean.Mason@house.texas.gov

Jessica.farrar@house.texas.gov

Idalid.navarro@house.texas.gov

Yvonne.davis@house.texas.gov

Jesse.bernal@house.texas.gov

julie.johnson@house.texas.gov

Melissa.alfaro@house.texas.gov

Matt.krause@house.texas.gov

Andrew.herrell@house.texas.gov

Morgan.meyer@house.texas.gov (Author)

Joshua.garrett@house.texas.gov

Victoria.neave@house.texas.gov

Rachel.lance@house.texas.gov

Reggie.smith@house.texas.gov

Emily.fankell@house.texas.gov

james.white@house.texas.gov

John.hagan@hosue.texas.gov

Read more at NowCastSA here

Posted on

Demolitions Lead to Increased Property Taxes

On April 14, 2019, Bexar County Chief Appraiser, Michael Amezquita told the San Antonio Express News that the “biggest horror shows” when it comes to property tax increases are, “Anything within 3 miles of the Pearl.” Among many near-downtown neighborhoods, he specifically called out Tobin Hill North.

In 2016 a developer bought two older but structurally sound duplexes at 421 and 425 E. Mistletoe Ave. in Tobin Hill North. They obtained a demolition permit, cleared the land and built six two-story houses, facing a center drive. In some cities, they call these slot homes, and in 2018, Denver passed an ordinance which does not allow themto be built there any longer. The houses on Mistletoe were completed this spring and they sold for between $325,000 and $370,000 each. And they are driving our property taxes up.

Of course, most people will tell you is that these new, two-story houses will not be used as a comparable property with our older, single-story bungalows and cottages. They are right, the improvements portion of your tax valuation won’t use these new houses as comps. However, that only accounts for part of your tax valuation.

New house next to an existing one on E Mistletoe Ave.

Between 2015 and 2017, the Bexar Appraisal District increased only the improvements portion of the appraisal by about $2000 on my house, which is across the street from the new Mistletoe development. In that same time, the land value went from $25,000 to $61,000. This is about a 144% increase in just two years. The 2019 valuation has now increased our land value to $177,290. It has nearly doubled again, a 369% increase over four years. 

Sometime between 2015 and now, the Appraisal District realized that the original house on each lot could be torn down and three could be built in its place. Try going to Bexar Appraisal District and arguing that your landis not worth what they say it is.

Since January 2019, the Office of Historic Preservation has received seven demolition applications for Tobin Hill. Of those, three have been approved, two are on hold for evaluation by the Historic Design Review Commission, and two, 430 and 434 E. Magnolia, are still awaiting a decision by OHP. 

Like the properties on Mistletoe, 430 and 434 E. Magnolia are on a quaint and quiet street on the northern end of Tobin Hill.  While this part of Tobin Hill is not currently designated as Historic, it is surrounded on all four sides by Historic Districts: Monte Vista to the north and west, River Road to the east, and the Tobin Hill Historic District to the south. These two homes would be contributing to structures to a future Historic District in this area which has been identified in the past as being eligible for Historic Designation. 

400 block of E Magnolia and E Mistletoe

The applications for the demolition of these houses on E. Magnolia have generated a lot of neighborhood concern. OHP received 24 letters of opposition to the proposed demolition of these homes. This far exceeds what OHP’s Scout SA team typically receives for demolition applications. It was enough that Shanon Shea-Miller, Director of the City of San Antonio’s Office of Historic Preservation, requested a site meeting between Scout SA and the property owner. 

During the meeting with the property owner, we discovered that the owner believes he can get a better offer on the land if it is vacant. However, these houses are occupied and in good structural condition. Demolition should be a last resort, not a quick path to making a buck.  While the Appraisal District views the land as more valuable than the houses built on them, to the renters living there, this is home. 

When taxes go up, it makes it hard to stay in your home. This is how many homeowners go from living in housing that is affordable to becoming cost-burdened by their home. Landlords in my neighborhood, unable to get a homestead exemption on their rental properties, will need to raise rents to cover increased property taxes. Land values that have doubled, or in cases like mine, gone up 369% in just 4 years, mean that rents will rise to compensate for this increase. It is likely that many renters who could afford a place in Tobin Hill North in 2015 will soon be so cost-burdened they will have to find somewhere else to go.

430 and 434 E. Magnolia, photo from Google

430 and 434 E Magnolia are not stunning. They are not what some would consider worthy of a Landmark status. They are humble homes, and some of the last remaining affordable housing we have in Tobin Hill North. They are currently providing affordable housing in an area where finding an apartment or house to live in is becoming increasingly expensive.  The demolition of these homes, which are both currently occupied, and in sound structural condition, will cause the direct displacement of these residents. 

We need to focus on preserving the affordable housing that we already have. San Antonio’s Housing Policy Framework specifically calls for the preservation of naturally-occurring affordable housing, especially rental units, like the duplex at 430 E Magnolia and the home behind it at 434 E Magnolia.  The Policy calls for the prevention and mitigation of displacement, and the need to address the impact of rising property taxes on housing affordability. 

It is clear that in neighborhoods like Tobin Hill North, affordability is tied to the land valuation. Demolitions like the ones proposed on E. Magnolia should be vehemently opposed. Our city: Development Services, the Office of Historic Preservation, our City Council and our Mayor should be denying requests for demolitions on houses that are structurally sound, and especially those that are occupied. It is in the best interests of not only those currently in need of affordable housing, but also of those who live nearby, who don’t want to see exponential growth in their tax bill every year. 

430 and 434 E. Magnolia will go before the Historic Design Review Commission for consideration of Landmark Designation in order to prevent demolition on May 1 at 5:00pm. The Tobin Hill Community Association would appreciate letters in support of the Landmark Designation of 430 and 434 E. Magnolia. Statements can be emailed to jessica.anderson@sanantonio.gov

We are also asking for community support in attending the hearing and speaking in favor of the Landmark designation. If you intend to speak, please sign up in person at 1901 S. Alamo St. on the day of the hearing. You may sign up anytime between 2:30 and 5:00 PM before the cases are heard.  

Posted on

Request from Tobin Hill at HDRC

Also read: NOWCASTSA’s excellent article: Tobin Hill neighborhood history, character is under fire by city and developers

April 18, 2019 Update from Anisa Schell (THCA Board):

Some of you may already be aware of the proposed demolitions of 430 and 434 E Magnolia. Because of the outcry of concern from the community, and after visiting the site with the Designation/Demolition Committee, the Office of Historic Preservation has decided to move forward with requests for Historic designation of both structures. The cases will be heard at the Historic and Design Review Commission Wednesday, May 1, no earlier than 5 PM in the first-floor boardroom at 1901 S Alamo.

The hearing is public and anyone may attend. 
In the past, it has been very helpful to have a large community of supporters attend and speak at the hearing.  You may sign up to speak before the hearing, anytime between 2:30 and when the case is heard (no sooner than 5:00pm).  

Each person will have three minutes to speak, but a short statement of support is all that is necessary. For example, you can use your time to say something like, “I am Anisa Schell and I live at 430 E. Mistletoe Ave. I support the Landmark Designation of these two houses. 430 and 434 E Magnolia are homes that contribute to the historic nature of the street and our neighborhood. They should not be torn down. Please designate these houses to protect them. Thank you.” 
In addition to speaking at the hearing, writing letters of support for the designation of these houses ahead of time is helpful.  Please send emails to Jessica.Anderson@sanantonio.gov. Your email should state that you support the Landmark Designation of 430 and 434 E Magnolia and make sure to include your name and address.  

The emails forwarded below provide a little more insight into what has happened so far with these properties. Also attached is the statement I wrote opposing the demolition of these properties. 

Tobin Hill Community Association needs your support for the historic designation of the two houses at 307 & 309-311 E. Evergreen.  

Demolition applications were filed for these houses in February. In researching the houses, it was discovered that 307 E. Evergreen was the home of Robert G. Cole who went to West Point, and later received the Medal of Honor for his bayonet charge during the Normandy Invasion. Cole has a video game character and local high school named after him (where Shaquille O’Neal went to school as well).

In its more recent history, 311 E Evergreen became locally known as “That Place Off Evergreen.” It was a local recording studio and live music venue, contributing to Tobin Hill’s culture of local music and the performing arts.

307 E Evergreen – photo by CoSA Office of Historic Preservation

The adjacent house, 307 E Evergreen, is known as The Cole House, as well as the former offices of Mujeres Unidas:

“Cole House is also significant in the area of social history for its associations with women’s civic history in the city of San Antonio. Clara Hoff Cole, the house’s longest continuous resident, moved into the house in 1919 and remained until her death in 1949. During that time she was a working professional and single mother of three children, teaching in the Tobin Hill neighborhood at Nathaniel Hawthorne, Jr. High School until sometime around 1944, when she had begun teaching at Mark Twain High School. Her involvement in the community and her son Robert’s military service attracted fairly constant attention from city newspapers through the 1920s, 30s, and 40s. Several decades later the Cole House became the office location of Mujeres Unidas, a charitable organization established in 1994 by Yolanda Rodriguez-Escobar to serve local women and Latinx community members with HIV/AIDS… Although their tenure at the Cole House happened within the past fifty years, it is still noteworthy and adds to the significance of the property in the area of social history and cultural heritage for the community of the Tobin Hill neighborhood and city of San Antonio.”
–Excerpt from 307 E Evergreen Statement of Significance, written and collected by Stephen Fonzo

These cases will go before the Historic Design Review Commission on April 17, 2019 at 5:30PM. Staff is recommending approval of the Landmark designations, however the property owner has not consented. If the homes are not designated, they will be demolished to make room for a multi-unit housing development.  

Your support at the hearing on Wed., April 17 would be appreciated.  The cases are “time certain” and are scheduled to be heard at 5:30PM. You may sign up at the One-Stop, 1901 S. Alamo, to speak any time from about 2:30 P.M. up until the time when the case is heard. (i.e., 5:00).  Emailed comments may be sent ahead of time to the case officer, Jessica Anderson, Jessica.Anderson@sanantonio.gov.

Posted on

86th Legislative Neighborhood Update

The following are bills that are of special interest to San Antonio neighborhoods. Jordan Ghawi has been in Austin and following the progress of these bills for T1NC. 

HB 2496 / SB 1488 (Municipal Historic Designation) – This bill prohibited historic designation without the owner’s consent, including in historic districts. In San Antonio, there are ways of opting out of a historic designation but requires a review. Now has four joint authors, including D120 Representative Barbara Gervin-Hawkins.  The substitute bill, which is better than what was originally filed, is close to mirroring San Antonio’s ordinance which requires a simple majority (51%) from the Zoning Commission and Historic Design and Review Commission (HDRC) and a super-majority from City Council (3/4 vote) for historic designation. This bill requires a super-majority from both commissions as well as City Council.   

We will continue to advocate for an amendment to the bill that would change the language to represent the current processes in San Antonio. Next step is a committee report on the bill and then it will be sent to Calendars. 

HB 3778 / SB 1888 (STR) – The substitute Short Term Rental (STR) bill prohibits local ordinances that ban STRs, allows unlimited Type 2 STRs in non-residential areas, and allows neighborhoods (such as HOAs) to ban STRs. The bill does not prohibit the block face restrictions that now exist in the San Antonio ordinance. We are still trying to figure out to what “non-residential” refers. 

HB2439 / SB 1266 (Building Materials Bill) –  This bill would enable the use of any building material or product as long as it has been approved for use by a national model building code that has been adopted by the local government. A substitute was considered in the House Committee on State Affairs.  It was not the author’s intent to affect NCDs, Historic Districts, or other overlays.  The Committee substitute has language that would exclude the aforementioned groups. This bill is in the House State Affairs Committee.  

HB 2730 / SB 2162 (Anti-SLAPP “reform” bill) – would gut the Texas Citizens Participation Act, a law that protects average citizens from being financially ruined by meritless defamation lawsuits filed by plaintiffs with deep pockets. The past eight years the law has protected common people who dare to speak their minds on matters of public concern. Read  A Perspective on HB 2730. Please write the members of the House Committee on Judiciary & Civil Jurisprudence as well as your local representatives about this bill. 

Find your State Senator

Find your State Representative     

 

 

Posted on

A Perspective on HB 2730 Anti-SLAPP “Reform”

See interview with State Representative Bernal on NowCastSA.com about anti SLAPP during the controversy here

Several years ago, my neighborhood association and each one of its members personally were threatened by a local powerful developer with a lawsuit. We were told that not only would we be sued as an association but each one personally would be “tied up for life” in an expensive legal battle. He said he had lawyers on retainer, so it did not matter to him how long he could drag it out. 

Our offense? We disagreed about how CoSA interpreted our NCD guidelines for a chain gas station he was developing, raised the $600 filing fee, and filed an appeal to the Board of Adjustment. On the very same day, we were threatened with a law suit. The point for the developer was not winning the suit, but dragging us all through years of litigation. 

It was a dark moment when our association board sat at my dining room table with our zoning committee and we decided to pull the appeal. We could not compete with all that money and power. 

Soon after, our State Representative Diego Bernal and State Senator Menendez let us know about the Anti-SLAPP law that would protect us as we lawfully advocated or took actions to protect our neighborhoods or communities and they would stand by our side. The anti-SLAPP (Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation) law, also known as the Texas Citizens Participation Act (TCPA), passed in 2011, protects first amendment rights, public participation and the media. The TCPA protects against abusive behavior by allowing for early dismissal of such suits and ordering the plaintiffs to pay the defendant’s legal fees. Although it had become too late to file our appeal, we understood that in the future we would be protected.

Until now. 

House Bill 2730 by Rep. Jeff Leach, R-Plano, would gut the Texas Citizens Participation Act, a law that protects average citizens from being financially ruined by meritless defamation lawsuits filed by plaintiffs with deep pockets. The past eight years the law has protected common people who dare to speak their minds on matters of public concern.

HB 2730 and SB 2162 threaten the Texas anti-SLAPP law

The bills currently proposed would undermine the Texas Citizen Participation Act (TCPA), which has  become the model for similar legislation in other states. The TCPA allows the courts to quickly dismiss meritless defamation and other lawsuits designed to silence everyday people as well as the press. Such meritless claims – so-called Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation (SLAPP) suits — are routinely filed by people with deep pockets not to ultimately succeed in the courts but to run up legal costs in order to intimidate or stop free speech.

For example, House Bill 2730 and SB 2162 would allow the entity accused of filing a meritless lawsuit to drop their case just days before a hearing. This effectively allows an entity to sue a media company for defamation, receive a hearing date, and then drop the lawsuit days before a hearing to avoid a bad ruling and the cost of the defendant’s legal fees.

Where HB 2730 is now:

Currently HB 2730 is being considered by the House Committee on Judiciary & Civil Jurisprudence who heard testimony on April 1st. 

This is a dangerous bill that would put community leaders in jeopardy as they advocate for their neighborhoods in lawful and exercise their constitutional right to free speech. 

CoSA and Neighborhood Protection

Our neighborhood association, and then Tier One Neighborhood Coalition, asked that CoSA make a public statement that they would support any citizens who participated in their lawful rights to advocate for their neighborhoods. Then Mayor Taylor promised to do so, but it never happened though we have asked repeatedly. Now we have submitted this request as part of the implementation of the Public Participation Principles.

What Can You Do?

Contact the following Committee members today to demand that they do not silence our advocacy. Please also write your local state and senate representatives.

Authors:

Four.price@house.texas.gov

Sandra.talton@house.texas.gov

joe.moody@house.texas.gov

Ellic.sahualla@house.texas.gov

dustin.burrows@house.texas.gov

Sara.schmidt@house.texas.gov

Committee Members:

Jeff.Leach@house.texas.gov (Author)

Sean.Mason@house.texas.gov

Jessica.farrar@house.texas.gov

Idalid.navarro@house.texas.gov

Yvonne.davis@house.texas.gov

Jesse.bernal@house.texas.gov

julie.johnson@house.texas.gov

Melissa.alfaro@house.texas.gov

Matt.krause@house.texas.gov

Andrew.herrell@house.texas.gov

Morgan.meyer@house.texas.gov (Author)

Joshua.garrett@house.texas.gov

Victoria.neave@house.texas.gov

Rachel.lance@house.texas.gov

Reggie.smith@house.texas.gov

Emily.fankell@house.texas.gov

james.white@house.texas.gov

John.hagan@hosue.texas.gov

Read more at NowCastSA here

Posted on

Request by Denver Heights for Help in Zoning Case

Request from Denver Heights’ resident, Alan Neff, asking for neighborhoods support against this zoning case that will be heard Tuesday, April 2ndat 1 p.m at One Stop. 

Update: Case postponed

Addition based on letter sent by Cynthia Spielman (the next two paragraphs): Inner-city neighborhoods face extraordinary challenges as they become “hot” real estate and speculators and developers purchase property to build. We face issues of unaffordability and displacement, degradation of once resilient neighborhoods and the destruction of legacy homes some more than a hundred years old. And like any crises, the challenges we face has created opportunities for revelation and visioning. Inner city neighborhoods do not oppose growth and change, but they want change and growth that is compatible, affordable, sustainable, and honors the existing culture. It seems like this quality is what the City of San Antonio has promoted through it SA Tomorrow Comprehensive Plan. 

I am asking that you think of this as developers, like this one, come with their requests.  Developers don’t lie to us: their interest is strictly monetary. They exist to make money for themselves and their investors. There is nothing wrong with that.  It is up to you to find that balance between a developer’s interest and the interests of the community in which they build. How much is enough? That is for the neighborhood residents and the developer to work out, but if they can’t, it is up to you to define what intensity of development creates good in a neighborhood and which helps to destroy its fabric. In this case it is clear that the proposed  development is not compatible in its intensity. Maximizing profit is simply not reason enough to burden a neighborhood. The following are good reasons to deny the applicant’s request: 

  • The request to change zoning from RM-4 to IDZ-2 at the 422 S Hackberry St property is not compatible with the existing neighborhood context. 
  • This development is proposing four dwellings that are three stories tall with roof terraces. The property is a generous size for what was originally intended for a four-plex to set on an historic inner city neighborhood. 
  • This developer is requesting a change to IDZ-2 zoning not because this is a difficult to develop infill lot, but because they want to maximize profit by building to the maximum potential lot area to the detriment of the surrounding community.  
  • The reduction of the 20- foot setback required by the RM-4 zoning to a 5-foot setback as allowed in the IDZ-2 zoning would allow a density and scale greater than anything around in the neighborhood. 
  • This combined with the requested parking reduction would add stress to an already stressed parking situation in the area.  
  • The garages are proposed at the ground level to face S Hackberry setting up a dangerous vehicular and pedestrian situation on this major thoroughfare. 
  • The proposed zoning change requested to support these $450,000 and up luxury homes is not supporting the master plans of the community nor is it supporting the community itself. 
  • Staff has recommended denial. 

Please support Denver Heights by writing or speaking against this requested zoning change. 

If you can’t attend the meeting you could write a letter/ email to the Zoning Commission. 

Send to 

Marco.hinojosa@sanantonio.gov

Re: ZONING CASE # Z-2019-10700012

412 S Hackberry 

Posted on

Toolkit to advocate against HB 3778

April 4, 2019 Update: HB 3778 has been modified so that there are no stipulations to block face restrictions. It does, however, provide for unlimited STRs in non residential areas outside of a municipality. It does prohibit any restrictions that result in the ban of all STRs. Read revised version here.

  • HB 3778 will prevent cities from regulating the location of short term rentals.
  • Testify Against HB 3778 in the House Urban Affairs CommitteeTexas Capitol – Room E2.010 – 8:00 AM – Thursday, April 4th


Click HERE if you intend to testify on Thursday. Also, review the links below for more info on opposing HB 3778.

Dear Texas Neighbor:
 Looking ahead to the hearing for HB 3778 on Thursday, we’ve put together a toolkit that you can use in your contact with Urban Affairs representatives. Please click on the links below to access the materials.

– Talking points for HB 3778/STR Preemption

– Tips for effective testimony

– Text of HB 3778

– Contact information for all members of Urban Affairs. For added convenience, these are also listed below for your convenience.

Please don’t hesitate to reply to this email address if you have any questions about testifying, or about the bill.

We will also conduct an email campaign on Tuesday, April 2nd in anticipation of the hearing. We will send out a link as we get closer to launch.

House Urban Affairs Committee Members:


Rep. Angie Chen-Button – angie.button@house.texas.gov – 512-463-0486
Rep. Matt Shaheen – matt.shaheen@house.texas.gov – 512-463-0594
Rep. Jessica gonzalez – jessica.gonzalez@house.texas.gov – 512-463-0408
Rep. Vikki Goodwin – vikki.goodwin@house.texas.gov – 512-463-0652
Rep. Eric Johnson – eric.johnson@house.texas.gov – 512-463-0586
Rep. Mayes Middleton – mayes.middleton@house.texas.gov – 512-463-0502
Rep. Christina Morales – christina.morales@house.texas.gov – 512-463-0732
Rep. Jared Patterson – jared.patterson@house.texas.gov – 512-463-0694
Rep. Valoree Swanson – valoree.swanson@house.texas.gov – 512-463-0572


Stay ready.

Sincerely,

Texas Neighbors for Property RightsDisclaimer – Texas Neighbors for Property Rights (TNPR) operates on behalf of the Texas Hotel & Lodging Association. TNPR’s sole purpose is to support the interests of the lodging industry through grassroots action. Any communication between TNPR or its officers and any other party is solely for informational purposes and does not constitute legal advice of any kind.
 Texas Neighbors for Property Rights
1701 West Avenue  |  Austin, Texas 78701  |  (512) 474-2996
Posted on

T1NC SC Letter to BoA re STR Special Exceptions

Translation: Tier One Neighborhood Coalition Steering Committee Letter to Board of Adjustment regarding Short Term Rental Special Exceptions

◊ TIER ONE NEIGHBORHOOD COALITION ◊

Steering Committee

Board of Adjustments

1901 S. Alamo St.

San Antonio, TX 78204

Re: STR BoA Cases for Special Exceptions

The T1NCSteering Committee supports the City of San Antonio’s recently adopted ordinance for Short Term Rentals (STR) and remains committed to seeing its fair and consistent application implementation.

The home sharing economy, such as Airbnb, HomeAway, Flip Key, and VRBO, allowing homeowners to list bedrooms, accessory dwellings or entire houses for Short Term Rental (STR) has changed the landscape of residential neighborhoods in San Antonio as well as across the nation. 

The Tier 1 Steering Committee members believe protecting our neighbors and neighborhoods is paramount in preserving and sustaining the cultural history of San Antonio and is also consistent with the SATomorrow Comprehensive plan and the Mayor’s Housing Policy Framework. 

We believe the STR ordinance as currently written is the first step toward a sensitive and balanced approach in protecting both San Antonio legacy neighborhoods and responsible business owners.  We acknowledge that future adjustments to the ordinance may become necessary once the city can quantify and evaluate the results, however we also believe that the willingness to allow for Special Exceptions should be carefully and judiciously meted out and that the rights of residents to protect their home investments be valued. There are many areas throughout the city that provide ample opportunity for the growth of STR Type 2s without the need to grant Special Exceptions and those areas that are already at the density limit should be aggressively protected.

We support our member neighborhoods’ decisions to either support the approval of or denial of a particular STR Type 2 Special Exception request and we respectfully ask the commission to do the same.

Respectfully,

Cosima Colvin (D1)

Dr. Christine Drennon (D1)

Antonio Garcia (D1)

Homer Hayes (D3)

Cullen Jones (D2)

Frederica Kushner (D1)

Velma Pena (D5)

Cynthia Spielman (D1)

Amelia Valdez (D5)

Terry Ybanez (D3)